i didn’t mean to insult him, calling his post hot air. sorry about that., though insulting his post doesn’t mean i’m insulting him anyway, but okay. no, it doesn’t.
nonetheless, it’s a good idea in theory. OP ships have always been a great FOTM, people loved them, people hated them. then it was a different groups of people turn to have an OP ship. you want to ruin this, for no good reason. it simply works, and it works well. everyone will eventually be flying an OP ship. the whole argument of “makes people quit” absolutely is hot air! there will always be reasons why people are quitting, and it’s never a real argument whatsoever.
the same goes on re CO2, where people blabla about people quitting, while reality shows that the vast majority is going to other alliances and the heist caused tons of news for the game, which is great! they use a fake argument, they declare everyone a victim by default, and they want to change the game for everyone, even though it’s not only extremely rare to happen and even though there’s no evidence that people don’t accept it as part of the game.
if even just a quarter of reasons for people quitting, were actually true, then the game would be long dead.
@Cade_Windstalker,
The reason I was very specific with some of the ships is that I am investigating them on SiSi for the last 3 weeks. I found many oddities and what I did propose is not unreasonable.
Regular tech 1 frigates have better capacitor and fitting. The Hawk is really weird with that shield booster bonus and has a minmatar feel to it.
What you believe is not my concern, my concern is subcapital ship balance.
Yes, I can agree that it provides a more complete picture… but I would argue it is not more reliable, because of the sheer volume of crud that CCP needs to sift through. An infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters will eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare… however I shudder to think of how many iterations fail (infinity -1 technically speaking). For every quality post on these forums, there’s probably at least 5 shitposts.
I’m not in goons the CSM won’t care. True to any election, an electoral candidate only really cares about their electorate during the election - modern democracy shows us this regularly.
Consider The Judge; he just boned like 6000 “of his own” people, I’m guessing many of whom voted for him. “That’s Eve” is totally a valid answer, but it also speaks to how he views other players - marks to be taken. How can you represent someone you don’t respect?
All of which have been music to my ears. They got sooo used to T3Cs being unstoppable and ludicrous. They’re still overpowered, though I agree they’re much better than they were. The saving grace here is that if CCP was indeed happy, T3Cs wouldn’t be on the poll.
I can certainly agree with that to an extent, but I cannot help but wonder if that is indeed actually a problem. If 20,000 players vote the way they were told, sure it allows mittens to influences policy, but all it does is pick something that CCP already decided was broken and in need of repair. And if said 20k players are backing something, seeing their voices heard is good for their morale. As kind of a litmus test, would players be any more or less salty if said balance pass happened as a result of CCP’s internal decisions rather than as a poll result?
Business as usual! The F&I thread is full of that already I’ve posted more than a few myself. I’ve made no secret that I think blops BBs are at this point in time useless in any form of combat role, I think that T3Ds and T3Cs are too powerful, and I think battleships and battlecruisers due to their lack of mobility are pretty useless for 90% of pvp. I’ve made many-a-post suggesting fixes, many of them ultimately turning out to be bad.
Their time investment is about 5 minutes more than what it is now, and the drama is debatable… apart from the anxiety induced or the “what about blah blah!!” threads it’s really not going to be any different than it is now.
Much appreciated Cade - though I confess my respect has definite limits. Once stupidity reaches critical mass, I’m just as rude as the next guy.
Right, bling them out and they’re neigh unstoppable, given their weight class. Name one other class of ship that is that unstoppable when blinged out, requiring such an overwhelming force to destroy?
Which is out of scope of this thread. The new thread button is over there ---->
First, I believe I answered every argument in your post - if you believe I’ve not, please do cite and I’ll be happy to answer it directly. “Weasling” out of things is not my style, and I’d like to think my history of posting obscenely long posts (such as this one) supports that claim.
Second, players get butthurt all the time. In every single instance of malcontents, you will see players drop off. Sure they get replaced, but in a game like Eve, most new people don’t stick around because of the insane skill curve and level of consequence - I’ve personally invited several dozen players to the game, and not one has managed to stick with it. Maybe you see that as a problem, maybe you don’t. Please do explain what makes that a carebear mentality, that I like having lots of players online to shoot at?
How many times have you been waiting on a gate for the enemy, and they’re either in a cloaky nullified T3C or a cepter? They moonwalk away from content, to the point where most people barely make an effort to try and catch them. That is as pure an example of overpowered being boring. “There’s no answer”. Sure they laugh as they moonwalk away, but the 5-15 people in the camp are left with the bitter reminder that they’ve no answer to that, which contributes to their overall opinion of the state of the game.
One reason among many is still a reason. You claim it is not an argument, I claim it is. Given that neither of us can substantiate the claims we make on the specific topic of players leaving on account of balance, I’m perfectly willing to drop the argument as being unprovable either way, and resume my original point that keeping players happy is simply good for business.
I certainly never said that all of CO2 was going to quit the game. A large majority will likely grumble at their loss, accept that Eve isn’t always nice to them, and as you said, move on. More on topic however, I don’t think I mentioned CO2 (in this thread at least) nor do I see the relevance to the argument about FOTM/OP ships. There are like 3 separate issues conflated together there, none of which really apply to the argument I am making? The whole CO2 thing is completely different from game balance, is it not?
And yet, if you have 3 accounts, or 50 accounts, you and your opinion are worth more to a business than someone with 1 account. Working as expected, in a private setting.
Oh sorry, I didn’t realize you were talking about a post in this thread. I think I missed that one somewhere in the shuffle. I’ll try to remember to read it later and respond x.x
AT a glance I’d say most of it’s pretty reasonable, though there are a few places where I think CCP have reasons for going the direction they’ve gone (the shield boost bonus on the Hawk for example) that have more to do with variety and creating a more generally interesting ship. A Hawk with a resist bonus would basically just be a Harpy with missiles and a low swapped for a med slot.
You also go a little off the deep end there at the end… xD
Sorry for the brain failure on my part there, I’ll come back and take a better look later.
More than 5, but those same forum posters would be the ones voting, so you have the same problem. The difference here is that the community tends to do the filtering for CCP by being very active (and with a lot of different posters) in threads that actually deserve CCP’s attention.
That serves the dual purpose of creating useful feedback for CCP and highlighting the issues that the community actually cares about.
Most of the bad ideas or troll-posts either get locked by the ISDs or fall off in activity after a few dozen posts, or spin off into a discussion between 2-3 people. Any of these is probably an indication that an idea doesn’t have much traction and unless there’s a particularly compelling argument for it’s probably dead.
I think you’ll find that the CSM are far more receptive to player feedback than you think. Even if we assume that the Goon ones only care about Goon members that still leaves what, 7-8 others?
Basically if you’re willing to spend several thousand words debating a hypothetical feedback system on here you should be willing to send an Eve-mail to the entire CSM. Worst case, nothing happens, best case you get a response, intermediate they see it and don’t respond. In any case that’s better than just dismissing them as unwilling to do anything with no evidence for your case when you haven’t actually taken the very minimal step of messaging them with your feedback.
But at that point your poll isn’t really doing its job because what CCP wants as feedback from the players is what we’re happy with, not us prioritizing CCP’s list of what they’re not happy with.
That’s another strike against polls and in favor of the current organic system of feedback.
And if the things Goons want to see aren’t on there they’ll either troll the poll or spam the comments. Also see above about issues with using players as a way to prioritize things.
Yup, but now the metaphorical sewer is being routed directly into something CCP is trying to use to gather useful feedback. That’s a bit of a difference from PFaID where the user community pretty much nominates ideas for consideration via activity.
The difference, and it’s a big difference, is that now you’re dealing with something that has CCP’s stamp on it. Look at what happened in the ooooold Features and Ideas Discussion before the split. Every time someone from CCP posted in a thread half a dozen people would show up just to plug their pet thought and the quality of the threads would, generally, tank at least for a few days.
On top of that you’re talking about a poll with publicly viewable results that CCP has put up… that’s a recipe for a mess right there.
Which is fair. Gods know I’ve loaded up my share of 425mm snark on here and elsewhere, but there’s a difference to me between retaliating when the conversation is already degraded and being the first one with a handful of mud.
Okay, finally getting around to this. Fair warning, a lot of this is gonna be “I don’t see any immediate issue but I’d like to see some justification”
Interesting way to balance the ships, I could totally go for this.
The Caldari AFs are supposed to be pretty tanky, and there’s nothing wrong with a shield boost bonus. As I said previously the Hawk with a resist bonus would pretty much be a Harpy with missiles and a slight slot change. We can do better than that.
IMO the application on small missiles is already good enough that an application bonus would make the ship weaker, not stronger, especially in the land of Small ASBs.
Really I think I’m gonna punt on this as a whole. AFs as a class have issues, and while I don’t see any particular issues with any of this I think it’s a bit like a Walmart bandaid on a sucking chest wound… okay it’s not quite that bad but AFs and HACs could both use at least a minor rework, even if it’s just making the MWD bonus stronger or something along with a few base stat tweaks (I will keep going on about the AF base speeds until either it changes or AFs get some other fix).
Makes sense on the whole. The Phobos is the largest sig HAC and that doesn’t make a ton of sense.
Would kinda like to see some justification here, specifically for why these need help and all the other Recons don’t.
I think there’s a decent chance of the second and almost no chance of the first. The way other ships are balanced the Nighthawk would probably have to lose at least 2.5% per level off the damage bonus for that to change, and that’s just not worth it. Most of the time, barring someone fit specifically to counter you, you’re going to be better off slinging kinetic at 2.5% more per level than you are slinging another damage type.
Really comparing to the Claymore it might lose 2.5% off of both bonuses, and that really wouldn’t be worth it.
I could get behind this personally, but I think you’d need to show that Command Ships need the bonus or are under performing for it to be justified. After all Command Destroyers don’t get the dessy range bonus, and both are meant to be fairly specialized ships that benefit the fleet in ways beyond raw damage projection.
On the other hand, 200km sniping Vultures!
I personally like these, but I don’t see any particularly compelling case one way or the other objectively speaking. CCP decided they’d rather give them damage sooooo yeah.
Napkin math says this would probably make Rails OP, especially out at 60km+ where Arty are getting into falloff even on longer range setups and Lasers are easily off of Multifrequency. Somewhere between 5-10% is probably more reasonable, but I dunno for sure. This one would probably get really math-heavy if you were to get into a justification for it.
Kinda want to nitpick this a little. It’s not clear if you mean 10% more damage compared to now, or a 10% per level bonus and remove two turrets, or what.
For both this and the other one you’d need some pretty heavy justification for buffing the ships so dramatically, especially with the many many cases Battleships get used in. As much crap as people give the class as a whole it still sees quite a bit of use.
I kinda feel like neither of these needs a buff. They’re massively used and very powerful ships, and the relatively tight fittings on some of the higher end fits are one of the few things holding them back… and even that’s sorta questionable in its impact.
Again, justification, but this one is probably pretty easy. Just do a chart of relative base speeds with various prop mods on this and other ships, and then pull out the usage for both ships (hint, the NM and Phatasm don’t see a ton of use in PvP)
IMO FAX balance as a whole needs a look, but that’s a complicated mess thanks to the wildly divergent use-cases of Wormholes and Null Sec.
Throw this in the little things thread.
That’s kinda not how launchers are balanced. Launchers have “Precision” ammo which is basically this, and if your concern is fittings then most missile boats don’t really need that option. Really it’s the smaller turrets that need a balance pass and a reason to be used besides “well, I absolutely can’t fit the largest size…”
I feel like both of these are in a weird place where they’re comfortable where they are, and don’t super need anything, so they’ve just been sitting on the back burner. Cov-Ops especially don’t really need any bonuses towards their job to do their job, and combat cov-ops kills are always hilarious. Also they already have: 10+ bonus to Relic and Data Analyzer virus strength so I’m not sure why they need a salvager bonus…
They can already do this, you just need to lock something before and fire as you warp out?
Not really sure what you mean here. It deals the same damage with its torps as every other SB and they’re all damage locked.
It’s actually the second most used T3 after the Loki, most likely because of PvE fits combined with decent PvP performance as well.
Generally speaking I’m hoping they give all the T3s a second layer of polish, but the Tengu wouldn’t be my first pick by a long shot.
Back to the general problems with battleships and wanting to see a justification in general, since the Scorp isn’t a damage boat and is just as likely to have its highs doing other things as dealing damage.
Not gonna touch those last few. Obvious trolling is obvious
But yeah, not sure if you were serious or actually expected me to type all that out.
End of the day if you wanna post an idea my go-to will always be to justify it well and be ready to defend it from criticism. I could totally see plenty of these ideas happening if someone were to write up a thorough outline of what the issue is, why the idea solves it, and how the ship compares to other ships with similar rolls or stats before and after the change with use cases. Basically write up three pages and submit to the CSM for consideration and forwarding to CCP.
Fly a Rook and put a mwd on. You cap yourself out in 23 seconds.
The Curse, Pilgrim, Arazu, Lachesis and even the Falcon can move around with a mwd. The Rook just sits there and hopes that them jams don’t fail.
If you take a look at the progression, I would say that the t1 disruption class becomes the t2 combat recon class and the Rook has 5 launchers, so 4x unbonused launchers on the Blackbird will not break EVE. I didn’t say she get a new slot, just a hardpoint to mount them on. 3x launchers and one turret doesn’t feel very Caldari
The Nighthawk has 47km missile range with fury missiles, if and only if she doesn’t move and the target also doesn’t move. The Drake - which you can bring again - has 65km fury range and 80-ish km regular missile range. Feels like the Nighthawk needs projection.
The Vulture doesn’t need more range, she has plenty.
The Absolution has 47/54km range with FM beams and Aurora M. Now go sniping with that one.
Damnation has good range.
The Eos would like the drone control range increased to 80km at level 5 command ships.
Well, the Moa progresses to an Eagle and she has plenty of range. The Moa could be a nice rail platform with that range and she was before Retribution.
Woops, I meant 10% more damage on large rails.
As compared to now. I would have said 10% per level, if I meant 10% per level. The damage is a little sad on the Apocalypse now.
The Abbadon cannot even shot the smalled pulse lazors without capping out in 2 minutes. I mean what??
And about battleships,
first, I do not care what blobbh muppets do. The even admitted publicly that they cannot pvp. Well, I can and I can fly battleships. Most life forms can only sit in them and press FONE.
Well with an X-type afterburner this would mean the Nightmare reaches 1000m/s without heat - well 968m/s to be precise (is now 880m/s). And my all-time favorite sex- erm laserboat would reach 1601.82m/s (is 1496m/s with an a-type afterburner) which won’t break EVE and you still have to buy an a-type and very, very expensive afterburner and an x-type afterburner for the Nightmare to reach those new speeds. For both ships I took +10% speed for math.
It is very unlikely that those speeds will break EVE.
Of course, why shouldn’t it be “balanced” if a minmatar boat fits 2x battleships shield boosters on a t1 boat for infinite tank and the Caldari need to meta everything to get a very, very sad tank.
Well compare the damage output of a purifier with 3x ballistic controls and the Manicore with 2x ballistic controls and tell me how “even” they are.
A justification for another launcher hardpoint (not slot) is also progression. She either becomes a Rattlesnake or a Widow and both have 5 launcher hardpoints.
About the Hawk,
that shield booster bonus has minmatar stink on. I would not be upset if we had a missile Harpy.
And last, thank the Jove, you did get that I wanted a simple slot change for the two rocket interdictor destroyers. I was looking at the Eris too but I am not certain a slot change would be necessary, so I didn’t propose one.
I’m kinda gonna beg off on this at this point and just respond generally. As much as I’d love to get into the balance of like a full half the game (no seriously, I would, look at my last 4+ years of posts. I have spreadsheets!) I’m super busy at work and I’m sorta occupied mentally with trying to beat Visual Studio and a really annoying whack of code into submission with the aforementioned brain.
Anyways, generally speaking:
Just because a ship can’t do one specific thing doesn’t mean that’s a problem. Whether it’s the Abaddon or the Blackbird or the Rook. If you want to make a convincing argument for a change have to show why not being able to do whatever that thing is, is an issue, what the use cases are, and preferably that it won’t break as much other stuff as possible (generally through comparisons to other ships whose roles don’t overlap but that might, or that the ship might fight against).
You also really do have to look at other use-cases. Not every ship is going to be good at every sort of thing and CCP are unlikely to buff a ship if it’s going to seriously impact a long-time use-case for that ship in a very negative way, whether it’s making it too powerful or seriously nerfing it without a good justification.
Lastly, “it’s unlikely that this thing will break Eve” isn’t really a good reason for a buff. There are a ton of things in this game that could probably be buffed without any serious repercussions. Hells you could probably double the Hull HP on 90% of the non-Capital non-hauling ships in the game and see no serious repercussions, but that doesn’t mean it needs to be done or that its worth CCP’s time time make sure that there would actually be no serious repercussions and then implement something like that.
Basically ideas need a “why” not just a “why not”. The former generally solves some demonstrable issue, the latter is what I call “a solution looking for a problem”. (note: I’m not saying that any of your ideas are doing this, even on accident, I’m generalizing here to the wider forums)
Popularity has absolutely ZERO to do with the quality of an idea or whether that idea is correct or not.
(At one point in time only ONE person on the entire planet knew that the Earth was not flat, the popular wisdom was that it was flat and proving to the entire rest of the world’s population that the world was in fact not flat took quite awhile). The point is two-fold, firstly, popular isnt always correct and secondly, changing a popular incorrect idea to a correct one is a serious uphill battle that we dont need to start making a habit of in EVE.
Let’s let CCP lead and we can toss out our opinions on where it is going in the appropriate forum they seem to always provide.
the CSM won’t care. True to any election, an electoral candidate only really cares about their electorate during the election - modern democracy shows us this regularly.
I’ve posted more than a few myself. I’ve made no secret that I think blops BBs are at this point in time useless in any form of combat role, I think that T3Ds and T3Cs are too powerful, and I think battleships and battlecruisers due to their lack of mobility are pretty useless for 90% of pvp. I’ve made many-a-post suggesting fixes, many of them ultimately turning out to be bad.
