Force Auxiliary Balance Proposal - Round 2

wormhole
pvp
null-sec

(DutchGunner) #101

The FAX change I can agree with. However in order to tune them down, I would have the remote rep be less effective and keep the local tank as it is. They are supposed to have staying power but they need support to stay alive. Otherwise you’ll hit the wormhole and small gangs with only 1 fax unreasonably hard.

To have the CASB go for all capitals including the rorqual is way to harsh. People may complain about triple CASB fitted rorqs behing hard to deal with but that takes a serious investment. As it stands, you can keep your rorqual alive long enough for help to arrive IF you are willing to spend a lot of isk on the fitting and running your tank. Rorquals are still dying in large numbers because most people don’t invest the isk to survive.


(Old Pervert) #102

They could also add a few zeros to battleship DPS pretty quickly. Doesn’t mean it’s a smart thing to do.

I agree with you saying that sig-based reps and diminishing returns are where things need to go… complexity needs to be a secondary consideration, after a decision has been made that will fix the problem.

If it takes them longer to implement, and they say “we want to do this, we’re making sure we get it right”, a lot of the people raging over capitals will bite their tongues and wait for the change.


(Brisc Rubal) #103

I’d rather do this now, see if it helps, and if not we can move on to the other ideas as part of a larger capital rebalance that takes longer.


(Old Pervert) #104

To each their own… I prefer a bit more accuracy than using a blindfold and a dartboard. It’s a stopgap at best, and one that they’ll need to roll back when they fix the actual problem (unless the goal is to leave the FAX docked in favour of more dreads).


(Brisc Rubal) #105

I’m fine with that.


(elitatwo) #106

Meanwhile, the real problem remains:

All capitals need 2 hours to build, supers need 10 days and titans 12 days.

To give a new citizen of New Eden an idea of what capital ship means, the build times must be increased by a ton.
Dreads should take 8 weeks, carriers 12 weeks, supers 6 months and titans 18 months to build.

There you go, I fixed all problems in EVE at once, no I expect my 500 billion payday.


(Old Pervert) #107

You’re very right that increasing the intangible cost of a hull will make them more valuable and harder to replace, but at the end of the day this just gets solved by N+1.

If the tangible cost to build a hull is unchanged and you increase the timeframe, all you’ll see is more Sotiyos floating around to build them in parallel. A lot more Sotiyos. Now sov warfare just got even more painful because taking control of space means more structure bashes (boring as ■■■■ btw).


(elitatwo) #108

The idea with the time was to give the impression that you are flying something, that takes a very long time to make.
The new age hipster attention span of today is 1 femto-second long.

I also proposed an increase in material cost to that of 5000 palapatine keepstars to make it less easy to print them like candy and treat them as yaaay-big yolo battleship that costs 1 isk.


(Old Pervert) #109

Right… but it doesn’t take a long time to make if you build them in parallel. If they took 100x longer to build, you’d just see powerbloc industrial activity scale out more to meet needs; it’s only stopping where it is now, because it meets needs where it is now.


(elitatwo) #110

Reduce the maximum allowed number of sotiyos per solar system to 1, EVE rescued, crisis averted.


(Luscius Uta) #111

Or remove insurance from all capitals. It won’t fix all problems since some people have more ISK than they can spend even if they PvP everyday, but when you lose a platinum-insured dread, FAX or carrier it hurts your wallet less than losing some subcaps who provide less bang for the buck (Blops especially in mind).


(Sakura Hoshizora) #112

Yeah, using a Marauder should be way cheaper than using any cap/super.


(theRaptor) #113

>Mega-alliances dropping huge numbers of FAXes are an issue.
>Let’s nerf FAXes so they are crap if used in small scale fights to slightly inconvenience mega-alliances.

How the ■■■■ do you guys still not know what the issue is? This doesn’t really hurt mega-alliances dropping hundreds of FAXes. In fact it gives more power to mega-alliances as it becomes a game of how quickly you can replace your FAX losses.

Is this just a ploy to make me re-subscribe the second and third FAX accounts I let go inactive after the PA take over?


(Soleil Fournier) #114

I like the idea of making remote reps scale off sig radius. CCP made that change to Neuts and it was a smart one.


(Siginek) #115

If we are making all Faxes to get same “base cap gain” flow, can we also get all caps to get same bonus to rep usage? Lif and ninazu are in kinda disadvantage with their cycle time against rep amount of apostle and minokawa (rep per sec advantage they get from faster cycle is really minimal compared to huge capacitor requirements they pay for this - and it makes them weaker in both cap regen fits and cap boosted fits)

they have 8% more rep per sec for cost of 33% more cap per sec consume, which is in the end pretty big disadvantage - same thing for rep bonuses on moros and nagl vs reve and phoenix


(DutchGunner) #116

So I’ve been giving this rebalance some more thought and I think I’ve come up with a decent alternative.

Nerfing the remote reps from FAX’es is a good and needed thing. It gives attackers better odds at getting their kills and not be rendered useless in smaller numbers when a single FAX is fielded. The local tank should stay the way it is. The ship has to have staying power to keep it a good an expensive option for smaller but well organised groups.

Let’s adress a different issue. The staying power capital ships get with the Capital Shield Anc. shield boosters. It creates a very though tank to beat when multiple are fit. Basicly it comes down to having enough cap boosters to last long enough. And that’s where my alternative comes in.
Instead of limiting the number of CSA’s, why not adress the issue by setting a limit on the amount of cap boosters you can carry to keep them running?
If needed, create a seperate bay on capital ships that can only hold cap booster charges and those can’t be refilled in space.
This way you limit the tank but still give the option to run a strong burst tank that runs out of cap booster charges quickly or a weaker but longer lasting tank as your supply of cap boosters lasts a bit longer.

This also gives a much easier tweaking tool to make future adjustments if needed.


(Mina Sebiestar) #117

Waaah waaah it’s hard… CCP at finest.
Introduce game breaking item,sell skins for it rack in money.
Than do laziest possible thing to address the situation where quality of gameplay isn’t even afterthought.
Great job game is getting better and better by the hour…


(Zuel Aaoiric) #118

A note from all small groups - As a small group leader, I have one option to provide content for my alliance without joining with a larger group - that is capital protection. As a smaller group we have one choice to protect ourselves - home ground advantage. There is no advantage if the FAX is useless. So now we can fit out a FAX for 3bil and have a team of 20 cruisers worth all of 1 bil take it out and everything else our 10 guys can throw at them? How about we have some balance this way… I put out a well fit fleet worth 4bil and you put out a well fit fleet worth 4bil and we stand on equal grounds. Why is it that we want to offset defense with the need to produce the same number of pilots? If you setup the small groups with the choice to either pay homage to the large group or go back to HS and mine - most of us will just quit the game!

If I don’t have a reasonable option to protect my small group, I won’t risk venturing out of HS. If we don’t leave HS, I’m really not interested in the game.

FAX can pop just as they are… they just require a group that has invested the same amount of money in ships to do it. Why is it even in question? You shouldn’t be able to take out a well fit ship that is worth 3 times what your fleet is worth.


(Bouh Revetoile) #119

You know an officer fit thorax doesn’t require several billions isks in a fleet to kill. Isk is not a balancing factor actualy. Or rather it shouldn’t. The fact that people like you think it can be a balancing factor should tell us something.


(Hands OF Wisdom) #120

dont touch the dreads … and reduce rorq mining yield by 200% and reduce rorq dmg and tanking ability and remove that invi item from the game… its a dam mining ship…

just remove faxes from the game … problem solved… and best solution …

is not the fax that are the problem but the rorqs… solve the rorq problem and eve will get glory back