open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [proposal] ship unbalancing, 64-bits & player friendly isk sinks...
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.01 17:55:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 01/08/2011 21:50:30


This issue is quite often misunderstood, as many people call for re-balancing when they actually mean to FIX a wildly unbalanced aspect of ship/item properties. Supercapitals are an example of this.

A less extreme example of this is the dramiel.

i have to admit those few sentences were a re-hash of what CCP Soundwave recently talked about at Eve Vegas, but what he said there makes a lot of sense. if we balance every ship in a class to be equal then theres no variation in a game like eve to inspire or motivate people to adapt to a new and dynamic universe.

various ships tend to get slight buffs or nerfs every so often to either bring them more in line with others of its class or to reduce the over use of it in comparison to others. obviously this hasnt happened in quite a while but now CCP have assigned CCP Tallest’s entire workload to it. so expect it to happen more often!

what i am proposing is for players to be able, for individual ships, to veto it out of the rebalancing cycles for a large isk lump sum (to be determined by CCP). please understand the distinction im making between rebalancing and fixing. im not a dramiel pilot wanting to keep my pre-nerf ship how it is.

I believe CCP should be able to make the call to fix aspects of ships that need culling, without the option for players to veto their ships out of it. BUT also be able to group minor changes that introduce what CCP Soundwave was talking about into ship re-balancing and allow players to opt out of that with isk payments.

Not only is this isk sink a good idea for removing isk from the game unlike converting plex to aurum for useless clothes, but if done correctly savvy players can also make a profit from it by keeping ships with stats that are advantageous and selling them on at a much higher markup. It may give rise to a new market devoted to “pre-era/pre-patch” ships. And unlike t2 bpo’s these ships would be limited, and as with most thing in eve, die eventually, so not contaminating eves economy.

With the relatively recent change to the item database bit depth theres tons and tons of room to do this thanks to CCP Creber!

currently re-balancing appears on patch notes and tbh very few pilots actually hunt for the ship re-balances that affect them unless theyre vets.

in terms of roleplay aspects you could bring about evemails to either all eve players or eve players who own the ships getting re-balanced from whatever faction shipyard creates the ships, concerning updates that have been recently installed on their ships.

that way the opt-out would be tied to these faction NPC shipyards when players want to take their ships out of the update loop.

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.01 18:01:00 - [2]
 

reserved for updates to the proposal

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2011.08.01 18:45:00 - [3]
 

Quote:
if we balance every ship in a class to be equal


This is a common misconception of what is meant by "balanced". People assume it means "make every ship the same", what it actually means is "make every ship viable" - I.E everything has a niché, and people actually need to pick what's best for a given situation rather than one ship being an all-purpose pwnmobile.

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:19:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Quote:
if we balance every ship in a class to be equal


This is a common misconception of what is meant by "balanced". People assume it means "make every ship the same", what it actually means is "make every ship viable" - I.E everything has a niché, and people actually need to pick what's best for a given situation rather than one ship being an all-purpose pwnmobile.


well then you can tell me and everyone else in eve what those 225 niches are then, in your infinite wisdom.

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:45:00 - [5]
 

... You really need this spelled out?
Ok, can do - some ships already have their niché defined and filled. For example: freighters, logistics, etc. etc.

On the other hand, some ships are given gimpy stats for no reason other than their place in the "tier" system.
For example, Caracal and Moa. They are both DPS ships, but they use completely different weapons and fly completely differently. However, the Caracal is given ridiculously low power grid because it has to be worse than the Moa for a stupid arbitrary reason.

You can see this same principle applied to numerous other ship types. Take battlecruisers - why does a Ferox get inferior stats to a Drake? They're not competing for the same role, they require different skillsets and different fits. But once again, the lower tier ship is gimped for no reason.

You seem to think balance means "make ship X and Y exactly the same". What it actually means is "make ship X a viable alternative to ship Y, more or less useful in certain circumstances".

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.01 22:00:00 - [6]
 

well done on that sir.. you've adequately filled niche roles for about 70 ships so far with that explanation.

ill give you an example though - why should i train skills for an oneiros when its inferior to a guardian and will almost never be used in fleets or gangs due to its inferior nature?

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2011.08.01 23:48:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 01/08/2011 23:55:23
Actually they're looking at buffing the Oneiros right now to make it both viable and distinct from the Guardian.

Just look at Scimitar vs Basilisk - the two ships have differing functionality despite both being logistics, and that works fine. With the buffs, hopefully the same will apply to the armour side of things.

So hopefully, if all goes well with the changes, you could be trained for both ships and and have use for either of them depending on the gang/scenario.

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2011.08.01 23:54:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 01/08/2011 23:54:03
Ugh, how did I manage to double post?


 

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