Devblog: Spring Balance Update Incoming!

[Huren_Ogeko]

Exactly. They are what they are but I remember when they were not this way. but yet people complain about them not being as good they they were a month ago but should be happy they are 1000 times better then they were a few years back. I think ccp went too far in the original rorq changes and now people are upset that they are dialing it back a little at a time over and over again looking for what ccp thinks is the right balance.
It would be a whole other conversation if ccp dialed them up slowly with small buff after small buff. then it would be a different group complaining but the ship would still end up in the same net result position in the end.

[Arrendis]

@Huren_Ogeko

It does actually if you read it correctly. The next fax after the subcaps picks up where the line left off as if the subcaps were not even there. I think the way they presented the data makes its a little confusing but if look at what that line represents you will see.

Yes, but what Rise is claiming is that the majority of the ‘diminishment’ comes from the bigger reps. If you look up-thread, you’ll see where I actually went through the numbers that graph presents to show that that’s not what it seems to say at all.

@Huren_Ogeko

I think they should mind some, and a lot more then say an orca but maybe not as much as multiple boosted hulks. This ship was suppose to be a support ship but people have been using them to replace exhumers and we wonder why we have such a problem.

Moon mining is one of the things we generally dont even use rorqs for since moons on 1-2 week pulls dont normally have enough mass to make a sieging a rorq worth while.

A) No, the ship was previously supposed to be a support ship. Since this will be something like the 4th or 5th neft, since they were changed, it should be pretty obvious that ‘as much as multiple boosted hulks’ is actually where the devs want them. The CSM told them going into that original buff that it was too much, but… this is what they wanted.

B) 1-2 week pulls? Good god, man, live somewhere civilized where you can set them for full-sized fracks.

[FairyDrakonchik]

several years ago motherships (now known as supercarriers) also was almost only for fights - but nowdays its one the most popular ratting ship in null-sec - but why they have such problem with rorqs?

[CrankyApe]

A Rorq is now roughly equivalent to two Hulks. Used to be 5, then got nerfed to three.

[Nuke_Michael]

good luck trying to multibox super ratting

[Brisc_Rubal]

@Alea_Kootz

You did accept the premise of dewk’s statement. And If supply of isk or ore needed to be reduced, perhaps reducing the supply of isk or ore via reducing the number or rate of anomalies would be a good way to do that. Reducing the rate at which isk is earned or ore is mined cannot reduce the supply of either in a game where skill injectors and plex exsist.

I’ll read the CSM minutes, like I always have. And I’ll pm you to admit you were right, if I see any reasonable suggestions that CCP ignored.

I didn’t accept his premise - I asked him how he can claim to know all the things he alleged.

[Huren_Ogeko]

@Arrendis

A) No, the ship was previously supposed to be a support ship. Since this will be something like the 4th or 5th neft, since they were changed, it should be pretty obvious that ‘as much as multiple boosted hulks’ is actually where the devs want them. The CSM told them going into that original buff that it was too much, but… this is what they wanted .

I agree with that. Personally I think they went too far then in dialing them back they get so many upset people. I think they needed to approach it from the other direction. But given I used these ships in the old days I have no problems using them as support ships again, personally I think they would be best if used more for support and only have mining as minor sub role.

@Arrendis

B) 1-2 week pulls? Good god, man, live somewhere civilized where you can set them for full-sized fracks.

We do the 2 week pulls so we can knock them down quicker and not spend long periods of time messing with them when some of our r64 moons tend to be in spicy locations with minimal coverage for defense. I like mining ops to be free of content that rorqs tend to attract. But once the mining is done we are more the happy to bring content to someone else’s group of rorqs on another moon.
And we do enjoy people hitting our bait procurer who is always seems to be too slow to warp of when hostiles come in system.

[BruceLee_Xadi]

Capitals get nuked constantly, no one needs to inject into anything to compete.

[Dravick_Afterthought]

“Don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose”…

[Huren_Ogeko]

@Dravick_Afterthought

“Don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose”…

EXACTLY
capslock intended

[BruceLee_Xadi]

You also will not be able to defend yourself from VNI hunters.

[Arrendis]

@Huren_Ogeko

Personally I think they went too far then in dialing them back they get so many upset people. I think they needed to approach it from the other direction.

Yeah, it’s always easier (and better for getting your players to like the changes and not be angry with you) to start off insufficient and slowly give them more than it is to be too generous and have to take things away.

[Brisc_Rubal]

@White_Russsian

What about the Widow? it is has been rendered useless with the ECM nerf. Would be good to give it some love.

It got a power grid upgrade and a sig radius reduction in November. It’s not useless.

[Huren_Ogeko]

@BruceLee_Xadi

You also will not be able to defend yourself from VNI hunters.

Its a good thing VNIs are cheap and easily replaced. Our alliance even SRPs them for ratting purposes.

[Arrendis]

Yeah, my bag of popcorn can’t defend itself from a movie theater, either. So what? It’s a bag of popcorn.

It’s a VNI. It costs less than a bag of popcorn. If its still too expensive, use a Myrmidon.

[Fjord_O_Neal]

Personally I’m not happy with the changes at all. This is a game. A game about advancement. You work hard, you keep your skills training and you become a T2/T3 pilot or a Capital pilot. With the achievement of that you get the benefits, the higher damage, the higher mining skills, the ability to do things others can’t because you took the time to achieve that.

I’m going to focus on the Rorq as that’s my game play. By reducing the ability of a Rorq to defend itself you make it extremely risky to have on field.

By reducing the mining ability you increase the amount of time it takes a Rorq to recoup it’s loses/potential loses. Already it can take weeks if not months of mining for a Rorq to mine enough to cover itself if it dies.

Basically I’m saying why would a person want to spend the months and months of training time to get into a Rorq and save up the months and months to buy a fully fit Rorq with drones only to risk a significant portion of that each time they go out?

I play by the moto “Don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose” and so I save and work hard to be able to replace my ships if I die. So when you’re telling me I can now lose almost double what I’m used to risking, that is a whole new component to my play style. Now I have to weigh the risk vs rewards.

Also keep in mind alot of people don’t have the type of security that Delve offers or the response they offer. The answer is they won’t want to risk that for that low of a payout.

Players then get stuck in a Exhumer or Barge or Orca. That’s it, that’s the level of advancement they can achieve in the game? What’s the point, what’s the incentive to keep people coming back? Not all players like to PVP, as much as you try to force it down their throats with updates like this. I get this game is a Sandbox PVP game, but you also built it to be a large PVE game as well with the requirements of mining/building/salvaging to make the vast majority of ships/mods in game. So you can’t complain when people want to do PVE content.

This game has changed a ton since it’s inception, so have the ships and their uses. You can’t just turn back time because you don’t like how much ISK certain ships are making. CCP, you’re the ones who barely release new content, rarely a new ship. If you want to change the Meta, stop trying to go back to the good ol’ days and start churning out new content worth a damn.

What I’m saying is you can’t make a nice shiny goal and then get mad when people get that goal and start to use it for all it’s worth. You need miners to fuel this type of game. You need to incentivize staring at rocks all day be it with relative safety or speed so the miners don’t have to sit around all day doing nothing and can go out and do something else. When you take away both you basically tell the PVE miners that their time/gameplay isn’t worth a damn, that you could care less about their enjoyment of the game. Also ■■■■ the answer “BOTSS” That’s on you as a company. You don’t get to nerf everything to make our game play shitty under the guise of “BOTTTSSSS” Take the time to figure out tools to combat bots and stop trying to nerf them out of existence.

[Brisc_Rubal]

@dewk

any intelligent developer/programmer would look at many of these suggestions and see the benefit to them. I’m sure many CSM members of the years have seen it to, but the question is why has CSM failed to push any of these ideas through the CCP process?

is the CSM just a mean of CCP passing the buck to CSM and those avoid answering the community questions and the CSM members get hammered instead of CCP over these “balances”?

We can’t “push anything through” - we can make suggestions and provide feedback on the proposed changes, but in the end, we aren’t bringing CCP designs and telling them to implement them. They decide what they want to do based on a variety of factors at the time. At best, we can influence what they work on and try to stop them if something is really, really bad. Otherwise, we tell them we think something is a problem and they develop the solution.

I highlight feedback from good posts all the time, and I grab stuff that I see and pass it on constantly. You may have thought some ECM change was better than what was proposed, but that doesn’t mean CCP agreed or what you thought was simple to code actually was.

We provide feedback. Whether CCP chooses to act on that feedback is up to them.

You also don’t seem to get that we all support most of these changes as necessary.

[Huren_Ogeko]

@Fjord_O_Neal

This is a game. A game about advancement. You work hard, you keep your skills training and you become a T2/T3 pilot or a Capital pilot.

Its more of game of adaptation and player skill. SP isnt the most important skill in this game. The most important skill is inside that brain we all hope people have attached to their head.
To be good at any game you need to adapt to win no matter the rules at the time. Here in lies difference between the men and the boys. (or women and girls as there are some of them in eve)

[Brisc_Rubal]

@dewk

that’s raises an old question, who’s interest are CSM raising issues for?

sometimes it seems to be for the small group that yells the loudest, instead of the betterment of the game and community at large.

now I maybe wrong, by saying the above, but everyone who used ECM ships asked that question when the ECM balance was applied, the fix seems to favour a specific group of players, but not the gameplay or the community as a whole.

You’re 100% wrong. The ECM changes are a perfect example - the vast majority of the community supported and agreed with them. It was only the folks who used ECM as an I Win button in solo PvP who were upset. They were loud, but in the end the changes went through and most folks have simply adapted. Those were changes that benefited the community as a whole, but one small group that was negatively impacted didn’t like.

[Huren_Ogeko]

@Brisc_Rubal Despite you being Imperium…I often feel very sorry for you as you might be the most sane person the CSM and doing the most good with the most common sense. And you are still here taking abuse and trying to help at the same time.

I might not always agree but you have my respect.