Dev Blog: October Balance Pass!

dev-blog
official

(Brisc Rubal) #3046

This is correct. I don’t see the point in using all the hyperbole when for the most part that stuff is unnecessary.


(Corraidhin Farsaidh) #3047

In this case it wasn’t playing it down, it was outright misrepresentation (I’m not one for hyperbole either). This was a binary change, ECM worked in 1v1, now it doesn’t. Yes that’s ‘less’, but that’s just using semantics to pretend it’s less of an impact.


(Brisc Rubal) #3048

Regardless of the words I use, it’s obvious to everybody that it’s a big impact. You could do something before, now you can’t.

I really don’t get why you’re hung up on my word choice. It seems a stupid thing to complain about.


(Corraidhin Farsaidh) #3049

I’m not hung up on it, just keeping balance by pointing out that the others above had a point. It at least seems disingenuous to categorize works/doesn’t work as works/works ‘less well’.

Personally I believe CCP opened a particularly unpleasant can of worms changing ECM in this way. If I made a change to a live system in this way I’d expect to be looking for a new contract.


(techzer0) #3050

Why do you keep going on and on about ECM when you don’t even use it?

Stop whining.


(Sobaan Tali) #3051

What about adding missile disruption buffs to ECM boats so they have an alternate role that can still work in 1v1? It’s not glamorous, but still.


(Sakura Hoshizora) #3052

The ECM change doesn’t work.

So roll it back.


(Brisc Rubal) #3053

Looks like it’s working fine to me.


(Darwien Deninard) #3054

Lol. ECM re-balancing… like falcon needs more power and not cpu. Jokers.
ECM takes 4 slots, you need propulsion. calculate how much that additional power grid add. there is actually no other module you could equip that would not be suitable before patch.


(Darwien Deninard) #3055

We know it. Next time try to listen before you speak. Maybe it should be a part of CSM membership requirements to practice.


(Brisc Rubal) #3056

I’m always listening. Doesn’t change the fact that the changes are working the way they were supposed to work.


(BIade Runner) #3057

No, you are not, and no, it’s not working; you just keep throwing lies in our faces… like all politicians by the way :wink:


(Brisc Rubal) #3058

It’s not working? So what you’re telling me is that ECM is doing exactly what it did before the nerf?

Unless that’s what you’re saying, then it’s working.


(Iowa Banshee) #3059

I don’t usually reply to trolls techzer0 but

  • ALTS

Bye Felicia -nd See you next Tuesday


(techzer0) #3060

Still salty I put you in your place huh?
Its okay. I hear mild therapy will help you get over it. :rofl:


(GhostWhite) #3061

Why the nerf to the standup armor for structures ? isnt enough that it only takes 4 cruisers to destroy a citadel ? You did not even put this change in the patch notes. Back to mocking your playerbase, CCP ?


(Black Pedro) #3062

It’s in the patch notes under Structures and Deployables: https://www.eveonline.com/article/phvxrd/patch-notes-for-eve-online-onslaught

They did a minor revamp of how the timers works that involved changing a bunch of numbers, but the net result is no change for the amount of HP a powered structure has while reinforcing a unpowered structure is now slightly faster.


(Rivr Luzade) #3063

Indeed. Thanks so much for better ratting ticks. :joy: Who cares about the few people who use Rooks or Griffins for PVP. Just throw them under the bus, I want my better ratting ticks!


(Corraidhin Farsaidh) #3064

And there’s the thing isn’t it? Nobody is questioining that the changes are working as intended. They’re questioning what was intended.

The whole thing strikes me as a classic example of Agile development, and it’s faults. A quick and easy change, working as intended. Yet providing no solution because the problem wasn’t one that can be quickly and easily fixed.


(Brisc Rubal) #3066

If ECM was interfering with your ratting ticks before, you were doing it wrong.