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


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris
Etherium Cartel
Posted - 2011.02.19 06:54:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Annoitte

I'm sorry that I actually read the two pages and noticed the underlying complaint that wasn't actually pointed out by anyone else.

It has been stated multiple times while that the tier system is unnecessary, making the changes the OP wants will only make things worse. And, to top it off, the OP obviously can't get over the idea that there are a variety of roles that are played by each ship, in each race, and not every ship is going to be equal to every other ship, because of those roles.



The intent of my post wasn't to support the OP, I think the OP is deficient in their argument in many ways. The first and most obvious is that there is no benefit to the tier system.

Now to your post

"Here's a hint: Instead of just complaining about how it's not the kind of ship you want it to be, look at the slot layout, powergrid, cpu, and bonuses. That should give you an idea of what it is intended to do. Then, figure out what you want the ship to do. If the ship doesn't fill your need, find one that does."

It did not live up to the quality of the previous posts, and I found it rather insulting given the effort others had put into their discussions. Now to be fair, my response was worse than yours, and I have deleted it, apologies.

Best,
AG

Amaroq Dricaldari
Amarr
Vengeance Industrial Militia
Posted - 2011.02.19 07:02:00 - [62]
 

Step I: Stop the arguing
Step II: Know the Histroy of Tech II stuff
Step III: Know how to solve the Tech System

I believe that Tech II stuff was introduced in Exodus, which means it wasn't there from the begnning. That could explain the problems with Tech I stuff.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.19 07:18:00 - [63]
 

Castor is where they started, with AFs, Interceptors and HASs, while RMR is where things stepped up with the inclusion of Interdictors, Recons, Command Ships and Logistics ships.

Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2011.02.19 10:51:00 - [64]
 

Don't forget that tech 1 ships have also received some changes in the meantime, most notably battlecruisers (agility + lots of hp).
So it's not like they've been totally neglected since tech 2 ships have arrived.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.19 11:42:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Sheledra
They are logistics cruisers and they are very good at what they do, in some ways even better than their T2 counterparts.

Scythe is good at adding tracking/range? Aurogor is good at transferring cap to buffers? In some ways better than T2 .. that's a laugh and a half Very Happy
Originally by: Sheledra
More importantly: Ships do not have bad stats because they are tire 1, they are tier 1 because they have bad stats.

So you think that CCP made a bunch of utterly **** ships and then cooked up tiers to explain it? Yeah, that makes a lot more sense Wink

There is absolutely nothing stopping us from adding slots, tweaking masses and refining roles of the filler ships.
We don't have to increase fittings at all in most cases as the additional slots will allow us to customize them far more than currently possible, thus increasing variety immensely AND making the useless ~75% of all ships in Eve actual choices for more than shuttle replacement or weak PvE content.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.02.19 14:54:00 - [66]
 

So... you're looking into making ships that nobody wants to fly anymore by basically making the rifter disguised as a miner, interceptor, off spec, electronics warfare ship would that really get rid of the problem? unlikely I say.

The solution seemingly would almost require increasing the hurdle between frigate to cruiser signficiantly and from cruiser to battleship just as much if not alot more to FORCE players to actually having that decisions where they are forced to decide if they need a miner or ewar or interceptor ship?

Then again in this day and age where I can get a pilot to sit comfortably in a battleship in about 10 days of activation leaves something amiss entirely. So bottom line i think nobody here knows exactly what the real problem is on why these ships are supposivly unused.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.19 15:18:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: AnonyTerrorNinja on 19/02/2011 15:18:26
They're unused because players that aren't comfortable with using multiple bookmarks to warp to for long-ranged guerilla ewar are unwilling to risk the chance of death using a 'small, weak, useless ship'.

They're unused because the majority of people only care about one thing, and that's getting as much dps on a killmail as possible.

They're unused because when people look at the ships, they think they should be as difficult to kill (if not more so) than their "combat" counterparts, such as a Bellicose or Arbitrator needing to be as tough as a Rupture or Maller.

They're unused because players always want to fly the biggest and/or most popular thing they can, not the things they could that nobody else uses, because they're afraid of being ridiculed for their ship choice by those of an already established position based on the above.

They're unused because some people can't deal with having to be creative in their slot layouts and fleet structures; why have a seemingly weakly buffered ewar cruiser when you can just add another RR BS?



The frigates, with exception to the 'attack' ones such as the Rifter, Punisher, Merlin and Incursus, are easily overshadowed by their Tech2 counterparts in practical use, or by cruisers or battlecruisers as the 'next step'. The frigates and cruisers don't automatically overshadow eachother within their own class because of a player-created concept of tiers for the ships, they overshadow and replace eachother because players simply don't want to use them, because they don't suit what they want out of a ship (dps, biggest buffer possible, ability to still fit a MWD and make use of it despite it limiting their ship and/or causing additional risks or complications).


In these ways, the Stabber still sees utility since, even though it has only 3 low slots, it can still fit a 1600mm plate, hardeners, armor rigs and a MWD, coupling with that a web and WD/WS and some small autocannons+nos/neut combo. This doesn't actually fit with the role the ship is meant to have, namely being used as a guerrilla platform, but that's not something players care about. What they care about is that they can fit it that way and they want to fit it that way. Similarly, the Rifter can make a competent guerilla frigate using 280mm Artillery II and Tremor with some tracking assistance and the mods required to get it all to fit. But people don't want to and won't use it like that. Not when they can fit autocannons for more DPS, a plate and resists and a MWD to get into peoples' faces.



So now, if you have to force players to consider their ewar frigates, they will look at them and think "why would I use this piece of crap when I could just use the cruiser? it has at least 10 times the hp...". Then, for the Caldari ECM line, they look at the Scorpion and think "I can get into this in a few days more and it's got a lot more module slots and is a lot tougher, why would I bother using the blackbird?"

Player choices make ships obsolete. Adding slots won't solve anything as the majority of those frigates can barely get their intended fits on without running out of PG and/or CPU. These ships also don't need more 'variety' in their fitting capabilities, as they are designed for a purpose; it just happens to be that there are some alternative purposes that people will end up using them for, often purely because they want those they're using them against to be uncertain of just what it is they're trying to do, such as baiting a miner using a 'mining frigate'.


Used together with other 'low tier' ships, all of these seemingly worthless ships are actually quite valuable in low-cost fleets. Many people that would have an opinion in a thread like this have simply grown too accustomed to using 'more expensive' and 'better' things, and thus can't or don't want to consider the lower cost fleets that are possible.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.19 15:31:00 - [68]
 

In that way, yes, the tech1 logistics are in ways better than their tech2 counterparts. 25 alts in a mixture of Augorors, Exequrors or Ospreys vs one tech2 logistics cruiser?

You're looking at far more confusion for your enemies without necessarily adding too much confusion for your own pilots. Those ships could be piloted by lower-sp players that you have flying with you. Arguably, you'd just as soon put them into battlecruisers so that you might add more DPS to the fray along with (some) remote repair, but this doesn't necessarily mean that more dps is automatically going to be better for you.

In essence, the bigger, better ships become more versatile. You don't often see people running remote repair cruiser or battlecruiser fleets, simply because their speed and mobility mean that those people will seldom be as huddled up, making their shorter ranged remote assistance modules less worthwhile.

On the other hand, you cannot necessarily do a whole lot of DPS in another remote repair battleship unless your skills are up to the task, let alone your ability to fit the thing properly. If you're in extended engagements against particular corps, your enemy's tacticians may begin recognising certain names as being low-skill and low-dps, opting to ignore those characters in favour of killing the higher dps ships first, considering that either ship may still have equally large buffers.

So does this mean that battleships and battlecruisers are another imaginary tier that make cruisers and frigates obsolete? From the looks of the logic of some players in this thread, yes, it does.

By the logic of some others, based on their arguments, ships should all be brought in line with eachother within their class, stats and mineral cost wise, and their bonuses be their primary differentiation factors. The stats needn't be 100% equal, just very similar.

This would ignore the fact that a Rokh is greatly more survivable than a Scorpion, while not being afforded the ability to render several ships entirely useless at once. It also means that, in order to 'keep the balance', all three the Caldari battleships, as an example, would need equivalent armor buffering capabilities, as well as low-slot averaging, causing a potential for a massively more survivable Scorpion, or a significantly less fittings-versatile Raven or Rokh.

It also removes a crucial element of tactical planning in that players no longer need to consider the versatility nor efficiency of their isk spent, as any one of these ships would end up costing them about the same to buy and fit as any one of the other ships within its class, meaning that, since a Maelstrom and a Typhoon, as examples, cost virtually the same, there is no logical reason to waste isk on fitting expensive armor equipment to a Typhoon when a Maelstrom, with its shield buffer, would be that much less expensive.

Arguably, the focus of this thread is on frigates, cruisers and battlecruisers exclusively, but honestly, I think it's just that the 'complexity' of working with these 'inferior' ships becomes too frustrating for some, so they prefer to regard the bulk of these ships as useless or inferior, so that they can have an excuse for not wanting to try and use them.


Aaaand back to sleep with me.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.02.19 15:32:00 - [69]
 

Ill have to say ATN hit it on the spot what is wrong with today's ships, people are going straight for the mothership because why bother with anything else? nothing else is viable in todays tending warfares.

Long term solutions is for newer warfares and breaking warfare concepts currently in existence. Brining fleet fights back down to included skirmishes leading up to the main event as the overall goal. Because honestly last time I ever saw a roaming destroyer pack was years ago and in that day in age they where extermly vicious on any strays they stumbeled upon and laughed the entire way as they got away or had thier ships blown up because its a non loss. Now adays a destoryer pack would be considered 'not fun' and almost in the same context as cruiser packs and frigate packs or even roaming battleship gangs. None of these are constituionally fun when your intended victims is flying in a titan or is a cyno alt waiting to bring down a super carrier down your throat.

Greater hurdels between frigate to destroyer to cruiser to battlecruiser to battleship which would force players to begin considering which ships they need to work with, getting used to the options familiarizing with them further and may actually begin to point out issues with them once they're properly fielded oftenly.

But currently the larger issue is the fleet warfare, what good would it be to rebalance ships, remove the player invented concept of tiers (which will exist in a new form, called ship class) if everyone shows up in a super carriers?

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.02.19 21:53:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Sheledra
Edited by: Sheledra on 19/02/2011 04:08:48
crucifier - Ewar frig, one of the best. Rifter does it better
executioner- T1 version interceptor, move fast and hit hard. Rifter does it better
inquisitor- Missile boat, hits very hard from far away. pretty straight forward.
condor- another T1 version of an interceptor. It does that job exceptionally well. Rifter does it better
atron- T1 intercepter. You seem to have something against speed tanking. Rifter does it better
incursus- you are right this one is pretty useless. Which disproves your point because this is a tier 3 frig.
maulus- Ewar frig. Pretty straight forward. Rifter does it better
slasher- this is one of the best speed tankers in the game. Rifter does it better
omen- This is the main amarr fleet dps cruiser. Rupture/thorax does it better
celestis- Ewar cruiser. very effective in fleet actions. But still crap
bellicose- Ewar cruiser. MAJOR dps booster in large scale pvp.

Every ship in the game has a very well defined roll, just because that roll isn't useful in solo pvp doesn't mean it is not useful. Not all problems are best solved by shooting at them.


The word you're looking for is "role". These ships have a role they were intended to perform, but end up being worse at it than higher tier ships.

The incursus is a special case, being a **** tier 3 frig. Look at it's base stats, then look at a loltristan. The incursus is a poser, having 2 less slots and less fittings.

The ewar frigates bar the griffin are crap because they don't have the slot layout or the sheer effectiveness of ecm.

I mean, really. Why fly a crucifier when a TD rifter does the same job, AND brings the pain? Why tackle in an executioner with it's loltastic 2/2/2 slotlayout, when a nanorifter can do the same job with a better scan res, agility, ehp, etc thanks to it's 3/3/4 slotlayout.....while bringing more dps?

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.02.19 22:19:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Nova Fox
Ill have to say ATN hit it on the spot what is wrong with today's ships, people are going straight for the mothership because why bother with anything else? nothing else is viable in todays tending warfares.



Not quite. He is saying that the unused frigates in the game aren't used because there are bigger/better ships out there. While that may be true, the topic of this thread is about removing the tiers and balancing the sub-bs ships.

He pretty much said that they're all fine, nothing to see here, and is being called out for being stupid.

The rifter and the griffin are excellent tech 1 frigates. They perform, so people fly them. There is no reason why all the other combat frigates shouldn't be garbage.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.19 23:07:00 - [72]
 

They are all fine, there is nothing to see here, and I am being told I'm stupid, not being called out on 'being' stupid.
I'd honestly prefer to be 'stupid' and know how to fit and use the ships in EVE than to believe there's something wrong with them, though.


-61.13% per TD on any non-bonussed ship, after rigs, level5 weapons disruption and an Eos gang linking vs -76.42%?

I'd rather take the latter, thanks.

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.02.19 23:41:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
They are all fine, there is nothing to see here, and I am being told I'm stupid, not being called out on 'being' stupid.
I'd honestly prefer to be 'stupid' and know how to fit and use the ships in EVE than to believe there's something wrong with them, though.


-61.13% per TD on any non-bonussed ship, after rigs, level5 weapons disruption and an Eos gang linking vs -76.42%?

I'd rather take the latter, thanks.


Yeah, 25% less effective. Yet, you get quadruple the damage on a rifter, which can also tackle, is faster, has a higher scan res, etc etc etc. Not to even mention what that ship is worth when you're up against drakes. Suddenly it's useless, unlike the rifter.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.19 23:48:00 - [74]
 

Because all ships in EVE should be able to counter all other ships. Gotcha.

Goose99
Posted - 2011.02.20 00:23:00 - [75]
 

Edited by: Goose99 on 20/02/2011 00:22:54
Market is the best indicator of a product's worth. If nobody uses it, it's probably because there's something wrong with it. If it's worth something then someone out there would be using it.Rolling Eyes

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.20 00:45:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Annoitte
It has been stated multiple times while that the tier system is unnecessary, making the changes the OP wants will only make things worse.


I doubt that, all of those changes are intendedd to end the tier system.

Quote:
And, to top it off, the OP obviously can't get over the idea that there are a variety of roles that are played by each ship, in each race, and not every ship is going to be equal to every other ship, because of those roles.


This subject has nothing to do with roles.

[Quote]Whoops. I used my brain again. I feel so ashamed.


You should use it more, so it will be strong enough to deal with mine.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.02.20 02:03:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
'Statements here are pretaining nothing to the topic and further indicate that I honestly have no idea what I'm talking about becuase I only pick at replies with half witty comments that barely contribute to the entire conversation adding no value and in some cases taking away value from the entire thread. Thus resorting to insults as the only possible and self service gracful option left it seems.'


...I have alot of doubts the OP is no where near serious about the subject.

So explain to me how increasing the cost of the cheaper ships is going to suddenly make them more popular? Because making the other ships cheaper is a stupid idea as it would not help contribute to the item sink speically in the light of modernization of mineral gathering as most options when the tier 1s where around didnt exist back then thus porportionately the amount of work effort for a tier 1 in its hay day is still nearly equatable to a tier 3 today.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.20 05:24:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Nova Fox
So explain to me how increasing the cost of the cheaper ships is going to suddenly make them more popular?


Who said their cost would increase? You sir, just made an assumption. And you know what they say about those.

Quote:
Because making the other ships cheaper is a stupid idea as it would not help contribute to the item sink speically in the light of modernization of mineral gathering as most options when the tier 1s where around didnt exist back then thus porportionately the amount of work effort for a tier 1 in its hay day is still nearly equatable to a tier 3 today.


Gibberish.

Change the way ships are built entirely. Minerals into ships is too... uncomplicated.

Let the decisions on which components are used affect the way the ship works or how well it does various things. Sort of like subsystems, but decided at birth and are permanent.


AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.20 06:03:00 - [79]
 

So now you're changing the topic of the thread entirely from wanting to have more balanced ship prices, to wanting more balanced ship fitting slots and attributes, with an emphasis on bonuses, to wanting the materials used in building ships to have an effect on the various aspects of the ship's performance, ignoring all the previous statements regarding how such 'uniqueness' would kill the database and server?

Considering your forum signature, I'm beginning to think this thread was nothing but a troll.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.20 10:01:00 - [80]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
So now you're changing the topic of the thread entirely from wanting to have more balanced ship prices, to wanting more balanced ship fitting slots and attributes, with an emphasis on bonuses, to wanting the materials used in building ships to have an effect on the various aspects of the ship's performance, ignoring all the previous statements regarding how such 'uniqueness' would kill the database and server?

Considering your forum signature, I'm beginning to think this thread was nothing but a troll.


You have yet to refute anything the OP said. None of your arguments are a reason not to get rid of the tier system. Either debate what is actually being proposed or just give up already.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.20 10:23:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: AnonyTerrorNinja on 20/02/2011 10:28:54
Actually, I have; I've challenged your desire to get rid of 'it', and you've provided no solid argument for why your stance is correct, simply that you consider these imagined attributes pertaining to the 'issue' you have with this 'tier' system to be valid concerns.

Why not show us exactly how you would change things so that they make more sense? If you cannot do so, how can you expect the development team to do so for you? Surely, if you have such an advanced understanding of this 'problem', you should be able to address the 'problem' with a 'solution'?


Also, why are you suddenly talking about yourself in the third person?

*edit* Additionally, I addressed virtually all those points with this post, in response to your responses.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1469347&page=1#13

And since I know you like responses, I put responses in response to your responses, so you could read responses to responses while you responded to responses.

Takeshi Yamato
Posted - 2011.02.20 12:05:00 - [82]
 

A vote for tiericide. The tier system disfavors variety and no longer makes any sense. I really don't understand why anyone would want the current system.


As for the topic of overlapping ship roles or ships just ending up being too similar in some cases. Yes, that would become very apparent if certain unused ships were ever given the stats to be worth using. I think it would especially affect the amarrian tech 1 lineup.

For example: Prophecy vs Harbinger. If the tier system were eliminated, then the Prophecy would likely end up slightly lower dps output but slightly stronger tank. The goal of greater variety wouldn't really be met.

What I would do about it:
Prophecy becomes a Khanid style HAM platform (+5% HAM dmg, +5% armor resists per level)
Omen becomes a mini Zealot (+10% laser cap use, +10% optimal per level). The Omen hull favors a long range and kiting approach, so let's give it bonuses for that.
Maller becomes a mini Abaddon (+5% laser dmg, +5% armor resists per level). So people actually fit lasers on it. Go figure.
Punisher becomes micro Abaddon (+5% laser dmg, +5% armor resists per level). See above.
Executioner becomes a micro Zealot (+10% laser cap use, +10% optimal per level). Helps differentiating it from the Punisher.
Inquisitor becomes a Khanid style rocket boat (+5% rocket dmg, +5% armor resists per level). Because training for standard missiles is pointless for a player training for amarrian ships.

Comments: As for the Geddon/Apoc/Abaddon, I'm not convinced that any changes are needed. Notice how in the list above, the combo of laser cap usage + armor resist bonus is gone. That's because it never made sense. A passive tanked ship doesn't really care about cap, and unbonused laser dmg + laser cap drain + active tank just conflicts with itself too much.
As for the Augoror, the poor thing needs more than a bonus to energy transfer modules and hitpoints to become useful Laughing.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.02.20 12:55:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
So now you're changing the topic of the thread entirely from wanting to have more balanced ship prices, to wanting more balanced ship fitting slots and attributes, with an emphasis on bonuses, to wanting the materials used in building ships to have an effect on the various aspects of the ship's performance, ignoring all the previous statements regarding how such 'uniqueness' would kill the database and server?

Considering your forum signature, I'm beginning to think this thread was nothing but a troll.


You have yet to refute anything the OP said. None of your arguments are a reason not to get rid of the tier system. Either debate what is actually being proposed or just give up already.


You're not the OP as far as the thread is concerned.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.20 13:24:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
So now you're changing the topic of the thread entirely from wanting to have more balanced ship prices, to wanting more balanced ship fitting slots and attributes...

Did you even read the original post? Do you even know what the tier system is for that matter?

Tier system is a leftover from a time when CCP were still noobs in the fields of game-design and balancing, but it holds no merit whatsoever any more.
Having a majority of ships unused due to being utterly inferior, except in a few very specific circumstances, serves neither Eve nor the playerbase.

Go back and read the OP and the Wiki articles on the tier system, I think you'll find that you have been way off the mark in practically all your responses. Smile

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.02.20 13:39:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Did you even read the original post? Do you even know what the tier system is for that matter?

Tier system is a leftover from a time when CCP were still noobs in the fields of game-design and balancing, but it holds no merit whatsoever any more.
Having a majority of ships unused due to being utterly inferior, except in a few very specific circumstances, serves neither Eve nor the playerbase.

Go back and read the OP and the Wiki articles on the tier system, I think you'll find that you have been way off the mark in practically all your responses. Smile


I hate to break it to you but the OP has been blanket holing the entire subject and providing no real value to any of the arguments and wont take alot of our own questions seriously including her purposed fixes, what would making all the frigates have similar slots and same cost fix? they still wont be flown when there are bigger ships people would rather fly.

Takeshi Yamato
Posted - 2011.02.20 14:06:00 - [86]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
So now you're changing the topic of the thread entirely from wanting to have more balanced ship prices, to wanting more balanced ship fitting slots and attributes...

Did you even read the original post? Do you even know what the tier system is for that matter?


I don't think he understands the concept of tier system.


I'll try to explain to the best of my knowledge:

Say there exists a stat budget for each ship.
When the ship designers create a new ship and add low slots, turret hardpoints, extra base speed, sig radius, etc to it, it costs a certain amount of stat budget every time which varies depending on what they add.
The total amount of stuff they can add is limited by the stat budget they set beforehand. This makes sure that ships with very different slot layouts or characteristics remain roughly balanced.

In the tier system, the lower tier ships have a lower stat budget, which makes them inferior by default.

Now all of this still made sense when T2 modules or rigs didn't exist and the cost of the ship hull made up most of the expense. Nowadays, after you fit rigs, t2 modules and everything, the price differences between ships of different tiers are negligible. That is, a Harbinger costs only 10% more than a Prophecy but out tank/ganks it by a large margin. So the old justification for the system (priece vs performance) doesn't hold true anymore.

Of course there are ships at the top of their tier that are unpopular (Maller, Moa), but that is a problem with their bonuses, not a sign that the tier system is working well.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.20 14:24:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Nova Fox
I hate ...

Guess the read the OP and learn what the tier system is before responding goes for you too.
Is it any wonder your "questions" are ignored if you don't even know what the hell the discussion is about?
Quote:
3. Change material cost to be based on mass (Tech 1 only)
4. Make the ship bonuses and slots be the differentiating factors.
5. Tweak individual ships to be more unique if there is excessive overlap

Nowhere, as in NO-friggin-WHERE does it say anything about making slots/prices equal. Variety in actual choice is what its all about, tier system removes choice for everything but specialised areas like eWar.
Originally by: Nova Fox
.. they still wont be flown when there are bigger ships people would rather fly.

You have got to be kidding me. In blob-tard land that might be true, with a very heavy emphasis on might (SC Online for the win, eh?).
But guess what, Eve is more than lagfests, blobs and spending hours shooting static objects.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.02.20 14:34:00 - [88]
 

Edited by: Nova Fox on 20/02/2011 15:31:09
Edited by: Nova Fox on 20/02/2011 15:23:55
Then explain to me why a Domonix is 11hrs 59minutes and 30 seconds of effort vs the Armageddon's is 8hrs 47 minutes and 13 seconds?

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.20 15:25:00 - [89]
 

Originally by: Nova Fox
Then explain to me why a Domonix is 13hrs of effort vs the Geddons 11hrs or more accurately?

In relation to what? Mining? Ratting? Killing with Velator? Very Happy

If you are referring to mining then look at the mineral content. BPO's vary in requirements for the different races with Gallente taking more Zydrine if I recall.
Has absolutely nothing to do with tier system though, so why you'd ask here is beyond me, so I'll just refer you to my opening paragraph in my previous entry.

Max Hardcase
The Scope
Posted - 2011.02.20 15:27:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: Max Hardcase on 20/02/2011 15:27:40
Originally by: Sheledra
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
A sharp definitive NO to adding bonuses of any sort, replace yes but not add. Eminently suited for the eWar and logistics boats.
Otherwise, couldn't agree more. I would love for an Inquisitor to (potentially) be as bad-ass as a Punisher or for people to take the Atron seriously when it smashes their face in Smile.

Originally by: Malen Nenokal
.. Also with th exception of frigate hulls, each tier caters to different play styles, the higher tiers aren't always preferred / better.

What possible purpose does the Scythe serve? Or the Bantam? Or the Aurogor?
Most of the ships in game are completely useless due to the tier system leaving them with inferior stats/slots.
The variety from "something being preferred" will still be present without tiers, it just won't require you to bend over for everyone else who didn't share that particular preference.


They are logistics cruisers and they are very good at what they do, in some ways even better than their T2 counterparts. More importantly: Ships do not have bad stats because they are tire 1, they are tier 1 because they have bad stats.

Laughing

tech 1 "logistics" ships are a joke m8.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7

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