Dev Blog: October Balance Pass!

dev-blog
official

(Sobaan Tali) #3006

Except if either ECM boat landed a jam, the target would be able to target no one, not even the ECM boats jamming. Now, regardless of ECM success, an ECM boat is effectively always targetable, even when ECM is on the table.


(Sylvia Kildare) #3007

Sure. I wasn’t trying to say that that aspect is a buff or something, that’s how it always was.

Just pointing out that where it’s a nerf to the ECM ship, the other ships in his fleet are still protected from being locked.

I think it was a silly change, and I’ve never flown an ECM ship in my life.


(Unseen Spectre) #3008

@Brisc_Rubal
Was it ever considered to make a special sensor booster anti-ECM script that allow a jammed ship to target the jamming ship (de facto as per the current ECM change), but with the added cost of fitting a sensor booster? (i.e. if a sensor booster with the above mentioned script, ECM would function like it did before the change). This should give a 100% counter to ECM while also adding some fitting costs/choices.

Furthermore, some of the general balancing parameters could be associated with the usage of the script, potentially reducing the need to balance each Caldari ECM script individually, and also making ECM viable to some degree for solo players.


(Brisc Rubal) #3009

I think we’re beyond that at this point.


(Unseen Spectre) #3010

@Brisc_Rubal
While you may be right, you did not answer the question.

I can only construe your reply that it was not considered.

Unfortunately, looking back at the entire process I think there was quite a few things that CCP/CSM failed to consider before the ECM change was rushed through.

Anyway, thank you for your feedback.


(Brisc Rubal) #3011

Regardless of whether it was considered or not, the changes are live and have been live for over a month. Whatever balance needs to be done after this current balance wave will be made moving forward under the new system since it has largely done what it was intended to do.

It’s a waste of time to be proposing “they should have done X” when what’s been done has been done, and there’s no hue and cry that it needs to be rolled back.


(Unseen Spectre) #3012

@Brisc_Rubal
I am not suggesting that it is rolled back, I was just asking whether a solution was considered that would basically do the same as the current solution at the fitting cost of a sensor booster.

Anyway, the change is here and we have to live with it. And if the aim was to nerf ECM for solo players, it certainly has.

Going forward, I am just hoping that next time CCP/CSM want to make a significant change they will do a more thorough job considering various options and not just rushing the decision through (this may not have been what actually happened, but from what I have seen from the CSM meeting minutes and the way the ECM change was communicated it surely looked like this to me).


(Brisc Rubal) #3013

A lot of different things were considered, and the one that was chosen was the quickest and easiest change that could be coded in a reasonable amount of time.

This was an issue that had been brought up by multiple past CSMs, so it wasn’t the first time it was asked for, nor was it something that somebody just came up with on the fly.

I wish folks would give CCP the benefit of the doubt that this type of change wasn’t just thrown together at the last minute because somebody asked for it without knowing what they were asking for.


(BIade Runner) #3014

You need to work up better your argumentation, is so full of cognitive dissonances that it can even make a good definition for that issue.

After you skip some rationalizations, you can see that this two phrases just go completely one against each other…
May be disturbing to see the kind of “logic” present into CSM membership, but i already got used with the fact that you are just rolling words like a mindless chat bot, and that you cannot care less if what you say makes any sense at all.
Writing on this forums is more a pure reflex and automation for you, like a physiological act.
Some professional deformation, i guess…

PS: Not because it really matters, but can you bring any argument in the favor of this urgency to change a game mechanic as old as the game itself? Other one than the obvious “…because somebody asked for it without knowing what they were asking for”.


(Unseen Spectre) #3015

@Brisc_Rubal
Credit should be given when credit is due and generally I think CCP do a very decent job when doing the balancing (at least in the areas I normally deal with). Unfortunately, this is not one of them.

Even though CCP/CSM had plenty of occasions to discuss this matter the quickest and easiest solution was chosen even though there seems to have been time to come up with a more suitable solution. Quick and easy do not always mean best.

While there may be more to it, the simple, cynical analysis from my point of view is that this solution was chosen in order to show “we do something”, it was rather quick and easy, it did not take too many resources, and it silenced the “bad feeling” complaints.

Unfortunately, it just shifted the problem. To name a few:

  • Now CCP can expect complaints from solo players who used to use the old ECM or people like me who just thinks it a bad solution. While we cannot change how ECM works, we do not need to agree with it.

  • It severely weakened an already suffering EWAR (CCP Rise’s words) – and though CCP say they want to improve ECM, there is still a very long way to go to even come close. The most recent buffs seem rather insignificant and make it necessary to make a tradeoff between tank and ECM rather than improving both.

  • It forced a line of ships into a role they are not designed for which will require CCP to use time and resources to do balancing (which may take a very long time).

  • It moves the Caldari line of EWAR ships further away from what seems to be the general design of EWAR for the other empires, i.e. they have 2 types of EWAR (I know technically cap warfare is not EWAR) and the EWAR ships of the other empires gain advantage from their own EWAR (making them useful for solo players).

And this is just to name a few besides all the other arguments in the threads discussing the matter.

So no credit for CCP/CSM for this one from my side.

I am not saying it cannot be fixed, but there is a very, very…. long way to go.

Only time will tell.

Edit: And maybe, just maybe… maybe the need for an ECM change could have been received better in the threads had CCP asked for input before implementing the ECM change. And maybe, just maybe… maybe the input from the community could have yielded a more balanced solution than the current one. Anyway, the chance for this has passed, but maybe there is something to learn from this going forward?


(Iowa Banshee) #3016

I’m beginning to think the Change was not just about feelings

Maybe after months of development someone suddenly realized that ECM would make the new abyssal pvp arena a bit of a Flop ?


(Unseen Spectre) #3017

@Iowa_Banshee
That may very well be. I cannot say.


(Corraidhin Farsaidh) #3018

The idea that this has been a problem for a long time, yet the quickest and easiest chang was implemnted just doesn’t make sense. If there’s been ages to think about it, surely a fully thought out solution should have been worked up and implemented. I don’t buy that I’m afraid.


(Unseen Spectre) #3019

@Corraidhin_Farsaidh
I am just referring to the comments made by Brisc Rubal in his previous post.


(Nevyn Auscent) #3020

Go and read his comments. It wasn’t “The quickest & easiest”.
You are just misquoting because of your bias on this.


(Unseen Spectre) #3021

@Nevyn_Auscent
This is what Brisc Rubal wrote:


(Nevyn Auscent) #3022

Yes, now read the second part of that statement, not just the bit that you wanted to read.


(Unseen Spectre) #3023

@Nevyn_Auscent
Yes, I know that the ECM change had been brought up and discussed on several meetings, and from those ideas they chose the quickest and easiest one to implement. My point is that while there may have been other ideas that may have been more balanced, they still chose the one currently found on Tranquility - therefore, I write the quickest and easiest solution may not always be the best.

And if you look at the CSM minutes it does not seem that much time was spent on it if you look at the description of the matter. The description of the ECM change in the minutes may not fully represent the discussion at the meeting (I was not there so I have no way of knowing), but it could also mean that it was not discussed thoroughly at the meeting.

The text describing the ECM change in the CSM minutes (judge for yourself):

> ECM is mentioned and CCP Rise feels that being able to do something on the field despite being jammed would be a necessary change to make a good ECM balance. One idea which was thrown around was to be able to target the ship which is jamming the player.

In the end it does not matter much since the ECM change went through and we will have to deal with that. I just hope that they come up with a sensible balance for Caldari EWAR. This could of course be done in several ways, including giving the other faction’s EWAR the same treatment as ECM (the relevant EWAR types) and adding a second EWAR type to the Caldari faction that would benefit the EWAR ship itself. This would bring EWAR ships to the same general design. That would be ok with me.


(Sakura Hoshizora) #3024

That seems to be the only real reason why they introduced this trainwreck of ECM change.

And it will still take them at least two years with monthly buffs to ECM ships to get them to have an acceptable (not OP) tank.


(Brisc Rubal) #3025

When has that ever happened?