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 : ... 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 ... : last (47)

Author Topic

Esk Esme
Caldari
Smack Crack and Pot
Posted - 2009.09.27 10:31:00 - [1051]
 


3. Marauders, you just gave isk farmers a better way to farm. theses ships should not allowed in empire. ppl make more isk in empire than in 0.0. either fix 0.0, or tax empire ppl with 25% tax, and remove marauders/faction BS from empire, as to make it harder to isk farm. empire = 30mil-50mil/hour no risk. 0.0 = same maby little more, but its never safe 24/7. hostile fleets stop isk rolling in, AFK cloaker hot drop gangs, ect... and im sick and tired of a -0.97 true sec system spawning more cruiser spawns than low sec.. a mission runner see more BS than me. cruiser rats shouldn't exist in super low true sec systems.. 5x BS spawns should.


lol stupidest idea iv seen tbh nobody forcing u to live/make isk in 0.0 you can choose were to live/isk make just coz u personaly dnt like it well just whine some more haha

maximus sotar
Posted - 2009.09.27 14:54:00 - [1052]
 


Posted - 2009.09.27 10:31:00 - [1051] - Quote
Report

3. Marauders, you just gave isk farmers a better way to farm. theses ships should not allowed in empire. ppl make more isk in empire than in 0.0. either fix 0.0, or tax empire ppl with 25% tax, and remove marauders/faction BS from empire, as to make it harder to isk farm. empire = 30mil-50mil/hour no risk. 0.0 = same maby little more, but its never safe 24/7. hostile fleets stop isk rolling in, AFK cloaker hot drop gangs, ect... and im sick and tired of a -0.97 true sec system spawning more cruiser spawns than low sec.. a mission runner see more BS than me. cruiser rats shouldn't exist in super low true sec systems.. 5x BS spawns should.

lol stupidest idea iv seen tbh nobody forcing u to live/make isk in 0.0 you can choose were to live/isk make just coz u personaly dnt like it well just whine some more haha

yes Mr mission runner.. you would hate to loose your faction fitted marauder wouldn't you. your little mission whoring ship that makes you millions. hence why the market in EVE is %^&$ed cause of #$%^ wits like you who would rather farm mission over and over rather than actually progressing your character into 0.0. marauders + faction BS just favor high sec mission *****s...CCP just made it easy for them to farm isk.

Phoenix T'ril
Gallente
Hashimoto Corporation
Posted - 2009.09.28 07:00:00 - [1053]
 

There's a lot of hate on L4s. I run L4s because it's something myself and my friends can do in between classes and school, and still feel like we're getting somewhere in the game and accomplishing something. I don't have the time to invest in going out to 0.0 and dealing with pirates and gankers and all the rest of that nonsense. L4s are a good low-barrier-to-entry way for us to progress in the game, as they are for a lot of people.
I'd take it as a kindness if you didn't completely torpedo that way for us casual folk to enjoy the game, much to the chagrin of all you hardcore players out there, I'm sure. Like it or not, Eve has casual players that just play sometimes, and 0.0 isn't very conducive to that sort of play.
And before you say anything, I've spent eight months in 0.0 before, and I didn't really enjoy it as much as empire. I didn't have the time to invest in it, I still don't. I'm a carebear, sure, but carebears play Eve too. I can't stress that enough.

Gabriel Ironfist
Posted - 2009.09.28 14:09:00 - [1054]
 

Since right on topic...

Fix the power poor Vargur. So the minmitar can farm Missions too :)


Xahara
StarFleet Enterprises
Systematic-Chaos
Posted - 2009.09.28 18:17:00 - [1055]
 

1. Blasters need a boost. Either in damage or both optimal and falloff. After all, it's supposed to be a cross between Lasers and Projectiles, right? It should have a bit more of both optimal and falloff, without overpowering it in terms of damage dealing. But it should still be the best damage dealing turrets out there.

2. Torpedoes need a nerf. As it stands right now, if you take into account a torp Raven for example, it can outdamage even a Megathron (which is supposed to be the uber damage dealer, right? It's Gallente after all and they're supposed to be the uber damage dealers, not to mention the fact that missiles always hit...) and have a comparable buffer tank.

3. Drake needs a nerf. Its buffer tanking abilities far surpass any other Battlecruiser and it can easily just stay out of range while blaster any battlecruiser to bits with Heavy Assault Missiles. I know I'm mainly talking about 1v1/2 situations here, but the Drake seems to be a bit overpowered.

Just my 2 cents!

Rogueweapon
Posted - 2009.09.29 01:01:00 - [1056]
 

developers , can you plz give the only pure shield tanking race a base em resist for shield , at least 25% for the caldari.

also id like to see the cerberus have more cpu and 150 more powergrid .

in PVP the caldari have to fight the amarr as well as the minmatar so why on earth not give the specialist shield tanking race a leg up on shield technology .

thanks


torps and ravens and drakes dont need nerfing , as it stands now they are pretty weak compared to the othe races

Esk Esme
Caldari
Smack Crack and Pot
Posted - 2009.09.29 14:25:00 - [1057]
 

Originally by: maximus sotar

Posted - 2009.09.27 10:31:00 - [1051] - Quote
Report

3. Marauders, you just gave isk farmers a better way to farm. theses ships should not allowed in empire. ppl make more isk in empire than in 0.0. either fix 0.0, or tax empire ppl with 25% tax, and remove marauders/faction BS from empire, as to make it harder to isk farm. empire = 30mil-50mil/hour no risk. 0.0 = same maby little more, but its never safe 24/7. hostile fleets stop isk rolling in, AFK cloaker hot drop gangs, ect... and im sick and tired of a -0.97 true sec system spawning more cruiser spawns than low sec.. a mission runner see more BS than me. cruiser rats shouldn't exist in super low true sec systems.. 5x BS spawns should.

lol stupidest idea iv seen tbh nobody forcing u to live/make isk in 0.0 you can choose were to live/isk make just coz u personaly dnt like it well just whine some more haha

yes Mr mission runner.. you would hate to loose your faction fitted marauder wouldn't you. your little mission whoring ship that makes you millions. hence why the market in EVE is %^&$ed cause of #$%^ wits like you who would rather farm mission over and over rather than actually progressing your character into 0.0. marauders + faction BS just favor high sec mission *****s...CCP just made it easy for them to farm isk.



you are dumb this is a dictor prober toon my mission runner uses a CNR and Domi rr alt instaed crying about missions why not cry about how crap most 0.0 is i mean bc and cruser rats ffs wot the hell do ppl want to go there for to make cash lol

i pay my sub i decide how i play wots the big deal if u dnt like 0.0 gtfo simple

the problem isnt lvl 4's its 0.0 most 0.0 is crap useless space

btw my pvp main does live in 0.0 but only for pvp i make cash in empire

Naomi Knight
Amarr
Posted - 2009.09.30 08:08:00 - [1058]
 

IMHO remove isk for missions in empire give only lp but increase it, also decrease npc-s drop/bounty. And give agents to 0.0 stations even to those not in npc region.
Increase 0.0 bounties, and make a new asteroid type which gives mainly trit worth near as much /cycle as other high end roids.

Bomberlocks
Minmatar
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2009.10.01 01:38:00 - [1059]
 

1.Current and proposed projectiles weapons. Currently underpowered, proposed niche weapon that will only serve to drive even more people away from Minnie BSs since they won't even be good in PvE anymore.

2.CCP itself: needs to take a serious look at how they approach balancing. Currently it feels as if they themselves do not do much in the way of QA, even though CCP has many testing centers in numerous countries. It also feels as if any proposed changes have to go through CCP's marketing department to be vetted for the patch's ability to string the user base along even further into parting with more cash.

3.UI clusterfsck: There have been few games with UI clutter as bad as Eve's. Seriously, employ a few usability designers and testers and fix it finally.

Degara Farat
Caldari
Posted - 2009.10.01 18:01:00 - [1060]
 

Remove basic T1 mods from the loot tables
Arty
AF 4th bonus

Nathanael Ashcroft
TAKAGI Corp
Posted - 2009.10.03 15:55:00 - [1061]
 

1> Blasters : give them the tracking they deserve !

2> HS lvl4 mission : Must stay WAY better than the lvl3 and should stay attractive. But the rewards (especially bounties) should be lowered.

3> T2 short range ammo : give a tracking bonus and lower the pure damages.

Mamba Lev
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2009.10.05 21:18:00 - [1062]
 

Edited by: Mamba Lev on 05/10/2009 21:19:02
Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir

Needs a better bonus to it's grid, enough so that you can fit 2 Large Shield extenders to it withought having to add grid mods and rigs. The 6 blaster version does this easily even with Heavy Neutron II's. The HAM version which i understand to be the missile version of blasters can't even fit 1 and that's before the MWD so you need to fit atleast 2 Grid mods/rigs to fit 1 LSE and the mwd.

I hope someone from CCP reads this as it's really doing my head in :)

Klandi
Consortium of stella Technologies
Posted - 2009.10.07 23:26:00 - [1063]
 

Edited by: Klandi on 07/10/2009 23:47:44
1. Balancing. The concept of a balance means there is inconsistancies and previous considered concepts in theory were not held to be correct in practice. But this is how human nature is, so the act of balance is a foreign concept in nature and I would love Eve to mirror nature.

Example: the human is top of the foodchain - but a lion can still hunt and kill him, unless the human has protection. If an act of 'balance' was enforced, the lion would be stripped of claws and teeth (cos that could injure the human) and the human would be bound hand and foot cos he could do damage to the lion. Ludicrious example maybe, but it does explain my point and it also reflects my frustration that Eve is like this.

I would love to get rid of balancing - reflect life as we have it today, with humans screwing things up, and using exploration and inventiveness to gain an advantage.

Just my thoughts

Shadi Dee
Posted - 2009.10.09 12:04:00 - [1064]
 

While I am sure has been noted before, there is something wrong with how "Adaptive nano plating" mods are balanced against "Energized adaptive membrane" mods.

Energized adaptive membrane t2 => 20% to all
Adaptive nano plating t2 => 15.36% to all

Energized adaptive membrane best named => 15% to all
Adaptive nano plating best named => 15.36% to all

Intended or not, truth is, a best named plating is better than its energized membrane counterpart ... and I can't find the logic behind it.


Kadoes Khan
Posted - 2009.10.10 20:59:00 - [1065]
 

  • T1 Production - This should be a fantastic way for newer players to get into industry and right now it's dominated by mission runners dumping all the loot form missions.

  • More Modules! - Not just extensions of current ones but brand new ones, to further improve the depth of the game.

  • Improving Low sec - Making low sec a more desirable place to call your home. Right now it is nearly as dangerous as 0.0 but does not have anywhere near the rewards. It's also painfully annoying to fight in low sec due to constantly dealing with agression timers and the global criminal timer.


Hun Jakuza
We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming
Posted - 2009.10.11 10:18:00 - [1066]
 

Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 11/10/2009 11:45:24
1. Fix undetectable cloakers who sit in cloak with a simple ship.
Fix cynoships or increase cyno generator PG and CPU fitting needs (banish cynogenetrator from frigs)
Solution against hot drop. (maybe cyno fuel
consumption limit)

2. Exploiters/trickers > Logoffsky/cloak+mwd/ninjalooters/wardec dodgers etc.

3. Revised aggro and redock politics. No more redock after 45 sec with 15 minute aggro time. (Or penalty payment on station when someone try to dock with global flag)

4. Balanced weapon system. Lasers have overpowered optimal. Blasters and projectiles need balance. Missiles need more revise {torps needs +5% flight times and need the all missile types a little better hit/ratios}. Rockets crap/unusable.

5. Drones needs love : Drone implants/damage rigs for small/medium/heavy drones.

6. Remove shadows from scanning map. (invisible probe chutes)

7. Sounds/killmail system need fixes.

8. Make a solution for pirate faction standing fix (no more agents when someone reach -2.0)

9. Consistent developments !!! (like: enemies shouldn't dock at enemies FW station/ more fight no dock at enemy station etc )

10. Make low and 0.0 space more inviting for players. (blackmarket/eligible system police and pirate hubs in low sec)

Felex Di
Warhamsters
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.10.12 11:20:00 - [1067]
 

1. local in 0.0 - like ally chat
2. anti missels protections (like track dis, As the universal module) - coz defender dont work and are established only on the rocket ships that is already absurd
3. agrotimer in 0.0 at gate - coz its make solo pvp impossible, What for it here is necessary?

CientificaLoca
Posted - 2009.10.12 19:57:00 - [1068]
 

Edited by: CientificaLoca on 12/10/2009 20:01:57
1) Love a little the minners.

2) Medium or slow item to enable repair slowwing the drones on drone bay.

3) Something to can make random miners party and cant steal the resources.

4) My love for a drone ship. A ship with 10 drones that cant use weapon , only drones.

5) Upper item increase DMG drones.

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.10.13 07:52:00 - [1069]
 

Edited by: Roland Thorne on 13/10/2009 08:45:50
1. (Because I'm biased I start like this lol) Minmatar need to return to the ideal of speed and luck: all matari ships should be moderately faster and more agile then their racial counterparts and keep the half-assed tanking slots we love so much. I am not talking about a return to pre speed-nerf stats, only a moderate increase in speed and agility to all matari ships so they are best in class in those attributes only.

2. Insurance still seems hacked together - - unfinished. Insurance should be balanced to reward a good record, and it should be more automatic, bi-monthly, with a low continuous fee. Insurance should take into account factions involved in ship destruction, and the pilot's pvp lost/kill record to balance reward on loss. Unless a viable way to calculate fitting costs arises, fittings and modules should still not be included in insurance coverage. All new pilots should have a clean slate and reasonable fee per ship, with room for improvement as faction standings change.

Those are the issues that come to mind which are important to me, besides the welcome attention toward projectile ammo, etc, which have already been reviewed and discussed for the upcoming patch.

Edit: Regarding insurance, basing payout and fees on faction standings and a pilot's pvp record should make it useful for both pvp and pve, and provide an incentive for pvpers to step up their game, even. Basing reward on faction standings could also give a need to preserve standings in highsec with concord. Also, a low continuous fee would save from putting down a huge chunk of change for only 3 months of coverage that a pilot may not even need.

CommunistMan
Posted - 2009.10.14 19:51:00 - [1070]
 

1. Make ships faster, speed nerf sucked :(
2. Armor buffer tanks are getting annoying
3. Ships that are meant to go fast are going too slow to fill their roles (interceptors and stuff)

IIIAsharakIII
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.10.15 20:41:00 - [1071]
 

Before I put in my top 3, I'd like to just put something out there. Most of the "complaints" I've read in this thread are a direct result of previous "complainers". Don't like chance based ECM? Well, it wasn't before, until someone "complained". Don't like missiles? Well, those were different before too. ETC, ETC, ETC. Balancing has caused more trouble for this game than it is worth. Errors in calculations is one thing. Game design is another. Constant nerfing/buffing of the races causes players to "chase" the currently popular race, ships, and fittings. Which leads me directly to my 3 top things I'd like to see changed in eve:
1. More specialization for each race. Each one should have a unique weakness, as well as a unique strongpoint.
2. Lets revisit drones, modules, and fittings. I'm not sure if its possible to redesign modules, drones, and ships to accomodate more diverse fittings, but it'd be great if you could figure a way to do it.
3. Increase 0.0 incentives, without nerfing other professions. Not every lvl4 mission runner has 3 accounts. Most eve players make far less than anything reported in the various guides you see around the forums.

Selvacin
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.10.17 00:49:00 - [1072]
 

Edited by: Selvacin on 17/10/2009 00:50:27
Edited by: Selvacin on 17/10/2009 00:49:42
Originally by: Xahara
1. Blasters need a boost. Either in damage or both optimal and falloff. After all, it's supposed to be a cross between Lasers and Projectiles, right? It should have a bit more of both optimal and falloff, without overpowering it in terms of damage dealing. But it should still be the best damage dealing turrets out there.

2. Torpedoes need a nerf. As it stands right now, if you take into account a torp Raven for example, it can outdamage even a Megathron (which is supposed to be the uber damage dealer, right? It's Gallente after all and they're supposed to be the uber damage dealers, not to mention the fact that missiles always hit...) and have a comparable buffer tank.

3. Drake needs a nerf. Its buffer tanking abilities far surpass any other Battlecruiser and it can easily just stay out of range while blaster any battlecruiser to bits with Heavy Assault Missiles. I know I'm mainly talking about 1v1/2 situations here, but the Drake seems to be a bit overpowered.

Just my 2 cents!


1. don't know enough about blasters to judge.

2. try moving torps have crap explosion velocity even a little movement can limit thier dps and if a raven is gank setup you should have no problems killing it, try using BC's lol, or hac's

3. drakes are SLOW as hell, i can catch up to one in a mealstrom with 8650's and emp ammo i will end it as well.


Marinochka11111
Posted - 2009.10.19 11:19:00 - [1073]
 

1600MM plates on cruiser platforms.
Cut powergrid a little on some cruisers (rupture, thorax, vexor, arbitrator, maller) to make it ipossible to fit a 1600mm plate.

Currently a cruiser can have 50+k effective hitpoints, maller can get over 90k effective hitpoints with 2 x 1600mm plates. Its just not right when most battleships have slightly over 100k ehp.

1600 plates must be available to bc's (one MAX, not 2 or 3) and bs'es, not to a cruiser.

Onin Ra
Core Impulse
Posted - 2009.10.19 11:32:00 - [1074]
 

Originally by: Marinochka11111
1600MM plates on cruiser platforms.
Cut powergrid a little on some cruisers (rupture, thorax, vexor, arbitrator, maller) to make it ipossible to fit a 1600mm plate.

Currently a cruiser can have 50+k effective hitpoints, maller can get over 90k effective hitpoints with 2 x 1600mm plates. Its just not right when most battleships have slightly over 100k ehp.

1600 plates must be available to bc's (one MAX, not 2 or 3) and bs'es, not to a cruiser.


I agree with this alt.
With the introduction of rigs, and now with them being so cheap, every ******* can afford them, and we got mallers with 100k ehp running around and thats without implants, most of other cruisers can have around 50k ehp + after web nerf and sig raidus fix they are very hard to hit with BS sized guns. Im not saying it is suposed to be easy to hit them with BS guns, but jee weez, 50k EHP AND small sig + nerfed webs?
This 1600mm plating hp fest on cruiser has got to stop.
Killing a cruiser takes so long now and it encourages blobing, by the time you kill a cruiser TEH BLOB is already here.
Pretty much same **** with BCs.

Onin Ra
Core Impulse
Posted - 2009.10.19 11:46:00 - [1075]
 

Originally by: Roland Thorne
Edited by: Roland Thorne on 13/10/2009 08:45:50

2. Insurance still seems hacked together - - unfinished. Insurance should be balanced to reward a good record, and it should be more automatic, bi-monthly, with a low continuous fee. Insurance should take into account factions involved in ship destruction, and the pilot's pvp lost/kill record to balance reward on loss. Unless a viable way to calculate fitting costs arises, fittings and modules should still not be included in insurance coverage. All new pilots should have a clean slate and reasonable fee per ship, with room for improvement as faction standings change.


While i do find this idea very interesting and cool on PAPER, in eve it will just encourage even more people to blob. Losing ships in blobs is much harder than in solo/small gang warfare.
I do understand that blobs etc is the part of the game, but i think we have eoungh big fleet warfare around as it is already.

Kaya Divine
Gallente
Kittens Factory
Posted - 2009.10.19 20:17:00 - [1076]
 

Overhaul of insurance:

Those who have -0.1 (not mitigated) shouldn't be able to insure ships.
This would implement a good ISK drain, and indirectly give usefulness for having sec status which is above 0.0

Ninja salvaging fix:

Currently it could be more profitable then running lvl4s mission.
My proposal, just remove salvage from high security, which would move some people to low security, not only some mission runners but also and ninja salvagers.






JitaPriceChecker2
Posted - 2009.10.20 11:41:00 - [1077]
 

* blasters cant track properly in their optimal

Battlingbean
Heaven's Gate
Posted - 2009.10.20 23:13:00 - [1078]
 

I. Passive Tanking and Shield vs. Armor - I can shield tank and armor tank, but at this point I'd armor tank everything if I could. Passive tanking is not effective atm because fights don't last long enough for it to be effective(Drake is the exception of course). All ships of the same class have the same shield recharge time, that seems wrong, shouldn't Caldari and some Minmatar be naturally faster?

II. T2 ammo - Simply not worth using.

III. Certain weapon systems - Rockets, artillery(so I hear), railguns etc.

If possible please don't nerf anything just buff others. Nerf doesn't exist in RL and will probably just cause whining.

Onin Ra
Core Impulse
Posted - 2009.10.20 23:54:00 - [1079]
 

I really liked the idea i read in the other topic about removing tiers or making just 2 tiers for frigs and cruiser and makinng all these ships viable.
In all my time in eve i had never had the need to fly a Condor or Heron for example, same with other races, these ships, you know what ships im talking about, are UTTERLY AND TOTALY USELESS. Sure a newbie here and there fly's it, but 95% of the time nobody even thinks of them viable. Alot of cruiser are never getting used at all.
Instead of adding new ships every time, how about making other ships that are already in game USEFULL. Tier system works fairly well with BS's for example, probably for the reason that there are only 3 tiers.
Adding few slots here and there, some different bonuses and we will have much more diverese t1 enviroment.
You keep adding t2, event t3 ships, but we still have Condors that nobody ever uses.

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.10.23 05:55:00 - [1080]
 

Last time I posted about rockets, my post was repeatedly deleted by moderators... let's see what happens now.

Module: Rockets (torpedoes seems to be okay, HAM's have issues, but I unsure about possible fixes)
Issue: They're sucks, comparing... to anything.
Okay, I know (well, I really know) - it is absolutely separate weapon classes, but some parallels exists. At least light missiles are closer counterpart, than, say, drones or guns.

So, keeping it in mind:

Issue #1: Reload time affecting rockets DPS insanely. Namely by 10%.
I've had feeling that all what i'm doing flying my Vengeance, is waiting for rocket launchers to reload... then I've placed numbers on paper... and saw it was not only feeling.

Suggested fix: Increase launcher capacity. (Double it at least)

Issue #2: Single rocket doing close to no damage, they're fired very often, resulting in Issue #1 plus huge load to EVE cluster.
Suggestion: Increase duration, damage in half.

Issue #3: Rockets are slow.
Really... Not a counter to interceptors. Not even close to. I suggest increase in speed. From half to twice increase.

Who want to play with numbers:
Screenshot and OOo calc document

ADD: Considering all these changes,
Suggested addition: Increase rocket launchers fitting cost a bit. More precisely, increase PG usage slightly (keep in mind to increase available PG on some ships as well, if that hurts them, namely Kestrel has so weak powergrid, depends on increase, it may never be able to fit rockets on it any more)


Pages: first : previous : ... 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 ... : 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