DUST Search - CCP and the CPM failed hard

All Channels

General Discussions

CCP and the CPM failed hard

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 834	Posted - 2014.10.21 01:50:00 - [1] - Quote Denchlad 7 wrote: Im gonna tread carefully before going in depth with a reply. ADS feel fine to me but at the same time they dont. I personally think its to do with the ROF nerf rather than AV at this point. I think Breakin Stuff said it best in another thread: AV vs V is fine; ADS vs AV isn't (I bastardised it somewhat.) Alt of Halla Murr.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 12:15:00 - [2] - Quote I've brought it up in other balance threads: ISK is generally perceived as not wanted as a balance mechanic. ISK cost limits the sustainability of ADSs (even post-Delta, though now HAVs are actually more expensive when similarly fitted.) What it boils down to is either: ISK is a balance factor such that more expensive gear is more powerful (PRO equipment is a prime example - it is flat out superior than the lower tiers, and has an appropriately high cost attached) ISK is not a balance factor and so nothing should cost more than 1 ISK, ever. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 14:40:00 - [3] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: Kallas, the point is, ISK cannot be a justification to buff a thing. Because that is not balance. You can set the ISK price based on power and effectiveness, but that is the afterthought. The balance must be from how it plays in the game. It either is or it isn't Soraya. You're flip-flopping on the issue. If 'consumables' are designed to make people go deeply isk-negative in a match should they lose them, they should certainly be powerful. If 'consumables' have a skill tree roughly 4x more expensive than infantry they should not only be able to play their chosen role in every match and have it be at least some use, but they should also be able to go isk positive while playing it. I have serious issues with the fact that you think vehicles should be warpoint pi+¦ata's or taxi's. Exactly, thank you MINA. Either ISK is or isn't a balancing factor, it's that simple. Considering EVE's philosophy and the inherited state we have, ISK evidently is supposed to be a balancing point. If ISK is a factor, then the more expensive an item, the more powerful it is, relative to others of its ilk: a plate that gives more armour is more expensive; a gun that kills better is more expensive. That's not to say balance cannot be achieved, but ISK is a part of that balance: even with Delta, losing a single dropship means ISK negativity unless you earn 300+ thousand ISK in a battle. So Soraya, a simple yes or no question: is ISK a balancing factor? Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 16:16:00 - [4] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: I've answered your question already. ISK is not a balancing factor. Ok, so with that being the case, why does a Prototype suit cost more than a Standard suit? Why does an ADS hull cost more than a fully fitted infantry suit? You have said yourself that ISK is not a balancing factor, so why is ISK even needed? Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 16:57:00 - [5] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: I've answered your question already. ISK is not a balancing factor. Ok, so with that being the case, why does a Prototype suit cost more than a Standard suit? Why does an ADS hull cost more than a fully fitted infantry suit? You have said yourself that ISK is not a balancing factor, so why is ISK even needed? I have explained this as well. ISK is not a balancing factor, as in, you do not use it when balancing gear. But you set the ISK price based on it's place in the game balance. ISK is not a balancing factor; everything is equally effective (for its level); some things cost vastly more than others. This is illogical. What is the purpose of something costing more ISK? Why is that important in any way if everything is balanced? Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 18:25:00 - [6] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Many things are goofy from the old way of doing things. Generally, ISK should be fairly representative of a thing's effectiveness in battle. Better things should cost more. ISK still obviously has a point, because there are tiers of items. But ISK cost is a result of balance, not an input justification to balance. So that is essentially full circle and completely counter to your previous statement. If ISK is needed to represent effectiveness, and affects how much a certain piece can be used, *that is using ISK as a balance point.* What you have asserted is that ISK is a part of the balancing; if something costs more, it should be more effective is essentially the bottom line. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 18:45:00 - [7] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: No, it doesn't run counter to anything I've said. You simply aren't comprehending what I am explaining. I will try one more time. You can base ISK cost on effectiveness. You cannot base effectiveness on ISK cost. If they are not linked in both regards then there is no purpose of the ISK system. The point of limiting the amount of ISK a player receives is to limit how much of an item that player can use. If that is not the case, then every item costing 1 ISK would not be a problem: that is not the case, ISK is given out on a limited basis such that the more expensive items cannot be used without thought. A player cannot use all-PRO gear for nearly as long or with as care free thought as all-STD gear. If this statement weren't true, there would not be a need to limit the gain of ISK. So, if ISK is important to limit the volume of any given item, then it is a part of the balancing process. You can base ISK cost on effectiveness. You cannot base effectiveness on ISK cost. Then why is ISK at all needed? Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 18:58:00 - [8] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: I am now giving up on this thread. Which is fine, because it was a bad thread to begin with. Well, it's fantastic that we have someone with such backbone on the CPM. I'm so glad someone can twist and turn so much even politicians would be proud... Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 19:21:00 - [9] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: I did not twist and turn at all. Your inability to comprehend the issue is not my problem, as I have exhausted multiple attempts to explain it to you. You cannot explain things to a brick wall. Sure. You said ISK is not a factor, yet refuse to acknowledge that it is an intrinsic part of the game that has been an element of the balance since the beginning. You say ISK is not a factor, but the game says otherwise: SP multiplier, damage and other metrics of effective define how much ISK it costs - that in and of itself does not mean much, but when coupled with the ISK generation mechanics, you have a method to restrict access to more powerful equipment. Restriction of access to certain assets is, therefore, a method to balance out the power of different pieces. Or, to put it simply, ISK is a balance mechanism. Really, I guess the point I'm driving at is that ADSs are not worth the ISK nor the SP cost, as voiced by pretty much every pilot I've spoken to and most pilots I've seen on the forums. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 842	Posted - 2014.10.29 20:18:00 - [10] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Really, I guess the point I'm driving at is that ADSs are not worth the ISK nor the SP cost, as voiced by pretty much every pilot I've spoken to and most pilots I've seen on the forums. This may be their biased opinion, but the data does not agree. As Derpty and Derrith have been talking about, the ROF bonus is extremely expensive and yet provides a very limited bonus to actual effectiveness. Having spoken to Judge and gotten only a small portion of his analysis of the data, I would very much for you to present something greater than, "Because data." Another [Data Analysis] thread would be extremely insightful. Maybe the 1.9 rendering fixes will help, but quite simply the Swarm changes have made ADSs incredibly vulnerable to even the most rudimentary AV; the most basic swarm fit is of enormous threat because of so many factors that have been ignored by Rattati and people like yourself because the 'data' doesn't support it. How much data is gathered about impulse effects? How much data is gathered about shots that go wild because an infantryman at 100m is barely a speck to an ADS pilot? What about the sheer inability to acquire and return fire on a target at 100m+ when you're taking enormous damage, being slapped about and being unable to even see the target, let alone hit within 2m to actually threaten them. If ISK is relative to effectiveness then Swarms need to be increased in cost by an enormous amount: they are extremely effective and yet extremely easy to use. The other inclination is to make the ADS actually usable whilst under fire. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 844	Posted - 2014.10.29 21:10:00 - [11] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: As Derpty and Derrith have been talking about, the ROF bonus is extremely expensive and yet provides a very limited bonus to actual effectiveness. Again, this is by design. Look at infantry skills which offer 3% reload rate increase. Some of the fitting optimization skills require two ranks just go get you 1 PG back. High-tier skills are extremely expensive and provide a very limited bonus. This is by design game-wide, but the ADS RoF bonus was a broken exception to the rule. The ADS skills are the equivalent of Dropsuit skills. No dropsuit skill is as expensive for as small a bonus (well, not at the moment: the AmScout used to be) but you think it's ok for ADSs? All Assaults get fitting on Light, Sidearm and Grenades as well as a weapon operation benefit. Sentinels get fitting on Heavy and resistance bonuses. Scouts gain fitting on Cloaks and EWar bonuses. Commandos get a plain damage buff and a reload speed buff. Logistics get fitting on Equipment and a bonus to the racial equipment. ADS get spare ammunition and ROF. Spare Ammunition: a minimal buff, pretty much akin to the fitting bonuses, except worse because it doesn't open any otherwise unavailable fittings. Without a change, the vehicle turrets have plenty of ammo for reasonably extended engagements. Not an amazing bonus, but it's also not the primary bonus. ROF: extra DPS. Sounds great, but comes with the minor drawback of also forcing an earlier reload. Applying your damage quicker is great, except the bonus is...mediocre. Python, empties clip in 9.6s: Max skill, empties in 8.16s - 2.48mil SP for 1.44s Incubus, overheat by 8th shot: Max skill, overheat by 9th shot - 2.48mil SP for 1 extra shot. ADS skill: extra damage - great, actually worthwhile and applies to all ADSs? Definitely worthwhile. Essentially, why bother with the racial ADS skill? The ADS skill is the same as a dropsuit; the racial skill is an entire SP load on top of it that costs even more - why is it worthless? You say that high level skills provide limited bonuses, but that doesn't apply to the Dropsuit Command skills, which universally provide potent, role defining bonuses. ROF bonus too high? Yeah, fine that's fair enough. But the ROF bonus as is is awful; an actually useful bonus to turret operation would be vastly more preferable. If you want to look at bias,I suggest that you have a look at the various threads that pilots have put up: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2394970 Does that look reasonable to you? What we, ADS pilots, need are useful bonuses that enable us to apply our damage in the manner that Rattati declared: strafing runs. Without high ROF or compressed damage output, we need the turrets to be able to do that and our skills to give bonuses to the operation of those turrets. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.