Comments on: The Endless Nerf Cycle

By: wavre

wavre — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:58:24 +0000

CCP has generally done well in its nerfs and balances. For example the torpedo changes described as a nerf by most but turned out to be a great boost for the Raven.

Unfortunately the changes to nanos and Concorde are excessive. A lot of ships need to stop doing ridiculous speeds and insurance definitely needs to be removed from suicide ganking. However I am concerned that the game will now be too easy. Where a big fight just involves ships sitting still hoping that their Tank will outlast the enemy. ie boring :(

Also what happened to all of the eve podcasts? I really liked WDA and dam you, you got me addicted when is the next one coming?

By: Tim Bennett

Tim Bennett — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 03:26:00 +0000

Some good perspective from a longer-term view. I think nerfing is a sign that EVE is alive and well… it preserves dynamic flow.

The community searches for even the slightest advantage to get the edge on opponents – as it should be. Watchful developers balance things out, and the cycle begins again. Without nerfing EVE would evolve to a status quo, not the rock-paper-scissors (rokh-pilgrim-slasher?) contest it’s supposed to be.

By: Kilswitch

Kilswitch — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:53:56 +0000

TLDR. Reading sucks. Where’s your podcast ffs. :)

But seriously… good read. All MMO players have to learn to adapt with the nerf stick every once in a while. Fact is.. a certain style of play (in this case nanofaggitry) is used by the majority of players because it is seen as hard to counter. So all players join in that style of play. Eventually it gets nerfed (there’s a lot of whining!!) and something else takes it place. Question is… what will it be? :)

Did I mention I’m still waiting for #41 WDA?

Kil.

By: Bri

Bri — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:39:50 +0000

Nice write-up on gameplay changes. I suppose EVE players in particular hate changes because everything comes across as an insulting nerf – just look at the threadnaughts with the nano nerf, the amarr boost, even the development of trinity and ambulation. I think in the end it should all just be viewed as what it is, and players should adapt to the new changes in order to survive rather than whine so much about it.

By: James Egan

James Egan — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:23:12 +0000

Good read.

By: Wensley

Wensley — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:07:06 +0000

Great piece, WB. I’m still a very young character so I haven’t really had chance to get into the nano craze. The changes seem sensible, though, and like you said most of the historic changes have resulted in more balanced gameplay. I guess people who invest a lot of their time specialising in the latest trend are always going to be put out when its rebalanced but I suppose that’s the price you pay for being so specialised. Real life combat is a dynamic shift in power and technology so Eve should be too. Flexibility is the key.

By: CrazyKinux

CrazyKinux — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:14:21 +0000

A very nice piece on the tricky art of balancing an ever growing, ever expending game. MMOs are a pain to balance as they keep changing over time. New features, new goodies are constantly introduced, which means that the developer is always in a precarious situation, game-play-wise. Not the easiest of situation.

For the last 5 years CCP has done a pretty good job, and I think the game has only become better over time. Like a good wine!