open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Live Dev Blog on Speed Balancing - Wednesday 8th October
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : last (23)

Author Topic

Hall Of Flame
Chain of Chaos
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:10:00 - [181]

I have an easy fix for this which solves the problem withought totally killing what it solves.

Introduce WEBBY BUBBLES for dictors and HIC's

Simple, effective, add's to the games dynamics and overall a fairer fix to a problem thats a fix to another problem that isn't being addressed.

Posted - 2008.10.08 19:10:00 - [182]

I think the game is balanced fine, it was balanced fine when I first started 1.5 years ago. CCP needs to stop nerfing stuff, in the real world nothing is as balanced as stuff is in this game. Ships all need to have their strengths and weaknesses, advantages and disadvantages. Every patch is leading us to an eve with more and more similar ships. Or to rephrase that every ship is becoming the same. CCP could save them selves a lot of work by eliminating all race ships and giving us 1 ship for each ship class, that’s 1 frig 1 cruiser 1 battle cruiser and 1 battleship, everything would be equally balanced then. And does anyone want that? NO! but that is where all the patch nerfs are taking us. And if battleships are having issues hitting a nano frigate then they should have a web fitted. Im sure someone will say what if the frig is over 10kms? That would be an issue, but every ship has to be vulnerable to something, that’s what the ships in eve are all about. So people are complaining about the tracking on battle ships, rather then nerf lets give the tracking script a little boost or just give all battle ships a small tracking bonus. Also shouldn’t the range of a scram and a web be proportionate to the size of the ship? I would think so, larger ship, more power behind a battleship, a 20km web would do wonders in this case. And as for everyone crying about nanoed frigates and hacs, they are balanced too, with great speed comes great tracking problems, range problems and most of the time a nanoed ship has little to no tank making them quite vulnerable. Ive watched nano HACS pop like shuttles many times and I’ve even seen a raven pop a vagabond, how did he do it? He had a web, a lethal weapon against a nanoed ship. As stated before, I think our game is balanced enough, if CCP wants to make the game better: update the servers so it quits lagging every time 60 people want to have a fight, Bring more content to the game, how about more ships? There is a huge gap between battleships and capitals a small drone carrier might be nice, Introduce another playable race, how about a mod that takes a large high slot and turns it into 2 med high slots- Or the other way around. There are lots of interesting things that can be done to make the game more interesting and fun, nerfing is the last thing that should be done.

Posted - 2008.10.08 19:15:00 - [183]

if you change anything, u kill all pvp.

Lethal Injection.
Hedonistic Imperative
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:15:00 - [184]

On the whole, I have to agree with the general proposal as far as altering ship statistics. Battleships need to slow the F down, bombers and other small and mid-range ships need a hand up, but the ships that hit in excess of Warrior II's speeds should be hard, if not impossible to come by. I even agree with the Speed Goals.

Specifically, however: the proposed changes to Microwarps are sound if and only if the changes to Webs are tied to them, and vice versa. De-microwarping an interceptor and webbing to 90% is just insane, it's basically dead at that point. Having mwd's not affected by warp disruption (Only Scramblers, or Disruptors, Probes, Bubbles, and Fields, too?) and only webbing to 50% is useless.

Changes to Polycarbs make sense, they do have a very large bonus. T1 should be between T1 and T2 nanos, and T2 should be a little more than T2 nano. Nanofibers themselves aren't necessarily a bad thing, but perhaps they should split up their bonuses? A slight speed bonus, a slight agility bonus, and a reduced mass reduction? That way they stack with overdrives and inertial stabs, but not completely.

X-instinct should not change. The bonuses are present, but every booster has an inherent drawback. You take a booster, there's a good chance you're going to suffer, and suffer severely. The better boosters, the better the chance. If you change the bonus to a signature radius bonus, X will not sell as Sooth does not sell. No one wants to risk a loss of combat effectiveness for such a trivial bonus. By the way, the only way to get people to use Sooth is to effectively double the Falloff bonuses. Most falloff ranges are tiny as it is, and no one wants to use Sooth because of it. Why use Sooth when you can use Frentix? Furthermore, falloff is decaying accuracy where optimal is full accuracy. It should stand to reason that a balanced booster for falloff would provide a larger bonus than one for optimal, right?

Doktor Feeelgoood
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:15:00 - [185]

My corp mate has noticed that his racial jammers are alllllll messed up. Instead of having a jam strength of like 11, they are jamming at like three. Comments?

Adam C
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:15:00 - [186]

Edited by: Adam C on 08/10/2008 19:15:46

Question; Will a Polycarb nerf solve the speed issue alone?

Ferenc Puskas
Hunters Imperiale
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:17:00 - [187]

In relation to the nano nerf making Slave set useless will there be more pirate or empire set of implants to boost stats on ships for a moderate price?

Arbiter Reformed
Garnet Resources
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:18:00 - [188]

as for missile changes that are dirctly related to the speed nerf due to balancing issues, how do you forsee this to change the feel of pvp from a missile users perspective and from the perspective of ships that will still speed tank. also are there any planned boosts to any ship atm, ishtar may need some help to fit more tank as will curses huggins etc

Crimson Royals
Swarm Of Locusts
Crimson Dragons
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:20:00 - [189]

is the orca going to be coming out in the winter industrial expansion and can you give us any of its stats.

would it be possible to make a folder in people and places places tab whos bookmarks will show up in the overview for quicker access. a lot of time right click links to bookmarks are blocked bye other objects and planets in the view window

Posted - 2008.10.08 19:22:00 - [190]

A megathron fitted with a afterburner just doesnt sound as scary. Guess i wont have to worry about getting primaried anymore thats one good thing. As for nano fits i really dont see it as a problem. Yes it does sink getting caught by a nano gang but it still has its place in eve. So... should i go ahead and sell all my blaster boats and fittings before there worthless and start training for a raven?Neutral

Tarron Sarek
Biotronics Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:22:00 - [191]

Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 08/10/2008 19:52:49

Some questions from the top of my head:

  • Have you (the devs) ever considered scripted stasis webifiers?

  • Will you try to preserve diversity as far as possible (i.e. speed tanks & viability of all weappon systems)?

  • Have you considered re-balancing only or mainly the 'straw to break the camel's back' factors like implants, warlinks and polycarbons?

  • Will you try to preserve the option to speed tank for players with a moderate wallet?

  • Wouldn't a mass and speed adjustment of AFs that roughly resembles the T1 cruiser - HAC relation be the safest step towards making AFs useful and more popular again? Especially in view of the positive feedback concerning the hinted changes on Sisi some time ago.

Poast Warrior
Imperial Academy
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:30:00 - [192]

Nerf polys. Nerf snakes. Make small adjustments to the speed of ships in their respective size class. Take it from there and see what happens. Take it slowly.

Anything more than that and you risk seriously messing up this game.

Underworld Protection Agency
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:33:00 - [193]

hey, ccp, can i just ask, why are you nano nerfing something that is so usefull, if you think about it, a small alliance that needs to grow would be able to clear out enemys with a nano fleet, to nerf the nano fleets is like taking all the guns away from ******, it isn't realistic, you can't win a war by removing something, instead, people need to think how they could combat against nano fleet, eg. a falcon fleet would stop them doing anything, also, look at the cost of a nano fleet, it's like 3 billion isk per character (implants and ships and rigs etc) a reasonable falcon will only cost arround 150 million isk - 200 mill isk, look at the isk difference, nano is expensive, but you get what you want for your money, you officer fit a falcon it could probably be just as leathal, all i want to ask, what is your evidence that the nano needs to be nerfed...

The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:37:00 - [194]

Originally by: Cabablanka
if you change anything, u kill all pvp eve will DIE!!!111.

Fixed that for you!

Posted - 2008.10.08 19:38:00 - [195]

How about a mechanisum for tidying up Freighter cans!
Either allow for them to be picked up or delete them during DT.

Posted - 2008.10.08 19:40:00 - [196]

How about waiting to hear what is actualy going to happen, when Nozh and Fendahl come online then we can ask the right questions.

I vote not to nerf, but definately to balance the speed out a bit more, and also to make all ships a bit faster, the gameplay is a bit too slov in my opinion.

Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:40:00 - [197]


  • With regard to battleships, particularly the ones that do not go fast (Amarr, Caldari), would we ever see a speed nerf? With the previously proposed changes, some of these battleships (like the abaddon for instance) would be quite literally going nowhere™, due to the fact that they are normally fitted with speed lowering modules as standard.

Sola Sun
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:45:00 - [198]

Will you consider just hard-capping maxium speed for given ship hull type, leaving all the rest modules the same?

military man
Manson Family
Corcoran State
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:53:00 - [199]

will you be nerfing all ships or just the higher ends? i mean today i had a battleship go faster then my 6.4k interceptor.

Nigth Eve
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:54:00 - [200]

Just an advise to EVE: i think u are intelligent people or so u appear so this is mi question.

Do u really think that Nerfing the game will bring u more people to the game?

I hope for the sake of eves future u answer no cause NERFING = LESS INCOME

Posted - 2008.10.08 19:54:00 - [201]

One of the problems with speed is the ability for small ships to go very fast and ram large ships causing them to bounce away. Will this be fixed? What would be the probability that if small ships were to ram big ships they would take damage. Specifically the ramming of capital ships by smaller ships.

Conspiracy of Silence
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:55:00 - [202]

"You have been gagged by GM Nova until 2008.10.08 20:40:14. GM Nova's reason was: Gagged for Spamming. "

Bit harsh CCP, dont mind the live dev blog, but all channels.

BTW.. Any chance we can delete all patches and go back to COLD WAR patch?

Lyria Skydancer
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:55:00 - [203]

Originally by: Nigth Eve
Just an advise to EVE: i think u are intelligent people or so u appear so this is mi question.

Do u really think that Nerfing the game will bring u more people to the game?

I hope for the sake of eves future u answer no cause NERFING = LESS INCOME

With that logic we would still all be flying 8xheatsinked armageddons. How is that for intelligence?

Posted - 2008.10.08 19:55:00 - [204]

could you turn the volume up a bit more in the live dev blog, my volume is on full and still I only hear very vaguely the test.

Astria Tiphareth
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2008.10.08 19:58:00 - [205]

I'd like to hear answered:

How they feel blaster ships should continue to operate after these changes?

How this change fits with their view of combat in EVE - how do they see EVE combat evolving, not just after this change but more generally, what are they aiming towards?

Whether they plan on fixing tracking, as outlined by a very early post in this thread?

Given that the primary focus of the complaints seem to be 'I spent a lot of money and skillpoints, therefore I should reap some considerable benefit in PvP', how do they feel this focus (on not only speed per se, but more expensive and even better/bigger ships) fits with the notion that new players should be able to contribute to PvP?

In other words, is this really of CCP's own making - they gave EVE bigger and better tools, more and more expensive options, and effectively created a two-tier system - those with lots of ISK and old characters, and everyone else. Nano would never have existed if not for the introduction of 'bigger, better, stronger' in the form of T2 and rigs.

To put it succintly, do they believe that having a skill and ISK grind akin to levelling in other games for bigger and better ships/rigs/modules is appropriate, or should every T1 ship have a place in PvP that is not outdone by its T2 counterpart, but rather complimented?

Euphoria Released
Posted - 2008.10.08 20:00:00 - [206]


The first genesis
Gentlemen's Club
Posted - 2008.10.08 20:01:00 - [207]

Make it so microwarp drives require ozone to function this fuel would become the limiting factor to using a microwarp drive. AB's would still use cap to function. Microwarp drives wouldn't function without fuel.

Make it so all speed boosting modules have diminishing returns like other modules. Excluding AB and Microwarp drives.

Give each ship a cargo and ammo bay in addition to thier current cargo bays.

Conspiracy of Silence
Posted - 2008.10.08 20:01:00 - [208]

I need to be ungagged, cant hear ****e, what a waste of time!

Nigth Eve
Posted - 2008.10.08 20:01:00 - [209]

OK keep taking stuff out of the game someday sooner than u think the game will be boring. So many restrictions so far that is no fun anylonger.

I'm just saying instead of taking out just balance the game putting in.

DONT take away = GIVE more to the game

Underworld Protection Agency
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2008.10.08 20:02:00 - [210]

i don't even think ccp are hear, no replays so far

Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : last (23)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only