Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Firkragg
Blue Labs Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:17:00 -
[1]
Ok this isnt a complain about the recent dev blog. Im actually for some tweakage of speed to elliminate the ludicrous speed hacs etc (im talking 5k+ ones really)
Im more complaining about the CCP approach to making massive changes all at once which are near impossible to properly balance before hand.
Examples of this are changes in sov warefare with the additions of cyno jammers and a whole lot of other pos mechanic changes at once. This has created a lot of problems which could have been avoided with incremental changes.
Another example was the massive changes to carriers which were fortunately vetod at the last minute. A better option would have been small tweaks overtime to find a positon that everyone can be happy with.
And now with the recent speed nerf instead of making incremental changes to find a happy midpoint there is yet again a knee jerk change which effects a huge variety of modules, ships, and mechanics. There is no way that the balance of all this can be anticipated before time (and no the test server does not give an accurate representation of how things really work in eve).
I am just asking CCP to start being more careful with balancing rather than making massive changes and then having to backtrack and make more changes eternally trying to chase balance.
|
Gonada
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:24:00 -
[2]
thank you for your tears.
really
Please, jump into traffic
|
Nikita Alterana
Gallente Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:27:00 -
[3]
I agree with the OP in this, I'm not saying the upcoming nerf is good, and I'm not saying its bad, it could make everything better, but it doesn't matter, dumping a massive rebalance in all at once is simply bad practice. look at how an RTS is balanced. If something is OP, they tone it back bit by bit until its balanced, they don't swing the nerf bat until its a bloody pulp and see if they got it. __________________________________________________ |
Lord Zoran
House of Tempers
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:28:00 -
[4]
your tears....... they taste nice.
|
justsometrader
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:30:00 -
[5]
TEARS DONT LIE !!!!
|
Korizan
Oort Cloud Industries Ultionis Quietus
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:37:00 -
[6]
Actually CCP has openly stated that this will be in testing for a month or more. They are dealing with one issue and all the changes are required.
Why. Because all the items on there list combine to make nano's what they are. IF they only did one item they take a much greater risk of nerfing something out of existance and doing more harm then good.
Instead they have decided to make several small changes to get a larger net result.
If anything I applaud CCP for going about it in this manner.
And as far as the end result. Well it is too early in the game to say.
|
Firkragg
Blue Labs Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 16:00:00 -
[7]
Yes the tears are in that bit were i say there needs to be a nerf.
With all the changes on test server at once how exactly are we supposed to see which ones are rubbish and which changes are viable?
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 16:28:00 -
[8]
It's always been sledgehammer less tweezers.
Making rigs like damage control one of a type per ship to begin with would be the more sensible approach.
I'm curious, did they by chance run any of this by the CSM?
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Molly Missile
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 16:32:00 -
[9]
CCP admitted that their physics engine can't cope.
With that admission, obviously they had to do EVERYTHING they can to fix it.
Your point may still be valid regarding your other examples.
But what player wants physics engine failure?
Seriously, I don't even want to WIN under those conditions.
|
Banana Torres
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 16:51:00 -
[10]
I would suspect that CCP's most likely approach to changes was sorta tangentially, so as to keep their transversal high to mitigate much of the crap that they know is gonna come their way.
I say go for it CCP, Eve was getting boring. It was buy new ship, buy mwd, buy scram, buy web, buy polycarbs, buy missile launchers, buy shield stuff.
Undock.
Redock, buy missiles, reundock.
|
|
OVERCOPES 1
Amarr Amarr Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 16:56:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Firkragg Yes the tears are in that bit were i say there needs to be a nerf.
With all the changes on test server at once how exactly are we supposed to see which ones are rubbish and which changes are viable?
The fact of the matter my friend is your alliance is renowned for nano ***gotry along with TRI.
Technolisa>those yellow things work better than platinum insurance :P |
Cynical Attitude
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 17:16:00 -
[12]
Knee jerk? Get real.
How long does it take your knee to jerk?
Dissatisfaction with nanos pre-dates the drone nerf last year, although at the time it ran second to Myrm-whines.
OK, big changes are a problem to people who can't come up with their own fittings, who will only use cookie cutter setups developed, tried, tested and published by others, not to mention those who have bought the ISK to fund setups which rely on faction and officer gear, but those who have a functioning brain and can think through the consequences of changes, those who have the guts to take new, original, experimental setups into the field to try them out, will manage very nicely thankyou.
|
gtcsellalt
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 04:34:00 -
[13]
wowwww
|
Daelin Blackleaf
The Reclaimed
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 04:41:00 -
[14]
The problem with making small incremental changes is that a large portion of the community are dim enough to start saying things like: They already nerfed speed X times before.
While they may have swallowed a large package of changes and gotten over it start feeding it to them bit by bit over the course of months and you'll see a near endless supply of tears and dropped subs.
This being the case it's typically better to package such things, see how it pans out, and balance accordingly and as few times as possible. It's better to backtrack once or twice than it is to throw the community and elements of combat into turmoil every week.
|
Zeba
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 04:49:00 -
[15]
Massive change can be good. It throws people off the fotm and forces them to actually use that mass of grey stuff between thier ears.
inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |