Failing In So Many Ways


Liang Nuren – Failing In So Many Ways

Tiericide Dev Blog: First Response

CCP recently posted a somewhat controversial dev blog [] about ship and skill rebalancing.  The major sticking point for many people has revolved around this phrase:

To sum up, this means that tech 1 sub-capital vessels would take a bit longer to train for (from 9 to 17 days for Battleships for instance), capitals would be less time consuming (30 days faster) and tech 2 ships like Interdictors and Command Ships would require 14-20 less days to train for.

If and when such changes occur, we would remove the generic Destroyer and Battlecruiser skills, reimburse the skill points (and possibly the cost) not to penalize players. Due to the way nested requirements work, it would also mean pilots would not need to re-train anything to fly Battleships or Cruisers. All of this is work in progress of course and subject to change, especially since we are still discussing skill reimbursement options.

I managed to land an early comment [] in the thread asking for clarification for people who have cross trained extensively, which Soundwave and Ytterbium quite thoroughly answered:

Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.

The net result to me is that I’ll have all racial Destroyers/BC skills at level 5 and it’ll almost certainly provide an immediate increase in the cost of my clone.  It will additionally mean that one of my PVP alts will end up with a more expensive clone than my target clone.  On the flip side, that’ll mean that people who haven’t trained Destroyers/BCs up yet will be stuck training longer to get the same massive result that I did so long ago.… but thats entirely the point.  On the flip side, it’ll become faster to get into various T2 ships like Interdictors and Command Ships, so new players aren’t totally screwed.

However, I feel like all this talk about skill points is distracting from the bigger message being presented:

In practice however, after assessing ship slots, EHP, speed, fitting potential and role overlap, we estimate almost half of our currently available ships to have suboptimal use, or are just be plain not worth it at all for pilots looking to min-max. … That is why we want to remove ship tiers altogether, then refocus our balancing philosophy to be based on role.

This is quite possibly the greatest balancing news I’ve seen in recent memory – its even better news than the Hybrid Buff.  However, the devil’s always in the details and I don’t feel we have enough details to make say much at this point.  My first reaction was that this was effectively creating a class system in Eve… and to a point I suppose it is.  However, there’s a lot of key differences and ultimately the ship line system is exactly how the currently successful ship lines work.  This means I really shouldn’t be too worried about the proposed ship lines and expanding on the concept will probably make the game significantly easier to balance.  Unfortunately, that simplicity comes at the cost of some “wildcard” play we’ve seen in the past, but ships capable of that tended to simply be bad at everything.

Overall – exciting times are ahead!

PS: If you ever plan to cross train: Train Destroyers 5, BC 5, Cruisers 3, and BS 1 in every race.  Now.


Filed under: Eve, Game Design, Gaming, ,

3 Responses

  1. Serpentine Logic says:

    Why BS 1? After the readjustment, all you’ll need is racial battlecruiser IV (which you will magically receive from having Battlecruisers IV + cruiser III), so you can instantly train the battleship skill.

  2. Trinkets friend says:

    I really like the idea of CCP revisiting the T1 frigs, cruisers and BC’s and looking at the roles and then rejiggering them to make that role doable. Lets take Minmatar cruisers:
    Scythe: T1 logistics and mining cruiser
    Bellicose: EWAR
    Stabber: Fast tackle
    Rupture: Brawler

    The Scythe should theoretically recieve a decent EWAR logistics bonus, extra low and midslots to use is, and a significant slug of extra CPU and PG. Plus, I would expect, a couple more drones; one drone is substandard and makes it vulnerable.

    The Bellicose does OK at the moment as EWAR…but only if you really want to bring TP’s to do the job. Which hardly anyone does. Either way, it should be able to fit more tank, and run its MWD for more than 2 cycles, while running two TP’s. So expect a moderate PG buff, a capacitor buff, and maybe an extra midslot.

    The Stabber…honestly, if it had space for 2-4 light drones it would be perfect.

    Ruppy, we’d leave as is.

    Of the other really useless cruisers, the Augoror would get more drones (theoretically rep drones, haha), more PG, more mids, more of everything. The Arbitrator might get another mid or low slot, but is otherwise OK. The Omen needs more PG, capacitor. Caracal could do with a bit more shield HP, and a mild missile velocity/ROF bonus instead of kinetic damage bonus – making it literally a poor man’s cerb. Moa might get enough PG to fit a rack of neutrons AND a tank. BB is fine as is, though some PG for fitting actual guns would be OK too.

    I don’t think that equalising the power of cruisers relative to one another is going to class-ify EVE and dumb it down; the mechanism may result in a startling burst of role creep as people miraculously pick up racial BC 5 in everything – but really you already basically had that once you got the racial cruiser skill to 4 anyway, so no biggie.

    In the end, if you can get half your cruiser lineup out of sucking massive cock, make them more competitive, by giving them a specialised role…if that comes at the expense of everyone being expert at everything, then its a good thing. The 99.5% of people who don’t read the dev blogs will suddenly wake up and dust their Bellicose off, find it is good, then look around and realise they can fly an Omen which doesn’t cap out instantly, and then get out there and PVP in them. That’s got to be a good thing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: