open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked CCP (hamerhead), PLEASE clarify this stealth nerf?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7

Author Topic

Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
Posted - 2008.03.18 10:25:00 - [151]
 

“1) The shield resist amps were terribly imbalanced. I did not know this, but look at that chart, the values are all over the place.”
The values were perfectly balanced and made sense. Now they are all over the place as they are not balanced based on faction.




“especially when talking about a few % resistance points.”
I lost 18% on Kinetic this patch. I hardly call that a few %. Last patch I lost mid slots, few patch’s before I lost shield recharge.

Yet CCP are talking about combat is to short, we need to extend combat not shorten it.



Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.03.18 10:41:00 - [152]
 

Originally by: Pottsey
“1) The shield resist amps were terribly imbalanced. I did not know this, but look at that chart, the values are all over the place.”
The values were perfectly balanced and made sense. Now they are all over the place as they are not balanced based on faction.



Since when is less than t2 for an officer mod perfectly balanced? Hallooooo.. is anyone there? knock knock knock...
Tobias: 34
Hakim: 30
Kaikka: 34
Rep fleet: 32
Domination: 32
etc

Sure, the agent runner's dream caldari navy one was 40, which is quite nice if you are farming those agents. As for some faction stuff having the flavor of lower cap usage, for lower stats.. nice try on making a point, but i would like to point it out, that cap usage is hardly an issue for a no-cap module, so you have to find other balancing factors.

Thing is: no faction/officer item should have lower stats than the t2 variant of the item. Hence why they adjusted the stats according to meta level. Now some of the items were out of the line in the positive direction, which got adjusted as well..

Generally, the only people whining here are those who got their uber expensive uber tanks 'ruined' by the change.

As for your 'faction flavor' kind of excuses.. Try it with someone who actually buys that cr*p.

Quote:

“especially when talking about a few % resistance points.”
I lost 18% on Kinetic this patch. I hardly call that a few %. Last patch I lost mid slots, few patch’s before I lost shield recharge.

Yet CCP are talking about combat is to short, we need to extend combat not shorten it.


CCP is talking about PVP.. You know, big boy stuff.. Not the whiney carebear stuff you do with these modules. I'm so sad that from now on you will not be able to perma tank lvl4 missions without activating a module on your ship. Really.. im devastated.

Take the route to enlightment NeoTheo did, and either stop complaining, or start a discussion that is actually a discussion in the appropriate forum.

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.18 10:49:00 - [153]
 

Originally by: Malar

You realize i hope, that there is no invul field equivalent of hardeners in the armor category. All they've got is an all around energized plate. Now even with skills, the best one of those only gives about 37% resists, compared to the 30% a t2 invul field would give, or god forbid the 50% the estamel invu field gives.

So forgive me if i do not burst into tears on how badly the shield tanks were nerfed.


Lol Dude stop trolling ;) your at it again! :)

hehe, you know malar, i am begining to like you despite thinking your just looking for a fight. heh.

shouldnt compare and moan about the armor tanking thou mate, i am caldari spec and gelente spec, and i hardly EVER use my caldari ships in pvp simply because Armor tanking lends its self to PvP so well, you gain utility slots in the middle (but end up with a comprimise in tank and gank, (but in a group this matters less i think) you can also (if amarr) slam your middles with cap batterys and cap rechargerII's and get a much bettter sustained tank than ANY shield tank can manage without rigs.

you also get the buffer of your shield before hand.

you shouldnt make these comparisons they are different types of tanking both with advantages and disadvantages. ;)

it works both way, armor tankers moan about the modules being worse and shield passive regen, shield tankers moan about lack of utility and the fact that armor tank s have the shield as a buffer ;)

stop looking for a fight dude :P nothing to see here ;) hehe.

Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:01:00 - [154]
 

“Since when is less than t2 for an officer mod perfectly balanced? Hallooooo.. is anyone there? knock knock”
Since always, the Tobias faction has always been about fitting. Only now it has worse fitting. Tobias shouldn’t be the same as Estamel. Perhaps some tweaking was needed but within the faction rules.

Now the shield amp Tobias equipment is all out of balance with the rest of the shield Tobias equipment and none shield Tobias equipment.
Now the shield amp Estamel equipment is all out of balance with the rest of the Estamel equipment e.c.t

See the problem? Before the change the faction gear was balanced based on where it came from and on how rare it was. Now its based on a meaningless number.




“why they adjusted the stats according to meta level.”
Which is stupid as that doesn’t take into account how rare the module is, where the module comes from or who it came from. You should adjust meta level based on the module, not the module on meta level.





“Thing is: no faction/officer item should have lower stats than the t2 variant of the item.”
I don’t agree, some factions with limited resources are based on great fittings not high stats. Not all factions have better then T2 specs. Each faction had a personality something all their gear focused on. Now that variety has been stripped away.





“CCP is talking about PVP.. You know, big boy stuff..”
PvP isn’t big boy’s stuff, you just fooling yourself if you believe that. Some PvP is more carebear like then PvE.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Fallout Project
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:20:00 - [155]
 

Originally by: Willow Whisp

It used to be consistent, now it's not.


Then it is good idea to get rid of the other officer modules before they get rebalanced in same way to make it consistent again.

Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:21:00 - [156]
 

Originally by: NeoTheo

Lol Dude stop trolling ;) your at it again! :)


Trolling? Nah, i hardly think it would be trolling. Sure i use lots of sarcasm, but thats just the way i work.

Originally by: NeoTheo

hehe, you know malar, i am begining to like you despite thinking your just looking for a fight. heh.


You know, why i never run away from a fight, and find some perverse pleasure in writing humiliating posts about people who just fail to grasp the basic concept behind balancing, i could do a lot better with my time than to spend it here writing these posts.

I meant it when i said, that this discussion does not belong here, and should not be conducted in this way. Yet people just go on and on and on, like a broken answering machine.

Originally by: NeoTheo

shouldnt compare and moan...


Dunno if that was directed at me, but i wasnt the one who used armor tanking as an example how badly shield tanks were nerfed. I merely pointed out for the guy, that he was wrong about it. (actually made sure to check the stats out before making the post)

Originally by: NeoTheo

it works both way, armor tankers moan about the modules being worse and shield passive regen,


And amarr pilots moan about lasers being useless by draining too much cap, caldari pilots moan about torps not having enough range, gallente pilots moan about.. dunno really, but there is surely something bothering them as well, and minmatars.. well, they fly junk anyway, so i guess they are used to harsh conditions.

Originally by: NeoTheo

shield tankers moan about lack of utility and the fact that armor tank s have the shield as a buffer ;)


Shield tank ships generally got about 1.5 times more med slots than armor tank ones. Meaning that even after shield tanking they got some utility slots left, compared to the true armor tank ships, that only have 2-3 med slots to begin with. I agree tho, that the 2-3 is more than what a shield tanker has left after a proper shield tank. Still, it wasnt the point of this thread.. in fact, the point of this thread was - as we just discussed earlier - more like 'boohoo, i got nerfed, boohoo'. Thats just pointless.

This brings us to the interesting question of how can the 'point' of something be 'pointless' at the same time. I say we all relax and meditate on that.

Originally by: NeoTheo

stop looking for a fight dude :P nothing to see here ;) hehe.


I was hoping that when i wake up this morning, the thread will long be gone. Well, its not. I guess someone forgot to ask the mods to close it down.

Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:35:00 - [157]
 

Originally by: Malar

I was hoping that when i wake up this morning, the thread will long be gone. Well, its not. I guess someone forgot to ask the mods to close it down.


Why would it be gone? because your persuasive, intelligent musings have convinced everyone who was either negatively impacted by this change, or everyone who considers this to be a negative ill-conceived change, that they are indeed wrong?

Stop trying to 'win' the thread and let people have an adult discussion about the implications of this unannounced change and the questionable thought process behind it. You are welcome to your opinion, be mature enough to let others express theirs.

Next up, lets apply the same change-logic to single resist energized plating and see how much the volume increases then?

Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:41:00 - [158]
 

Edited by: Willow Whisp on 18/03/2008 11:44:42
Originally by: Malar

I was hoping that when i wake up this morning, the thread will long be gone. Well, its not. I guess someone forgot to ask the mods to close it down.


Why should the only thread on this issue that has gotten some dev feedback and some actual productive discussion be closed down?

Malar, you want us to simply ignore the fact that this change was done irrespective and without any thought to how the rest faction items work and are balanced. That's fine. You are welcome to that opinion. But it's just that. An opinion. The same as the opinion that many of us hold that the changes are not consistent with how complex and officer items work.

As it has been stated repeatedly, the issue with the change is not the % drop, but rather the fact that the change completely goes against the flavor of the factions. They were done in isolation to the rest of the faction fittings.

I don't mind a faction overhaul, if it means that all the faction lines are balanced at the same time, and consistently. I do mind a "fix" that makes no sense within the context of the entire faction picture.

It's about the relative value of certain items as well, I won't put isk out of the picture. Some of the previously "useless" mods are now more useful. But the rarity & fitting characteristics of certain items also had to do with their value, and it's the relative value that i'm concerned with. I don't care if an "Estamel's xyz" drops 1 billion in worth overnight.

I do care if the relative value of an "Estamel's xyz" becomes less than of a "Tobias XYZ". Do you see the difference? The current changes take a rare valuable item, and gives it mundane properties that are inconsistent with its rarity. Suddenly, the rare item has no value, other than the name, which isn't enough to give it a higher value due to it's original properties. In this case, better resistances in exchange of higher CPU cost.

It doesn't have to be imbalanced-high. But it does need to be higher. Variety and Flavor are good, and I don't like any changes that homogenize the entire spectrum of items where the only difference is color and/or name.

BrambleRose
NeverMore Inc.
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:49:00 - [159]
 

You know, some of these changes, it really begs the question: Do these Devs actually play this game??? It's really hard for me to believe they do with some of this crap they have implemented.

They seem to think that fair is fair, ok....that's fine, but where is the chart for the passive Armor mods?? How does that one go??

Better yet, give us the Meta lvl charts for all the Passive mods in the game??

Why nerf the Shield amps and leave everything else as is??? Your excuse is the Meta lvls but the entire Meta lvl on every Faction/Deadspace/Officer module is pretty much out of whack.

I just don't get it. Maybe it's just me but I think a better explanation is in order, rather than we 'forgot to put it in the Patch notes' crap.


Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment.
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:54:00 - [160]
 

Edited by: Rawthorm on 18/03/2008 11:55:12
What I don't understand is why Meta level (a figure added not that long ago, to arbretarily asign a value to invention purposes) is being used as the guiding star to redoing any modules statistics.

If anything the Meta levels should have been ballanced out, not the modules.

Mioelnir
Minmatar
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:59:00 - [161]
 

Meta level wasn't necessarily added recently, but made visible recently.
The loot tables most likely work with this number to enumerate different versions of the same module for a long time already.


I guess one simple call from game balancing to game design would have told Nozh why those modules where the way they were. It's sad.

Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment.
Posted - 2008.03.18 12:05:00 - [162]
 

Originally by: Mioelnir
Meta level wasn't necessarily added recently, but made visible recently.
The loot tables most likely work with this number to enumerate different versions of the same module for a long time already.


I guess one simple call from game balancing to game design would have told Nozh why those modules where the way they were. It's sad.


The old database sites used to show all the hidden info and meta level wasnt among them. It was added for invention (and at that point still hidden and only revealed in a later patch)

Hyperforce99
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.03.18 12:15:00 - [163]
 

Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 18/03/2008 12:34:09
faction and officer modules are all about being exceptional and as has allready been stated before.

As far as I know metalevels where added only recently (as i've never seen them before) and i've been playing this game for over 3 years.

Basicly, this doesn't really effect me, Yes I can fly caldari but I don't passive shield tank.

However this neft, and though I disagree about a lot of people screaming murder on this thread, I do believe that because it wasn't posted in the patch notes Its somewhat under the radar especially for a nerf that has such widespread effects as this one did.

People spend billions on the highest resistance gear. Quite frankly people usually don't give a damn about fitting requirements cause these modules are usually bought to be put on expensive high CPU ships like motherships, carrier and faction ships which in general allready have highend stats.

nerfing a modules resistance down neary 7% will result in a major beneficial drop of the effected module.
Therefor the person that spend the large amount of isk to buy this module has been put to a great disadvantage.

The games faction gear (with that I mean these kinds of modules) in general they're stats are SET IN STONE for the players, they are the top of the line modules which everyone wants.

Basicly nerfing it to fit to METALEVEL is just stupid.
These items are all about being rare and special and they are bought for that. the METALEVEL should be adjusted to fit the specific module, not the other way around.


let me say it like this:

Metalevels where added, but not balanced to the modules in question. (how can you messure a rare and unique module like the named officer modules in the first place.)

Now for some reason many of us can't understand, and sertainly find non-understandable, the module stats have been adjusted to fit this METALEVEL which was added for invention.

so what has basicly happend,

- someone added a rating system which was not adjusted to the RARE modules of the game

- someone changed the rare modules to be in line with this rating system

And to clarify that the rating system IS IN FACT not in line with the modules rarity and stats:

The original modules where in line with the factions storyline. some had more efficient cpu usage, other excelled in higher CPU but much better resistance (and most of us will agree that the CPU req, means nothing towards the resist bonus).

Also the metalevel did NOT represent the rare modules unique (especially the higher ones) stats. therefor nerfing these modules to fit the metalevel was a mistake that should have never been made.

Wasn't METALEVEL a stat that basicly tells you how hard it is to research on it.
and if i'm right about that, in what relationship should that which only comes into play when you RESEARCH a module... (which with such high stats are rares have, is impossible anyway.) EVER play a role in the invention anyway.

I ask you again?

In what relationship should a invention STAT which only comes into play when you use a module for invention EVER play a role in the effectiveness of a extremely rare module that can't be use for invention anyway.

[i][b]so this is why changing the stats of these modules was a WRONG change:

1: What does metalevel (invention difficulty level) have to do with the effectiveness of a for invention unusable module.
[b]Thus METALEVEL is NOT a Rarity-O-Meter!!!


2: Why would someone re-align stats of modules to METALEVEL which wasn't even in line with the RARE modules in the first place, therefor this STAT (METALEVEL) was NOT in line with the modules themselves.

3: People spend loads of money on these modules and it is generally by the playerbase considered unethical and immoral to STEAL/NERF something people worked so hard on to get. (this applies mainly to the (rare modules).

4: Its out of line with the rest of the factions modules stats.


Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.03.18 12:30:00 - [164]
 

Edited by: Malar on 18/03/2008 12:41:43
Originally by: Hectaire Glade
Originally by: Malar

I was hoping that when i wake up this morning, the thread will long be gone. Well, its not. I guess someone forgot to ask the mods to close it down.


Why would it be gone? because your persuasive, intelligent musings have convinced everyone who was either negatively impacted by this change, or everyone who considers this to be a negative ill-conceived change, that they are indeed wrong?

Stop trying to 'win' the thread and let people have an adult discussion about the implications of this unannounced change and the questionable thought process behind it. You are welcome to your opinion, be mature enough to let others express theirs.


Ouch, now you got me. I really just want to 'win' this thread. You know, the first prize for winning threads is a 3cm increase in e-peen size, which i desperately need. Rolling Eyes

I seem to have remember saying somewhere, that this is not the place / way to have a constructive discussion about something. It's more like a river of tears that - by your hopes - will wash the changes away.

OFC you can go on rambling about me trying to flame ya all you want. I gave you plenty of examples on why / how i think the modules were less balanced than they are now, yet all you guys were able to show in exchange is the pathetic clinging to how they related to eachother in the past.

Well, newsfalsh for you. Change is about - suprise - changing things.. once you change things, - even bigger suprise - they are lo longer the way they used to be. Now if it is a balance change, you can be sure that the relations between the modules will be different afterwards, guess why it is called: balancing.

If you have a scale with two weights on each side, then you do not balance it by adding equal weights onto both sides, but by adding weights to one side until it gets in balance with the other.

Thats balancing 101 for those who didnt know it before.

Sure CCP tends to add tons instead of grams when balancing, but that does not change the fact, that if you balance, you can't keep all the previous attributes / relations unchanged.

Just as you can't keep everyone happy. So cry me a river if you have to, give me lectures on how previously passive hardeners were easier to fit, or used less cap Rolling Eyes. It is not your call to make, neither it is mine. It's CCP's. If you are unhappy with that, then you can go to the APPROPRIATE FORUM and start a discussion about the issue.

A few key things to note:
- Do not use big catchy thread titles to draw attention
- Do not try to make CCP look like a bunch of morons for not making the game the way you want it to be
- Come up with some solutions that take CCP's obvious intentions into account, instead of just complaining or demanding to make things like they were before

Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.03.18 12:38:00 - [165]
 

Edited by: Malar on 18/03/2008 12:43:46
Originally by: Willow Whisp

Originally by: Malar

I was hoping that when i wake up this morning, the thread will long be gone. Well, its not. I guess someone forgot to ask the mods to close it down.

As it has been stated repeatedly, the issue with the change is not the % drop, but rather the fact that the change completely goes against the flavor of the factions. They were done in isolation to the rest of the faction fittings.

I don't mind a faction overhaul, if it means that all the faction lines are balanced at the same time, and consistently. I do mind a "fix" that makes no sense within the context of the entire faction picture.


Oh please. You are - again - making up arbitrary rules/lines that CCP did cross just to prove your point. Where does it say in the big book of balancing, that balance changes can only come all at once? Is changing only a portion of shield hardeners a sin, compared to changing them all which is okay? What about armor hardeners then? Shouldnt they be included in the pack as well? After all.. only changing shield hardeners would seriously screw up the balance between those and the armor hardeners. I could really go on.

Point is, you can very well do changes in small steps. There is really nothing that would make it more logical to change a whole bunch of things at once, apart from your desperate wish to find something with which you can prove CCP's fault.

Originally by: Willow Whisp

It's about the relative value of certain items as well, I won't put isk out of the picture. Some of the previously "useless" mods are now more useful. But the rarity & fitting characteristics of certain items also had to do with their value, and it's the relative value that i'm concerned with. I don't care if an "Estamel's xyz" drops 1 billion in worth overnight.


Do you really think, that statistical balancing of items has anything to do with the market? The market will adjust itself just fine. Some items will increase in price, others will plummet. The circle of life: the eve way.

Originally by: Willow Whisp

I do care if the relative value of an "Estamel's xyz" becomes less than of a "Tobias XYZ". Do you see the difference? The current changes take a rare valuable item, and gives it mundane properties that are inconsistent with its rarity. Suddenly, the rare item has no value, other than the name, which isn't enough to give it a higher value due to it's original properties. In this case, better resistances in exchange of higher CPU cost.


Of course you do, because - if im not mistaken - you are directly interested in the price of those, either by having some, or maybe even trading with them, god forbid.. outright farming them.

As i mentioned earlier: balancing decisions should never - and prolly will never - consider the wallets of the players. You just can't go down that road without seriously messing up things.

Originally by: Willow Whisp

It doesn't have to be imbalanced-high. But it does need to be higher. Variety and Flavor are good, and I don't like any changes that homogenize the entire spectrum of items where the only difference is color and/or name.

Homogenize? Hell no.. That two items share the same stat is no new thing. Ever checked armor mods? For every level, there are at least 2, sometimes even 3 or more variants that give the same level stat. That there was more variety in shield department.. i really didnt mind. Then again, i'll not burt into tears if they remove that either. It is the way of eve: constantly changing, constantly evolving.

Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.03.18 12:55:00 - [166]
 

Originally by: Hyperforce99

People spend billions on the highest resistance gear. Quite frankly people usually don't give a damn about fitting requirements cause these modules are usually bought to be put on expensive high CPU ships like motherships, carrier and faction ships which in general allready have highend stats.

nerfing a modules resistance down neary 7% will result in a major beneficial drop of the effected module.
Therefor the person that spend the large amount of isk to buy this module has been put to a great disadvantage.

Basicly nerfing it to fit to METALEVEL is just stupid.
These items are all about being rare and special and they are bought for that. the METALEVEL should be adjusted to fit the specific module, not the other way around.


See, this is where EVE differs so much from other MMOS. Items in EVE are not the content, only the means to access the content. In other words: those poor souls who grind their way to a top module in EVE just to reach 'high end content' are sooo wrong, its not even funny. They are simply playing a game that is not WOW with a WOW philosophy.

So a few players lost a few billion ISK because of a change CCP made. Now what? How much do you think players lost, when the Zyd market plummeted a while ago because of the increase in zydrine coming from drone regions? I would say it was a lot more wide spread than the nerf of a handful of faction modules. Yet EVE is still here, mining is still going on, the market steadied and life went back to normal.

Do you think a month from now there will be anyone remembering this change? Maybe the handful of poor souls who quit over this will.. other than that, people just move on.

As for the rest of your post, its scary, its bold and it makes even less sense than the first part. With your permission, i would like to ignore it.

Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
Posted - 2008.03.18 12:58:00 - [167]
 

Originally by: Malar

Point is, you can very well do changes in small steps. There is really nothing that would make it more logical to change a whole bunch of things at once, apart from your desperate wish to find something with which you can prove CCP's fault.

The same as you are desperate to find something with which to prove that the change was the correct thing to do? And that changes did not take other faction into account?

Yes, changes can be done in small steps, I agree. And yes, balancing can be done one set at a time, I agree as well. But to do that without taking into consideration racial traits and attributes, and looking only at "meta level" as the main balancing factor? common.

Originally by: Malar
Of course you do, because - if im not mistaken - you are directly interested in the price of those, either by having some, or maybe even trading with them, god forbid.. outright farming them.

As i mentioned earlier: balancing decisions should never - and prolly will never - consider the wallets of the players. You just can't go down that road without seriously messing up things.


Yes, I am directly interested in the price of those, I do happen to trade in faction items, and as such, i have noticed the traits that run between them. Something that a paid CCP employee looking only at "Meta", "CPU" and "Resistance Bonus" seems to have missed. You caught me. Oh woe is me. Boo hiss CCP Rolling Eyes God forbid that I point out an inconsistency and ask for the reasons of the change. You are as blindly defending this change, as i am "blindly" attacking it. Neither of us know the thought process or reasoning behind it. Do you know why? Because it was undocummented. That's the issue.

Originally by: Malar
Ever checked armor mods? For every level, there are at least 2, sometimes even 3 or more variants that give the same level stat. That there was more variety in shield department.. i really didnt mind. Then again, i'll not burt into tears if they remove that either. It is the way of eve: constantly changing, constantly evolving.

Yes, I have and do on a regular basis. My stock and trade is moving faction items, and part of what I fear, is that this change is an attempt at making shield mods work like armor mods. Amarr Navy, Dark Blood & True Sansha mods share stats. Many other armor mods do the same. The only difference between them is their name. I personally find that to be unimmersive, and I feel they each should have different traits and flavors. Nothing wrong with that.

If CCP reads my points, and takes them into consideration, or says "Look, we have taken all this into account, but feel that this change is better that way" - then that's ok. It's their change to make. I'll adapt, I'll re-do my market tables, I'll change my faction/officer/deadspace equivalencies. That's not a big deal. I can make a profit either way.

You seem to think that because I question the validity of this decision, that I'm calling for CCP's head and am throwing a temper tantrum. I'm not. But when I'm told "It's to make things more consistent" - then I want to know "Consistent to what?" Because a whole lot of items are dependent on that answer.

Minerva Richie
Posted - 2008.03.18 13:03:00 - [168]
 

I prefer modules to be itemised along racial/faction lines than versus a meta number, simply due to immersion.

I'm far too poor to care about them in terms of utility. ;)

Nova Satar
Sileo In Pacis
Posted - 2008.03.18 13:14:00 - [169]
 

LoL ...dont know about everyone else, but i never gave a rats a$s about CPU..i used DG hardners for the added resistance.

and i know how it got passed ya's for the pactch notes, yall delibratly left the **** out because ya's did not want too look like a bunch of monkeys, because some idiot in marketing said "hey lets call this patch a Boost patch" to counter the countless nerfs you caffine addicts at the north pole have been pushing out these days.

and putting said nerf in the patch notes of a "boost patch"...bit of a contradiction of terms..

;ast time i checked cpu was never an issue for a passive drake or any passive tank that i know of so u can keep that "look kids, but its better on ya cpu now" bull and shove it.

Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.03.18 13:28:00 - [170]
 

Originally by: Willow Whisp

The same as you are desperate to find something with which to prove that the change was the correct thing to do? And that changes did not take other faction into account?


Unlike you, I never criticized the changes, neither do i support them. I simply do not care, but i did mention that earlier i think.

I'm sure however, that this thread / the arguments raised in here are nowhere near enough to justify reverting the changes. Plus i also mentioned a few times, that this isnt the way to tell CCP what you think.

Originally by: Willow Whisp

Yes, changes can be done in small steps, I agree. And yes, balancing can be done one set at a time, I agree as well. But to do that without taking into consideration racial traits and attributes, and looking only at "meta level" as the main balancing factor? common.


You *might* be right, you still happen to be posting at the wrong place tho.

Originally by: Willow Whisp

Yes, I am directly interested in the price of those, I do happen to trade in faction items, and as such, i have noticed the traits that run between them. Something that a paid CCP employee looking only at "Meta", "CPU" and "Resistance Bonus" seems to have missed. You caught me. Oh woe is me. Boo hiss CCP Rolling Eyes God forbid that I point out an inconsistency and ask for the reasons of the change. You are as blindly defending this change, as i am "blindly" attacking it. Neither of us know the thought process or reasoning behind it. Do you know why? Because it was undocummented. That's the issue.


You are blindly attacking a change, thats right, while i'm simply attacking yor posts. Since i read your posts, you can hardly say i do it blindly. What you obviously is still missing: i don't care about the balance issue in this thread, as this thread is not about the balance, it is about ranting because of a change.

Originally by: Willow Whisp

Yes, I have and do on a regular basis. My stock and trade is moving faction items, and part of what I fear, is that this change is an attempt at making shield mods work like armor mods. Amarr Navy, Dark Blood & True Sansha mods share stats. Many other armor mods do the same. The only difference between them is their name. I personally find that to be unimmersive, and I feel they each should have different traits and flavors. Nothing wrong with that.


Nope, nothing wrong with that, then again if you really would have wanted CCP to make such a change, you would come up with an intelligent suggestion and post it in the right forum while you forget about this thread.

Originally by: Willow Whisp

If CCP reads my points, and takes them into consideration, or says "Look, we have taken all this into account, but feel that this change is better that way" - then that's ok. It's their change to make. I'll adapt, I'll re-do my market tables, I'll change my faction/officer/deadspace equivalencies. That's not a big deal. I can make a profit either way.

You seem to think that because I question the validity of this decision, that I'm calling for CCP's head and am throwing a temper tantrum. I'm not. But when I'm told "It's to make things more consistent" - then I want to know "Consistent to what?" Because a whole lot of items are dependent on that answer.

I say it again, because in general discussions, repeating is key for people to understand you. I see your point, but you fail to realize this isnt the forum you are looking for.

Face it: you are just another one of those personally involved in the nerf. While i believe your intentions are 'pure', your judgement is clearly influenced by the loss / extra work the nerf caused for you. Again.. there could be lots of intelligent talk on this in the right forum. I strongly advise you to go there and start one.

Johnster
Caldari
Resurrection
Gentlemen's Club
Posted - 2008.03.18 13:36:00 - [171]
 

Edited by: Johnster on 18/03/2008 13:38:13
Damn it CCP!

Just delete the caldari race and give us all our skillpoints back.

You have nerfed an already useless PVP race to death over the last year. Give us our skillpoints back so we can pick a useful race.

Caldari can now not only not PVP, we also suck for PVE. You have created a totally pointless race.

Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
Posted - 2008.03.18 14:03:00 - [172]
 

Originally by: Malar
Unlike you, I never criticized the changes, neither do i support them. I simply do not care, but i did mention that earlier i think.

You are right, and I missed this. Part of the confusion on my part was thinking you were coming from an angle you weren't. My apologies.

Originally by: Malar
I'm sure however, that this thread / the arguments raised in here are nowhere near enough to justify reverting the changes. Plus i also mentioned a few times, that this isnt the way to tell CCP what you think.

I agree with this as well. I don't think that fully reverting the changes is in place, but the changes do need to be revisited with the rest of the faction items in mind.

Originally by: Malar
You *might* be right, you still happen to be posting at the wrong place tho.

Yes and no. I'm posting to a thread that has CCP feedback, and that the dev in question is surely watching.

Originally by: Malar
You are blindly attacking a change, thats right, while i'm simply attacking yor posts.

Conceeded LaughingLaughing Although it's not as blind as an attack as you may think it is. Nozhs' reasons for changing certain items were "Because they were useless" - and that was a statement based -in my opinion- on a narrow view of how complex and officer items interact. That's for another discussion/topic/forum though (as you so kindly point out)

Originally by: Malar
What you obviously is still missing: i don't care about the balance issue in this thread, as this thread is not about the balance, it is about ranting because of a change.

You're right, and I get it Laughing Although while there are some rants here, your ranting about our ranting is still ranting.

Quote:
Nope, nothing wrong with that, then again if you really would have wanted CCP to make such a change, you would come up with an intelligent suggestion and post it in the right forum while you forget about this thread.

I hadn't really thought about this particular change much until this thread came about. I will, as you suggest, take it somewhere else.

Originally by: Malar
I say it again, because in general discussions, repeating is key for people to understand you. I see your point, but you fail to realize this isnt the forum you are looking for.

I will say it again as well, what with the repetition that you so fondly point out is necessary and all. This is a thread and a forum that CCP chose to interact with the playerbase in. It directly affects a change that was done that wasn't documented, and the beggining of dialogue was done here. This *is* the thread i'm looking for.

Quote:
Face it: you are just another one of those personally involved in the nerf. While i believe your intentions are 'pure', your judgement is clearly influenced by the loss / extra work the nerf caused for you.

That's an unsubstantiated statement. You don't know how much this nerf does/doesn't affect me, other than your own ideas of how much it does. While I have stated that I do trade in faction modules, and that due to that I am familiar with how the faction modules correlate with each other, I have not, at any point, mentioned lost profits, lost investment, or lost time. As you yourself have pointed out, adapting to this is easy.

Originally by: Malar
Again.. there could be lots of intelligent talk on this in the right forum. I strongly advise you to go there and start one.

This change is just coming to light, and while taking everything to a different forum could be beneficial, this particular thread is a good avenue for discussion on this issue, at this time.

Phoenix Pryde
Caldari
3-I Area 42
Posted - 2008.03.18 14:06:00 - [173]
 

Well, the stupid thing is imo mostly to bring Pithum passive stuff down in line with Gistum mods. Thats the case nowhere else. With active mods the Pith stuff has always higher boost attributes, but harder to fit and needs a more cap. I dont really see why it suddenly was necessary to change that for the passive modules .... ugh

I d have thought that Gurista's are supposed to be superior in shield matters Rolling Eyes




Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
Posted - 2008.03.18 14:24:00 - [174]
 

Edited by: Pottsey on 18/03/2008 14:25:44
Edited by: Pottsey on 18/03/2008 14:25:16
“You are blindly attacking a change, thats right, while i'm simply attacking yor posts.”
It’s not a right change as its cased a massive imbalanced when it was perfectly balanced.




“as this thread is not about the balance, it is about ranting because of a change.”
You’re wrong. It’s not about ranting it’s about balance. How is the faction who is meant to have the better shield tech suddenly having worse shield modules then the worst shield faction balanced?
From a racial/faction line this change is completely unbalanced and wrong.

Statistical balancing of items/modules should be based on how rare it is and which faction it comes from. Then you give it a meta level based on the specs. Not specs based on meta level. This change is like makeing a T2 module worse then T1.

One of the devs tried to balance the modules and in doing so he has made a mistake/oversite and made them more unbalanced.

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.18 15:17:00 - [175]
 

Originally by: Malar

See, this is where EVE differs so much from other MMOS. Items in EVE are not the content, only the means to access the content. In other words: those poor souls who grind their way to a top module in EVE just to reach 'high end content' are sooo wrong, its not even funny. They are simply playing a game that is not WOW with a WOW philosophy.



Taking this in isolation mate, i am afraid you have controdicted yourself,

In the essance of the change they HAVE made it more like wow, in that higher meta level = better. Same as blue better than green and purple better than the rest in Wow.

With things they way they used to be a least the meta level was aguide to quility of item, NOT the defining factor.

the defining factor was the "name" and the back ground story.

afraid your loosing it dude.

Casino Alkasar
Caldari
Posted - 2008.03.18 15:23:00 - [176]
 

Why did they promote it "NO NERFS..HONESTLY"
in the first place?

Even if you agree with the changes, they made stuff
worse..thats in most comon knowledge a NERF.

They outright fooled their playerbaseConfused

Malar
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.03.18 15:39:00 - [177]
 

Originally by: Casino Alkasar
Why did they promote it "NO NERFS..HONESTLY"
in the first place?

Even if you agree with the changes, they made stuff
worse..thats in most comon knowledge a NERF.

They outright fooled their playerbaseConfused


Depends on how you look at it. As i said, the changes detailed actually contain more imporvements than reductions, so overall it still can be labelled a boost patch, even if it includes some negative changes as well.

Originally by: NeoTheo

Taking this in isolation mate, i am afraid you have controdicted yourself,

In the essance of the change they HAVE made it more like wow, in that higher meta level = better. Same as blue better than green and purple better than the rest in Wow.


Actually, in EVE there were always top of the line items, no matter what 'color' - from what faction - they were. With that said, the poster i replied to complained about 'precious player investment' being lost by the change, which shows a clear case of WOWSY Syndrome for me. EVE never had a clear line of which items are supposed to be uber and which should suck, other than the raw guideline that officers > deadspace > faction > t2 > t1 > basic stuff.

While making items follow the meta levels more closely might bring EVE closer to the item structure seen in other MMOGs, it still does not make the items any similar. They will still only be tools, and not content.

Problem is, some people look at these items as 'content'. They see them as things to get, goals to achieve. So quite understandably, when CCP changes the position of a previously highly sought item, these poor souls cry out loud as all their efforts put into getting said items is now 'wasted'.

Originally by: NeoTheo

afraid your loosing it dude.

There is nothing to lose here. Other than my sanity, which i might really lose eventually :) Hope ye all have a fat pocket, cuz i surely will send you my medical bills.

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.18 15:40:00 - [178]
 

Originally by: Casino Alkasar
Why did they promote it "NO NERFS..HONESTLY"
in the first place?

Even if you agree with the changes, they made stuff
worse..thats in most comon knowledge a NERF.

They outright fooled their playerbaseConfused



qft

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.18 15:46:00 - [179]
 

Originally by: Malar

Originally by: NeoTheo

afraid your loosing it dude.

There is nothing to lose here. Other than my sanity, which i might really lose eventually :) Hope ye all have a fat pocket, cuz i surely will send you my medical bills.


Lol ;)

i ment your sanity mate :D

Herring
Caldari
Pimpology
Posted - 2008.03.18 18:49:00 - [180]
 

Not a good change. Faction [resistance amp] gear is supposed to appeal to us how now (as opposed to t2)? If people had cpu problems you'd hear about it. If you didn't hear any of the people above me, we do not need anymore ****ing cpu, it's not a benefit.


What we would like is the bonuses that we either worked hard or paid for in either isk or lp's for faction items that you've nerfed with your 'boost' patch. Thanks for putting that in the patch notes, btw. Awfully kind of you. Rolling Eyes









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