| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Serratin
Perkone
Caldari State
0
   |
Posted - 2011.09.13 13:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
What is wrong with EVE?
My opinion is that it is not the strengths or the weakness of any one ship.......but the usage of the ships.
As an example......the Titans were introduced into the game with the AOE Doomsday to counter the SuperBlob. The SuperBlob caused the problem of Massive LAG, so the Titan and AOE Doomsday.
The BLOB still exists as of this time............its composition is what has changed.....be it a t3 cruiser fleet with logistics support or a SuperCap fleet............no matter which fleet it is the problem is that it is not a FLEET of ships...........!
A fleet of ships is composed of supporting vessels............frigates supporting cruisers supporting battleships supporting capitals with specialty ships supporting each of those groups..........
YOU DO NOT SEE ANY.........I REPEAT ANY FLEETS SO COMPOSED!
Until a way is found to get fleets together and lose the blob eve will not BALANCE. it can not balance.....
I do not have the answer. but the first step is always to identify the problem.
Nerf'ing Supers. buff'ing whatever will not change that the BLOB of a majority of one type of ship can be used to devastating effect...........this is not a fleet.
as an example.
1 Destroyer for every 3 Frigates.
3 Frigates for every Cruiser.
3 to 5 Cruisers for every BattleShip
5 or more Battleships for each Capital
5 or more Capitals for each SuperCarrier
3 to 5 SuperCarriers for each Titan
things like Electronic Warfare frigates, interceptors, Assault frigates could be figured in as a reduction type multiplyer
same with some of the other types of ships.............
The problem I see is how to get the Fleet composition forced into play.
Sorry i don't have the answer to that. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 14:12:00 -
[2] - Quote
My suggestion was actually adding a new t2 bs that was based off the t3 hulls.
Give the ships a massive damage buff while at the same time giving them basically terrible tracking or large explosion radius for missiles.
Give them a buff to smart bomb damage and range, but restrict them to only using one.
The heavy damage with bad tracking makes them perfect for capitals but weak against anything smaller, which means that they fit perfectly into the fleet compilation that you're suggesting.
These ships would also suggest to the capital blobs to build a mix fleet as well, or die.
These ships would require little more to make than the t1 version.
This is to increase the price, but not make them so expensive that no one will use them in pvp like marauders, however, it needs to be increased enough to where it's destruction is at a loss to the pilot, but not a massively significant loss. |
Rek Seven
Zandathorn Industries
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 14:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
I think the problem with this game is that itGÇÖs (dare i say it...) too simple. People will always go with a blob because anything different (but potentially better) is too hard to organise and manage.
Flying through low sec, all i see is drake groups with ecm support. ItGÇÖs simple and it works and so everyone does it and it just becomes a case of whose blob is bigger.
The only place in eve that has interesting pvp is wormhole space, simply because there is no local. In wormhole space, you are actually incentivised to fly smaller ships, the bigger your fleet is.
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 14:39:00 -
[4] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I think the problem with this game is that itGÇÖs (dare i say it...) too simple. People will always go with a blob because anything different (but potentially better) is too hard to organise and manage.
Flying through low sec, all i see is drake groups with ecm support. ItGÇÖs simple and it works and so everyone does it and it just becomes a case of whose blob is bigger.
The only place in eve that has interesting pvp is wormhole space, simply because there is no local. In wormhole space, you are actually incentivised to fly smaller ships, the bigger your fleet is.
On top of the ship suggestion I made, it would be nice if CCP would actually find a way to reduce the price of t2 ships a good bit so that players would actually be less weary of the costs of t2 ships and actually use them for pvp.
The golem would be great dps for taking down drake fleets, but the golems is too expensive to risk.
So, instead of "BALANCING SHIPS" CCP can add a cap busting b.s. and find a way to reduce the costs of t2 ships, and boom.
Fleets in eve will be made up of entirely different compilations.
Capital blobs will be a bad idea with the introduction of my ship suggestion, and cheaper t2 ships would combat drake and/or t3 ship blobs because ships that can take them down fairly quickly will be introduced into the fight. |
Tyberius Euthipticus
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 16:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
With the biggest problem being blobs, why not introduce a script to the doomsday device allowing it to be focused or AOE like the hictor has with the interdiction bubble gen. That in itself would force people to reduce the size of the fleets to reduce the amount of potential loss.
Personally I think that taking away the AOE DD was partially a big mistake allowing larger blobs and greater lag due to fleet size. Of course then there would just be more fleets of smaller size but the possibility of them all being in the same place at the same time is greatly reduced given certain circumstances. |
Rek Seven
Zandathorn Industries
3
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 16:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tyberius Euthipticus wrote:With the biggest problem being blobs, why not introduce a script to the doomsday device allowing it to be focused or AOE like the hictor has with the interdiction bubble gen. That in itself would force people to reduce the size of the fleets to reduce the amount of potential loss.
Personally I think that taking away the AOE DD was partially a big mistake allowing larger blobs and greater lag due to fleet size. Of course then there would just be more fleets of smaller size but the possibility of them all being in the same place at the same time is greatly reduced given certain circumstances.
Agreed. Our corp was talking about the exact same thing the other day. They should have a script for the Titan.
If any ship deserves to be OP in this game it's the Titan... F'ing stupid CCP  |
Carnadyne
Galactic Alta Imperata
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 17:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
Quote:The problem I see is how to get the Fleet composition forced into play.
Sorry i don't have the answer to that.
The problem there is that people want to min/max and fly what will give the greatest chance of success.
To fix the "fleet composition" the best way would be to apply/deny bonuses - could start at the wing level and move up to the fleet level. Wings without support just wouldn't get link bonuses, etc and roll it all the way up. Thus if they wanted max bonuses, they'd have to have appropriate balance of ships/support.
This might take a bit of coding effort, and I'm not real optimistic that it would jump to the top of the list of dev priorities.
|
Kon Illat
2 Minutes of Oxygen
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 17:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
There are two basic ways to steer fleets into the pyramid you have suggested.
1. Give smaller ships a way to disable modules on larger ships via subsystem targeting. (something that has been talked about vs cap ships, but never implemented)
2. Severely reduce the ability for larger ships to damage smaller ones. To do this, drones would have to be nerfed on most ships. A flight of 5 light drones will tear into a frigate relatively easy. Forcing fleets to use defensive frigates/destroyers to counter other frigates would be the ultimate goal for this method.
If you try to hard restrict fleet composition, corporations will no longer use the "fleet" option and instead fly as a group out of fleet and use TS or vent to coordinate.
As far as blobs go - I have no clue. |
Havak Kouvo
State War Academy
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 18:26:00 -
[9] - Quote
Lack of release of noticeable "useful" changes to the interface or common activities.
An example is how long the corp roles are long out of data of what players/corporations need to be effective. How in the corp management window, the spreadsheets column extend beyond the range of the window, with no horizontal scrolling, and if you don't have a large enough monitor, you have to manually reduce the size of each column.
How while there have apparently been regular updates to the server performance, the client has consistently gotten slower, and not just in fleet engagements. Sometimes it takes the client forever to start, or login. Or when undocking, there can be times where it takes forever for you to get rid of the 'black screen of death'. Or how models are now taking longer to load, resulting in empty space for noticeable periods of time, even on underloaded nodes.
CCP claimed that their would be regular updates to the ship models and textures, but a year later, only one other ship has had a noticeable change to its model/
CCP designed the game with the idea that processor would just keep getting faster and hasn't adapted enough yet to the fact that processors are getting more cores and not higher clock speeds.
POSs... POSs... POSs.... |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 18:41:00 -
[10] - Quote
I still feel my suggestion would probably balance out very well with little tweaking while still allowing cap ships to be as powerful as they are now, but be forced to fit into a well rounded fleet, instead of a super cap blob. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |