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: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... : last (47)

Author Topic

Segmentation Fault
Rim Collection RC
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:00:00 - [301]

Edited by: Segmentation Fault on 18/04/2009 00:20:08
Edited by: Segmentation Fault on 18/04/2009 00:00:01
1. Ewar outside of ECM is not used pvp at all now. Target painters were always a joke with marginal usage and only in pve, tracking disruptors and RSD were both made obsolete even on bonused ships with scripting.

2. Naglfar has half the performance of the three other dreads in both tanking and dps. This is largely because of:

3. Large artillery - lost its role with the HP buff and has since not been given a new one. Minmatar BS are the black sheep of most fleets and their marginally better agility makes little to no difference, the Tempest can just barely perform the sniper BS role by sacrificing all of its tank (and its mediocre at best in other ranges), the Maelstorm has such terrible performance increase to price increase ratio over the Tempest that it's only ever used as a comedy option.

Forcas armadas
Moon Warriors
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:15:00 - [302]

1) Blaster
2) Blaster
3) Damper .. I would say reduce cycle timer a bit.

TBH as a pure gallente pilot I feel gallente ships getting weaker after each new patch. I'm not sure exactly what would need to be done, but maybe CCP could add some new toy for gallente in general ... for example a kinda Drone Control Unit (module or rig .. both ways are fine) for small / med ships to increase drone bandwidth or something like this.

Just my 2 cents.

Angelica Winters
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:22:00 - [303]

1. Rockets, I really wish they were useful
2. afk cloaking
3. T2 production skyrocketing

Atsuko Yamamoto
Spartan Shipyards
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:36:00 - [304]

1. Blasters

2. Make active armor tanking more viable with buffer.

3. Increase low sec appeal: bounties, sites, ore types, ice types.

Malena Panic
Veto Corp
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:49:00 - [305]

1. Level 4 missions in high sec pay out way too much for the risk and effort involved.
2. Buffs to point blank weapons; if you're willing to get into death range with blasters or rockets, you should be able to reap some reward.
3. Sovereignty mechanics.

Taguchi Hiroko
Shady Oaks Retirement Home
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:49:00 - [306]

Edited by: Taguchi Hiroko on 18/04/2009 00:51:47
I will just put all my vote in blasters. Blasterboats atm are sub-standard (if you simply compare it with Pulse lasers, mid range, excellent dps and almost better tracking, wtf), eg, one would much rather fly an Ishtar than a Deimos, for very good reasons. And if one is cross trained, one will never fly a Deimos, ever. (yes rail deimos is fine- if you never flied a muninn, doh).

A ship like the Deimos (or its varients, ranis, astarte, mega, hyperion, and give or take, proteus for that matter) must always get close, so close that their mwd are often disabled by scram and they are at <40% of their ship's velocity by webs....

Blasterboats are "do or die" ships since their creation. After the nano nerf- you are even slower than before, with 3 mids (Deimos), you have no choice but to fit at all times: mwd, scram and web to deal with just this situation (and if you don't, it is a guaranteed death, watch that zealot/cerb/ishtar/vaga orbit you at 20 while keeping his point, lol), which means losing the majority of targets beyond 9k, an obvious handicap compared to all other HACs, and with no clear advantage you ask yourself: "why don't I just fly a Zealot!?"

Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:49:00 - [307]

Edited by: AstroPhobic on 18/04/2009 00:49:56
1. Projectile Turrets
2. Naglfar
3. EWAR effectiveness (Dampeners, Target Painters in specific)

Ard UnjiiGo
Meatshield Bastards
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:55:00 - [308]

1) Get the impression this is not what you want to hear, but #1 is: high sec/low sec imbalance especially L4 missions in high sec. Single greatest present imbalance effecting game play most. Above any tweaks to individual ships or modules.

2) Get on it already. Give the AFs their 4th bonus.

3) Give the Hyena, Huginn and Rapier a bit of a web strength bonus.

Anakin Katana
Posted - 2009.04.18 00:59:00 - [309]

1) Boost blasters
2) Boost railguns
3) Balance missiles

Mad Bombers
Posted - 2009.04.18 01:09:00 - [310]

1. Large Projectiles fail
2. Energy Weapons seem a too dominating.
3. Passive Tanks are a little too awesome to be so convenient.

Celestial Apocalypse
death from above..
Posted - 2009.04.18 01:19:00 - [311]

1. Blasters need love to adapt to the gameplay changes.

2. Titans. Major fun killer. Way too easy to use, way too effective.

3. Sov warfare.

Posted - 2009.04.18 01:24:00 - [312]

1.) Large Projectile (particularly Arty)
2.) Minmatar BS and Dread
3.) POS Logistics

Reach Life
Posted - 2009.04.18 01:31:00 - [313]

1. Rockets. They suck. My idea on rockets is to increase the charge rate, which I believe means the launchers would fire more than one at a time? That is how I've always pictured rockets working. I haven't used rockets in years so I'm just really jumping on the current bandwagon with my thoughts.

2. L4 missions. Easy money, like others have said. Maybe get some of that Sleeper juice creeping into the L4-L5 missions? Instead of just bigger ships, stronger ships. Better AI.

3. Salvage. It's been talked about to death. I'm pretty sure the idea from the very beginning was that PvE's could work the high-sec business without bother and the PvPers could work the low-sec/null-sec business without restraint. Salvage breaks this accord by allowing carebear pirates to harass PvE players without restraint. Regardless of past comments from CCP, it seems to be contradicting the basic design of the gameplay which is a beautiful balance of open PvP and safe PvE all on the same server. It also seems like an awfully easy fix for all the hassle it causes by simply restricting who can salvage a wreck. Just quit arguing about it and do it.

Black Colt
Posted - 2009.04.18 01:55:00 - [314]

  • The bounty system

Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2009.04.18 02:22:00 - [315]

Originally by: Molock Saronen
Increase the effectiveness of EW drones except for ECM drones.
Why? Because I'm getting sick of everyone always yelling 'NERF!' for any item that actually does the job it's ment to do.

I would love to see some positive ideas in stead of the ever present 'It works to good(for someone else), nerf it!' remarks.

I agree :).

Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2009.04.18 02:27:00 - [316]

Originally by: Malcanis

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?

I wouldn't increase isk sinks. Contrary to popular belief the level 4 mission runners help the economy not hurt it. Without them running their missions and providing a continual supply of named components for sale on the market the pvpers and others would not be able to fit their ships as well as they do.

You can't force the people out of Empire, if you try you'll lose some of them. The others will just adapt taking lower mission types. It is always better to buff than to nerf.

Ruze Ahkor'Murkon
No Applicable Corporation
Posted - 2009.04.18 02:32:00 - [317]

Originally by: Mecinia Lua
Originally by: Malcanis

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?

I wouldn't increase isk sinks. Contrary to popular belief the level 4 mission runners help the economy not hurt it. Without them running their missions and providing a continual supply of named components for sale on the market the pvpers and others would not be able to fit their ships as well as they do.

You can't force the people out of Empire, if you try you'll lose some of them. The others will just adapt taking lower mission types. It is always better to buff than to nerf.

PvP fits are often built from either T2 components which are player crafted, or officer components which are gained in 0.0 ratting. Looted modules are bought, not by pvpers, but by mass-reprocessing industrialists by the thousands, who then reprocess said loot for the mid and high end minerals that can be gotten from them. The exceptions are meta 3 and 4 items, which are sometimes useful for new players and mission runners who haven't trained up tier 2.

What missions DO allow, is the infinite control of 0.0 constellations by alliances who otherwise would be unable to pay for their ship losses. It also allows many suicide gankers to fund million-isk ship losses in order to carry out their fun.

As well, and contrary to popular belief, having everything on the market being sold at near base prices is NOT good for the economy, as it cuts many industrialists out of being able to make any return on their massive investment of time and resources, and kills much of that playstyle.

Posted - 2009.04.18 02:40:00 - [318]

1. Minmatar large projectiles are bad. They need more range and tracking!

2. The naglfar is mediocre. It could use another 75 cpu and another mid slot.

3. Target painters need extended range. They really should be the longest ranged ECM module because they are 'painting' a target.

Dasalt Istgut
Posted - 2009.04.18 03:05:00 - [319]

Edited by: Dasalt Istgut on 18/04/2009 03:16:17
1) Revisit ship grid and CPU across the board. There are way too many gimped ships to even start listing (like every Caldari turret boat besides the Rokh and Harpy, most faction ships including expensive pirate faction ships, etc).

2) RR BS gangs.

3) Station games. Make RR prevent docking like shooting at someone, make it so if you deaggress and dock you can't undock for 3+ minutes, etc. And for that matter, fix logon traps. Can't target anything for 5 minutes after logging in sounds simple enough.

Edit - on second thought given how much the game crashes not targeting after login is probably a bad idea.

Nova Labs
New Eden Research.
Posted - 2009.04.18 03:49:00 - [320]

1:Reverse Engineering
Quantity of datcores used doesn't scale with relic quality. Wrecked Subsystem components use too many, Intact Hull Sections use too few. See this thread --

2:Reverse Engineering
Too boolean. You either have a dramatic success and a 3-run ME0 BPC, or a dramatic failure and recover only 1 of the 9 materials consumed by the process. A chance to get a low-run/negative ME BPC instead of totally failing, or recover additional material from a failed job would make things more interesting.

3:Reverse Engineering
Each subsystem now has 4 variants, with plans for 5th variants announced. You have a 1/4 chance of getting the one you wish to produce. This was a problem for cloak/strip miner/AF/ceptor invention early on, as my 30 un-built Modulated Deep Core Strip Miner II BPCs will attest. Why is it back?

Pelennor Swarm
Posted - 2009.04.18 04:56:00 - [321]

Edited by: HankMurphy on 18/04/2009 04:58:03
Much has already been stated already and many others are better at detailing drawbacks/specifics than I. Anywho, thanks for the consideration i hope i make a fair argument:

A) artillery (all weap sys review)
2) buffer vs active tank
iii) AF 4th bonus

A) Artillery (all weap sys review)

You said 3, i had to say artillery but would assume (or like to think) that a review of artillery goes hand in hand with blasters and the rest of the weapon systems.

Artillery stands out the most and should have vastly better range and alpha at the cost of dps and tracking (we already have the disadvantages, how about some love for the advantages?

Blasters should receive much better tracking and dps but should pay for it with even less falloff. rails and autocannons seem ok (please don't throw trash at me) and lasers perform very well.

I'm not suggesting lasers need to be nerfed, only that they be reviewed with the rest keeping pros/cons in mind (they have very decent tracking and great optimal, tachyons are a higher tier weapon option no other race gets. is the current energy use enough of a drawback for those advantages in the world of buffer tanks?

2) Buffer tank vs Active tank

Currently there is few/little reasons to use an active tank over a buffer in pvp. This has a lot to do with the blanket HP buff and sways balance in regards to ship to ship slot layouts and weapon systems.

Active tanks are cap dependent and when actually used give more purpose to combat options focusing around speed (mwd), cap warfare (nos/neut) and serves as a balance vs high cap use weapons.

Buffer should always be a valid option, but at the moment there is little reason to even consider an active tank unless your ship has a bonus to it.

iii) AF 4th bonus

not a huge deal but it made my list. It may just be a disagreement between player base and CCP and if so fair enough.

I don't think I've seen anyone from CCP state that AFs (even now) would be in any danger of being overpowered receiving the same bonuses as their tech I counterparts.

The cost of the ships seems to warrant it and (not that it matters) but it only seems logical.

disclaimer: I'm cross trained equally across all ships and weapon systems

i try not to hold a bias against any one race/weapon system (unless intentionally trolling Ships&Modules Razz) as i really do like all of them and don't want any to fall into or remain in obscurity/irrelevance/unbalance

Mel Nalsek
Merch Industrial
Posted - 2009.04.18 05:08:00 - [322]

1. Minmatar BS, Dreads, and their respective weapon systems are significantly poorer in all respects to their counterparts.

2. Blasters and Blaster-Boats are almost completely useless.

3. POS logistics. Anchoring and fueling POSes and requisite modules is full of unnecessarily time and labor intensive processes.

Hardened Heart
Percussive Diplomacy
Posted - 2009.04.18 05:10:00 - [323]

1) Low-sec- Pointless for anyone to go there other that pirates or people looking to fight pirates. Put some incentive for ISK making out there. Give the pirates more to shoot at and everyone else more reason to shoot the pirates.

2) Faction Warfare- Currently pointless. I am very strongly against any sort of direct or individual reward for success in faction warfare. However, it needs some sort of motivation aside from bragging rights/RP. My thoughts were that it should be something world shaping and changing the face of empire.

3) Left blank because for the most part I am happy with the game as it is. Hence my subscription. Keep up the good work and don't let all the tards get you guys down.

Posted - 2009.04.18 05:20:00 - [324]

I can fly a nidhoggur and have no problems with it at all. However when I come to train for a dread, I'll be cross training to ANY dread that isn't a naglfar. It'll take a lot longer, but the nag really is that terrible. It doesn't seem to do anything well except die.

The tempest is a subpar fleet BS at best, and large projectile weapons (artillery in particular) are pretty much outclassed by other large weapons. I'd love to see arty ships like the tempest go back to the low RoF extreemly high alpha that they used to be, but yet still be able to hit out to the type of ranges that rails/lasers can.

There's 3 rather biased (but no less correct) balance issues that I can see.

Posted - 2009.04.18 05:23:00 - [325]

1) Minmatar Battleships (and for that matter capital ships). In general they are weaker than their competition. Minmatar battleships lack a true sniper as none of them have optimal or tracking bonuses. With active tanks going the way of the dinosaur and the reduction in value of mid slot mods, the inability to fit large buffer tanks on minmatar battleships leaves them far behind the competition. Arguable the best of the lot is the phoon, mostly because it doesn't rely on projectiles.

2) Projectiles in general and Artillery in particular. AC's need a slight tracking boost after the web nerf and the hole in the damage formula that causes optimal range to effect hit quality really hurts them since they have the smallest optimals, but artillery needs a major overhaul. Much larger clip size (like 3 to 4 times larger) and much greater range. A noticible increase in DPS is also needed if people are expected to actually use it. Sure I would love to have back the huge alpha, but I understand CCP wanted to go for longer fights. Fine, but reloading every 10 shots, poor range and poor dps is a bit much to take. The system has been less than useful for quite some time now.

3) Missiles need a slight boost to explosive velosity or a reduction in explosive signature. I don't think a return to the old system is wise, but in general missiles are too easy to evade especially for ships they were designed to hit. While I understand the need for torpedoes to do reduced damage to cruiser and frigate class ships, a battleship without an AB should almost always take full damage. HAM's should hit cruisers hard, and rockets should hurt frigate class ships, they don't. The need to fit a web and a painter to do normal damage against properly sized ships is a bit harsh since there is no way to minimize their speed by flying (like you can with transversal), even a change where you could use a web or a painter would be welcome. A small adjustment or even a skill that reduces unguided missile explosive signature is needed. This problem isn't as noticible on guided missiles because of the effect of skills.

Spawns of Thanatos
Gentlemen's Club
Posted - 2009.04.18 06:08:00 - [326]

1. Level 4 Mission - low risk (almost zero), high reward

2. Large Projectile - Falloff of Large Autocanons is impractical on a BS, need more damage/ROF. Large Artillery just sucks, need more range/alpha

3. Rockets - very low damage compared to other short ranged small weapons.

Mirei Jun
Right to Rule
Posted - 2009.04.18 06:13:00 - [327]

1) Sovereignty warfare and its bastard child, POS management.

2) Titans

3) Cloaking

All three of these topics and what is wrong with them are thoroughly covered by other threads in this very sub-forum.

The last few updates have heavily focused on new players, empire space, and PvE content. Endgame content (above issue #1 and #2) has outgrown its original scope and is badly in need of an overhaul.

The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.04.18 06:14:00 - [328]

1) Naglfar, it's just plain horrible, why would you want split weapons on a dread?

2) Large projectiles. I think it's been covered well enough by others that I don't need to explain this.

3) Faction ships, they need a serious relook, everything from PG, CPU and slot layout, many are impossible to fit. It would also be nice if the LP requirements would come down on faction ships, I'd love to see more flying about.

Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.04.18 06:18:00 - [329]

After reading the last patch notes, I finally realize how pointless it is to argue anything against the Dev ideas. All the changes they originally propose go thru, unless they themselves change their mind. Nothing that players say - as far as good ideas go, has any impact on their final decision, as apparent from their continuous ignoring of good deas.

The only way to do anything that matters is to find a game bug or feature that goes against the dev's idea of how it supposed to work, thus reinforcing Dev's correctness, rather than trying to change it.

I give up posting on game design issues
The futility is too frustrating

Posted - 2009.04.18 07:09:00 - [330]

1. POS - It takes around 6 hours to setup a standard POS in 0.0 space. What kind of fun is that? Especially since a spaceholding alliance has hundreds of these POS in their space.

It would be cool to have pre-built fitttings for a POS where you can drop it and have it all anchor and online on it's own. The anchoring and onlining would take the same 6 hours or more, but you would have to sit there pushing a button every 5 minutes.

2. Naglfar

3. High-Sec - You get to sit around safe from everything with no drawbacks. I understand it was originally made for newer players, but there are people who sit there are do level 4 missions all day poopsocking with no real risk.

Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... : 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

These forums are archived and read-only