Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 31 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 02:08:07 -
[421] - Quote
Mike Right wrote:carriers are so **** after the patch their damage dealt in pvp spiked up by 350%?? less crying about ticks and dank instapops and more NERFING plz https://i.imgur.com/SRnIFFA.png
Yeah they became broken for easy camps but these nerffsites extend beyond that
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Verde Minator
Crack And Cookies For Santa
24
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 02:47:15 -
[422] - Quote
CyberRaver wrote:https://zkillboard.com/kill/53696372/
5 carriers and a aeon dropped on our small gang
We killed 2 carrier before the others decided Nope
The aeon was 50% armour before we called in the bombers
Bring a proper setup small gang
that carrier was garbage fit, no nsa, no ab for align, probably wasnt aligned to begin with, must not have had dscan active, wasn't watching local, i mean.. good job taking out the trash though! lolz.. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
441
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 03:11:47 -
[423] - Quote
Mike Right wrote:fighter speed needs a huge nerf too by like 30-70% einherjis with 3 drone navigations computers on a nidho do 20km/s for 20s??? those are pre speed nerf values - CCP tried so hard to get stuff down to 5-6km /s and maybe like 8/10k a second with snakes and links on ceptors and now introduce a ultra hard hitting fighter that goes far beyond those limits
why probe stuff thats 150-300km away now if your just quicker sending your fighters there ? those speeds are just ********
The issues with pre-nano-nerf speeds had more to do with them being applied to a ship not with things being able to move that fast in general. Fighters being able to run out 250km and hit something isn't hugely different from being able to send a Cruise Missile that far in terms of impact on the game. Also you would need to fit *three* Drone Nav computers to do that which is a pretty significant fitting cost for a really questionable benefit.
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Okay good sir where do carriers fit into the game after this change?
I don't really have a satisfying answer for that one right now.
The only two that I've got, based on what I've seen, are:
- Jack of all trades, master of none, because they're fairly decent damage dealers, can project damage basically anywhere on grid, and have Support Fighters to respond to various situations and threats. That said the Support Fighters seem a bit lackluster at the moment and suffer from some of the same issues EWar drones have.
- They're Carriers. They've got some pretty unique mechanics now and I think there's still a lot of room to figure out what they can do with those and what they're good for. Obviously "this seems interesting and has potential" isn't *really* a satisfying answer.
I don't think "wrecker of sub-caps" is really healthy though. CCP seems to rather badly want to move away from the idea that you can field *just* capitals and succeed, and I fully agree that this is a good idea. We've seen what that does to Null and to PvP in general and it just wasn't a great environment for anyone who wasn't a capital pilot.
That said, I don't think I need a satisfying answer to believe that being able to fairly easily blap sub-caps off the field is a bad place for Carriers to be sitting.
C-137 wrote:You need to learn some math and not just repost stuff from Reddit. The best ship in the entire game to shoot a Mach going 700 m/s @ 182m Sig IS A CARRIER. Even a Rigged, Implanted, MissileGuidance Tengu is worse at doing damage to this TheoryMach. AND THIS THANNY IS NAKED! No rigs, no mods, no implants. Math for Carrier Balance
More of this please! This is what I call solid supporting evidence! Though please do upload that spreadsheet to Google Drive and post a link so other people can play with it :)
Marranar Amatin take note. |
Jessie McPewpew
U2EZ
23
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 03:58:13 -
[424] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:Jessie McPewpew wrote:Mike Right wrote:carriers are so **** after the patch their damage dealt in pvp spiked up by 350%?? less crying about ticks and dank instapops and more NERFING plz https://i.imgur.com/SRnIFFA.png You sound like someone who would go to nebraska to surf. Yeah, you sound that dumb. You do realize that carriers were only glorified logistic ships and null ratters before the patch? The patch brought about a fundamental change to carriers that saw them shift to an anti subcapital platform and yet the spike comes as a shock to you? Cade Windstalker wrote: It also completely ignores anything about Carriers other than tank and raw DPS, for example Sentries were used over Fighters not because they had higher DPS (even against Battleships) but because they applied that DPS instantly and Carriers could carry so many of them they would effectively never run out.
Not that I have a horse in this race, but "glorified logistic ships"? Not that long ago, people were constantly up in arms over sentry carriers whelping subcap fleets, including but not limited to slowcat fleets. People often took to the forums to complain about it, saying that carriers should not have access to subcap drones (specifically sentries) because, well, precisely what I quoted from Cade Windstalker. Great damage, no ammo, no cap, applied instantly, long range, and carry an almost inexhaustible supply. Plus, sentry drones are cheap. That was a problem when you had lots of carriers on grid. The same would probably happen if you had many dreads on field. With very few support and logi, a dread fleet will wipe out a subcap fleet many times its size, if done properly. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 04:20:52 -
[425] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Okay good sir where do carriers fit into the game after this change? I don't really have a satisfying answer for that one right now. The only two that I've got, based on what I've seen, are:
- Jack of all trades, master of none, because they're fairly decent damage dealers, can project damage basically anywhere on grid, and have Support Fighters to respond to various situations and threats. That said the Support Fighters seem a bit lackluster at the moment and suffer from some of the same issues EWar drones have.
- They're Carriers. They've got some pretty unique mechanics now and I think there's still a lot of room to figure out what they can do with those and what they're good for. Obviously "this seems interesting and has potential" isn't *really* a satisfying answer.
well they have less DPS than dreads and less DPM than a cruiser so thats out. their range (other than nid) is 100km that is not anywhere (paper is not the same as practice) support fighters are a useless joke and their job is done better and should be by the carriers support fleet.
this lake of point of a carriers and this change putting them further into uselessness is the issue. Right now carriers can not be fielded w/o subcap support in any real fight or their fighters will be neutralized almost immediately but with subcap support they are powerful. This is how it should be and even when gate/station camping they still need sub caps to catch anything smaller than a cruiser.
what the issue is right now is that with a carrier and 1-2 ships for tackle you can lock down a gate this change solves that but then goes waaaay beond. A capital can be built to be anti sub cap so long as it can't do that w/o the help of other sub caps and we have this right now.
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Fyt 284
The Stone Cutters Guild Requiem Eternal
2
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 04:29:03 -
[426] - Quote
After testing on SISI, I have to say that carriers are now worse than they were pre-citadel. Pre patch, while lock times were slow, we at least had the ability to chose drones according to the situation. Now we are locked into severely limited fighters, with no real way to break tackle. We have no application against sub-capital ships, and our damage is too low against capitals to justify using carriers. (Not to mention the fact that we're back to a lone sabre being able to perma-tackle a carrier.)
All in all, I have to ask, what the hell is the point of flying a carrier anymore? We're just expensive killmails now :/ |
Onictus
The Scope Gallente Federation
938
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 04:52:32 -
[427] - Quote
See and I was debating reactivating fully, but between my carrier now being a FAX and Nag ...WTF CCP.... there are too many arguments against it.
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 05:21:03 -
[428] - Quote
Fyt 284 wrote:After testing on SISI, I have to say that carriers are now worse than they were pre-citadel. Pre patch, while lock times were slow, we at least had the ability to chose drones according to the situation. Now we are locked into severely limited fighters, with no real way to break tackle. We have no application against sub-capital ships, and our damage is too low against capitals to justify using carriers. (Not to mention the fact that we're back to a lone sabre being able to perma-tackle a carrier.)
All in all, I have to ask, what the hell is the point of flying a carrier anymore? We're just expensive killmails now :/
The whining is getting out of control. Do your own math instead of making crap up. Thanatos ingame right now, is the hardest hitting ship ingame vs SubCaps (baring MoMs).
Thanatos does more damage to a 10mn AB Interceptor with Links than a Destroyer or a RLML Caracal.
That is just disgusting and its obvious they need to change it. Even post change, Thanatos is still Top5 for shooting interceptors, probably Top3.
That is not even getting into the FACT that Fighters can Out-run ALL CURRENT MISSILES, thus taking 0 damage. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 05:29:23 -
[429] - Quote
umm.... except its rof is about 10 seconds has a limit of 8 shots and then takes almost 60s to reload....
but wither way we are talking about how they are on SiSi with this patch not how they are on TQ now
after the change the thanny deals almost no damage to an inti and currently the damage they deal is easy to mitigate with logi on field do to the low ROF.
That's not even getting into the FACT that fighters can be perma jammed BY T1 FRIGS thus doing 0 damage
Citadel worm hole tax
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 05:54:31 -
[430] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:umm.... except its rof is about 10 seconds has a limit of 8 shots and then takes almost 60s to reload....
but wither way we are talking about how they are on SiSi with this patch not how they are on TQ now
after the change the thanny deals almost no damage to an inti and currently the damage they deal is easy to mitigate with logi on field do to the low ROF.
That's not even getting into the FACT that fighters can be perma jammed BY T1 FRIGS thus doing 0 damage
You are welcome to prove me wrong, but you would need evidence. The only unknown factors affecting my numbers are:
1) Does fighter refuel time get multiplied by number of fighters in the squadron (5s vs 45s for reload) 2) Is there still a 10% Damage cap that was mentioned months ago? (Fighter Torp weapon supposed to deal 10% damage to Sub-Caps before modifiers)
Aside from those, all the numbers in my posts are in agreement with EFT, PYFA, and EveUni Damage Formulas. |
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 06:13:01 -
[431] - Quote
the reload time is 53 seconds no matter the number of fighters you have
5 second base 6 seconds per charge
as for number 2 considering there is no change to heavy fighters being proposed this is hardly relevant
these ships are strong against sub caps but only if they are tackled
they will not one shot anything decently fit and flown and they will not get two shots off in the time logi can land reps.
and again all you need to completely lock a carrier down is a griffin
Citadel worm hole tax
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 06:16:32 -
[432] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:the reload time is 53 seconds no matter the number of fighters you have
5 second base 6 seconds per charge
as for number 2 considering there is no change to heavy fighters being proposed this is hardly relevant
these ships are strong against sub caps but only if they are tackled
they will not one shot anything decently fit and flown and they will not get two shots off in the time logi can land reps.
and again all you need to completely lock a carrier down is a griffin
You don't have a clue do you?
"Q: How does application on type-limited abilities (Micro Missile Swarm, Torpedo Salvo etc.) work? A: The ability's base damage is reduced to 10% first, and on top of that it has missile application - so a super trying to alpha a HIC will have its Salvo reduced twice."
From the Capital Focus Group, this implies all Secondary Weapons for all Fighters.
Carrier vs Griffin:
Fighter's get jammed, pull fighers in, relaunch, Griffin is on ECM cycle reload (20s). Griffin gets alpha'd off the field as carrier can lock it and apply damage way before even 10s passes. (in before you say the carrier is fighting 1000 KM away and the fighters need travel time) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 06:19:15 -
[433] - Quote
.....
well the torpedo salvo is for heavies
and the micro missile is for the supiriority (anti fighter/drone) fighters
the heavy rocket salvo has no reduction as it is meant to hit sub caps
the torps are meant for capitals and micros are meant for drones that is why these have a reduction
so before telling people they don't have a clue maybe you should try fully reading the material not just skimming the FAQ
Citadel worm hole tax
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 06:20:51 -
[434] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:.....
well the torpedo salvo is for heavies
and the micro missile is for the supiriority (anti fighter/drone) fighters
so before telling people they don't have a clue maybe you should try fully reading the material not just skimming the FAQ
So if the Superiority Fighters, and the Heavy Bomber's get damage reduction arbitration, the Light Fighters don't? Why would the Superiority fighter's need this Modifier and not the Light Fighters? Wow so dense. |
Fyt 284
The Stone Cutters Guild Requiem Eternal
3
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 06:27:15 -
[435] - Quote
C-137 wrote:Fyt 284 wrote:After testing on SISI, I have to say that carriers are now worse than they were pre-citadel. Pre patch, while lock times were slow, we at least had the ability to chose drones according to the situation. Now we are locked into severely limited fighters, with no real way to break tackle. We have no application against sub-capital ships, and our damage is too low against capitals to justify using carriers. (Not to mention the fact that we're back to a lone sabre being able to perma-tackle a carrier.)
All in all, I have to ask, what the hell is the point of flying a carrier anymore? We're just expensive killmails now :/ The whining is getting out of control. Do your own math instead of making crap up. Thanatos ingame right now, is the hardest hitting ship ingame vs SubCaps (baring MoMs). Thanatos does more damage to a 10mn AB Interceptor with Links than a Destroyer or a RLML Caracal.That is just disgusting and its obvious they need to change it. Even post change, Thanatos is still Top5 for shooting interceptors, probably Top3. That is not even getting into the FACT that Fighters can Out-run ALL CURRENT MISSILES, thus taking 0 damage. Thanatos currently out-damages a Tracking Enhanced Glass Cannon Confesser vs 10mnAB Interceptor
I am not saying carriers did not need changes, I am saying that the changes they have proposed and put on the test server are completely overbearing and leave no practical use for a carrier. We have no application worth talking about against sub caps, so we are **** out of luck there. We can apply to capitals, but the damage we can bring to bear is pointless in comparison with dreads. Post change, doing 29 damage to a ceptor / dictor is NOT top 5 in terms of application, a vexor can apply better with warriors. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 06:28:05 -
[436] - Quote
C-137 wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:.....
well the torpedo salvo is for heavies
and the micro missile is for the supiriority (anti fighter/drone) fighters
so before telling people they don't have a clue maybe you should try fully reading the material not just skimming the FAQ So if the Superiority Fighters, and the Heavy Bomber's get damage reduction arbitration, the Light Fighters don't? Why would the Superiority fighter's need this Modifier and not the Light Fighters? Wow so dense.
are you just trolling now??
the reason heavies get it is because they are only supposed to be used against capitals if they did not they would be broken against sub caps
the reason superiority fighters get it is because they would be broken against everything if they didn't
attack fighters don't because their damage is meant to apply to sub caps what would you reduce their damage against??
Here is where carriers break
Nid/than being given 5% damage bonus (this should have stayed at 2.5% like it was originally) and the omnis that give way to high of an application bonus remove the Expl vel bonus from them and things would be much better.
do those too things and carriers will stop alphaing cruisers and under
Citadel worm hole tax
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 06:58:08 -
[437] - Quote
Fyt 284 wrote: I am not saying carriers did not need changes, I am saying that the changes they have proposed and put on the test server are completely overbearing and leave no practical use for a carrier. We have no application worth talking about against sub caps, so we are **** out of luck there. We can apply to capitals, but the damage we can bring to bear is pointless in comparison with dreads. Post change, doing 29 damage to a ceptor / dictor is NOT top 5 in terms of application, a vexor can apply better with warriors.
Current Thanatos does more applied damage to 10mnAB Interceptor than Vexxor with Warrior IIs. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:01:12 -
[438] - Quote
Again not talking about current we are talking about the upcoming...is English your second language by chance?
Citadel worm hole tax
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:04:44 -
[439] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Again not talking about current we are talking about the upcoming...is English your second language by chance?
You must be ******* stupid, my numbers have both Pre and Post changes, stop trolling and read. |
Fyt 284
The Stone Cutters Guild Requiem Eternal
3
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:11:00 -
[440] - Quote
C-137 wrote:Fyt 284 wrote: I am not saying carriers did not need changes, I am saying that the changes they have proposed and put on the test server are completely overbearing and leave no practical use for a carrier. We have no application worth talking about against sub caps, so we are **** out of luck there. We can apply to capitals, but the damage we can bring to bear is pointless in comparison with dreads. Post change, doing 29 damage to a ceptor / dictor is NOT top 5 in terms of application, a vexor can apply better with warriors.
Current Thanatos does more applied damage to 10mnAB Interceptor than Vexxor with Warrior IIs.
I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT CURRENT APPLICATION! I AM TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBERS POSTED IN THIS THREAD, THAT ARE NOW ON SISI. LEARN TO READ. |
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:16:33 -
[441] - Quote
Fyt 284 wrote:C-137 wrote:Fyt 284 wrote: I am not saying carriers did not need changes, I am saying that the changes they have proposed and put on the test server are completely overbearing and leave no practical use for a carrier. We have no application worth talking about against sub caps, so we are **** out of luck there. We can apply to capitals, but the damage we can bring to bear is pointless in comparison with dreads. Post change, doing 29 damage to a ceptor / dictor is NOT top 5 in terms of application, a vexor can apply better with warriors.
Current Thanatos does more applied damage to 10mnAB Interceptor than Vexxor with Warrior IIs. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT CURRENT APPLICATION! I AM TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBERS POSTED IN THIS THREAD, THAT ARE NOW ON SISI. LEARN TO READ.
THEY ARE IN THE PICTURE, you learn to read moron. How can you guys be so dense. The numbers in my picture are for Current Thanny AND Sisi Thanny. Holy **** I thought Eve players were supposed to be smart. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:25:37 -
[442] - Quote
yes and like he said the sisi one applies far far worse than a vexor with warriors you just proved the point
Citadel worm hole tax
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:30:16 -
[443] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:yes and like he said the sisi one applies far far worse than a vexor with warriors you just proved the point
What nonsense are you smoking? My numbers show Current Thanny is the highest damaging Ship vs Interceptors in the game (aside from MoMs). You can't just make **** up and say I proved it. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2842
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:38:42 -
[444] - Quote
.. okay get the current one out just throw it away we are not talking about it
your numbers show sisi 15dps
warrior 47
15dps applied is not the highest applied to an inty
Citadel worm hole tax
|
C-137
C3 Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:44:10 -
[445] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:.. okay get the current one out just throw it away we are not talking about it
your numbers show sisi 15dps
warrior 47
15dps applied is not the highest applied to an inty
And thats why the change is fine. Unless you want Fighters doing more DPS than Warriors vs Interceptors like currently. |
Morrigan LeSante
Black Omega Security The OSS
1466
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 07:48:30 -
[446] - Quote
A carrier with two mods post change applies around 4% DPS to a 10mn stiletto. What you're neglecting to mention is that the fighters cannot keep up with that ceptor without MWDing.
Seeing as you don't know how carrier squadron reloads work I'm going to assume you've never flown one and thus have never seen fighters try and keep an orbit or keep at range when MWDing. They're really really bad at it, because they are going so fast. The MWD is great to cover ground and absolutely terrible at remaining on a target. Obviously this is because the overshoot at MWD speeds is utterly hilarious.
tl;dr: Your conclusions are flawed by a lack of experience in actually using these in the game. Sorry
Ed: And the change is not fine, because I'll still spank small things with a handful of carriers. Carriers remain rather comical at the fleet level. |
Anthar Thebess
1556
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 08:36:39 -
[447] - Quote
Maybe just give us anti subcapital fighters - designed to fight sub capitals - something like Light Fighters.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Blaststar Revenge
Higher Than Everest The-Culture
2
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 09:43:02 -
[448] - Quote
For all the bros interested I updated the google sheet for figther/bomber/etc dps volly ability calculation with the new numbers suggested by CCP.. its set to view only so if you wanna use it just make a copy for yourself to play with it..
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QUYXTcG8E7Yxfad_THbmv1Tn_E1hsaon1-AuoIq2GsI/edit?usp=sharing
You'll see how truely bad these changes are. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2843
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 10:18:03 -
[449] - Quote
I was reading wrong...
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Fyt 284
The Stone Cutters Guild Requiem Eternal
4
|
Posted - 2016.06.21 11:34:41 -
[450] - Quote
Blaststar Revenge wrote:For all the bros interested I updated the google sheet for figther/bomber/etc dps volly ability calculation with the new numbers suggested by CCP.. its set to view only so if you wanna use it just make a copy for yourself to play with it.. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QUYXTcG8E7Yxfad_THbmv1Tn_E1hsaon1-AuoIq2GsI/edit?usp=sharing Your basic ability will have more volly damage then the Missile ability against subcapitals. Web's will become mandatory for the missile ability to have any effect.
Which wouldn't be AS much of an issue, if we could use webs / tps / points while running an NSA, but CCP decided that having a 99999% increase in cap use while the NSA is on made sense post nerf. (I completely understand why it was added in the first place, but now it just serves to keep carriers even more crippled)
2 things that would have been viable ideas: 1) Make it so that sensor boosters get the same cap penalty as ewar when the NSA is running, and have the sensor strength at 650% while nerfing the raw damage of missile volleys 2) If you are going to keep the absolutely overbearing nerf numbers, add an additional launch tube ONLY for support fighters, and keep the other tubes damage only. That way carriers have a way to actually be useful, and will have to make choices on which support fighters to bring / use. (since support fighters are generally fairly useless in comparison with damage fighters, even post change.)
Also, thank you for the spreadsheet, I'm going to be playing around with the more. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 31 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |