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 : ... 36 37 38 39 [40] 41 42 43 44 ... : last (47)

Author Topic

Lani Sun
Posted - 2010.03.09 13:15:00 - [1171]
 

1) Fix blasters by increasing range or better tracking.

2) Active shield tank is overpowered compared to active armor tank. A shield tank always reps more dps than armor. And shields can use Xtra large reppers and shield boost amplifiers which have no equivalent in armor tanks.

3) Legion should have better subs and better use of drones with lasers.

FerdinandNL FCR
Posted - 2010.03.10 15:26:00 - [1172]
 

Edited by: FerdinandNL FCR on 10/03/2010 15:30:03
Hi

My list for changes.

(1) Each station should be like those from amarr that you get ejected out a station not that someone can dock up after a small while.

(2) Neutral rep those should get a timer that they cant dock or jump for 30seconds after they last repair or aid.

(3) Mabye like something that you can get a tab in local chat and say you only want to see war targets its a pain in the ass to scroll through a huge system.

Thnx

Syzygium
Amarr
Friends Of Harassment
Posted - 2010.03.18 03:24:00 - [1173]
 

#1 : Rockets. Seriously guys, they are completely useless atm. It should be a close-range small-ship weapons system. So it *obviously* needs to have higher explo-velocity than every other missile, and a LOT. Consider that most frigsize ships move with ~1000m/s (AB) and 2-3k (MWD). The current explo velocity of 85 is a joke, even if you can dualweb or scramble your opponent.

#2 : ECM. Way too strong compared to the other EWAR-Techniques. Shorten the Jam Duration to 10 Seconds instead of 20 and just *gray out* the Target Picture so you can't activate Modules on it, but don't remove the lock.

#3 : Dramiel. No Frig should be faster than Interceptors. Give her a bit more tank and cap but reduce speed. Even the slowest Interceptor should be a bit faster than any T1 Frigate, no matter if Faction or not, its an Interceptor damnit.

Sassy B
Kenssy Fried Chicken Kru
Posted - 2010.03.21 16:25:00 - [1174]
 

heh my list is exactly the same as the previous posters

1. Rockets. They need increased explosion velocity and/or raw damage output so they can approach turrets in effectiveness.

2. ECM. Too powerful. Too lame. Total rework needed.

3. Dramiel. I think the speed is cool, and fits its super-minmatar theme. However, in combination with its current EHP+DPS it's plainly unbalanced compared to the other faction frigates. Should a Dramiel really out-damage a Succubus??? If you remove the dronebay it remains a rifter/firetail on steroids, and retains its current survivability, but becomes far more balanced in comparison to other t1/t2/faction frigates.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.03.23 11:32:00 - [1175]
 

1. Roflkets.

2. Field Command ships. They offer far too little over a tier 2 BC and are far too dificult to fit when using a gang mod. Rework the class - more fittings and slots, and bonuses to fitting a single gang mod would be worth looking at.

3. Gang mods themselves. Minmatar links are great, Amarr are good, Gallente and Caldari are crap. Sort the balance out.

4. Shield transporter CPU requirements. BS remote-rep is armour-RR, because large remote armour reps are easy to fit and large shield trasnporters are impossible to fit. The modules are similar in effect (HP/cap and HP/sec) and it's absolutely crazy that the shield transporter takes up about 20% of the CPU of a BS, when armour RR is so easy to fit. The domination of RR BS by armour kills diversity, hinders the use of shield-tanking BS and is fundamentally bad for the game. Either fix armour RR by bringing armour RR PG requirements in line with shield transporter CPU requirements, or fix shield transporter CPU requirements by bringin them in line with armour PG requirements, as % of typical BS' PG and CPU.

5. Faction ships. Come on. Who thought the Dramiel was balanced with the Worm?

Bravyan
Posted - 2010.03.24 03:28:00 - [1176]
 

1. Gallente ships
2. Gallente hybrid turrents
3. Gallente armour tanking

Need I say more

Lady Shaniqua
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2010.03.24 21:48:00 - [1177]
 

1.) ECM
2.) Rockets
3.) ECM

Aleks Vens
Posted - 2010.03.26 15:40:00 - [1178]
 

Hello. I would like to know... this new ship.. strategic cruiser. Why the f**K it's so easy to learn on it?? EASIER then on golem - the king of the ships fo agentrunners! On golem I have to learn 3 MONTHS! And what about tengu? only 20 f**king days and thats all! My friend will now be more powerful than me!!!! Do you aware what does it mean? NO BALANCE! Tell me, how it can be?? And the cost... 1 billion for a good golem. and 600 millions for a good tengu? with fit. And again about torpedoes... Why did you decrease the max range of them? For what?? You made golem pease of expensive ****. Why did you do this? Don't you carry about players? I must learn on tengu at least 5 MONTHS!!!! but not these 20 f*cking days. And 1 day to learn this 1x skills... to make your tengu super tank. This is balance?? This is ****, but not balance. Tengu is cheaper, easier, more manoeuvrable, more damage (yes, i saw one well-fitted tengu, it was awesome) More resists. 80%!!! Can you aware it? Can you aware what it allows to do??
And as you decreased range of torpedoes, move away this useless bonuses on target painters on golem. You think this is still in use with cruise missiles?? I think not. Then why you dont carry about this f*cking balance? Add new bonuses! on golem. Make it usefull again please!
ok, I hope on your chariness. And thank you for reading till the very end.

Shoosh
Posted - 2010.03.28 19:55:00 - [1179]
 

Gallente - they need some PVP balance.

Fettered Soul
Posted - 2010.03.29 02:00:00 - [1180]
 

Originally by: Aleks Vens
Hello...

Golem is much better for mission running. It is dedicated mission running ship. Play more to understand this :)

WAuter
Gallente
Posted - 2010.04.05 11:05:00 - [1181]
 

1. Blasterships, damage and tracking.
2. Droneboats: remove gun bonuses and give an extra bonus towards drones, reduce cpu fitting requirements for T1 drone upgrades and bring T2 drone upgrades into the game (give t2 DU the same fitting requirements as the T1 DU now have)
3. Assault ships 4th bonus/overhaul.

Aphex8
Posted - 2010.04.07 07:55:00 - [1182]
 

1. Rockets need to be fixed they are lame and weak, Also defender missiles need to have a 50/50 chance of not hitting its target. Its really lame when a 100isk defender missiles will always hit my 1000isk torpedo.

2. High Sec, you need to add an invulnerable timer when coming out of gates and stations. Getting killed in high sec on a gate is really childish and shouldn't happen I mean its HIGH SEC! There should be a lock on all weapons in 1.0 and 9.0 meaning no firing at all unless you have stolen from another character and in 8.0 to 5.0 their should be longer invulnerable times coming out of stations and gates making sure you can fly safely in high sec systems. Or at least give no fire zones like at gates and stations but you can fly to a belt and fight or planet.

3. Detailing, I think ships start to get boring after a while we should be able to change little things on ships looks like color, lights, the way its shaped when different modules are fitted. Little things but still making your ship look a little different from everyone else.

Dmoney3788
Black Aces
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2010.04.10 03:56:00 - [1183]
 

1. industry/military indexes of the ihub: the industry index rises too slow compared to the military index given the same amount of man hours contributing to each index. It seems impossible to get industry lvl 5 upgrades given a small/medium sized corp.

2. 0.0 is not as profitable as level 4 hisec missions, and has much more risk involved. Either nerf hisec lvl 4 missions or boost the income from 0.0 sites.

3. Passive shield tanking: Something seems wrong with it, the fact that you can make an effective passive shield tank out of almost any BC. Perhaps the shield recharge rate and the effects of adding shield extenders should be looked into.

Gavinat0r
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:27:00 - [1184]
 

Originally by: Lani Sun
1) Fix blasters by increasing range or better tracking.

2) Active shield tank is overpowered compared to active armor tank. A shield tank always reps more dps than armor. And shields can use Xtra large reppers and shield boost amplifiers which have no equivalent in armor tanks.

3) Legion should have better subs and better use of drones with lasers.



ARE YOU JOKING.........

Active armor tank is so much better then shield, Its called nano pumps... 2 LARS on a mega or domi with 2 nano pumps and a accel pump and you have free mids for injector = wtf pwn thats about 1000 dps tank you cant get any where near that with a decent dps shield tanker, besides maelstrom which pawns. X-large shield booster have you seen grid it needs

menacemyth
Minmatar
Onyx Brotherhood
STR8NGE BREW
Posted - 2010.04.15 16:23:00 - [1185]
 

topic is balancing so here i goes!

Spend a little time revamping the amount and quality of profession and complex sites. Currently they are great in and around gurista and angel space, suck everywhere else and are completely non-existent in drone space.

I understand each region should be unique but there's no excuse for the lack of content or creativity in some areas. Obviously some content programmers went to lunch early in this area!

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2010.04.16 17:45:00 - [1186]
 

  • Less pirate ships, but stronger and worth more (giving some need for speed and reducing difference between PvE and PvP

  • Logistics - aggro rules make them difficult to counter in empire

  • Dock/Undock ranges on stations are too large

  • Buffer tanks in general are much much better for pvp than active tanks making gank and buffer + RR the only effective way to pvp

Entilzah Valen
Band of Builders Inc.
Posted - 2010.04.24 17:47:00 - [1187]
 

Buffer tanking is my only peeve. I'll break the rules a little bit to explain it for you. For this one we'll have to travel back in time.

2006/2007. Nanoing was the way to go for small scale PvP.

Reasons being were pretty simple, in fact most of everything in EVE boils down to it: Risk.

In the event that your ideal situation went south, with a nano fitted ship, you could mitigate the risk of losing it by having the ability to run away like a pansy.

In the event that you found a target that required more damage, you'd end up bringing friends more and more often. Hard to kill a Battleship with a Vagabond. Numbers.

It obviously could be done, but the ideal locations were A) Off gates and stations and B) Distant from your targets backup. You needed time. Time.

So, in the end, you had blobs of ships fitted with a "Velocity Buffer" dedicated to mitigating the risk of losing their ship as an individual.

Now, if you take that all away, you of course resort to the next best thing. In this case, buffer tanks.

With a buffer tank, those conditions are all flipped. By proxy, your agreeing to be a willing target if you fit with a buffer. You fit that way with the firm realization that your going to take damage, and the whole idea is to outlast your target so that you can escape or kill him, whichever comes first.

Now, put two competent pilots against one another and they've probably made the same realizations. So they'll be fit the same. Neither of them wants to lose a ship or a fight, and their friends want kills and fights.

So you get gangs of people running around with buffer tanks. And the only way to kill those gangs is to meet them with a better gang of buffer tanked ****heads. Multiply this over and over as each side tries to counter one another, and you get a mad case of blobbing. 150 pilots jumping in on about the same to get a fight. Probably turns a lot of the subscriber base off to PvP if that is what they have to go through in order to have fun.

Solutions:

Stacking nerf percentage based armor and shield mods.

Chi Quan
Bibkor Enterprises
Posted - 2010.04.27 02:41:00 - [1188]
 

Originally by: Entilzah Valen
Stacking nerf percentage based armor and shield mods.


resist mods are already stacking penalized. what ruined the fine numbers were rigs, especially the large trimark armor pump. for most fits, there is little sense in using something else. regenerative plating: 6%, energized regenerative membrane: 12,5%, (large) trimark 15%

MacGuiness
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
Posted - 2010.04.29 03:01:00 - [1189]
 

Edited by: MacGuiness on 29/04/2010 03:07:57
1) Caldari slot layout and/or where shield mods should go and/or base shield resists

Basically this boils down to fitting and hitpoints. If you fly Caldari with the exception of only a few ships, your choice boils down to tank or gank. Any gank modules you fit will adversely affect your tank and any tank you fit adversely affects your ability to hold somebody in place.

Here's an example. Take a full buffer mega and you get 130,000 EHP (thereabouts). You also still have 4 slots in which to choose your gank and sustainment mods. lets say, MWD, scram, web, cap booster.

Now take a Raven and fit MWD, Scram, and web. (I'll make the slots even. 3 tank, 3 gank). The best you can do is about 90.000 EHP. This is a full 40,000 EHP lower than the mega. To get even close to the Mega's tank, you have to drop both the scram and the web. This leaves you with just an MWD.

Something needs to be done about this. It boils down to:

1: Complete slot redesign to give most Caldari ships more mid slots.
2: Complete slot redesign while changing shield mods to low slot items (or some being mid and some being low).
3: Adjust base shield resists for Caldari ships only to be in-line with armor resists of other races.
4: Combination of the above.

Honestly, I'm most in favor of changing shield tank items to low-slots and then redistributing the mid-slots. It provides the best balance between tank/gank/and damage output across the board. It's a major game changer but unfortunately if you just provide more mid-slots, you will have players who will fill those mids with pure tank and suddenly your looking at a 200k EHP ship that can also dish out 1k DPS in damage.

If you don't want the changes to be THAT drastic, you can change some of the shield items to lowslot while keeping others as midslot items. It would still cause a slot layout change to be in order but not as drastic of one. Would have to be done carefully though...


2) (still list of top 3 issues) ECM. Reduce to 10-second timer and maybe a slight decrease in strength.

3) Blasters: Give em back most of their range but not their tracking. They were way too good at hitting smaller stuff in the past and they are now on par, tracking-wise, with Large AC's. Slightly better than, actually.

Noveron
Caldari
Aitnaru
Posted - 2010.04.29 09:49:00 - [1190]
 

Edited by: Noveron on 29/04/2010 09:49:49
1 Risk vs. Profit in lowsec/wormholes for solo people
2 Loot Tables
3 Shield Tanking

Fettered Soul
Posted - 2010.04.29 23:20:00 - [1191]
 

Edited by: Fettered Soul on 29/04/2010 23:24:31
Originally by: MacGuiness

1) Caldari slot layout and/or where shield mods should go and/or base shield resists


Armor ships should choose between tank and damage (low slots for tank modules OR Damage modes) Caldari ships should choose between tank and e-warfare (middle slots for tank modules OR utility - AB/MWD/EWarFare/Tackle)
Propose better Raven slot layout :) And remember that total slot amount should be like other race have.
You compare Mega and Raven EHP? Ok. Do you consider their DPS-range?
Mega: Neutrons + 2MFS = 735 DPS at 4.5km optimal (no drones)
Raven: Siege + 2BCU (you can set 3 without tank sacrifice) = 843 DPS at 30km
So in some conditions you can hit without hitback even? You also can shoot in resist hole and your real DPS will be near EFT numbers.

Originally by: MacGuiness

3) Blasters: Give em back most of their range but not their tracking. They were way too good at hitting smaller stuff in the past and they are now on par, tracking-wise, with Large AC's. Slightly better than, actually.


Long time ago blasters were good because of 90% stasis web. Degrading 90% webs degraded blasters.
Blasters with better range = AC. Blaster just need more DPS.
Pulse lasers shoot 85% blaster damage at 300% blaster optimal - it is unfair.
AC shoot 80% blaster damage at 200% blaster falloff (no cap use, selectable damage type) - it is unfair.

Gelvina
Posted - 2010.04.30 09:31:00 - [1192]
 

1. storyline items in relationship to tech2 and faction perhaps.

2. augmented drones?

3. t2 ammo!!


Zedia Zhane
Posted - 2010.05.01 01:40:00 - [1193]
 

1. Financial advantage of T2 BPO manufacturing.

2. Drakes. They are significantly better at PvE than any other BC in the game. Which is why you can't swing a dead cat without hitting one. Especially in a wormhole.

3. Meta 4 T1 modules vs T2. The game is really inconsistent where for some items the Meta 4 T1 is significantly better than the T2. I'd like to see this better balanced across the board. (On the other hand, this would be a huge amount of work, probably more than it's worth.)

Insurance would have made the list at #1, but I understand that's being addressed in Tyrannis.


Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.05.02 18:18:00 - [1194]
 

Edited by: Whitehound on 02/05/2010 18:18:58
I have only now read about the coming changes with Tyrannis and regarding the loot from missions.

I think it is a great idea to stop the flow of the standard T1 items (meta 0) coming from mission runs and drop other stuff instead. However, so far the word is that tags or something will drop.

IMHO, the best substitute for me would be to have more T2 salvage in the game. These are very rare and T2 rigs are extremely expensive. Since we now have so many rigs and these are becoming more and more a "must have" would a reduction in prices of T2 rigs be a nice move.

Comm Den
Posted - 2010.05.02 22:34:00 - [1195]
 

Originally by: Lani Sun
1) Fix blasters by increasing range or better tracking.

2) Active shield tank is overpowered compared to active armor tank. A shield tank always reps more dps than armor. And shields can use Xtra large reppers and shield boost amplifiers which have no equivalent in armor tanks.

3) Legion should have better subs and better use of drones with lasers.




1 blasters are made for close combat
2 active tank isnt overpowered try a raven vs a megathron - mega wines 100% of the time
3 idk t3

Kvo Vadis
Posted - 2010.05.03 22:28:00 - [1196]
 

Originally by: Comm Den

2 active tank isnt overpowered try a raven vs a megathron - mega wines 100% of the time


Try KIN/THERM fields on Raven and you will win Very Happy

Psycros
Posted - 2010.05.04 09:04:00 - [1197]
 

Edited by: Psycros on 04/05/2010 09:09:33
In order of importance/desirability:

1) Make the game more friendly towards non-PvP and casual players. Add a pvp flag system, eliminate any highsec missions sending players to lowsec, make theft in highsec a crime, etc. However, rewards should be considerably higher in lowsec to equal the risk. This way you're not punishing either those who just want to play a pure economic or PvE game OR the hardcore traditional userbase. A big, dynamic world like EVE is fully capable of accommodating both types - other games prove this.
2) Rebalance combat to make something other than Caldari worth flying (i.e. end missile & shield tank domination). Hybrids are worthless, projectiles aren't much better..lasers are OK unless you get neuted, then you're hosed. Missiles can't be neuted, can't be disrupted, never miss, do all damage types, easier to learn than other weapons, easier to fit, etc. Shield tank is cheaper than armor tank, more effective, more flexible. Where are the mid-slot armor items - we have low-slot SHIELD stuff, right? Drones should automatically return to the bay when they take a selectable percentage of armor damage. Even better, have the drone-oriented ships (Myrm, etc.) fully repair drones over time while their in the bay: maybe add a module that grants this ability to other ships as well, and improves it for the drone carriers. Repair Systems skill could speed this up further.

There are entire categories of modules that are basically broken (auto-targeters, rockets, etc.) that could be retooled to help in this effort.

3) Massive model improvement! Ship and station models are just..well, pretty illogical for the most part. Even taking into account a couple millennium of technology and so forth, the look of most stations and ships is just bizarre (clearly the art dept. was in charge of EVE's early design). New hulls since Trinity show that CCP knows this - symmetry and more believable design are readily apparent here. I would love to see the whole game given this treatment.

I truly believe that if CCP took these suggestions to heart they would be astonished by the growth that EVE would see, and the critical acclaim they have now would be nothing to what they'd soon be hearing.

Chapilan Lemartes
Caldari
KANTAI HIKAGE
White Noise.
Posted - 2010.05.06 13:40:00 - [1198]
 

I have some ideas about Machariel it's realy a good ship after dominion, but a beet overpowered. If you will compare it with another pirate BS, for example Nightmare you could notice that there is a great diference in signature (1km BS with 350m signature?) , speed (BS>BC?) and agility (BS>BC?). All this make Machariel realy cheat in PVP and bring disballance to the game. Imho it will be realy good to reduce it's speed and agility, or may be DPS..

Den Dugg
Posted - 2010.05.06 14:36:00 - [1199]
 

1 defender missiles... whats the point?

2 t2 cap moduales.

3 increase hitpoints on all ships sucks to lose a ship in 30 secs.

AnarConn
Posted - 2010.05.07 18:38:00 - [1200]
 

Edited by: AnarConn on 07/05/2010 18:44:01
1. Dramiel is waaaay to hard to catch, make it more voulnerable, lower resist or speed would help

2. Cloak (its a lenghty discussion in progress already on this forum)

3. More viable Caldari ships for blobfights, i know they are a shield loveing race, but dam give us atleast a few ships that you can make somewhat decent in a armorgang that isnt missile based. or try and balance the whole armorblob gang. id bet if you took a statistic of any large fight youd find armortankers covering 80% of the fleet, that doesnt sound balanced to me. Oh and might be a subject for a 4th suggestion, but having caldari and gallente using a hybrid weapon system that only does 2 of the heavyliest tanked dmg in the game no matter what ammo you load isnt cool either i think. Having to chose between hybrid weapons which does thouse two or missiles which is crap (as in can be counterd in so many ways, is slow to hit targets faaaaar away)


Pages: first : previous : ... 36 37 38 39 [40] 41 42 43 44 ... : 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