Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shevar
Minmatar A.W.M Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 08:50:00 -
[61]
If every race had a roughly similar amount of "best" ships in each ship role category I would agree with you. But since 90% of the ship roles are divided between gallente and minmatar I can't. ---
-The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
Aramendel
Amarr North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 09:02:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Aramendel on 27/10/2007 09:04:48
Originally by: Alkeena The position I would take with regards to that is that it doesnt matter if the myrm is overpower (to an extent), so long as other ships are differentiated enough to make them worthy of flying on their own merits.
Uh....that is an extremly flawed position.
Essentially you complain that the drone changes reduce options or variety for myrmidon setups, right?
What do you think does an overpowered ship which fills a large amount of game niches to that extend that it is by far the most used ship in its class? It reduces option. Not for itself but for all other ships in its class.
Nerfing that ship will reducing the options of it, but will add new, previously inefficient options to the other ships.
You complain that the myr is forced out of some of its niches but do not mind at all that it was pigeonholing the other BCs in very narrow niches. More perspective please.
|
shinsushi
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 09:12:00 -
[63]
Edited by: shinsushi on 27/10/2007 09:14:41 Double post.
++++++++++ AMARR - Taking it up the butt since 2005
Fixing Laser Boats 101 |
shinsushi
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 09:14:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 27/10/2007 09:04:48
Originally by: Alkeena The position I would take with regards to that is that it doesnt matter if the myrm is overpower (to an extent), so long as other ships are differentiated enough to make them worthy of flying on their own merits.
Uh....that is an extremly flawed position.
Essentially you complain that the drone changes reduce options or variety for myrmidon setups, right?
What do you think does an overpowered ship which fills a large amount of game niches to that extend that it is by far the most used ship in its class? It reduces option. Not for itself but for all other ships in its class.
Nerfing that ship will reducing the options of it, but will add new, previously inefficient options to the other ships.
You complain that the myr is forced out of some of its niches but do not mind at all that it was pigeonholing the other BCs in very narrow niches. More perspective please.
What he said.
Lets say CCP just left certain ships overpowered, they would just stay that way. Everyone would be flying them, then there would be no diversity at all in eve. Cookie cutter overpowered setup on the Flavor of the Game ship.
++++++++++ AMARR - Taking it up the butt since 2005
Fixing Laser Boats 101 |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation Abyss Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 11:26:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Vyktor Abyss on 27/10/2007 11:27:35
Great Posts Alkeena.
I think you're spot on. The devs added variety for example with the BCs - with distinct differences like DPS, tanking, speed - then seem desperate to NERF them into being pretty much identical.
This NERFing seems quite ill thought out since by attacking the differences that exist between the races, they actually make the game a lot more bland for everyone - especially for those older players that just see these balance changes as 'homogenization' (heh...if thats even a word!)...
Spiritual Death?!? - maybe not...but definately heading along the lines of Spiritual Decay by verbose long sermons and kiddy fiddling priests *ahem*.
Alkeena for Community Council Representative! [x]
- Ideas are my business...maybe thats why I'm always skint! Please read my ideas |
Brianna Talnor
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 11:44:00 -
[66]
This whole post was complete bull****....
This is a video game, the only thing that is homogenized is the fact that one type of ship (drone ships) was so powerful that everyone who used it was hands down more powerful then anyother ship in its class.
I'd rather see a balanced range of competitive ships to choose from rather then one uber ship that's "different" beating the hell out of everybody. Why? Because I like a competitive video game.
I understand your argument, and in some ways am able to empathize with you. However, I still disagree with the stance you are taking that "balance" is a negative thing. The weapon types are still different, just less different now in an attempt to remove unfair advantages between them.
|
Mark Lucius
Forbidden Lore
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 12:12:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 27/10/2007 09:04:48
Originally by: Alkeena The position I would take with regards to that is that it doesnt matter if the myrm is overpower (to an extent), so long as other ships are differentiated enough to make them worthy of flying on their own merits.
Uh....that is an extremly flawed position.
Essentially you complain that the drone changes reduce options or variety for myrmidon setups, right?
What do you think does an overpowered ship which fills a large amount of game niches to that extend that it is by far the most used ship in its class? It reduces option. Not for itself but for all other ships in its class.
Nerfing that ship will reducing the options of it, but will add new, previously inefficient options to the other ships.
You complain that the myr is forced out of some of its niches but do not mind at all that it was pigeonholing the other BCs in very narrow niches. More perspective please.
This! Aramendel wins thread. ---
|
Alkeena
Gallente Unitas Nusquam Est FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 21:07:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Alkeena on 27/10/2007 21:15:30
Originally by: Saris Dadra I think most of the posters here seem to be missing the OP point.
Balance is wonderful, balancing everything by making it the same is not.
For example a passive shield tank and an active shield tank are very different beasts. Now suppose a change comes around that makes them less so. Perhaps, the optimal recharge rate is removed and shield recharge rates are boosted slightly to compensate. Now the two tanking styles are fairly similar. All damage is repaired in a linear fashion so you just chose the one that does it slightly better. The change may not even drastically change the effectiveness of any particular ship, but it removes a certain flavor of the game, which is something I think should be avoided.
I'm not a big missile user so I cant offer much of an opinion the torpedo changes. But if the changes are being made because every other race has long and short range weapons, not because torpedos in their current form are overpowered then it is a bad change. Balance doesn't mean that every race has long and short range weapons, it means that every race is just as viable to play as the next one.
Likewise nerfing the Myrm for the REASON it can fit Large sized weapons is bad. Nerfing the Myrm for the REASON it OMGWTFPWNs all other battle cruisers is a good thing, and I think it is the real reason for nerf. Still it makes me rather sad to see a rather unique ship made into an oversized Vexor, and I wish there was another way to nerf the ship that didn't destroy its uniqueness.
Again, just a quick read, not nearly enough time now to respond to everything that might warrant one. This, however, is exactly the point I'm after.
And this: \ Originally by: Vyktor Abyss Edited by: Vyktor Abyss on 27/10/2007 11:27:35 Great Posts Alkeena.
I think you're spot on. The devs added variety for example with the BCs - with distinct differences like DPS, tanking, speed - then seem desperate to NERF them into being pretty much identical.
This NERFing seems quite ill thought out since by attacking the differences that exist between the races, they actually make the game a lot more bland for everyone - especially for those older players that just see these balance changes as 'homogenization' (heh...if thats even a word!)...
Spiritual Death?!? - maybe not...but definately heading along the lines of Spiritual Decay by verbose long sermons and kiddy fiddling priests *ahem*.
Alkeena for Community Council Representative! [x]
~Akeena
|
Caenus
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 05:14:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Caenus on 29/10/2007 05:14:46 change the title to balancing is killing the solopwnmobile "i gank j00 l0l" community, and I'll sign.
|
Megadon
Caldari Deathshead Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 06:13:00 -
[70]
Hey to OP, Eve is turning into Electronic Arts Battlefield in space. That's the trend and thats the way they want it.
You see, the deal is, CCP wants to grow Eve by leaps and bounds and that means pasteurizing and homoginizing it to appeal to the masses of sheep and meat puppets.
Mass appeal is all about those kinds of things.
It's just the way things are.
Some view it as evil, some as progress, some as backwards, some as necessary and good. The masses want it though so it will be done. Don't believe me. Look at how many muppets play WoW and you'll figure out why and where Eve is headed.
--------------
|
|
Atius Tirawa
Minmatar Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 06:20:00 -
[71]
Sad thing is, balance is a nomitive judgment (for those who have not read Kant: A Nomitive Judgment is basically an ideal that cannot be realized but guides action nevertheless - like the idea of 'freedom' does - can't happen, but it guides action) and the most 'balanced' form eve can take is for all of us to have the same skill-points (thus no skill points) and all be in Ibis' or some such - obviously there is not death penalty and so on.
So difference and flavor in any MMO, especially in EvE, is based on strengths and weaknesses - saddly some strengths are better then others.
Does this mean 'balance' cannot be achived, yes. Does that mean CCP should quit trying? No. Does this ultimatly mean that we should all train for Gallente or Minmatar for PvP? I hope not, and in CCPs defense, EvE is very well balanced. Yes there are problems, mainly with Amarr. But overall, the game is well balanced. -----------
|
ZerKar
Caldari Zen'Tar
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 07:26:00 -
[72]
Balance has its place but I agree that it needs to be done only to a point. Personally I think each race should just be awesome at whatever they do irregardless of if it is very powerful or not. Balance them vs. their enemy a bit like they did in the past and all is well. Just make sure not to nerf the hell out of what makes any given race good AND PLEASE GOD, do make it VERY clear from sign up what each race really can and cannot do! If you did that then there is no ill suprises later.
I am a good example of that. By what the intro says Caldari should be hardcore military veterans with powerful ships. Reality: The Gallente make them look pathetic in every way and they struggle almost as much as the Amarr at killing anything, except that they are slower. Had I known at the start what I know now I would have been Minmatar from day one lol.
---------------------------------------------------------- I saw the Sign...!
O.o |
Digital Anarchist
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 09:02:00 -
[73]
This also affects specialization. If every avenue of specialization is nerfed, people are forced to become jacks-of-all-trades when it comes to PvP. If variety is to be prefered, some mechanics have to be left alone.
I don't see where drones were breaking this game, for instance. The criteria for balance should be game-breaking mechanics, not homogenization.
------------------------ This space for rent |
Bum Slave
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 09:08:00 -
[74]
Yes Balance is killing eve lets all have Shuttles with Ion Siege cannons and 1 second shield regen with 99% resists so we can all live in total Equilibriam.
|
Sheriff Jones
Amarr Please Enter Password
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 09:14:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 29/10/2007 09:14:26
Originally by: Bum Slave Yes Balance is killing eve lets all have Shuttles with Ion Siege cannons and 1 second shield regen with 99% resists so we can all live in total Equilibriam.
Dibs on the short black hair, black jacket and two pistols
My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit. |
Bum Slave
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 09:16:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Sheriff Jones Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 29/10/2007 09:14:26
Originally by: Bum Slave Yes Balance is killing eve lets all have Shuttles with Ion Siege cannons and 1 second shield regen with 99% resists so we can all live in total Equilibriam.
Dibs on the short black hair, black jacket and two pistols
Yes Sir!!!!
|
Gaven Blands
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 10:17:00 -
[77]
And can we define "counter" when you're talking about counters to nano ships?
Because a "counter" to anything else almost invariably involves destroying it, if you say there are dozens of "counters" to nano, you must be talking about repelling it rather than destroying it. Which is I believe where you will find the problem with nano ships.
Balance is not about blandness, and even if it was, people still watch the motor sports where no one car is allowed to be faster than another.
If you really want Eve to die, then simply stagnate it. OR worse still go back to how it was when the Veteran's weren't crying rivers.
Out with the old, in with the new. -- Awwwww Diddums! Did I wardec your highsec alt recently or something? |
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 10:44:00 -
[78]
Very nice posting Alkeena. I definitely agree and said something similar in a Torp thread.
If the differences only exist in the name of the modules and the graphic effects (say, torp explosion vs blaster flash) but the capabilities and tactics used are nearly identical, then there is no real difference at all. Unfortunately, it's much easier homogenizing ships/wepaons systems then it is to balance different types of ships and ship roles.
|
Cygnus Zhada
Amarr Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 11:17:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Tarminic There's nothing killing EVE - it's been growing consistently for several years now. People are whining, people have whined, and people will continue to whine. If CCP decides to nerf something it will be due to the massive amount of data they have on how various ships or modules are purchased/lost/used primarily and input from the community secondarily.
If the Myrmidon is 3 times as popular as any other battlecruiser despite only 35% of players being Gallente (example numbers) then they figure it needs to be balanced. Of course this won't be popular because unbalanced ships are popular for obvious reasons - they kick ass.
EVE will survive the carrier nerf, will survive drone bandwidth, and will survive any future nerfs unless they're truly short-sighted and idiotic, which I don't think will ever happen.
QFT (apart from the idiotic, shortsighted nerfs but even those will be mended/balanced out in the long run).
Welcome to EVE Online: Press 1 for Caldari, PVE Online Press 2 for Minmatar, PVP Online Press 3 for Gallente, PWN Online Press 4 for Amarr, Lulz Online |
Khalm
Firing Squad Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 11:27:00 -
[80]
balancing, what does it mean? changing things to be more identical? fine.
Do it once and then leave it to **** alone or refund skill points everytime you do it.
|
|
Grimpak
Gallente Trinity Nova KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 11:32:00 -
[81]
while alkeena is somewhat right, I have to agree with Tarminic and Mark Lucious.
one thing that the OP must take into consideration is the fact that most of the eve players are addicted to one thing: DPS. pretty much atm the ship that can dish the most DPS = the best ship.
if they nerf the ability of one ship that is a bit unbalanced because it dishes more dps than the norm, of course that the whinings will start.
dps addiction is what kills the game. ---
planetary interaction idea! |
bogir
War And Peace Construction
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 11:55:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Grimpak while alkeena is somewhat right, I have to agree with Tarminic and Mark Lucious.
one thing that the OP must take into consideration is the fact that most of the eve players are addicted to one thing: DPS. pretty much atm the ship that can dish the most DPS = the best ship.
if they nerf the ability of one ship that is a bit unbalanced because it dishes more dps than the norm, of course that the whinings will start.
dps addiction is what kills the game.
the problem whit this fix is that its not just 1 ship they are hitting whit this.. its ALL ships there use dropes.. one i dont konw jet is do all ships get a higher drone bay whit this. becouse is you still only have 125m3 drone bay you still only have so much space to fit drones in ( the drones you want to mix whit mostly ude a lot of drone space ) and non have told you to allways fit in 5x heavys. you all ways been able to mix the drones that you wanted to fix in whit in the limet of youre drone bay
Ceo of WAPC WE can build it. |
Grimpak
Gallente Trinity Nova KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 12:16:00 -
[83]
Originally by: bogir
Originally by: Grimpak while alkeena is somewhat right, I have to agree with Tarminic and Mark Lucious.
one thing that the OP must take into consideration is the fact that most of the eve players are addicted to one thing: DPS. pretty much atm the ship that can dish the most DPS = the best ship.
if they nerf the ability of one ship that is a bit unbalanced because it dishes more dps than the norm, of course that the whinings will start.
dps addiction is what kills the game.
the problem whit this fix is that its not just 1 ship they are hitting whit this.. its ALL ships there use dropes.. one i dont konw jet is do all ships get a higher drone bay whit this. becouse is you still only have 125m3 drone bay you still only have so much space to fit drones in ( the drones you want to mix whit mostly ude a lot of drone space ) and non have told you to allways fit in 5x heavys. you all ways been able to mix the drones that you wanted to fix in whit in the limet of youre drone bay
while I rarely use heavy drones on ships smaller than BS (bar the ishtar), my setus always revolve arround specific situations where heavy drones are too bulky or too slow for the job, which makes these changes irrelevant to me, or even good, if they are boosting the dronebay sizes.
for the ishkur I usually use it in a anti-frigate role, so valks are a bit too slow here. instead I go for a full drone bay with T2 warriors and I still pack some spares. how will this change affect me? I will be able to pack more than 2 spares now.
for the myrmidon, I go for anti-support with Ewar capabilities, packing 2 wings of valks as the main weapon (they tear cruisers apart. honest) and 1 wing of warriors to fend off frigates that come too close, together with a dual MAR 2 tank, wich makes this ship very sturdy. how will this change affect me? maybe able to pack a 2nd wing of warriors.
however, I do agree that the Eos changes were overboard. The ship was stuck with lousy bonuses to a Warfare link type that was, already by itself, sucky, together with a bad tank. the saving grace was the ammount of firepower that the ship could dish out, making it being used in a role that it wasn't that ship in the first place. so how to change the ship to accommodate the role it should have, together with the changes that are looming there? strip the drone bay bonus, increase substancially the drone bay size, give a 2nd tanking bonus to the ship, so that the tank doesn't suck too much, and double or even triple the bonuses to Information warfare links.
Eos is now a true fleet command ship that can even do some footwork with repair bots to the gang, and no longer the rather overpowered droneboat that was in contradiction with all the other fleet command ships. ---
planetary interaction idea! |
Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari Daikoku Fleet Shipyards
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 12:47:00 -
[84]
Well while you fit your pidgeon hole drones into your homogenised ship, I'll look through all my available drone options, which are currently wider than they have ever been, and I will come up with a setup that will pwn your lack of imagination.
All these threads smack of 'I'm taking my football and leaving' because your favourite advantage is being made more competitive. You have to look at why a specific ship is more popular to it's counterparts and consider that perhaps it is able to do it's job a little too easily. It's great for you, but not for those ships that are marginalised in it's shadow. If one ship is consistently preferred above all others, especially for a PvP function then either the others need a boost or that one needs a nerf.
Now a nerf is easier, as it brings a ship down to the level of the competition and requires only changes to the one ship. A boost effects too many variables in most cases, and can have wider ramifications by knock-on-effect. Therefore, if your ship is the uberest by a significant margin you should expect it to get sat on by the nerf tree.
~Ryoji Tanakama
Daikoku Fleet Shipyards |
Derek Grim
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 13:24:00 -
[85]
I do agree with the OP, and have seen this happen in several MMO's over the years. Though I am new to Eve, and I've always wondered a few things that maybe someone can explain to me.
A) Why have races if there is no real difference? What I mean is, Race A has the same stats as Race B, other than Starting Skills, what really makes them different? They both can cross train if they want. They both can train the same Skills that each other can, and as far as I know there is no boost, nor penalty to learning any skills based on race? So what makes the Races different?
B) Ships. Now then again, I am new so my view may be skewed. There seems to be only Two decent fitting layouts per Ship. As for ship Choice, it seems to me that there tends to be a 'favored' ship of each Class type, and the other ship(s) are just an option for specific situations.
Anyway, sorry for the rambling, I guess overall I like the Idea of what Eve is/was but not enjoying the direction that it may be heading. This has nothing to do with specific nerfs or any Ship, just a general feeling.
Repectfully, -- Derek Grim
Remember - Wherever you go, there you are. |
Matrixcvd
Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 13:48:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Tarminic There's nothing killing EVE - it's been growing consistently for several years now. People are whining, people have whined, and people will continue to whine. If CCP decides to nerf something it will be due to the massive amount of data they have on how various ships or modules are purchased/lost/used primarily and input from the community secondarily.
EVE will survive the carrier nerf, will survive drone bandwidth, and will survive any future nerfs unless they're truly short-sighted and idiotic, which I don't think will ever happen.
You must be a dev, your in everyone of these threads telling us how its all gonna be ok. Are you seriously going to say the lastest batch of nerfs has not brought about a total firestorm, its no longer a whine its a mob and they want blood for screwing with the game in all facets. From BW to Carrier to torp, there are a huge number of threads started, locked restarted discussing these changes, way more than the NOS nerf.
The only thing that is saving Eve at this point is that there is no alternative. These major mechanics shifts are ridiculous. And you said it best, these changes are short sided idiotic and without a true understanding. Take that back to your leader and tell him to leave us alone
|
Garia666
Amarr T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:20:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Garia666 on 29/10/2007 14:23:10 Edited by: Garia666 on 29/10/2007 14:22:07
i havent read your post but i agree to your topic header..
CCP shouldnt ballance all the ship types. Every race should have his better ships and less good ones.
small example.
in the old days amarr had the geddon with the heat sinks staking.. making it a n effective ship. Amarr was happy and notorious
and so had every race a ship or a couple one`s wit its qualitys. and that was the ballance of the game..
now a days they make something for every race and then ballance them in a way they do all the same .. ( more or less ). you could just create ships with no race atached to it.. and make it availible for everyone.. Just like the ore ships.. you dont hear anyone complaining about ore.. just because of that...
->My Vids<- |
Occara
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:20:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Moon Kitten I disagree with the entire premise of your argument.
i approve of your sig
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:30:00 -
[89]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 29/10/2007 14:30:40 This has been pretty obvious for a while.
CCP has intentionally been making EVE design changes for the purpose of promoting cookie-cutter fittings and diminishing any actual thought required to play the game.
It is one of many reasons why EVE is pretty much going to die within the next 5-7 years.
23 Member
EVE Video makers: save bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! (updated) |
OneSock
Crown Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 15:00:00 -
[90]
Completely agree.
CCP think Eos must be brought in line with other fleet commands. Ok fine.
Now then CCP, bring the Nano Vagabond in line with the other HACs. Only fair, right ? Right ?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |