open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Balancing - Identifying problems
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (47)

Author Topic

CCP Nozh


C C P
Posted - 2009.04.17 09:13:00 - [1]
 

Hi,

Balancing is an ongoing process; there will always room for improvement. This pursuit for maximized fairness and stability will always be disputed, one way or another. Everyone has an opinion; this is where I want you to voice them in a very simple manner.

Create a Top 3 list of what you believe is unbalanced. Based on how many people are unsatisfied with a given subject well create separate threads (limited amount) where we analyze the problem and try to figure out a solution.

With Apocrypha changes authored and checked in Ive got some breathing room. During this time Im going to be more active on the forums and follow this thread through.

Please note this is not a discussion thread.

Miyamoto Uroki
Caldari
Sarum Industries
Posted - 2009.04.17 09:36:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:42:15
Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:37:32
1. High Sec lvl 4 missions
(needs to be adressed, way too much profit for no risk, this ruins so many other activities as they cannot compete in ish/h and risk vs reward. Also the loot from missions screws mining. PLUS it injects too much isk into the economy, making things too expensive so that you cannot compete with the activities that earns you less isk/h)



2. Projectile Artillery
(cause everyone says they suck...)



3. Tech1 Mods
(who uses tech1 stuff apart for invention? It simply has no use anymore imho, as even noobs can afford named stuff and tech2 mods are ridiculously low in terms of skill requirements. Though I guess some database mining would be needed to prove that tech1 is still used)

Grez
Neo Spartans
Laconian Syndicate
Posted - 2009.04.17 09:42:00 - [3]
 

1) ECM drones (compared to other EW drones, they are superior)
2) Armour tanks vs. shield tanks (in a large majority of cases, a shield tanking ship is superior to an armour tanking one)
3) DCU - has CPU requirements akin to a passive module (make it passive <3)

Finnroth
The Guardian Agency
Posted - 2009.04.17 09:53:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Finnroth on 17/04/2009 10:38:14
1.) ECM Drones and EW Drones in general ECM is the only really useful, and they're quite a bit too strong. On the contrary. the other EW drones lack any utility at all and nee to be looked over again. No Tech2 versions aswell.
This might be a seperate point, but maybe Drones (not dps mind you) in general and Drone Modules in particular are rather due for a bit of love aswell.

2.) Rockets, they're just horrible.

3.) Most of the T2 ammunition suck hard. Sniper ammo is fine, and some close-quarter long-range ammo (namely scorch) is more or less fine, but the high dps short-short-range ammo sucks in comparison with faction ammo (i don't care if you want to do something about faction ammo or boost the normal T2 ammo, eitherway there's an imbalance at the moment).
The short long-rage ammo is also pretty much across the board utter trash - in dire need for some love.

Those are the things i feel can be done pretty easy. There're other things i would like to see adressed aswell, like faction ships, smartbombs, caps and super caps but this would probably take alot more effort than to fix the three entrys above.

Aylara
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:17:00 - [5]
 

1. Hybrid Turrets, mostly the Blasters
2. Drones a) management: the UI is horrible; b) Gallente drone bays too small -> there are Amarr ships with more drone capacity and bandwith (Amarr recons first comes to mind?)
3. Fix the Gallente, make them again the top damage dealers in everyday combat situations, not only special instances; atm Amarr are top tankers and damage dealers in PVP engagements.

Bonus: Hull tanking, not really an option; I think this was first intended for Gallente in the development phase, since Gallente have strong hulls

Kaileen Starsong
Amarr
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:18:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Kaileen Starsong on 17/04/2009 10:22:08
Hmm...

1) Overloading being stacking penalized with module effects. BAD Laughing [This is not about guns, but about mods like ABs/MWDs/Reps/Shield Boosters, etc]. Especially bad when you think about T3 being so heat-focused...

2) T2 Ammunition, especially close-range T2 ammo.

3) Overall balance of some T3 subsystems. AB speed boost one comes to mind when compared to overall speed boost one(as in, the latter is superior even if you use AB - it affects base speed too, is just as fast with AB running, is not limited to AB for propulsion, etc...). Slot decisions on some are also weird - in most cases we get Legion with less lows and more mids than Proteus Laughing

Last) ECM Drones

PS. Almost forgot.. Zulupark promised that Sentry drones would benefit from racial specialization skills. When?

Kerdrak
GreenSwarm
Black Legion.
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:23:00 - [7]
 

1 Some weapons like large artilleries and rockets are a bit unbalanced.

2 Naglfar is very sub par, not only because the weird slot layout (tempest with typhoon bonus), the 4 weapons are bad for overloading compared to the other dreads with 3 weapons: less damage even with 4 weapons and less overload time because more weapons.

3 High damage T2 ammo, simply too many drawbacks for the benefit compared to faction ammo. Nobody really uses conflagration, gleam and the other races homologues.

Jovoich
Trans-Solar Works
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:29:00 - [8]
 

My one and only wish!


Bring ECM in line with other EW. Remove the chance based factor.


LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:31:00 - [9]
 

1) T2 ammo. Nuff' said.
2) Black ops(Can has fuel bay?)
3) Maybe have a look at command-ships. They could use a shake-around and maybe some tier-2 BC models, T2-ified.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:33:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Miyamoto Uroki
Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:42:15
Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:37:32
1. High Sec lvl 4 missions
(needs to be adressed, way too much profit for no risk, this ruins so many other activities as they cannot compete in ish/h and risk vs reward. Also the loot from missions screws mining. PLUS it injects too much isk into the economy, making things too expensive so that you cannot compete with the activities that earns you less isk/h)


This is the biggest single issue I have in EvE, alongside with 0.0 POS-grind-for-sov.

Seriously, every single time you see some economic activity discussed you always see the same "meh makes thr same/less ISK than level 4s for more effort".

Missions URGENTLY need reforming. Yes there will be huge floods of tears on the forums, but the problem will get worse the longer it is left. It has been left too long already.

0.0 class rewards, collected with no danger, no competition, no real effort or skill, have no place in hi-sec.

Another Forum'Alt
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:34:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Another Forum''Alt on 17/04/2009 10:55:30

Remove insurance, I thought EVE was supposed to have a harsh penalty for death. At least remove insurance for being concorded.

Nerf HACtors at gatecamps in lowsec.

reserved

malcanis, you do realise EVE probably won't survive without mission runners, right? They pay a lot in subscriptions to CCP, CCP won't want to make them all quit.

Clone 1
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:40:00 - [12]
 

1) ECM Drones, so overpowered that they are manditory fit now.
2) Increase base jump range of black ops to 2.5au
3) Agility but thats being sorted, right ?

Also why dont you tell us what you think is unbalanced?

Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:41:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Mecinia Lua on 19/04/2009 04:40:18
Edited by: Mecinia Lua on 17/04/2009 10:49:02
Balance Issue

1. Sovereignty

Under present rules there is no real way to take down a large alliance. They in truth can only be taken down from within such as what happened to BoB.

In order to make EVE more exciting we need a revamp of Sov rules to enable medium and small alliances a chance at having Sov which is impossible under current rules.

2.

T2 Ammo needs revamped on all levels, the faction ammos have eclipsed them in a way they shouldn't.

3.

Minmatar....projectile weapons could use a slight boost to dps.


Comments:

Keep in mind balance is an illusion, you can never truly achieve balance in any game unless everyone is absolutely the same...which is boring.

Whineroy
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:42:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Malcanis

This is the biggest single issue I have in EvE, alongside with 0.0 POS-grind-for-sov.

Seriously, every single time you see some economic activity discussed you always see the same "meh makes thr same/less ISK than level 4s for more effort".

Missions URGENTLY need reforming. Yes there will be huge floods of tears on the forums, but the problem will get worse the longer it is left. It has been left too long already.

0.0 class rewards, collected with no danger, no competition, no real effort or skill, have no place in hi-sec.


Also get rid of GTC/PLEX trade if you want to get rid of "0.0 class rewards collected with no danger". It isn't exactly lvl 4 mission runners that keep GTC/PLEX prices up.
Missions do need reforming but it is far more complex issue than "just move L4s to lowsec" or similar.

Darth Felin
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:45:00 - [15]
 

1. med and large blasters, large AC, rockets.
2. half of t2 ammo is useless
3. shield vs armor tank for higher metalevels.

Doomed Predator
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:46:00 - [16]
 

1. Missiles are fine for missions and all that but in pvp missiles are ineffective against their intended targets if that target moves at full speed(god forbid he has an AB).

-T1 missiles should do 80-90% damage to targets of their intended size while he is using an afterburner
-T2 precisions should do 80-90% damage to targets while MWD is active
-T2 Rage/Fury should do 80-90% damage to a target one tier larger than their intended
-T2 Javelin should have 70% range of it's long range counterpart

2. Truesec 0.0, basically most of 0.0 has poor truesec and thus suck, an non-NPC 0.0 region should have 80% of it's systems with truesec lower than -0.80, in addition all 0.0 belts should have spawns in them,when you find every second belt empty it gets old very fast.

3. Level 4 missions generating too much ISK. The ISK per hour from a level 4 mission in hi-sec at least should never exceed the ISK per hour of a half decent 0.0 system. So either boost 0.0 NPC bounties or preferably reduce hi-sec mission rewards and NPC bountys

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:47:00 - [17]
 

1. Buffer tank modules. BS size modules should NOT fit on cruiser hulls, if they do no other "useful" cruiser size mod should fit. Bring back skill by re-introducing active tanks.

2. T2 Close range ammo. Introduction of readily available navy munitions have completely nullified the T2 version. Reduce damage, keep range and give a huge boost to tracking.

3. ECM Drones. The chance based nature makes them godly, a single flight of mediums require a maximum of 1 minute to get a jam on a dual-ECCM Guardian.
Either remove them or reduce their HP to mining drone levels to allow for smartbombs to function as counter (smarts have huge fitting requirements and generally useless unless on dedicated disco ships).

Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:47:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Miyamoto Uroki
Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:42:15
Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:37:32
1. High Sec lvl 4 missions
(needs to be adressed, way too much profit for no risk, this ruins so many other activities as they cannot compete in ish/h and risk vs reward. Also the loot from missions screws mining. PLUS it injects too much isk into the economy, making things too expensive so that you cannot compete with the activities that earns you less isk/h)


This is the biggest single issue I have in EvE, alongside with 0.0 POS-grind-for-sov.

Seriously, every single time you see some economic activity discussed you always see the same "meh makes thr same/less ISK than level 4s for more effort".

Missions URGENTLY need reforming. Yes there will be huge floods of tears on the forums, but the problem will get worse the longer it is left. It has been left too long already.

0.0 class rewards, collected with no danger, no competition, no real effort or skill, have no place in hi-sec.


Nerfing level 4 missions is not the answer, you have to understand that. If you move them to low sec they'll move to Level 3 missions.

You have to boost low sec and 0.0 to make them more enticing, and sadly you will never get a majority to leave empire.

The main problem with isk making in 0.0 and wormhole space is time commitment those who can't play full time, are at a very distinct disadvantage whereas they can hop on in empire and do a mission in the time they have.

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:48:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 17/04/2009 12:25:28
1. Rockets

2. T2 ammo (closerange one being balls)

3. titans + doomsdays (breaking engagements) and capital warfare (who brings more wins, no skill required)

3b ;p. destroyers (uber balls) and a bit dictors (survivalability on those due to huge sig radius)

Virgo I'Platonicus
0utbreak
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:49:00 - [20]
 

1) artillery long range alpha strike (imo too low for tanks today)

2) ecm drones too good for the skill requirements.

3) black ops need fuel bay ....

V.



5pinDizzy
Amarr
Pillow Fighters Inc
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:50:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 17/04/2009 11:00:51

If there was a limit of 20 I'd still easily fill it, so it's really hard picking a top three. Razz

1. Energy Neuts - Rebalance

2. Passive Tanking - Uncounterable, Rebalance

3. Tech 1 ships and/or modules, so many of them are useless and obsolete and are near suicide to fly in. Suggest a slight unique bonus or ability that can be gotten through more skill training for at least some of them.

Jay T
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:51:00 - [22]
 

1. High Sec Lvl 4 Missions (Risk verse Reward ratio sucks)

2. Bookmarking Inflight missiles (Because shooting missiles that can compromise sniper fleets is BS)

3. Amarr Pulse Range (Becuase that stuff is way to goodCrying or Very sad)

Rellik B00n
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:57:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: Rellik B00n on 17/04/2009 10:59:58
(1) racial EW. Got to be a way to balance this across the board, it would be fun to have a real rock, paper, scissors type situation with EW rather than the current FOTM, FOTM, FOTM one we have.

(2) shield tanking tackler. I fly both armor and shield ships but whenever i look through the slot layouts its kinda:

Armor:
LOW - tank/damage
MED - tackle/propulsion/ewar
HIGH - f1 f2 f3

Shield
LOW - damage
MED - tank/tackle/propulsion/ewar
HIGH - f1 f2 f3

This disparity has always bugged me since it effectively means people than cant rely on always having a blob to help them must inevitably choose armor. Less choice is bad. (nb. for active tanks!!)

(3) Sov. Its not fluid enough.

Count Helmchen
Posted - 2009.04.17 10:58:00 - [24]
 

T1 Ships
1) Slot layout on most Battleships, cruiser etc are not inline ...for example, the Armageddon & Typhoon (tier1) get 19 slots where the Dominix & Scorpion only have 18 .. give the last two ships the missing slot

2) Faction Ships like the Ashimmu, need a cpmplete overhaul and redesign (btw, give the bhallgorn its own unique model!)

1) tier 1 Battlecruisers ... where do i start? they are the worst ships n term of damage, fitting, bonus etc in the hole galaxy!!!!!

T2 Ships
1) Give the Rook & Falcon the same amount of drone bandwith and cargo bay like the other recons ships .. without the 10% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints they are still weaker with drones like the other ones

2) Commandships (Nighthawk f.e.) need some love, speaking of give them more pg and cpu to allow them to fit a proper fitting

3) BlackOps ; whats the entire idea behind a ship, which cannot jumps complete on his own into one system to another ? why does we need another "alt" to bring him first into a cynojammed system to be able to jump with our BO ship into it ? Infiltration does not need any support.. got it ?

T3 Ships
1) Give EVERY t3 hull 25 drone bandwith/cargo base attributes ... goddamn, they are t3 ships!

2) redesign the model of the ECM & Scan Electronic Subsystem for the Tengu!! ugly!

3) Propulsion Subsystem are a joke, espacially the new one (bubble imunnuenity) in combination with covert ops cloak

Weapons

1) Lasers to strong, to high optimal & tracking
2) Hybrids to weak , worst tracking and optimal
3) Projectiles subpar, dont even speak of Artys
4) Missiles, currently the worst form of damage mechanism in eve

RR Gangs

1) to strong in its current form

Snipers

1) to strong in its current form

more to come

Toramii
Le Moulin Rouge
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:03:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Toramii on 18/04/2009 08:19:53
1. Buff medium and large blasters (or dedicated blaster ships)
CCP balancers seem to have overlooked 90% webifiers were originally designed to enable blaster ships to track targets at their abysmal short range. Agreed, the webifier nerf was needed to make smaller ships usable and is welcomed by most people, myself included, but blasters (tracking/dps) were never re-balanced to compensate. Blasterships were not classed as overpowered before the web nerf, blasters are supposed to be the most feared short range weapons ingame, please fix them.

2. T2 Ammo
Re-balance T2 ammo to make it an alternative to faction ammo, and remove the rediculous stacking penalties especially the short range varieties.

3. Large Projectiles (Mainly artillery)
Increase artillery alpha.

Willy Nerfalot
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:11:00 - [26]
 

[1] blasters. not overpowered before web nerf, definitely suffering from 400% tracking nerf.

[2] blaster ships in general. they need a large dps advantage and the ability to reliably hit their target once in range, in order to overcome the typical damage incurred from closing range. a mere 10% advantage (or worse once shots start missing due to poor tracking) over equivalent missiles is simply not good enough.

[3] gallente recons. need much better bonus to damps to be worth flying compared to other recons.

Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:15:00 - [27]
 

1- Minmatar large and XL weapons.

2 - Naglfar and Nidhogur (omg those are sinferior in every frickign possible way to their counteparts .. just compare directly to the gallente ones,, )

3 - SHield transporters need a MASSIVE reduction on fittings.

baltec1
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:16:00 - [28]
 

The ashimmu needs help with CPU and Powergrid so you can actualy get a fit on it, Its a great ship both in stats and looks but at the moment it is impossible to fit anything on it.

Also the Amarr navy slicer needs some help. At the moment it is a ship that doesnt know what it wants to be which means you cant fit it very well.

And finaly could you alter the retri so that I can fit the following. It is my favorate of all ships but I wish I could solo in it.

[Retribution, If only]
Small Armor Repairer II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
Capacitor Power Relay II
Armor Thermic Hardener II
Heat Sink II

1MN Afterburner II
Warp Scrambler II

Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Small Nosferatu II

[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]

Wang Jing
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:18:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Wang Jing on 17/04/2009 11:18:22
1) Faction ships, other than the Sanshas, need to be updated, as many suffer from huge fitting problems, or awful bonuses/slots (i.e. the dramiel with 3 turret bonuses yet only 2 out of 5 high slots able to fit turrets, the cruor with a bonus to stasis webifiers yet only 2 midslots).

2) Assault Frigates deserve to have their 4 bonuses, in line with the other T2 ships. For example, the Wolf and Jaguar do not get the 7.5% bonus to turret tracking that the rifter has, making them laughable for use with autocannons either against other frigates, or in the tight orbit necessary when fighting "under the guns" of a cruiser. I have recently made a thread to discuss this: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1050315

3) Rockets need to be rebalanced. They do laughable dps to start with, especially considering their fitting requirements; compare a vengenace with any other assault frigate (other than the hawk Laughing ), plus their explosion velocity means they are rendered almost useless against frigates, when they are a frigate class weapon.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:19:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Mecinia Lua
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Miyamoto Uroki
Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:42:15
Edited by: Miyamoto Uroki on 17/04/2009 09:37:32
1. High Sec lvl 4 missions
(needs to be adressed, way too much profit for no risk, this ruins so many other activities as they cannot compete in ish/h and risk vs reward. Also the loot from missions screws mining. PLUS it injects too much isk into the economy, making things too expensive so that you cannot compete with the activities that earns you less isk/h)


This is the biggest single issue I have in EvE, alongside with 0.0 POS-grind-for-sov.

Seriously, every single time you see some economic activity discussed you always see the same "meh makes thr same/less ISK than level 4s for more effort".

Missions URGENTLY need reforming. Yes there will be huge floods of tears on the forums, but the problem will get worse the longer it is left. It has been left too long already.

0.0 class rewards, collected with no danger, no competition, no real effort or skill, have no place in hi-sec.


Nerfing level 4 missions is not the answer, you have to understand that. If you move them to low sec they'll move to Level 3 missions.

You have to boost low sec and 0.0 to make them more enticing, and sadly you will never get a majority to leave empire..


So increase income from 0.0/lo-sec then increase ISK sinks to compensate?

That's just nerfing level 4s via inflation. Why wreck the economy even further to disguise what you're doing?


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (47)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only