| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Aedron
Sinister Defiance
Elitist Cowards
   |
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:22:00 -
[1]
balance... its a terrible thing when a game company talks about balance. I like Rock, Paper, Scissors me.
With this nerf essentially being another step towards balance in a game you all must ask is that what we want?
Balance - (in an eve scene) would mean every ship has the same odds in every situation for whatever reason. Full balance would mean that a cerb has the same chance as a vagabond in PvP as it has in PvE and all the variations within the two. The only difference being the class of ship rather that the type or race. Leading to the question why have 4 separate races in the first place?
The Speed ISSUE not problem was that nano spec ships where one of the last remaining specializations remaining in the game. Ewar has been nerfed to the point of extinction and so now its the speed fit ships turn. well what has that got to do with rock, paper scissors I hear you ask?
It in start of every game there is the Rock, Paper Scissors Idea and its what makes the game great, its core. It allows a certain ship or class in a game to be miles better than another while being controlled by its counter part.
The wrong tree? I believe that CCP is barking entirely up the wrong tree, apposed to adding a sufficient counter part to the game they have removed the issue itself. Whats wrong with that? well basically your removing a play style, or as CCP would like you to believe limiting it to the point where its no longer fun.
Thats wrong, instead of removing the Rock they should add the paper. Alter the existing ships or implement new ones and add to the gameplay aposed to removing from it.
Why do this? If you keep removing from a game choice is effected. Some may argue that by removing the nano ships (might as well call them the HAC class) you will have more variety but thats only because the other ships, specializations are underdeveloped.
So ok,what should be implemented then?
After testing things like,
Making the HIC bubble also have a Web Script that effects everyone inside its bubble.
Increased Tracking and falloff for all sniper ships giving them the ability to shoot up close AND far away.
Increasing the effectiveness of the Ewar Frig, making them immune to web and jamming.
Decreasing the cost of bombs and increasing the effectiveness
Fixing all the recons so they can actually work
Making spider tanking better, Warfare links better
I think most will agree that majority would rather see CCP implement MORE content to the game than keep removing it. Yes being able to move "silly" fast is hard to combat in this game but if people are spending 1.8bill to get there then let them. Implement new ways to combat these issues apposed to removing essentially your own content or you will end up with a game that has less avalible content that when it was first launched. (for example mines? hehe)
|
Aedron
Sinister Defiance
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:46:00 -
[2]
All I know is, if this was put to a vote. PvPers would vote against this nerf on the majority while care bears will vote for it. Majority of care bears are empire bound and have no say in the matter as it has no effect on them.
Main reason people go with nano ships is there isnt any choice to combat blob warfare. Give us more options and then the nano will be less used.
As this nerf stands the Nano will still be used but will be more of a target to blobs and blobs only.
|
Aedron
Sinister Defiance
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:52:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Grath Telkin
Originally by: Thorradin
Some of you are just bitter that you have to actually 'hit and run' now, and can't just do whatever you feel like in an area as long as you'd like.
no, were ****ed cause we can hit, but we now run like a one legged man, so the concept of hit and run has been destroyed.
Originally by: Thorradin
The fact that people actually would say to train for a couple specific ships to counter a setup usable with great success on damn near every sub capital ship, should've been that first alarm bell.
Those people were idiots, there were literally a good dozen counters to a nano hac. That should be what makes you question some people's skill. The fact that more people didn't know those counters.
wait a sec
Originally by: Thorradin
The fact that people actually would say to train for a couple specific ships to counter a setup usable with great success on damn near every sub capital ship, should've been that first alarm bell.
so having to train purely to fight with this style of combat and invest 100's of millions to billons on a ship with no insurance is fine. Having to train to a high standard of SP 10-20mill SP for a decent nano toon is fine in your eyes
BUT IF YOU HAVE TO TRAIN 1/10TH OF THAT TO COUNTER IT!!! all hell breaks loose? you sir need to re-think that statement.
|
Aedron
Sinister Defiance
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 23:05:00 -
[4]
this topic isnt best suited to forums.
We have two clear sides forming here but here is the catch:
Side 1: against the nerf because its harmful to gameplay across the board. Aproching the debate with a decent respectful and informed view of the proposed alterations and confirming that its too overboard.
Side 2: Shouting as loud as they possibly can for the nerf, backed by nothing more than childish banter and an "in your face" attitude which is causing this to turn from debate into just slating.
Keep the posts constructive, post only when you can back up what you say.
|
Aedron
Sinister Defiance
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 23:17:00 -
[5]
there are too many people against this change for it logically to go ahead. End of the day its not about the amount for and against, its about the people against the change. If too many people say NO then they have to rethink.
and if they don't well then.. why ask for an opinion :P
|
Aedron
Sinister Defiance
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 23:20:00 -
[6]
Originally by: LetsDoThis
***MAKE WAY, COMING THROUGH WITH ACTUAL FEEDBACK***
Ok so, ignoring all the teary-eye hypocrisy, I think the ship-class speeds and ship-class turrent tracking and explosion velocity are off.
In general most people agree that lower ship classes shouldn't be easy fodder for higher class ammunition. Interceptors and AFs being blasted out of the air by medium sized weapns, and HACs being blasted easily by battleship sized weapons.
Also drones. I think its way too easy for larger ship classes to take out or chase off smaller tech 2 ship classes with drones now.
Bigger guns blow up smaller, cheaper ships... whats wrong with that?
|
Aedron
Sinister Defiance
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 15:35:00 -
[7]
no one responds to me, I'm invisible o.O
1. I disagree that a whole class of ship should be used in 1 way only and this nerf will see this happen.
2. BALANCE is a much hated thing in terms of gaming. Balance will see a cerb have the same chance in every situation as a vaga (and they have been designed to do two completely different things)
3. Along time ago Missles where the king of PvP, no sig radius reduction ment frigs just died. This was a happy time, because this was the age of eve where standard missle launchers could use Cruise Missles :P the days of the Cruise Missle crow is still missed :(
4. Removal of a game is BAD in anyones books. Keep removing content and your left with a ship you can spin around in station.
5. ROCK PAPER SCISSORS! for the people that dont know this childhood game look it up. Games in the modern age start of with these Ideas. They then BALANCE them out eventually giving into the few crying that their ship or character designed in healing cant kill people too.
6. ROCK = Nano Paper = Ewar, the ewar frigs where spoken about being made immune to webbing. Lighter, faster and cheaper than the HAC they would be an easy counter-part to add to the recons that nano's all love.
hope this gets read. I dont think I can slim it down any smaller xD
|
| |
|