Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1103
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:24:00 -
[31] - Quote
I support CCP's approach.
Keep changing. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
2848
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:56:00 -
[32] - Quote
Cough
Arms Race
You forget empires are at war with each other and they are constantly looking to ways to one up against thier adversaries.
New Technologies will emerge becuase of the arms race. Its is time to shake things up. Ill leave it to the community and ccp to balance things I rather have FOTMs if they are only FOTMS for that month and ccp fixes it quickly.
And this happens in real life if you want to go argue that route. The best example the most powerful ship at sea before ww2? the battleship post ww2 the carrier. Even more interestingly before ww2 started the carrier concept was LAUGHED AT and almost dismissed entirely.
And yes I am posting there with reckless abandon its lightning round in the brainstorming idea table, ccp should know what is better what sounds bad and sounds good or what ideas they can pick apart and peice back together in thier vision as good I expect none of my suggestions to even be remotely close to what I imagine them to be but its not stopping me from posting or inspiring something from happening. I wouldnt mind seeing a whole slew of ejectable modules that add performance for a short duration or new functionality. Just like extended fuel tanks on fighter jets today, tanks extend the range of the bird and if in a dire situation they will eject the tanks to gain more agility.
|
Gripen
488
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:26:00 -
[33] - Quote
So far I'm amazed how many people didn't read first post fully and didn't get that it's NOT about new stuff vs rebalance old stuff dilemma... Probably there were too many threads about it. =\ |
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:22:00 -
[34] - Quote
Cyzlaki wrote:Disagree. Constant nerfing and buffing is the same as WoW, having to re-spec every patch and suddenly all your gear is worthless. Same thing here. Every patch will change the game which is terrible in a game where you have to wait for skills to finish in real-time.
It's just a cop out really. He's basically saying they don't know how to balance the game. If it was truly balanced it would not be stagnant at all, it would always be about player skill, not overpowered ships and modules.
This isn't WoW; there is no respec. Nerfing and Buffing sucks too, when it's done for the wrong reasons; but this also isn't nerfing and buffing.
What will change with patches that have new modules and ships in them, (expect next Winter I imagine), is that people will have to rethink how they approach systems that change because of new introductions along this line. That process is called adaption, and it is a healthy process.
CCP can balance the game with regards to ships, modules, and the mechanics of those devices; but you all have to keep your traps shut and let them run numbers on it. Numbers being partially figurative.
If CCP made a server strictly for testing ships, and gave everybody a Test Server alt with SP intended for specific testing; then took samples of all the data that resulted from it, we'd probably see some results. Just one node, constellation, and server; cap of 200 players.
No mirrors. Just a generic test character when you log in; same as everybody else. Ships in the hangar; prefit and ready to fly. You've got 10 minutes to get a feel for it, and take it out for a spin; then everybody gets rallied for fleets, gangs, solo flying, or whatever. Server is unreachable outside of monitored testing.
Base requirement: You have 15 Million SP on one character/toon on your account you log in with; generic toon takes up a slot, and it disregards your actual toons. Need more than one type of generic toon; then you still have 2 slots to fill.
|
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:28:00 -
[35] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Cough
Arms Race
You forget empires are at war with each other and they are constantly looking to ways to one up against thier adversaries.
New Technologies will emerge becuase of the arms race. Its is time to shake things up. Ill leave it to the community and ccp to balance things I rather have FOTMs if they are only FOTMS for that month and ccp fixes it quickly.
And this happens in real life if you want to go argue that route. The best example the most powerful ship at sea before ww2? the battleship post ww2 the carrier. Even more interestingly before ww2 started the carrier concept was LAUGHED AT and almost dismissed entirely.
And yes I am posting there with reckless abandon its lightning round in the brainstorming idea table, ccp should know what is better what sounds bad and sounds good or what ideas they can pick apart and peice back together in thier vision as good I expect none of my suggestions to even be remotely close to what I imagine them to be but its not stopping me from posting or inspiring something from happening. I wouldnt mind seeing a whole slew of ejectable modules that add performance for a short duration or new functionality. Just like extended fuel tanks on fighter jets today, tanks extend the range of the bird and if in a dire situation they will eject the tanks to gain more agility.
I will say this though.
Adapt or Die Trying
EVE isn't about the Empires, except in the barest sense of the notion. Empires in EVE only produce the technological advancements for Capsuleers to use; where Capsuleers make use of it as they see fit. I don't know if you've looked around recently; but the Empire involvement in these 'Wars' has devolved into political maneuvering and not much else.
Independent NPC Corporations in EVE are more likely to produce technological advancements for the Capsuleers, than the Empires; and I think this is where all newer technology should come from, with only a few exceptions. Certainly, the Empires use them to produce their Technological advancements; so there is no reason they cannot research and develop their own. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
2848
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:30:00 -
[36] - Quote
Gripen wrote:So far I'm amazed how many people didn't read first post fully and didn't get that it's NOT about new stuff vs rebalance old stuff dilemma... Probably there were too many threads about it. =\
Poor title choice my friend extremly poor title choice. Also I leave it to the community to summarize wall of text OPs they're brutally efficent at it and regardless its what the conversation did evolve into.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
2848
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:32:00 -
[37] - Quote
Mars Theran wrote:
EVE isn't about the Empires, except in the barest sense of the notion. Empires in EVE only produce the technological advancements for Capsuleers to use; where Capsuleers make use of it as they see fit. I don't know if you've looked around recently; but the Empire involvement in these 'Wars' has devolved into political maneuvering and not much else.
Independent NPC Corporations in EVE are more likely to produce technological advancements for the Capsuleers, than the Empires; and I think this is where all newer technology should come from, with only a few exceptions. Certainly, the Empires use them to produce their Technological advancements; so there is no reason they cannot research and develop their own.
Is this self contradiction or am I imagining things?
|
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:50:00 -
[38] - Quote
Gripen wrote:So far I'm amazed how many people didn't read first post fully and didn't get that it's NOT about new stuff vs rebalance old stuff dilemma... Probably there were too many threads about it. =\
I'm fairly certain it's not new stuff for the sake of new stuff, as you seem to imply. You're a little ambiguous though; in that you do not focus an argument directly, but rather make reference to another game and some multi-expansion release schedule you have to pay for every time.
I don't see the relation.
EVE needs new stuff. Everything in this game is tired and old. The economy is dreadfully predictable, despite it being ludicrously competative. Ship fitting has been the same since I started playing, with exception to FOTM ships like Nanocanes which were really just a briefly discovered and celebrated hole in the fitting process.
People try new things because they are bored, find something like that, (or usually stumble across it because a newb fit it against all protocols and procedures), and just like that it gets spammed all over EVE until someone decides to nerf it.
Nerfbat in; clever ship out.
The imbalance in this game is as often player caused, as just being a limited way of exploiting fitting mechanics that creates a opportunity for a particularly special fit. I'm fairly certain the Devs were-at the very least-close to balanced before the players started complaining about overpowered ships.
Unfortunately, players tend to blow things way out of proportion and exagerate everything; and sometimes the nerf isn't even remotely justified. Fortunately, it hasn't often ended in complete destruction.
So, new things are good. They force players to adapt to new situations and a changing environment; new opportunities arise, and the balance of power shifts ever so slightly. Sometimes it's more drastic, but let's face it; no little grouping of modules hitting the market is going to result in that much change. *snicker*
Okay, it's a possibility, but not overly likely.
|
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:52:00 -
[39] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Mars Theran wrote:
EVE isn't about the Empires, except in the barest sense of the notion. Empires in EVE only produce the technological advancements for Capsuleers to use; where Capsuleers make use of it as they see fit. I don't know if you've looked around recently; but the Empire involvement in these 'Wars' has devolved into political maneuvering and not much else.
Independent NPC Corporations in EVE are more likely to produce technological advancements for the Capsuleers, than the Empires; and I think this is where all newer technology should come from, with only a few exceptions. Certainly, the Empires use them to produce their Technological advancements; so there is no reason they cannot research and develop their own.
Is this self contradiction or am I imagining things?
It's only a contradiction if the Corporations are not private entities. That doesn't mean governments can't stop private corporations from doing something.
Maybe you were referring to something else; but I'm guessing that's what you mean. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
2849
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:55:00 -
[40] - Quote
Just saying all of the new battlecruisers are empire comissioned.
|
|
DarkAegix
Acetech Systems
806
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:25:00 -
[41] - Quote
Change is good as long as it's constant, and one race/ship/fit/mechanic doesn't remain in the lead for a huge amount of time. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
132
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:32:00 -
[42] - Quote
The only bad thing about this ever change is that it's still CCP who intrudes in the sandbox to apply the "evolution". It's an hard coded thing.
Would be VERY refreshing and incredibly original if they could just feed us the tools to evolve EvE ourselves. We'd have the first MMO that evolves on its own, with no developer intervention beyond creating general guidelines to keep such evolution in check.
EDIT
A possible idea: random rigs for modules.
I could be given a BPO that would create a module rig with random +stats and -stats but that also uses random +CPU / PG.
The possible number of variations you can get by fitting multiple rigged modules is huge and therefore we could have our own "personal" ship.
Or we could have each module accept 1 rig (frigate) to 3 rigs (BS) to 5 (capitals)... with bonuses and maluses like the regular rigs. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1121
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:36:00 -
[43] - Quote
I for one welcome our tactical-aspect fluid environment where we have to THINK.
Of course it's hard for a lot of people to think these days. Poor bastards. Shuffling around looking for something to eat all the time.
|
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:46:00 -
[44] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Just saying all of the new battlecruisers are empire comissioned.
The ships pretty much have to be; given they are branded predominantly as Empire ships. That doesn't mean the modules have to be. Most modules are developed seperately from the actual ships; and there is really very little information supporting those modules being made in any fashion other than aftermarket technologies.
The Empire modules and ammunition are all achievable through faction LP; rather than as an off the market item available to all. |
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:48:00 -
[45] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:The only bad thing about this ever change is that it's still CCP who intrudes in the sandbox to apply the "evolution". It's an hard coded thing.
Would be VERY refreshing and incredibly original if they could just feed us the tools to evolve EvE ourselves. We'd have the first MMO that evolves on its own, with no developer intervention beyond creating general guidelines to keep such evolution in check.
EDIT
A possible idea: random rigs for modules.
I could be given a BPO that would create a module rig with random +stats and -stats but that also uses random +CPU / PG.
The possible number of variations you can get by fitting multiple rigged modules is huge and therefore we could have our own "personal" ship.
Or we could have each module accept 1 rig (frigate) to 3 rigs (BS) to 5 (capitals)... with bonuses and maluses like the regular rigs.
I for one, am very glad it's CCP and not the players who do this. If it was the players, I would have quit a long time ago, because this game would be so absurdely unbalanced as to be unplayable, and all the 'special effects' would make me wish I was blind with any real prolonged exposure. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
424
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:54:00 -
[46] - Quote
Site seems to be temporarily unavailable, but: EVEnews24 - CCP Soundwave Interview - Why balancing is bad and monkeys are good
|
Elzon1
Shadow Boys Corp Bloodbound.
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 04:33:00 -
[47] - Quote
I'm up for adjustable tech 3 mods and ammo.
Imagine adjusting shield/armor resistances mid battle.
Imagine changing your ecm type mid battle.
Imagine changing range, explosion radius, velocity, and damage type of ammo mid battle.
In situ tactical fitting change could add an interesting dynamic to fleet fights I think. |
canflipper
Infested U.E.D.
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 06:07:00 -
[48] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:... balanced ...
CCP SoniClover wrote:... Starcraft II ...
Someone's never heard of Marauders.
|
Lord Lewtz
AQUILA INC 0ccupational Hazzard
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 10:57:00 -
[49] - Quote
Change is good.
Even SC2 is constantly balancing the units so GTFO with that reference. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
783
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:22:00 -
[50] - Quote
Gripen wrote:Following is a quote from F&I subforum but I think it outlines important development question which is worth a thread on its own so it won't be lost by community attention spotlight. CCP SoniClover wrote:Just a quick note on why we're looking into adding new modules, rather than focus completely on fixing/balancing existing stuff - what we're looking into is creating a fluid tactical environment that shifts over time. So we're not looking into creating an uber-balanced utopia ala Starcraft II that, once achieved, we can then walk away from. Rather, we want to achieve a more chaotic environment where 'best' fittings change rapidly and the value of items (modules, rigs, ships) is relative based on the current metagame rather than fixed in eternity. The idea is that a fluid, ever-changing environment like that will have more long-term appeal in a game like EVE than a static uber-balanced system does. I just want to know am I the only one who is really disappointed by such approach? Isn't this "fluid, ever-changing environment" is a synonym to the constant FOTM race and lack of complex balance vision what we had in EVE all the way since 2003? How can one reference an existing commercial product and utopia in the same sentence without implying that there is no way to create something even close to other people archivements? Shouldn't you always aim high? And balance doesn't mean there couldn't be any changes. Talking about after-mentioned SC2: it's supposed to be released in three parts so that's the same game sold three times in a row just because of changes supposed to shake the game environment. There is no debate that changes are needed but the question is "new stuff for the sake of new stuff" or "changes to improve depth without ruling out old stuff". More choices at any given time vs constant shift of the focus from time to time.
They're just admitting their inability or incapacity to actually address hybrids/Gallente situation, that simple
If most were that good than CCP Punkturis, by the way charming lady your UI job is just awesome (sig), hybrids would be balanced at the first announcement, man now we've got blasters ammo rebalanced, in 6 months Diemos will probably receive enough PG to fit what it needs to be useful but still not the necessary speed witch will come with next winter expansion...dammit.
|
|
Liam Mirren
184
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:30:00 -
[51] - Quote
Change is good as long as Minnie and Amarr stay on top, right? I mean, we can't have a Caldari ship suddenly actually be more useful (Naga) than the minnie one (tornado) . NERF THAT **** REAL FAST! Also, Talos is not at all overpowered, we need to buff it some more. The fact that it dominates lots of solo/small fleet scenarios is not important at all, THE ONLY THING THAT COUNTS IS BLOB WARFARE BALANCE (in favour of Amarr and Minnie). If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. |
Drew Solaert
University of Caille Gallente Federation
41
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:44:00 -
[52] - Quote
I'm all for a fluid changing dynamic |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
783
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:57:00 -
[53] - Quote
Drew Solaert wrote:I'm all for a fluid changing dynamic
Such nice words |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
2852
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 15:09:00 -
[54] - Quote
What we finally give the caldari a useful gunboat now everyone is jealous?
|
Gripen
489
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 16:02:00 -
[55] - Quote
I read this article and I think that first comment is a good tl;dr of it:
Quote:Unbalanced gameplay is good, because everytime we nerf a gameplay element it forces people to invest again a whole load of time training other skills. And it allows us (CCP) to ignore the game and do other things with our time. What a load of *** from CCP marketing. Im only reading excuses upon excuses why CCP isnt working on the game.
From monetary point of view there is of course a group of players called FOTM-chasers who gladly train for the new FOTM but is it safe to bet that there are more of such people than players who would leave the game after their specialization becames useless with another boost-nerf cycle or people who will leave because of shallow gameplay FOTM concepts always inherent? It's no wonder why there is such a low retention rate in EVE with such design priorities.
And argument about always discovering something new makes no sense to me either as it takes mere hours after patchnotes release for the experienced player to figure out what would be a new FOTM and for beginners or those who don't like to think by themselves it's just a question of one line in the corpchat: "link me a current FOTM fit please". |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
2891
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 19:53:00 -
[56] - Quote
Either way I strongly belive in military escalation. So many games or sci-fi's dont have it. (cough Star Trek the worst offender)
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
240
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 20:01:00 -
[57] - Quote
Gripen wrote:I just want to know am I the only one who is really disappointed by such approach? I hope so. Changes in the environment is what spurs continuous evolution and growth of all life on earth. While EVE is nowhere near as complex as the biosphere or evolution in general, the game through hundreds of thousands of players making millions of good and bad choices selects good behaviors from bad, strong alliances from weak due to a harsh risk/reward system. Without continuous change in the environment providing external stimulus, playstyle in EVE would eventually reach stasis. This doesn't happen in the real world because the real world is constantly being bombarded by rocks, volcanoes, stellar phenomenon, recession in its rotation, new technology being discovered, etc. EVE's tactical and alliance status however without continuous developer input (new tools, new risks, new rewards) is in complete stasis and, eventually, complete stagnation. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |