Devblog: Spring Balance Update Incoming!

Folks use these forums for legitimate complaints all the time. At the same time, those of us (for whatever reason) who read the forums daily and interact daily get to know the pulse. And what Bob said is absolutely accurate - whenever nerfs happen that impact high sec or high sec wants changes, they routinely get mocked by nullseccers for being carebears and wanting to be able to print isk risk free, etc. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, they can’t help but be amused at the reactions.

That’s a perfectly fair assessment.

5 Likes

This is why Eve-Online’s player controlled economy is super awesome! Excavators prices are completely controlled by players. The value of them depends on the drone goo and the BPC that players obtained. If less players feel like Excavators and Rorquals are worth the cost, the demand will go down and so will the price until it stabilizes.

The only problem is that any larger nerf would make super/carrier ratting unreliable. They’re trying to balance the ability to rat with the inability to pop subcaps too quickly.

Btw, wasn’t it just a bit easier to just nerf bounty’s of NPC for 10-20%?

1 Like

Right, you’ve admittedly made the solo rorq more vulnerable. This hurts who? Who benefits? Who is not affected in the least? The answers to those questions should shed some light on the legitimate problems people have with these changes.

1 Like

Except it’s not completely controlled by players. The drone goo remains a bottleneck.

3 Likes

I am kind of curious, is there any reason that dreads didn’t get touched in this capital balance? I feel like they are easily the most effective against subcaps.

Well said to be honest.

It does open up a lot more ship’s that are viable to take on cap’s thou If my math’s is right cruiser’s should be doing a lot better after those change’s.

1 Like

Finally done reading just about 350 posts.

So from what I gather, out of those who make posts proclaimining the balance changes are bad:

  • Vast majority of posters are either with Imperium, Legacy or Fraternity
  • Most base their opinion solely from their individual perspective, where they feel wronged due to having been good crabs and grinded out enough for a capital PvE fleet of their own (may it be ratting or mining), of which they are entitled to continously reap rewards of mad ticks and low risk crabbing at a high ISK/hour.
  • Seems to believe that these balance changes will somehow increase PLEX prices and thereby make CCP richer (wtf?), and that it is CCP’s true motivation for doing the balance changes
  • Still tries to spin it, as if they are the holy white knights of ‘small NS alliances’, that the big blocks won’t hurt from these changes, and in reality it’s just punishing the ‘newbros’ trying to ‘catch up’.

The reality is that all of these balance changes adress aspects of the game which have been severaly broken for several years from various standpoints, both in terms of gameplay and in game economics.

Constant viable complaints have been made due to the implications of this, and the vast majority of players now embrace a very long overdue fix. The ones who primarily seem to oppose it, are the very ones who’ve managed to maximize these indescrepancies for the longest time, and to the greatest extent.

I guess some people feel that certain changes are just a bit overwhelming, being so much, in one single go. I guess they could have split up those balance changes over time, to make it hurt less for the crabs who’ve been cruising semi-AFK under a super-umbrella for 150-200 mil/hour?

All in all, great work with the balance change CCP. And keep it up going forward.

4 Likes

In order:
Presumably fools. People who built Rorquals. NPCs!

1 Like

Changes look good.

Excited by the remote assistance changes but at the same time a little disappointed by how slight they are.

Very excited by the hinted changes coming this year. Hurrah module rebalancing! (hopefully with meta module industry attached)

1 Like

Поддерживаю, многие пилоты вкидывают донат в игру, дабы достичь к капиталам, а тут на тебе сокращают!! Что за хуйня? Может ССП придумают возврат вложенных средств в игру?

1 Like

That’s fair enough. I would be saying the same thing to those nullsec carebears, but to be entirely fair I don’t spend much time on the forums.

Dreadnoughts have many weaknesses (Siege mode prevents mobility and remote assistance). They feel like the most fair capital ship currently in the game.

Max Tank Titans were doing the same DPS as 3x Damage Mod Dreads while also cancelling out 6 dreads with 1 FAX repairing them. Making them generally untouchable in entrenched space unlike Dreadnoughts which can easily be overwhelmed.

4 Likes

ur acting like everyone has a fleet of titans ready to help you ? sorry but reality is normal players dont have that.
Consider other alternatives ? yes sure tell me wich ship can make same Money as a super carrier and carrier can ? in same TIME. couse time is the bloody problem here now aint it.
seariously your pushing ur thumb on normal players so hard you cant even see your doing it.

carrier ratting is the only viable means to get isk these Days. there is no other ship that can compete. and now we get punished couse goons are doing it.
why not just ban goons from useing it and let normal players do that would solve the problem now would it not ?

getting fuel and payment for home systems will be like a second job and people will not tolerate it
they will quit or RMT
and you guys are to blame for that .

2 Likes

Because they’re basically popcorn. And no, carriers have been much more effective against subcaps. Show me a dread that can do its full damage to frigates from over 5,000km away while burning at 1km/s.

1 Like

Unless of course you are a the mercy of an arbitrary drop rate of rats that are now less likely to be farmed thanks to nerfs. So I’ll say it again, when is the blueprint going to be changed to reflect diminished capacity?

1 Like

Wtf? Give me what you’re smoking, mate.

2 Likes

Then remember the first rule of EVE: don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose.

1 Like