Danae Melios
   |
Posted - 2007.10.27 06:56:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Alkeena
Edited by: Alkeena on 26/10/2007 22:32:53
Edited by: Alkeena on 26/10/2007 22:18:20
Quick response as I have other engagements shortly:
You're quite right in believing that I'm not terribly fond of the impending drone nerf. That, however, was not the primary thrust of the post, merely an extended example. I think the greatest affront of all is actually the proposed torp changes...It really removes quite a bit of cross-race variety from the game, much to its detriment imho. These are all just symptoms of a larger problem though.
Alkeena, I agree with this somewhat. I liked the idea of a "big, slow, dumb, can kill you quickly if it hits but is easily outran" weapon with a long range. I ran a Caldari toon for a long time, and I liked having it as part of the game.
Originally by: Alkeena
This is not really a whine about nerfing in general, although it seems many people misconstrued it as such. It's a whine about HOW nerfing is done. Adjusting ships to "bring them in line" with other ships in class seems a poor decision. First because, as I've repeatedly said, it encourages homogenization which I consider to be the bane of any good game a direct source of boredom and stagnation. Also, balance is almost impossible if you attempt to have everything perform the same without actually having their stats exactly the same. The end result is that you either have ships that ARE exactly the same (BAD) or you have ships that are very nearly the same but with some inherent imbalance which people will seize upon. If all ships of a given class perform exactly the same role, but one performs it marginally better (as one inevitably will) then the players will flock to it until further calls for nerfs are made. In this way we'll end up with the consistent chain nerfs that we've been witnessing for the past couple years. This is the mechanism behind the FOTM...nerf...FOTM cycle in my estimation.
Here, I am afraid, we part ways out how we see things. You have been in the game since pre-Exodus, well I have as well (though I gave my previous characters away to start a new life in Eve). Remember that each navy has been built up independently of the others, reacting to one another. One Empire comes up with a new concept, the others steal it to put a ship with the same role in their navies. So there is deliberate duplication of capabilities. Why? Because not everyone cross-trains to different races to get unique ships.
Originally by: Alkeena
The way to avoid this issue is to ensure that each ship in a class has a particular independent role which encourages people to fly it in specific circumstances because that's what it is best suited for. I get the sense that this was originally why the racial profiles were created in the first place...Who says Caldari should have a good close range damage dealer? They're (ostensibly) the long range race. Who says the minmatar need 'good' ew, be happy with your target painters and speed, it makes you unique (or should, and the fact that it doesn't is really the issue).
~Alkeena
Yes, I agree that the flavors of the different races need to be preserved. Hell, halve the structure of Minmatar races and boost their speeds, make 'em more distinct. At the same time, add more armor to the Amarr, buff their lasers, and lower their speeds even more. Keep different weapon systems more consistently Amarr and Caldari and Gallente and Minmatar, enhance the modifiers that come from each shipyard.
BUT-- keep in mind that every fleet needs its fast scouts and tacklers. Each fleet needs its snipers and its close combat specialists. Its own tankers and logistics ships. And when one side gets too good at a particular trick, others will steal it. Or, now, file complaints with CONCORD alleging provocative and illegal weapons systems threatening a new arms race, requiring adjustments to technology to comply with arms limitations treaties.
|