Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
|
CCP Abathur
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 19:19:00 -
[1]
Please use this thread to discuss all things Supercarrier related. Bear in mind that the numbers on the test server are subject to (and probably will) change more than once in the coming weeks. We wanted to get this information out sooner rather than later to ensure time for proper feedback and balancing.
There will be special events announced soon with regard to testing these ships. I will update this post once those announcements are made.
|
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 19:38:00 -
[2]
oh hey
first here too
no one reads this area dude
supercarrier is a dumb name btw _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 19:51:00 -
[3]
Yeah lets start with the name.
Mothership -> Fleet Carrier (or Flagship) Carrier -> Escort Carrier
Will post on the numbers and experiences once its on sisi!
|
Auden Sky
Evolution
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 19:55:00 -
[4]
I don't have a problem with the term supercarrier. Seems like a good traditional name.
(quickie google): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercarrier
|
fairimear
Gallente Esto Perpetua Coalition Of Carebear Killers
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 20:22:00 -
[5]
Edited by: fairimear on 16/09/2009 20:23:32 Out rolled by multiple dreads now. fighter bombers are a good move.
IMO supercapital's need a balance to hic's. 3 hic's would be a fair infi scramble. on a mothership or titan.
1 hic point should give a 2min count down till warp scramble ends.
2. 4min
3. then gives you the perma lockdown well all maintained.
Anyless makes any change pointless.
Btw bubbles should give a 2min scram. to give time for hics to arrive to take over.
Bringing a type of class to PL. |
manasi
Caldari Ceptacemia Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 20:59:00 -
[6]
No problem with the name either. There is so much going into this next...expansion, that my concern is actually getting all the information actually needed to play. I like changes, I do, just the size and the scope for these are rather large. Supercarriers obviously seeing a big change. I have yet to see when testing on these might be on Sisi? Might there be an announcement before too long about the when etc...of testing?
How many fighter bombers will carrier be capable of fielding? Will they lose any more space or are they where you want them to be? In terms of 2 Battleships fitting inside...
great work so far...keep on rocking. Come visit me at http://amuleineve.net I do not bite and value comments! |
Ferria
Caldari Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 21:22:00 -
[7]
quick question, will supers be avalible on test for those of us with the required skills to test without direct ccp intervention?
|
IHaveTenFingers
Caldari ADVANCED Combat and Engineering Violent Society
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 21:32:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ferria quick question, will supers be avalible on test for those of us with the required skills to test without direct ccp intervention?
I'd love to know as well. I've never advocated the "OMG SEED TITANS AND MOTHERSHIPS" threads, but with fortnightly mirrors (moms presumably still take 26 days and titans take 40 something), some consideration might be given to seeding supercaps in order to be able to test the changes without undue stress on the devs.
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 21:53:00 -
[9]
Originally by: IHaveTenFingers
Originally by: Ferria quick question, will supers be avalible on test for those of us with the required skills to test without direct ccp intervention?
I'd love to know as well. I've never advocated the "OMG SEED TITANS AND MOTHERSHIPS" threads, but with fortnightly mirrors (moms presumably still take 26 days and titans take 40 something), some consideration might be given to seeding supercaps in order to be able to test the changes without undue stress on the devs.
Check the latest devblog. Friday 25th, 48 hours, Supercaps and all skill lv5 for everyone. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
Freidrich Nietchize
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 22:56:00 -
[10]
according to http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=697 the testing will be done on: The supercapitals test will take place on Friday the 25th of September at 18:00
what system(s) will this take place in so i can go ahead and move my char to a location where i can participate? ================================================ 00:59:14 Notify The Guardian Veteran is too far away, you need to be within 48400.0 meters of it but are actually 57737.3598289 meters away.
WHAT?! |
|
Torin Thunderfist
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 01:06:00 -
[11]
The new Minmatar Fighter Bomber Tyrfing has 13'392 effective HP. Calculated with the EFT model of EHP calculation of evenly distributed damage types / average resistances, not the ingame fittings screen method that uses a minimum effective HP calculation with 100% damage against the lowest resist of that HP type.
With the Hel's new bonus at level 5, that gets increased to 17'857 EHP. Fighter bombers are also slower than regular Fighters (210m/s orbit velocity Tyrfing vs 300m/s Einherji) and larger (125m/s vs 100m/s).
Chimera and Archon win big time with their 25% resistance bonus on the ships HP.
Nyx wins with a 25% dps increase on Fighter Bombers (12k dps instead of 9.6k dps for a flight of 20). Rumors have it that FBs can't be delegated, removing the problem the Nyx had with regular Fighters.
The +4465 EHP on Fighter Bombers are... well... let's just say, could we have the repair amount bonus back please? It was the worst of the 4 bonuses, but it could make a difference.
Also: posting via new IGB. Awesome.
|
Kyra Felann
Gallente Noctis Fleet Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 01:07:00 -
[12]
Quit whining about the name "supercarrier". It's what they call the biggest type of carriers in real life, and it makes sense in Eve, since what motherships will become is basically just a bigger carrier with the capability of fielding bomber fighters.
|
Artassaut
Minmatar Oblivion Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 02:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Torin Thunderfist The new Minmatar Fighter Bomber Tyrfing has 13'392 effective HP. With the Hel's new bonus at level 5, that gets increased to 17'857 EHP. Fighter bombers are also slower than regular Fighters (210m/s orbit velocity Tyrfing vs 300m/s Einherji) and larger (125m/s vs 100m/s).
...
It was the worst of the 4 bonuses, but it could make a difference.
Hm, I would have thought the Minmatar Supercarrier would get a velocity/Signature Radius bonus to their fighters.
Thoughts? --- The Gate: Lol, try targeting me in a fleet fight. The Station: No U. |
Gonff MaeTeiff
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 02:38:00 -
[14]
Some more consideration needs to be given to the effect of carrier smart bombs on fighter bombers and their torpedoes - or well have the same problem as citadel torps
also im disappointed not to see an increase in jump range. The gimped jump range was the worst part about pre Dom Mother ships. If Super Carriers are to live up to their namesake the jump range needs to be changed appropriately.
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 02:46:00 -
[15]
Well first of all. Stop calling them supercarriers. If you want that name to stick... let them dock. Afterall I didnt eject from my HAS(read HAC) and jump into my RNI(read CNR) You want to eleviate confusion... but it's only going to create eversomore confusion.
New ehp is pretty crazy. Damage just blinks off moms now. I really do think that will mean they are likely to jump onto the battlefield now... or rather stay at the battlefield sigh. I think that it will be essentially the value of commandships in rr bs gangs. Massive tanks that if the enemy shoots... they might just break it. However how many loses will they take in that fight.
Fighter bombers on the otherhand. Very nice. Ammo for drones :) compact citadels :) Perhaps something that might roll over to being used on the stealth bombers or new variant there of? the compact torps dont take skill to use. The launchers could be what makes the skill deal. Have a special launcher. WIN!
Fighter bombers dont win though. From what I can see. They orbit within smartbomb range. This is totally impractical. The reason carriers and motherships dont use fighters vs caps is because of smartbombs. Instead relying on sentries which are extremely weak and very limited in range. Where a mothership with 20x garde 2s does a weak 1200 dps.
Im not sure wat bomber dps is with 20 of them and proper skills. Id hope for 3000-5000 dps i think.
The problem though. Smartbombs beat on them dont they? So you're right back to the first problem. Make them orbit very widely. Like 25-50 km. Within range of dread drones. Very clear for support to pew pew; and far enough rr from carriers and moms cant get them. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 02:52:00 -
[16]
Quote: IMO supercapital's need a balance to hic's. 3 hic's would be a fair infi scramble. on a mothership or titan.
No. The point of hics are exactly this.
The only thing hics need a nerf on is sensor res. They can get boosted to where they are catching the impossible.
Quote: quick question, will supers be avalible on test for those of us with the required skills to test without direct ccp intervention?
Indeed. I cant fly a titan but id test out mom in things like lvl 5 missions if i could. Beyond the 2 days of all lvl 5. supercap available? ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Sea Gate
Caldari Sea Gate Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 03:38:00 -
[17]
Just tested out my Hel. Gotta say I'm happy with the changes except for the need of Fighters to V for fighter bombers. Just seems... to much.
Also, make the models for supercarriers bigger
|
Mara Intala
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 04:36:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Sea Gate except for the need of Fighters to V for fighter bombers. Just seems... to much.
Also, make the models for supercarriers bigger
Seems fine to me. Even though I have major doubts about only letting moms use bombers (Bad idea, major bad idea ) you wouldnÆt want every carrier pilot to have them w/o any extra work. Besides, flying a SC w/o fighters V anyways just seems.... wrong.
But this is just by bit of feed back. I donÆt fly moms and until they can dock and cost under 5 bil each. I WILL never fly one on the front line. Not when you could field and loose over 8 dreads at the current cost of a SC.
So far only Titans should have the name Super Cap. SC should be remade into normal caps, dock able and cheaper (3-5 bil)
This is what I have though ever since I heard about the Bombers.
Carriers as they are should be renamed Logistics Carrier. They can keep the Triage and be able to use normal fighters.
Moms should be named Fleet Assault Carriers; they are DPS based, cheaper and can use Bombers. (Much cheaper Not 12 more like 3-5)
Currently I can see NO reason why something like this should have been done. Titans can cause massive destruction across a battlefield; they are feared and renowned for what they can do and in turn. The pilot canÆt dock them.
But moms do what exactly? What destruction can they cause to make them cost so much (15 bil + just for looks?) they are not super logistics ships capable of repping massive amounts of hp, nor are they insane dps. In fact, IÆm sure 2 carriers can do more dps and more logistics than 1 mom for 1/10th the price.
Now, before you just shoot this idea down, which IÆm sure you will cause it seems your minds are made up on this. Just think, at the moment, most 0.0 alliances that I know of, only have a few moms, why is this? Because they are les useful that carriers, but for the most part they are too much trouble for most carrier pilots to use. I canÆt think of any reason that any carrier pilot would get a mom other than to look cool (because they do!)
But if they could dock, and had a reasonable price that could be replaced if lost (15b is enough to buy a character, why spend it on a ship that WILL get destroyed.) not only would the manufacturers of said ships get more business, but the future manufacturers of the bombers will have a reason to build them. (Moms will not be used on the front line, and so they will not have there bombers out much and in turn they will not get destroyed).
Just my 2 isk worth of feed back about an awesome ship and an awesome idea. I would like to see these ships more in 0.0, not less.
|
Viper ShizzIe
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 05:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Viper ****zIe on 17/09/2009 05:55:29 Jumprange really needs to be looked at, if cal5 motherships could have the same range as cal4 dreads (currently like .5ly short) it'd make them a lot more appealing.
Also, mothership infinite point module, please.
|
|
CCP Abathur
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 06:38:00 -
[20]
Originally by: IHaveTenFingers
Originally by: Ferria quick question, will supers be avalible on test for those of us with the required skills to test without direct ccp intervention?
I'd love to know as well. I've never advocated the "OMG SEED TITANS AND MOTHERSHIPS" threads, but with fortnightly mirrors (moms presumably still take 26 days and titans take 40 something), some consideration might be given to seeding supercaps in order to be able to test the changes without undue stress on the devs.
Yes, we are planning a couple special events that will be announced shortly.
For right now just keep doing what you are doing and keep the feedback as constructive and factual as possible. Some of the designers will be on and off SiSi over the weekend as well to discuss things more directly.
|
|
|
Armadaus Baldwin
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 06:42:00 -
[21]
Gentles at CCP,
While testing the "SuperCarrier" (more in specific, the Fighter Bombers), I and a couple others noticed a glaring problem that I'm surprised passed your QC.
Not only do the bombers easily fall prey to Smartbombs, much in the fashion of fighters... But so do their Torps. Making them virtually useless against other Carriers/SuperCarriers and the average Titan.
So while the idea is cool, it's current iteration is less than useful. My understanding, is the intent is to once again bring "Motherships" ala the new SuperCarrier name back to the front line. Risk V Usefulness is still amazingly unbalanced in this iteration.
Please take some time into looking into increasing the Midget Torpedo hitpoints, or find some magical alloy that makes them immune to Area of Effect weapons in general. (Are either of these possible, or even ideas being tossed around at this stage?)
I must say, I'm quite happy with the 2-3 months advance testing time so we can discuss these issues. I still have reservations, quite strongly, against the new Titan weapon... but it's too early to call. Also, I too, would like to encourage the production of T2 Capital Reps, or T2 Capital Remote Reps.
Also, really... SuperCarrier? Can't we think of something that actually sounds menacing? Going to continue testing with my Alt, but so far... much work to be done, thank you for giving us the opportunity to assist.
In honor of 02-05-09, and our new Goon Overlords.
|
Angor
KAHONAS
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 06:43:00 -
[22]
let them dock _______________________________ [ 2007.06.07 21:07:22 ] FrankyWave > ransom me guys I am joining XElas !!! |
Generic PlayerX
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 07:08:00 -
[23]
how will the construction components of the supercarrier be effected ?
oonly the clone vat bay will be removed ?
or will it be removed and some parts added to the others needed to be constructed ?
from generic
|
|
CCP Abathur
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 07:14:00 -
[24]
Edited by: CCP Abathur on 17/09/2009 07:14:48
Originally by: Armadaus Baldwin
Not only do the bombers easily fall prey to Smartbombs, much in the fashion of fighters... But so do their Torps. Making them virtually useless against other Carriers/SuperCarriers and the average Titan.
Please take some time into looking into increasing the Midget Torpedo hitpoints, or find some magical alloy that makes them immune to Area of Effect weapons in general. (Are either of these possible, or even ideas being tossed around at this stage?)
We are already looking into this. Also, "at this stage" - Dominion is still roughly two months from deployment. As you noted, there is plenty of time for us to tweak all aspects of this part of the expansion.
|
|
Ravcharas
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 08:05:00 -
[25]
Originally by: XXSketchxx supercarrier is a dumb name btw
They're alot scarier than carriers. Get it? S-carrier!
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 09:24:00 -
[26]
RL carriers i.e. Nimitz class - Super Carrier carriers like HMS Ark Royal - Carrier
Enough of the name whining pleeeease.
|
Theron Gyrow
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 09:41:00 -
[27]
FYI, if the stats I have are correct (expl rad 1000, expl vel 29, DRF 5) AND that player's skills don't affect those in any way, the fighter-bombers will do about: 17% (~1700 DPS) of their max damage to a 400-sigrad BS going 100 m/s 36% (~3600 DPS) of their max damage to above BS when it's single-webbed 3% (~300 DPS) of their max damage to 130-sig cruiser (Rupture) going 240 m/s 7% (~700 DPS) of their max damage to above cruiser when single-webbed 12.5% (~1250 DPS) of their max damage to above cruiser when double-webbed.
Discuss.
Also, a question: do player skills (target navigation prediction being a real possibility) affect these weapons? -- Gradient forum |
fairimear
Gallente Esto Perpetua Coalition Of Carebear Killers
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 10:17:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Jason Edwards
Quote: IMO supercapital's need a balance to hic's. 3 hic's would be a fair infi scramble. on a mothership or titan.
No. The point of hics are exactly this.
The only thing hics need a nerf on is sensor res. They can get boosted to where they are catching the impossible.
Quote: quick question, will supers be avalible on test for those of us with the required skills to test without direct ccp intervention?
Indeed. I cant fly a titan but id test out mom in things like lvl 5 missions if i could. Beyond the 2 days of all lvl 5. supercap available?
No the point of hic's was to counter the unscrambleable supercaiptals. NOT TO MAKE THEM SO VULNERABLE THEY NEVER LEAVE A POS.
Bringing a type of class to PL. |
Drake Mezcal
Eye of God Slightly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 10:20:00 -
[29]
make them able to dock and alot more people would have them and it would b win win for every1
|
BiggestT
Caldari Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 11:05:00 -
[30]
Can they dock now?
If not, they'll still be alt-ships that are rarely used, more so than titans.
(Plz don;t give me "they will always be used, nub" I'm talking about in general, player goals etc.) EVE Trivia EVE History
|
|
TechnoMag
Minmatar Reikoku
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 11:48:00 -
[31]
Titan nerf : well good it was about time but its not kinda to much? Even if i got dd'ed ****ing lots of time and i hate titans (i dont have one and dont intend to buy one) this nerf its a little bit too much. Aspects and suggestions: - One shot one headshot ...great thing capital ship goes boom ... this is good but for what dreads will be good anymore when u can siege a pos with 30 titans (right now number of titans in game i guess its over 200 and will be nice from CCP to have some numbers of titans + mommy builded until now). - titans will have a siege thing? They can be remote repped after they firing? - titans can shot in low-sec? - all lvl 5 skill can destroy a super-cap in one shot? - one shot one kill: no more hugin station carriers ... this is nice
Nerf suggestion: dont remove dd thing, u dont think will be much more interesting to reduce dd area (30 km instead 300km) and introduce the focus fire? Something like interdictor bubble u put a script on the DD weapon for focus dmg or splash dmg, with focus script u will have 5min cycle time and with splash dmg 60min cycle time ... (u cannot put to 2dd weapons on ship u cant change the script when its in cycle... u cannot unfit the dd when its in cycle ...this to avoid exploits)
Supercarriers: - will can be docked now?
SuperCapital parking pos: - anchoring a supercap inside bubble of a pos. Having a stuck char into a ship suck big time. We should have for this ships something like an anchoring near pos and acces the ship only with a password as long as the pos its online or anchored. So a owner of a supercap will come to a corp pos and anchor his ship. After the ship its anchored he can eject and when its ejecting he will need to put a password (pass will lock the supercap to be boarded, to take something from corporate hangars or ship maintance bay... u will need that pass to take anything or board) Parking pass its independent from the pos password and cant be reset by ceo/directors from that corp.. dont have anything with corp access and rights. - if pos will go out of fuel and will go offline (no pos force field) ship still cannot be boarded without the parking pass ... but u can destroy the ship. -if pos got destroyed parked ships there are now unanchored and anyone can board them without a pass. - u cannot unanchor a pos if u have a ship parked.
- parking a ship will position the ship near the tower by default (so u cannot park the ship at 15km from the tower). Maybe u can put a parking slots limit 1/2/3 for each pos and when u parking a ship in that anchoring time will move the ship in a predefined position to the tower. -parked ships cannot be bumped and theyr positions will be static even another titan coming and bump. -parked ship will need some cpu and powergrid from tower (so the parking pos will consume more fuel when it have a supercap anchored) - u cannot park a supercap if it isnt inside pos force field EULA 7. CONDUCT A. 1. You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System. |
Neige
Cardshark Influence Quarantine Zone
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:31:00 -
[32]
Allow SC to dock !
They are not mommy's anymore so there is no reason they can't dock, the're not so big ! You must have a charater just to park it it's spimle crazy for Carrier tiers 2
And the reduction of cost is not enought just maybe 1B so you pay you SC 14B intead of 15B :/ immagine you wine 1B per week (and i'm very far of this ), you need 3 or 4 month to get it and not buying anything else and nned the fit too it's too big for normal alliance who don't win 300b per month with r64 Why loosing 14 B on one battle ? but with carrier you just lost 800M and buy many more for other battles. The price is very expensive for the capabilities of the ship
And others thing i'm wondering
the be called now Super Carrier but one thing is actually an heresie for me they jump less far than a simple carrier not the same or better but less far so the don't are so "super" than carriers
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 16:05:00 -
[33]
Quote: Seems fine to me. Even though I have major doubts about only letting moms use bombers (Bad idea, major bad idea Evil or Very Mad) you wouldnÆt want every carrier pilot to have them w/o any extra work. Besides, flying a SC w/o fighters V anyways just seems.... wrong.
Oh totally forgot that part.
Seemingly you can put them in carriers. With the limitation of either/or for fighters. you cant haveboth.. So i think it's good.
fighter 5 I just dont know. Fighters 4 will allow more death and destruction though.
Quote: So far only Titans should have the name Super Cap. SC should be remade into normal caps, dock able and cheaper (3-5 bil)
Not cheaper and not buildable in stations also.
Quote: Jumprange really needs to be looked at, if cal5 motherships could have the same range as cal4 dreads (currently like .5ly short) it'd make them a lot more appealing. Also, mothership infinite point module, please.
I wouldnt mind the jumprange change. I dont like the mom infiny point. Back when hics were in testing. I want another mom-titan to be the one holding them there. However now the moms/titans are far more offensive. I dont think it fits in. The big issue. Hics can be easily neuted out by titans and moms. The special part of the titan dmg bonus. They are far less likely to fit neuts. So it is a hictor boost in the eyes of supercap capturing.
Though someone should test how much dps those capital turrets and citadels can do to hictors. I can fly neither a hic nor titan atm.
Quote: They are not mommy's anymore so there is no reason they can't dock, the're not so big ! You must have a charater just to park it it's spimle crazy for Carrier tiers 2
This is what I was reading during the blog.
The simple fact is that this class of ship now stays mostly parked on trained alts and is rarely used as they are nothing more than expensive targets for hungry legions of Dread pilots.
It really does hurt because of this. Allowing them to dock would be a fix to this garbage. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 16:27:00 -
[34]
What about production costs for the Super Carriers? Just taking off 1bil isk isn't much when they cost about 15billion. Maybe slash it to hell to about 6 or 7 I don't know. Just seems to me that if they're replacing the mothership with something else (which is what I think from the wording in the blog) it would make more sense to make them cheaper.
If they do go down in price massively, and make them dockable... I would like one :D
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 16:30:00 -
[35]
Originally by: CCP Abathur For right now just keep doing what you are doing and keep the feedback as constructive and factual as possible.
Straight to the point then?
I've been doing some testing with my Aeon, obvious I had to train the FB-skill (now lv2, testing done with lv1 skill). Some experiences;
FB's - As other mentioned, they die incredibly easy to smartbombs. I engaged two titans and some dreads, one wave of smartbombs goes off and I had to pull them back to remote rep them up, else they'd been dead.. Damage wise? Even at lv1 it's noticeable. I like them so far. The explosion gfx is huge (I assume this will be fixed?). The spam from 20 FB's totally cover the screen, I don't even see the titans.
Capital Repairer - I ate three Doomsdays and some dread/titan guns, dropped down to 28% armor. Warped out, and put my dual reppers to work. It took exactly 40 (fourty) minutes to rep up to full. That's an Aeon with HG slaves and Akemon's 8% implant, no Trimarks. If it stays this way I'll fit Trimarks and drop both reppers, if they were bad before, they're useless now. Assuming it'll take an hour to rep full hp with dual reppers..
Local tank - Can't comment on this one. Three doomsdays (no clue about skill level) and some random caps put me to 28% armor in short due, with 90% allround resists. One single dread and carrier struggled to even dent me. With no knowledge about skill levels and DD's mixed in, I can't say if tank is too strong or too weak at this point. The DD's are bloody damn scarey even with 90% resists, I can say that much.
Waiting for FB skill to go up and some more proper testing vs opponents I know skill level of. Tad worried about the local buffer/resist, if it is enough to keep you up seeing as you can't self-rep. Far from everyone can field multiple xMom's each time they go and play. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
sathan dakara
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 17:48:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Hull Blaster RL carriers i.e. Nimitz class - Super Carrier carriers like HMS Ark Royal - Carrier
Enough of the name whining pleeeease.
cept the new english super carriers can carry upto 50 fighters, whilst the nyx only does 20. but thats beside the point. the point is it needs a more threatening name, not a military classification. we're privateers, not soldiers. liking the changes, but can i just confirm there are no changes to carrier/mom skill requirements other than fighters 5 (which you should really have) to use fighter bombers?
|
kidrob
PPN United Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 18:22:00 -
[37]
The new fighters are awesome, but the requirement of Fighters at level 5 is just too much in my point of view
Not, that the skill is not nice - but i dont think it fits with the requirement of the new super-gold-deluxe-T2-carriers itself as they have very "low" requirements compared to this 60d "skill-monster" and for myself its more or less totally wasted time. Even as a "real" MS pilot ig for years...
Please comment this and/or confirm that skill req will still be level5 at deployment so ill start training this asap instead of skilling smth more usefull in bloody 60d...
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 18:25:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Misanth Local tank
I can update a bit on this part now;
Victim: Misanth Destroyed: Aeon Damage Taken: 3811458
[ 2009.09.17 17:34:05 ] (combat) <color=0xffbb6600>Compact Thor Torpedo I belonging to Pooseidon hits you, doing 1098.4 damage.
That was the first hit. I start to initiate warp as I see that most people in the room is -A- pilots and all titans is locking me up. Ooops.
[ 2009.09.17 17:35:34 ] (notify) External factors are preventing your warp drive from responding to this command.
Damn! Onyx and Broadsword ***s on me. Wth..
[ 2009.09.17 17:37:25 ] (combat) <color=0xffbb6600>Dual Giga Pulse Laser I belonging to INZi barely scratches you, causing 251.7 damage. [ 2009.09.17 17:37:26 ] (notify) Ship is out of control
3 minutes and 20sec. Avatar x2, Leviathan, Leviathan, Nyx, Phoenix x4, Moros, Revelation x2. Two HIC's.
HG slaves, Akemon's 8%, I still had the dual rep tank and 2x CCC II with a Anti-EM Pump II, hadn't swapped it out yet. X-Type hardeners and A-type EANMs. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
BiggestT
Caldari Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 18:36:00 -
[39]
Edited by: BiggestT on 17/09/2009 18:37:10
Originally by: Misanth
Originally by: Misanth Local tank
I can update a bit on this part now;
Victim: Misanth Destroyed: Aeon Damage Taken: 3811458
[ 2009.09.17 17:34:05 ] (combat) <color=0xffbb6600>Compact Thor Torpedo I belonging to Pooseidon hits you, doing 1098.4 damage.
That was the first hit. I start to initiate warp as I see that most people in the room is -A- pilots and all titans is locking me up. Ooops.
[ 2009.09.17 17:35:34 ] (notify) External factors are preventing your warp drive from responding to this command.
Damn! Onyx and Broadsword ***s on me. Wth..
[ 2009.09.17 17:37:25 ] (combat) <color=0xffbb6600>Dual Giga Pulse Laser I belonging to INZi barely scratches you, causing 251.7 damage. [ 2009.09.17 17:37:26 ] (notify) Ship is out of control
3 minutes and 20sec. Avatar x2, Leviathan, Leviathan, Nyx, Phoenix x4, Moros, Revelation x2. Two HIC's.
HG slaves, Akemon's 8%, I still had the dual rep tank and 2x CCC II with a Anti-EM Pump II, hadn't swapped it out yet. X-Type hardeners and A-type EANMs.
Hmm, if the titan spam of current allainces continues, then perhaps ms will be unusable on the field due to insta primary from the titans...edit: well thats if they did indeed dd you, did they? (If they didn't then I think ms need a massive rep bonus or nice hp bonus..)
If you were DD'd, maybe make MS immune to focused titan dd? EVE Trivia EVE History
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 18:59:00 -
[40]
Originally by: BiggestT Hmm, if the titan spam of current allainces continues, then perhaps ms will be unusable on the field due to insta primary from the titans...edit: well thats if they did indeed dd you, did they? (If they didn't then I think ms need a massive rep bonus or nice hp bonus..)
If you were DD'd, maybe make MS immune to focused titan dd?
I went in there with low shield and full armor/structure. Majority of damage taken was from DD's.
#1 Avatar Damage Done: 889762 #2 Avatar Damage Done: 830851 #3 Leviathan Damage Done: 690245
Compare to highest non-titan; # Nyx (Compact Rift Torpedo I) Damage Done: 110654 ..and highest dread; # Phoenix Damage Done: 78259 - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
|
Fossil Wolf
omen.
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 20:58:00 -
[41]
Can we have shield slaves please
|
Loco Lemming
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:00:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Fossil Wolf Can we have shield slaves please
ahh hahahahahaha
|
Rooster Fish
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:02:00 -
[43]
i second that,
i bet i could get a great buffer tank on the nyx...
|
Arzal
omen.
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:08:00 -
[44]
Originally by: kidrob The new fighters are awesome, but the requirement of Fighters at level 5 is just too much in my point of view
Not, that the skill is not nice - but i dont think it fits with the requirement of the new super-gold-deluxe-T2-carriers itself as they have very "low" requirements compared to this 60d "skill-monster" and for myself its more or less totally wasted time. Even as a "real" MS pilot ig for years...
Please comment this and/or confirm that skill req will still be level5 at deployment so ill start training this asap instead of skilling smth more usefull in bloody 60d...
tbh mate, as a mom pilot I have had fighters 5 before I got in it, its a requirement imho.
|
Pirate McTackler
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:10:00 -
[45]
Increase physical model size of Supercarrier (still gonna call 'em Motherships tbh) by 50% to make it out-size Dreadnoughts.
|
VoiceInTheDesert
Inroads
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:20:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Theron Gyrow FYI, if the stats I have are correct (expl rad 1000, expl vel 29, DRF 5) AND that player's skills don't affect those in any way, the fighter-bombers will do about: 17% (~1700 DPS) of their max damage to a 400-sigrad BS going 100 m/s 36% (~3600 DPS) of their max damage to above BS when it's single-webbed 3% (~300 DPS) of their max damage to 130-sig cruiser (Rupture) going 240 m/s 7% (~700 DPS) of their max damage to above cruiser when single-webbed 12.5% (~1250 DPS) of their max damage to above cruiser when double-webbed.
Discuss.
Also, a question: do player skills (target navigation prediction being a real possibility) affect these weapons?
These stats are not a problem because you're not supposed to be using anti-cap weapons on sub cap ships...
If the DD changes stay the way they are though, SC's will not be able to show their face in a fleet fight without becoming instaprimary.
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:32:00 -
[47]
Regarding Super Carrier and DD's... perhaps give the SC's a ship bonus that grants them a % resist specifically to DD's. Like 60% or something. That would leave the Titan's to pop the dreads and remain somewhat effective whilst having the SC survive a wee bit longer instead of being insta-popped because it got primaried by 4 Titan's.
No need to make the SC's any bigger than they are. I think it would be a good idea (as many others have stated) that SC's be made a dockable ship, CCP you said it yourself they fall too easily to hordes of hungry dread pilots leaving them to hug POS's. Making them able to dock would fix this problem over night.
Fighter-Bombers most likely need to have their orbit range increased... as they will fall to smart bombs way too easily. If they stay the same they will be useless as carriers will just bunch up with the dreads smartbombing.
|
Arzal
omen.
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:41:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Hull Blaster Regarding Super Carrier and DD's... perhaps give the SC's a ship bonus that grants them a % resist specifically to DD's. Like 60% or something. That would leave the Titan's to pop the dreads and remain somewhat effective whilst having the SC survive a wee bit longer instead of being insta-popped because it got primaried by 4 Titan's.
No need to make the SC's any bigger than they are. I think it would be a good idea (as many others have stated) that SC's be made a dockable ship, CCP you said it yourself they fall too easily to hordes of hungry dread pilots leaving them to hug POS's. Making them able to dock would fix this problem over night.
Fighter-Bombers most likely need to have their orbit range increased... as they will fall to smart bombs way too easily. If they stay the same they will be useless as carriers will just bunch up with the dreads smartbombing.
hmm, thing is, orbit ranges will make no difference if they bunch up anyway,they will cover all the bases. secondly if carriers and dreads bunch up, RR will be a pain due to range, and they will be bumping off each other like kinds on crack. and smart bombing all the dreads drones (insert moros here). My personal vue is to improve drone bays for replacements.
oh and the DD/mega death ray thing, yeh I agree, moms can still be melted, this needs to be looked at if you are ever going to see 10b isk hulls in a fleet, also needs to be said about titans, seeing 10 titans wtf pawning another titan could be a problem, considering what some sides can already muster.
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 22:31:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Misanth on 17/09/2009 22:35:54
Originally by: Arzal hmm, thing is, orbit ranges will make no difference if they bunch up anyway,they will cover all the bases. secondly if carriers and dreads bunch up, RR will be a pain due to range, and they will be bumping off each other like kinds on crack. and smart bombing all the dreads drones (insert moros here). My personal vue is to improve drone bays for replacements.
oh and the DD/mega death ray thing, yeh I agree, moms can still be melted, this needs to be looked at if you are ever going to see 10b isk hulls in a fleet, also needs to be said about titans, seeing 10 titans wtf pawning another titan could be a problem, considering what some sides can already muster.
Yup, they need a massive hp increase, not a shorter orbit range. It will help in lag situations as well, keep them alive before they respond to your calls for them to return/swap target.
My testing on SiSi came to an abrupt halt there, but my feeling so far is that we need a new "capital ship" bonus on the xMoms. +50% rep per level (grand total of +250% at lv5) per level in Capital Ships.
Not sure if more HP, reduced dmg to Titan DD or whatever is needed, but it was just 4 titans doing the bulk of the damage on me in just over 3 mins. Which alliance that means anything can NOT field four+ titans at the same time? And how much remote rep would I have needed to make my Aeon stay alive at a decent time? And how fast would a Hel or Nyx have died, not having the resist bonus that I had?
The FB's are a "fun addition", but if that and the small (it is small, particulary when thinking when thinking that you have X time before you have to leave field, since you lack rep) HP boost to the moms is what we got.. I dunno, I hope CCP use these two months well. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
Neige
Cardshark Influence Quarantine Zone
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 22:59:00 -
[50]
I like the idTas of the resistance againt's new DD,
FB need more range because every cap ship with a smart bomb can tell you're new epensive SC is useless just with a T2 smartbomb Or they can be an other type or FB like sentry, don't move but have extra power and extra range
|
|
BlackHorizon
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 23:53:00 -
[51]
Edited by: BlackHorizon on 17/09/2009 23:54:40 Fighter Bombers' torpedos should do a small splash/AoE damage.
They also ought to orbit a little farther out, perhaps 10km or more, than they do currently. Other than that, I think they're well balanced.
|
Nekmet Awai
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 01:19:00 -
[52]
ow YER lets make even stronger supercaps, as if the whole capital online isn't doing it.. sigh... the worst thing ever to enter eve is cap ships, they are WAY overpowered considered anything else and they have no counter at all of smaller ships. no ship smaller then a cap stand a change in hell to take down a moros,no matter what.. that's just wrong.
|
Ceriaus
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 02:20:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Misanth
Capital Repairer 28% armor. Warped out, and put my dual reppers to work. It took exactly 40 (fourty) minutes to rep up to full. That's an Aeon with HG slaves and Akemon's 8% implant, no Trimarks.
Ok So i don't fly super carriers yet.... I fly a Chimera and am very seriously considering a Wyvern in Dominion. I haven't heard anything about the Wyv yet but that above quote freaks me the out!! 40 mins to rep yourself is ridiculous.
Also I agree if these things are meant to be front line cap fleet vessels paying 15bil for one is alot. I get grouchy loosing a chimera which fully fit with t2 and some faction gear is like 1.2 - 1.5 billion. I would happily pay maybe 7-10 billion as long as i know It won't be insta popped and as long as I can dock it.
Does a SC do 15x the damage of a carrier? Do they have 15x more tank? Are they 15x more a pain in the ass cause you can't dock or jump far?
I really want a SC but paying 15x for one compared to paying 5-8bill for a 2nd carrier character and 2 boxing 2 carriers ....??
TL;DR - Cheaper, better hit points or rep, can dock.
Do this and I will save my pennies.
|
Viper ShizzIe
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 04:22:00 -
[54]
Please don't allow them to dock or make them any cheaper than removing the clone vat bay components. Both have been whines for ages and frankly they're unnecessary. Currently they're pretty well balanced (this is assuming fighter bombers and their missiles get a pretty large HP boost) and the amount of EHP you can get on a well-fit mothership allows it to withstand a pretty massive amount of firepower.
|
Hsan Evets
Gallente BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 04:49:00 -
[55]
I have to agree with the docking issue. If they are supercarriers, let them dock.
|
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 04:52:00 -
[56]
People need to quit asking for the supercarrier to be dockable....Its not gonna happen, it has already gotten reduced in price drastically because it wont need the clone vat bays. If they make it dockable you will see far too many of them. The bigger problem that hasnt been pointed out is the sov 4 going away....where are people gonna safely build supercaps? Any POS with a capital construction yard is gonna get reinforced easily, baby titans and moms are gonna be tough to build secretly. You will see threads on CAOD of construction yard locations. |
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 04:56:00 -
[57]
Was able to log in and play around a bit today. Here's my feedback:
Again, I'm going to strongly voice that a buffer tank setup will not allow supercaps to survive on today's fleet fighting battlefield. Titans and Supercarriers are primaried without exception. Average fleet fights include 40+ dreads and 150 support ships. This should be what the testing centers around....placing the supercarrier in the average fleet fight setting. Supercarriers will drop in 4 minutes or less in this scenario and thus this must be remedied.
So, I agree with the above poster, 50% increase to armor/shield rep amount per level would go a long ways to solving this problem.
Onto FB's... As stated by others, smartbombs eat them up, and carriers love using smartbombs to protect dreads. A massive HP boost to FB's,and an increase in their orbit range is needed. Or, you could nerf smartbombs on carriers by making them a class-level weapon....so large smartbombs could only be used on battleships, mediums on cruisers, etc. I kind of like the latter.
I'd also like to note displeasure with not having a truly unique role on the battlefield. We're getting fighter bombers...but we're effectively just going to be doing the same job as dreads. Titans get portals/gang bonuses in addition to their superweapon. Remote ECM burst's effect is barely a speed bump in a fleet fight, nothing real threatening, it's effect it too short. I'd like to see us with our own fleet bonuses, or new special abilities that give us something other than "kill caps."(The rumor about being a mobile cyno jammer sounded sweet, to give an idea).
|
Nyx Spire
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 04:56:00 -
[58]
Originally by: TechnoMag
Nerf suggestion: dont remove dd, think what will be much more interesting to reduce dd area (30 km instead 300km) and introduce the focus fire? Something like interdictor bubble u put a script on the DD weapon for focus dmg or splash dmg, with focus script u will have 5min cycle time and with splash dmg 10min cycle time ... (u cannot put to 2dd weapons on ship u cant change the script when its in cycle... u cannot unfit the dd when its in cycle ...this to avoid exploits)
Supercarriers: - can they be docked now?
SuperCapital parking pos: - anchoring a supercap inside bubble of a pos. /quote]
My spin on this, 1 what's going to rip a tittan to bits, short range high damage guns with say anti matter what's the optimal range?,
i think 30km DD is perfect, 30 seconds warm up delay. still keep warning. forcing ships to warp off grid, get out of range. or communicate to warp too a fast cepter just out side of 30km. or they fit guns and ammo for out side of 30km and do reduced damage.
focus script is perfect idea, id like to see resistances really effect DD though. if your going up against a avatar fit with judgement with a script, and you know it before hand, full EM hardener resisting to 90% should reduce that damage massively.
#1 Avatar Damage Done: 889762 #2 Avatar Damage Done: 830851
with resistances 90% to EMP in said window of same three minute fight #1 Avatar Damage Done: 88976 #2 Avatar Damage Done: 83085
Secondly, yeah why not anchor carriers at poss, put a pilot password on it and a general access password. i wouldn't get too technical with it, one pass to pilot one to access its extras.
This guy has the right idea. Docking would still be a nice touch- maybe it takes 3 minutes to dock, as that is how long it takes a tug boat with tractor beams to drag you into station. additonaly no ones commented on the effect...and i have had a good look at the other main thread based on this topic of SC. no one mentioned the detrimental effect of not being able to fit all the warfare links, this will have a nasty effect on your surrounding support fleet which your trying to promote.
and clone vats have always been flawed - if a fleet member gets poded in same system as carrier he should spawn at carrier and be able to undock a new ship from its bay, be reassigned fighters and carry on his way.
triage module -it can be handy, it depends what your aim is, if your mother ship is warping around SS's repairing ships that warp to it assigning fighters and so on then its doing its job until it sits some were too long gets probed and gets hic'ted its at that point their were the triarge modual being engaded to buy you time until your fleet can get there. can take out the hic'ter/'s and move on.
fighters and bombers die, its going to happen its a very expensive habit. the thing i could never get my head around was why don't the other drone upgrade moduales assist in fighter and now bomber viability. if your fighters benefited from nav coms and got orbit velocity and mwd velocity bonus from nav coms they are going to dodge more fire. upping their survivability, if they received bonuses from omni directionals they are going to have a better optimal range / tracking and miss less more direct hits means more damage.
the other thing that always annoyed me is omni directionals more range so why are drones still orbiting close, bombers and fighters if effected by omni's will also be able to negate smartbombs from the gained viability of being able to orbit further out or only be effected by large Smartbombs
also drone link augmenters. make them viable for SC, maybe it means SC drones repair when in bay - or add a new upgrade, maybe bombers have full grid access, can be assigned to fleet members, or it allows control of fighters within 1LY
lastly remote ecm burst, tweak it a bit. make it more viable if a SC isnt living 5 min whats the point of 5-10min ROF
more options not less. that or strip it make it like a freighter
|
Mioelnir
Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 05:08:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Mioelnir on 18/09/2009 05:14:21 Found something odd while looking at the HP boost currently on Sisi.
Hull HP got a x2 boost. The secondary HP got a x2.5 boost ("not tanking HP type"). The primary HP got a x4 boost ("tanking HP type").
Old Nyx ---> New Nyx Hull 300'000 ---> 600'000 (x2) Armor 262'500 ---> 1'050'000 (x4) Shield 225'00 ---> 562'500 (x2.5)
Old Wyvern ---> New Wyvern Hull 275'000 ---> 550'000 (x2) Armor 237'500 ---> 593'750 (x2.5) Shield 250'000 ---> 1'000'000 (x4)
So far, so good. Now the oddities:
Old Aeon ---> New Aeon Hull 287'500 ---> 575'000 (x2) Armor 275'000 ---> 1'102'000 (x4 + 2000) ?? Shield 212'500 ---> 531'250 (x2.5)
Is that a typo?
And now the king of duct tape engineering:
Old Hel ---> New Hel Hull 262'500 ---> 525'000 Armor 250'000 ---> 625'000 (x2.5) Shield 237'500 ---> 950'000 (x4)
The boost factors are correct and from them we can deduct that CCP wants the Hel to shield tank. Ok, reasonable choice at 5 lows and 7 meds. But why then is the Hel the only supercarrier with more armor than shield, if it should tank shield? This gets masked by difference in HP-boost factors on Sisi, but those work on top of wrong stats. I there for propose:
#1: Keeping the pre-boost armor plus over shields, but consequently switching layouts accordingly.
Old Hel ---> Maybe New Hel #1 Hull 262'500 ---> 525'000 (x2) Armor 250'000 ---> 1'000'000 (x4) Shield 237'500 ---> 593'750 (x2.5) 7 lows, 5 meds
#2: Keeping the Hel a shield tank, but switching the HP amounts before boosting them.
Old Hel ---> Maybe New Hel #2 Hull 262'500 ---> 525'000 (x2) Armor 237'500 ---> 593'750 (x2.5) Shield 250'000 ---> 1'000'000 (x4) 5 lows, 7 meds
Those 50k more base shields (case #2) translate into nearly 600k EHP (at 88% resists). And the Hel does not have any spare EHP lying around to give away. It is already regarded as the weakest mothership, and the new bonus likely won't change that perception once it is called supercarrier.
|
Necronus
Amarr Monks of War Banzai Boyz
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 05:45:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Necronus on 18/09/2009 05:47:25 Edited by: Necronus on 18/09/2009 05:46:13 My 5 cents:
1) DD - great innovation. But supercapitals should be somehow protected from it. Because in large fleet engagement Titans will focus fire a DD's on Supercarriers or another Titans , which in my opinion will be pretty OP. And this brings us back to the problem we currently have at TQ.
2) Hp buff of supercapitals - great thing. But now MS and Titans have effective hitpoints equal to Large control towers, which makes them easy and appealing to field in actual combat BUT makes them almost totally invulnurable to subcapital fleets due to logoffski factor. I think if you catch supercapital without any support it should die horribly not just logout and escape. Now its impossible without a blob or your own supercapital fleet.
|
|
wallenbergaren
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 08:06:00 -
[61]
I think supercaps should be given a 10-20% bonus to smartbomb range per level
|
Starxplorer
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 08:34:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Starxplorer on 18/09/2009 08:34:46
Originally by: Mara Intala
Originally by: Sea Gate except for the need of Fighters to V for fighter bombers. Just seems... to much.
Also, make the models for supercarriers bigger
Seems fine to me. Even though I have major doubts about only letting moms use bombers (Bad idea, major bad idea ) you wouldnÆt want every carrier pilot to have them w/o any extra work. Besides, flying a SC w/o fighters V anyways just seems.... wrong.
But this is just by bit of feed back. I donÆt fly moms and until they can dock and cost under 5 bil each. I WILL never fly one on the front line. Not when you could field and loose over 8 dreads at the current cost of a SC.
So far only Titans should have the name Super Cap. SC should be remade into normal caps, dock able and cheaper (3-5 bil)
This is what I have though ever since I heard about the Bombers.
Carriers as they are should be renamed Logistics Carrier. They can keep the Triage and be able to use normal fighters.
Moms should be named Fleet Assault Carriers; they are DPS based, cheaper and can use Bombers. (Much cheaper Not 12 more like 3-5)
Currently I can see NO reason why something like this should have been done. Titans can cause massive destruction across a battlefield; they are feared and renowned for what they can do and in turn. The pilot canÆt dock them.
But moms do what exactly? What destruction can they cause to make them cost so much (15 bil + just for looks?) they are not super logistics ships capable of repping massive amounts of hp, nor are they insane dps. In fact, IÆm sure 2 carriers can do more dps and more logistics than 1 mom for 1/10th the price.
Now, before you just shoot this idea down, which IÆm sure you will cause it seems your minds are made up on this. Just think, at the moment, most 0.0 alliances that I know of, only have a few moms, why is this? Because they are les useful that carriers, but for the most part they are too much trouble for most carrier pilots to use. I canÆt think of any reason that any carrier pilot would get a mom other than to look cool (because they do!)
But if they could dock, and had a reasonable price that could be replaced if lost (15b is enough to buy a character, why spend it on a ship that WILL get destroyed.) not only would the manufacturers of said ships get more business, but the future manufacturers of the bombers will have a reason to build them. (Moms will not be used on the front line, and so they will not have there bombers out much and in turn they will not get destroyed).
Just my 2 isk worth of feed back about an awesome ship and an awesome idea. I would like to see these ships more in 0.0, not less.
I agree with all your point, this nearf to the motherships will end almost with this kind of ships. IŠm paying one account only to be sit on space, I canŠt dock, and I was expecting more options to use in this ship and in the end. But in the end Options had been remove, with the price of one ship of this kind, we can buy several carriers and dreads and have fun and dock.
I was expecting one thing in this ship like the Jump Bridge, that will turn this ship with more use that will be, you will see this ship more time on the fields, because like now, you donŠt see too mutch. And if you want to go ahead with all this -options , let this ship dock.
And why the rename, this seens like today my name is Luis tomorow will be David, stay the name like he is.
|
The Kan
Gallente Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 09:16:00 -
[63]
Here's my prespective, from flying a nyx for more than 2 years, and been part of 3 major wars with it, and now sisi extensive testing:
- HP boost: was needed. Alto, 4x on the primary tank type sounds "awesome", it inst. Problem with it, is that a mom is alot more expensive than a dread or carrier, thus, when a fight rages on, the FC will try to win the fight, that fight, can be own by looting the field or by isk ratio. To kill 1 mom is to kill 15 carriers, so, supercaps are always primary. Specially now for the titans. This buff only means, they will take longer to kill, thus, every1 will be "on time" to get on the killmail. Me, as a veteran nyx pilot, i wont field my ship just because i have 4x the armor.
- Survivability: Currently, it's near zero, and on sisi aswell. The capital armor rep'er (and capital shield booster) are too weak to repair the massive amounts of shield/armor this ships currently have, and even worse with current sisi values. This ships really need a +100% per level bonus or +50% per level as a absolute minimum. 40mnts to self rep is nuts.
- Lack of triage. Triage is part of the "emergence" on this ships. You taking away alot of options (read: emergence) from players here. Triage can transform this ships in logistics monsters, motivating owners to field them and opening more emergence to the FC's.
- ECM thingi: useless. i tried to jamm HICs several times in the past on multiple occasions and i never broke theyr lock on me or others. it's frustrating. i had to use ecm drones with neut's to be able to escape or help others escape.
- FBombers: They look good, they are promising, but they really need to orbit @ 10km or more from target and the torps they use rly need a massive hp boost so they dont die horribly to smarty's.
- Docking: If you insist on that lame name, then you have to let this "supercarriers" dock.
All in all, i think the risk vs reward of fielding this ships in a 50+ hostile dread scenario as it is today, the risk is too high. supercaps will stay as they are. log'ed off.
My sugestions: > armor/shield repper bonus (+100% per level) (or, release a supercapital armor repair module for supercaps only) > FB and the missiles get +400% eHP > put the triage back > put the option of gang modules back
|
ropnes
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 09:28:00 -
[64]
Yeah I don't see the point in removing Triage from supercarriers With a tanking boost they would actually be able to perform the Triage role in a cap battle, unlike regular Carriers which melt way too quickly.
And again, there's no point in removing choice from the players. Such massive ships should have a lot of versitility IMO. I think the Triage module is needed now more than ever
|
Virtuozzo
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 09:40:00 -
[65]
Alright
If CCP are serious about creating a next arms race as part of the way of dealing with the rather sick problem of the X64 easy isk challenge, Motherships will become either a big part of this, or take no part in this at all.
The way they are right now, I just can't justify the investments in MS wings. It would be much more worthwhile to put it in Titans, since it is still the same easy afk production cycle, and ISK - pending other changes affecting the X64 hickup) is still easy.
- Motherships remain very feeble, especially with Titans on the field, but also in regards to any sort of capacitor warfare.
- Triage is not a solution, since being immobilised is equal to suicide.
- Another hitpoints increase might also not be the solution, since hitpoints simply do not scale in light of player numbers scaling, but perhaps an angle of Heat (on an XL scale) could be an option, or creating a Remote Repair type of scenario where Motherships can buddy up with other Motherships and the whole picture of repair is bigger then the sum of its parts.
It would encourage fielding more, in smart manners, while still giving room for solo soap operas.
- With Titans but now also Dreads facing a bit of a challenge (more painful now for Titans) in fuel logistics, a big boost could be a logistical bonus for Motherships.
Imagine a special purpose bay, which carries ice fuel types, but which has a skill based extended range bonus (say for starters 15K and upwards from there) enabling resupply on the field, but also opening up for countless rescue and **** happens scenarios. Not to mention provide an angle for effort and prolonging combat at the same time.
- Bombers are nice, but it has to be possible for players to tackle and deal with them (support role, as if Bombers are support type ships as well) so that support ships get a much more critical role in dealing with the new scenario of bomber waves (as opposed to simple smartbomb shields or jamming bombers).
|
Bonny Lee
Caldari The Guardian Agency Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 10:14:00 -
[66]
Originally by: The Kan Here's my prespective, from flying a nyx for more than 2 years, and been part of 3 major wars with it, and now sisi extensive testing:
- HP boost: was needed. Alto, 4x on the primary tank type sounds "awesome", it inst. Problem with it, is that a mom is alot more expensive than a dread or carrier, thus, when a fight rages on, the FC will try to win the fight, that fight, can be own by looting the field or by isk ratio. To kill 1 mom is to kill 15 carriers, so, supercaps are always primary. Specially now for the titans.
To kill one BS is like killing a ****ing load of frigates or cruiser... this argument doesnt count because it isnt applied anywhere else in EvE.
|
Viper ShizzIe
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 10:29:00 -
[67]
Originally by: The Kan Here's my prespective, from flying a nyx for more than 2 years, and been part of 3 major wars with it, and now sisi extensive testing:
- HP boost: was needed. Alto, 4x on the primary tank type sounds "awesome", it inst. Problem with it, is that a mom is alot more expensive than a dread or carrier, thus, when a fight rages on, the FC will try to win the fight, that fight, can be own by looting the field or by isk ratio. To kill 1 mom is to kill 15 carriers, so, supercaps are always primary. Specially now for the titans. This buff only means, they will take longer to kill, thus, every1 will be "on time" to get on the killmail. Me, as a veteran nyx pilot, i wont field my ship just because i have 4x the armor.
- Survivability: Currently, it's near zero, and on sisi aswell. The capital armor rep'er (and capital shield booster) are too weak to repair the massive amounts of shield/armor this ships currently have, and even worse with current sisi values. This ships really need a +100% per level bonus or +50% per level as a absolute minimum. 40mnts to self rep is nuts.
- Lack of triage. Triage is part of the "emergence" on this ships. You taking away alot of options (read: emergence) from players here. Triage can transform this ships in logistics monsters, motivating owners to field them and opening more emergence to the FC's.
- ECM thingi: useless. i tried to jamm HICs several times in the past on multiple occasions and i never broke theyr lock on me or others. it's frustrating. i had to use ecm drones with neut's to be able to escape or help others escape.
- FBombers: They look good, they are promising, but they really need to orbit @ 10km or more from target and the torps they use rly need a massive hp boost so they dont die horribly to smarty's.
- Docking: If you insist on that lame name, then you have to let this "supercarriers" dock.
All in all, i think the risk vs reward of fielding this ships in a 50+ hostile dread scenario as it is today, the risk is too high. supercaps will stay as they are. log'ed off.
My sugestions: > armor/shield repper bonus (+100% per level) (or, release a supercapital armor repair module for supercaps only) > FB and the missiles get +400% eHP > put the triage back > put the option of gang modules back
I don't believe you've ever flown a mothership.
Mothership survivability on sisi is amazingly higher than it is now, with their EHP and the amount of damage they can put out they're one of the most worthwhile ships in game. More EHP means you survive a lot longer, which in turn means that instead of 90 hostile dreads instapoping your nyx, you last long enough for your fleet to get remote reps on you. This, coupled with a hefty DPS (~12k on an all L5 Nyx, 9k on others) against non-moving capitals basically means that a mothership gang with a few triage carriers can easily kill a dreadfleet that's 2-3x as large as the gang opposing it. This is assuming you fit them properly. Which brings me to two.
If you ever put a triage module on a mothership you really have no place in commenting on the balancing as you have no idea how to use one properly. Being immobile for ten minutes for a mothership is guaranteed death against any competent alliance, even post patch with the massive amount of EHP they have. Sorry, the game can't really be balanced for some gtc selling idiot camping the Rancer gate in his triage mothership repping his gatecamping friends. Furthermore, the ECM burst is one of the most worthwhile modules in the game. Motherships should never be able to dock.
What motherships require post-patch is teamwork. Motherships aren't designed as solo ships. Talking about how long it takes to repair your own armor has no real value as you'll always have people with remote repair modules with you on TQ. The only thing that really needs to be looked at with them is fighter-bomber HP (along with the HP of their missiles) and possibly jumprange.
|
The Kan
Gallente Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 10:40:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Viper ****zIe stuff
back paddle faster.
im not saying moms are solo ships, they should not be solo ships. they survive longer in sisi, yes, because rarely there's a HIC around.
and i never been in rancer, geez... brain dead you are.
|
Virtuozzo
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 10:52:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Virtuozzo on 18/09/2009 10:55:55 Edited by: Virtuozzo on 18/09/2009 10:52:56 zomg, posted in the wrong friggin thread >.<
Anyway, I do miss one thing on Motherships. If smaller entities have to start nibbling at space and the big boys, it might just make sense to give Motherships a number of tools which could make them a sort of counterweight to the big boys and their Titans.
Jump range extended would have an impact of hit & runs, but also on supplying teams doing deeper raids. But a limited jump portal would perhaps be interesting as well. Maybe just for covert use, but still.
≡v≡
Please resize sig to a file size no greater than 24000 bytes - Mitnal
|
Starxplorer
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 10:54:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Starxplorer on 18/09/2009 10:56:53
Originally by: Viper ****zIe
I don't believe you've ever flown a mothership.
Mothership survivability on sisi is amazingly higher than it is now, with their EHP and the amount of damage they can put out they're one of the most worthwhile ships in game. More EHP means you survive a lot longer, which in turn means that instead of 90 hostile dreads instapoping your nyx, you last long enough for your fleet to get remote reps on you. This, coupled with a hefty DPS (~12k on an all L5 Nyx, 9k on others) against non-moving capitals basically means that a mothership gang with a few triage carriers can easily kill a dreadfleet that's 2-3x as large as the gang opposing it. This is assuming you fit them properly. Which brings me to two.
If you ever put a triage module on a mothership you really have no place in commenting on the balancing as you have no idea how to use one properly. Being immobile for ten minutes for a mothership is guaranteed death against any competent alliance, even post patch with the massive amount of EHP they have. Sorry, the game can't really be balanced for some gtc selling idiot camping the Rancer gate in his triage mothership repping his gatecamping friends. Furthermore, the ECM burst is one of the most worthwhile modules in the game. Motherships should never be able to dock.
What motherships require post-patch is teamwork. Motherships aren't designed as solo ships. Talking about how long it takes to repair your own armor has no real value as you'll always have people with remote repair modules with you on TQ. The only thing that really needs to be looked at with them is fighter-bomber HP (along with the HP of their missiles) and possibly jumprange.
and you ??? had you ever fly one ??? Seens not, or maybe you didnŠt have work to have it, someone had offer to you. If you had work to have one, you will UNDERSTAND what is spending like 18bilions only in a ship, not speaking on the fitting, to see a ship like this loosing options.
One think is create a inter-medium ship carriers-super-carriers-motherships but decreasing the options is not good, of course all ships die in the game, no one can tell that I have one ship that is invencible. The triage in this kind of ship, itŠs a LAST option to save this ship. Even with triage on will be down, but will take more time.
The unique point point that I agree with you is they need more jump range.
|
|
Theron Gyrow
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 12:33:00 -
[71]
Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert
Originally by: Theron Gyrow FYI, if the stats I have are correct (expl rad 1000, expl vel 29, DRF 5) AND that player's skills don't affect those in any way, the fighter-bombers will do about: 17% (~1700 DPS) of their max damage to a 400-sigrad BS going 100 m/s 36% (~3600 DPS) of their max damage to above BS when it's single-webbed 3% (~300 DPS) of their max damage to 130-sig cruiser (Rupture) going 240 m/s 7% (~700 DPS) of their max damage to above cruiser when single-webbed 12.5% (~1250 DPS) of their max damage to above cruiser when double-webbed.
Discuss.
These stats are not a problem because you're not supposed to be using anti-cap weapons on sub cap ships...
I'm more worried that the damage output might be too good, not that it is too low. ;) -- Gradient forum |
Nyx Spire
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 12:57:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Bonny Lee
Originally by: The Kan Here's my prespective, from flying a nyx for more than 2 years, and been part of 3 major wars with it, and now sisi extensive testing:
- HP boost: was needed. Alto, 4x on the primary tank type sounds "awesome", it inst. Problem with it, is that a mom is alot more expensive than a dread or carrier, thus, when a fight rages on, the FC will try to win the fight, that fight, can be own by looting the field or by isk ratio. To kill 1 mom is to kill 15 carriers, so, supercaps are always primary. Specially now for the titans.
To kill one BS is like killing a ****ing load of frigates or cruiser... this argument doesnt count because it isnt applied anywhere else in EvE.
This rule damn well does apply in every part of EVE. I kill enemy ships to deny the enemy of isk and time to recoupe isk. If I kill a 150mill BS a cheap battle ship, I might add, but a battle ship all the same. Its as if I just killed 5-6 of that players 30 mill frigates. Further more if each frigate take 2 minutes to catch and kill cos its zipping around under my guns and drones are barely denting it. and yet I could kill the same players bs in a 3-4 minute fight. then the BS is a far greater isk lose to said player as in the time of enjoying combat. said player ether way you look at it now needs 2-3 days strait to recoup that lose of isk. were that player is now no more a threat or annoyance to me on the battle field.
if i melt his SC in a 3 minute fight with a hand full of dreads and friends or a titan. then i have denied him a hell of a lot of time were he needs to remake that isk. its a gamble your ship only pays its self off once it has denied the enemy that much more isk than it is worth. when it has denied the enemy that much more time that it takes you to accumulate that much isk and produce said ships in said allotted time. then a ship is worth it to fly. you can pay for the upkeep on said ship. it isnt running you a huge lose. you can comfortably field it in battle.
at its current state and current suggested state this doesnt look and feel like the case.
every kid that earns his first amount of pocket money can tell you this. is chewing gum more viable than a bouncy ball or is it more viable than a hand full of lollies. heck people you learn high risk, high gain marketing at the age of five. think about it.
what will you get more fun out of 15 dreads or one SC. that depends, is one SC most likely to kill more than 15 dreads constantly in its life. merit maybe not all at once, but if you choose your fights wisely it should be able to. currently it cant. whats suggested for SC's, well it doesn't appear it will be able too ether.
END rebuttal*
|
Del Girl
Shade. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 17:45:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Starxplorer Edited by: Starxplorer on 18/09/2009 10:56:53
Originally by: Viper ****zIe
stuff....
and you ??? had you ever fly one ???
Considering who you are speaking to i find this comment hilarious!
I need to retink my Titan fit, recently it assploded on Sisi far too easily. It was mid changing the fit when i somehow decided to warp into Capital FFA. Id say from landing to dying it was around 3 minutes, maybe less. I had a couple of Nano mods in the lows, no local rep but i had 2 Agility Rigs in the Lows from something i was arsing about.
Need to check the damage but seeing chunks of armor drop that quickly was scary. Im damn sure there is something bugged about it, it was holding, then 1/4 armor would go, and then it went totally at around 20% armor to 0 hull.
There was a lot of Fighter Bombers around me for sure and stupid lag wouldnt let me fire the Smartie but siffice to say that wouldnt have helped me much!
Was fun though :)
|
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 18:14:00 -
[74]
I think another option for the survivability of "supercarriers" would be that they can fit triage w/o the negative effects of triage. they can still be remote repped, they can still move, but it will cost strontium to get the bonuses from the triage module as far as repping amount, repping duration, and remote repping. The only negative effect they would receive from triage module would be they cant jump while triaged. THIS would fix a lot of the problems with the tank/survivability. |
wallenbergaren
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 18:45:00 -
[75]
Then it's not a siege module anymore
Just make Supercapital Armor Repairers that require fuel to activate
|
waferzankko
Caldari The Maverick Navy Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 23:08:00 -
[76]
Make mother ships have a POS mount spot, so you could setup a small pos on your mother ship, drive by moon mining and you could eject from your ms and go rat, cuz your ms is docked in its own pos!
|
Manu Hermanus
FaDoyToy
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 04:02:00 -
[77]
2 super carriers + target painter = hurty battleship
sad face for the battleship for the Super carriers You're posting again!? Has it really been 5 mins?
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 15:00:00 -
[78]
Slave sets are a huge bonus for armor tanking supercaps, shieldtanks are left out here.
Im also not quite sure what a mothership is supposed to do with 3 ganglinks unless a change to links on moms would allow them to benefit capital remote reps and/or/only capital local reps. -
|
ropnes
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 16:21:00 -
[79]
I don't see where these supercarriers fit in Anyone even thinking about fielding one will probably have access to Titans too.
Titans cost about 3x more to build, and their DPS is 2x more than a supercarrier (10k guns, 10k death ray). Titans have A LOT more EHP and can't have their DPS destroyed.
It seems they're both supposed to be anti-cap ships but the Titan is just way way better at it
|
crack'me'up
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 17:52:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Del Girl
Originally by: Starxplorer Edited by: Starxplorer on 18/09/2009 10:56:53
Originally by: Viper ****zIe
stuff....
and you ??? had you ever fly one ???
Considering who you are speaking to i find this comment hilarious!
Liking some balls to PL are we?
"mr. viper, mr. viper, i defended you in there. that must count for something, right? right? riight??
|
|
Mc Leech
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 20:10:00 -
[81]
I strongly support the idea that supercarriers need to be able to dock. There is no logical reason not let them do that and it would make this ship much more popular without making it any more powerfull.
|
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 21:27:00 -
[82]
Only dumb people complain about the name change to motherships. Motherships were always supercarriers. If you don't like the name, then don't fly them.
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 21:41:00 -
[83]
I disagree with supercarriers being able to dock, it makes em just another ship and takes the novelty away of seeing, flying and killing them. -
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 22:13:00 -
[84]
I cannot even tell you how badly you guys at CCP missed the boat on this.
1) They should have stayed Motherships.
2) They should have been given the ability to anchor in systems without player declared Sov, and when anchored act like mini-stations, at which players could dock, and to which they could jump clone. Like stations, the hull itself should be more or less invulnerable when they are anchored, but you could still shoot the services.
3) The pilot should be able to board another ship and get out when his mothership is anchored.
4) They should have been given a special (enormous, will only fit in a Mom) jump drive that allowed them to jump into WH space systems class 4 and higher.
They could have truly been "Motherships" in the sense of being a home away from home for intepid explorers of deep, uncharted space. Instead they're just going to be MOAR DPS!!!!. Isn't that just refreshing and exciting . I hope that some day you consider ways of making this game continue to be fun and interesting other than by providing larger guns.
|
galphi
Gallente Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 02:54:00 -
[85]
I think the Hel bonus should be a speed bonus for it's fighters, that's more inline with what Minmatar are about. And since fighter-bombers are slower than regular fighters (that aren't all that quick anyway) this would be a useful bonus. It's like, not the dps bonus of the Gallente, but since the fighters will get to the target sooner, it's a little more dps effectively.
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 08:00:00 -
[86]
Edited by: Ryan Coolness on 20/09/2009 08:02:36 having tested out my Aeon on SiSi I can say the following:
- Fighter-Bombers really need a way to survive better vs smartbombs, ideally by launching their torps from well outside smarty range, e.g. 15-20km, alternatively by getting a massive hp boost (especially fast regenerating shields would help)
- Fighter-Bombers are less effective vs BS and below then regular fighters which is good and balanced ofc, provided the Supercarriers get enough fighter bay to field fighter-bpmbers and regular fighters (if they couldnt do that they would hardly deserve the "super"carrier tag imho), fighter bay size should be around 400k (e.g. 300k for 2 waves of fighter bombers plus 1 wave of fighters)
- supercarriers are underpowered vs Titans as they share basically the same role, titans have more hp and more dps that is instant dps even in most cases (bar the Leviathan) plus their dps cant be shot down yes titans are more expensive but they also got added utility in form of massive gang bonuses and jump bridge which justifies the extra cost easily
the new supercarrier is a pure warship compared to the logistic/command/warship hybrid that the titan is, it should be superior or at least on par on the pure warship role to the titan
|
Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 08:34:00 -
[87]
A lot of people seem concerned about fighter bombers and their torpedoes not hitting the intended target. Why not just make them plasma bombers (instant hits) to circumvent that issue? I can't think of a reason they need to be firing torpedoes anyway. We already have those on frigates.
___
Latest video: War Has Come (720p) |
Dri Kulsane
Amarr Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 09:01:00 -
[88]
There's no reason to allow a SC 'Super Carrier' to dock. Their hulls are just not made for that, since they still require construction at a POS.
HP buff seems pretty good in my opinion as it stands. Though the Titan ganks happening on SISI would make any SC Pilot just a little concerned about entering any system with a roaming Titan Gang ;) This ship is not intended to be a solo craft, so support in the form of carriers will always be around to assist it.
Fighter Bombers at the moment seem just a little too flimsy, easy to destroy and hard to replace. I was able to put 20 Fighter Bombers along with 9 standard Fighters, not too sure if this is final, but it would be better if SC's were at least able to hold one deployment of each at least. 20 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters, along with a small amount of assortment of other drones for versatility
I'm not too happy about the name type change, but if there are other modules coming down the line, like the Remote ECM, which are specialized towards these ships then it'll sit well enough.
|
Blazde
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 09:08:00 -
[89]
The problem of actually getting supercaps onto the battlefield would be solved best by reversing the sig radius boost so that dreads don't do full damage but at the same time it doesn't take hours for a sizable support fleet to take down a solo supercap that's playing hero. This all applies to titans too but I'll post it here cos I already whined in the titan thread and it addresses the problems lots of people are already expressing in this thread. (Actually this tank argument is very similar to my problem with the new superweapon, neither are currently balanceable to different battle scales).
Back when dreads were introduced they were balanced (beautifully imo) with a specific role against infrastructure. They had collosal dps but it came at a cost/risk of being 'prone' for 10 minutes and could only be used effectively against starbases, stations, and other dreadnaughts in seige. The later is self balancing since if you're killing other dreads in seige they're probably killing you. Dread vs dread is the most tactic-less form of combat in EVE, raw dps vs raw hp. No running, no EW, support fleets hardly matter until near the end. But it's highly satisfying and in isolation it's a great way for rich alliances to trade big blows, use vast amounts of resources and demonstrate their military-industrial might. But it isn't a model for combat in general. EVE has an intricately balanced combat engine for support ships and it needs to be extended to capital combat instead of being overshadowed by a crude more cost = more flat dps & hp approach. Aside from an early hp boost dreads have scaled magnificently over the past 4(!) years, from fleets of 3 in 2005, to fleets of 150 now, they've remained balanced wrt to starbase proliferation, and to nullsec economies. The only problems came when they started being able to do their seige damage to supercapitals, which was never their intended role and effectively negates the risk aspect of going into seige since you can afford to suicide dreads if it means ganking a supercap.
Supercapitals meanwhile haven't remained balanced. They've already had a hp boost and now we're looking at another. ~3 times hp boost is certainly not enough because motherships have been unviable in cap fights since dread fleets were at least half what they are now. Even if it was enough, we'll be back here in a year or two boosting hp further, because dread fleets will have grown to 200 or 250 or 300. It doesn't matter how many hp you give supercaps they'll still, at some point, be unviable on EVE's biggest battlefields because of the dps dreads can lay down. And surely the biggest battlefields are exactly where EVE's biggest ships should be? At the same time, as their hp increase they become all the more overpowered against any fleet that doesn't contain dreadnaughts.
I hear the argument that they can be supported by triage carriers, and triage carriers even seem on first glance like a great counter to dreadnaughts. A single triage carrier can offset the dps of around 3 dreads against a well resist tanked Nyx for example. So if you're facing 100 dreadnaughts and you want to deploy some supercaps you need 30 odd carriers to keep them reasonably safe. With your supercaps doing 3 or 4 times the dps of a dread, and your carriers doing 1/4 the dps of a dread at best (if they're not forced into triage and can actually get their fighters to the targets) you need to deploy 8 supers just to offset the dps you lost by putting all those pilots in carriers when they could have been in dreads. Meanwhile you greatly complicated the task of FCing your fleet, and put a whole lot more assets at risk. If you wanted to deploy less than 8 supercaps then you're out of luck. ... |
Blazde
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 09:13:00 -
[90]
... This is without mentioning that dreads cream triage carriers so you most likely want a large margin over 30, or else you want a good exit plan for your supercaps when 10 minutes into the battle you find your titan primaried and only 10 carriers left supporting. You'll need the support battle to go your way very fast or face dictors while you're trying to extract supercaps. Battles are fluid and even if you face 100 dreads to begin with, and few dictors, once you put your supercaps in the soup it's likely things will get hotter.
With these changes I'm sure in the begining we'll see plenty of supercap pilots flying (and dying) as some titan pilots have already stated they will. The same happened when motherships were first introduced (and again when remote ECCM was added) but when the novelty wears off corps won't be able to justify the funds to keep deploying them in ineffective situations. Alliances field cost-effective fleets for the most part. Pilot numbers are a very important resource but still we don't see fleets of faction BS instead of t1 sniper fleets or mauraders instead of rr BS fleets, or t3 cruisers instead of HACs or BC, or motherships instead of carriers, and it's not even always for lack of funds. It's also not worth handing your oponnent juicy killmails and boosting his morale. I know supercaps were originally meant to be "huge *****es" and crazy rich people will always buy them with GTC and lose them in comedic ways but we're way over them being luxury ships, particularly motherships. I don't want them to be the exclusive domain of the rich and crazy, I desperately want to see them in the major battles over the next 5 years. And I want to think "**** they have five titans and we have some too, this is gonna be brutal" not "hah idiots warped titans infront of our dread fleet?! wtf". And I wanna see them blowing up, which they won't do if they're not there in the first place. You need a solution that's future-proof and gives supercaps an integral balanced part in a capital warfare.
Enough with the lengthy spiel, some constructive suggestions:
Most important: Reduce Titan & Supercarrier sig radius, or otherwise nerf dread turret damage (for example a harsher seige penalty to tracking) plus a harsher seige penalty to explosion velocity or otherwised balance c.torps (have to confess I'm a bit behind atm on how missile stats scale, it's possible no change is needed but remember the smartbomb problem will vanish if titans are sporting 6 turrets). General aim should be that dreads in seige mode do no more than about 2x the dps against supercaps that they do out of seige, so long as the supercap pilot strafes appropriately at maximum velocity (which they can do fairly easily with web immunity and the partial/coming improved bump mechanics).
Moderately important: They still need a bit of a boost to hitpoints, so they take longer to die but ideally aren't so much harder to kill (I'll explain). What would work well is a pretty big hull hp boost (same theme as freighters), while leaving shield & armour pretty much where they are now on TQ (or maybe a small hike) and certainly not boosting local tank rates with any kind of rep bonus or special repper. This gives the supercap a big buffer against surprises/screw-ups, time to rally assistance and remote tank, but means if he's damaged significantly it's not something he can fix easily during a battle. The enemy fleet can attack a supercap, get it down to say 50% hull before being out-tanked by carriers assisting the supercap and then go to work on the carriers, satisfied that a lot of the damage done to the supercap will stick and they can return to it later if all goes well, instead of an all-or-nothing supercap takedown attempt. Since battles can be so fluid (reinforcements, lag, repositioning) a good counter to making ships take a long time to kill is not to demand that they're killed all in one go. |
|
Blazde
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 09:18:00 -
[91]
... The other more minor factor I notice is that the more you boost shield and armour hp the more the anomolies of shield tanking vs armour tanking get amplified and things get unbalanced. For example slave implants boosting armour, armour tanking being more cap effecient, active tanking becoming almost irrelevant anyway, more carriers remote repping armour. There's a danger of armour tanking supercaps being viable while shield tankers aren't. Meanwhile crystal implants already don't affect capital tanks because "they'd be too unbalanced". Hull hp are a more natural way to tame these issues (might need a stacking penalty on reinforced bulkheads though if it were to be taken too far).
Titan superweapon vs supercaps: Regardless of nerfing dread damage this new titan weapon is also potentially too big a disincentive especially to supercarriers. I've already said I hate it as a concept but if you must go with it an idea to solve the main problems is to reduce the damage it does to hull, either to zero or better, if combined with a big supercap hull boost, to say 5 or 10%. This way it'd still vape any sub-cap and put carriers/dreads well into hull but would give supercaps a significant defence against being ganked in the time it takes 10 titans to hotdrop them. Then increase the rof appropriately to compensate not being able to one-shot gank capitals.
Other random thoughts:
- As a concept I like fighter bombers. If you nerfed dread damage against supercaps fighter-bombers could have a particularly nice unique role as heavy dps killers of other supercaps, making it possible to still kill a titan reasonably fast but only if you risked a lot yourself. Regardless, combined with the remote ECM burst I think supercarriers will have a decent enough role offense wise as long as you can fix their survivability.
- Jump range of supercarriers with cal5 being on par with dreads at cal4 would certainly be a good idea. Having to provide extra cynos / towers / lengthen dread route is just one more reason to leave ms at home.
- Blow up supercarrier models a bit so at least the Nyx is harder to mistake for a thannie :)
- There's no reasons given for removing the clone vat ability. If it's just "nobody uses it anyway" then it should be left in, since it's exactly the kind of thing someone finds a sound use for eventually. Removing it is just shrinking the sandbox. Better still, fix cloning at ships so it's more useful. On the otherhand if removing it is a Need-for-speed fix or something then cool go ahead, nobody uses it anyway. Triage ability on ms really is useless (it's a liability tbh :) ) but would be nice also to know the thinking behind removing warfare link ability - is it really neccesary?
- Noone's suggested yet making Fighter Bomber orbits elliptical (if it's doable), with them firing their torps at the point(s) where they're closest to their target but flying outside smartbomb range at other times. Would spice things up and make it require some skill/timing to smartbomb them.
- It's traditional for Matari caps to have a joke bonus at first but I think it's been overlooked that we already had a good chuckle at the Hel and it's now due a serious bonus. 7.5% velocity to fighters/fb per level could work. Gives a bit of a dps boost since they get on-target quicker but can also escape quicker so it's still a defensive bonus too, but with a very Minmatar flavour. Failing that just give it an identical bonus to the Nyx, it's not like the Wyvern and Aeon don't already have basically matching bonuses. Or redo all the bonuses and give every supercarrier +5% dps to their racial fighter (bomber) type. I fear the Nyx as it is now might end up being the only supercarrier worth caring about again. Even if drones are Gallente's thing it's not really fair to tip an entire important shipclass so heavily in their favour.
- And err. Don't make them dockable. Seriously why is everyone suddenly suggesting that? _
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 09:19:00 -
[92]
In which case, surely its a good idea to make the SC's far more popular. If they're vulnerable on the battlefields of today, instead of giving them a HP buff again make them more numerous. People have moaned and groaned about this proposition, but I believe it would increase the popularity of SC's overnight...
a) Make Super Carriers dockable at stations. b) Reduce the production costs by roughly 5 billion ISK.
This would get around needing a further HP buff, which as previously mentioned would make SC's a bit of a ZOMGWTF pwnmobile against smaller sub-cap fleets. This would also make them more viable against a large fleet of Dread's, as they would gain a numerical advantage to an extent where the large DPS would mean that one might fall but the rest could finish the job.
I've not flown a dread, but personally I think at the present dread pilots can drop a huge blob of them in to a system without really having to worry about getting pwned on the other side. Perhaps the proliferation of Super Carriers and anti-cap platforms would make them think more carefully about their tactical options.
|
kyrieee
Brutal Deliverance Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 11:05:00 -
[93]
I think the hull tanking idea makes a lot of sense They would need a pretty insane HP boost though since you can't really get your resists very high down there
|
iudex
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 13:53:00 -
[94]
I didn't test them myself, but I noticed that mothership BPCs have considerably gone up in price on TQ. It was quite frustrating when researched Aeon BPCs had to be offered below 500 mil for example, since no one wanted to build them as motherhips were rather useless after losing their tackle immunity. But it seems that this has changed now and the increased demand of mothership BPCs is a good indication that people might want to build and fly them again. _____________________________________________________ My skills // Faction Standings: Serpentis +8.02 / Angel Cartel +9.24 / Gallente Federation -10.00 |
Hamatitio
Caldari Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 15:37:00 -
[95]
Perhaps a change to warfare links so they are only viable on grid, along with a better bonus for fitting them to motherships? (apart from [the few] other good changes already mentioned)
Hijack this |
Ridjeck Thome
The Older Gamers Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 16:56:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Ridjeck Thome on 20/09/2009 16:57:01 regarding the titan superweapon Vs supercarrier argument, I do wonder if the shield tanking Supercarriers will be at a disadvantage, in that they will take the entire initial hit against their primary tank, as opposed to having a buffer to absorb some of the initial alpha damage before reaching their primary tank (for armour tankers).
It might be that this is just one of those things, but i do think that with these massive 'insta-hit' weapons around, the shield tanks will be hit relatively harder with initial alpha than the Armour tanked versions.
on a related note, as mentioned a number of times previously, I would support any decision taken to allow them to dock OR increase the model sizes of these ships (data included in thread below),
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1179392
|
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 19:11:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Ridjeck Thome Edited by: Ridjeck Thome on 20/09/2009 16:57:01 regarding the titan superweapon Vs supercarrier argument, I do wonder if the shield tanking Supercarriers will be at a disadvantage, in that they will take the entire initial hit against their primary tank, as opposed to having a buffer to absorb some of the initial alpha damage before reaching their primary tank (for armour tankers).
It might be that this is just one of those things, but i do think that with these massive 'insta-hit' weapons around, the shield tanks will be hit relatively harder with initial alpha than the Armour tanked versions.
on a related note, as mentioned a number of times previously, I would support any decision taken to allow them to dock OR increase the model sizes of these ships (data included in thread below),
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1179392
All the more reason that Crystal sets should work on Capitals as the slave sets do |
Mc Leech
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 22:15:00 -
[98]
I find it totally hilarious that some people feel that ccp should do something to protect their precious little super carrier against 10 titans hot dropping it. This is EVE ONLINE this isnÆt wow, this isnÆt belt miners online. The whole point of this game is for ships to die not so your little supper carrier can live happily ever after in a belt. I sure as hell hope that nearly a trillion isk of ships will be able to hot drop your super carrier after the patch and wtfpwn it laugh at you and fraps it too so we all can watch it and laugh with ccp joining us on it.
|
IWill Ducttapeyou
School of PWN
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 22:28:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Mc Leech I find it totally hilarious that some people feel that ccp should do something to protect their precious little super carrier against 10 titans hot dropping it. This is EVE ONLINE this isnÆt wow, this isnÆt belt miners online. The whole point of this game is for ships to die not so your little supper carrier can live happily ever after in a belt. I sure as hell hope that nearly a trillion isk of ships will be able to hot drop your super carrier after the patch and wtfpwn it laugh at you and fraps it too so we all can watch it and laugh with ccp joining us on it.
Surely you mean four hundred billion, not nearly a trillion.
|
Blazde
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 23:29:00 -
[100]
Edited by: Blazde on 20/09/2009 23:33:44
Originally by: Mc Leech I find it totally hilarious that some people feel that ccp should do something to protect their precious little super carrier against 10 titans hot dropping it.
Point is not that it shouldn't die but that it's no fun for anyone if it's gone in the blink of an eye (or if he was never there in the first place cos he knew it was too easy to get ganked). Think about it, you're in a fleet and your FC says on TS:
"Cool ten of our titans just instagibbed a supercarrier"
Great, chances are it makes you smile a bit. The first time anyway, but it'll get old fast. Just like hearing PL titans just wiped out the Kenny fleet you were about to engage got old fast. The alternative is:
"Align ABC gate. Ten of our titans just dropped on a supercarrier, we need to get there fast to keep him tackled. Hostile fleet of 100 bs is a few jumps out and they're already gathering a dread fleet, if you have a carrier alt log em in and get undocked. Jump on land." _
|
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 00:05:00 -
[101]
Edited by: Misanth on 21/09/2009 00:12:42 Blazde, I know I'm writing too long posts at times, and yours were probably very well thought through and all.. but seriously dude, if you can't fit it all in one post, it should give you a hint that it's way too long.
I skimmed through your first, noticed it continued, then saw a 3rd post and I just gave up. It takes quite alot to make a forum***** like me to stop read a post you know, I think only you and Jade Constantine have succeeded to do that so far.
Please try to summarize it and I'll promise I'll read it. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
Terra Mikael
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 04:44:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Terra Mikael on 21/09/2009 04:44:30
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine I cannot even tell you how badly you guys at CCP missed the boat on this.
1) They should have stayed Motherships.
2) They should have been given the ability to anchor in systems without player declared Sov, and when anchored act like mini-stations, at which players could dock, and to which they could jump clone. Like stations, the hull itself should be more or less invulnerable when they are anchored, but you could still shoot the services.
3) The pilot should be able to board another ship and get out when his mothership is anchored.
4) They should have been given a special (enormous, will only fit in a Mom) jump drive that allowed them to jump into WH space systems class 4 and higher.
They could have truly been "Motherships" in the sense of being a home away from home for intepid explorers of deep, uncharted space. Instead they're just going to be MOAR DPS!!!!. Isn't that just refreshing and exciting . I hope that some day you consider ways of making this game continue to be fun and interesting other than by providing larger guns.
Either you're a complete troll or you're the biggest most flamboyant carebear I've ever seen.
Either way, 7/10
Originally by: Dass Gus I need some help,i'm frenchmen ok so ccp bannish my account without proov, doesn't respond to my petition since 3 weaks, WHAT I AM SUPPOSE TO DO ?
Call justice and take lawer ? |
Haramir Haleths
Caldari Nutella Bande
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 09:03:00 -
[103]
Nah, he want his super duper solo Wormhole Space Mobile
|
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 09:10:00 -
[104]
not sure if i got it right but atm fighters are shooting outside of 7.500km smartbomb and tbh i like it ... at least 1 thing that allow a ms to do decent dmg without losing already hard to replace drones ...
i say NO to docking MS ... xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Deva Blackfire
Viziam
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 11:06:00 -
[105]
Originally by: LoveKebab
i say NO to docking MS ...
you sooo dont want see me in one eh?
|
Saul Reaver
Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 11:07:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Hull Blaster RL carriers i.e. Nimitz class - Super Carrier carriers like HMS Ark Royal - Carrier
Enough of the name whining pleeeease.
I wish people would stop comparing equipment/ships in EVE to real life stuff. THIS IS EVE. NOT REAL LIFE. Personally i don't care what they are named. Aslong as they are fun to fly i'm good with it. Keep up the good work CCP.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 11:15:00 -
[107]
Just one thing from being on the receiving end of fighter bombers - the graphical effect from their torpedoes hitting the target is a massively obnoxious full-screen whiteout, please tone this down a little (a lot).
|
Jags
Minmatar M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 11:30:00 -
[108]
Played about a bit earlier a few things I think need changed
- supercarriers need a bonus to repair amount on capital reppers , whether thats 25/50/100% per level of skill I dunno but taking 40 mins+ to rep my armor isnt much fun.
- fighterbombers need a wee bit of loving , seems to be just slightly better fighters , need a wee bit more than that IMO.
- somehow my Hel works better as an armor tank if you bung the implants in , 2,2m armor and 1.3m shields = nice , is that an intended side effect of the changes ?
|
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 14:29:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: LoveKebab
i say NO to docking MS ...
you sooo dont want see me in one eh?
supercaps were designed as a remote station - i see no reason for giving them ability to dock after 2 years of when they were introduced... in last 2 years ppl were not whining about not being able to dock in his supercap but now when ccp said they are looking for ways to improve them suddenly every1 want to dock their MS, like wtf? xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 16:15:00 -
[110]
I think the docking thing is because people would rather not have to hug a POS forever and a day. A lot of people also don't like the pretty lame idea of being stuck in there all the time if you don't have an alt. To be honest... it makes sense to me. CCP want to increase the amount of SC's being fielded... with the current system I think a lot of people are put off training for such ships because they would be permanently stuck in it.
|
|
Ethan Hunte
Ninjas With Frikkin StarShips
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 16:36:00 -
[111]
perhaps CCP can say...
- allow them to dock
- increase jump range
what does not allowing motherships/super carriers to dock add to the game? And what does allowing them to dock subtract from the game.
What reason is there. Other than to squeeze a few more paid alt accounts out of people. With all the titans and motherships + the alts to move them around, equaling a couple hundred or more than 1000 thats a nice return.
On some current alliance budgets they could afford to replace like 10 - 15 motherships currently anyway a month.
So motherships isn't a problem for certain space holding alliances.
Ninja is recruiting. |
Commander Keyes
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 17:46:00 -
[112]
A lot of people are asking for a jump range increase and I agree Super-Carriers (moms) titansneed to be able to travel with other caps if they want to play. I would say that SC and Titans need Cal5 to travel with Dreads with Cal 4.. seems fair.
I have mixed feelings about allowing Super-Carriers to dock. I would like to see a bonus to Cap repping to all Super Carriers. Be it armor or shield ect.
|
El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 21:00:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Jags - somehow my Hel works better as an armor tank if you bung the implants in , 2,2m armor and 1.3m shields = nice , is that an intended side effect of the changes ?
Check page 2 for a few numbers on this. The TQ Hel has more armor than shields and received the x4 hitpoint buff on shields.
Sadly there seem to be so few Hel pilots around, that next to no one cares. -- [17:47] <Mephysto> its dead, jim |
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 21:26:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Ethan Hunte perhaps CCP can say...
- allow them to dock
- increase jump range
what does not allowing motherships/super carriers to dock add to the game? And what does allowing them to dock subtract from the game.
What reason is there. Other than to squeeze a few more paid alt accounts out of people. With all the titans and motherships + the alts to move them around, equaling a couple hundred or more than 1000 thats a nice return.
the very essence of name "SUPERCAPITAL" - they were meant to stay in space, why wont u leave ur supercapital at pos if u want to do anything else with the pilot char?
following ur logic ccp should also allow titans to dock tbh... they are also supercaps and " What reason is there. Other than to squeeze a few more paid alt accounts out of people." ? xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Mara Intala
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 01:20:00 -
[115]
Edited by: Mara Intala on 22/09/2009 01:19:59
Originally by: LoveKebab
Originally by: Ethan Hunte perhaps CCP can say...
- allow them to dock
- increase jump range
what does not allowing motherships/super carriers to dock add to the game? And what does allowing them to dock subtract from the game.
What reason is there. Other than to squeeze a few more paid alt accounts out of people. With all the titans and motherships + the alts to move them around, equaling a couple hundred or more than 1000 thats a nice return.
the very essence of name "SUPERCAPITAL" - they were meant to stay in space, why wont u leave ur supercapital at pos if u want to do anything else with the pilot char?
following ur logic ccp should also allow titans to dock tbh... they are also supercaps and " What reason is there. Other than to squeeze a few more paid alt accounts out of people." ?
Super Carriers should not be Super Caps, end of story. why should you not be able to Dock your super carrier? take a look at this.
Thanatos. 2,300 Meters long. Can Dock. Archon. 3,300 Meters long. Can dock. Providance 1,800 Meters Long. Can Dock. Nyx. >>3,250<< Meters Long. Cant Dock? WTF. Hel >>4,000<< Meters Long. Cant Dock? WTF. EREBUS >>>15 Kilometers<<< Long. Shouldent be able to dock.
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 01:27:00 -
[116]
How about seperating supercarriers from carriers with a more powerful bonus then simple dps and costing 13b to make while not able to dock -
It already is a sortof flagship with its commandmods, if the fleet bonuses of the titan get moved to motherships theyd had a significant role besides doing the dps of two dreads. Titans will be happy with their bridges, instaing capitals and doing twice the damage of a sieged dread with only their xl guns - theyd never fit a warfare mod inplace of a xl turret while supercarriers have 5 highslots to play with. -
|
mrpapageorgio
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 01:50:00 -
[117]
Not sure if being able to dock supercarriers is a good idea, but surely there should be a way to anchor/lock them inside a pos. I can lock my car in the parking lot, but not an incredibly advanced spaceship, makes perfect sense to me. Why should a character be locked into a ship that is going to get such limited use, even with the boost.
|
cyborg 009
Isk
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 11:52:00 -
[118]
Sorry if i'm a little off topic. Fighter bombers i saw a carrier use them? Is this just for SISI or will standard carriers be able to field them?
|
Kraken Kill
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 12:54:00 -
[119]
some epic ******s posting in this thread who will never own one of these ships.
Anyway. Down to Brass Tacks.
The Super Carrier should not be able to dock, its a Super Capital all the same and one of the burdens of such a ship is that you are tied into it.
The Hel Needs more Tweeking to make it make more sense. The TQ armor/shields need reversting and the x4 shield bonus applying to this value.
Slave Sets for Shields, either slaves need to go for caps or There needs to be a shield equivalent. Crystals not working on Capital shield boosters.
Repping 60k Shields every minute 10k repped with cap booster and a nice Amp...- repping 1.8million Shields on a Hel (let alone a Wyvern). 30mins to repair your shields. The Cap stability of a Hel isnt so great as it is, just barely running the Capital shield booster stable, so its just pretty crazy the HP that the Booster cannot repair.
Looking at the Aeon- that can easily have 2.4mil Armor. They rep about 20k every 24 seconds with dual reppers- thats going to take roughly 50minutes to repair the armor.
Fighterbombers. Its Being able to smartbomb these torps they fire is pretty crap. Every carrier with a clue has smartbombs.
the ECM burst- can it be changed so you cant instantly lock a target again? No point breaking a Hics lock for it to have locked you in half a second again.- The Cap use of this Mod is INSANE- so trying to run your shield booster at the same time is madness.
I do Support the Idea that Lvl 5 Cal on a Super Carrier = lvl 4 Cal on a Dread. Also Fighters 5 insted of 4 for the bombers also sounds good, less noobs in these ships.
What Would be a suggestion is that the Ship could dock externally to the station to access things like Items/Ships and the Market, corp hanger etc, but be targetable and pew pewable and not safe while it does so.
But really- the hel, if its only going to have 7 mids for tanking and other stuff and no shield resistance bonus then its gotta get the TQ armor and shield amounts swapped and then recieve the boost to these shields. Its just too paper at the moment to titans. 3 Titan blasts and you could be about in armor, or very low shields, and with the repper barely doing anything your pretty much all finished in the Hel.
Also Make The Wyvern Model Far larger. its stupid small atm. |
Ethan Hunte
Ninjas With Frikkin StarShips
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 13:59:00 -
[120]
alot of people dont want them in the first place because they cant dock.
your just a traditional eve player doing another traditional thing just for the sake of it.
your one of the people who loves endless pos warfare and can't see anything wrong with it because you have no life outside of eve. Ninja is recruiting. |
|
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:23:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Ethan Hunte alot of people dont want them in the first place because they cant dock.
your just a traditional eve player doing another traditional thing just for the sake of it.
your one of the people who loves endless pos warfare and can't see anything wrong with it because you have no life outside of eve.
ok, ability to dock for removing immunity to EW ? xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:37:00 -
[122]
I could live with that... but reduce the cost dramatically, otherwise NO ONE will fly a 15bil isk cap if it can be jammed by a 100k isk t1 frigate!
If you want to do that reduce the cost to like 6bil.
|
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:47:00 -
[123]
lol not rly m8 :) not 6bil, never ...
why do u want to give the ability to dock to a ship that cant be tackled by a conventional ships ?
yea, sure - leave the ecm burst and maybe add some other **** only for supercarriers but ffs if they will be able to dock REMOVE EW immunity - i dont mind the ecm immunity but the tackling one ... xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:58:00 -
[124]
Well maybe that was being a bit OTT, 9billion would be better :).
I still think they should be able to dock though, there is no reason for them not being able to dock. The Archon is only a normal carrier, and that has a longer axis than a Nyx! If they also go ahead with the removal of clone vat bays, then I don't think they can be considered a true "super cap".
Titans are super caps... gal titan has a 15km axis... a weeee bit bigger!
|
Arramis
Minmatar ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 15:40:00 -
[125]
With "supercarriers" are more problems that it seems. I`ll try to split them in 2 major. From the viewpoint of a an everyday player (with an actual life and eve as a evening/weekend hobby).
1. Economical part. 1.a. The ship is too expensive to be fielded in an normal fleet fight, where numbers as we know are at least over 100 caps for both sides, even for big alliances, the cost is the foundation for the rest of argumentations. Allways will be "better 10 dreads and carriers" then a supercarrier and i don`t need to explain why. 1.b. It takes ****loads of time for building/gathering materials for it.. that means 2 times failure (1 the cost in ISK and 2 the cost in TIME). .....and all of this for no actual advantages. On sisi...it takes at least 15 minutes for 1 supercarrier ..to take down 1 sieged dread, fleet fitted and with no bonuses from implants or boosters. Now tell me would you field 1,2, 10 MS when you know that you`re primaryed in a cap fleet fight?!I won`t.
2. Ethical part. Why should I pay one more account just to fly an expensive ship(it aplies to titans too)? I don`t remember reading in EULA that flying an expensive items would require another 14 E/mounth.
Solutions? 1. Solve the ethical part first to give an example of common sence. 2. Give bonuses to supercaps to justify their cost in time and money becouse there is allways anything about eve but ballance. (titan has a great logistical role but in an actual fight bonuses does not justify his price.
Excuse my english, is not my mother language.
------------------------------------------ Manelele`s expresia clara a prostiei si inculturii romanesti. |
Xing Fey
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 17:08:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Xing Fey on 22/09/2009 17:10:11
Originally by: Hull Blaster I could live with that... but reduce the cost dramatically, otherwise NO ONE will fly a 15bil isk cap if it can be jammed by a 100k isk t1 frigate!
If you want to do that reduce the cost to like 6bil.
Of course, it can launch 20 warrior IIs and shret the frig in no-time flat.
Though I wouldn't be entirely averse to giving it +2 warp core strength if it got docking and lost ewar immunity...
Also it would be nice to give titans + superCs a flat +% bonus to rep/shield boost amount. To cut down on the ludicrous rep times if nothing else.
|
King Dave
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 17:17:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Xing Fey Also it would be nice to give titans + superCs a flat +% bonus to rep/shield boost amount. To cut down on the ludicrous rep times if nothing else.
Maybe a boost to the carrier skill. So at level 5 it does the same amount of repair as what triage made it do beforehand, wihtout the added cap consumption.
|
Goodbye Horses
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 19:21:00 -
[128]
As per the new DD vs everyones precious supercaps, would a new module be out of the scope?
Something along the lines of a "High energy deflection array", reducing DD damage by so much % per module, maybe high slot, Capital sized.
|
xttz
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 23:53:00 -
[129]
Originally by: Kraken Kill The Super Carrier should not be able to dock, its a Super Capital all the same and one of the burdens of such a ship is that you are tied into it
True. However there is a workable compromise.
Introduce a 'Shipyard' outpost upgrade. This allows supercapitals to interact with an outpost in the same manner as a starbase by sitting in docking range. They can drag items to/from the corp hangar, refit their ship, perhaps even transfer corp clones from the station into their clone vat bay. This removes alot of the tedium from resupplying supercaps and introduces opportunities to gank the dumber ones.
Originally by: Kraken Kill ...its just pretty crazy the HP that the Booster cannot repair ... thats going to take roughly 50minutes to repair the armor.
I think you missed the point of supercaps somewhat. They're not intended to be solo vessels. You don't spend an hour repairing a mothership or titan yourself, you get allied carriers and other support ships to help. The HP is there as a buffer so that its less efficient to primary supercaps in large fights, not so they can take on whole fleets solo.
Originally by: Kraken Kill the ECM burst- can it be changed so you cant instantly lock a target again? No point breaking a Hics lock for it to have locked you in half a second again.- The Cap use of this Mod is INSANE- so trying to run your shield booster at the same time is madness
The ECM burst needs some polish. Personally I like the idea of scripts for some flexibility. Make it capable of permajamming a single target, or bursting an area with a lower strength. The related skill is somewhat broken as well - it currently affects activation time reducing it from 20 to 15 seconds. Ideally it should be reducing the cooldown. Five minutes is a little excessive for something that is currently only a minor annoyance to an enemy.
|
HoshinoRuri
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 00:05:00 -
[130]
The ECM burst does need modified, and I would say that super carriers be allowed to dock to outposts only but only if the corresponding outpost had an add on possibly called a capital shipyard, but this add on would also allow the alliance that controls it to build super caps there, that would solve one of the issues with the docking. Also the FB's need tweaked i killed them with my Sb's on my carrier against a buddies way way too fast for it to be a viable Capital ship weapon.
|
|
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 00:07:00 -
[131]
Abathur or other CCP:
Any thoughts so far on what you saw with supercarriers with testing or from feedback in this thread?
Thanks
|
Mara Intala
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 07:49:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Mara Intala on 23/09/2009 07:51:15 I like the idea of letting Super Caps anchor at a pos. More so than letting them dock, that way there is still a bit of danger involved with having one but you are not stuck in it like some trapped rat.
Maybe something like a pos module?
Super capital Anchoring Array 0 CPU 1,500,000 Power Grid 1 XXL Docking Clip (Titan) 2 XL Docking Clips (Super Carrier) 1,000,000,000.00 isk base price Anchoring IV to place it.
Acts like a Maintenance Array and links to the Corp hanger array so you can fuel and fit wile its anchored.
Your ship anchors inside the shield and can only be placed at a large pos. When you anchor your super cap you are able to eject and the ship will not move. you can also Lock the ship by entering a password. In order to board a locked ship you would need to enter the password.
If the pos in destroyed with a super cap anchored at it. the anchoring array will go to a backup generator that will last 36 hours in which time the ships remain anchored, but after that time runs out the array goes offline and the anchored ships are unanchored and unlocked, free to be taken by anyone.
Just an idea, but there really should be some way to let super caps be ejected from with out any joe blow being able to come along in a BS and bump it out of the shields.
Edit* If the Anchoring Array is destroyed, it will self destruct the anchored ships. making the attacking forces require to protect the ships if they wish to take them.
|
Ethan Hunte
Ninjas With Frikkin StarShips
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 17:02:00 -
[133]
maybe ccp should clarify how in their eyes they want super carriers to be used, instead of us endlessly quarelling over their implementation. Cause in the end it is all for nought if it isnt in line with how they see it.
Does CCP see super carriers as an alliance only weapon fielded by the richest alliances in number so large that they dont fall prey so easily? Or that the cost to focus on destroying them during a fleet fight bleeds more of your own losses?
People say it is too expensive to want to field in any worthwhile battle with 100 enemy caps on field. Given, but too expensive for whom? 99% of individual players but not alliances.
One some current alliance budgets they could afford to buy like 5 motherships a month being realistic and with sov poses in the hundreds becoming a thing of the past soon, they could devote even more to super cap production, so much so that they would run out of properly skilled pilots to fly super carriers.
If for every super carrier you lose, you could destroy 50 dreads it would be worth it for an alliance to field them because they can replace the super carrier at will. I am sure pandemic legion alone has something like 20 trillion in their account by now.
They could field a devastating fleet of remote repping GODLY super carrier frontlined godliness.
Imagine this if you will. 50-100 super carriers 600 billion to 1.2 trillion roughly. Backed by 100 carriers in triage mode? The triage sit behind repping the hell out of the motherships and the motherships are up front destroying the enemy dread fleet with fighter bombers.
Tell me who could counter that? And dont say its impossible, if I had that ask (which I know PL does) Id invest it now in 50 of my best mothership pilots. Get them equip them, and go to town. IT would be like a Roman Legion. And carriers? cheap replaceable loses for alliances nothing more than an insured battleship. And if you focus on carriers in triage mode? Your dread fleet is decimated in the mean time before you probably even burn through all those replacable carriers.
Wow I went off, but anyway, clearly you see super carriers have a use in numbers and are useful to those that can replace them. Alliances. So when we talk of survivability, we can't include the person who can barely afford one and therefore does not want to ever lose it and therefore will not put it on the front line. And there is no way it can be buffed enough without being way overpowered in any other instance (such as described above) which would allow the inidivudual supercarrier owner to be convinced to field it on the front line. Ninja is recruiting. |
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 17:11:00 -
[134]
Ethan are you saying that the days of Dread blobs are over
|
Gavin Darklighter
THE FINAL STAND The Final Stand.
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:22:00 -
[135]
The problem I have with the new supercarriers and titans is that they are now hands-down the strongest front-line ships you can have in a cap fight. This is in contrast to how things are right now on TQ where Titans are great for blowing up support fleets but must then hide in a POS shield while the real fighting takes place. Having more than half a dozen titans in fleet doesn't really add much more capability than just having a couple of them (unless you hit the magic number of ~40 and could doomsday cap fleets, but no one ever accomplished that feat)
Basiclly as it is now, a dread is more effective in a cap fight than any supercap is, but come Dominion CCP is going to make the supercaps front-line killing machines that are FAR more effective than any dread or carrier will be. I think a lot more people are going to invest the time and resources to fly them since they are now of real use when deployed in numbers.
Wait until we start seeing alliances fielding 20-30+ Aeons or Wyverns fit for massive resists and six remote reps each. Some might say fits like that aren't possible, but they are, and they don't require officer cap rechargers either. It does require an Avatar, CC8/CR8 implants, and maybe some mindflood, but thats not all that much honestly. A little EFTing shows around 30-40k tank per supercarrier depending on how much you pimp the hardeners, so we will assume that 20 Aeons could tank 600k dps without too much effort; thats 100+ dreads tanked by 20 supercarriers. And don't forget that even if the dread fleet can out dps the tank, the supercarriers still have massive hp, and will likely be able to warp out at will when their buffer starts to get worn down. Just holding a tackle on one of the supercarriers will require a herculean effort from a support fleet. Dreads on the other hand tackle themselves for 15 minutes every time they go into siege.
signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:31:00 -
[136]
Maybe capital ships would be better if none were capable of being built in stations and docked in stations (including freighters/jump freighters although they could be built and stored in high sec).
Build them all in space with an achorable anywhere construction platform and watch them being slowly constructed over time. Get rid of the Capital Shipyards to store them and just put a Capital/Supercapital docking platform to attach them to (literally) while no-one is piloting them. Stations may be a bit too big flavour wise to build and keep them anyway.
|
Ethan Hunte
Ninjas With Frikkin StarShips
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 12:49:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 23/09/2009 22:30:56 The problem I have with the new supercarriers and titans is that they are now hands-down the strongest front-line ships you can have in a cap fight. This is in contrast to how things are right now on TQ where Titans are great for blowing up support fleets but must then hide in a POS shield while the real fighting takes place. Having more than half a dozen titans in fleet doesn't really add much more capability than just having a couple of them (unless you hit the magic number of ~40 and could doomsday cap fleets, but no one ever accomplished that feat)
Basiclly as it is now, a dread is more effective in a cap fight than any supercap is, but come Dominion CCP is going to make the supercaps front-line killing machines that are FAR more effective than any dread or carrier will be. I think a lot more people are going to invest the time and resources to fly them since they are now of real use when deployed in numbers.
Wait until we start seeing alliances fielding 20-30+ Aeons or Wyverns fit for massive resists and six remote reps each. Some might say fits like that aren't possible, but they are, and they don't require officer cap rechargers either. It does require an Avatar, CC8/CR8 implants, and maybe some mindflood, but thats not all that much honestly. Six capital remote reps per ship is quite a bit of tank And don't forget that even if the dread fleet can out dps the tank, the supercarriers still have massive hp, and will likely be able to warp out at will when their buffer starts to get worn down. Just holding a tackle on one of the supercarriers will require a herculean effort from a support fleet. Dreads on the other hand tackle themselves for 15 minutes every time they go into siege.
and like I said no alliance is going to field those 20-30 moms without the support fleet. 50 carriers or more. WHo have the option to go into triage if there normal repping isnt enough.
no node in this game can hold the amount of ships required to break a new super carrier tank with 50 triage carriers repping it. Ninja is recruiting. |
LordInvisible
Gallente GK inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 14:31:00 -
[138]
CCPs changes are only forcing players to blob more..
Titans DD was introduced to be anti-blob tool..They started to blob with anti-blob tool.
Now they will blob even more with titans, insta poping carriers and dreads with 3-4 titans isnt that bad.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My story: www.subjectx.net/eng |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 16:13:00 -
[139]
Currently the commandships get a 3% role increase for their specific mods, strategic cruisers 5%
Motherships coul get a bonus of 5% or somethin around that, carriers maybe 3% to underline their bonuses and making it worthwwhile fitting these mods on carriers. -
|
John Zorg
Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 08:22:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists Currently the commandships get a 3% role increase for their specific mods, strategic cruisers 5%
Motherships coul get a bonus of 5% or somethin around that, carriers maybe 3% to underline their bonuses and making it worthwwhile fitting these mods on carriers.
Or... give supercarriers the 7.5% bonus to warfare links like the Titans have a 7.5% bonus to their respective races benifits.
That is one thing I always wanted to see was a bonus like that for the moms. We all agree that the clone vat bay was pretty useless, why couldn't it allow for rapid clone jumps so large fleets can be moved around. Ship maintenence bay would also need to be increased in size or a new Logistics Hanger that is linked to a clone?
Also, I liked the following ideas:
- Bonus to repp amount for Super caps - Immunity for super caps from the Titans super weapon - Increase the orbit range of FBs to avoid smart bombs :<
I have been wanting an Aeon for a looooong time, glad to see CCP is finally reworking the ships.
Just throwing it out there :D
|
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 12:55:00 -
[141]
Imho Supercarriers are underpowered vs Titans. Why? Lets compare their abilities.
1. offensive capabilities:
On the SC we get 10k dps (12.5k on Nyx), this dps has a long travel time and can be shot down (and even easily smartbombed currently but that is getting changed hopefully), to apply the dps the ship needs to be on grid and in the line of fire all the time the only unique combat ability, the ecm burst is widely regarded as useless
vs
10k dps on the Titan from the doomsday alone plus at least another 10k dps from turrets (mainly also without travel time with the exception of the Leviathan), out of this the doomsday dps can be applied in a "drive by" way with the titan being exposed only for a limited amount of time (30sec immobility plus whatver time it takes to get into warp from there), so using the titans dps is far safer
2. defensive capabilities:
Effective hitpoint wise the titan is a bit ahead with the exception of Wyvern and Aeon wich are almost on par, yet the supercarrier has to be exposed to fire all the time to do its job while the titan can do a good chunk of its job being only temporarily exposed or not exposed at all (see below)
3. logistical and command capabilities
The Titan has two absolutely unique abilities both of which it can use away from the frontline: the jump bridge and the special 37.5% command bonus (armor, shield, cap, sig), these abilities are not only unique but also very powerful (with the exception of the sig one, which is a bit meh in comparioson), in fact the jump bridge will become even more powerful then it is now with the proposed sov changes and the reduction of cyno jammed systems it will likely bring.
The supercarrier on the other hand shares its logistical abilities with carriers and various other ships, nothing unique here, just a bit bigger (in fact the ship hangar is too small even as it never received the 100% size boost the carriers did a while ago) and titans also have the very same abilities on top of everything else anyway with the exception of the remote repair bonus which, again, a single carrier can do just as good.
4. conclusion
With no logistical abilities to write home about the Supercarrier is clearly an all-out warship whereas the titan is some kind of warship/logistic/commandship mix, yet it is in all these areas superior to the supercarrier, even the pure combat role
Sure, the titan is more expensive then the supercarrier but it is so much more powerful in various roles that the price difference cant justify it any more imho.
What is needed is either a boost to the warship role of the Supercarrier or a boost of its logistical/supporting abilities, but that seems to be the opposite of what is being aimed at by CCP
Maybe fixing/improving the ecm burst would be a good start, although not nearly enough.
|
Enraged Mado
DEATHFUNK Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 14:25:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Kraken Kill
The Super Carrier should not be able to dock.
30mins to repair your shields.
50minutes to repair the armor.
Fighterbombers. Its Being able to smartbomb these torps they fire is pretty crap.
the ECM burst- can it be changed so you cant instantly lock a target again?
I do Support the Idea that Lvl 5 Cal on a Super Carrier = lvl 4 Cal on a Dread. Also Fighters 5 insted of 4 for the bombers also sounds good, less noobs in these ships.
Also Make The Model for ALL SUPER CARRIER'S Far larger. They are stupid small atm.
Cut some out and fixed some but hit the right ideas from my (Nyx) POV...
-Capital Rep's (armor and shield) need fixing for Super Caps. -Fighter-bomber's needs fixing against smartbombs. -Super Cap jump range needs increasing. -PLEASE increase the visual size of Super Carrier's. They SHOULD NOT be dockable.
-------
|
Sieur NewT
Gallente N'Th'Rack Squadron
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 15:24:00 -
[143]
Originally by: Neige Allow SC to dock !
They are not mommy's anymore so there is no reason they can't dock, the're not so big ! You must have a charater just to park it it's spimle crazy for Carrier tiers 2
And the reduction of cost is not enought just maybe 1B so you pay you SC 14B intead of 15B :/ immagine you wine 1B per week (and i'm very far of this ), you need 3 or 4 month to get it and not buying anything else and nned the fit too it's too big for normal alliance who don't win 300b per month with r64 Why loosing 14 B on one battle ? but with carrier you just lost 800M and buy many more for other battles. The price is very expensive for the capabilities of the ship
And others thing i'm wondering
the be called now Super Carrier but one thing is actually an heresie for me they jump less far than a simple carrier not the same or better but less far so the don't are so "super" than carriers
i agree at 150% with that. :) ---- Sauvez les castors, mangez la foret! |
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 15:24:00 -
[144]
Oh no, not my Eve realism!
MY IMMERSION
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Gavin Darklighter
THE FINAL STAND The Final Stand.
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 18:29:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Amy Wang Imho Supercarriers are underpowered vs Titans. Why? Lets compare their abilities.
1. offensive capabilities:
On the SC we get 10k dps (12.5k on Nyx), this dps has a long travel time and can be shot down (and even easily smartbombed currently but that is getting changed hopefully), to apply the dps the ship needs to be on grid and in the line of fire all the time the only unique combat ability, the ecm burst is widely regarded as useless
vs
10k dps on the Titan from the doomsday alone plus at least another 10k dps from turrets (mainly also without travel time with the exception of the Leviathan), out of this the doomsday dps can be applied in a "drive by" way with the titan being exposed only for a limited amount of time (30sec immobility plus whatver time it takes to get into warp from there), so using the titans dps is far safer
The doomsday immobilizes the titan for the full 5 minute cycle time. If you shoot it you are stuck until it is ready to shoot again. Fighters on the other hand can be assigned and operated remotely from off-grid while the supercarrier sits just outside a POS shield, so the exact opposite of what you are trying to say is true. I have no idea if fighter-bombers will have the same functionality, but I would be suprised to learn that they do not.
Originally by: Amy Wang
2. defensive capabilities:
Effective hitpoint wise the titan is a bit ahead with the exception of Wyvern and Aeon wich are almost on par, yet the supercarrier has to be exposed to fire all the time to do its job while the titan can do a good chunk of its job being only temporarily exposed or not exposed at all (see below)
The Aeon and Wyvern with their resist bonuses will have MORE eHP than a titan will. But that extra eHP over an Avatar/Leviathan is absolutely NOTHING compared to the remote spider-tanking capability that the super-carriers offer. With a not-too-expensive fit and an Avatar giving a cap bonus an Aeon will be able to fit massive resists and six perma-running remote armor repairers. The net effect of this is that a spider-tanking Aeon fleet will tank around 30k dps for every Aeon beyond the one getting shot. 20 Aeons will tank something like 600k dps. If you don't see the utility of that you are blind.
Originally by: Amy Wang
3. logistical and command capabilities
The Titan has two absolutely unique abilities both of which it can use away from the frontline: the jump bridge and the special 37.5% command bonus (armor, shield, cap, sig), these abilities are not only unique but also very powerful (with the exception of the sig one, which is a bit meh in comparioson), in fact the jump bridge will become even more powerful then it is now with the proposed sov changes and the reduction of cyno jammed systems it will likely bring.
4. conclusion
With no logistical abilities to write home about the Supercarrier is clearly an all-out warship whereas the titan is some kind of warship/logistic/commandship mix, yet it is in all these areas superior to the supercarrier, even the pure combat role
Sure, the titan is more expensive then the supercarrier but it is so much more powerful in various roles that the price difference cant justify it any more imho.
What is needed is either a boost to the warship role of the Supercarrier or a boost of its logistical/supporting abilities, but that seems to be the opposite of what is being aimed at by CCP
Maybe fixing/improving the ecm burst would be a good start, although not nearly enough.
The Titan also has build requirements that are serveral times that of a supercarrier, so one would expect some additional capability for that price. Personaly the way I see it, the super-carrier will be the super-cap ship-of-the-line choice while titans get mixed in for extra DPS and the cap/armor/shield bonuses.
signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan |
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 20:21:00 -
[146]
Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 25/09/2009 20:23:13 Gavin, fighter bombers will not be able to be assigned once it hits live.
Also, Aeons with 6 perma reps? Get real. An Aeon would have to use CCC rigs, 4 cap recharger IIs, and 5 cap power relays to be cap stable. That leaves them with crap for resistances and crap EHP. It also means they won't be using any smartbombs, projected ECCM, DCUs, cloaks, etc. Highly doubtful.
Super carriers will now be buffer tanked. That means 3x trimarks, and lots of hardeners. There will be enough cap for -maybe- one repper per supercarrier.
|
Mc Leech
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 21:20:00 -
[147]
There is a very big issue I dont see being addressed in this patch, if supercarriers become popular what happens to lag in capital battles? Even 20 super carriers = 400 drones thats more lag than any number of titans ever produced.
There needs to be a change that makes carriers and super carriers have bigger and more damaging drones but not more of them. Just give carriers a bonus +100% drone damage and HP and allow them to use only 5 at a time. Same with supper carriers only +300% damage and HP so its equal to 20 drones but only 5 of them will be in space.
|
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 22:29:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Mc Leech There is a very big issue I dont see being addressed in this patch, if supercarriers become popular what happens to lag in capital battles? Even 20 super carriers = 400 drones thats more lag than any number of titans ever produced.
There needs to be a change that makes carriers and super carriers have bigger and more damaging drones but not more of them. Just give carriers a bonus +100% drone damage and HP and allow them to use only 5 at a time. Same with supper carriers only +300% damage and HP so its equal to 20 drones but only 5 of them will be in space.
There's a large problem with this suggestion....you could delegate a carrier's or supercarrier's full dps to a single interceptor pilot...too overpowered |
Mc Leech
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 23:18:00 -
[149]
Chould do same to drones as they did to turrets and simply group them, say up to 5 drones will = 1 drone swarm. You will only see the swarm and not individual drones. The swarm will have the HP and DPS of all the drones in it. Than carriers will have 2 swarms and supercarrier 4. This way people will only see 20% of all the drones in space and that will reduce the lag by a lot. You will deligate them in swarms too 1 swarm per ship. Would work just like turret grouping.
Lots of drones in space create way too much lag and if there will be fleets of supercarriers... Its already really bad when you have fleets of carriers as it is.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 01:50:00 -
[150]
if 400 drones cause lag, then ccp network engineers need a new job.
and u can disable drone models now too. ------
Aaron your one hot man. I love you. Applebabe |
|
Gavin Darklighter
THE FINAL STAND The Final Stand.
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 03:40:00 -
[151]
Originally by: Soleil Fournier Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 25/09/2009 20:38:32
Gavin, fighter bombers will not be able to be assigned once it hits live.
Also, Aeons with 6 perma reps? Get real. An Aeon would have to use CCC rigs, 4 cap recharger IIs, and 5 cap power relays to be cap stable. That leaves them with crap for resistances and crap EHP compared to the buffer tank they're capable of. It also means they won't be using any smartbombs, projected ECCM, DCUs, cloaks, etc. Highly doubtful. Even with the avatar bonus they'll still have to sacrifice a lot of HP or resistances.
It is possible with only two two navy CPRs in the lows, T2 CCCs, and a med-rack full of T2 CRs. Don't forget about the CR8, the CC8, and mindflood. Of all the alternate highs-lot uses mentioned only smartbombs and DCUs are of any real use in a cap fleet engagement. Other ships can fit the bombs and I think most people will value the extra spider tank over the ability to deploy a couple more fighter-bombers. The spider-mom fleet will lose a sizable chunk of eHP compared to the trimarked mom fleet, but they will gain the ability to tank whole dread fleets.
signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan |
aldarrin
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 12:30:00 -
[152]
As I posted on the Titan feedback thread, I think the jump portal ability should migrate from the Titan hulls to the Supercarriers (Motherships). Carriers are capital class logistics boats that can dish out BS level dps. I think a boost to to its core logistics role would make sense. And then the Titans won't be seen as completely overpowered (if at all). -- Flame on. |
Ridjeck Thome
The Older Gamers Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 13:26:00 -
[153]
Originally by: aldarrin As I posted on the Titan feedback thread, I think the jump portal ability should migrate from the Titan hulls to the Supercarriers (Motherships). Carriers are capital class logistics boats that can dish out BS level dps. I think a boost to to its core logistics role would make sense. And then the Titans won't be seen as completely overpowered (if at all).
I have had the same thought as well and would support this as a more fitting assignment of the jump portal role.
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 14:49:00 -
[154]
Maybe Dust514 brings some options to give Supercarriers some extra utility.
some ideas:
- a third class of fighter specialized in ground attacks only usable by supercarriers, could either do more damage then other orbital bombardment measures (boring) or have an advantage in precision and produce less collateral damage to civilian/industrial installations (more interesting imho)
- if there gonna be dropships to transport equipment to the planets that launch from ship maintenance bays make the biggest dropship (that only can transport the heaviest equipment down to the surface) require more then 1m mŠ space so that only supercarriers and titans can carry them
|
Princess Jodi
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 18:26:00 -
[155]
Allowing SuperCarriers (stupid name) to dock would instantly double all the SC's in the game. All the alts holding Moms would either be sold or put into a SC of their own. Might even tripple the number of SC's, as there are many pilots would would own one but don't have second account alts ready.
It might be fun... Noob SC Pilots in expensive toys.
Oh, and if Fighter-bombers die easily/do no damage cuz of Smartboms on their intended targets, they kinda lack usefullness don't ya think?
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 21:03:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Princess Jodi
Oh, and if Fighter-bombers die easily/do no damage cuz of Smartboms on their intended targets, they kinda lack usefullness don't ya think?
yes, it makes the whole concept pointless and needs to be addressed, I actually expect that in the next sisi build to be fixed as not fixing it would be kinda silly, dont you think?
|
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 23:18:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Princess Jodi
Oh, and if Fighter-bombers die easily/do no damage cuz of Smartboms on their intended targets, they kinda lack usefullness don't ya think?
smartbombs aint killing torps from fighters lol
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
SolarKnight
Gallente ORIGIN SYSTEMS Shadows of Light
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 00:32:00 -
[158]
You give these ships the ability to dock, youll see them in the numbers dreads are in now, even faster then you would if you dont allow them to dock, simple as that.
Supercaps should be the pride of the fleet, the elite forces, flown by the FCs or higher ranking members of the faction they represent.
The Light in the Darkness
|
aldarrin
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 08:32:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Ridjeck Thome
Originally by: aldarrin As I posted on the Titan feedback thread, I think the jump portal ability should migrate from the Titan hulls to the Supercarriers (Motherships). Carriers are capital class logistics boats that can dish out BS level dps. I think a boost to to its core logistics role would make sense. And then the Titans won't be seen as completely overpowered (if at all).
I have had the same thought as well and would support this as a more fitting assignment of the jump portal role.
Any dissenting opinions on moving jump portals from Titans -> SCs? -- Flame on. |
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 12:07:00 -
[160]
Originally by: aldarrin
Originally by: Ridjeck Thome
Originally by: aldarrin As I posted on the Titan feedback thread, I think the jump portal ability should migrate from the Titan hulls to the Supercarriers (Motherships). Carriers are capital class logistics boats that can dish out BS level dps. I think a boost to to its core logistics role would make sense. And then the Titans won't be seen as completely overpowered (if at all).
I have had the same thought as well and would support this as a more fitting assignment of the jump portal role.
Any dissenting opinions on moving jump portals from Titans -> SCs?
yes, one ... fuel bay xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 12:17:00 -
[161]
Originally by: LoveKebab
fighters are orbiting just out of the 7500m smartbomb range and torpedo is hitting within 2 sec of when it's fired so u dont have much time to kill those 20 torps...
7.5km is just faction smartbomb range, there are bombs with higher ranges, a lot of them, orbiting outside 10.5km, that would make sense
granted we wont see those smartbombs on titans that much any more since they give up a lot of dps by not fitting turrets but on SCs they will still be common as they simply lack options to put in their highs
speaking of that, how about changing the drone control units stats so it has the same effect of an additional carrier level in regards to drone control? it would still give +1 fighter/drone on carriers but supercarriers would get +3 bombers/fighters/drones per DCU which would make them a lot less pointless to fit as lets face it nobody fits DCUs on motherships if it just gives 5% extra dps, 15% and we are talking
|
Ethan Hunte
Ninjas With Frikkin StarShips
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 17:25:00 -
[162]
things on sisi are constantly being changed, so because you see them orbiting at 7500 now doesnt mean thats how it was when the first changes rolled out. Ninja is recruiting. |
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 20:39:00 -
[163]
Edited by: LoveKebab on 29/09/2009 20:45:08
Originally by: Ryan Coolness
Originally by: LoveKebab
fighters are orbiting just out of the 7500m smartbomb range and torpedo is hitting within 2 sec of when it's fired so u dont have much time to kill those 20 torps...
7.5km is just faction smartbomb range, there are bombs with higher ranges, a lot of them, orbiting outside 10.5km, that would make sense
granted we wont see those smartbombs on titans that much any more since they give up a lot of dps by not fitting turrets but on SCs they will still be common as they simply lack options to put in their highs
fighter bombers are not supose to be SCs bbq drones so u wont have to use any others... if u want to do dmg and not lose ur drones to smartbombs use SENTRY DRONES from 40km!
besides nothing prevent u from recalling ur bombers back and sending to attack once more over and over again :)
as for 7500m - how many carriers are using officer smartbombs ? close to NONE
bombers have just enough hp to survive couple blasts with no problem, and shield recharge is pretty decent too, if u are afraid of losing a fighter it's ur problem, i for one like the idea of how the bombers work atm, they shouldnt be flying outside of webrange for sure and i think the current orbit is perfect
if u would want them to orbit at 10.5+km ccp would have to slow them down a lot cuz that's like outside of webrange and it just cant be - but then again no drone/fighter has ever orbit outside of webrange so i rly doubt it gonna happen here :> xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 02:09:00 -
[164]
Carrier pilots don't need/deserve a free pass against fighter bombers.
Citadels were changed a long time ago because smart bombs would kill them. CCP agreed this was no good and gave them a beefy hit point increase to stop this from happening. The same needs to be done for the compact version.
The additional orbit range is necessary, at LEAST to 10.5km (the torps can actually fly much farther than this according to their stats). The fighter bombers would be 100% useless if carriers could simply turn on a smart bomb and nullify a supercarrier. Groups of carriers are already going to pose problems to the bombers because they'll simply group up and overlap smartbombs to make sure the bombers die.
I'd also like to hear CCP's thoughts on the current repping abilities of supercarriers. they need to be improved with a 50-100% bonus per level to repping. The massive hp increase isn't enough to make them survive. Spider tanking hasn't changed, so if the spider tank was what would keep a mom survive, we would see this on TQ, which we don't.
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:48:00 -
[165]
Originally by: LoveKebab fighter bombers are not supose to be SCs bbq drones so u wont have to use any others... if u want to do dmg and not lose ur drones to smartbombs use SENTRY DRONES from 40km! [/quote
Well,I can already do that now on tq cant I? why need the dps boost to moms/sc at all then? if the SC is not able to apply its new boosted dps realistically and has to resort to the tools it already got against its intended primary targets which are other caps and supercaps then something needs to be rebalanced.
I agree the SC should have to use other drones on different targets: fighters on BS/BC, heavies/meds/lights on smaller, sentries on pos but against capital ships the weapon of choice should be fighter-bombers, simple as that.
A titan does not lose any of its dps to smartbombs (not even the leviathan thanks to the hp buff on citadels), why should the SC?
|
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 10:39:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Ryan Coolness
A titan does not lose any of its dps to smartbombs (not even the leviathan thanks to the hp buff on citadels), why should the SC?
smartbombs are not killing the torps but fighter bombers, the idea of making them orbit outside of webrange is ******ed - no drone ever did that so why should bombers be any different ? u can go with "story about smartbombs" and apply it to every drones so ccp will make fighters orbit at 15km, heavy drones at 12 etc, etc. bombers still r orbitting farthest or all MOVING drones
titans are not a DRONE SHIPs, every drone ship is supposed to watch for its drones or lose dps it's simple as that - it's either learn to manage ur fighters/bombers or use dread
stop complaining, SCs already got a gr8 boost in HP and DPS xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Ardion
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 11:30:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Soleil Fournier Yeah lets start with the name.
Mothership -> Fleet Carrier (or Flagship) Carrier -> Escort Carrier
Will post on the numbers and experiences once its on sisi!
Agree |
Miner Bob
Quam Singulari Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 13:39:00 -
[168]
1st I will say that no supercap should ever dock - lets get that clear
The bombers work great - except for the lag/effect when the bombs hit
Instead of a raw hp boost I think a huge unstacked resistance boost would work much better - this would mean that remote reppers have a much larger effect as well as local reps
They also need a better jump range - at least as far as a dread with cal 4
All I can think of atm
|
Becq Starforged
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 01:00:00 -
[169]
Originally by: Mara Intala Edited by: Mara Intala on 23/09/2009 07:51:15 I like the idea of letting Super Caps anchor at a pos. More so than letting them dock, that way there is still a bit of danger involved with having one but you are not stuck in it like some trapped rat.
Maybe something like a pos module?
Super capital Anchoring Array 0 CPU 1,500,000 Power Grid 1 XXL Docking Clip (Titan) 2 XL Docking Clips (Super Carrier) 1,000,000,000.00 isk base price Anchoring IV to place it.
Acts like a Maintenance Array and links to the Corp hanger array so you can fuel and fit wile its anchored.
Your ship anchors inside the shield and can only be placed at a large pos. When you anchor your super cap you are able to eject and the ship will not move. you can also Lock the ship by entering a password. In order to board a locked ship you would need to enter the password.
If the pos in destroyed with a super cap anchored at it. the anchoring array will go to a backup generator that will last 36 hours in which time the ships remain anchored, but after that time runs out the array goes offline and the anchored ships are unanchored and unlocked, free to be taken by anyone.
Just an idea, but there really should be some way to let super caps be ejected from with out any joe blow being able to come along in a BS and bump it out of the shields.
Edit* If the Anchoring Array is destroyed, it will self destruct the anchored ships. making the attacking forces require to protect the ships if they wish to take them.
I like this idea a lot. I'd tweak the details a bit: keep the 'anchoring' and 'locking' features (which are key to the concept), however remove the 'self-destruct' and 'backup generator' features. If the POS is destroyed, the capitals remain attached to the Anchoring Array until it, too, is destroyed, at which point the anchored ships become unanchored and unlocked. This is somewhat analogous to ship maintenance arrays, with the ships contained inside 'dropping out' upon destruction.
In fact, make all of the existing ship maintenance arrays use these same mechanics (for subcapitals, as well). Ships built by assembly arrays anchor themselves at the appropriate maintenance array and take on a default password (programmed into the assembly array) until changed.
-- Becq Starforged
The Flame of Freedom Burns On! |
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 14:03:00 -
[170]
Edited by: Amy Wang on 01/10/2009 14:08:33 There is already something like that in game: the capital ship maintenance array
Only difference and prime reason that is not used as much is that the highest access restriction you can have for it is pos config roles which basically means anyone with that role and ofc all directors have access to the supercap.
Instead of adding a new module add another protection level with a password to that array and it will do just fine. Alternatives are ofc the holding alt (very common) as well as having only absolutely trusted people with pos and director roles (well, with 60+b asset at stake this might be stretching it for some tho) but that certainly is a loophole the other suggestion would also be subject to unless you adopt the "lockdown" function the original poster suggested which basically exactly counters this.
Another problem is that people with the pos config role can just offline the tower and pop the array, then steal the ship, but it is far easier to notice that going on the the ship just going missing suddenly.
|
|
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 01:20:00 -
[171]
Originally by: aldarrin As I posted on the Titan feedback thread, I think the jump portal ability should migrate from the Titan hulls to the Supercarriers (Motherships). Carriers are capital class logistics boats that can dish out BS level dps. I think a boost to to its core logistics role would make sense. And then the Titans won't be seen as completely overpowered (if at all).
This makes a lot of sense with the new role changes to both the Supercarrier and Titan....The titan is now a "cap killer" and Supercarrier is the logistics ship. I have to agree the Jump Portal Generator should be moved to Supercarriers instead of Titans or leave them on the Titans and make them available on Supercarriers.
|
Mendos TradeAlt
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 12:35:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Battle Tested
Originally by: aldarrin As I posted on the Titan feedback thread, I think the jump portal ability should migrate from the Titan hulls to the Supercarriers (Motherships). Carriers are capital class logistics boats that can dish out BS level dps. I think a boost to to its core logistics role would make sense. And then the Titans won't be seen as completely overpowered (if at all).
This makes a lot of sense with the new role changes to both the Supercarrier and Titan....The titan is now a "cap killer" and Supercarrier is the logistics ship. I have to agree the Jump Portal Generator should be moved to Supercarriers instead of Titans or leave them on the Titans and make them available on Supercarriers.
Supercarriers aren't going to be logistics ships at all, they're dread killers. They're going to have no logistics bonus, so to call them logistics ships means you're hanging onto the past.
Titans are also going to be cap killers, so I agree with removing the Jump Portal from them. I've seen CCP make mention to new Motherships in the future, which would fulfill a different role. I rather suspect that when this happens the Jump Portal will be moved to these, along with a redesigned clone vat bay and a godly sized ship maintenance bay, and probably bugger all offensive weaponry.
|
Isaac Starstriker
Amarr Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 22:56:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Amy Wang Edited by: Amy Wang on 01/10/2009 14:08:33 There is already something like that in game: the capital ship maintenance array
Only difference and prime reason that is not used as much is that the highest access restriction you can have for it is pos config roles which basically means anyone with that role and ofc all directors have access to the supercap.
Instead of adding a new module add another protection level with a password to that array and it will do just fine. Alternatives are ofc the holding alt (very common) as well as having only absolutely trusted people with pos and director roles (well, with 60+b asset at stake this might be stretching it for some tho) but that certainly is a loophole the other suggestion would also be subject to unless you adopt the "lockdown" function the original poster suggested which basically exactly counters this.
Another problem is that people with the pos config role can just offline the tower and pop the array, then steal the ship, but it is far easier to notice that going on the the ship just going missing suddenly.
Can't shield passwords block even people with the roles to access the POS?
--Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed
|
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 23:53:00 -
[174]
Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 07/10/2009 23:54:13 No, anyone with the role can remove the password without having to enter it.
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 10:31:00 -
[175]
i think supercarriers are in fact dread killers.
The next step is tech 2 capital ships filling niche roles.
ECM bonus to caldari, i think an overheat bonus to amarr is needed and better shield tanking 2-5% for minmatar
|
McEivalley
Fallen Angel's Blade.
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 14:47:00 -
[176]
And I say DON'T let super-carriers dock. Anyone in his right mind that has a carrier now will get rid of it and buy a super-carrier if you let them dock. In essence, you will eliminate carriers from the game, making them into level 5/complex runners for the super-rich and the pride and joy flagship of the ultra-poor (which will go quickly back to empire as it dies, or keep spinning it forever in the low sec station of their choice).
Super-carriers atm are just uber carriers (fighter bombers or not) and any thought abotu letting them dock will just make them that much more uber. At the very least do that - keep them in space - or just say "screw it" and drop carriers off the game completely.
Insert clever remark where? |
Twelve Jackals
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 16:50:00 -
[177]
Edited by: Twelve Jackals on 08/10/2009 16:54:39
Sel, I think I've said it on sisi already but titans shouldn't be able to fire their dd on other supercaps.
In addition to that, whats the status on the rep bonuses for supercaps? Repping up all that HP is a godawful job as it is now and as pointed out by someone else earlier on, spider tanks didn't change so they will still melt eventually.
Fighter bombers are nice and all but they really need immunity from smartbombs by either range or HP, personally giving them 50 - 100k EHP sounds good to me, would actually make them a sizeable target.
- Sok.
|
LoveKebab
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 23:20:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Twelve Jackals
Fighter bombers are nice and all but they really need immunity from smartbombs by either range or HP, personally giving them 50 - 100k EHP sounds good to me, would actually make them a sizeable target.
they work just fine as they are now, they could get some more ehp but that's not rly nesessary as they orbit outside of most of the smartbombs anyway, had them orbiting me at 10-12km today, that's more than avrage smartbombs @ ms (officer that is) :) xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 11:15:00 -
[179]
The explosion from the fighter bomber's missiles are waaaaaaaaay too large. You can't make out anything while they are going on. |
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 12:19:00 -
[180]
Having Supercarriers be able to dock is a really bad idea be it over a space improvment like suggested during the fanfest presentaiton or in general.
Everybody and their dog will suddenly get one either for their carrier piloting main or for their recently aquired new alt they bought from a present suprcap owner that doesnt need his alt any more now.
The ships will be even more inflationary then they are already, no thanks. I agree that SCs could use another buff in utility or combat terms to bring them more in line with titans cost/benefit wise but giving them the option to dock is not the right way to boost them imho.
But since CCP will likely lose subscriptions (not to emoragequitting, no, but to the closing of now superfluous supercapital accounts) if they do this I'd say they are too smart and wont do it ;)
|
|
Ethan Hunte
Ninjas With Frikkin StarShips
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 17:56:00 -
[181]
how many super cap accounts strict do you think there are?
maybe 1000. Drop in the bucket.
plus those characters can still be sold to other players. And whether paid for by someone else or the original owner, money got no color.
If you are in a super cap only then you can do nothing else in game if you have one account.
You cant even dock and sort out your hangar. The only thing you are likely to own is that ship. It's the most silly stupid concept ever. Ninja is recruiting. |
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 18:14:00 -
[182]
Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 09/10/2009 18:18:36 The notion that by allowing supercapitals to dock that somehow all of a sudden 10,000 of them will show up is far fetched at best.
It takes months to build the parts. They're expensive. CCP stated somewhere that the economics of dominion will not allow for the current level of production for them. Also post dominion they won't have the benefit of being produced in invulnerable sov 4 systems. And since we're going to see supercaps die in glorious explosions on live the numbers will be reduced naturally.
Supercaps will always be rare, regardless of the docking mechanic. Will more people want them? Sure, but just because more people want them, doesn't mean the supply is there.
Not being able to dock negatively impacts the pilot who sits in a pos for 6-18 months unable to do squat, waiting for a war and then a capital engagement within that war that they'd be able to join in. These are not unbalanced Gods of war like they were previously and don't justify the need to keep the pilot slaved to the ship.
|
Meeogi
Amarr Debitum Naturae THE KLINGONS
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 18:37:00 -
[183]
If you can put out a secure container.....a massive city in space like a supercarrier should at least have a locking mech. when you leave.
Why not make a module locking device?
The NEW SUPERCAP LOCKER 3000!!! would require a password to place your pod inside and steal it more or less.....as I believe this is the main problem.
I mean if a supercap has hundreds of thousands of people living on them ...you would think someone would lock the pod door.
I find it hard to believe that security devices went away with the Car alarm, thousands of years ago on earth. Wax on Wax off |
Skraeling Shortbus
Caldari Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 19:16:00 -
[184]
If they could be docked... Id get one in a heartbeat, till then meh ill pass having to have an alt to park it.
|
Avoida
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 19:43:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Meeogi If you can put out a secure container.....a massive city in space like a supercarrier should at least have a locking mech. when you leave.
Why not make a module locking device?
The NEW SUPERCAP LOCKER 3000!!! would require a password to place your pod inside and steal it more or less.....as I believe this is the main problem.
Pilot to NSL 3000: Open the pod bay doors please, NSL NSL 3000 to pilot: I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that..
|
Kamikazie
Amarr AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 22:09:00 -
[186]
I think a lot of people are missing the docking concept. Its meant only for those that hold sov and upgrade the station far enough, whose to say there isn't a limit such as there is now on the docked m3 of super caps. Look at the way the arrays work. Saying people will go back to low sec and dock for ever and spin their ships is not correct as you CAN NOT have sov in low sec.
Super carriers AKA Mother ships need to be made specifically into mother ships not beefed up carriers, unless of course CCP changed the name as there are true mother ships coming out in a future patch, in which case a super carrier should not be a super capital then, therefor allowed to dock. What we really need is some more information from CCP.
The problem is that all of you users have no idea what you want. Really, I develop software and I have NEVER met a user who could tell me they knew exactly what they want. What you think you want is for the most part is an advantage exclusive to you and no one else. Something like this...(I am generalizing and statistically I will incorporate some from one group into the other as you are outliers so when I pick you up don't cry saying I am wrong)
Current Super Capital Owners Cant dock and think that it should not change as if you couldn't dock for months why should they be allowed to now to benefit all the people looking to buy them since they announced the change.(this group probably has many accounts most paid for by GTC)
OR
Docking is a great thing as I want to get out so I can do other things (this group has 1 or 2 accounts more then likely paid for with cash)
If you look most people saying they don't want super caps to dock is because they are in major alliances or have a significant amount of cash to buy PLEX for all their accounts with ISK so they can have massive amounts of accounts with out spending real money. A Super Carrier is a pleasure toy like giant yachts for the rich IRL.
|
Mr Opinions
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 23:30:00 -
[187]
wrt docking supercarriers. There have been many threads suggesting that one be able to moor them outside stations. So that they would be visible in some way but, technically outside the station for immersion purposes, while still being invulnerable (behind the station shield etc). The moored ships could either be visible on approach to the station, or, the much easier version from a developers point of view, there could be an option on the station to "access moored ships" which would show a ship-maintenance-array-like list of ships moored there; you would be able to see all of them including owners in a window, but only access the ones you own.
Imprisoning characters in their supercaps because of a lack of in-game security is not a good way to reward all that training.
|
Meeogi
Amarr Debitum Naturae THE KLINGONS
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 00:25:00 -
[188]
Said it before ..I'll say it again....a simple pod lock like secure containers would solve the prob. Still behind a pos shield.
And I promise they will still get stolen all the time...people will give out the passwords to their most "trusted" friends. Wax on Wax off |
the teddybear
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 01:42:00 -
[189]
super carriers will not, should not, or ever be dockable. EVER if you signed your life away to one and regret it either sell it ir SD it. otherwise no one cares.
|
Stealthbug
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 07:29:00 -
[190]
OK soo why can 1 Nyx kill a titan alone? Even if the titan uses the doomsday on it? That's kinda ridiculous....
|
|
Twelve Jackals
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 08:51:00 -
[191]
Originally by: Stealthbug Edited by: Stealthbug on 10/10/2009 07:56:03 OK soo why can 1 Nyx kill a titan alone? Even if the titan uses the doomsday on it? That's kinda ridiculous....
I cant say i can agree with a super carrier, alone, killing a titan. Incase you are wondering, this was tested by a couple friends of mine on sisi.
Its rather easy.
Nyx can tank 6-7k dps or so
titan deals 5k dps thus nyx can permatank it
nyx deals 12k dps - no titan can permatank it
|
AL G0RE
Intergalactic Hunters of ManBearPig
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 09:54:00 -
[192]
There should be a boost to the drone bay size, you should be able to have a full set of bombers and traditional fighters in the bay. As well as having the assortment of other drones.
|
achoura
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 12:06:00 -
[193]
Any mechanic making the player a slave to the game removes the fun. This is the fundamental flaw in poses which is why they're being changed. What is the point of a player spending years training the skills for various ships, if getting into a more expensive one instantly means they wasted 3 years?
That is the problem. ***The EVE servers and their patches*** |
Saurish
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 16:01:00 -
[194]
Only problem i see with capitals, is correct warp animation. Atm is totaly broken.
|
something somethingdark
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 16:16:00 -
[195]
Edited by: something somethingdark on 10/10/2009 16:16:35 feedback tiem nao
1) FFA beacons are barely playable due to very low fps 2) Just the bombers from 2 moms... sorry supercarriers make your fps drop considerably 3) A T2 fitted supercarrier is not an acurate measure for ... anything 4) T2 fitted supercarriers cant tank at all 5) The dps output from bombers is imballanced (sig res etc everything) 6) Drone bays are way too small on supercarriers 7) Carriers are hardly worth being called capital ship if you put it next to a supercarrier
|
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 16:23:00 -
[196]
Originally by: LoveKebab
no drone ever did that so why should bombers be any different ?
No drone can warp after targets like fighters. Why are fighters different?
Because fighters and fighter-bombers are not drones.
|
Wardo5
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 18:30:00 -
[197]
Trying out caps and supercaps. Nice we have free ships but when you are testing things out on Consenting areas and have the ISO pull in his titan fleet and kill ya then message you and asks if its ok to blow you up AFTER your dead? 45 min working on a set up. Nice. Thanks. Thought there was Free for all areas for that? fleet shoots you? [ 2009.10.10 18:18:18 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > do you mind if my friendly titan fleet shoots you? [ 2009.10.10 18:18:25 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > <3 [ 2009.10.10 18:18:56 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > oh sorry dude [ 2009.10.10 18:19:02 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > theyre a bit impatient :( [ 2009.10.10 18:21:05 ] Wardo5 > noticed [ 2009.10.10 18:21:34 ] Wardo5 > thanks m8, another 45 min wasted [ 2009.10.10 18:21:39 ] Wardo5 > cheers
|
Kaya Divine
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 19:18:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Wardo5 Trying out caps and supercaps. Nice we have free ships but when you are testing things out on Consenting areas and have the ISO pull in his titan fleet and kill ya then message you and asks if its ok to blow you up AFTER your dead? 45 min working on a set up. Nice. Thanks. Thought there was Free for all areas for that? fleet shoots you? [ 2009.10.10 18:18:18 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > do you mind if my friendly titan fleet shoots you? [ 2009.10.10 18:18:25 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > <3 [ 2009.10.10 18:18:56 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > oh sorry dude [ 2009.10.10 18:19:02 ] ISD BH CounterBlow > theyre a bit impatient :( [ 2009.10.10 18:21:05 ] Wardo5 > noticed [ 2009.10.10 18:21:34 ] Wardo5 > thanks m8, another 45 min wasted [ 2009.10.10 18:21:39 ] Wardo5 > cheers
This days even my cat can become member of ISD.
Shoot your shot... |
Sig Sour
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 21:52:00 -
[199]
Ive noticed a couple of ISD's acting like fools in this level 5 escapade.
I love the super carriers though!
|
Adam Ridgway
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 21:57:00 -
[200]
Edited by: Adam Ridgway on 10/10/2009 21:58:13 So, finally, SISI became officially a playground instead of a test server. Terrible.
|
|
the teddybear
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 01:03:00 -
[201]
only thing that needs changing on the cap ships is a bigger dronebay or a deditcted fighter and a dedicated fighterbomber bay along with 25000m3 conventual dronebay. and possibly a lower recharge rate on the capacitor.
|
Sneaky Sneakerson
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 01:39:00 -
[202]
Perhaps has already been said by people but when I tested out the whole smartbomb vs fighter bomber issue I found the smartbombs don't stop much of the damage and barely hurt the fighter bombers themselves. So people worrying they'd essentially be useless have some hope.
Well, unless some caps are all bunched together smartbombing themselves+fighterbombers. That added affect might be a problem.
|
Major Hunt
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 07:08:00 -
[203]
Edited by: Major Hunt on 11/10/2009 07:08:24 Serious attention is required to the drone bay sizes
NYX is the only supercarrier to be able to carry 20 bombers and 20 fighters, and leaves no room for vanila drones
All other super carriers cannot have a full set of each. With the NYX bunus to drone damage, it now becomes a no brainer to fly a NYX above all other races. At bare minimum all supercarriers should be able to carry a full set of fighters and bombers, or none should.
Please address this CCP. I think its a critical balance issue. Since these are supercarriers, 4km long with massive fighter bays to forfil thier primary function, i doubt the designers would overlook such a critcal flaw in the design
|
Blueaise
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 12:05:00 -
[204]
Edited by: Blueaise on 11/10/2009 12:06:42 I think CCP's view is that a mom should either be focused on being a fighter carrier (defensive role) or bomber carrier (offensive role) or you should be forced to field a mix of 50/50 fighters/bombers + support drones.
As it stands FB's can kill a titan very quickly, and because (as stated on the titan thread) the titan has lol drone BW it has no defense other than SB's had they been fitted.
For balance if moms get FBs then titans should get defensive fighters, that can attack FB's within a certain range, then mom pilots would be forced to either commit a mixed force of both FBs and fighters to knock out the Defensive fighters, or mix the fleet with both defensive teams of fighters and offensive teams of FB's. if you look at RL airforce tactics you would not consider sending a fleet of bombers without a fighter escort as they are intentionally vunerable to fighters, so while Its a nice idea in principle that you should be allowed a full bay of FBs + fighters i think to stop it becoming a one size fits all pwn mobile CCP should sensibly force a MOM pilot to commit to a strategic decision about how they fit out their bay and for what purpose otherwise we just get spammed FBs then spammed Fighters from every mom.
As things stand the FB's do a silly amount of damage when swarmed so their needs to be some sort of trade off for that i.e the mom itself is more vunerable if it has no fighters of its own to fend off incoming bombers, if bombers are allowed to cause the sort of damage they do then they need to be as vunerable as RL bombers to other fighters and smartbombs (in the absense of anti-aircraft mods :) )
edit wrt to the nyx issue - i've not looked much at the other bonuses for racial moms, but it stands to reason that the nyx would have a better drone bay simply because its gallante and they are dedicated droneboat fielders, if CCP has given some racial bonus to other carriers then its fair that the gallente gets a boost to drone usage as thats what gallente is about
|
Litaney
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 12:37:00 -
[205]
Edited by: Litaney on 11/10/2009 12:46:31 Edited by: Litaney on 11/10/2009 12:44:23 Heres an idea that I have been toying with about this now called "Super-carrier" or "Mothership" idea. This is along the lines of a carrier having atm one of two purposes...triage or combat support(fighters/RR/nuets/SB). Why not have a module that turns the S-carrier into in effect a small mobile pos. Fleet warps in, in the carriers "bubble" and it becomes a fight to take the shields down before any of the protected support ships can be targeted. This would nearly guarantee the use of these ships for fleet support and protection. This additional shield would regenerate but the module itself would use fuel like a triage or Siege. Limitations could be (to prevent deserters) no warping into or out of the bubble, like a HIC bubble. Once the shield has been pounded down the support is vulnerable...and make it size dependent say 5-10k...so 1 carrier with a tight fleet or the newly announced "Formations" could only fit 3 or 4 other cap ships in the bubble 100%...once passing in 100% a msg displays that your under protection and a warning if any part peeks out that you are now targetable. The effect would be similar in scope to a carrier with actual player fighters (inty/frig/cruisers) swarming around it, or a tight nit fleet of BS orbiting at 500 Everyone in the bubble being able to shoot out but till the bubble is down only the bubble is targetable. This is coming from the RL idea of what a "carrier" is defined as, either something to "care-for" or "carry" many things. But the idea to me of 1 ship being a mobile base for a mass of player ships instead of just a bigger npc drone boat is appealing. And even a fitting target for a titan super wpn...like 1 shot 95% of the shield is gone. I dont think any 1 ship should own the field all by its onezy, but instead be dependent on your mates for support.
Anyways...just an idea run with it or drown it...just thought it was worth sharing Lit
Oh and the 4 S-carriers all seem to fit in a station just perfectly, I think they should be allowed to dock as things are now, even if they have say an extended session change to undock or a docking timer, click dock, and a cute msg pops up saying "The docking tugs will be in place to tow you in, in [2:00] mins." or "[2:00] mins till docking maneuver complete"
|
Blueaise
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 12:52:00 -
[206]
Edited by: Blueaise on 11/10/2009 12:52:32 I think the idea of mobile POS is what i have been arguing is the logical place of titans as the biggest ship in game, instead of being a giant gunboat it should act as a forward base of operations which is generally the role of a flagship in any armada.
I dont agree supercaps should be dockable ever - you can dock a carrier which is good enough, supercaps and titans should remain as a very elite alliance tool - docking them would lead to the sort of carnage you are seeing this weekend on sisi where every carebear industrialist trader can cough up 16bn to sit in a smartbombing nyx off a lowsec gate killing everything.
Moms have to remain as a strategic fleet role, if you have the isk for a SC then its not difficult to either train an alt to sit in it or buy one off character bazaar if you dont want to lose your main.
The purpose of not being "dockable" is important in that it encourages more teamwork in a fleet - just as real supercarriers can't just dock up every 5 minutes for supplies but need regular supply boats to bring ammo and fuel to them so moms encourage fleet members to do logistics to keep their SC's in drones, fuel and cake, making them more of a logistic headache where 1 SC needs at least 1 other fleet member in a orca/indy to supply it gives a new strategic problem to their usage that is important in fleet combat, for sure its a headache for solo players but then the whole cyno thing dictates that was never their role in the first place.
besides i think being stuck out in a belt, off a moon or endlessly floating about in your titan/SC is specific part of that gameplay. it gives you a much better sense that your ship is something out of the ordinary.
|
Pantorus Necraliss
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 15:16:00 -
[207]
Edited by: Pantorus Necraliss on 11/10/2009 15:23:58 Edited by: Pantorus Necraliss on 11/10/2009 15:21:37 Personnally : 1 - I realy think that SC still mustn't have the ability to dock but they realy need to become bigger. For moment they are ridiculous, same side as carrier ?!?
2 - Bombers are doing too much damage, carrier and dread explose too fast
3 - I'm affraid that big alliance use large number of SC to destroy POS (by this : destroying docked systems defence ships) and easily crush other holders.
They will easily corrupt the primary use of SC, as they've done with Titans, to attack structures and not only carrier-size ship...
--> raise structure's heal, raise dread's damage (especially the Naglfar, skill need/damage done completely unbalanced; maybe give him a 7.5% bonus to missile damage), lower dread's tracking speed
|
Isaac Starstriker
Amarr Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 15:22:00 -
[208]
Originally by: Major Hunt Edited by: Major Hunt on 11/10/2009 07:08:24 Serious attention is required to the drone bay sizes
NYX is the only supercarrier to be able to carry 20 bombers and 20 fighters, and leaves no room for vanila drones
All other super carriers cannot have a full set of each. With the NYX bunus to drone damage, it now becomes a no brainer to fly a NYX above all other races. At bare minimum all supercarriers should be able to carry a full set of fighters and bombers, or none should.
Please address this CCP. I think its a critical balance issue. Since these are supercarriers, 4km long with massive fighter bays to forfil thier primary function, i doubt the designers would overlook such a critcal flaw in the design
Eh, I disagree. The Gallente one should have the best drone bay. (IE, the whole reason the race exists...) Besides, CCP never stated that Supercarriers were supposed to hold a whole flight of fighters and fighter bombers at the same time. The fact that your trying means nothing tbh. It might mean you'll have to think ahead before going into battle.
--Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed
|
Ahz
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 15:57:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Isaac Starstriker
Originally by: Major Hunt Edited by: Major Hunt on 11/10/2009 07:08:24 Serious attention is required to the drone bay sizes
NYX is the only supercarrier to be able to carry 20 bombers and 20 fighters, and leaves no room for vanila drones
All other super carriers cannot have a full set of each. With the NYX bunus to drone damage, it now becomes a no brainer to fly a NYX above all other races. At bare minimum all supercarriers should be able to carry a full set of fighters and bombers, or none should.
Please address this CCP. I think its a critical balance issue. Since these are supercarriers, 4km long with massive fighter bays to forfil thier primary function, i doubt the designers would overlook such a critcal flaw in the design
Eh, I disagree. The Gallente one should have the best drone bay. (IE, the whole reason the race exists...) Besides, CCP never stated that Supercarriers were supposed to hold a whole flight of fighters and fighter bombers at the same time. The fact that your trying means nothing tbh. It might mean you'll have to think ahead before going into battle.
--Isaac
Full set isn't 20, it's actually 25 (5x drone control units)
I was able to get 25 bombers into a Hel with room for only 7 regular fighters. There was a little space left over for about 60 ogres, hammerheads and hobgoblins each.
I don't know if the mothership (now supercarrier) drone bay has been expanded but I think this needs attention. They just gained a new drone class and they take up a lot of space.
|
Agent Unknown
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 17:09:00 -
[210]
I'd say that fighter bombers are a bit unbalanced...heck, using a single Avatar and Nyx against a large POS was able to take it down in the same time it takes for a fleet of dreads to do it. Firing off the doomsday of course, but...just a single mom and titan wouldn't be a normal sight on TQ; you'd have more.
Titans can also not tank fighter bombers from ONE Nyx; I had a dual repper setup on my Avatar and it was able to easily eat through its rep cycles. Of course, there would be support for this titan (triage carriers and such), but since bombers don't take long to kill carriers, it could become an issue.
Originally by: CCP Fallout
And yelling is bad. It makes the baby Jesus cry and when the baby Jesus cries I'm forced to lock threads |
|
Miner Bob
Quam Singulari Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 18:28:00 -
[211]
Edited by: Miner Bob on 11/10/2009 18:28:44 they shouldnt let moms/supercarriers dock
in a propper 0.0 system with the upgrades - it will make the supercarriers invul cyno jammer prevents dreads (and even if there wasnt 1 - it would take like 250 dreads to jump in and melt it) There is no real way to kill a station hugging mothership in the 1 min docking timer - aside from like 20 titans instapopping it
on a side note - they need to make it so the ddd doesnt work on other supercaps - to Oprevent this exact problem in a fight
edit - they also need to remove self destruct as with the new ehp a supercarrier can easily self destruct before it can be killed
|
Krystal Flores
Amarr Sinister Elite
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 18:34:00 -
[212]
Originally by: Blueaise
As it stands FB's can kill a titan very quickly, and because (as stated on the titan thread) the titan has lol drone BW it has no defense other than SB's had they been fitted.
Ive noticed this, in my Hel i was able to do a ton of damge to my corpmates avatar (80% armor) before it killed me. To be fair i was like 150km away and it couldnt hit my w/o dd. Still, the fighter Bombers seem to do too much dmg. also the "Super carrier should be much bigger than a carrier and defencive fighters soulds like a good idea.
|
Sea Gate
Caldari Sea Gate Corp
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 19:23:00 -
[213]
Not being able to hold 20 bombers + 20 fighters isnt cool.
And the models need to be bigger...
|
Adam Ridgway
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 20:01:00 -
[214]
DPS is fien, contrary to titan or dreads, their weapons are destructable (FB/Fighters/Drone). Make use of support fleets (which you should have) and it will be fine.
Wasn't able to test how much officer smartbombs would hurt them though, anyone checked? How much HP those FB have?
|
Chuck Skull
b.b.k Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 20:50:00 -
[215]
Edited by: Chuck Skull on 11/10/2009 20:54:01 Had a blast in FFA2 and 9 with an RR nyx fleet of doom and a handful of titans for a few hours last night. Lots of killmails later, here's what I noticed;
All 4 super carriers need a larger drone bay OR "Fighter bays". You cannot fit a flight of Fighters along with Bombers at the moment, you need to choose in advance, nor can you bring any real number of spares should you choose bombers. You should at least have room for a second flight if the first meets it maker. This seems uncharacteristic of what is supposed to be the ultimate class of carrier.
The supercap EHP buff is very good, it balances nicely with the titan weapon from what I could tell. Although the titan weapon makes armour tanked caps even more desirable as they can eat up a couple of them with their otherwise useless shields and have their main tank for the battle. Whereas shield tankers(even the rag and leviathan) usually lose their main tank in the first exchanges and will generally succumb soon after.
We really need a new class of reps(remote and local) for super capitals. Even when we had 6 nyx's each with 3 bonus'd perma running(<3 avatar cap recharge bonus) capital remote reps each it was taking an eternity just to rep back peoples buffer. The danger of that is of course, with so much active tank on the supercaps they would just become impossible to ill. Not sure how you're going to figure it out, but repping back 2-3mil armour with the current reps feels awfully familiar to repping poses.
On the flip side of that. Of course you could argue that a heavily damaged supercapital should take a long time to repair and if done right might make damaging them in combat still worthwhile even if you fail to destroy them, forcing your enemy to choose between repping back up or deploying while missing most of it's buffer into the next fight. Nowadays we often see cap battles raging for hours, spanning multiple smaller engagements this could definitely play into that.
Now for the contentious; "Can I dock it?" question. Titans no, never, It's a supercap, end of.
Supercarriers is more tricky to answer, yes they are now very powerful, but currently they are NOT supercaps. They just aren't, yes we call them that, and have all kinds of grand ideas about what a supercap should be and could do, but it's irrelevant as the current version of supercarriers just aren't supercapital sized. Go put a Nyx next to an Erebus and try to tell me with a straight face they're in the same weight class. They're not even close.
So two paths you can take from here; you either change them, so that their total length/size is at least half that of a titan, perhaps along with some tweaking to boni. Thereby giving them true supercap status. Or leave them as they are and let us dock them because in reality they are just a tier 2 carrier. They're the same size, do the same job, they simply cost vastly more and for that you get vastly increased effectiveness.
From what I can see, these change are all intended to take the supercarriers from their position of neglected middle child and into a frontline role. All the changes a huge step in the right direction, but those who can afford these huge amounts of money(and alts) involved will more likely favour the new buffed titans. Due to sheer firepower of the superweapon and the utility of the jump bridge. Leaving mom's back where they started, much vaunted and admired, but come fight day usually left sitting in a pos.
If you(CCP) really want these ships to become front line combat vessels they need to become true supercaps in size and ability, or they need to be dockable thereby effectively lowering the bar for entry and increasing use.
Personally, I say let them dock, and whatever takes the mothership moniker can become the undockable super powerful drone boat, on par with a titan in cost/effectiveness. Docking games are another issue entirely. ---
Also available in 'sober' |
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 23:37:00 -
[216]
Edited by: Oljud Zork on 11/10/2009 23:46:17 I am a dedicated Archon pilot, and I have seen my fare share of fights. I can fly the Aeon, I have tried it, but NO I donŠt fly one on the TQ.
A lot of the posting in this thread are complete bullocks by people that obvious donŠt dedicate there life to the game mechanics that control the use of Carriers and Mother Ships. I will in this post refer to the momŠs as "Super Carrier" or "SC".
Today are a SC an oversize carrier with "Awesome" written all over their hulls and they are true Super-Capitals even if they donŠt share the size of titans. They are built in space and should never ever be able to dock! By making them dock-able only increase the accessibility of these ships and we will see an increase of SCŠs.
During Fanfest did CCP present a brochure with some statistics, and according to that does it today exist on TQ roughly 400 SC. We all know that it exist about 233 Titans (see CAOD) and by letting more people access SC will it shift the balance of fielded Super-Capitals. It is not a curse not to be able to dock, it is a gift to forever float around in space, and if you really want to be an elitist and fly one. Then you have to stick with the drawback of not being able to dock.
If you can afford a SC then you are probably already using several accounts, and having one in the SC is not that bad. Another way are to by the pilot on the "Character Bazaar" and if you can by the SC, then by the character to pilot it...
About the tactics for fielding carriers and SC, there is nothing in EvE that works like "I win button" everything has to be balanced and it is that blend that make EvE to the ultimate game it is. We all have to adopt to the new mechanics when the mechanics are rebalanced. It is a constant evolution!
Stop complaining about that the Nyx have a much larger drone bay then the other SC, it is itŠs racial thing. But sure the Nyx damage bonus to the Fighter Bombers (FB) are an issue. By going with the current bonus will the Nyx probably be the main choice for dedicated SC pilots. It needs a rebalance...
I like the new FB, they do what they are intended to do, and it is possible to keep them alive on the battle field. I tried them a lot on SiSi and the only thing I would like to see are some little more resists, or buffer to their HP.
About the size of the drone bays, I like the separate Fighter Bomber/Fighter bay and drone bay coming in Dominion. Right now on SiSi can I fit 25 Fighter Bombers in an Aeon, including my regular "vanilla drones" and honestly you donŠt need 800 Warrior T2 drones, so this is forcing you to think twice before you stock up your regular drones. It will sort the pilots who know what he/she is doing from the noob with to much ISK to play with. Well everyone will always cry for more FB or Fighters, but you donŠt need a metric-****ton of those.
Sure some replacement FB are nice and the resupplying part of an SC are tough, I mean the SC are unable to dock, so someone else has to fetch new drones for you (or your industrial alt can do it...) Therefore do I suggest that all SC are allowed to fit in the FB/Fighter bay at least 25 (as current) but preferably 30 Fighter Bombers, and of course the Nyx should have the largest FB/Fighter bay of all SC.
I donŠt think that SC should be able to field a full set of FB and Fighters, this kind of ruin the carriers role in the fleet, if you are in a SC stick to FB and let the carriers do the fighters. I believe that the SC role will be in the capital fleet, as a weapon against other capitals. A complement and a tool used by the Fleet Commanders in capital engagements. Super Carriers are not an OMG gank mobile used to troll around in low-sec...
Jump range, it would help the Fleet Commander a lot if a SC pilot with max jump skills are able to jump the same range as a dread with the jump skills on level IV. But it is logical that larger ships (more mass) has a shorter jump range or use more isotopes to jump the same distance.
Regards
Zork
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 23:45:00 -
[217]
I ran out of letters...
To summarize my previous post, the SC are not a solo ship, it has a purpose in the fleet and by using it in the intended role do I think it has a lot to contribute with the changes in Dominion. I hope to see a few more SC fielded.
But donŠt forget the Super Carrier need the Battleships and support ships and the other capitals so be that awesome that is actually are.
Now flame me!!
Regards Zork
|
Reiisha
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 23:54:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Chuck Skull you either change them, so that their total length/size is at least half that of a titan
+1 on making supercarriers much much larger.
"If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all"
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 01:24:00 -
[219]
why not make it +2 on the supercarriers
|
AL G0RE
Intergalactic Hunters of ManBearPig
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 01:27:00 -
[220]
Given the recent trend of specialized bays, an ideal situation would be a 'fighter bay' which could hold 2 sets of fighters and a 'drone bay' of something like 300-400m3.
|
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 02:04:00 -
[221]
400m specced drone bay would be a good start
|
Ahz
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 02:05:00 -
[222]
Originally by: Reiisha
Originally by: Chuck Skull you either change them, so that their total length/size is at least half that of a titan
+1 on making supercarriers much much larger.
I'd vote for having a look at the scale of all the carrier models. The Niddy is the same size as a Typhoon.
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 02:16:00 -
[223]
so make the niddy bigger and or the typhoon smaller
|
Walker Bulldog
Minmatar VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 09:08:00 -
[224]
Just curious - how hard is it for a sniper HAC such as a Zealot/Muninn/Cerberus/Ishtar to pop a fighter-bomber? How long will it take 20 of them to completely defang a supercarrier?
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 09:15:00 -
[225]
from my testing they are pretty tough. Youll need a few to deal with their damage im assuming
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 10:28:00 -
[226]
are you seriously suggesting that 10k dps is too much? on big targets nonetheless
heck, two dreads almost do the same damage, just that that damage has no travel time (except phailnix) and cant be shot down the damage has to be this high to make bringing these ships to the frontlines worthwhile, otherwise we might just stick with the good old dread blobs which are more bang for the bug anyway
sure for a single ship the damage is impressive but also consider the cost and that there are lots of ways to completely eliminate that damage, if you cant figure out how then lol
plus the SC is meant as a pure combat ship, the titan on the other hand has some really powerful abilities to support fleets as well as considerable combat abilities on top, a SC should be superior in combat abilities to a titan as it has nothing else going for it
as for the hitting of pos with bombers, since when is that possible? when I tried last week (cant access game atm) I got an error message that the target is invalid since the bombers couldnt enter the forcefield, did that change?
if you are talking offline posses though, dont see much wrong with that
|
RazorPoint
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 10:34:00 -
[227]
CCP, don't forget to change the description of the Triage Module. It still says; 'Can only be fitted on Carriers and Motherships'.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 10:45:00 -
[228]
Originally by: AL G0RE Given the recent trend of specialized bays, an ideal situation would be a 'fighter bay' which could hold 2 sets of fighters and a 'drone bay' of something like 300-400m3.
Dear Al, a Dominix have a 375m3 Dronebay. Carriers and Super Carriers are supposed to be the mother of all drone ships, I really just hope that you just missed a zero in your post...
I currently have 4100m3 (total drone volume are 80 000m3) of Vanilla drones in my Archon. I am not going to teach you how the ultimate mix of carried drones look like.
NO you donŠt need two full sets of Fighters or Fighter Bombers, some spare are handy and it is reasonable if you can field 10 Figthers that you have 5 spare on-board. If you canŠt keep your drones alive then you are not supposed to fly a drone ship!
Carrier pilots think twice before they launch their fighters when massive support fleets are on the field, that's why we carry sentry drones...
Again Carriers and Super Carriers are not solo ships, call in your support or battleship fleet to deal with your enemies support fleet or bs fleet. Instead of sending massive waves of fighters, who will succumb to the fire from the enemies HACŠs.
Super Carriers role are not to have an insane amount of Fighters and Fighter Bombers on-bord. They only need the full set of FB + 5-10 spare depending on the size of the FB/Fighter bay. The new Fighter Bombers are harder to kill then regular Fighters, and it will be interesting to see how they perform on the battlefield on TQ.
Regards
Zork
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 10:57:00 -
[229]
yes they have their niche roles. I think there will be some adjustment but a specialised drone-fighter bay could be useful if ccp ever expand he range of cap ships to new types and classes
|
Twelve Jackals
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 13:27:00 -
[230]
Originally by: Oljud Zork
During Fanfest did CCP present a brochure with some statistics, and according to that does it today exist on TQ roughly 400 SC. We all know that it exist about 233 Titans (see CAOD)
I know quite sure that the titan figure in the CAOD thread is a 2-3 fold underestimation, but heck, only 400 motherships? Are you sure CCP actually aid that because it seems like its closer to a thousand.
|
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 14:10:00 -
[231]
Originally by: Twelve Jackals
Originally by: Oljud Zork
During Fanfest did CCP present a brochure with some statistics, and according to that does it today exist on TQ roughly 400 SC. We all know that it exist about 233 Titans (see CAOD)
I know quite sure that the titan figure in the CAOD thread is a 2-3 fold underestimation, but heck, only 400 motherships? Are you sure CCP actually aid that because it seems like its closer to a thousand.
I will check the brochure again and type down the exact number and the date it referred to. I DonŠt have the brochure with me right now.
Yes CCP had done the statistics and it was an official copy, we used it during the discussion regarding the economics in EvE.
Regards
Zork
|
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 14:56:00 -
[232]
Edited by: Battle Tested on 12/10/2009 14:59:51 Edited by: Battle Tested on 12/10/2009 14:58:53 I think as far as docking the SC in an NPC station the answer should be no, however I would have to say outposts should have the ability to add a upgrade that makes SC's dockable.
As far as the dps of fighterbombers..I personally think they are right on line with their role and class.
Drone bays is the best idea, Carriers should get 1500m3 drone bay + a fighter bay of 100k m3(2 flights of 10)......SC's should get a 3k m3 drone bay, 200k m3 fighter bay, and 200k m3 fighter bomber bay. |
Twelve Jackals
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 15:58:00 -
[233]
Originally by: Oljud Zork
The information are from Quarterly Economic Newsletter EvE Online 2nd quarter 2009. Take a look on page 9 Figure:7.
I have a really hard time believing those numbers, that would mean there are almost as much motherships as titans.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 18:55:00 -
[234]
Originally by: Twelve Jackals
Originally by: Oljud Zork
The information are from Quarterly Economic Newsletter EvE Online 2nd quarter 2009. Take a look on page 9 Figure:7.
I have a really hard time believing those numbers, that would mean there are almost as much motherships as titans.
Originally by: Twelve Jackals I know quite sure that the titan figure in the CAOD thread is a 2-3 fold underestimation, but heck, only 400 motherships? Are you sure CCP actually aid that because it seems like its closer to a thousand.
I believe that my link to the 2nd Quarter Economic Newsletter, presented by CCP are fairly accurate on the numbers of capitals in game. If you can show something objective that supports your opinion that the numbers of existing motherships (Super Carriers) are close to one thousand, feel free to post it. Until I am proven wrong will I continue to believe that the existing number of SC are 383, stashed away in space and waiting for Dominion to kick in!
Sure! I totally agree with you that the CAOD thread does not contain all the Titans in game, but I am not going to argue about how incomplete that list actually are...
Regards
Zork
|
Twelve Jackals
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 19:05:00 -
[235]
Just saying, its a gut feeling, I have no accurate count.
The notion that there are as much titans as motherships sounds ridiculous to me. In Tri Mk1, a year and a half ago, we had 30+ motherships and none titans.
|
Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 23:23:00 -
[236]
Modeling:
the aeon's, archon's, nyx' and thanatos' landing bays are looking strange. you cannot look "into" the ship as there is a texture which seals it off. its painted niceley but it would have a better effect if you could actualy see the inner bay and add some sort of force field at the entrance like the minmatar outpost or the leviathan titan has.
please reconsider the little detail here. it would make those carriers look more sophisticated.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 08:25:00 -
[237]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 13/10/2009 08:26:53 Models need to be larger. Phoenix is currently larger than most the MS. That's complete bull**** since it can dock.
Also we either need the ability to dock or carry both fighters and bombers, full 20 drone flights of each. Asking something that can't dock to redo your fit every engagement to be flexible is downright unrealistic. Unless each of us gets a personal CHA stocked with fighters there isnt jack we can do beyond hauling 5+ loads of fighters back and forth every time we want to fight.
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 09:35:00 -
[238]
so make the phoenix bigger, still yet to see pirate faction dread and carrier blueprints yet. They could have 20 % boost over normal.
|
xttz
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 10:33:00 -
[239]
Originally by: Twelve Jackals Just saying, its a gut feeling, I have no accurate count.
The notion that there are as much titans as motherships sounds ridiculous to me. In Tri Mk1, a year and a half ago, we had 30+ motherships and none titans.
That's a holdover from when motherships were "I win" ships. Motherships have been virtually useless since the introduction of HICs and changes to dictor bubbles. As such, production declines and the ones that are destroyed are not replaced. You only need to look at the sales forum to see the price crash for motherships dropping to only slightly above mineral cost. Before the nerf they would easily fetch 2 or even 3 times build cost.
In meantime, titan proliferation continued as not only are they useful solo for bonuses and jumpbriding, but are very effective when deployed in numbers. Titan production continued to rise and eventually overtook MS production.
|
Adam Ridgway
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 11:53:00 -
[240]
I hope base insurance is removed, otherwise proliferation could get out of hand as they will be made of win, and honestlly, 15 bill. is not that much anymore. And docking should be only be possible with outpost/infrastructrue hub upgrades, for the same reason; also it should be costlly and with limited parking slots per system/outpost/whatever. |
|
Twelve Jackals
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 12:51:00 -
[241]
Originally by: xttz
Originally by: Twelve Jackals Just saying, its a gut feeling, I have no accurate count.
The notion that there are as much titans as motherships sounds ridiculous to me. In Tri Mk1, a year and a half ago, we had 30+ motherships and none titans.
That's a holdover from when motherships were "I win" ships. Motherships have been virtually useless since the introduction of HICs and changes to dictor bubbles. As such, production declines and the ones that are destroyed are not replaced. You only need to look at the sales forum to see the price crash for motherships dropping to only slightly above mineral cost. Before the nerf they would easily fetch 2 or even 3 times build cost.
In meantime, titan proliferation continued as not only are they useful solo for bonuses and jumpbriding, but are very effective when deployed in numbers. Titan production continued to rise and eventually overtook MS production.
Hmmm have to say it sounds plausible at least. Anyway it clearl ysays something abotu how bad ms are currently
|
Sovarin
Caldari Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 14:22:00 -
[242]
Dunno if this has been posted already i cba reading 9 pages.
Super carriers need to be dockable and cheaper to make them a viable ship to train for for an average player. A large percentage of players can fly and own a carrier and or dread. But after that theres nothing to aim for as for 'big toys' are concerned, as most players could neither afford to buy a mom or titan, nor wanted one without loosing an alt. Just 1 last little thing the drone bays need to be expanded on the super carriers, to give them to capability to hold fighters AND bombers, not either or.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 16:05:00 -
[243]
I agree with the scaling up of capship sizes, especially carriers and supercarriers :) ----
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 16:05:00 -
[244]
Edited by: Oljud Zork on 13/10/2009 16:07:50
Originally by: Sovarin Dunno if this has been posted already i cba reading 9 pages.
Super carriers need to be dockable and cheaper to make them a viable ship to train for for an average player. A large percentage of players can fly and own a carrier and or dread. But after that theres nothing to aim for as for 'big toys' are concerned, as most players could neither afford to buy a mom or titan, nor wanted one without loosing an alt. Just 1 last little thing the drone bays need to be expanded on the super carriers, to give them to capability to hold fighters AND bombers, not either or.
I suggest you read the previous posts so you know the arguments that speak against your opinion.
* Super Carriers should NOT be dockable, they are supercapitals and if you want to fly one get used to its drawbacks. CCP are currently working on a way to dock SC in 0.0 space in outposts, using utterly expensive outpost upgrades. This information was released on Fanfest and CCP did not tell IF/OR when it would hit TQ or if it was just mumbo-jumbo, more information about this can certainly be found on this forum. I donŠt have a specific link right now.
* Super Carriers "Fighter Bomber/Fighter Bay" do need to be a bit larger, but SC should not be able to hold for example 30 Bombers and 20 fighters. I believe that the SCŠs future role are as a capital killers, and does not need a ton of fighters. By giving SC both Bombers and Fighters will it remove a part of the role as the regular Carriers hold. Regular Carriers will receive a tweaking to their triage and by giving SC both FB and Fighters will this lead to that no-one wants to fly carriers. The space will be filled with a metric****ton of Super Carriers... Then will the SC be nerfed back to the stone-age to make people fly regular carriers again and we are back to square one and the SC will stay inside a POS.
* I agree with a lot of people that the graphical size of SC should be increased, so a SC are 40-50% of the length of a titan.
I believe that all ships in EvE have a certain role in the fleet and to leave the battlefield victorious must the Fleet Commander use the ships as tools, and he has to use his set of tools in a correct way. By introducing unbalanced ships will only result in a disaster, with all the work with rebalancing them and that we will flame CCP for nerfing our ships. Therefore must the SC be balanced from the beginning now when CCP introduce the Fighter Bombers. Personally do I have a small problem with the damage bonus as the Nyx have...
Regards
Zork
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 19:14:00 -
[245]
Originally by: HeliosGal so make the phoenix bigger, still yet to see pirate faction dread and carrier blueprints yet. They could have 20 % boost over normal.
Not sure you read/comprehended my post at all when you attempted to respond to it.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 22:16:00 -
[246]
Originally by: Battle Tested Edited by: Battle Tested on 12/10/2009 14:59:51 Edited by: Battle Tested on 12/10/2009 14:58:53 I think as far as docking the SC in an NPC station the answer should be no, however I would have to say outposts should have the ability to add a upgrade that makes SC's dockable.
As far as the dps of fighterbombers..I personally think they are right on line with their role and class.
Drone bays is the best idea, Carriers should get 1500m3 drone bay + a fighter bay of 100k m3(2 flights of 10)......SC's should get a 3k m3 drone bay, 200k m3 fighter bay, and 200k m3 fighter bomber bay.
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 13/10/2009 08:26:53 Models need to be larger. Phoenix is currently larger than most the MS. That's complete bull**** since it can dock.
Also we either need the ability to dock or carry both fighters and bombers, full 20 drone flights of each. Asking something that can't dock to redo your fit every engagement to be flexible is downright unrealistic. Unless each of us gets a personal CHA stocked with fighters there isnt jack we can do beyond hauling 5+ loads of fighters back and forth every time we want to fight.
During Fanfest did I participate in the roundtable discussion about capitals. I asked if we would see three separate bays on Super Carriers; one for Fighters, one for Fighter Bombers and a regular drone bay. The answer was NO. Fighters and Fighter Bombers will share one and the same bay, and regular "vanilla" drones would be in a bay separated from the Fighters/Fighter Bombers Bay. Meaning you have to decide how many spare Fighter Bombers you want to have and still being able to launch regular Fighters.
After arguing the entire day over irc with mothership pilots that actually fly the ships, (remember my first post? I am a dedicated Archon pilot, nothing else) I must admit that it is hard to stock up the drones and refit depending on the task that the SC will do in the fleet. Yes 20 regular fighters are nice dps and the arguments that I presented in my previous post about stripping the carrier of one of its roles, the use of fighters against BS fleets, and that it would render people to switch to SC instead of carriers might be to bold said of me. The new SC will still come with a nice price of 11-12 Billions (without the fittings...) and you can by 11 Thannys for that price. The cost benefit calculation will force some people to stick to their carriers since they canŠt handle the lost isk if they are shoot down.
This conclusion lead to only one thing, all the Super Carrier need a larger Fighter/Fighter Bomber bay. And the only SC who can field a full set of FB and Fighters are the Nyx.
The Nyx has room for 22 Fighter Bombers (7500m3/drone * 22 = 165 000m3) and 20 Fighters (4000m3/drone * 20 = 80 000m3) The total drone bay are 250 000m3 = used space Fighters + Fighter Bombers 245 000m3 this gives 5000m3 to tinker around with vanilla drones. Compare this to the Aeon which have a drone bay of 200 000m3 and this gives 20 Fighter Bombers (7500/drone * 20 = 150 000m3) and 12 Fighters (4000m3/drone * 12 = 48 000m3) and left are only 2000m3 for vanilla drones.
I am not going to go emo about this, the issue are now pointed out to CCP to think of when they balance the Super Carriers against each other. The fact that we will have different FBŠs/Fighters bay separated from the regular drone bay will make it a lot easier to decide if to:
* Field a full set of Bombers and keep spare bombers and nearly no fighters, or the vice versa. * Or go for a mix with no spare FB and not being able to field a maximum of regular Fighters, or the vice versa.
You are still being able to bring all the vanilla drones you like and I hope that all the Super Carriers will receive a regular drone bay larger then 4000-5000m3...
Regards
Zork
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 23:08:00 -
[247]
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Originally by: Battle Tested Edited by: Battle Tested on 12/10/2009 14:59:51
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 13/10/2009 08:26:53 Models need to be larger. Phoenix is currently larger than most the MS. That's complete bull**** since it can dock.
Also we either need the ability to dock or carry both fighters and bombers, full 20 drone flights of each. Asking something that can't dock to redo your fit every engagement to be flexible is downright unrealistic. Unless each of us gets a personal CHA stocked with fighters there isnt jack we can do beyond hauling 5+ loads of fighters back and forth every time we want to fight.
During Fanfest did I participate in the roundtable discussion about capitals. I asked if we would see three separate bays on Super Carriers; one for Fighters, one for Fighter Bombers and a regular drone bay. The answer was NO. Fighters and Fighter Bombers will share one and the same bay, and regular "vanilla" drones would be in a bay separated from the Fighters/Fighter Bombers Bay. Meaning you have to decide how many spare Fighter Bombers you want to have and still being able to launch regular Fighters.
After arguing the entire day over irc with mothership pilots that actually fly the ships, (remember my first post? I am a dedicated Archon pilot, nothing else) I must admit that it is hard to stock up the drones and refit depending on the task that the SC will do in the fleet. Yes 20 regular fighters are nice dps and the arguments that I presented in my previous post about stripping the carrier of one of its roles, the use of fighters against BS fleets, and that it would render people to switch to SC instead of carriers might be to bold said of me. The new SC will still come with a nice price of 11-12 Billions (without the fittings...) and you can by 11 Thannys for that price. The cost benefit calculation will force some people to stick to their carriers since they canŠt handle the lost isk if they are shoot down.
This conclusion lead to only one thing, all the Super Carrier need a larger Fighter/Fighter Bomber bay. And the only SC who can field a full set of FB and Fighters are the Nyx.
The Nyx has room for 22 Fighter Bombers (7500m3/drone * 22 = 165 000m3) and 20 Fighters (4000m3/drone * 20 = 80 000m3) The total drone bay are 250 000m3 = used space Fighters + Fighter Bombers 245 000m3 this gives 5000m3 to tinker around with vanilla drones. Compare this to the Aeon which have a drone bay of 200 000m3 and this gives 20 Fighter Bombers (7500/drone * 20 = 150 000m3) and 12 Fighters (4000m3/drone * 12 = 48 000m3) and left are only 2000m3 for vanilla drones.
I am not going to go emo about this, the issue are now pointed out to CCP to think of when they balance the Super Carriers against each other. The fact that we will have different FBŠs/Fighters bay separated from the regular drone bay will make it a lot easier to decide if to:
* Field a full set of Bombers and keep spare bombers and nearly no fighters, or the vice versa. * Or go for a mix with no spare FB and not being able to field a maximum of regular Fighters, or the vice versa.
You are still being able to bring all the vanilla drones you like and I hope that all the Super Carriers will receive a regular drone bay larger then 4000-5000m3...
Regards
Zork
I completely agree with this post.
|
Vincent Jarjadian
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 00:56:00 -
[248]
Can someone who managed to test a 'Supercarrier' on SISI tell me if the fighter bombers can be assigned the same as normal fighters.
|
sdchew
Gallente Jazz Associates
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 02:34:00 -
[249]
Originally by: Vincent Jarjadian Can someone who managed to test a 'Supercarrier' on SISI tell me if the fighter bombers can be assigned the same as normal fighters.
At the moment, it appears you can delegate the Fighter Bombers on SIS. However, I think I saw a prior post from a Dev that it will not be so on TQ. This could have been changed since then.
A lot of things aren't set in stone on SIS. The dedicated Fighter/Fighter Bomber bays aren't on SIS at the moment by the way.
The day that EVE is truly bug-free, the EVE Gate will probably go super nova and kill us all. |
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 02:57:00 -
[250]
there will be a lot of tweaks to come yet. PIrate faction dreads are needed
|
|
mystiq pwnzorg
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 13:32:00 -
[251]
I have one problem
why did u took the gang link and triage?
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 20:05:00 -
[252]
Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 14/10/2009 20:05:34 Doh, the ganlink is gone for supercarriers? How come? -
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 00:02:00 -
[253]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 14/10/2009 20:05:34 Doh, the ganlink is gone for supercarriers? How come?
Thats why!
|
Isaac Starstriker
Amarr Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 02:41:00 -
[254]
Originally by: mystiq pwnzorg I have one problem
why did u took the gang link and triage?
The gang link is a bit huh, (Minus the fact that the Titan can execute them, so I guess its mildly pointless) but Triage was taken as the current Supercarrier tank is way too good for triage. You really want to try and break an Aeon tank after Triage mode?
Have fun.
--Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed
|
starliight
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 03:24:00 -
[255]
SC's will never be scaled back so the average player can own one. For all these people to keep sugesting such a rediculas idea is beyond me. The sc should always be a ship only the best of the best can fly (sp and skill wise) especialy after the changes that are going to be released in the next xpac, so for all you guys who wine about not having the skills to fly one STFU and troll another forum.
the slight price reduction does however bring the ship inline with expected demand when this goes live on tq
|
Major Hunt
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 06:17:00 -
[256]
Originally by: Isaac Starstriker
Originally by: Major Hunt Edited by: Major Hunt on 11/10/2009 07:08:24 Serious attention is required to the drone bay sizes
NYX is the only supercarrier to be able to carry 20 bombers and 20 fighters, and leaves no room for vanila drones
All other super carriers cannot have a full set of each. With the NYX bunus to drone damage, it now becomes a no brainer to fly a NYX above all other races. At bare minimum all supercarriers should be able to carry a full set of fighters and bombers, or none should.
Please address this CCP. I think its a critical balance issue. Since these are supercarriers, 4km long with massive fighter bays to forfil thier primary function, i doubt the designers would overlook such a critcal flaw in the design
Eh, I disagree. The Gallente one should have the best drone bay. (IE, the whole reason the race exists...) Besides, CCP never stated that Supercarriers were supposed to hold a whole flight of fighters and fighter bombers at the same time. The fact that your trying means nothing tbh. It might mean you'll have to think ahead before going into battle.
--Isaac
Thats great, but by saying that you also saying a ship that was specifically designed to carrier fighters/fighter bombers cannot actually fit a full flight. The logistics involved in trying to replace bombers or fighters are difficult enough without trying to organise last minute changes between the two cause you races designer was short sighted enough to fit a 2.5m m3 ship maintenance array and not throw in that extra 100k m3 for the fighters... I would swap 1m m3 of ship maintenance bay for more fighter/bomber capacity anyday. Try hauling 150k m3 of drones before each fight... Im not saying all drone bays should be equal, but as it stands, a NYX can carry 20 fighters and 20 Bombers, which all get a damage bonus. No other race can do that. A NYX should have the biggest drone bay, but all races supercarriers should be able to carry full flights of bombers and fighters as a minimum, or none should. (i think you missed that bit)
Currently all races carriers can carry enough Fighters for a full flight with replacements.
Supercarriers should not be able to dock. Its not an issue. 99% of people who have them have them on a dedicated alt. You cant always have your cake and eat it to.
Also introduce a new repping module class, "supercapital armour/shield reppers" or introduce a ship bonus, ie 25% rep amount per level for supercarriers, 100% bounus per level for titans. Current capital reppers are ridiculous in comparison to the hitpoints given. Hitpoints dont increase the "tank", only the "buffer"....
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 10:50:00 -
[257]
Edited by: Oljud Zork on 15/10/2009 10:53:39
Originally by: Major Hunt
Originally by: Isaac Starstriker
Originally by: Major Hunt Edited by: Major Hunt on 11/10/2009 07:08:24 Serious attention is required to the drone bay sizes
NYX is the only supercarrier to be able to carry 20 bombers and 20 fighters, and leaves no room for vanila drones
All other super carriers cannot have a full set of each. With the NYX bunus to drone damage, it now becomes a no brainer to fly a NYX above all other races. At bare minimum all supercarriers should be able to carry a full set of fighters and bombers, or none should.
Please address this CCP. I think its a critical balance issue. Since these are supercarriers, 4km long with massive fighter bays to forfil thier primary function, i doubt the designers would overlook such a critcal flaw in the design
Eh, I disagree. The Gallente one should have the best drone bay. (IE, the whole reason the race exists...) Besides, CCP never stated that Supercarriers were supposed to hold a whole flight of fighters and fighter bombers at the same time. The fact that your trying means nothing tbh. It might mean you'll have to think ahead before going into battle.
--Isaac
Thats great, but by saying that you also saying a ship that was specifically designed to carrier fighters/fighter bombers cannot actually fit a full flight. The logistics involved in trying to replace bombers or fighters are difficult enough without trying to organise last minute changes between the two cause you races designer was short sighted enough to fit a 2.5m m3 ship maintenance array and not throw in that extra 100k m3 for the fighters... I would swap 1m m3 of ship maintenance bay for more fighter/bomber capacity anyday. Try hauling 150k m3 of drones before each fight... Im not saying all drone bays should be equal, but as it stands, a NYX can carry 20 fighters and 20 Bombers, which all get a damage bonus. No other race can do that. A NYX should have the biggest drone bay, but all races supercarriers should be able to carry full flights of bombers and fighters as a minimum, or none should. (i think you missed that bit)
Currently all races carriers can carry enough Fighters for a full flight with replacements.
Supercarriers should not be able to dock. Its not an issue. 99% of people who have them have them on a dedicated alt. You cant always have your cake and eat it to.
Also introduce a new repping module class, "supercapital armour/shield reppers" or introduce a ship bonus, ie 25% rep amount per level for supercarriers, 100% bounus per level for titans. Current capital reppers are ridiculous in comparison to the hitpoints given. Hitpoints dont increase the "tank", only the "buffer"....
I totally agree with you about the dronebay vs ship maintenance bay size. I also think that the Nyx are a bit overpowered compared to the other SC with its ability to field 20 Fighters and 20 Fighter Bombers...
Yes it is a nightmare to haul 150k of Fighter Bombers, on SiSi is it fairly easy done. But consider the idea of hauling those drones deep out in 0.0 on TQ and its not that fun anymore... Also when the Mothership was introduced and designed was the Fighters the largest drones with a size of 4000m3, all Motherships can field 20 Fighters + spares. If the scientists invent a new and cool Fighter Bomber drone with the size of 7500m3 is it logical to me that all the navies take their Motherships in to shipyards and rebuild them to take advantage of this new technology. Before launching them and rename them to Super Carriers...
Yes a new bonus to repair modules are needed for all the Super Capitals. If I donŠt remember wrong from the Fanfest did CCP say that they would not introduce either T2 or Super Capital modules, maybe faction mods but that was not sure... So the only way around this as it looks to me are a bonus for repair modules to the Super Capitals.
Regards
Zork
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 14:23:00 -
[258]
Edited by: Oljud Zork on 15/10/2009 14:27:01 Edited by: Oljud Zork on 15/10/2009 14:25:59 Edited by: Oljud Zork on 15/10/2009 14:23:26
Originally by: Oljud Zork
When the Mothership was introduced and designed was the Fighters the largest drones with a size of 4000m3, all Motherships can field 20 Fighters + spares. If the scientists invent a new and cool Fighter Bomber drone with the size of 7500m3 is it logical to me that all the navy's take their Motherships in to shipyards and rebuild them to take advantage of this new technology. Before launching them and rename them to Super Carriers...
mow lets look on some figures:
Nyx drone bay = 250 000m3 = 50 Fighters. Hel drone bay = 225 000m3 = 45 Fighters. Wyvern drone bay = 200 000m3 = 40 Fighters. Aeon Drone bay = 200 000m3 = 40 Fighters.
Given the size of fighters (5000m3) do I think that all the Super Carriers are balanced and the Nyx should have the largest drone bay because Gallente favour drones right. But introducing the Fighter Bombers (7500m3) turn this upside down! Either do the pilots of these ships have to focus on one sort or a mix but not being able to max out the drones.
I suggest that all Super Carriers get a Fighter / Fighter Bomber bay of at least 250 000m3 that allow them to field both a full wing of Fighters and Fighter Bombers. After fiddling around with the numbers do I want to have a Fighter / Fighter Bomber bay for all the races containing 275 000m3 so all can have 22 Fighter Bombers and 22 Fighters, it is not to many spare Fighters and Fighter Bombers, but it allow the pilot to be prepared for a little of everything. If time is given can the pilot swap all his Fighters to Fighter Bomber and are able to fill the bay with 36 Fighter Bombers, that's a lot of spare Bombers if he gets de-fanged in a capital fight and need to launch more.
Since the Hel has 12.5% larger drone bay and the Nyx has 25% larger drone than the Wyvern and the Aeon. Do I want to keep these proportions. I suggest that the new Fighter / Fighter Bomber bay get the following sizes and the added space in the drone bay are removed from the Ship Maintenance Bay.
Nyx = Old bay 250k, suggested bay 343k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'427k m3. Hel = Old bay 225k, suggested bay 310k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'415k m3. Weyvern = Old bay 200k, suggested bay 275k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'425k m3. Aeon = Old bay 200k, suggested bay 275k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'425k m3.
With this new bay size can: Nyx hold 45 Fighter Bombers or 68 Fighters or a mix, 32 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Hel hold 41 Fighter Bombers or 62 Fighters or a mix, 28 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Weyvern hold 36 Fighter Bombers or 55 Fighters or a mix, 23 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Aeon hold 36 Fighter Bombers or 55 Fighters or a mix, 23 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters.
Because Fighter Bombers and Fighters will share the same drone bay in the upcoming expansion will we not see SC with 1000 warrior T2 since they simply will not fit in, if the pilot are going to have the amount of needed vanilla drones. Right now do I have 4-5k regular drones in my Archon and since the SC are a little bigger do I think that a figure for the regular drone bay should be around 6-10k m3 depending on the race for the Super Carriers.
Regards
Zork
|
AL G0RE
Intergalactic Hunters of ManBearPig
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 17:33:00 -
[259]
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Nyx = Old bay 250k, suggested bay 343k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'427k m3. Hel = Old bay 225k, suggested bay 310k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'415k m3. Weyvern = Old bay 200k, suggested bay 275k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'425k m3. Aeon = Old bay 200k, suggested bay 275k m3. Old Ship Maintenance Bay = 2'500k m3, suggested bay 2'425k m3.
With this new bay size can: Nyx hold 45 Fighter Bombers or 68 Fighters or a mix, 32 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Hel hold 41 Fighter Bombers or 62 Fighters or a mix, 28 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Weyvern hold 36 Fighter Bombers or 55 Fighters or a mix, 23 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Aeon hold 36 Fighter Bombers or 55 Fighters or a mix, 23 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters.
Because Fighter Bombers and Fighters will share the same drone bay in the upcoming expansion will we not see SC with 1000 warrior T2 since they simply will not fit in, if the pilot are going to have the amount of needed vanilla drones. Right now do I have 4-5k regular drones in my Archon and since the SC are a little bigger do I think that a figure for the regular drone bay should be around 6-10k m3 depending on the race for the Super Carriers.
Those numbers look great, not being able to fit a set of fighters and bombers is detrimental. I believe someone mentioned earlier the logistical nightmare of 'refitting' a drone bay in 0.0, especially if you need a quick change when the need arises. SC's should really be able to have at a bare minimum 20 fighters and 20 bombers, as well as the mix of 'vanilla' drones. Due to not docking, and they should never be allowed to do so, having this drone bay buff is necessary.
|
Chuck Skull
b.b.k Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 17:57:00 -
[260]
Originally by: Oljud Zork With this new bay size can: Nyx hold 45 Fighter Bombers or 68 Fighters or a mix, 32 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Hel hold 41 Fighter Bombers or 62 Fighters or a mix, 28 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Weyvern hold 36 Fighter Bombers or 55 Fighters or a mix, 23 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters. Aeon hold 36 Fighter Bombers or 55 Fighters or a mix, 23 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters.
I like these numbers too. Still big enough to offer flexibility and spares to the pilot without being so big that killing their fighters and bombers is pointless for a hostile fleet.
If they want to specialise in one type then they have a good number of spares meaning they can launch a second wave if the first wanders into smartbomb hell(will happen). Which is good, but they have to pay a price if they want the added versatility of fielding fighters and bombers. In only having a small number of spares in each type it means there's a danger that they could be pushed onto a less preferable drone type quite quickly in a bigger engagement. Makes for an interesting fitting choice. ---
Also available in 'sober' |
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 20:18:00 -
[261]
Just in case we haven't hammered this into the ground enough Seleene, lack of being able to launch 20 fighters and 20 bombers at the very least for every MS will really kill their popularity and use.
|
Haxfar Portlaind
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 21:01:00 -
[262]
Does anyone have pics of the other fighter-bombers?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 00:02:00 -
[263]
Originally by: Haxfar Portlaind Does anyone have pics of the other fighter-bombers?
The caldari one looks amazing but I didn't take pics sorry :(
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 08:13:00 -
[264]
figther bombers on NPC level 5 missions, anamolies and sleeper sites ? thoughts
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 09:21:00 -
[265]
Originally by: HeliosGal figther bombers on NPC level 5 missions, anamolies and sleeper sites ? thoughts
No
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 12:20:00 -
[266]
Originally by: HeliosGal figther bombers on NPC level 5 missions, anamolies and sleeper sites ? thoughts
No! Not with fighter bombers. The Fighter Bombers are only useful against capitals that are moving below 100M/S or standing still like the Dreads do in Siege or Carriers in Triage. All other ships can just laugh at the the Fighter Bombers since their torpedoes don't hurt them at all... ThatŠs why the Super Carrier must be able to fit a full wing of regular Fighters.
Speaking of level 5 missions in general, I donŠt do them I have never ever tried. But I have heard that it is possible to solo a lv5 with two accounts one in carrier and one in a command ship with fighters assigned. It can be a rumour, I honestly donŠt know and I certainly donŠt care either.
I have lived in a class 4 wormhole and done some serous amounts of anomalies in class 4 and class 5 wormholes. Bringing in a carrier was a bad, bad, bad and utterly stupid idea. It survived but barley, sleepers are a lot more smart than other NPC. By deploying the carrier makes more BS to spawn and by assigning Fighters from a POS give the same result. Not to mention it is tricky to get the carrier in and out from the WH... I am sure that the lads who run level 5 WH on a regular basis may have found a way to deploy multiple carriers and spider repair each other. But I honestly donŠt have the experience of this in a wormhole so I am going to drop this thought...
Regards
Zork
|
Major Hunt
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 13:49:00 -
[267]
Originally by: Haxfar Portlaind Does anyone have pics of the other fighter-bombers?
Cyclops
Malleus
Mantis
No Minnie pic yet
|
starliight
|
Posted - 2009.10.16 18:42:00 -
[268]
i think alot of people are missing the general idea with the massive hp increse to moms, they dont need a bonsus to how much armor they rep. they need a bonus to how much armor they remote rep. the ship is not designed to be a solo boat, its meant to be in fleet engagements and what better way to do that than to fill your low (or mid) sots with all harnders or enams. That will greatly increase the ehp of the mom and with a remote rep bonus make them much more substantial in fleet warefare.
|
Zaethiel
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 07:51:00 -
[269]
Reasons i won't warp a MoM to a fight.
1. There is a HIC present. Currently Motherships have no real way of dealing with HICs effectively. They are too small for the bombers. Without being able to field 20 fighters and 20 bombers and 80 heavies and 20 mediums and 20 smalls, you cannot guard yourself against HICs and trouble against dictors.
In the end if you warp a mothership into a fight and your side isn't winning, your going to lose your mothership no matter what your EHP is and you will have no way of getting out once things start to go poorly.
2. In a capital fight just about everyone has smartbombs. I like the HP of the bombers but they are still easy for cruiser gangs to kill, sniper fleets to alpha, and of course 100 smartbombs to annihilate.
3. Hp tank is good, but without a good way to kill HiCs or get away form them, it won't save you from a decent gang. If Motherships could rep more than 0.3% of their armor per rep then they might be able to survive on the battlefield a bit better.
until they have some decent escapability the MoM will continue to be a a very expensive gank ship. Maybe ill hotdrop and insta pop frieghters at jump bridges. -----
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 11:36:00 -
[270]
Any word yet on XXL shieldboosters / repairers or bonuses to aid their tank?
Loads of HP will only make you last a bit longer, and the amount of time it currently takes to boost up all that shield on my wyvern is #&*(^# ridiculous.
169 dead caps caught on video |
|
Haxfar Portlaind
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 11:47:00 -
[271]
Originally by: Major Hunt
Originally by: Haxfar Portlaind Does anyone have pics of the other fighter-bombers?
Cyclops
Malleus
Mantis
No Minnie pic yet
Thx for the pics The amarr reminds me about that ship the bountyhunter from Star Wars have...
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 13:13:00 -
[272]
Originally by: Sokratesz Any word yet on XXL shieldboosters / repairers or bonuses to aid their tank?
Loads of HP will only make you last a bit longer, and the amount of time it currently takes to boost up all that shield on my wyvern is #&*(^# ridiculous.
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Yes a new bonus to repair modules are needed for all the Super Capitals. If I donŠt remember wrong from the Fanfest did CCP say that they would not introduce either T2 or Super Capital modules, maybe faction mods but that was not sure... So the only way around this as it looks to me are a bonus for repair modules to the Super Capitals.
Does this answer your question?
Regards
Zork
|
aldarrin
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 13:30:00 -
[273]
Edited by: aldarrin on 17/10/2009 13:33:51 Edited by: aldarrin on 17/10/2009 13:32:39 Just a thought, but what about allowing SCs to rep carriers in triage / dreads in siege? That would certainly be useful. Would certainly cause FCs to want them on the field.
edit: looking at the pictures, makes me wonder if we'll be able to directly pilot the fighter bombers (lovely ****pits, those). edit: /\/\ I can't believe that "name for the place a pilot sits" got censored. This is a game about piloting space ships, right?
|
Karazack
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 13:48:00 -
[274]
Edited by: Karazack on 17/10/2009 13:52:28 I doubt they will introduce a repair bonus for supercaps, the ships are designed to have big buffers that delay their demise but not completely hinder it, they are not meant for permatanking oodles of dps and it is more balanced that way really.
Ofc repping them up after a fight will take annoyingly long but can always fit a dedicated repair fit and sit in a pos for an extended time (or in case of shield tankers only sit in a pos and let recharge commence) or get a gang of logistics and/or carriers to rep you up, supercaps arent meant to be operated solo, enlist some help ;)
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 22:57:00 -
[275]
supercaps rquire a support gang. Not solo omgwtfpwnmobiles. perhaps if not under aggro they could have a 2-3% repair boost. The other otpion is for the pilot to have implants to assist
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 02:57:00 -
[276]
Originally by: Karazack Edited by: Karazack on 17/10/2009 13:52:28 I doubt they will introduce a repair bonus for supercaps, the ships are designed to have big buffers that delay their demise but not completely hinder it, they are not meant for permatanking oodles of dps and it is more balanced that way really.
Ofc repping them up after a fight will take annoyingly long but can always fit a dedicated repair fit and sit in a pos for an extended time (or in case of shield tankers only sit in a pos and let recharge commence) or get a gang of logistics and/or carriers to rep you up, supercaps arent meant to be operated solo, enlist some help ;)
Have to agree with not letting supercaps have XXL repairers, that would force massive blobs to break it's tank and thus a bit unbalanced. A remote repair bonus and/or even higher HP buffer would be nice.
Having flown both ships extensively on Sisi and TQ, I can say they are quite fun now and more versatile. The sit-at-pos-rep-armor sessions after every serious combat is quite a pain though.
|
Crexa
g guild Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 03:02:00 -
[277]
Edited by: Crexa on 18/10/2009 03:06:02 50% support docking, 50% oppose docking. Compromise solution can be found on page 2, post by TechnoMag Reikoku. Or something close to this.
It satisfies those that think the ship is something special since it can't dock, but provides the option to pull your butt out of a ship flown only for big fights and lets you go make some isk. I think its unfair to "lock" a character into a ship. But, if no "anchoring" solution is possible by CCP in the time remaining before expansion launch, then the no docking (current non-option), should be maintained.
I also support increasing model size.
|
aldarrin
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 04:03:00 -
[278]
Originally by: Crexa Edited by: Crexa on 18/10/2009 03:06:02 50% support docking, 50% oppose docking. Compromise solution can be found on page 2, post by TechnoMag Reikoku. Or something close to this.
It satisfies those that think the ship is something special since it can't dock, but provides the option to pull your butt out of a ship flown only for big fights and lets you go make some isk. I think its unfair to "lock" a character into a ship. But, if no "anchoring" solution is possible by CCP in the time remaining before expansion launch, then the no docking (current non-option), should be maintained.
I also support increasing model size.
You can already anchor a capital ship maintenance array at a POS.... no change necessary if that's what you want (unless you'd like the grid / cpu requirements adjusted). Personally, I'd favor letting them dock ONLY if their re-dock timer is made ridiculously long (say an hour). Station games are annoying enough as is.
I support the model size increase.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 06:19:00 -
[279]
I too, support the model size "buff".
It's embarrassing enough that some battleships are bigger than a Supercarrier, nevermind the fact you can't dock or use stargates in one considering the laughable size.
|
Major Hunt
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 07:29:00 -
[280]
Edited by: Major Hunt on 18/10/2009 07:32:16 Edited by: Major Hunt on 18/10/2009 07:30:55
Originally by: HeliosGal supercaps rquire a support gang. Not solo omgwtfpwnmobiles. perhaps if not under aggro they could have a 2-3% repair boost. The other otpion is for the pilot to have implants to assist
I dont think anyone here wants them to be solo ships. But the ships need to atleast retain some consistency with the rest of the game. I would still like to see the armour/shield hitpoints reduced by 30-50%, and a repair bonus introduced. At the moment the ships have simply received the "band aid" approach to give them staying power. If CCP where to go back to the drawing board and give them a modest amount of hitpoints, and introduce bonuses to make fitting capital modules viable (Im thinking 25% repair amount per level for supercarriers, and 100% repair amount per level for Titans) it would balance them far better, without alienating the supercapital class from its support fleet (ie, other normal capitals).
However I dont think they should recieve a remote repair amount bonus, this would create alot of balancing issues with using them on conventional ships
|
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 09:10:00 -
[281]
Originally by: Major Hunt ...I would still like to see the armour/shield hitpoints reduced by 30-50%...
Can you elaborate on that? That statement makes me think you never flown a supercapital, or rather flown one in heavy combat. Even with the current HP buff they are still prone to dying relatively quick in a typical alliance vs alliance warfare.
|
Major Hunt
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 10:25:00 -
[282]
Originally by: Serena Ku
Originally by: Major Hunt ...I would still like to see the armour/shield hitpoints reduced by 30-50%...
Can you elaborate on that? That statement makes me think you never flown a supercapital, or rather flown one in heavy combat. Even with the current HP buff they are still prone to dying relatively quick in a typical alliance vs alliance warfare.
No i just think the ship needs to move away from a passive buffer and towards being able to active tank. The armour hitpoint reduction is to compensate for the additional active tank I think they should have. Im assuming CCP has calculated the numbers at this point for a reason, but if introducing a buff to the tank, to remain balanced something must be taken away. Hell I would love to see 2-3x the armour on my titan, but at the end of the day CCP wants to remove the massive numbers of these ships from the game, so it wont happen...
Also the hitpoints difference between supercaps and titans is not enough. In the current proposed format on sisi a titans tank is similar to a supercarrier. That dosnt work for me is one ship is 100x the mass.
|
Grut
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 10:35:00 -
[283]
Originally by: Major Hunt
Originally by: Serena Ku
Originally by: Major Hunt ...I would still like to see the armour/shield hitpoints reduced by 30-50%...
Can you elaborate on that? That statement makes me think you never flown a supercapital, or rather flown one in heavy combat. Even with the current HP buff they are still prone to dying relatively quick in a typical alliance vs alliance warfare.
No i just think the ship needs to move away from a passive buffer and towards being able to active tank. The armour hitpoint reduction is to compensate for the additional active tank I think they should have. Im assuming CCP has calculated the numbers at this point for a reason, but if introducing a buff to the tank, to remain balanced something must be taken away. Hell I would love to see 2-3x the armour on my titan, but at the end of the day CCP wants to remove the massive numbers of these ships from the game, so it wont happen...
Also the hitpoints difference between supercaps and titans is not enough. In the current proposed format on sisi a titans tank is similar to a supercarrier. That dosnt work for me is one ship is 100x the mass.
1. Fleet ships 2. Focus fire
The above makes titan / sc local repair completely redundant.
50 dreads put out 200k dps, thats the kind of levels of focus fire the supercaps are expected to put up with. A local tank which would put a dent in that would let an SC solo bs fleets.
I doubt any serious SC fits will include a local rep.
Kinsy > deadman you there? Kinsy > are either of us in pods, becase we dont know...
Mostly harmless [ 2005.12.09 19:22:50 ] (notify) You have started trying to warp scramble the Dreadnought |
Crexa
g guild Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 13:34:00 -
[284]
Originally by: aldarrin
Originally by: Crexa Edited by: Crexa on 18/10/2009 03:06:02 50% support docking, 50% oppose docking. Compromise solution can be found on page 2, post by TechnoMag Reikoku. Or something close to this.
It satisfies those that think the ship is something special since it can't dock, but provides the option to pull your butt out of a ship flown only for big fights and lets you go make some isk. I think its unfair to "lock" a character into a ship. But, if no "anchoring" solution is possible by CCP in the time remaining before expansion launch, then the no docking (current non-option), should be maintained.
I also support increasing model size.
You can already anchor a capital ship maintenance array at a POS.... no change necessary if that's what you want (unless you'd like the grid / cpu requirements adjusted). Personally, I'd favor letting them dock ONLY if their re-dock timer is made ridiculously long (say an hour). Station games are annoying enough as is.
I support the model size increase.
No. Your missing the point. What those that support docking want, is to be able to leave the ship and fly something else. Without worrying that the ship is going to be bumped out of a pos bubble, or ripped off by a corpmate. Trust is one thing, trust with 15 billion plus, in cap ship, is another. Re-read the post I refer to. It explains alot.
|
Haxfar Portlaind
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 14:29:00 -
[285]
Any have a pic of the minmatar FB?
|
Alpha Dragh
Caldari Gemeinschaft interstellarer Soeldner
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 23:39:00 -
[286]
Edited by: Alpha Dragh on 18/10/2009 23:39:34
sorry if already posted, but from a eye candy / cameraguy point of view (all effects on) , the fighter bomber explosion effects are performance killers. After a couple of explosions, the framerate goes from 60 to 15 and I have to jump to another system to get it back to 60 (zoom out or warping away in same system doesnt work)
also, it looks cool the first 5 minutes if the screen goes white for each explosion, but in a fleetfight it would be annoying, so please tone it down a bit.
PR
G.I.S. Gemeinschaft Interstellarer S÷ldner - Mercs For Hire - |
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 23:45:00 -
[287]
Originally by: Alpha Dragh Edited by: Alpha Dragh on 18/10/2009 23:39:34
sorry if already posted, but from a eye candy / cameraguy point of view (all effects on) , the fighter bomber explosion effects are performance killers. After a couple of explosions, the framerate goes from 60 to 15 and I have to jump to another system to get it back to 60 (zoom out or warping away in same system doesnt work)
also, it looks cool the first 5 minutes if the screen goes white for each explosion, but in a fleetfight it would be annoying, so please tone it down a bit.
It's a known bug that lags even the best of systems; appears to be a memory leak. Just turn off "missile effects" and it will play smoothly again.
|
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 09:21:00 -
[288]
Docking: Supercap docking would be wonderful tbh, not everyone who has a supercap also has sov, many people have to use a character they spent years on to log the things off on and basically say goodbye to that character. My Nyx pilot used to be my favorite ninja ishtar. Not to mention he would also be useful with his all V jump skills in a JF. But alas I can't just throw a pos in lowsec and leave a 20bil ship floating to do other things.
HP Buffer: The Buffer from what I can tell works quite well. It buys time, time for the supercap pilot (and his support) to attempt to kill off the HICs and try to get out if need be, or his support to repair and hold him over. In my experience so far on SiSi local reps dont have a big effect but I would still fly with them on. As an Example dual Rep Aeon and Nyx are still able to rep themselves fairly well (like in a pos after the fight) while maintaining a tough tank, Aeon with A-type hardeners, DC, and a-type eanm is tough cookie to get down.
Wyvern, for the first time I tried to be serious business with this ship, but again I realized that it was pointless. Shield tank with 2 X-type Pith boost amps, DG Invulns, and X-type EM/TH, still didn't matter the thing dropped quick. Sadly shields just dont hold up in comparison to slave implanted aeon or nyx.
Dont have the skills to try the Hel.
I like what CCP has done, MSes will actually be almost commonplace on the frontlines again which is nice. But at the same time post dominion we will see a lot of supercaps dieing. Without Sov4 we won't be seeing a lot of them being produced anymore. So the ones that do exist will become quite a bit more valuable, also I think that with supercap production dimming down (without sov 4) we'll also see abundance of capital components which may lead to cheaper carriers and dreads. so that is something good to look forward to.
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 10:10:00 -
[289]
Edited by: Amy Wang on 19/10/2009 10:10:53
Originally by: McFly
Wyvern, for the first time I tried to be serious business with this ship, but again I realized that it was pointless. Shield tank with 2 X-type Pith boost amps, DG Invulns, and X-type EM/TH, still didn't matter the thing dropped quick. Sadly shields just dont hold up in comparison to slave implanted aeon or nyx.
Maybe the slave implanted Nyx or Aeon just were better fitted? two boost amps is pretty fail and doesnt add to the buffer which is the strong point of the new supercap, dont try to active tank them like that and they will hold up far better ;) with proper use of PDUs, mix of single hardeners, invul fields and shield extender rigs I doubt you will notice much difference in sturdiness especially not if you fork out the same cash that the nyx/aeon guy had to pay for his more expensive omni hardeners plus the slave set ofc.
|
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 10:30:00 -
[290]
well I just can't bring my self to drake fit a wyvern, even if it is the advantageous way of doing it... lol. Now if CCP lifted the ban on Crystal Implants, there would be something to active tanking on capitals for shield.
As far as isk investment, my Nyx and Aeon fits run about 1bil for the necessary hardeners, I went with a-type, x-type armor hardeners and eanm would be cream of the crop but I didn't take the time to price check them and only had a-types from the mirror.
|
|
Jason Sarek
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 00:41:00 -
[291]
I think the hitpoint changes are good. It finally gives supercaps the much needed buffer required to actually stay on the batttlefield. However, the boost is a bit massive. In conjunction with the huge damage of fighter bombers, focused DD and new titan dps, I am worried that dreads will lose their role as capital damage dealers and just become food for supercarriers or target practice for titans.
The progression for carriers over battleships was more tank, same or slightly higher dps. The progression for dreads over battleships was more tank, a lot more dps, but with severe penalties (siege) and inability to combat sub-capitals. The progression for supercapitals over dreads seems to become a lot more hp and a lot more dps. I'm sceptic. A lot more hp is definitely ok. But a large boost to both hp and dps makes the scaling pretty ugly.
Question to the devs: Have you thought about how many dreads or carriers are supposed to beat one supercarrier or titan? Is there a concept? Does it work? I think small groups of supercarriers taking out fleets of normal capitals without serious losses would be wrong.
|
Alxea
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 06:07:00 -
[292]
Originally by: Necronus Edited by: Necronus on 18/09/2009 05:47:25 Edited by: Necronus on 18/09/2009 05:46:13 My 5 cents:
1) DD - great innovation. But supercapitals should be somehow protected from it. Because in large fleet engagement Titans will focus fire a DD's on Supercarriers or another Titans , which in my opinion will be pretty OP. And this brings us back to the problem we currently have at TQ.
2) Hp buff of supercapitals - great thing. But now MS and Titans have effective hitpoints equal to Large control towers, which makes them easy and appealing to field in actual combat BUT makes them almost totally invulnurable to subcapital fleets due to logoffski factor. I think if you catch supercapital without any support it should die horribly not just logout and escape. Now its impossible without a blob or your own supercapital fleet.
You realize these ships are 10km long? And they are bigger then POS's. Thats how they should be, not like paper how they use to be.
|
Alxea
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 06:24:00 -
[293]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine I cannot even tell you how badly you guys at CCP missed the boat on this.
1) They should have stayed Motherships.
2) They should have been given the ability to anchor in systems without player declared Sov, and when anchored act like mini-stations, at which players could dock, and to which they could jump clone. Like stations, the hull itself should be more or less invulnerable when they are anchored, but you could still shoot the services.
3) The pilot should be able to board another ship and get out when his mothership is anchored.
4) They should have been given a special (enormous, will only fit in a Mom) jump drive that allowed them to jump into WH space systems class 4 and higher.
They could have truly been "Motherships" in the sense of being a home away from home for intepid explorers of deep, uncharted space. Instead they're just going to be MOAR DPS!!!!. Isn't that just refreshing and exciting . I hope that some day you consider ways of making this game continue to be fun and interesting other than by providing larger guns.
Motherships don't exist yet. They where called that by mistake... ccp has said mother ships are not super carriers and they are something we haven't seen yet that will be put in the game some day in the future.
|
Alxea
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 06:39:00 -
[294]
Originally by: Mc Leech I find it totally hilarious that some people feel that ccp should do something to protect their precious little super carrier against 10 titans hot dropping it. This is EVE ONLINE this isnÆt wow, this isnÆt belt miners online. The whole point of this game is for ships to die not so your little supper carrier can live happily ever after in a belt. I sure as hell hope that nearly a trillion isk of ships will be able to hot drop your super carrier after the patch and wtfpwn it laugh at you and fraps it too so we all can watch it and laugh with ccp joining us on it.
Most importantly this isn't hello kitty online.
|
Alxea
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 06:47:00 -
[295]
Originally by: Ethan Hunte perhaps CCP can say...
- allow them to dock
- increase jump range
what does not allowing motherships/super carriers to dock add to the game? And what does allowing them to dock subtract from the game.
What reason is there. Other than to squeeze a few more paid alt accounts out of people. With all the titans and motherships + the alts to move them around, equaling a couple hundred or more than 1000 thats a nice return.
On some current alliance budgets they could afford to replace like 10 - 15 motherships currently anyway a month.
So motherships isn't a problem for certain space holding alliances.
They are too damn big for the inside of a station to dock in the 1st place. They just DON"T FIT INTO THE BLOODY STRUCTURE. You get it now?
|
Alxea
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 07:23:00 -
[296]
Originally by: Princess Jodi Allowing SuperCarriers (stupid name) to dock would instantly double all the SC's in the game. All the alts holding Moms would either be sold or put into a SC of their own. Might even tripple the number of SC's, as there are many pilots would would own one but don't have second account alts ready.
It might be fun... Noob SC Pilots in expensive toys.
Oh, and if Fighter-bombers die easily/do no damage cuz of Smartboms on their intended targets, they kinda lack usefullness don't ya think?
Super carriers are a real life name, history lesson = go back to school.
|
Alxea
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 07:44:00 -
[297]
Originally by: Twelve Jackals
Originally by: Stealthbug Edited by: Stealthbug on 10/10/2009 07:56:03 OK soo why can 1 Nyx kill a titan alone? Even if the titan uses the doomsday on it? That's kinda ridiculous....
I cant say i can agree with a super carrier, alone, killing a titan. Incase you are wondering, this was tested by a couple friends of mine on sisi.
Its rather easy.
Nyx can tank 6-7k dps or so
titan deals 5k dps thus nyx can permatank it
nyx deals 12k dps - no titan can permatank it
With guns titans do 10k dps, plus DD another 10k dps. Your not going to tank a titan with your reps. Your reps will take 50mins to fully rep your armor from say 10% armor to 100%. Buffers are more useful with these kind of ships. Reps are useless on super carriers. RR is the way.
Titans will also have 40mill/50mill ehp, they will out buffer you. But yes they both do a lot of dps because they are anti-capital capital ships, that can't be said enough.
|
Alxea
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 07:55:00 -
[298]
Originally by: Pantorus Necraliss Edited by: Pantorus Necraliss on 11/10/2009 15:35:56 Edited by: Pantorus Necraliss on 11/10/2009 15:23:58 Edited by: Pantorus Necraliss on 11/10/2009 15:21:37 Personnally : 1 - I realy think that SC still mustn't have the ability to dock but they realy need to become bigger. For moment they are ridiculous, same side as carrier ?!?
2 - Bombers are doing too much damage, carrier and dread explose too fast
3 - I'm affraid that big alliance use large number of SC to destroy POS (by this : destroying docked systems defence ships) and easily crush other holders.
They will easily corrupt the primary use of SC, as they've done with Titans, to attack structures and not only carrier-size ship...
--> highly raise structure's heal, highly raise dread's damage (especially the Naglfar, skill need/damage done completely unbalanced; maybe give him a 7.5% bonus to missile damage), lower dread's tracking speed for they can touch only non-moving targets
Where does super carrier being a anti-capital capital ship not compute? A dread and carrier are regular capitals see... and titans and super carriers are the anti ships to capital ships... get why fighter bombers need the dps? Thats about 60% the dps of a titan anyways. Super carriers are fine dps wise where they are at. They do their role as intended, poping capital ships. Any less and a sieged dread could tank fighter bombers, thats just not right.
|
John Zorg
Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 09:15:00 -
[299]
Please CCP, if anything... please fix the size of the models, being able to visually hide a Super Carrier behind a battleship is a bit wrong. Maybe a size between a dread and a Titan would be nice.
Also, much respect for finally giving these ships some loving. I agree with the massive amount of DPS they can deal, will make them feared again vs. being a juicy target :P
|
King Dave
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 09:20:00 -
[300]
Originally by: John Zorg Please CCP, if anything... please fix the size of the models, being able to visually hide a Super Carrier behind a battleship is a bit wrong. Maybe a size between a dread and a Titan would be nice.
Also, much respect for finally giving these ships some loving. I agree with the massive amount of DPS they can deal, will make them feared again vs. being a juicy target :P
werd.
|
|
Arra Lith
HUSARIA Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 09:41:00 -
[301]
Edited by: Arra Lith on 20/10/2009 09:42:32 Edited by: Arra Lith on 20/10/2009 09:41:32
Originally by: Crexa
Originally by: aldarrin
You can already anchor a capital ship maintenance array at a POS.... no change necessary if that's what you want (unless you'd like the grid / cpu requirements adjusted). Personally, I'd favor letting them dock ONLY if their re-dock timer is made ridiculously long (say an hour). Station games are annoying enough as is.
I support the model size increase.
No. Your missing the point. What those that support docking want, is to be able to leave the ship and fly something else. Without worrying that the ship is going to be bumped out of a pos bubble, or ripped off by a corpmate. Trust is one thing, trust with 15 billion plus, in cap ship, is another. Re-read the post I refer to. It explains alot.
No big changes are needed actually. For start just let people set password when storing ship in maintenance bay. To launch ship you need first write correct password - if it is set (and you better dont forget it :P).
Then introduce more manageable access rights - it should be possible to restrict access per single pos to single corp member. Different rights for different station office corp hangars etc. For most 'dangerous' options and high valueable assets give high protection option - to eliminate that 1 hacked account (or infiltrated) can kill whole alliance. Ie CEO / corp director can do this only if x other directors are online and agree to this action - ie by message box similiar to start conversation (that is without need of vote system / shares and item lock-down as it takes too much time). But thats another story :)
|
Zaethiel
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 11:06:00 -
[302]
Edited by: Zaethiel on 20/10/2009 11:06:05
Originally by: Arra Lith
No big changes are needed actually. For start just let people set password when storing ship in maintenance bay. To launch ship you need first write correct password - if it is set (and you better dont forget it :P).
Then introduce more manageable access rights - it should be possible to restrict access per single pos to single corp member. Different rights for different station office corp hangars etc. For most 'dangerous' options and high valueable assets give high protection option - to eliminate that 1 hacked account (or infiltrated) can kill whole alliance. Ie CEO / corp director can do this only if x other directors are online and agree to this action - ie by message box similiar to start conversation (that is without need of vote system / shares and item lock-down as it takes too much time). But thats another story :)
They still haven't given carriers an ability to lock their own hangers yet; good luck getting CCP to change pos mod access that drastically. FFS its been years and people can still walk up to a cap in fleet and steal ****; rediculous. -----
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 22:00:00 -
[303]
Originally by: Alxea
Originally by: Twelve Jackals
Originally by: Stealthbug Edited by: Stealthbug on 10/10/2009 07:56:03 OK soo why can 1 Nyx kill a titan alone? Even if the titan uses the doomsday on it? That's kinda ridiculous....
I cant say i can agree with a super carrier, alone, killing a titan. Incase you are wondering, this was tested by a couple friends of mine on sisi.
Its rather easy.
Nyx can tank 6-7k dps or so
titan deals 5k dps thus nyx can permatank it
nyx deals 12k dps - no titan can permatank it
With guns titans do 10k dps, plus DD another 10k dps. Your not going to tank a titan with your reps. Your reps will take 50mins to fully rep your armor from say 10% armor to 100%. Buffers are more useful with these kind of ships. Reps are useless on super carriers. RR is the way.
Titans will also have 40mill/50mill ehp, they will out buffer you. But yes they both do a lot of dps because they are anti-capital capital ships, that can't be said enough.
DD is only 5k dps, at least if the change to a 10 minutes timer rather than a 5 minute timer goes through. And a mothership orbiting closeby can negate quite a bit of damage from capital guns (with the new penalties).
169 dead caps caught on video |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 04:53:00 -
[304]
Willing to wager that if we cut out the posts by people that have never flown a supercap outside of sisi this thread would be 2 pages long. Ya they aren't going to give us a new secure password to use pos CSMA when we have been asking for years why this game let's us password a ****ing energy field but not our ship's SMA's
|
Alexis Zalman
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 11:11:00 -
[305]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources Willing to wager that if we cut out the posts by people that have never flown a supercap outside of sisi this thread would be 2 pages long.
Ofc ofc, but the whole idea is to have more people fly them and to actually justify putting them on the field after Dominion. I agree there are some rediculous things, like making motherships dock, allowing triage, or increasing the HP boost even more, but there are still some reasonable suggestions. Motherships are still a lot harder to build than a carrier, you need to sacrifice a char to be in it all the time and are pretty vulnerable on the battlefield, I think making them more affordable won't be so bad on such conditions. Unlike titans, motherships are still kinda personal ships and not everyone have 3000 men alliances to stay behind him and buy him caps.
Also using them in carrier, or even dread fleets is currently very hard, due to jump range limitations, this need to really be changed, possibly equaling carrier's. In current warfare we move carrier and dread fleets several jumps for every battle, some times we have to use only JDC V to get in time, having to think about MSes shorter jump range will only slow warfare more.
|
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 13:19:00 -
[306]
Edited by: McFly on 21/10/2009 13:22:09 one big problem I am seeing is that with the current 400ish moms in game according to some posts somewhere that were referencing a QEN, cant be bothered to track it down at the moment, we are going to see them dramatically increase in price, even with the build cost reduction.
For the first thing once Dominion hits and Bombers start coming out of the production lines, Mom Pilots are going to be looking for fights, also the Titan Pilots will have finished their refits and will be looking for fights. Now this is all good, pew pew is eve after all, but we'll be seeing a lot of dead supercaps as the playerbase adjusts to the new mechanics, as is always the case post game changes.
Second thing is mainly about motherships, I've seen carebears dump 10billion into a CNR or Golem. I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing some incredible instances of fail from the rich highseccers.
(edit: separating the nullsec carrier pilots from carebears since I assume they would know how to fly a Mom)
But also nullsec carrier pilots who have always wanted a mom but never been able to justify it with their pre-dominion lack of purpose.
Third thing is that even with the build cost reduction, we no longer have Sov 4 systems to pump out supercaps. Want to abort a titan? kill that Sov Marker, or just assault the pos it's not invulnerable. So with a decrease in safe production, the manufactures will want more for the risk they put in. As well as some manufacturers may stop producing them. I mean all those components and investment sitting in a pos for a month or 2 is hard to feel safe about with the new system.
So with a decrease in supply and an increase in demand (pilots looking to replace losses and pilots looking to get their first supercap in light of the changes) then add in the near requirement for a third party service to exchange them. I see thier availability decreasing and value gradually climbing. A quick trip to the sell orders forum will show a massive decrease in MS auctions in the last week, when the previous weeks between the change announcement and now there were 5-6 nyx auctions, 3 aeons, a wyvern and 2 hel's running at the same time iirc.
I know this is the Supercap Change thread, but these are comments on the effect the changes will have on this ship class.
And give mah Nyx dread jump range dammit, I'm tired of being left behind when I have JDC V
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 06:53:00 -
[307]
That is something I have completely overlooked through all this testing on sisi. Jump range of supercaps needs to be at least comparable to a dread. I understand its bigger so the jump drive has to work harder blah blah blah but we are talking about ships the size of large cities, I am fairly positive that they wouldn't use even remotely the same jump drive.
Wouldn't put a lawnmower engine into a minivan.
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 08:29:00 -
[308]
Fair enough on the fact that super carriers shouldn't dock if thats what you guys want. But I think its mad that you should effectively loose a character just to pilot one. If they want to make super capitals a good thing for the player... they need to implement a way for you to lock them down securely in a POS/outpost. I know they are the biggest/costliest ships in the game, but its **** poor game design to make a player loose a character with years of training in one ship which might not see much action, thus rendering all those other skills worthless.
|
Alexis Zalman
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 09:50:00 -
[309]
Tbh,I prefer lower MS prices and losing a char in it, instead of making it an overpriced carrier. This is one of the things that make motherships special, only thing I can live with is some special structure for docking moms, if so many people want them to dock...
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 11:04:00 -
[310]
Originally by: Hull Blaster Fair enough on the fact that super carriers shouldn't dock if thats what you guys want. But I think its mad that you should effectively loose a character just to pilot one. If they want to make super capitals a good thing for the player... they need to implement a way for you to lock them down securely in a POS/outpost. I know they are the biggest/costliest ships in the game, but its **** poor game design to make a player loose a character with years of training in one ship which might not see much action, thus rendering all those other skills worthless.
The intention is to make Supercarriers worth using at the frontline, the intention is not to make them worth using for everyone and their dog which is why they hopefully wont change the no-docking feature as that would inflate numbers massivle no doubt.
If you cant afford a dedicated pilot for your supercap or at least a holding char or dont dare to leave it in a capital ship array (both options let you continue to use the not SC related skills on your main) then there are always other capital ships that can dock namely dreads and carriers
However a very welcome change to make the SC more enjoyable to use would be to increase their base jump range to 4.5ly so a JDC 5 SC can jump with dreads with JDC 4.
|
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 14:00:00 -
[311]
I know you have the super cap arrays, but they aren't secure... so someone could just walk up and take it. At least have some way of locking it down with a password or something.
Agree on the jump distance though, seems a bit stupid that its got shorter range than a dread or normal carrier.
|
c0rn1
Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 17:08:00 -
[312]
Originally by: Hull Blaster I know you have the super cap arrays, but they aren't secure... so someone could just walk up and take it. At least have some way of locking it down with a password or something.
Agree on the jump distance though, seems a bit stupid that its got shorter range than a dread or normal carrier.
I agree as well. Since SC are the "superior" development of the carrier it should actually jump "further". What else would explain the 20x higher price? Base Jumprange should be 10 LY for the SC or at least the same as a carrier.
cheers
c0rn1 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Life's a waste of time ... |
Jack Sparroxx
Honour Bound Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 08:04:00 -
[313]
Well there are proÆs and conÆs in this super carrier thing. But I do hope ccp reads this tread and will consider the ideas and concerns voiced here.
But here is what I think anyhow. 1: Please fix the model size, itÆs supposed to be a SUPER capital. 2 or 3 times the size of a normal carrier would be fine
2: Please give them the same jump range as carrier, or at least dreads, but I would prefer carriers, as you quite often see rapid reaction forces made up only by carriers to go gank some random low sec pos shooty. Cry Havoc and likeminded quite often do stuff like that, so would be nice for SCÆs to come along.
3:I like the idea of SCÆs being able to dock up. Some would argue the number of SCÆs would inflate, that is a possibility no doubt, but I donÆt think it will be that bad. The price tag alone will keep the numbers down. A well fitted SC will still set you back a good 20billion isk. But I also understand the argument why they should not be allowed to dock. However IF CCP decides to let them dock, then SC should be allowed to dock in ANY station or outpost. Why you might ask? ItÆs very simple, IÆm in a small alliance that donÆt do SOV wars and hold donÆt SOV, and really donÆt have any interest in it(emo e-peen politics and such) So why should I be put in disadvantage over other SC pilots who have access to a station? I pay for my accounts just as the SC pilot in a SOV holding alliance, so I think it would be unreasonable that some player will be able to utilize an account better than others simply due to a game mechanic.
4: fix the fighter/fighterbomber orbit range. 20*15mill=300mill is for a flight of fighter/bombers. They are WAY WAY to easy to kill with a couple of smartbombs. I dot mind smartbombs being able to kill off normal drones, but fighter/bombers should be orbiting further out and be taken down by normal drones or light support fleet.
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Optimus Crime. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 23:41:00 -
[314]
Originally by: c0rn1
Originally by: Hull Blaster I know you have the super cap arrays, but they aren't secure... so someone could just walk up and take it. At least have some way of locking it down with a password or something.
Agree on the jump distance though, seems a bit stupid that its got shorter range than a dread or normal carrier.
I agree as well. Since SC are the "superior" development of the carrier it should actually jump "further". What else would explain the 20x higher price? Base Jumprange should be 10 LY for the SC or at least the same as a carrier.
cheers
c0rn1
well, titans are also superior to carriers and even more expensive - maybe they should be able to jump across the universe with 1 cyno ? xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Hurricane Carter
0ccam's Razor Varangians.
|
Posted - 2009.10.24 11:12:00 -
[315]
I personally tend to agree that SC's should recieve a buff to their jumprange, Dread range for sure because you sometimes just CAN NOT provide cyno's for :
Dreads / Carriers AND one for SC's, just "impossible" to do in certain occasions.
On the whole "docking" thing... i'd love to see mom's dockable because I'd "instantly" get one then, simply because I do not want to imprisons my char in a ship that it'll only use on "big" and "important" fleet ops. you don't take your SC to a sniper BS fight ya know...
and YES, please, for the love of god, make fighters / Fighter bombers orbit wider so they are out of range of normal smarties... nothing is a bigger pain then being this "pro" carrier / SC pilot with 15 mil a pop worth of drones, and seeing them die to a solo disco ship -_- specially when sometimes, in lagged battles you don't always have them respond instantly to being recalled.
|
Tappits
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.24 16:38:00 -
[316]
Originally by: LoveKebab ok, ability to dock for removing immunity to EW ?
NO NEVER!!!!
NO Docking, thay should never able to dock EVER!
Something to stop Smartbombs killing fighterbombers before they have even got to there target.
Are slave inplants getting nerfed????
Bit of a jump range boost.
All these 30mill+ EHP they got on sisi is that with slaves or without?
We don't need boost to reps the HP boost is fine, (just have triage carriers with you) giving them a rep bonus WOULD make them over powered
That don't need making cheaper, last thing we need is to make it easier for ebayers getting them. They don't need to be costeffective just like T2 is not nore is faction mods or ships
Hel fighter bomber speed bonus or something
If some one wants to drop 7-15 titans on a mom to kill it that's fine with me.
We don't need to make them anchor at pos's or any crap like that we just need passwordable CSMA's that cannot be unlocked with roles like we got now and pos passwords.
They don't need triage mods
Boost the ECM burst
Fighter bay that can hold 20 Fighters and 20 fighterbombers 25/25 for nyx
-PLEASE increase the visual size of Super Carrier's. ---------------------------------------------- Pro BOB????? I fail At forums |
c0rn1
Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.10.24 22:50:00 -
[317]
Originally by: LoveKebab
well, titans are also superior to carriers and even more expensive - maybe they should be able to jump across the universe with 1 cyno ?
Well, I wouldn't mind that titans get the dread jumprange and SC the carrier jumprange.
cheers
c0rn1 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Life's a waste of time ... |
Muadeeb Ousil
Minmatar Insidious Existence RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 11:32:00 -
[318]
Can we stop going on about whether SC can dock or not.
The simple fact is that the majority of current owners have already invested in a dedicated alt to pilot one, given these circumstances i can understand why they would not want this investement to be reduced in worth. This dedicated charector puts them in a an exlcusive ingame "club", that is in their benefit not to be increased. (Supercaps kill other supercaps, so why create more competition to kill your toy?)
On the other hand if you want more people to fly them, this is the key barrior that excludes them from doing so. There are many pilots with the isk/training line that would aspire to flying one, however they are not willing to invest a dedicated charector to do so.
It pretty well much comes down to this.
|
Alexis Zalman
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 16:01:00 -
[319]
Many people train ther chars for fleet action, that means battleships and caps, dread, carriers, JDC V, fighters V for many thanny pilots. At some point they just get tired and train an alt, which can fly more ships, including battleships. Most of the people in 0.0 warfare have cap char and a normal one. And many of the people flying titans and motherships are chars with a lot of Sps, which can fly a lot of other ships.
And many people, including me think that upgrading your capital char from carriers to a wtfpwnmobile supercarrier should require sacrificing more than just ISK.
Reducing price will be a lot more beneficial for wider use of motherships and a better reason top put them on the frontlines than been able to dock.
|
Jack Sparroxx
Honour Bound Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 17:44:00 -
[320]
Oh I forgot one little detail I havnt seen any one mention yet. I know it's a bit off topic, but still related to supercarriers and capitals.
It seems selfdestucting capitals when they get caught with pants down or or getting outgunned so survivel is not at possible, seems to be ore and more comon now.
So I seriouly think selfdestucting should void any insurance payout, and you not be able to selfdetruct a ship if you have agro, simple as that. selfdestucting you ship is about the most lame thing in the game at the moment. Normally I wouldnt care about this, but considering how much hitpoints supercap will get after dominion, I'm pretty sure that you will see alot of the supercap pilots selfdestuct simply to deney the enemy the KM. I have seen it way to many times latelt with normal capitals, so I cant see why it woudl be any different with supercaps
|
|
Omnarak
Minmatar Omnarak Imperium
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 23:17:00 -
[321]
Originally by: Haxfar Portlaind
Originally by: Major Hunt
Originally by: Haxfar Portlaind Does anyone have pics of the other fighter-bombers?
Cyclops
Malleus
Mantis
No Minnie pic yet
Thx for the pics The amarr reminds me about that ship the bountyhunter from Star Wars have...
Any Minnie (Tyrfing) pics now?
|
Fighter26
The Dam'd
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 23:47:00 -
[322]
Edited by: Fighter26 on 25/10/2009 23:50:30 Few things, love the new supercarrier despite its name, but please give all SCs ability to fit 20FB/20F at same time. Dont really care about size heck make it look frigate size for all I care- here comes the controversial part, make it 40 percent cheaper and cant dock. If you cant give people such a reasonable request then make it able to dock once at any 0.0 station or outpost once every 24hrs. Doubt CCP reads this but thanks for your time
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2009.10.26 14:04:00 -
[323]
Originally by: Muadeeb Ousil
On the other hand if you want more people to fly them, this is the key barrior that excludes them from doing so. There are many pilots with the isk/training line that would aspire to flying one, however they are not willing to invest a dedicated charector to do so.
Who in his right mind wants more people to fly supercarriers? I sure dont. Which is exactly the reason why they should not be allowed to dock, allowing it would inflate their numbers in a silly way.
If the "trap character in ship" feature (which is not even really the case) is a hindrance for the myriad of rich carebears not to get a supercarrier, great, best feature ever.
Turning capital ship online into supercapital ship online ? no thanks
|
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.10.27 00:19:00 -
[324]
Edited by: McFly on 27/10/2009 00:25:02
Originally by: Amy Wang
If the "trap character in ship" feature (which is not even really the case) is a hindrance for the myriad of rich carebears not to get a supercarrier, great, best feature ever.
Turning capital ship online into supercapital ship online ? no thanks
I agree here, if you want to fly a supercap, you should be old enough in eve to realize that patience is essential, and if you can actually afford a supercap you can easily afford to plex and train an alt account on (mental math including a good skillplan w/remaps) the 140 day plan to sit in your supercap when you aren't using it.
If you have the isk to buy and fit a supercap then you should have an account with a character slot open you could devote to this, or be able to afford to add one, tbqfh.
Remember we are talking about (according to some isk seller sites) $1000 USD of internet spaceship. If you're not interested in paying for an account to hold your supercap, then pay the transfer fee and put it on one of the accounts you are already paying for.
Edit: Sorry this sounds like a bit of a rant, but seriously, if you have no alts, what are you going to do with a supercap? constantly rely on others to provide cynos/fuel/scouting/etc.... personally I don't think anyone should have one of these behemoths without the necessary accounts to jump, scout, resupply, log, and utilize a supercapital.
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.10.27 06:31:00 -
[325]
Not sure if this was mentioned or not but, is the number of locked targets on the super carriers going to be increased? 6 seems really low for a 'super' carrier.
|
Polinus
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 15:08:00 -
[326]
Originally by: LoveKebab
Originally by: c0rn1
Originally by: Hull Blaster I know you have the super cap arrays, but they aren't secure... so someone could just walk up and take it. At least have some way of locking it down with a password or something.
Agree on the jump distance though, seems a bit stupid that its got shorter range than a dread or normal carrier.
I agree as well. Since SC are the "superior" development of the carrier it should actually jump "further". What else would explain the 20x higher price? Base Jumprange should be 10 LY for the SC or at least the same as a carrier.
cheers
c0rn1
well, titans are also superior to carriers and even more expensive - maybe they should be able to jump across the universe with 1 cyno ?
well on first day of the tests on sisi, a dev used titan jump bridge to jump us between the 2 most distant system within eve...
but have seen no word on if that would come into TQ.
|
Selene Asteria
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 15:09:00 -
[327]
Edited by: Selene Asteria on 28/10/2009 15:10:02
Originally by: Meeogi If you can put out a secure container.....a massive city in space like a supercarrier should at least have a locking mech. when you leave.
Why not make a module locking device?
The NEW SUPERCAP LOCKER 3000!!! would require a password to place your pod inside and steal it more or less.....as I believe this is the main problem.
I mean if a supercap has hundreds of thousands of people living on them ...you would think someone would lock the pod door.
I find it hard to believe that security devices went away with the Car alarm, thousands of years ago on earth.
THIS! such an easy fix. |
|
CCP Abathur
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 15:35:00 -
[328]
A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
|
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 15:35:00 -
[329]
Quote: -PLEASE increase the visual size of Super Carrier's.
Hell yes, it does not look all that impressive next to my BS. Fix Destroyers |
Jags
Minmatar M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 15:38:00 -
[330]
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
What about those of us that used to armor tank ? Will we be able to get implants etc removed under petition as in effect the ship has completely changed ?
|
|
King Dave
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 16:36:00 -
[331]
Originally by: CCP Abathur
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
W I N
|
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 20:32:00 -
[332]
Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 28/10/2009 20:34:15 /sigh 11 pages of feedback and that's all we get?
I appreciate the increase in jump range. It was needed. The hel does need a boost. Lets hope that change helped out.
I'm highly disappointed in the lack of docking. Now, my toon is going to sit in a pos waiting for a war, then sit in a pos waiting for a cap fight, then go back to sitting in a pos. You say these aren't overpowered solopwn mobiles, well if that's the case, what gives? Let us upgrade the stations and dock. Or give us something outside of combat to be useful to justify us not docking. Let us use the jump portals too. Or something along those lines
Anything on the orbit range of fighter bombers? Anything on the armor/shield rep rate? (spending hours repping armor even when outside of combat is not a good mechanic) The dev blog mentioned more tools for supercarriers to help us in our role. Any info on those?
|
Kraken Kill
Arcana Imperii Ltd. Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 22:19:00 -
[333]
Edited by: Kraken Kill on 28/10/2009 22:21:59 what does IRC need Super Carriers for? But anyway, Could You guys Clarify Details on the Slave Implants. It was mentioned that some balance between the armor and shield implants would take place- the balance being most likely that Slaves would have their effects disabled on Capital ships.
Will this still be the case? |
Lira West
|
Posted - 2009.10.29 00:45:00 -
[334]
Being able to use the Jump Portal would be super cool. Thanks for the jump range increase. What about a size increase now. Maybe have it be 3/4 the size of a Titan? |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.29 02:31:00 -
[335]
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
Nice, this is definitely a step in the right direction. Thanks Seleene. Since they will never be dockable any word on their drone bays being able to hold 20F/20B and how about physical size? I'd love to be larger than dreads and BS.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.29 15:12:00 -
[336]
Originally by: Kraken Kill ...It was mentioned that some balance between the armor and shield implants would take place- the balance being most likely that Slaves would have their effects disabled on Capital ships.
Oh hell please no
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.10.29 16:39:00 -
[337]
That would be the boring solution.. -
|
ByFstugan
Caldari Big Shadows Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 05:29:00 -
[338]
Edited by: ByFstugan on 30/10/2009 05:34:39
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
Docking: Plz don't just state "no docking" but instead motivate the reason (if U have anyone else than it seems hard for U to fix). And when that's done plz change your mind again, the ability to dock is a really good feature imo since being trapped in POS's is poop.
Size: As another thing I agree with those who wants Super Carriers bigger, perhaps not insane much larger than a regular Carrier, but so it's noticed there's something big on the field.
Active tank: Another VERY important comment imo; I'd like to see either an XXL-rep/booster for supercaps or an x00% effectivity to the regular capital reppers. Without that a regular carrier in triage get 4x more effective active rep than a Super Carrier, and the Super Carrier tanks will ONLY be about EHP, since active rep gives like nothing compared to that.
Implants: Since Super Carriers is REALLY expensive ships and EVE get's more and more a very deadly place for this behemoths (now with Titans/SC's who specilize in killing them also) the best way to go concerning implants should be to also make crystals make for shield tankers (or make an new Shield implant for HP-buff and make only crystals not work for capitals as it is).
Hel: A good move to adjust the HP on this. I got a small thought about it's new bonus to fighters. Isn't it more in Minmatars style to get extra speed to their fighters instead of an resist bonus? Anyone is fine by me, it's just a thought. _______________________________
The wise knows what he knows not. |
xttz
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 12:45:00 -
[339]
Originally by: ByFstugan
Docking: Plz don't just state "no docking" but instead motivate the reason (if U have anyone else than it seems hard for U to fix). And when that's done plz change your mind again, the ability to dock is a really good feature imo since being trapped in POS's is poop.
This has been done to death, but OK I'll oblige you.
SC's can have the effective hitpoints of a large pos, immunity to ewar, and the dps of several cap ships. Short of assembling a dozen titans, they are extremely unlikely to die in the current aggro mechanics before being able to dock and repair for free in their outpost. As the new sov mechanics now rely on defending outposts directly, this becomes a major balance issue. Until docking aggro mechanics are examined, supercarriers should not be able to dock.
Originally by: ByFstugan
Active tank: Another VERY important comment imo; I'd like to see either an XXL-rep/booster for supercaps or an x00% effectivity to the regular capital reppers. Without that a regular carrier in triage get 4x more effective active rep than a Super Carrier, and the Super Carrier tanks will ONLY be about EHP, since active rep gives like nothing compared to that.
Supercarriers are alliance-level ships. They require an alliance to build, they will need the support of an alliance to keep them safe during production, and require an alliance to support them in combat. Why would you think they should recieve bonuses designed around solo play? Carriers get remote repair triage bonuses specifically to assist things like Supercarriers in combat. Also carriers may well be able to tank more than supercarriers, but they do so at the expense of remote repair ability and are still extremely vulnerable to high alpha attacks such as doomsdays and the new citadel torps. A double or triple strength active tank is often worth far less in fleet battles than having 40 times the EHP. The strength of supercapitals is their ability to fit a very siginifcant EHP buffer that allows them time to recieve remote assistance and have it be far more efficient due to high resists, or to buy time to get out if needed.
|
xttz
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 12:52:00 -
[340]
Originally by: ByFstugan
Implants: Since Super Carriers is REALLY expensive ships and EVE get's more and more a very deadly place for this behemoths (now with Titans/SC's who specilize in killing them also) the best way to go concerning implants should be to also make crystals make for shield tankers (or make an new Shield implant-set for Shield-HP-buff and make only crystals not work for capitals as it is).
As discussed at length in the titan thread, slave implants are not the issue.
Shield vs armour tanks are actually fairly well balanced providing a few other issues are resolved. Firstly shield tanks lend to higher average resists with less modules, due to invuln fields being more efficient than EANMs. This makes remote repair more efficient. However the issue is that higher meta level shield modules are far more expensive than their equivalent armour modules. This is down to lower drop rates and popularity among empire mission runners - both issues unrelated to capitals or implants.
Secondly armour tanks typically need to compromise DPS for tank, as both related modules share low slots. Shield tankers on the other hand can fit damage mods and tank and only compromise cap stability. For zero cap use weapons and passive tanks this is very powerful.
Finally there is the gang bonus problem. For some reason still unexplained by CCP, shield amount gang bonuses are not applied immediately and the extra shield must recharge. Coupled with the fact that the bonus is lost due to changes in fleet structure, this puts shields at a disadvantage. Of course this is still unrelated to implants, and its better for it to be fixed directly rather than lazily patching it up with new implants.
Originally by: ByFstugan
Hel: A good move to adjust the HP on this. I got a small thought about it's new bonus to fighters. Isn't it more in Minmatars style to get extra speed to their fighters instead of an resist bonus? Anyone is fine by me, it's just a thought.
This is a good idea. The resist bonus is largely useless, as fighters will often be out of repair range and take too long to lock up anyway. A better bonus would either be speed so they can return faster when shot at, or optimal range so that they orbit out of range of any smartbombs.
|
|
ByFstugan
Caldari Big Shadows Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 14:30:00 -
[341]
I don't quote, but this is reply to xttz posts 339-340. First thx for good answers.
Docking: The issue of using supercaps defending stations I think is better solved by making SC's not be able to use modules/drones at station grids, in same way as Smart bombs are made ineffective to close to stations. I still want to see them able to dock, and think the problems with that should be solved instead of keep them unable to dock :)
Active Tank: I get your point but I still think a larger and 20 times more expensive ship should have better active tank, even if it's just a double bounus the rep-amount (or half cycle). The active tank will still be almost non-existent compared to the EHP. And I don't think it's really fair to compare the 700 million ships vulnerability to instapop versus a 15000 million ship. It's still mostly paid by personal players and not alliances. As always in such matters there could be valid arguments from both sides, but in the end someone (CCP) will have to weigher one more heavy than the other. Their choice isn't by any law the most fair or logic one - it's just the one they got stuck with at the coffetable.
Implants: I still don't think it's fair that one way of tanking should have set implants and the other not. This is much more so since the overall best tank is armor also - especially due to the amount of remote armor reps compared to the shield transfers. What damage mode in low-slots got to do in a topic about SC's I don't get. _______________________________
The wise knows what he knows not. |
Odda
Gallente Phantom Squad Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 15:06:00 -
[342]
Originally by: Serena Ku
Originally by: Kraken Kill ...It was mentioned that some balance between the armor and shield implants would take place- the balance being most likely that Slaves would have their effects disabled on Capital ships.
Oh hell please no
Problem here is that with shield tanking supercarrier you can stil out tank any armor tanked supercarrier. a officer fittet nyx, wil tank the same as a faction fitt chimera (3,5k dps)
Wyverns and hell's can out tank the Nyx and Aeon.
But the Nyx and Aeon got more EF HP.
Slave setts gives passive bonus. Crystals sets give active bonus to boosters.
|
Petit Faucon
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 18:05:00 -
[343]
Edited by: Petit Faucon on 30/10/2009 18:06:31 Unless pyfa is wrong and the shield recharge times are incorrect..
It seems possible to get a 8-9k dps passive shield tank on most super capitals...
Edit: without using estamel invuls etc, just normal meta 13 hardners and caldari navy invuls... With meta 14 etc you can get 9-10k..
|
Odda
Gallente Phantom Squad Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 18:18:00 -
[344]
Originally by: Petit Faucon Edited by: Petit Faucon on 30/10/2009 18:06:31 Unless pyfa is wrong and the shield recharge times are incorrect..
It seems possible to get a 8-9k dps passive shield tank on most super capitals...
Edit: without using estamel invuls etc, just normal meta 13 hardners and caldari navy invuls... With meta 14 etc you can get 9-10k..
When you say "most" is that even aeons\nyx? or wyvern\hell?
|
Petit Faucon
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 20:55:00 -
[345]
Edited by: Petit Faucon on 30/10/2009 20:57:40
Originally by: Odda
Originally by: Petit Faucon Edited by: Petit Faucon on 30/10/2009 18:06:31 Unless pyfa is wrong and the shield recharge times are incorrect..
It seems possible to get a 8-9k dps passive shield tank on most super capitals...
Edit: without using estamel invuls etc, just normal meta 13 hardners and caldari navy invuls... With meta 14 etc you can get 9-10k..
When you say "most" is that even aeons\nyx? or wyvern\hell?
Edit: Scrap-that pyfa doesn't have updated shield recharge times, unless they are still the same on sisi now.
|
Ukiah Oregan
O.W.N. Corp OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 21:00:00 -
[346]
Edited by: Ukiah Oregan on 30/10/2009 21:00:36
Originally by: Jack Sparroxx Edited by: Jack Sparroxx on 23/10/2009 09:12:10 ... 4: fix the fighter/fighterbomber orbit range. 20*15mill=300mill is for a flight of fighter/bombers. They are WAY WAY to easy to kill with a couple of smartbombs. I dot mind smartbombs being able to kill off normal drones, but fighter/bombers should be orbiting further out and be taken down by normal drones or light support fleet.
5: Fix the dammed corp hangars so random scumbag canÆt run of with the gear you have stored there ...
I have to agree with the idea of having to involve light support to kill fighters/bombers - Destroyers would be a good class for this role and it would let younger pilots with less skills have a vital role in a large fleet action - the protection of large fleet assists.
I also have to agree with the POS & corp hangers - a better rights management system should be implemented to provide for a better player experience.
|
Cleat
Arcana Imperii Ltd. Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 21:38:00 -
[347]
Edited by: Cleat on 30/10/2009 21:38:30 Passive Shield 'rechage based' tanked motherships. Let me know how that works out for you... GL capping up in that to jump.
You can chunder all you like about being able to tank X-amount of Dps more in an 'Active tanked' Shield ship compaired to an armor tanker, but these SuperCarriers will rely on pure HP buffer and resistances, not the active tanking capabilties. When you can only out rep 1.5-2 Dreads worth of DPS thats rather irrelevent, the fact that your Capacitor is now on its arse due to the cap use ontop of this isnt going to help you either. No one uses just 2 Dreads worth of DPS.
Crystals do not work, it seems some people still dont realise this, They dont work on capital modules, only on subcap modules. Right now Slaves Directly affect the Hitpoints of armor ships while Shield tankers have nothing that has any real effect to them.
It means Aeons are capable of massive armor hitpoints along with the 5% resistances from the ship. Hels alone have less base Shields than the Nyx's Armor. Its not a level playing field. |
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 21:56:00 -
[348]
Edited by: Letifer Deus on 30/10/2009 22:07:00
Originally by: Cleat It means Aeons are capable of massive armor hitpoints along with the 5% resistances from the ship. Hels alone have less base Shields than the Nyx's Armor. Its not a level playing field.
The EHP difference between a nyx and wyvern is not that big. I really believe only one shield mom has a tank issue, and that's the Hel. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 23:26:00 -
[349]
Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 30/10/2009 23:35:25
Saying that these are "Alliance level ships" and therefore require the alliance support behind them is a misguided argument, from this standpoint:
What FC is going to say "Ok, you 20 dread pilots go hop in your triage carriers cuz we're bringing 3 supercarriers to the fight?" No FC is going to say that. The FC is going to be clammoring for as many dread pilots as he can get because the numbers work out better. Any FC worth his salt will take 5 dreads over 1 supercarrier and 4 triage carriers.
In addition, pilots who take triage carriers out to support the supercarriers don't receive a benefit in return. Which leads to "Why am I sacrificing my ships and gameplay so YOU can have fun flying in your big ship?"
That's the crux of this problem and until it's addressed by either increasing the repping abilities of supercaps to be a more self sufficient without being solo-pwn, or providing the gang a significant bonus to make FCs WANT to take them then supercaps will still be just pretty ships to look at without seeing them on the battlefield.
Right now supercarriers are still more of a liability than a benefit. Hopefully CCP realizes this and makes a few more changes before dominion.
|
Mioelnir
Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
|
Posted - 2009.10.31 00:03:00 -
[350]
Edited by: Mioelnir on 31/10/2009 00:03:26
Originally by: xttz
Originally by: ByFstugan
Hel: A good move to adjust the HP on this. I got a small thought about it's new bonus to fighters. Isn't it more in Minmatars style to get extra speed to their fighters instead of an resist bonus? Anyone is fine by me, it's just a thought.
This is a good idea. The resist bonus is largely useless, as fighters will often be out of repair range and take too long to lock up anyway. A better bonus would either be speed so they can return faster when shot at, or optimal range so that they orbit out of range of any smartbombs.
Unless my caffeine-deprieved math was wrong, the resist bonus increases the average EHP of a fighter drone from 14k to 17.5k. I'd vote for completely useless, not largely.
Similarly, I don't think even a 200% speed bonus will be anywhere near the league of the other supercarrier's +25% DPS or +25% resistances.
[Edit] Oh, and thanks for the jump range upgrade and rework of supercapital HP amounts.
|
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.31 15:29:00 -
[351]
Originally by: Soleil Fournier
In addition, pilots who take triage carriers out to support the supercarriers don't receive a benefit in return. Which leads to "Why am I sacrificing my ships and gameplay so YOU can have fun flying in your big ship?"
Well said.
I was thinking the logistics work with Logistics or Triage Carriers can be fun with the challenges of quick ever constant changing of targets to be repped up. The fact when a supercapital needs logistics support by triage carriers may well end up as a "lock it, overload remote reps, wait and hope you get your carrier replaced in time".
|
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.31 17:47:00 -
[352]
Originally by: Soleil Fournier
In addition, pilots who take triage carriers out to support the supercarriers don't receive a benefit in return. Which leads to "Why am I sacrificing my ships and gameplay so YOU can have fun flying in your big ship?"
It really isn't much different than people flying logistics in sub cap gangs. Besides, a triage carrier supporting a mom is probably going to end up a lot more useful than a non triage carrier (which is really pretty uselesS) and not everyone can fly dreads. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.10.31 18:30:00 -
[353]
Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 31/10/2009 18:35:19
Originally by: Letifer Deus
It really isn't much different than people flying logistics in sub cap gangs. Besides, a triage carrier supporting a mom is probably going to end up a lot more useful than a non triage carrier (which is really pretty uselesS) and not everyone can fly dreads.
True, there will be some carrier pilots that are unable to fly dreads. However, not all of those carrier pilots have trained logistics 5 to use triage. And it is quite different than flying a logistics ship in a fleet fight. With a logistics ship you don't have to enter siege mode, and you can have a decent tank and survivability w/ the mobility of a cruiser, whereas with triage you are sieged, need a failfit just to be cap stable to rep well, and are not apt to survive post capital fight. Thus many pilots will be reluctant to use triage and sacrifice ships unless the gang gets a big benefit in return. That benefit is missing currently as a few dreads/carriers can do everything a super carrier can do for less risk and money.
|
ByFstugan
Caldari Big Shadows Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.31 18:42:00 -
[354]
Originally by: Letifer Deus
Originally by: Soleil Fournier
In addition, pilots who take triage carriers out to support the supercarriers don't receive a benefit in return. Which leads to "Why am I sacrificing my ships and gameplay so YOU can have fun flying in your big ship?"
It really isn't much different than people flying logistics in sub cap gangs. Besides, a triage carrier supporting a mom is probably going to end up a lot more useful than a non triage carrier (which is really pretty uselesS) and not everyone can fly dreads.
That sounds almost as same thing to say as there really isn't much different in loosing a mom versus loosing a carrier. I have to say in both cases there is a BIG difference. First of all ISK-wise - second of all logistics-wise. U can't just pay someone 150-200 millions and get a fitted Carrier delivered or picked from the market with fittings. _______________________________
The wise knows what he knows not. |
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.31 23:09:00 -
[355]
Edited by: Letifer Deus on 31/10/2009 23:11:29
Originally by: ByFstugan That sounds almost as same thing to say as there really isn't much different in loosing a mom versus loosing a carrier. I have to say in both cases there is a BIG difference. First of all ISK-wise - second of all logistics-wise. U can't just pay someone 150-200 millions and get a fitted Carrier delivered or picked from the market with fittings.
The initial argument was of people saying "I don't get anything out of it (aka I don't get to pew pew/get on KMs) and just get risk, so why should I help you get to pew pew?" This same thing can be applied to logistics cruisers. I never argued there weren't differences in scale or otherwise (of course there are). And if your alliance is willing/able to field supercaps in large scale cap engagements, it shouldn't be having problems replacing a triage carrier in timely fashion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
menace ace
Gallente Empire Assault Corp Dead Terrorists
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 18:15:00 -
[356]
Originally by: Kraken Kill Edited by: Kraken Kill on 28/10/2009 22:21:59 what does IRC need Super Carriers for? But anyway, Could You guys Clarify Details on the Slave Implants. It was mentioned that some balance between the armor and shield implants would take place- the balance being most likely that Slaves would have their effects disabled on Capital ships.
Will this still be the case?
I doubt they will nerf slaves as with shield tankers power diag increase the shield hitpoints so if they nerf slaves it will be unbalanced imo
|
Ginlene
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 03:10:00 -
[357]
I think a lot of problems could be fixed by limiting the number of supercapitals/titans that can be in a system. However, limit it by positive standings.
Eg.
3 Titans in system, 1st is positive to 2nd, and 2nd is positive to 3rd, but 1st is not positive to 3rd. This counts as "one group" and if there was a three titan limit, no titan with a friendly standing to ANY of the other three titans could jump in.
It would still be possible to amass more friendly titans, but the logistics would get very complicated. You would need them all in seperate corps with no alliance and no friendlies, but know each other. But it would cause confusion at the lower levels with dreads shooting friendly titans, etc. and be a risk that many may not want to take.
If each side has 3 titans, the stratgies involving other ships become much more appealing, and it is less useful for an alliance to just amass craploads of money and field as many titans as possible because you couldn't use them all at the same time. It would be more about fielding good groups of vehicles.
The eve excuse for the limit could be due to interference from friendly communication systems in Titans. This interference impacts the jump drive of any friendly incoming titan by overloading it.
|
xttz
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 09:11:00 -
[358]
Originally by: Ginlene I think a lot of problems could be fixed by limiting the number of supercapitals/titans that can be in a system. However, limit it by positive standings. 3 Titans in system, 1st is positive to 2nd, and 2nd is positive to 3rd, but 1st is not positive to 3rd. This counts as "one group" and if there was a three titan limit, no titan with a friendly standing to ANY of the other three titans could jump in.
You have to be joking.
This is going to result in 2 effects: 1) Defending alliances bringing in titans one by one, altering standings between each jump. 2) Attacking alliances marking hostile titans blue should they be suspected of jumping in.
Ships need to be balanced via their ingame stats and abilities, not via arbitrary and easily exploited rules.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 11:27:00 -
[359]
1 comment. I am not a cap pilot, but when i sit in my Bs, mothership does not look big and impressive, but it should. MAKE THEM BIG! Fix Destroyers |
Zeveron
Destructive Influence IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 11:33:00 -
[360]
Any official response on the leviathans cpu and gang bonuses issues? Or should I start whining about the 7 launchers needed and the armor buffer again? ________________________________________________
|
|
Guterro d'Tefiane
Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 12:11:00 -
[361]
You guys should really look into the remote ecm burst. In its current form, it is not that useful. You break someone's lock, but they can instantly relock. Would be nice if the mod works like a jammer and prevents other ships from being able to lock for a set amount of time.
|
John Zorg
Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 16:54:00 -
[362]
Originally by: Guterro d'Tefiane You guys should really look into the remote ecm burst. In its current form, it is not that useful. You break someone's lock, but they can instantly relock. Would be nice if the mod works like a jammer and prevents other ships from being able to lock for a set amount of time.
agreed, make it grid wide and make it jam for a set time.
|
HoshinoRuri
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 00:04:00 -
[363]
Yes the ECM burst really does need tweaked. Maybe a 15 second jammer or so cause the current one is less than a second and isn't useful at all. As far as the docking goes i don't think they should be allowed to dock in empire space but that there should be a system/ outpost upgrade in 0.0 that alliances can use to allow them to dock, that way it isn't an over powered system and alliances have to work at it to allow it to be done. In terms of the models though most Super carriers are only marginally bigger than a freighter so with that said you may want to increase there beam size and then adjust there size in game, on that note the hyperion looks bigger or the same size as most carriers... may wanna look into that as well.
|
ThePurpleTurtle
High Flyers
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 04:46:00 -
[364]
First of all, I agree with the model size increase. The info on a Nyx says that it is 55 million cubic meters in size, while a Moros is roughly 22 million cubic meters in size, but the Moros is too big to be anywhere near under half the size of a Nyx.
Secondly: Stop whining about being able to dock. A pilot set password should be implemented for SMA's however, since capitals are not the only things that get stolen from POS hangars, and the implementation of this would remove the stress of going to a POS to get your RR BS out only to find it has been stolen, or in the case of the capital and super-cap pilots, your precious big shiny ships would be safe from all but yourself and those you trust with the password.
Third: from what I can tell, FB's do fine DPS, but a size increase to the fighter/bomber bay would be a good addition which would allow the smarter players to actually create a good working set up which would still be a pain to swap, but that is the luxury of a super-cap
Fourth: A super-cap specific repper, or a bonus to rep speed/amount should be added as well as it does take too long to rep these ships, I could understand a 15 minute rep time, but 40-50? A modest increase here would make the majority of us happy, and those of us that are still unhappy should suck it up, or just not fly an SC.
Finally: I feel that that despite what the trolls think, the slight price reduction combined with the increased DPS is enough for most alliances to build more of these, period. Forget no Sov 4. I think most people commenting on that don't live in null sec or haven't lived in null sec very long. All of these are wonderful additions to this class of ships, and I feel that with the small tweaks myself and others have suggested, they will easily become more widely used, and possibly become a staple of large capital fleets, which is, I am sure, the intended goal for the SC's anyways.
PS-> If you don't know anything about these ships, or are just whining: SHUT UP and leave this thread alone. Leave the posting to people who know what they are talking about.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 06:02:00 -
[365]
Originally by: Guterro d'Tefiane You guys should really look into the remote ecm burst. In its current form, it is not that useful. You break someone's lock, but they can instantly relock. Would be nice if the mod works like a jammer and prevents other ships from being able to lock for a set amount of time.
/signed
It seriously needs looking at.
|
Noghri ViR
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 17:27:00 -
[366]
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
Horrible decision. Not being able to dock is the reason why we don't see more of these. There's people out there that don't want to lock their main high skill point character into one ship that they can't ever get out of. --------------------------------------------- Noghri ViR for CSM Vote for me here: http://myeve.eve-online.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=28
http://noghri08.wordpress.com/ |
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 22:40:00 -
[367]
Originally by: Noghri ViR There's people out there that don't want to lock their main high skill point character into one ship that they can't ever get out of.
Which is why you either A) get a dedicated mom pilot or B) get a garage character to store the mom on while your main isn't flying it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
ThePurpleTurtle
High Flyers Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 00:00:00 -
[368]
Originally by: Letifer Deus
Originally by: Noghri ViR There's people out there that don't want to lock their main high skill point character into one ship that they can't ever get out of.
Which is why you either A) get a dedicated mom pilot or B) get a garage character to store the mom on while your main isn't flying it.
Or you have to suck it up and put it in a CSMA. Personally, I find that putting up your own POS and not broadcasting the location to your corp works well, you can also uncheck a box and prevent your corpmates from getting into the POS without a password. Just a couple things no one ever seems to mention.
|
Zaethiel
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 01:50:00 -
[369]
So, if Citadel torps can be destroyed by smartbombs, can the compacts from the F.Bombers be killed also?
wait to see torps launch, activate smarties, all torps die = 0 dmg?
-----
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 06:56:00 -
[370]
Edited by: Oljud Zork on 04/11/2009 07:01:58
Originally by: Zaethiel So, if Citadel torps can be destroyed by smartbombs, can the compacts from the F.Bombers be killed also?
wait to see torps launch, activate smarties, all torps die = 0 dmg?
I suggest that before you reply to the topic, read the entire thread first. The discussion about smartbombs ended on page 6.
Originally by: LoveKebab
smartbombs aint killing torps from fighters lol, they are just about the same as normal torps so HP is pretty much the same and u CANT kill torpedo with smartbombs for like a year now
fighters are orbiting just out of the 7500m smartbomb range and torpedo is hitting within 2 sec of when it's fired so u dont have much time to kill those 20 torps... if u cant keep ur drones alive u should not fly a drone ship...
|
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 16:58:00 -
[371]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 04/11/2009 17:02:57
Originally by: Noghri ViR
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
Horrible decision. Not being able to dock is the reason why we don't see more of these. There's people out there that don't want to lock their main high skill point character into one ship that they can't ever get out of.
Those changes are great, and the reason we don't see more motherships (current term) out there is that a mothership is an overpriced glorified carrier atm which dies too fast. Expect 400-500 supercarriers after dominion. I wouldn't say that's too few..
Regarding the Remote ECM Burst I agree that it should have a set amount of time where targets are unable to lock. I'd say 5 or 10 sec (maybe depending on skill-level?) would be reasonable. |
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 17:10:00 -
[372]
Originally by: ThePurpleTurtle
Or you have to suck it up and put it in a CSMA. Personally, I find that putting up your own POS and not broadcasting the location to your corp works well, you can also uncheck a box and prevent your corpmates from getting into the POS without a password. Just a couple things no one ever seems to mention.
one thing many people don't know is.... CEO's have automatic access to all corp poses, regardless of whether there is a password, the allow corp/alliance boxes are unticked or etc.
Now this may not be a problem for most people as if you're an oldtimer you've probably been flying for a ceo you know you can trust. But this isn't always the case, some people get greedy.
A wise man once told me, "...the padlock on that trunk isn't to stop people from stealing from inside it, but to keep them honest."
20 billion isk is a lot to entrust to anyone, more so if you did all the work to build and haul the minerals, components, etc. Which is why I use a garage/logoffski alt.
|
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 03:37:00 -
[373]
does anyone know what the explosion velocity and radius of the F/B torps are? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Slippy Pete
Eye of God Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 05:02:00 -
[374]
I would like to suggest the idea that fighter bombers have a further orbiting range after all a faction smartbomb that cost about 80million can blow up another ships main weapon that is supposed to be far superior to a normal carrier or at least just make it that only officer smartbombs would be able to have the fighter bombers in range.
|
King Dave
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 14:26:00 -
[375]
From what i have just seen. If you do not have roles within a corporation, you cannot access your own corp hangers. Is this intended, because that's pretty fail.
|
dame rose
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 20:07:00 -
[376]
hhmm i see a huge problem on suprcarrier. Their drone bay need to be extend because you can't bring enough fighter/fighter bomber's for a long fight.
And fighter bomber need start fire on the targe at 30km i think because many fighter can be destroy during their approach and they are very low, and if they start fire during their approach we have more chance see supercarrier on the field if they can easily bring more fighter bomber and if they are not useless during their approach (new assault ship can kill them easily)
|
ThePurpleTurtle
High Flyers Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 18:47:00 -
[377]
Originally by: McFly
Originally by: ThePurpleTurtle
Or you have to suck it up and put it in a CSMA. Personally, I find that putting up your own POS and not broadcasting the location to your corp works well, you can also uncheck a box and prevent your corpmates from getting into the POS without a password. Just a couple things no one ever seems to mention.
one thing many people don't know is.... CEO's have automatic access to all corp poses, regardless of whether there is a password, the allow corp/alliance boxes are unticked or etc.
Now this may not be a problem for most people as if you're an oldtimer you've probably been flying for a ceo you know you can trust. But this isn't always the case, some people get greedy.
A wise man once told me, "...the padlock on that trunk isn't to stop people from stealing from inside it, but to keep them honest."
20 billion isk is a lot to entrust to anyone, more so if you did all the work to build and haul the minerals, components, etc. Which is why I use a garage/logoffski alt.
If you can't trust your CEO you should probably not be in the corp. But not trusting one of the Directors is another thing, and if you don't trust one (or more) of them you should probably consider discussing this with your CEO. But I do understand your argument, I guess I am just lucky enough to be able to trust all those in my corp who have Director/CEO status.
Originally by: King Dave From what i have just seen. If you do not have roles within a corporation, you cannot access your own corp hangers. Is this intended, because that's pretty fail.
Yes this is intended, but no it is not fail as this makes sense because it makes new players in a corp earn the trust required to have access to corp hangars and such. It also acts as a deterrent to corp thieves, though many corps just hand access to new players without knowing them or having an X # of days trial period before allowing basic access [ex. first tab]. But if you have been in the corp for a while, there really is no reason for you to not have the roles, and as such you should ask a director or your CEO for them.
|
Bhazra
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 23:21:00 -
[378]
Originally by: McFly
Originally by: ThePurpleTurtle
Or you have to suck it up and put it in a CSMA. Personally, I find that putting up your own POS and not broadcasting the location to your corp works well, you can also uncheck a box and prevent your corpmates from getting into the POS without a password. Just a couple things no one ever seems to mention.
one thing many people don't know is.... CEO's have automatic access to all corp poses, regardless of whether there is a password, the allow corp/alliance boxes are unticked or etc.
Now this may not be a problem for most people as if you're an oldtimer you've probably been flying for a ceo you know you can trust. But this isn't always the case, some people get greedy.
A wise man once told me, "...the padlock on that trunk isn't to stop people from stealing from inside it, but to keep them honest."
20 billion isk is a lot to entrust to anyone, more so if you did all the work to build and haul the minerals, components, etc. Which is why I use a garage/logoffski alt.
Another thing - Any character who can manage a tower and has the correct settings - if they get close outside the shield, they can just change the password. - so any pos managing chars in the corp can also get in if they want too.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:14:00 -
[379]
Originally by: Bhazra
Originally by: McFly
Originally by: ThePurpleTurtle
Or you have to suck it up and put it in a CSMA. Personally, I find that putting up your own POS and not broadcasting the location to your corp works well, you can also uncheck a box and prevent your corpmates from getting into the POS without a password. Just a couple things no one ever seems to mention.
one thing many people don't know is.... CEO's have automatic access to all corp poses, regardless of whether there is a password, the allow corp/alliance boxes are unticked or etc.
Now this may not be a problem for most people as if you're an oldtimer you've probably been flying for a ceo you know you can trust. But this isn't always the case, some people get greedy.
A wise man once told me, "...the padlock on that trunk isn't to stop people from stealing from inside it, but to keep them honest."
20 billion isk is a lot to entrust to anyone, more so if you did all the work to build and haul the minerals, components, etc. Which is why I use a garage/logoffski alt.
Another thing - Any character who can manage a tower and has the correct settings - if they get close outside the shield, they can just change the password. - so any pos managing chars in the corp can also get in if they want too.
This is the biggest security problem imho.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:46:00 -
[380]
By the way, CCP just a friendly reminder to look at the Supercarrier's fighter bay size; Nyx's 20/20 FB/Fighter layout isnt enough room for any other drones, let alone losing 1 is a pain in the bum in laggy fights when you can not recall them fast enough when under fire.
And this is not even possible with other Supercarrier classes...
|
|
Soleil Fournier
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 20:59:00 -
[381]
We're only 2 1/2 weeks away now.
Whats the status on:
Dedicated fighter bays? The extra tools we'd be receiving as mentioned in the dev blog? What CCP thinks of the current sisi iteration of super carriers based on feedback/testing?
Thanks
|
Rewt ed
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 05:23:00 -
[382]
Super Carriers should not be able to dock. They are fine as they are. Generally if you have enough isk to fork out for a super cap you can probably afford a character to park it with. Hugging stations with super capitals sounds like a lot of fun huh?
FB requiring fighters 5 is fine. If you're going to field a SC hopefully you're going to be properly skilled. fighter 5 only reinforces this. If you can't spare 50+ days for the skill, then super caps probably aren't for you, as it's a long and tedious process to become well skilled for them.
Super carriers being WTF bbq to multiple titans. Of course this is expected. If you have 4 battleships vs 1 battle cruiser you should expect to be WTFBBQ.
A solution to titans wtf bbqing everything is limit their fuel bays to a certain amount or change the module fuel requirement so they can't just stay on grid and kill everything on sight forever.
|
Nagelbrett
Congregatio Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 11:15:00 -
[383]
Originally by: Serena Ku By the way, CCP just a friendly reminder to look at the Supercarrier's fighter bay size; Nyx's 20/20 FB/Fighter layout isnt enough room for any other drones, let alone losing 1 is a pain in the bum in laggy fights when you can not recall them fast enough when under fire.
And this is not even possible with other Supercarrier classes...
Yep. i would like to have a clarification too
until now, it really didnt had any impact on the Wyvern having 50kmŠ Dronespace less than the Nyx, but with the expansion, the Nyx can field 20/20 and the Wyvern is crippelt with 20/10, i mean wtf, anyone going Nyx now, just because of the Dronespace? I like the Wyvern with its throw away holes in it *g*
|
fibergunner
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 21:33:00 -
[384]
Well thats crap I refuse to live in a ship forever its just ******ed.
|
SXYGeeK
Gallente do you Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 21:55:00 -
[385]
supercarries now get 1 extra drone per level as opposed to 3, with no damage buff to compensate ?
-We So SeXy |
Salam Farooj
INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 2009
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 00:38:00 -
[386]
Originally by: SXYGeeK supercarries now get 1 extra drone per level as opposed to 3, with no damage buff to compensate ?
And not even a posting anywhere to explain why it was done?
Awesome, so now it's a Dread with easily destroyable weapons that can't be docked, and only for 13x the cost.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 01:06:00 -
[387]
This really better be a typo Seleene or you just undid all the good work you've done on these ships.
|
casai
Caldari North Eastern Swat
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 01:18:00 -
[388]
Edited by: casai on 11/11/2009 01:21:52 yea and a big fat target painted on its back
soo this is gonna pretty much make them worse than before!
|
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 01:33:00 -
[389]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources This really better be a typo Seleene or you just undid all the good work you've done on these ships.
It ****ing better be a typo. If not, there is ZERO point in having a super carrier. Great, 20 bil isk ship no more effective than a 2 bil dreadnaught. Yeah, thanks for that......
Anyone want to buy a ****ing Wyvern?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 01:43:00 -
[390]
Originally by: Buxaroo
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources This really better be a typo Seleene or you just undid all the good work you've done on these ships.
It ****ing better be a typo. If not, there is ZERO point in having a super carrier. Great, 20 bil isk ship no more effective than a 2 bil dreadnaught. Yeah, thanks for that......
Anyone want to buy a ****ing Wyvern?
If this doesn't change back I, too, will be selling a wyvern
|
|
ElvenLord
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 01:46:00 -
[391]
Edited by: ElvenLord on 11/11/2009 02:03:31 if it was +2 per level I might could have lived with it but this is ridiculous
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 02:18:00 -
[392]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
If this doesn't change back I, too, will be selling a wyvern
I asked a GM in sisi about this as I also logged in and was suprised the Nyx only could launch 10. His response was it is a bug and would be fixed at the next downtime.
We can breathe guys... it's ok.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 02:25:00 -
[393]
Would really appreciate a post telling us if this is a bug/typo or not created by how drones were handled serverside.
|
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 02:26:00 -
[394]
Originally by: Serena Ku
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
If this doesn't change back I, too, will be selling a wyvern
I asked a GM in sisi about this as I also logged in and was suprised the Nyx only could launch 10. His response was it is a bug and would be fixed at the next downtime.
We can breathe guys... it's ok.
Oh man I was about to murder someone
|
casai
Caldari North Eastern Swat
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 09:52:00 -
[395]
i very much doubt it is a bug when they go and change the description think that guy was talking out of hiss ass
Like ccp will ever be fair to ms pilots
|
Nyx Spire
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 09:52:00 -
[396]
WTB a Nyx ;) fully fitted or not... not willing to pay the ridiculous 13+ bill price tag for this heap of **** as i am after it for nostalgic reasons if you feel like selling your Nyx send me a mail in game we will chat... i am obviously not going to offer you 1x trint for it ether / but the price is debatable if your looking to reprocess your Nyx in the up and coming months.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 10:02:00 -
[397]
Edited by: Serena Ku on 11/11/2009 10:04:13
Originally by: casai i very much doubt it is a bug when they go and change the description think that guy was talking out of hiss ass
Like ccp will ever be fair to ms pilots
I doubt a CCP/GM member would willfully lie about such stuff.
But as it stands right now with the release of the 113614 sisi patch, the supercapitals are f***ed up big time.
|
Odda
Gallente Phantom Squad Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 12:12:00 -
[398]
Originally by: SXYGeeK supercarries now get 1 extra drone per level as opposed to 3, with no damage buff to compensate ?
WTF. that removes the whole point of having a supercarrier.
If nothing give them a dmg bonus!
|
John Zorg
Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 15:17:00 -
[399]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: Buxaroo
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources This really better be a typo Seleene or you just undid all the good work you've done on these ships.
It ****ing better be a typo. If not, there is ZERO point in having a super carrier. Great, 20 bil isk ship no more effective than a 2 bil dreadnaught. Yeah, thanks for that......
Anyone want to buy a ****ing Wyvern?
If this doesn't change back I, too, will be selling a wyvern
I just finished Training Amarr Carrier V :< How ******ed is that. So we get fighter bombers, and everything else about the SC is nerfed? Makes me a sad panda :<
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 15:33:00 -
[400]
Originally by: Odda
Originally by: SXYGeeK supercarries now get 1 extra drone per level as opposed to 3, with no damage buff to compensate ?
WTF. that removes the whole point of having a supercarrier.
If nothing give them a dmg bonus!
QFT
20% dmg and hp per level of carrier skill would fix this ridiculous change and at the same time reduce the "smartbomb kills fighter-bombers too fast" issue as well as the "too little drone bay for spares" issue.
If the change stays without any considerable compensation...yea, uhm, wts Aeon ?
|
|
NightHawk VenGarden
Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 16:23:00 -
[401]
Edited by: NightHawk VenGarden on 11/11/2009 16:24:58 We still do not have definitive word from CCP as to weather this is a bug or not. However a description change along with the code change is two VERY suspicious bugs at once...
So comon CCP, is this a bug...or have you gone and screwed the pooch two weeks before patch by introducing a fail to a ship that after 2 years of bubble hugging finally has a chance to get out into the daylight. Have you nerfed a ship that your work on SiSi has made people SOOOOOOOOOO excited that they've been selling like hot-cakes for the past few weeks. Have you nerfed this ship JUST TWO FREAKING WEEKS BEFORE RELEASE and thereby screwed the wallets of hundreds of your 0.0 pilots?
Comon CCP....tell me I'm wrong...
****ing fail. |
Sith8
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 16:39:00 -
[402]
Originally by: SXYGeeK supercarries now get 1 extra drone per level as opposed to 3, with no damage buff to compensate ?
What tha fak? then why build them at all?
|
seliana tanis
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 16:45:00 -
[403]
If this isn't a typo....wow wts 2x nyx.
|
mineswallower
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 18:30:00 -
[404]
Sigh, I thought I would have a reason to actually use a Nyx again.
CCP, why dont you try listening to your game designers, who have actually played the game at this level and know about this stuff, rather than just running round screwing up the first decent change you have made in game play in about 3 years?
Noah, wake up and take control please, or no more drinks at fan fest for you!!!!!! Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal |
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 18:32:00 -
[405]
Super glad I didn't buy a nyx yet. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Ap0ll0n
Gallente Lone Star Joint Venture Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:07:00 -
[406]
This is either a mistake or part of a plan to reduce lag on the server during huge fleet fights, by reducing number drones on the battlefield..
Why would they do fighterbombers for motherships, if they get same dps as regular fighters currently have?
|
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:21:00 -
[407]
I am usually a CCP fanboy, but if they nerf the fighter bombers for the super carriers I won't be wasting my time on this game anymore. I put in WAY to much work attaining my super carrier, I have grinded mining and ratting for 2 months straight and sold most of my other caps just so I could get the Wyvern and all of it's fittings so that I can actually use the ship the way that they are meant to be used, fighting. I am talking about SOUL CRUSHING grinding. I have put off buying/building a mothership for the last 2 years because they are a WORTHLESS ship right now. But when I went on the test server and saw the DPS and the tank that these ships are SUPPOSE to have, I did everything I could and scrambled like hell to get one at the detriment of doing other things I would rather do like blow up other peoples ships and actually play the game as opposed to grinding.
No one, and I repeat no one is going to put their super carriers on the field if they nerf the dps.
So, if you devs really have nerfed the fighter bombers and going to stick with it, I demand a god damn way to insure my Wyvern so that I can go to a POS and take off my fittings and self destruct the worthless piece of **** and get my isk back.
|
Thaeus
Black Serpent Technologies R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:48:00 -
[408]
Yeah if this is the way it's going to be CCP, You're gonna lose a lot of players, and a lot of supercap usage. I'll sell my wyvern and my Nyx and let the accounts go down. it's a waste. In fact I'm gonna try and sell em NOW while they're still worth a damn. *looks for some unsuspecting noob to buy my ships. ;p* Oh **** IT'S A TARP! |
Dramaticus
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:49:00 -
[409]
um yeah im pretty much cancelling my wyvern order if this goes through because its seriously dumb. id rather spend the billions on disposable dreads that do the same amount of damage.
Please don't use RL pictuers of players in Sig without permission. - WeatherMan |
El Mauru
Amarr Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:49:00 -
[410]
Originally by: Buxaroo But when I went on the test server and saw the DPS and the tank that these ships are SUPPOSE to have, I did everything I could and scrambled like hell to get one at the detriment of doing other things I would rather do
regardless of the supercarrier-changes : you fail kind sir, because something like this has never happened in eve before. -
|
|
Mioelnir
Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:51:00 -
[411]
And while this bug is fixed back to 3 fighters per level, also fix the Hel's new bonus. It was meant to be something worthwhile (no, 17.5k EHP instead of 14k EHP (normalized) is NOT a worthwhile bonus for a supercarrier).
|
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:54:00 -
[412]
Originally by: El Mauru
Originally by: Buxaroo But when I went on the test server and saw the DPS and the tank that these ships are SUPPOSE to have, I did everything I could and scrambled like hell to get one at the detriment of doing other things I would rather do
regardless of the supercarrier-changes : you fail kind sir, because something like this has never happened in eve before.
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:54:00 -
[413]
/signed
At the start, I was excited to hear about the changes and was glad to see that with the changes, there might actually get used in fights. Now of course CCP has had time for their balls to be chopped off or just went MIA, again. I was so excited to get a use out of my NYX and hope all the other MOM pilots out there would come out of the wood work and fight in theirs. If CCPs intent is to get people to use their nice ships than making them suck is not the way they need to go. Give them the tools to be able to kill enough ships to make it worth the risk of losing it.
- Fighter Bombers- great idea * Hope the torps do not get ganked by Smart Bombs * Hope the dps is high enough to make the risk of deploying them worth the risk. * Hope the tank is good enough for the above.
- Jump range increase. * Awesome, about time
- Talk of making Slaves not affect Super Caps, *OMG!! Really, why take something away? Just add a set for Shields (or make the ones in the game already effect SC.) IF you take them away I want my 2b back.
- Not being able to dock. * ok, my Nyx char cannot do anything else anyway.
CCP D NO F%%K THIS UP. YOU WANT TO SEE SC ON THE FIELD? Don't HIT THEM WITH THE NERF BAT!
|
Dri Kulsane
Amarr Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 19:58:00 -
[414]
There is no respect in making a change like this. Bad enough it was decided that such glorious ships were down graded to a sub class level at the start, but now the decision to take us all from behind while we were smiling.
I've been an Aeon pilot for a long time. I've held onto the ship through tick and thin. For the past few years I've trained one character to use that ship to the best of it's abilities, just like so many others here posting. I know what they are capable of, and with this change you are reducing them to nothing all over again.
If it's an isk sink you were in need of CCP, then you just pulled the wool over a lot of peoples eyes here with this. Imagine how many Mothership's have been sold in the past few weeks since the original announcement was posted about them being "FIXED". Well, all those people just sank their isks into an area of the game which will never be used again as it stands.
Sincerely, Dri Kulsane
|
The Mittani
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 20:32:00 -
[415]
i don't even fly a mothership but this nerf is bs and you know it
Sins of a Solar Spymaster: my ~fair and balanced~ column TheMittani @ Twitter
|
Vuk Lau
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 20:33:00 -
[416]
I will just say two words - WTF?
Seriously guys stop focking nerfing supercaps. Removing DD - ok I can live with it, but nerfing initially crappy supercarriers, and not to mention castrating titans and then nerfing them to hell is utterly stupid.
So please stop doing that, or no one will fly them which means they will not die at all. Dont blame playerbase for not following CCP vision of only 5 titans in total in New Eden.
|
Agmar
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 20:37:00 -
[417]
Originally by: The Mittani i don't even fly a mothership but this nerf is bs and you know it
I don't fly a MS... anymore... but this nerf is BS and you know it
|
Thaeus
Black Serpent Technologies R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 20:48:00 -
[418]
Yep back to it hiding logged off in a super safe in low sec somewhere never to be used again. LOL. CCP, I hope read and consider these threads. There are a lot of very ****ed off players here Oh **** IT'S A TARP! |
SolarKnight
Gallente ORIGIN SYSTEMS Shadows of Light
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 21:06:00 -
[419]
This will be another -1 future MS pilot if change is true. The Light in the Darkness
|
Arcanim Al'Seif
Volatile Nature Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 21:06:00 -
[420]
I'm afraid you are going to have to explain the use of the "super" carrier in such a role if it is only able to field the standard number of fighters that I would expect from a ship that costs a 15th of the price, from a ship that can actually dock and be insured.
So the only "super" part of this carrier, that makes it superior to a carrier is that it can't be jammed? Whoop-dee-doo. At least now I can safely field my 10 fighters without the risk of being unable to target. Good thing those fighters are immune to smartbombs...no...wait.
This has to be the most ******ed change you've come up with. Titans are still a viable weapons thanks to their weapon damage bonus, making them a serious attack vessel that you need to worry about, on top of their logistics capability for moving fleets around. The threat from supercarriers however is reduced to zilch. Oh, and you can't even run gang-link modules? Fantastic. Someone is going to have to do a run down on what benefits are going to come of my being able to field one of these ships. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels. Zymurgist |
|
casai
Caldari North Eastern Swat
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 21:20:00 -
[421]
its been what 24hrs+ lots of emo and not 1 person from ccp has come forward not exactley good business
|
MAX MEXX
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:04:00 -
[422]
Time to go again!
|
Jack Sparroxx
Honour Bound Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:25:00 -
[423]
Well if this really is going to happen. I might aswell just let my MS pilot account run out. I want the pewnage that should come with a pricy toy like this. not dps on a carrier lvl.. Might aswell not have bothered with getting a nyx.
and worst of all, they will be worth bugger all, no one in thair right mind will buy a "super carrier" with normal carrier dps. f.. that. I have to many accounts anyhow.. will give me the the excuse to terminate one of them
|
Dri Kulsane
Amarr Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:52:00 -
[424]
Edited by: Dri Kulsane on 11/11/2009 22:53:05 Edited by: Dri Kulsane on 11/11/2009 22:52:48 Start posting on this thread: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1212602
At least that thread was started by a player and clearly voices our concerns.
|
Traderjohn
Caldari Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 00:01:00 -
[425]
Edited by: Traderjohn on 12/11/2009 00:02:14 What is the incentive to get a monthership / Supercarrier now?
The only bonus that still makes any difference is the immune to Ewar. MS has no role and is now worthless. I might aswell go keep my carrier instead of getting another MS.
Cross posted this from another thread.
So Supercarriers:
Can't dock Can't insure, and possibly won't receive any base insurance upon destruction Can't deploy more fighters than a carrier Can't triage like a regular carrier Can't break a dread tank with 10-15 fighter bombers Cost 15 billion + fittings + fighters Can't tank on their own and require a fleet of triage carriers to be used, but yet -> Don't offer incentive's to group play by giving gang bonuses or special abilities like portaling
Maybe I'm missing what they are "super" at, other than frustrating to any pilot that wants to fly them.
|
Skags
Minmatar Conflagration. Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 00:41:00 -
[426]
Moms broke again.
|
Alex Under
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 01:07:00 -
[427]
Back to them being Paperweights again.
Leave it to CCP to make a change on SISI and not tell anyone of it. It's just like them to try to sneak in a Supercap change and see if anyone notices.
So now with Dominion, they've basically removed a need for Dreads with this expansion as there won't be any POS bashing. They've also nerfed Titans and Motherships. Guess this was CCP's plan all along to nerf capital ships. Motherships are back to having no role and since they've gotten nerfed, Titans will never be fielded in combat either with Moms getting nerfed, so their role is worthless other then jump portal.
Dominion = Capital Nerfing
CCP Abathur, I still luv ya, but certainly don't like these supercap changes.
|
Needa3
Minmatar BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 01:10:00 -
[428]
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
you serious? ffs i wonder if you actually get your own game? the Hel is not a shield tank
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 01:23:00 -
[429]
CCPs Six step processes to ****ing everyone off.
Step 1: Announce that a massive change to Super Caps is coming; in the hope of BALANCE and to get people to use them.
Step 2: Boost the Super Carriers to a level that makes people want to, either buy one or dust off the one they have.
Step 3: Put the changes on the test server.
Step 4: Watch all the woo... ayah.
Step 5: Nerf said changes to a level that ****es off the community.
Step 6: In another few years "look" as Super Carriers again.
CCP pls don't fail. PLEASE for the love of all that is holly in the world make Super carriers worth deploying into a fight. That means an offensive punch and a decent tank to reflect their cost.
ty
|
Sea Gate
Caldari Sea Gate Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 03:31:00 -
[430]
Edited by: Sea Gate on 12/11/2009 03:32:18 If we complain enough they put it back to the way it was.
A year or 2 ago they tried limiting carriers to 5 drones... people complained so they didn't do it.
DevBlog
|
|
Bifferd
Lowlink Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 03:58:00 -
[431]
WTS mothership pilot...
unless ccp can undo their nastiness
|
Nyx Spire
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 06:11:00 -
[432]
ok i know i have been a bit greedy but in all honousty i dont want to see these ships nurf yeah sure i think one would make a fitting tome logoffski if i ever do away with my eve account but damn id still like to be able to fly one a few times in battle.
guys drones models can be turned off so can missiles yes torp VFX has always been over the top its bigger than smart bombs vfx and can be more annoying that the old DD's some times.
25 drones isnt a issue **** the nyx should get 30 additionally i am requesting from the players
CAN we please have a current trinity mother ship show info screen shot a buff sisi screen shot and a nurf sisi screen shot of the mother ship bonuses and their attributes for easy on hand comparison
would be good to support the maths and or provide evidence
|
cpu939
Gallente Volatile Nature Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 07:23:00 -
[433]
Originally by: Sea Gate Edited by: Sea Gate on 12/11/2009 03:32:18 If we complain enough they put it back to the way it was.
A year or 2 ago they tried limiting carriers to 5 drones... people complained so they didn't do it.
DevBlog
did ccp let zulupark out to play with the super carriers.
personal changes that should happen to them
1 - drones put back to where they should be 20 at lvl 5 2 - resized atm they are 3.3 times bigger then a Machariel, how about making them 6600m long if it can' dock might as well make it bigger 3 - give them back the 1 warfare link mod 4 - give them a jump portal make its range smaller then a titans, so titan are still useful also make it an auto jump in your fleet jumps and so do you 5 - not realy important but give back the clone bay. 6 - bonus to capital repair mod sheild or armor maybe 7.5% each level 7 - bonus to cap/shield/armor tranfers/reps not to be the amount but to be the cap so it take less i.e. -10% per level to cap cost this would mean that i'm not going to rep as much as a triaged carrier but i'm going to have cap for my own tank. 8 - the jump range change is cool so don't change that back
ok 4 might be a bit out ther and far off the goal post but well it 7am and i haven't had any sleep
0101011 001101111 011011000 110000101110100 01101001011011000 1100101001000000 1001110011000010 11101000111010101 11001001100101
|
Odda
Gallente Phantom Squad Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 07:54:00 -
[434]
Whel i thinkt he lack of response from ccp tells the full story ( nerf incoming )
|
Katana Seiko
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 08:58:00 -
[435]
Can I have a new Gallente Supercarrier on SiSi please? --- "Multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign for a diseased mind." -Terry Pratchett |
John Zorg
Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 10:19:00 -
[436]
Edited by: John Zorg on 12/11/2009 10:20:33 Well, I agree, this is ******ed. When I started playing, super carriers were much feared because they are so "powerful". After getting into 0.0 realized that they are just juicy targets. So what happens... people are scared to use them. Now, you give us great excitement with new higher DPS fighters, better tanks etc... only to fsck us over again...
You gave the Titan a integrated Seige mode, why not give the Super carriers integrated Triage? By removing 10 drones you are effectivly cutting away 50% of the ships DPS. Fair enough you want to increase the Fighter Bomber damage but what about the other drones? The Nxy is supposed to be the best Super carrier, now it's bonus is useless. Is the reduction in drones to improve lag in fights?
When your enemy brings out super carriers this must mean business. Now they are just prime targets again. Please make them feared. Game houses seem to not care what gamers want or enjoy anymore.
|
John Zorg
Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 11:06:00 -
[437]
After going through this thread again. There seems to me a reicurring issue regarding not being able to rep ones own HP just because of the sheer amount of HP that super caps now have. If the Titan is now basically the big daddy of the Dreadnaught, why can the Super Carrier not be the big daddy of the carrier?
Basically, leave the rep on super caps as is and add integrate the Triage ability into the Super Carriers. The Titan basically had the seige module integrated. This way the Titan is dependent on Triage support as it is a mega damage dealer and the Super carrier can fulfil the role of a support ship. I personally feel that Jump portals and all these other fancy ideas for super carriers is really going make them imbalanced.
- Leave the bonus to +3 drones launched to the carrier skill for super carriers. The SC should also be able to do massive damage. - Integrate all the Triage bonuses into the Super carrier.
This will force the Titan/SC to work together on the field and will add value to the fleet.
Please just listen to the people that play the game :<
|
Sarah Norbulk
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 11:19:00 -
[438]
Two days and no sign of a dev. Is CCP too afraid of their ****ed off player base to shoe their face. No reason why it was changed. No response to if it was a mistake. Why to hide like a bunch of pussies.
|
casai
Caldari North Eastern Swat
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 11:38:00 -
[439]
star trek online comeing out in feb
wonder if they will have a better pr team
|
IAmPrimary
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 11:49:00 -
[440]
/me closeing my 6 acc's and moveing over to sto if this new bul**hit ever gets implimented.
|
|
ezraniel
Caldari 0ccam's Razor Varangians.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 12:12:00 -
[441]
Originally by: Buxaroo
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources This really better be a typo Seleene or you just undid all the good work you've done on these ships.
It ****ing better be a typo. If not, there is ZERO point in having a super carrier. Great, 20 bil isk ship no more effective than a 2 bil dreadnaught. Yeah, thanks for that......
Anyone want to buy a ****ing Wyvern?
offering 2 bil :p
In all honesty... if this is not a bug its a BIG slap in the face and has "nerfed" a lot of the economy of eve right now. Because i'm very sure a LOT of ppl and big alliances where ramping up their supercarrier production in anticipation of DOminion, thus effectivly making TONS of resources wasted.
|
Mhorbaine
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 12:16:00 -
[442]
cross poastin from SHC because its what the cool kids do:
Originally by: "Mhorbaine"
mm will still use my nyx tbh since 4mill armor and 10x fighter bombers aint something to be sniffed at (still what... 6.5k? dps with fb5? on a nyx) but it kinda annoys me as it removes the other bonus that moms provide which no1 seems to talk about...
the ability to drop 20x drones of any size vs any target.... yeah fighters are nice but a lot of the time i've chosen to use 20x sentries or med drones etc to take out cruiser hulls (hics esp) and it looks like those days are gone... makin HICs pretty invulnerable vs MS since they can easily tank the meager 10x drones in question or sig tank fighters/fb'sp
|
Tradesman Mcgee
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 12:38:00 -
[443]
WTS mothership, mothership pilot. WTS a bunch of PLEX that I wont need since I might as well close 6 of my 7 accounts, since CCP obviously do everything they can to ruin the game with Dominion release. -------------------------- Insert signature. |
Sternin Mantur
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 13:06:00 -
[444]
Please fire head game designer (if any). Then hire someone that actually plays the game and is able to keep players informed. Thank you.
|
New ones
Caldari Koln united
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 13:32:00 -
[445]
Originally by: Sternin Mantur Please fire head game designer (if any). Then hire someone that actually plays the game and is able to keep players informed. Thank you.
Yes please!
|
Vector950
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 13:49:00 -
[446]
Epic fail, with this "boost" it much more worse then was before. Before "boost" moms have 20 drones, it was versatile ship in case of simple drones (20 t2 warriors can kill interceptors and such) and you was free to choose to use rep, jam,painter and such E-War. And with fighters mom have 2000 dps(Nyx more). NOW what we have.... we have 10 fighters that can't kill even Heavy Dictor. So we have simple carriers.....
SO, "Boost" give us only big HP and doubtful Bomber fighters, but NERF clone vat bay, numbers of fighters(versatality in drones), gang links. Totals in my opinion, before that "boost" was much more better.
|
Etien Aldragoran
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 13:55:00 -
[447]
Originally by: SXYGeeK supercarries now get 1 extra drone per level as opposed to 3, with no damage buff to compensate ?
CCP destroying the game by not playing it.
|
Ceralio
The Carebear Stare Hydroponic Zone
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 14:02:00 -
[448]
Edited by: Ceralio on 12/11/2009 14:02:13 Guess i wont buy my mom and titan after all. Haha
god what a worthless nerf.
Lottery is closed, refunding tickets |
DrefsabZN
Caldari Butterfly Effect Corp.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 14:20:00 -
[449]
WTB: Nyx 2.5bil :)
|
Sea Gate
Caldari Sea Gate Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 15:43:00 -
[450]
WTS 3 characters and a hel
|
|
Rose Nuke
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:03:00 -
[451]
so now we will have something that does the same as a carrier just takes a little longer to kill wow so worth the price, hmmm not sure?
As far as the titan changes go its not a nerf i think it more overpowered than it was before most large aliences can field nearly double figure titans that will own other cap fleet.
|
Suboran
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:14:00 -
[452]
This change seems to sum up ccp at this moment, ccp doesnt know where it is coming from or going.
The ccp devs seem to be fiddling around with conceptual ideas 2 weeks before the patch is supposed to go live. From what I have seen and read, dominion should be renamed disapointment.
The game is in a dire state of economical turmoil it seems and ccp devs are still banding radical changes, buff motherships one week and nerf them the next. It is incredibly poor from a company that I once had absolute faith in after abandoning the dabacle of SWG, however it all seems to head tha\t way with patch after patch of bad improvements.
SAVE OUR MOTHERSHIPS AND TURN THE GAME AROUND!
|
Carai an'Caldazar
Amarr Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:33:00 -
[453]
Edited by: Carai an''Caldazar on 12/11/2009 18:36:20 I feel the need to give my opinion due to the amount of whining I see here and on alliance forums.
As I see it, a 6 billion ISK ship would rock if it could do 2-3x Dreadnoughts DPS while moving, have assignable fighters when not using fighter bombers, a Hitpoint buffer surpassed only by titans, Immunity to EWAR, and massive logistics capability. The inability to dock is obvious with the station mechanics playing a role for sovereignty and a massive HP buffer ship as it would be impossible to kill playing station games.
I'm not a Wyvern pilot yet (Just a lowly Chimera/Phoenix pilot) but have been considering it for some time. These changes not only increase the liklihood I will one day be one, but at the same time the liklihood I'll actually use it on the battlefield instead of fly around like a pu$$y like most MOM pilots.
Not trying to be a troll, just calling it how I see it. ~Carai an'Caldazar~ ~Carai an'Ellisande~ -- Dawn of a new Empire --
|
Mhorbaine
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:41:00 -
[454]
and that is why you sir would loose it to the first hictor that decided to point you up :)
not trollin, just sayin
|
Devilish Ledoux
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:45:00 -
[455]
I have never in my life seen or heard of a capital ship that qualified as a "moving target".
|
Carai an'Caldazar
Amarr Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:45:00 -
[456]
If I lose it to the first HIC pilot that points me, I have no business flying the ship in the first place. Large Energy Neutralizers, Drones/Fighters, and hopefully some support should clear out the HIC's with points on me quick enough. This is status quo whether your flying a standard capital ship or a super capital ship.
Even as it is, my Chimera/Phoenix are deployed in capital ship fleets with support... Why would I behave any differently in a Supercarrier?
Or is the ranting from solo-Supercarrier pilots? ~Carai an'Caldazar~ ~Carai an'Ellisande~ -- Dawn of a new Empire --
|
Supreme Feather
Indigo Rising
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:03:00 -
[457]
What exactly does the 'Super' stand for again CCP?
This ain't working one bit..
|
Sarah Norbulk
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:06:00 -
[458]
Edited by: Sarah Norbulk on 12/11/2009 19:06:06
Originally by: Carai an'Caldazar If I lose it to the first HIC pilot that points me, I have no business flying the ship in the first place. Large Energy Neutralizers, Drones/Fighters, and hopefully some support should clear out the HIC's with points on me quick enough. This is status quo whether your flying a standard capital ship or a super capital ship.
Even as it is, my Chimera/Phoenix are deployed in capital ship fleets with support... Why would I behave any differently in a Supercarrier?
Or is the ranting from solo-Supercarrier pilots?
If you want more DPS than a dread your gonna have to sacrifice all your highs for DCUs. That's rights. Neuts, smartbombs, RR can't be fit if you actually want to be effective. If you do fit utility slots your better off flying a dread. It's a lose/lose. There is no reason to fly this ship over a carrier or dread now.
Edit: typo
|
R0ze
Exile Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:10:00 -
[459]
Originally by: The Mittani Edited by: The Mittani on 12/11/2009 16:17:46 Another seriouspost: What on earth is going on in your dev environment when you assign a team of random devs to re-do the already completed/settled work of a previous team?
The primary reason why the nullsec playerbase is even vaguely considering the Dominion sov changes in a positive light is because the known architects of the design was /one of us/. Someone we know understands the game and all the things that can go wrong with it. When Soundwave or Abathur mouth off about sov, we can at least know that they understand where we're coming from.
Similarly: the supercapital changes were, until now, designed by someone who flew the damn things extensively, logged many hours pvping in them, and lost a titan to boot. Abathur has cred on supercapital changes. Who are you, Nozh? How many hours have you logged in a supercap? Where does your team's credibility on these new, unasked-for supercapital changes come from?
Leave nullsec and capital changes to devs who actually have some shred of credibility/experience in design.
Quoting from other thread..
|
Carai an'Caldazar
Amarr Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:19:00 -
[460]
Edited by: Carai an''Caldazar on 12/11/2009 19:20:59
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk Edited by: Sarah Norbulk on 12/11/2009 19:06:06
Originally by: Carai an'Caldazar If I lose it to the first HIC pilot that points me, I have no business flying the ship in the first place. Large Energy Neutralizers, Drones/Fighters, and hopefully some support should clear out the HIC's with points on me quick enough. This is status quo whether your flying a standard capital ship or a super capital ship.
Even as it is, my Chimera/Phoenix are deployed in capital ship fleets with support... Why would I behave any differently in a Supercarrier?
Or is the ranting from solo-Supercarrier pilots?
If you want more DPS than a dread your gonna have to sacrifice all your highs for DCUs. That's rights. Neuts, smartbombs, RR can't be fit if you actually want to be effective. If you do fit utility slots your better off flying a dread. It's a lose/lose. There is no reason to fly this ship over a carrier or dread now.
Edit: typo
Numbers are incorect. Assuming Nozh is correct, 2x Dreadnought damage with DCU's for non Nyx, 3x Dreadnought damage on Nyx.
Without DCU's, should still be higher by about 50% over a seiged dreadnought. ~Carai an'Caldazar~ ~Carai an'Ellisande~ -- Dawn of a new Empire --
|
|
Del Girl
Shade. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:19:00 -
[461]
**** over the old players, give head to the new players.
How nice, thanks CCP.
Del
|
the plague
Scoopex Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:25:00 -
[462]
I'm generally very supporting of CCP and its design decisions. Even when I disagree with a particular decision, I can almost always see where the devs were coming from, even if I would have chosen another path. But this is just asinine.
I'm almost always on your side, CCP, but even I have to wonder if there isn't some truth to the charge that the devs no longer play the game or even know what's going on.
The Mothership has always been one of the coolest ships in the game, but one rarely seen or used because it was huge waste of ISK. Worse than a waste of ISK, it was little more than a very expensive target. But finally, after years of neglect, this class of ships was finally going to be made into a weapon fearsome enough to justify the extreme price and inability to dock. After testing the new Supercarrier design several times on SISI over the last few weeks, I was still unconvinced the ship was effective enough as it remains one of the few ships in the game that can have its primary weapons taken away from it quite easily. But still, it was still a move in the right direction.
And then someone decided to nerf the damn thing back into uselessness before we even got to use it! This has got to be some kind of new record.
Really CCP, you need to get it into your heads that many players see cap warfare as EVE's endgame. They won't spend years and years paying for accounts, training up characters, and painstakingly building up in-game assets just to fly the same old ships as the noobs. People want an endgame! It is not unreasonable or "unbalanced" for players who have invested years in your game to demand rewards commensurate with that kind of investment. I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that this habit of nerfing and pre-nerfing everything in the damn game into oblivion is beyond old. A lot of us are to the point where we're questioning whether it's really worth the time, energy and in-game currency to invest in anything in this game because it will likely just get snatched away at some point on the whim of some dev.
Come on CCP, you're supposed to be giving seasoned players more reasons to stick with EVE and keep playing. Instead, your intent seems to be to nerf every worthwhile investment in the game into complete uselessness. But if you're not real damn careful, you're going to end up nerfing EVE into uselessness.
The rest of you can call this whining if you want, I really don't care. I've had enough Nerf Online for now.
|
Sarah Norbulk
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:27:00 -
[463]
Originally by: Carai an'Caldazar Edited by: Carai an''Caldazar on 12/11/2009 19:20:59
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk Edited by: Sarah Norbulk on 12/11/2009 19:06:06
Originally by: Carai an'Caldazar If I lose it to the first HIC pilot that points me, I have no business flying the ship in the first place. Large Energy Neutralizers, Drones/Fighters, and hopefully some support should clear out the HIC's with points on me quick enough. This is status quo whether your flying a standard capital ship or a super capital ship.
Even as it is, my Chimera/Phoenix are deployed in capital ship fleets with support... Why would I behave any differently in a Supercarrier?
Or is the ranting from solo-Supercarrier pilots?
If you want more DPS than a dread your gonna have to sacrifice all your highs for DCUs. That's rights. Neuts, smartbombs, RR can't be fit if you actually want to be effective. If you do fit utility slots your better off flying a dread. It's a lose/lose. There is no reason to fly this ship over a carrier or dread now.
Edit: typo
Numbers are incorect. Assuming Nozh is correct, 2x Dreadnought damage with DCU's for non Nyx, 3x Dreadnought damage on Nyx.
Without DCU's, should still be higher by about 50% over a seiged dreadnought.
Nag can get 4800 DPS currently in siege, all Moms minus the Nyx will have 5k DPS from 10 fighter bombers. No sane pilot will fit 5 DCUs to his Mom as its stupid and suicidal. So your stuck with 2-700 DPS advantage minus the Nyx which'll have an additional 1100 DPS. Comparing viable dread fits to nonviable Mom fits isn't a fair example of DPS.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 19:53:00 -
[464]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 12/11/2009 19:53:24
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk
Originally by: Carai an'Caldazar Edited by: Carai an''Caldazar on 12/11/2009 19:20:59
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk Edited by: Sarah Norbulk on 12/11/2009 19:06:06
Originally by: Carai an'Caldazar If I lose it to the first HIC pilot that points me, I have no business flying the ship in the first place. Large Energy Neutralizers, Drones/Fighters, and hopefully some support should clear out the HIC's with points on me quick enough. This is status quo whether your flying a standard capital ship or a super capital ship.
Even as it is, my Chimera/Phoenix are deployed in capital ship fleets with support... Why would I behave any differently in a Supercarrier?
Or is the ranting from solo-Supercarrier pilots?
If you want more DPS than a dread your gonna have to sacrifice all your highs for DCUs. That's rights. Neuts, smartbombs, RR can't be fit if you actually want to be effective. If you do fit utility slots your better off flying a dread. It's a lose/lose. There is no reason to fly this ship over a carrier or dread now.
Edit: typo
Numbers are incorect. Assuming Nozh is correct, 2x Dreadnought damage with DCU's for non Nyx, 3x Dreadnought damage on Nyx.
Without DCU's, should still be higher by about 50% over a seiged dreadnought.
Nag can get 4800 DPS currently in siege, all Moms minus the Nyx will have 5k DPS from 10 fighter bombers. No sane pilot will fit 5 DCUs to his Mom as its stupid and suicidal. So your stuck with 2-700 DPS advantage minus the Nyx which'll have an additional 1100 DPS. Comparing viable dread fits to nonviable Mom fits isn't a fair example of DPS.
I'm not arguing at all, but I have to ask this.
Considering the new price point, the hit point buffer available, and the dynamics of how the fighter/bomber damage works, why would you not leverage the extra damage potential of a DCU fit and rely heavily on carriers for logistics support?
Maximizing a more flexible and effective damage delivery system, and taking advantage of its huge buffer doesn't seem to be a stupid tactical decision... especially as they are far cheaper if lost and they would presumably make up a larger percentage of your fleet (at that price point)than we see currently.
Again, just asking (because its easy to only think in terms of tactics that work/don't work currently as opposed to what "would" work under revised circumstances).
===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
Dregek
Pilots Of Honour Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 20:08:00 -
[465]
**IDEA**
Scrap dominion and start. this is quite honestly going to be the worst expansion ever
|
Obsidian Hawk
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 20:14:00 -
[466]
|
Sarah Norbulk
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 20:29:00 -
[467]
Originally by: Ranger 1 Edited by: Ranger 1 on 12/11/2009 19:53:24
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk
Originally by: Carai an'Caldazar
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk Edited by: Sarah Norbulk on 12/11/2009 19:06:06
I'm not arguing at all, but I have to ask this.
Considering the new price point, the hit point buffer available, and the dynamics of how the fighter/bomber damage works, why would you not leverage the extra damage potential of a DCU fit and rely heavily on carriers for logistics support?
Maximizing a more flexible and effective damage delivery system, and taking advantage of its huge buffer doesn't seem to be a stupid tactical decision... especially as they are far cheaper if lost and they would presumably make up a larger percentage of your fleet (at that price point)than we see currently.
Again, just asking (because its easy to only think in terms of tactics that work/don't work currently as opposed to what "would" work under revised circumstances).
The main issue comes down to a) is it worth 3-4 times the price of a dread (or 6-8 times the cost of a carrier) and not be dockable. That's 9b isk for a parking alt and effectively $15 dollars a month(even if it is payed for by isk) for a ship that may be marginally better than a dread.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 20:39:00 -
[468]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 12/11/2009 20:39:59 Thanks for the reply, and that is an understandable point of view. At the very least if this change comes through then the ability to dock (or have a docking ring on an Outpost) should be implemented at the same time.
The monetary hit to current Mothership owners is an issue too of course. Perhaps if they gave each current owner a half dozen by way of compensation.
===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
Sarah Norbulk
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 20:49:00 -
[469]
Edited by: Sarah Norbulk on 12/11/2009 20:49:48
Originally by: Ranger 1 Edited by: Ranger 1 on 12/11/2009 20:39:59 Thanks for the reply, and that is an understandable point of view. At the very least if this change comes through then the ability to dock (or have a docking ring on an Outpost) should be implemented at the same time.
The monetary hit to current Mothership owners is an issue too of course. Perhaps if they gave each current owner a half dozen by way of compensation.
I think if those changes were implemented that the reaction would be a lot less severe. Unfortunately, the current response from CCP was **** you if you already bought it before the patch and you'll still need another account to hold it for you.
Edit: I think another issue of why this was so poorly recieved was the way CCP tried to sweep it under the rug.
|
Thaeus
Black Serpent Technologies R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 20:56:00 -
[470]
Edited by: Thaeus on 12/11/2009 20:56:15 Yeah, two weeks before deployment they drop this MAJOR change without even hinting at it before. Most people were REALLY excited about the new changes coming to motherships: buffer, figther bombers, and the ability to field a ship that will actually be FEARED! Now it's like that RMS Video where mom is the Nidhouggur coming out of the POS array sneezing a piddly ass 10 drones and getting laughed at. Oh **** IT'S A TARP! |
|
Murixo
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 21:01:00 -
[471]
Awful, awful changes. But I'm not going to sell, instead:
Pre-Patch
1) Unfit expensive mods 2) Warp to gate 3) Self-destruct 4) Get insurance
Post-Patch
5) Build a new one for 5b
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 21:29:00 -
[472]
There is absolutely no reason to buy a super carrier now. What next? Remove 6 turret slots from the mega?
Why are goons crying the most over the new sovereignty changes?
|
Lyshah
The Carebear Stare Hydroponic Zone
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 21:37:00 -
[473]
Kinda makes one wonder YET AGAIN if whoever makes the decisions at CCP actually plays the game or has any common sense whatsoever
|
tikki
T-Wrecks Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 21:38:00 -
[474]
1. not happy at just reducing value of property people have alreay invested in....I didn't buy a house on a flood plain!
2. Give the super carrier a purpose. Currently it has none. You changes make no sense. imo super caps should be set out as titan is "super" offensive weapon, super carrier is "super" support. Give jump portal to the mom, this at least makes some sense to me.
Whatever you do...don't do what your planning currently!
|
Rafina Kalare
Erasers inc. Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 21:50:00 -
[475]
this must be joke right ?
|
Dramaticus
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 21:53:00 -
[476]
theres also the little problem that fighterbombers wont do full damage to a sieged dread
Please don't use RL pictuers of players in Sig without permission. - WeatherMan |
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 21:57:00 -
[477]
Originally by: Dregek **IDEA**
Scrap dominion and start. this is quite honestly going to be the worst expansion ever
Nah, the moons got a nice graphical boost. Can spin around in POS looking at them pretty moons.
|
Shigsy
Ignition.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 22:02:00 -
[478]
Seeing as the other petition thread was locked...
Join "C&P" ingame! |
Kalissa
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 22:16:00 -
[479]
I'm not happy about the changes CCP are making to the motherships here, whats being added with the hit point buffer and fighter bombers does not in my opinion mitigate what's been removed. However if CCP do want to go down this road I would say a good way of making the Mothership more viable for people would be to do the decent thing and make them dockable. They are little more than carrier now with a couple of tricks they can do that a carrier can't.
Do the decent thing CCP let us dock those ships.
|
Mundem Pashdale
FLYING SP3GH3TTI MONSTERZ
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 22:26:00 -
[480]
Originally by: Kalissa I'm not happy about the changes CCP are making to the motherships here, whats being added with the hit point buffer and fighter bombers does not in my opinion mitigate what's been removed. However if CCP do want to go down this road I would say a good way of making the Mothership more viable for people would be to do the decent thing and make them dockable. They are little more than carrier now with a couple of tricks they can do that a carrier can't.
Do the decent thing CCP let us dock those ships.
A fair point. If you wish (CCP) to remove the extra drones and drop the price, assuming the intention is to make a new form of capital specialised in anti-cap warfare, it would make sence to dock them
The earlier changes with the removal of certain mods but the retention of the damage bonuses... well, I could live with not docking. Now it seems to make no more sence then banning a jump frieghter from docking up to be honest
Prehaps (specualation) CCP will re-introduce a mothership vessel in a similar form to the original (big, fairly versatile befor they where superseeded by large cap fleets), but so far this all seems somewhat poorly explained and unwanted by most people who use these ships
Also...
Hi Kalissa o/
|
|
Scout Black
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 22:28:00 -
[481]
Regardless of what is proposed to happen or what is going to happen. The way CCP has handled this has been nothing short of appalling. Bring out a new weapon, rant and rave about it, bring it out on the test server for a good period showing how good it will be and tempt allot of people into building/buying a mothership, then 3 weeks before the patch nerf the cost and the ship to hell and back. You obviously had this in the pipeline and this should have been made clear from the start.
This just seems a like a very poor trick played on people and i for one am disgusted at how this has unfolded.
|
Trent Nichols
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 22:38:00 -
[482]
I would love to hear from Zymurgist how a thread where hundreds of paying customers show their disapproval of the proposed mothership changes is classified as spam.
CCP has hit a new low.
Colonies and Capitals |
Needa3
Minmatar BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 22:40:00 -
[483]
Originally by: Trent Nichols I would love to hear from Zymurgist how a thread where hundreds of paying customers show their disapproval of the proposed mothership changes is classified as spam.
CCP has hit a new low.
can't agree more
|
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 22:54:00 -
[484]
Give us Abathur or give us biomass ______________________________
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:00:00 -
[485]
Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 12/11/2009 23:00:48 This is beyond words - why would i now lock up a character ina wyvern when it does nothin better then a chiemra and a phoenix - hell i could make sue of that characters recon5 and hac 5 and commandship5 at the same time. Im no even sure what persuaded you to make this move it just doesnt make sense?
And woohoo maxed out mindlinked Siege Warfare Harmonizing mod.. -
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:05:00 -
[486]
Originally by: Mhorbaine and that is why you sir would loose it to the first hictor that decided to point you up :)
not trollin, just sayin
Yes because people only fly a mom solo with never a single bit of support EVER and there is always a hic with instant hotdropping supercap killer backup waiting to point you as soon as you finish logging on.
|
Mundem Pashdale
FLYING SP3GH3TTI MONSTERZ
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:11:00 -
[487]
It seems that someone at CCP (or a group of people) had the clever idea that a new, small and accessible anti-capital ship based on carrier mechanics was needed, and considered the easiest way to achieve that would be to alter the current motherships beyond the buff they had recieved on SiSi
The buffed motherships where kinda cool, and worth flying again. The latest change creates a workable ship, certainly (assuming it is alowed to dock) but the loss of value to mothership pilots, who tend to be the more committed and older players, is enormous
Would it not have made more sence to create a new carrier class, something mid way between carriers and motherships, and call that the supercarrier? I would sujest this could have been a wiser course of action. I doubt this will be sorted out and thus currently have no plans to resubscribe my accounts. Having trained into every ship I wanted the last thing left keeping me engaged with the grind of the game was the new mothership proposals. With that gone, it's time to find a new game
I have realy enjoyed EvE. Fantastic game in parts, wonderfull players and worth the money. But now that is no longer the case. A very sad day indeed
Here's to four years!
|
TZeer
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:21:00 -
[488]
Edited by: TZeer on 12/11/2009 23:21:09 I love how CCP do their testing and feedback.
"HAY guys!! Look at this, new sov, nerf/boost to titans, look at the new superweapon, and awesome turrets. And lets not forget the supercarriers, awesome fighterbombers!!"
"Come on the testserver and give us soime feedback ,and lets test it!"
*Testing*
"Nice damage on the cap wepons on the titans! Woot, instabeam death a dread!! \o/"
"Awesome supercarrier, HP buff, a real capital killer!! Good job CCP"
.........
CCP goes:
"WTF?"
"NO WAI!"
"YES WAY"
"TO THE NERFMOBILE!"
CCP`s new slogan can be:
Been there, nerfed that!
And the expansion can be changed from Dominion to LOLminion or Trollminion or something.
|
Tappits
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:32:00 -
[489]
This is like Microsoft doing testing on a new windows 7 OS
Microsoft: ooo look at all the cool things, this is good but will cost loads,
People: oo that looks cool i think i will pre orda a copy
and then 2 weeksbefore it came out
Microsoft: sorry we have changed it, its not that good now and we have halfed the price, but no refunds will be paid nm we will just ban you from the forums so you cannot mone at us, bye.
People: but i pre ordard and i have lost loads of $$$$'s on this?
Microsoft: Locked ---------------------------------------------- Pro BOB????? I fail At forums |
Sheial Tarlien
Minmatar The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:40:00 -
[490]
Ever since the early days of eve I've always been a big supporter of CCP's style of game development. Maticulous and careful calculation to ward off post launch nerfs etc. Long term planning over short term solutions etc. We see other game developers like blizzard more than willing to provide temporary bandaids to critical game design issues to a) retain players and b) attract new subscriptions.
With the onset of the past several expansions, I find myself in a position where I am having ever increasing difficulty making these same statements to support the work of CCP. This mothership nerf has the idea of "nerf previous content to promote young/new player attention" all over it. While i appreciate the numerous levels of testing implemented on SISI, I cant help but feel that the Mothership changes are a glimpse of whats lays ahead for the veteran players of eve. Should we expect our accumulated efforts to diminish in significance in the future? I think this is a underlying question that many players are concerned about.
Good luck to everyone affected by this change and the apparent shift in CCP development strategy.
|
|
Obsidian Hawk
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:43:00 -
[491]
This is a formal petition to make sure these changes dont happen.
But everyone, please post constructive feed back on what they should change in test server feed back.
copy and paste this if need be.
" I am unhappy with the changes that have been made to super carriers, you have effectively nerfed a super capital many train, and work hard for. Please restore them to their original glory and make them super capitals again. E.G. +3 drones per carrier level, able to fit triage modul, ability to fit a clone vat bay.
Thank you, <your name>
"
This is a good formal response that will let them know you are happy, you want changes to be made, and look its not a flame or an attack on anyones character.
YES we are all pretty ****ed off, but we can still be civil and get the changes removed.
|
Mhorbaine
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:50:00 -
[492]
to be honest i'm not too bothered about the loss of the clone vat/triage as it made it more streamline for its dmg role, hell i dont even mind bein limited to 10 fighterbombers just let us have 20x normal drones... limit it via bandwidth or something :S
|
Dirk Culliford
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 23:55:00 -
[493]
So CCP, how does the unified agreement of all of the major players in 0.0 quantify as "spam" ?
Furthermore, why should we take our desires for change to the assembly hall. This is the feedback section of the forums, and we are providing lots of feedback. If the feedback is negative (to put it lightly) then you have to accept that, not attempt to delete every thread on the issue.
Congratulations on once more handling the PR of this so well....oh wait...
Also, save motherships '09!
|
Yana Cova
The Wizard's Sleeve
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 00:05:00 -
[494]
My 2 cents - short and sweet - worked for about 2 YEARS with aim to get Nyx - seen it go from IMBER to POS with intro of hics (necessary imo but serious harm done) as we see cost/benefit of MS has since been way out of whack - no one ever fields them now since they are dread magnets and cost way too much for their effectiveness.
So now we have HP boost to make them withstand a dread assualt for a reasonable while whilst the nerf makes them as good as carriers against subcaps - unless fighter/bombers are made freaking insane and/or build cost of these ULTIMATE/EPIC beasts are drastically reduced, then the aim of seeing more people invest/use them in action will have been scuppered due to what I can only see as a poorly considered design decision. Remember it is not only alliances with tons of moongoo that have bought these guys, some people train for a long time with alts to sit in them on a personal basis - this is end game for some people, and rendering ships which are horrendously over expensive even more ineffective in terms of defence and cost/benefit will only serve to annoy alot of people - if they are effective we will see more of them on the field and we will see more people form fleets to kill them and get the killmails - Everyone's a winner.
Remember, we want to see more supercaps on the field, as it increases feeling of engagement of the parties involved - the scale and stakes of combat increases - let's not miss an opportunity to get the MS on the field and used as useful and effective assests rather than have over expensive toys for the rich which gather dust in pos shieds, or a single hangar slot in a post patch upgraded outpost....
We want MS to be desirable, sexy, fun and effective, which makes them used in the field, blowing stuffup, getting blown up, which makes everyone happy - what do you say?
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 00:21:00 -
[495]
Originally by: Dirk Culliford
Also, save motherships '09!
|
Gliding
Eye of God
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 00:28:00 -
[496]
I spent 2 much time and isk gettin my mothership, its the only thing i look 4ward to after 4 years of game play. After making it so awesome if they make it as good as a normal carrier against sup-caps it will actually ruin that whole part of the game 4 me, which atm is the part of the game thats keepin me interested if that goes i have no reason 2 play, dont know about other ppl but im talkin end game sorta stuff. ppl spend so much time, trainin on lots of different accounts and grindin to get these things ccp cant just screw ppl over like that.
|
Mundem Pashdale
FLYING SP3GH3TTI MONSTERZ
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 00:38:00 -
[497]
Originally by: Gliding I spent 2 much time and isk gettin my mothership, its the only thing i look 4ward to after 4 years of game play. After making it so awesome if they make it as good as a normal carrier against sup-caps it will actually ruin that whole part of the game 4 me, which atm is the part of the game thats keepin me interested if that goes i have no reason 2 play, dont know about other ppl but im talkin end game sorta stuff. ppl spend so much time, trainin on lots of different accounts and grindin to get these things ccp cant just screw ppl over like that.
Hey Gliding. Long time no see. Same goes for me. Was why I was still playing. Canceled my remaining accounts tonight, will only be back if this does not go live
|
Saul Reaver
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 01:20:00 -
[498]
Originally by: Trent Nichols I would love to hear from Zymurgist how a thread where hundreds of paying customers show their disapproval of the proposed mothership changes is classified as spam.
CCP has hit a new low.
I agree with you on this one i'm sorry to say. Certainly makes me reconsider next months payment on my accounts.
|
Nyx Spire
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 01:25:00 -
[499]
Originally by: CCP NozhHey,
The changes on Singularity now, are intentional. The drone control units are however broken at the moment, and are being fixed.
New stats for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" (launched by fighter bombers):
Explosion Radius: 3500 Explosion Velocity: 45 Damage Reduction Factor: 6.5 (magic number) Damage: 3600
Super carrier build cost, reduced by 40%. Estimated build cost around 5-6bn.
What we want to create is an anti-capital ship/role, which is more effective than dreadnaughts against moving targets. They can currently reach 7200 DPS (9000 DPS on the Nyx), provided they are fitted for damage and are being supported by fellow pilots. To put this into perspective, the old motherships used to deal 2000 DPS, 2500 DPS (3125 DPS on the Nyx) with drone control units, additionally they've received a huge hit-point boost. The main advantages everyone seems to be overlooking is that Super carriers don't need to commit to a battle like Dreadnaughts nor do they have to be stationary while dealing damage, and of course the fact that they're immune to Electronic Warfare.
By fitting drone control units, pilots are increasing their damage potential greatly while sacrificing survivability. It becomes a hard choice, but being capital ships, they should reach their maximum potential when working together as a team.
There is currently a devblog in the making which should clarify the big picture a bit.
-Nozh
OMG a kid could work out that in your backwards way of sliceing code togther like a mad scientist THE BEST OPTION STARING YOU IN THE FACE is up the band width on fighter bombers to 62.5 so it can only field 10
not cripple the damn thing so it cant field 25 warrior t2's be viable in fleet or feild. 25 wardens to be viable at a pos base.
lets look at the man hours from a coder monkey prospective
the difference here is phenomenal
one go into each mother ship file, delete description lines "3 fighters per lvl" change to 1 fighter per lvl, then go further down in file find drone control bandwidth line adjust lower. further down in file find class skill lines of code that relates to description and adjust them to 1 extra drone per lvl. make sure no misstacks and save
VS
go into each fighter bomber file scroll down to drone band width and delete push number 62.5 and save
leave drone bandwidth at 625 so 25 fighters can be fielded but up FB bandwidth to 62 so only ten can be fielded.
now pay me my weekly wage so you can get your subscriptions back from all the people that just cancelled
|
Armadaus Baldwin
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 02:07:00 -
[500]
I've seen some fairly dumb moves by CCP through the years, this one's up there.
You had a good idea with the proposed change, all the feedback on it was positive except for the "make em dockable" whine. Don't **** it up now.
In honor of 02-05-09, and our new Goon Overlords.
|
|
Yaay
Game-Over
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 03:00:00 -
[501]
do you know why supercarriers are so overpowered. Because you gave them massive HP, the ability to do wicked damage, the ability to not be jammed, and the ability to RR from 50km away.
You can't have it all.
Nerfing the cost, and the DPS isn't the fix. Just take away RR from Super carriers, call them Moms again so you don't have the association, and let them do wicked damage. That way at least they'll need their own support similar to titans if they start getting pawned. Carrier RR can at least be countered with ewar and damps and other devices. Motherships in large swarms can't.
What's hillarious is that the one potential problem with moms is the one thing you aren't addressing. All you're requiring are more moms on the field, but you reduced their cost, so now their barrier to entry is virtually nada.
Just remove RR all together from ships that aren't logistics platforms.
If you gave Logistics ships triage, they'd be great at repairing towers and other large structures, but highly vulnerable. Then you could take the range boost away from carriers and we'd have so much more balance in this game it's scary.
But instead, we get this joke of a change.
DD changes
Docking PVP games |
Mye Klit
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 03:13:00 -
[502]
Originally by: Yana Cova this is end game for some people
Your right, this will end the game for a lot of people.... oh wait you meant the intended role of 20bn ISK ships that take 8-24months to grind on a personal level, not the fact that anyone who does/has/or wants to play the game for the superior challenge and risk that typical "end-game" features supply will just quit and go play jumpgate evolution (Guild beta signup anyone) or the new Star Trek/Wars MMOs?? Hell even AoC would seem like a good choice right now, infact i think ive still got 3 top level toons in LOTRO, at least they dont use a nerf bat on their players, now where did i leave my bow & arrow???...
|
Crimsonjade
Phantom Squad Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 03:31:00 -
[503]
well seeing CCP is acting like the Titanic's Captain, How are they going to explain to the people who paid for a 20 bil isk ship. only to see its price plunge overnight to 5-6 bil.these arn't t1 cruisers. its a major isk sink as it is now and people are upset. CCP MUST compensate the players who own these in some way.
i am staring at a bil trit wondering if its even worth it now. 3 weeks from a major expansion you make a major change to a ship class that is already under used.You don't even announce it, you just put it in and see what happens. I dearly love this game, but really wish a little thought could go into major changes like this.
FREE MONGO PECK CCP |
Spurty
Caldari Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 03:44:00 -
[504]
What is the exact purpose of these ships again?
I thought it was to kill sieged dreads, but people are whining about them being useless vs carriers?
Sounds a lot like moaning about destroyers dying to hac gangs. i.e. people want to make this ship the win button.
Part of EVE that a love is that there exist ships that can't dock!
I'd like to see more of them. Make it so that people should use them and lose em rather than buy a holding character.
make it so once you get into these ships, you can't leave. Or make it so leaving comes at a big cost, something like T3 ships, it costs you skill points to exit it.
At least its easy now to dream up a story about how mammoth they are and how hard it is to connect the pod to it and disconnecting results in some physical distress.
I enjoy the moaning going on about the naming too. Rather comical, carry on!
Originally by: Machine Delta When making a point, anyone taking it should consider the source.
pretty deep coming from you |
Ezekiel Sulastin
Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 03:49:00 -
[505]
Originally by: Spurty What is the exact purpose of these ships again?
I thought it was to kill sieged dreads, but people are whining about them being useless vs carriers?
Sounds a lot like moaning about destroyers dying to hac gangs. i.e. people want to make this ship the win button.
Part of EVE that a love is that there exist ships that can't dock!
I'd like to see more of them. Make it so that people should use them and lose em rather than buy a holding character.
make it so once you get into these ships, you can't leave. Or make it so leaving comes at a big cost, something like T3 ships, it costs you skill points to exit it.
At least its easy now to dream up a story about how mammoth they are and how hard it is to connect the pod to it and disconnecting results in some physical distress.
I enjoy the moaning going on about the naming too. Rather comical, carry on!
3/10 troll points.
It's meant as an anticapital platform - and as pointed out in other threads, the ONLY capitals it hits for anything near full paper DPS are other supercaps. They don't even hit sieged dreads well with the new changes (and no, CCP Nozh, you can't target paint triaged or sieged caps).
Furthermore, CCP emasculated them to utter **** and you want to see more by banning holding alts? How about you see more by having CCP pull their heads out of their rear and undo this latest round of crap?
|
Joe
Umbra Legion Shadow Empire.
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 04:09:00 -
[506]
Reimburse all MoM pilots during the Patch, Depositing the difference in New/Old mineral amounts into the Station the Pilot has their clone at.
Youve reimbursed people like this previously in patchs, I'd suggest doing the same to minimise the company relations Drama that is going to happen with this change.
If your going to nurf a ship, turning it into the same class as another ship, then atleast give it the same bonus/attributes of the other ship, eg allow Supercarriers to dock just like the other cariers that they now share ship class with.
Also, what is the name of the Dev that proposed and Initiated these changes? |
Ezekiel Sulastin
Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 04:14:00 -
[507]
Originally by: Yaay
You can't have it all.
Actually, they planned to give it all, they gave it all, they tested it all, they collected data about it all, they told us about all at fanfest, they balanced it all, then they celebrated that it would have it all.
Unfortunately, CCP {insert your own moron joke here} got a hold of it and took it all, giving it nothing two weeks before patch date after months of work. Oops.
|
Ares Helix
Gallente Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 04:18:00 -
[508]
Originally by: Joe Also, what is the name of the Dev that proposed and Initiated these changes?
And address.. if we're going to send them hate mail/nailbombs we need an address :)
In other news, anyone wanna buy a specced up gal carrier pilot?
|
Armadaus Baldwin
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 04:31:00 -
[509]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: Buxaroo
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources This really better be a typo Seleene or you just undid all the good work you've done on these ships.
It ****ing better be a typo. If not, there is ZERO point in having a super carrier. Great, 20 bil isk ship no more effective than a 2 bil dreadnaught. Yeah, thanks for that......
Anyone want to buy a ****ing Wyvern?
If this doesn't change back I, too, will be selling a wyvern
I too, will be selling a Wyvern and a perfect MS Toon if this doesn't change back. I'll buy a useful toon then, a High-Sec perfect mission runner... Cripes.
In honor of 02-05-09, and our new Goon Overlords.
|
Zanthar Eos
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 04:56:00 -
[510]
In all truth if we look at the bigger picture this is a treamendously bold (stupid?) move on the devs side. I hear alot of people talking about the fact that this might be a whiff of what's up ahead. As previously stated by a pilot, along the years CCP was famous for the meticulous planning of the changes that they intend to implement, just to avoid these kind of situations; because let's face it ... it is a situtation. I cannot stress enough that it takes soo much time to make that isk, even a mega-alliance like PL, Goons or any other powerblock will agree that even on a alliance level 20 bil isk is not a sum to be overlooked. By dropping the mom prices to a meere 6 bil u have stolen from the players/alliance/corps ... stolen time, resources or just plain and simple years of training, toiling in belts, plexes and what ever means people have to make isk. If this is a whiff of what's upwind then i don't even want to think what will happen if u even go remotely close to Bs's, marauders, or any kind of widely-used ship. There are alot of new space sim MMO's out there dear CCP, and people will not hesitate to move to another (actually i bet some of u guys already have trial or paid accounts on some). This is an inoportune time to kick the bucket in such a way.
|
|
Vladameir
Caldari Phantom Squad
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 05:09:00 -
[511]
Just wanted to post my displeasure about the changes.. I had been testing the new fighterbombers on test with the big hull hitpoints.. Most Supercarrier Pilots on test had removed their remote rep slots anyway.. I propose removing it as yaay says.. now with these changes Im really in disbelief..
I have a Wyvern on Tranquility and im a sad panda.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 05:25:00 -
[512]
Although I have previously voiced my concerns about supercariers dealing massive amounts of damage in addition to the hugely increased hp, these changes aren't even remotely what I had in mind.
This went way over the top.
I was talking about 50% higher dps than a dread. I still think it's a good starting point. But I was not specifically referring to the Nyx, nor was I referring to unrealistic fittings with 5 Drone Control Units.
Adjusting damage of bombers is ok. Making changes due to lag is also ok, although you have to keep an eye on all the side-effects (ECM drones, etc.). But nothing justifies reducing bomber damage, 'conventional' damage and price! What were you thinking?
I'd like to repeat what others have already said: a 40% reduction in price is not necessary. There's enough ISK in the economy, and it's gettting more.
And the most important thing is, you, the devs, have already been quite specific about this aspect of the mothership change. Let me quote: "One side effect of this change is that the build cost for Supercarriers will go down slightly as they will no longer require the Capital Clone Vat Bay components.
dominion - the capital battlefield reported by CCP Abathur | 2009.09.15 21:38:01"
This could be called cheating on your playerbase. Since you already commented on that matter (costs) people most likely took those words for granted and the cost aspect as covered.
Last but not least I'd like to comment on all the whining and flaming: Don't fly or buy what you can't afford to lose! This goes for 'veterans' just as well as for newbies and applies to losses against players as well as 'losses' due to game changes.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Nyx Spire
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 05:51:00 -
[513]
Can we get a laywer here to skim over their ToS and see if these guys "CCP" just made them selves open to a "class action law suit" or civil as known in most of Europe. I have heard it is possible in Dutch law.
That a lot of isk they are messing with as the provider of a service. all those digital 1's & 0's has a real world value to us the end consumer
|
glassmanipulator
Gladiators of Rage Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 05:59:00 -
[514]
CCP is too lazy to make new models for a new class of ships.. that would involve actual work on there part, thats why you will never see a new class of carrier.
ccp your really fudgin this up, please listen to your player base, they know better than your devs.
|
Nyx STeeLGamers
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 07:50:00 -
[515]
In a nutshell: please roll back this crazy nerf. I'm displeased to a threshold.
If you want to float another low cost capital ship in space and name it super carrier be my guest but for goodness's sake don't break the game for thousands of players who spent so many hours making 18 to 20 billion ISK to buy a mothership. Just because some whimsical development lead in your team decided the mothership class would become too powerful for it's cost you shouldn't fix the problem by reducing the cost by almost half and nerfing yhr freaking ship. Increase the cost instead. Let players pay the price they want to pay to fly a ship that's second to a Titan. If you want a super carrier, design a new bunch of ship. But please don't break the game for so many people. It's not fun for them. Please don't forget that this is at the end a game, a means of fun for people. If you treat it like anything less and make it less fun, you will hurt your own payhecks. Nothing in this world lasts forever. This game, EVE Online, too won't last forever. Please let the dedicated players who spent weeks to months collecting isk in excitement of the ubber motherships to not leave and hate their experience. You will b responsible for their frustration. You will have broken their games. And if you are bent on not changing your dev minds, then at the very least refund all mothership pilots with amounts of ISK equavalent to the price in billions you reduce on the ships. Otherwise you will have essentially thieved from all pre-Dominion mothership pilots. As such, I am heavily dissappointed in tour ability to value player sentiment. I like a fun game, not a frustrating develeopet roller coaster of broken promises and petty sweet dreams of ubber ships that were never to be. This mothership boost that existed on SISI had been a cold joke. I would never play with this much hate for the devs and the game developer as I am building upon hearing of these changes. Wish you good luck. Adios.
|
Qual
Gallente Cornexant Research
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 08:10:00 -
[516]
I think we should have seperate thread for people crying over lost ISK, and then keep this one for evaluating if Supercarriers are balanced as they are now on sisi, not in histrical context of what they have been.
As it is this tread has too much emo and too little constructive feedback.
"The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf |
Bodo Bass
Minmatar Fanta pants
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 08:14:00 -
[517]
Hi my name is CCP ScrewthemALL,
We are proposing a new mechanic against the current blob warfare.
let's create a new relatively cheap ship give it a big HP buffer give it mediocre dps **** the players that trained several years to fly a mom take away the AOE of a DD
now imagine a fight with
50 rr supercarriers and their support fleet (CCP stated that all moms need a support fleet), this will roughly make a small fleet of between 100 - 300 men.
opponents need to take em out, they cant DD the support fleet as CCP screwed the titan up aswell they cant bring enough dps to break the tank on the RR supercarrier fleet unless they bring like triple the numbers.
yep ccp, sounds very much anti - blob warfare we are looking at.
together with icelands economy it seems like ccps brains went down the drain aswell
great job CCP, nice statement how much you know about your own game and how much you care about the playerbase
|
Nyx STeeLGamers
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 08:38:00 -
[518]
Originally by: Qual I think we should have seperate thread for people crying over lost ISK, and then keep this one for evaluating if Supercarriers are balanced as they are now on sisi, not in histrical context of what they have been.
As it is this tread has too much emo and too little constructive feedback.
Ship cost is very much relevant to balanced ship/game design. And may I also add, your post is very constructive in it's feedback.
|
xOmGx
Gallente 24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 08:42:00 -
[519]
Edited by: xOmGx on 13/11/2009 08:45:01 CCP Wat The F**k
CCP Why you HATE SuperCapitals Soo much?
Why you REMOVE MotherShip/SuperCarrier drone bous??
Wat is use of this nerfed ship??
GIVE BACK: 1. Old Jump animation / sound 2. MotherShip/SuperCarrier drone bous 3. Ability to fit Clone Bay module 4. Triage
PS. Forgot.. WTF mean 3500 m explosion signature for fighters???? realy WTF??? WHY?? No Pain - No Gain |
Zeoliter
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 09:11:00 -
[520]
You'll never see Motherships being used with DPS as it stands. So CCP, if you want to see Moms being used in major fleet operations as you appear to do then we really need to field the full 20 and do nice damage.
I'm find with the new build costs even though I paid 17b for my Wyvern over a year ago. Just means a new one will be cheaper when this one goes pop.
However, you have to reward older players that have had Motherships for a long time and have been waiting for a boost. With the change as it stands older players won't be as willing to risk their 20b ships as much as a newer player with their 6b ship.
|
|
sdchew
Gallente Jazz Associates
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 09:17:00 -
[521]
Reposting my earlier comment
WTF!
The day that EVE is truly bug-free, the EVE Gate will probably go super nova and kill us all. |
Nyx Spire
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 09:33:00 -
[522]
In reading all these threads & holy crap its hard to keep up
A light bulb dinged in my grey matter
How about you split every single mother ship BPO into two everyone that holds a mother ship bpo or BPC spawns a a T2 carrier bpo or bpc right next to it.
the T2 carriers is like a normal carrier except geared towards damage & not so much logistics'. break the mold a bit here make the build costs mostly t1 cap build costs of a normal carrier up them a bit to be inline with this supposed SC changes. then add some T2 mat requirements just a hand full say the cost of t2 requirements it takes to make a t2 BS.
So you now have a t2 carrier adjust the texture mess with the high slots let this t2 carrier use fighter bombers and basically keep the stat's your proposing for the MoM/SC. give it immunity to EWAR without needing siege or triage. Make it dockable... Except give these ships a 15 minute docking timer were they can still take damage. consider it the time it takes for a tug boat to drag your huge HULL into the dry dock. heck make the t2 carriers slightly faster on the flat so to negate some damage.
Now take the MoM/SC and kit it out I mean pimp it hard. torps shouldn't be hitting other torps and killing them in turn nurfin the damage. you add a new weapon to the game but seriously haven't given the numbers play time, not to mention signature and explosion velocity issues. only hard adjusting the new numbers is going to make these viable. so run the mom up another couple of percent damage wise on FB's leave it with its 25 drone control. but adjust the FB bandwidth. kit the MOM out up. remote ecm to a jam. its reactivation timer is enough to bore it owner to death before getting off a second shot. maybe even give the mom full 8 high slots and allow it to have two launcher hard points across each faction. so player can choose a touch more dps, a DCU or nut. settle the cost roughly around were it was yeah drop the cost a bit due to lack of clone and triage. Make MoM dockable but with a 20 minute waiting period for tug boat.
So now you have a solidly happy player base if you must give everyone thats got a MoM this new T2 carrier without fittings in their clone station. now watch and see what happens you keep your dev's happy. you keep ccp happy. you keep your players happy
T2 carriers 15% fighter/FB damage per lvl 5% resistances per lvl 2% velocity per lvl 1 extra fighter per lvl 200% drone control range 15 minute dock timer immune to EWAR
Said race faction and ancestry have decided to shell out the inside of the logistic forward base carrier in line with SC to maximise its potential damage out put. dropping the logistical command centre like fittings and construction to make a mobile skirmisher with fighter like bombers. a massive portion of the carrier was striped of triage hard points to make way for additional bomber refitting. the massive drop in weight and excessive room has allowed engineers ways to maximise the polymers in the ships construction for better resistance this drop in weight along with the lack of command bulking has allowed mechanic's new ways of tweaking the astronautics of these behemoths making them faster in their top end. which has also resulted in the ships immunity to EWAR as the sensors and vulnerable ships computers can now be shielded from such forms of attack and stream lined.
MOM/SC 60% bonus Fighter/FB d per lvl 99% reduct remote ECM 3 drones per lvl 200% drone control range Immune EWAR interdiction null 20min dock timer
creo drone came up with it first but others soon followed. striping the guts of a MoM to make way for FB combined with sleeper tech to breech enemy lines. taking these mobile bases and turning them into flag ships to be feared dropping the logistic and command mods for more fire power and a bigger drone bay these ships are now formed a new class of their own "The super carrier" skipping through enemy lines to hit fast on structures & other caps. They only fear HIC's & TITANS.
|
Sofia Swift
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 10:44:00 -
[523]
GJ ccp and Nozh for destroying trillions of peoples hard earned ISK.
|
Miss Shifty
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 11:06:00 -
[524]
Edited by: Miss Shifty on 13/11/2009 11:06:42 quick question, slightly off-topic:
how many ISK do i get from the basic insurance of my mom if i self destruct or get destroyed?
is it more than a "new mom" is going to cost?
|
Vinco Extes
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 11:20:00 -
[525]
I mean ... i know alot of people in eve that would GLADLY jump at each others throats any chance they get, but now ... all of eve's player are massing up to 1 thing now : GIVE US BACK THE PROMISED FEATURES
|
Archangel Divinity
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 11:57:00 -
[526]
Im just glad I sold mine while ago ...
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 11:57:00 -
[527]
Originally by: Miss Shifty
how many ISK do i get from the basic insurance of my mom if i self destruct or get destroyed?
is it more than a "new mom" is going to cost?
sadly no afaik, the basic insurance payout is roughly the same as the build cost of the SC and thus a fair bit under expected market price (considering BPC cost, manufacturers profit etc)
although the fact that this question is asked all the time should tell us and CCP something shouldnt it
|
Gliding
Eye of God
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 12:09:00 -
[528]
Super carrier build cost, reduced by 40%. Estimated build cost around 5-6bn.
with out sounding like a bastard but wat the ****, i spent far to long savin up 18 billlion for my nyx, i could have saved my self weeks of boring grinding, over a year of game play and training went in to this, im affectivly loosin 12billion isk. im sorry but u cant even comprehend how annoyed i am, how could u even consider this?
|
Captain Plumb
Gallente Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 12:15:00 -
[529]
So, CCP have once again proven that they have no idea how their game works. The new supercarrier changes are horrific beyond measure. Give the supercarriers their 25 bombers back CCP!
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 12:53:00 -
[530]
What i have to wonder is why Nozh actually comes up with this thing. I mean forgetting for a sec how its done etc. - the preNozh SC change has been hailed by pretty much everyone in this thread. There were discussions about minor balance details but no one questioned the whole deal that has been on sisi for months, it was completely accepted.
Where does Nozhs idea come from? It is a completely new one which, i guess, is to lower the step from capital to supercapitals but i atleast never saw a reason for it to be lowered. PPL alrdy are cautious with their carriers and dreads, few but them into harms way lightly - a supercarrier costing 4.5b instead of 9 isnt going to change the pilots mind in which hed be very careful about the decision to bring his ship into combat.
On the other side this change can cause the supercarrier to lose its status as a unique, awesome ship that takes great costs and dedication to acquire - and turns it into a more mainstream ship.
9b in Minerals is alot for many, but achievable - its a dream within reach, if one really wants. Titans one the other hand are way out there. If supercarriers have lost their uniqueness, what is a common players goal then? -
|
|
Ooook
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 13:22:00 -
[531]
........................................________ ....................................,.-æö...................``~., .............................,.-ö...................................ô-., .........................,/...............................................ö:, .....................,?......................................................, .................../...........................................................,} ................./......................................................,:`^`..} .............../...................................................,:ö........./ ..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../ ............./__.(.....ô~-,_..............................,:`........../ .........../(_....ö~,_........ô~,_....................,:`........_/ ..........{.._$;_......ö=,_.......ô-,_.......,.-~-,},.~ö;/....} ...........((.....*~_.......ö=-._......ô;,,./`..../ö............../ ...,,,___.`~,......ô~.,....................`.....}............../ ............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-ö ............/.`~,......`-...................................../ .............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__ ,,_..........}.>-._...................................|..............`=~-, .....`=~-,__......`,................................. ...................`=~-,,.,............................... ................................`:,,...........................`..............__ .....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==`` ........................................_..........._,-%.......` ...................................,
|
Mioelnir
Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 13:32:00 -
[532]
Reposting the math from the other thread because it kinda got lost in there:
Quote:
Ok, after a bit of math, it looks like when CCP Nozh called them anti-capital ships, he in fact meant anti-supercapital. Because the paper DPS do not hold up against normal capitals. As the mythbusters would say: "reality makes for a poor special effects crew". In this spirit, let's do a reality check:
Supercarriers with 3500m explosion radius (ER) on their fighter bombers: - Aeon, Nyx, Wyvern Supercarriers with 2187.5m explosion radius (ER) on their fighter bombers: - Hel (carrier skill 5)
Target 1: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 53.88% (DPS: 4800 -> 2586.24)(Nyx: 6000 -> 3232.8) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 86.21% (DPS: 4800 -> 4138.08)
Target 2: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 19.69% (DPS: 4800 -> 945.12)(Nyx: 6000 -> 1181.4) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 33.03% (DPS: 4800 -> 1585.44)
Target 3: Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 81.8% (DPS: 4800 -> 3926.4)(Nyx: 6000 -> 4908) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 100% (DPS: 4800)
Target 4: Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 29.19% (DPS: 4800 -> 1401.12)(Nyx: 6000 -> 1751.4) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 48.97% (DPS: 4800 -> 2350.56)
Target 5: Hel, Standstill or Full Thrust: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 100% - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 100%
Target 6: Ragnarok, Standstill or Full Thrust, With or Without -37.5% sig bonus: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 100% - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 100%
Missile Damage formula used: latest version of Stafen's formula, http://www.eve-search.com/thread/901280/page/3
thanks for the Hel's new bonus, beats the fighter resistance once maybe the DPS fighter bombers really apply against normal capitals could be nudged a bit from where they are now in the direction of the PR flyer values (4800/6000 -- 7200/9000). A reduction to 20% of the paper dps is what one would expect them to inflict against a Tier 3 bs, not a capital.
|
Del Girl
Shade. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 13:41:00 -
[533]
How you can decide yet again to wipe massive value from peoples wealth again is just ridculous. HICs come in and they go from 35bn ISK ships to 15bn ISK ships if you are lucky. Closer to build cost so at a push that was understandable (ish).
Now you want to make them 6bn at most? Thats a 29bn ISK loss for people who have had them for 18 months or more? Way to go!
Would be nice to get some official word/reasoning behind this because these threads will never stop. The changes we thought we were getting were actually exciting and nice to look forward to, both Supercap changes, now, well dunno what to say.
It is just a Joke :( A very poor, expensive joke!
|
Elendar
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 14:11:00 -
[534]
Originally by: Mioelnir Reposting the math from the other thread because it kinda got lost in there:
Quote:
Ok, after a bit of math, it looks like when CCP Nozh called them anti-capital ships, he in fact meant anti-supercapital. Because the paper DPS do not hold up against normal capitals. As the mythbusters would say: "reality makes for a poor special effects crew". In this spirit, let's do a reality check:
Supercarriers with 3500m explosion radius (ER) on their fighter bombers: - Aeon, Nyx, Wyvern Supercarriers with 2187.5m explosion radius (ER) on their fighter bombers: - Hel (carrier skill 5)
Target 1: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 53.88% (DPS: 4800 -> 2586.24)(Nyx: 6000 -> 3232.8) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 86.21% (DPS: 4800 -> 4138.08)
Target 2: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 19.69% (DPS: 4800 -> 945.12)(Nyx: 6000 -> 1181.4) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 33.03% (DPS: 4800 -> 1585.44)
Target 3: Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 81.8% (DPS: 4800 -> 3926.4)(Nyx: 6000 -> 4908) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 100% (DPS: 4800)
Target 4: Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 29.19% (DPS: 4800 -> 1401.12)(Nyx: 6000 -> 1751.4) - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 48.97% (DPS: 4800 -> 2350.56)
Target 5: Hel, Standstill or Full Thrust: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 100% - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 100%
Target 6: Ragnarok, Standstill or Full Thrust, With or Without -37.5% sig bonus: - Damage applied, 3500m ER: 100% - Damage applied, 2187m ER: 100%
Missile Damage formula used: latest version of Stafen's formula, http://www.eve-search.com/thread/901280/page/3
thanks for the Hel's new bonus, beats the fighter resistance once maybe the DPS fighter bombers really apply against normal capitals could be nudged a bit from where they are now in the direction of the PR flyer values (4800/6000 -- 7200/9000). A reduction to 20% of the paper dps is what one would expect them to inflict against a Tier 3 bs, not a capital.
Nice to see that 'anticapital' supercarriers can't even hit a seiged dread properly. Thats pretty good balancing right there.
Nerfing fighterbomber numbers is bad, but why nerf normal fighters/drones with it? do that and a single passive tanked hic will laugh off your dps and pin you down for an entire fight. yay.
Also if you really do decide to nerf cost down as much as you say PL could afford to replace its entire dread fleet with a supercarrier fleet.
Is fleets of 70+ of these things RRing each other and generally being utterly invulnerable what you really want? Imagine 2 fleets like this. Pretty fast they will smartbomb each others fighter bombers down and they will be able to tank anything that can be thrown at them with ease.
|
Sommer Glau
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 14:15:00 -
[535]
I'm really ****ed at this CCP. I'm gonna try to kill u all with my brain.
|
MarkusBarak
Gallente Phantom Squad Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 15:13:00 -
[536]
You know I put up with the NOS nerf the EOS nerf the Myrm nerf the speed nerfs the countless other nerfs that ccp has blessed us with as time has gone on but this one takes the cake. There are words I would use now that would probably get me sent to jail in several countries for the feelings I have for you right now CCP theres a reason why you guys did this after fan fest because if you did it during or before your lil corp HQ would more than likely have been burnt to the ground and I would not have even relieved myself to help put out the blaze. Nice one CCP
|
Ruafo
Minmatar r.evolution 8 Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 17:42:00 -
[537]
From what i see. You, CCP, try to give us a moveable anti dread ship.
1.Point With the new sov. mechanics which probably includes two completly differnt strategic targets, the hub and the outpost, in a system at the same time, the idea of this moveable anti dread ship is a good one.
But now why you reducing it to a super capital killer, i don't like that idea. You just gave the ship a new role and now you kill that role and make the ship useless again.
2.Ponit I think it's not fair for all the mothership owner, personaly i don't own one, that your reducing the worth of it that much. Don't make it that easy accessible for everyone. It's probably destroying this part of the game, if everyone can reach it's no longer something special, that makes it to a more worthless goal and as already mentioned it destroys the work and time other players spended to reach that goal.
My suggestion is, if you really see the needs of such a ship type. Don't destroy the old ship, creat a new ship and ship type, call them t2 carriers or whatever , give them the ability to use that bomber fighters and no normal fighters. let them cost 6bil. and give them the same hitpoints like the t1 variants, reduce the jump range, do what ever it's needed to balance it.
Back to Super Carriers:
They need to be special!!! -Let them use Fighter Bombers and Fighters! (to rais it from my mentioned t2 carriers) -Give them a huge hp boost. (like you already did) -Give them more damage than a normal capital ship has! (20 fighters are a performance problem do it like you did it in the past with the Drone Interfacing Skill. Don't compare them with Dreads we are speaking of a former Super Capital.)
Don't let them dock, don't make them much cheaper. Don't let everyone be able to have one circuit in their hangars.
The current version of the Super Carriers really only sounds like a t2 variant of the normal one. There is nothing special nothing SUPER in it. It's a normal capital ship, in a new role. It's not a worthy replacement of a former called Mothership, a Super Capital class ship!
|
Lira Reib
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:29:00 -
[538]
As someone who has nearly saved for a mothership but not ordered it yet, I would like to say that the 6b figure is far too low. Supercapitals are supposed to be prohibitively expensive. A ship that does twice as much damage but only costs 4x more than a dread just doesn't convey insecurity about the size of one's anatomy.
10-11b, please. It should be a low midway point between a dread and a titan; 6b is just an oversize capital, and I really don't want to see dreads made into a second-rate ship.
|
Uzume Ame
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:42:00 -
[539]
Originally by: Lira Reib A ship that does twice as much damage but only costs 4x more than a dread
lol
|
Lira Reib
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:46:00 -
[540]
Originally by: Uzume Ame
Originally by: Lira Reib A ship that does twice as much damage but only costs 4x more than a dread
lol
Haven't really been paying attention to the dps maths, seems like it's still sort of up in the air.
|
|
James Razor
Amarr The Executives IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:49:00 -
[541]
Good that i did not yet buy one. But i am realy up to go to Island and have a serious *talk* with your developers.
Pls tell us that these changes are a joke. Why dont u nerf your developers and give us back all those things that they messed up(Myrmidon for example). And btw.: The Golden Fleet presents their new Elite Battleship: Its painted Black and White (New Skins for Faction Tier 2 BS are a fail as well and i demand reimbursement of the time and money spent on getting it if u change those skins).
Well, btw. u should call for some Zombie hunters. I realy think your HQ has been infiltrated by some of them, as the amount of brain decreased a lot during recent times.
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 21:52:00 -
[542]
Originally by: Elendar
Nice to see that 'anticapital' supercarriers can't even hit a seiged dread properly. Thats pretty good balancing right there.
Quite frankly, those damage calculations are pretty bogus.
Apply 3 target painters and the signature of a Naglfar is around 3.4k, which is perfectly fine to hit.
If you want to hit a moving Nidhoggur well, apply a single target painter (sig = 3.7k), and a single web (speed = 45m/s).
Pretty well balanced actually, unless your fleet doesnt have 2-3 spare slots...
|
Spectre Wraith
Darwin Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 22:02:00 -
[543]
You don't know how sieged dreads work if you're saying they're fine with painters. Duh.
|
Tactile Trader
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 22:13:00 -
[544]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 13/11/2009 21:58:22
Originally by: Elendar
Nice to see that 'anticapital' supercarriers can't even hit a seiged dread properly. Thats pretty good balancing right there.
Quite frankly, those damage calculations are pretty bogus.
Apply 3 target painters and the signature of a Naglfar is around 3.4k, which is perfectly fine to hit.
If you want to hit a moving Nidhoggur well, apply a single target painter (sig = 3.7k), and a single web (speed = 45m/s).
Pretty well balanced actually, unless your fleet doesnt have 2-3 spare slots...
(Edit: these figures are with completely unbonused painters btw, no character skills applied. For a sieged dread, dual painters on unbonused ships should suffice.)
Ever heard of a siege module?
Pro tip, read what it does.
|
Shade Millith
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 22:59:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 13/11/2009 21:58:22
Originally by: Elendar
Nice to see that 'anticapital' supercarriers can't even hit a seiged dread properly. Thats pretty good balancing right there.
Quite frankly, those damage calculations are pretty bogus.
Apply 3 target painters and the signature of a Naglfar is around 3.4k, which is perfectly fine to hit.
If you want to hit a moving Nidhoggur well, apply a single target painter (sig = 3.7k), and a single web (speed = 45m/s).
Pretty well balanced actually, unless your fleet doesnt have 2-3 spare slots...
(Edit: these figures are with completely unbonused painters btw, no character skills applied. For a sieged dread, dual painters on unbonused ships should suffice.)
Please PLEASE research what you're saying before you say it!
Target Painters are Electronic Warfare. A capital ship, in Siege/Triage is IMMUNE to Elextronic Warfare.
What do you think Dreads do? In order to DO their massive damage, they must siege.
After all the good changes made, with the massive possitive responce to them, and the testing of them. To suddenly turn around and **** all over what people were saying was good, just baffles me. No explanation, no nothing. --------------------------------------------
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 23:08:00 -
[546]
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 13/11/2009 23:11:19 If its sieged you're down to ~50% of your onpaper dps (~80% for the Hel), which is fine imo as it wont go anywhere fast, besides dropping your SC ontop of a bunch of sieged dreads might not be the smartest move to start with.
A triaged carrier you dont care much as you get ~80% of onpaper dps, out of triage you do full damage with 2 mods.
Still dont see the issue tbh, looks pretty fine if you consider the primary use in carrier RR groups.
|
Dirk Mortice
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 23:40:00 -
[547]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 13/11/2009 23:11:19 If its sieged you're down to ~50% of your onpaper dps (~80% for the Hel), which is fine imo as it wont go anywhere fast, besides dropping your SC ontop of a bunch of sieged dreads might not be the smartest move to start with.
The new SC role is to provide mobile non-sieged anti-cap dps, and you're telling us we shouldn't drop it on dreads, and that our anti-cap ship should only do 50% dmg against a stationary cap ship?
|
Cefte
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 00:02:00 -
[548]
Originally by: Omara Otawan
(Edit: these figures are with completely unbonused painters btw, no character skills applied. For a sieged dread, dual painters on unbonused ships should suffice.)
Thank you, Caldari Provisions alt, for telling us to use target painters on a ship that by definition cannot be target painted. You cretin.
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 13/11/2009 23:11:19 If its sieged you're down to ~50% of your onpaper dps (~80% for the Hel), which is fine imo as it wont go anywhere fast, besides dropping your SC ontop of a bunch of sieged dreads might not be the smartest move to start with.
A triaged carrier you dont care much as you get ~80% of onpaper dps, out of triage you do full damage with 2 mods.
Still dont see the issue tbh, looks pretty fine if you consider the primary use in carrier RR groups.
And after being corrected, you paint the thread brown with this bull****?
Still don't see the issue with me knowing sweet ***** adams about the ships and mods I'm pontificating about, tbh, tbh, and seriously, if an intellectual subnormal who literally cannot be arsed to read the item description of a siege module can't see the issue, everything is fine.
Oh, yes.
Quote: besides dropping your SC ontop of a bunch of sieged dreads might not be the smartest move to start with.
Guys, using this anticapital ship against the fundamental unit of a capital fleet might not be the smartest move to start with.
Now excuse me, I've activated my cynosural field and microwarp drive, so it's time to fly out of here.
(get out)
|
Dani Leone
Gallente How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 00:06:00 -
[549]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 13/11/2009 21:58:22
Originally by: Elendar
Nice to see that 'anticapital' supercarriers can't even hit a seiged dread properly. Thats pretty good balancing right there.
Quite frankly, those damage calculations are pretty bogus.
Apply 3 target painters and the signature of a Naglfar is around 3.4k, which is perfectly fine to hit.
If you want to hit a moving Nidhoggur well, apply a single target painter (sig = 3.7k), and a single web (speed = 45m/s).
Pretty well balanced actually, unless your fleet doesnt have 2-3 spare slots...
(Edit: these figures are with completely unbonused painters btw, no character skills applied. For a sieged dread, dual painters on unbonused ships should suffice.)
Good luck with that, as TPs cant be used on sieged/triaged ships, they are immune to ewar.
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 00:57:00 -
[550]
Edited by: Omara Otawan on 14/11/2009 00:58:18
Originally by: Dirk Mortice
The new SC role is to provide mobile non-sieged anti-cap dps, and you're telling us we shouldn't drop it on dreads, and that our anti-cap ship should only do 50% dmg against a stationary cap ship?
It would still be 3.5 - 5.5k dps from 15 FBs (more or less what a dread would put out), while you can receive RR and move which the target can not. Not really bad imo.
Ofc you can still drop it on a dread fleet, but from the economic standpoint you'd be better doing it with dreads taking dps/ehp/isk into account. The numbers (which contrary to popular belief devs most likely didnt pull out of their proverbial a** but put there for a reason, i.e. intended use against carriers) at least suggest so.
Against a carrier fleet it starts to get really worthwhile, as you'll be able to bring your full dps to effect, 7-9 times the damage output compared to a regular carrier and same rr capability is pretty good if you ask me.
|
|
Merbok
Gallente The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 02:02:00 -
[551]
I am starting to wish I didn't spend 2 years training towards a mothership... on the brightside now I don't have to spend another minute carebearing because I have no reason to save up isk. CCP you took away my endgame damnit. --------
|
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 03:24:00 -
[552]
Edited by: McFly on 14/11/2009 03:34:19 Edit: wasn't aware of the recent bug? change? nerfbat? so comment retracted.
|
Zaethiel
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 06:15:00 -
[553]
If your going to cut their prices by so much we should get compensation.
18bill - New Cost = Pay Out or Give out HIC, Maruader, and Black OPs BPOs since they weren't around during the lottery =) -----
|
King Dave
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 08:45:00 -
[554]
I have an aeon on tq and i'm a sad panda.
|
Ivy Jay
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 10:43:00 -
[555]
just my humble proposal:
3x fighters and 1 bomber per level if CCP is too concerned on the output of bombers
|
icekold killa
Caldari Underworld Rising Inver Brass
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 11:09:00 -
[556]
Edited by: icekold killa on 14/11/2009 11:09:03 nerf nerf nerf nerf ? nerf CCP anyone ?
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 11:13:00 -
[557]
This post contains serious xMom feedback!
First I would like to thank CCP for fixing the following stuff on the xMoms to the better.
- Increased HP; everyone and their dog does buffertank these days.
- Increased jump range; I love it!
Introducing the Fighter Bomber; yes it was kind of needed to counter capitals.
Introducing the separate drone bay for Fighters and Fighter Bomber; well I havenŠt seen it yet but this will prevent newbies to bring 1000 Warrior T2.
- Preventing them from docking; station hugging are a lame game!
Now their is some stuff that I am having serious concerns about and really disagree with CCP about.
- The price reduction; a Mothership was a Super capital and when they were introduced they were a feared beast and had a use. When the Interdictor was introduced the immunity to EWAR crippled them a bit. But the real sack came with the HICŠs infinity point and this sent a lot of MothershipŠs to log-offski in a POS.
About the price, if the price drops to the price that has been released a lot of people will loose a lot of ISK in their investment. But most important the xMom will be available to a larger group of players, the Mothership was an end of the line ship that was hard to get and the rewards of having one was worth that investment. Remember it is not the pilots who own and fly the Motherships that wants these changes it is all the other carrier pilots who wants a piece of that cake. Also you fly what you can afford and it is a lot players that have to much ISK and can afford to loose a 35bil ship.
Originally by: EVOL Mothership pilot I want to use the mom, I want to risk it, I want to kill and eventually be killed in it, it's part of the cycle of life in eve. build -> use -> die
Last thing about the price, lowering the price and making the xMom more common will result in that we will see them a lot more, a few years ago we hardly saw 40-50 carriers in one and the same blob. Nowadays we do, and if the xMom cost this ridiculously low will we see them a lot more. At this point they might be to overpowered, but let them stick to a hefty price tag and it will keep the xMom away from a lot of players and the imbalance wonŠt occur.
- Nerfing the 20 drones to 10, a xMom need 20 drones to defend itself against all type of ships. If this is to counter the new Fighter Bombers think twice! Adding a huge bandwidth on the FB would prevent the pilot to launch more than 10, and adding some DCU on the xMom would give the xMom the ability to launch more than 10.
Suggestions!
Keep the +3 drone per level and increase the bandwidth for Fighter Bombers. Also the sig resolution is too low at the moment on the torpedoes. Linky! If you stick to the Fighter Bombers as they are but let us have the 20 drones back, the use of regular Fighters against capitals as it was are just fine!
- Interdiction nullifiers on all xMoms and Titans! Being cough in a bubble by either a HIC, Dictor or an anchored bubble on a POS are just not fair. A 120mil ship to tackle and eventually kill a several billion ISK ship. Let alone the HICŠs infinity point be the thing to tackle the xMoms and Titans, this allows this ships to either fit for countering them, meaning fitting neuts or having a fleet to fend them off.
By launching Dominion and using the nerfbat on the Motherships will be a sad chapter in the history of EvE. Please donŠt rush with these changes. I would be a very happy pilot if CCP hit the EMERGENCY BRAKE and realise that the changes to Motherships needs a rethink and that the changes to xMomŠs will come in Dominion 2.0.
Regards // Zork
|
Juliette DuBois
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 11:29:00 -
[558]
Edited by: Juliette DuBois on 14/11/2009 11:31:19 Price never stopped profiliteration. Look at the titans... Only reason there isnŠt even more motherships around is simply due to the fact that mommies havenŠt been very useful, with poor price/performance ratio ever since HICs arrived to stop lowsec mommy riders.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 11:45:00 -
[559]
Edited by: Oljud Zork on 14/11/2009 11:50:30 After posting my previous post did I find this CCP Nozh post it the Super Carrier Flame thread...
Originally by: CCP Nozh Hey,
We've made some further changes to super carriers after taking your feedback into consideration. It's quite understandable that the changes made were a disappointment to many of you, but I wanted to remind you that Singularity is a test server and all changes, even these are subject to change.
Compact Citadel Torpedo Changes:
* Explosion Velocity: 60
* Damage: 3200
Super Carrier Changes:
* Can deploy 2 additional Fighter or Drone per level
* Can dock at stations
Furthermore we're looking into solutions to reimburse current mothership pilots for the drop in construction cost.
That's all for now.
-Nozh
First is it not appropriate to post this in the Super Carrier feedback thread instead of a flame thread so we who actually care about feedback can find it easily???
Second donŠt let the xMoms dock!!! Station games a lame!
Third thanks for the +2 drones, now can we field 15 drones on racial carrier level V. It is a middle way, but I strongly urge you to give us the +3 drone per level. I am now talking about not fitting any DCU at all = 15 drones on carrier V...
Thanks for the reimbursement too, but sorry CCP you will ruin the game with the new xMoms...
Regards
// Zork
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente Missions Mining and Mayhem Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 13:21:00 -
[560]
I like the idea of SC's docking. But please for the love of God put an extended docking timer on them! Make it an absolute MINIMUM of 30-45 minutes. Docking games are incredibly lame!
|
|
Just Buch
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 13:33:00 -
[561]
Before to-be Dominion Mom change, they were considered not worthy, let me repeat some arguments: - overpriced for their value, low hp, low dps, etc., etc. ... - juicy targets, weak - undockable, therefore being prison like Titans - small sized for supercapital ship - not actually being worth called "Mothership", because other ships cant dock into it - because of above, rarely seen on bf, therefore cpp having bad asset since ship doesn't bring joy and pleasure to players, except to very few
So, current situation is: - production price 6B - OK - hp buff, bombers, still ew-imune except hic - OK - Supercarrier is not supercapital any more, therefore dockable - appropriately sized in new role - Moms are now not called "Mothership" but Supercarrier- OK -> mobile POS that will be true motherships discussed, envisioned, one proposal is hanging in FD-MLJ, see evil lair - as tier 2 carrier, they will be actually used - better carrier (tm) that can't be instapoped by Titan Whiners, CPP gave you exactly what have you been asking in the first place. I'm happy with Nozh's changes, provided that some minor tweaks are applied.
Current issues: - fear of docking games - well, Moros nerf came from the same line of thought, however only few players were actually abusing it in lowsec, if that can be called abuse: how can you get caught by dread in first place lol, if you didn't made mistake, or don't have knowledge on how to avoid -> don't make mistakes, learn to play As for dockable blob of rr supercarriers in 0-0, remember that multiple Titans combined can pop supercarrier - do undock by all means, make my day; - less drones and fighters - I think 20 needs to remain, I would want to deal with that HIC; while its not wise to deploy sc alone, I still think it needs to be able to kill the HIC by itself is such situation occurs; - isk lost - reimbursement is on its way, and that didn't happen before - isk lost because of speculation - well this time you lost, its game you play - lack of supercap carrier ship - well yes, but lest finish this now with dockable tier 2 carrier and then concentrate on something titan sized AND mobile pos true Mothership that "moms" never were
|
Achura Calda
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 14:43:00 -
[562]
So if they can dock now , does that mean we can also build them in stations ?
|
The Nastrond
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 17:05:00 -
[563]
Reimbursement is a terrible idea. People were either flying them previously or buying/selling them on speculation. Producers will have significantly increased demand and will easily recoup losses (and 1 JF load will be able to have all the components for a supercarrier now if it scales properly).
It's setting a very bad example for future changes, as well as ones done in the past. People have lost very high amounts of ISK in the past when CCP changed things, why should reimbursement and etc start now?
Frankly, if the BPO cost is changing, the owners of those BPOs deserve it, nobody else.
|
Ruby Lionheart
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 18:22:00 -
[564]
Make them the way they where two weeks ago, when they where acttaly usefull.
And stil had some nice spirit.
A lot of pepole didd a hell of a lot of work to afford these beautifull ships. Not they are just gona end upp like another crap ship you have in your hangar..
And at the cost @ 5 bil, it's no use fitting the nice mods on it any more.
|
Mhorbaine
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 18:51:00 -
[565]
least it'll rip the bottom out of the officer cap recharger market... afterall who'd spend 2-4b on a single 28-32% for a 5-6b isk ship?
|
DickeDinger
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 21:06:00 -
[566]
Originally by: Lachender Henker The changes of the attributes of the Supercarriers created a lot of tears and argues. But not so many proposals to fix/balance things. So i made up my mind a little bit...
Heres my idea: I think that itŠs time to implement SUBSYSTEMS on Supercarriers. Each subsystem has advantages and penatlties, for example:
A Drone Subsystem:
+25% Fighter, Fighter-Bomber Bay Capacity -25% Armor-, Shield HP, Hull HP per Module
So you force the player to choose if they want to live longer or deal a lot of damage. And use this system as a way of balancing. In numbers: A supercarrier can still launch +3 Drone/Fighters/Fighterbombers per Level from the start, but without a Drone Subsystem the supercarrier will only have room in their Fighterbay for 10 Fighters/F-Bombers. (Normal Drones get their seperate Bay) As soon as you add a single "Drone Subsystem" you will be able to fit 15 Fighters/F-Bombers and you will loose 25% of your armor hp,hull and shield hp, because you need room for more drones. High DPS Supercarriers will have a lot less HP => Balancing
So a System with 2 Subsystem slots would give us for example (Drone wise):
2x Drone Subsystem: 20x Drones, 20x Fighter,20x Fighter-Bombers ( that you can launch ) -50% Hp
1x Drone Subsystem, 1x XYZ-Subsystem: 20x Drones, 15 Fighter,15x Fighter-Bombers ( that you can launch ) -25% HP
2x XYZ-Subsystem
20x Drones, 10 Fighters, 10x Fighterbombers ( that you can launch )
Advantages of this system: Even if you fit other Subsystems you will still be abe to launch 20 normal drones, but just 10 fighters/f-bombers.So your abiliy of defending against tacklers and sub-cap ships are still decent by using standart drones. But what you do NOT have is: Massive DPS and Masssive Hp. You have to choose...
Theres some more Subsystems i thought of to make it more interesting: -Increased jumprange -Remote ECM Burst Bonus -Armor Bonus -Shield Bonus ... the list you could implement is pretty long. Oh and forgive me i am not good in finding good names for those subsystems :(
To wrap it up: Taking an idea from the T3 ships, which are pretty popular because you can customize your ship,and combine it with a shipclass that has been discussed and argued about for ages now. The players set their penalties and advantages themselves and it opens up huge potentials for fleets.
So i hope my idea was kinda understandable. I do not read a lot in the forums so forgive me if this system was suggested for supercarriers somewhere else, but afaik i never heard of it before.
Supercarriers and Docking: I fly a Nyx for nearly 2 years now and i do not really need to dock to be honest. But since some ppl like to see it happening, i have an idea aswell:
It should be a docking "AT" stations not "IN" stations. Meaning you can establish a connection to the station but you still be outside and can be shot. The only things you will get are bonses to certain things like : cap-recharge rate, shield-recharge rate and repair bonuses. You also will be able to use the fitting tool, access your hangar, and access the market. Lowsec factions can take docking fees or certain fees for repping structure or whatever. In 0.0 space alliances can choose what they want to charge for it.
I mentioned that you can be shot... This is to avoid docking games which are pretty boring. You also will not be able to use offensive modules while you are linked with the station. You have to close the connection before you can, so you will not see any station boosted supertanks+drones. The station can provide some cover, but will not be able to save you everytime=> no hiding in station. In additionits it is possible to set some intervals for connecting and disconnecting with the station. Lets say 1 minute to eshablish a connection and 30 seconds to disconnect. This also will asure that you take a huge risk to "dock" at a station. Since you can not run away instantly if a hostile jumps in.
|
Jediwifebeater
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 22:08:00 -
[567]
Edited by: Ka''lorn Font''a on 14/11/2009 20:58:44 Why change what isn't broken?
Abathur's proposed, and tested changes were fine. If there are concerns with Fighter damage being too excessive, then reduce the damage that those 20 fighters would do to the level of what 15 fighters do.
There's no need to screw over the fact that Motherships can deploy 20 fighters/drones (fighters are fine, drones are fine, neither were ever considered overpowered).
By allowing Motherships to dock, you are opening a huge can of worms which, to be frank - should have been thrown out the design meeting the second it was raised.
Nor should the price be changed, there's 400+ Motherships around EVE as it is currently (probably closer to 1000, including alts/in production), you don't want 5000+ of them running around (which is what will happen, if the proposed cost reductions are implemented). If you can't see much of a bad idea injecting trillions of ISK into the economy is (10b x current number of mothership pilots), then I wonder what exactly you've been smoking in the office as of late. Signed no need for other posts I actually feel sorry for Sel/Abathur, as he has expertise in this area that - I'm willing to bet, would blow the combined experience of the rest of the development team out of the water.
|
Linas IV
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 23:05:00 -
[568]
Edited by: Linas IV on 14/11/2009 23:07:52 Edited by: Linas IV on 14/11/2009 23:07:24 Suggestion for the new SuperCarriers:
Since the new SCs are now basicly "normal" Caps (dockable, reasonable price etc.) maybe consider reducing their mass around 10-20% so that using them in WHs could be an viable option.
They would be about ideal for WH-use, since they are able to work there best in their intended role: as logistic- and support-ship for Fleets. (Because of their big SMA and Corp-hangar, that help in W-Space)
Furthermore they could help to stop that endless Faction-Pos-Spam in W-space (those that are basicly invincible because of the Wh-mass-restrictions, i.e. not more than 3 Dreads)
So please think about it.
|
Just Buch
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 23:20:00 -
[569]
Originally by: ****eDinger
Originally by: Lachender Henker
I think that itŠs time to implement SUBSYSTEMS on Supercarriers. Each subsystem has advantages and penatlties, for example: Supercarriers and Docking: It should be a docking "AT" stations not "IN" stations. Meaning you can establish a connection to the station but you still be outside and can be shot. The only things you will get are bonses to certain things like : cap-recharge rate, shield-recharge
Author has put a lot of effort and thinking into this, however I need to object this ideas: - with Abathur version, proposed changes are not necessary - with Nozh, sc is tier 2 carrier, therefore no need to complicate with subsystems and make it T3, while in the future we may get better T3, also no time - tier 2 carrier should be dockable as tier 1, besides what would happen if 30 sc wants to attach your way, how would it look?
I second reducing its mass and allowing it in wh space lol. But no HP nerf!!
|
Adenfi
Last Chance
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 00:51:00 -
[570]
I think all of them should have a sleight tank buff.
The ability to assign specif drones to a specific task. Ie These fighters will only attack Battle ships, These fighter bombers will only attack carriers.
|
|
Vincent Gaines
Dirt Nap Squad
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 04:10:00 -
[571]
CCP you went from one end to the other.
On SISI I was swarmed by 3 SCs in the FFA. I was running a pretty lame tank. I dropped into siege and was swarmed by a mix of fighters and bombers. A HIC dropped by for good measure.
I was stationary and out of range/wrong weaponry (citadel torp fitted).
It still took them more than 7 minutes to take me down.
Anti-capital? Wut?
Increase drones back to 20. Keep EHP buff. Remove docking ability. keep original value.
In other words, go back to what you had last week. |
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 04:48:00 -
[572]
Originally by: Vincent Gaines CCP you went from one end to the other.
On SISI I was swarmed by 3 SCs in the FFA. I was running a pretty lame tank. I dropped into siege and was swarmed by a mix of fighters and bombers. A HIC dropped by for good measure.
I was stationary and out of range/wrong weaponry (citadel torp fitted).
It still took them more than 7 minutes to take me down.
Anti-capital? Wut?
Increase drones back to 20. Keep EHP buff. Remove docking ability. keep original value.
In other words, go back to what you had last week.
I sign on this too!
Seriously CCP what are you thinking with? And donŠt pull any more crap about Target Painters it makes me sick just to bring up the subject.
Capitals are freaking huge compared to frigates and a TP on a capital is just nuts. Let alone the fact that a SiegeŠd Dread or TriageŠd Carrier are EWAR IMMUNE! donŠt mess with the siege or triage mods, they are just fine.
A week ago could an Aeon kill a SiegeŠd Revelation with 20 Fighter Bombers in 4ish minutes and that was a DPS worth to bring out the xMom from hiding in a POS. Now 7 minutes and 3 xMomŠs you just have to be kidding me!
Let alone the fact that Fighter Bombers can be killed either by other drones/smartbombs/support fleet are a certain way to handle the threat a xMom cause the opposing fleet. A dread canŠt loose its DPS unless you put nets on it and render its cap to deplete.
Regards
// Zork
|
Dri Kulsane
Amarr Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 07:04:00 -
[573]
Originally by: Oljud Zork A dread canŠt loose its DPS unless you put nets on it and render its cap to deplete.
Regards
// Zork
And don't forget, our new friend at CCP has recommended to us xMom pilots to use a full rack of DCU's in order to get better DPS. Not going to have room there now for neuts and such
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 07:19:00 -
[574]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 15/11/2009 07:23:33
Like I've said in the other thread, if you want to reduce the number of drones/fighters/bombers, change the drone control bonus to +2 per level, but also give all supercarriers a 5% damage and hp bonus (10% for Nyx).
That will probably keep people from asking for the old +3 bonus and as a nice side-effect boost drone control units a bit.
18.75 (Nyx 22.5) effective drones is still a reduction, down from 20 (25), but I think it might be one people will stomach. It reduces lag and supercarrier sub-capital effectiveness.
Now if you adjust the base dps of 15 fighter-bombers (or 10 with increased FB bandwidth) to around 5600 (7000 with full bonus, 8400 on Nyx) I guess most players wouldn't complain anymore.
Have you considered adding a signature penalty to the siege and triage modules? Or maybe the explosion velocity formula needs some tweaking, so that sub-capitals aren't overly endangered by FBs.
Anyway, most importantly, the price of motherships/supercarriers should not be changed. It's a major slap in the face of your old and loyal playerbase, more than any stats rebalance or nerf. It's devaluating effort. That's even worse than pure ISK.
Keep them expensive, keep them out of stations.
If you want some new 'Assault-Carrier', then I'd like to suggest: - postpone the supercapital change - take the jump portal generator from the titan - give it to the motherships along with some super crazy damage absorption single resistance sphere that redirects blows of one damage type to the mothership (anti-DD mod) - increase mothership hp but slightly reduce dps - retain all current mothership specials. If necessary make them more useful - create a new tier 2 (Assault) Carrier which has the stats of the latest supercarriers (6bil, can dock, fighter-bombers), but with less hp (6-8 mil eff) and without EW immunity
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Frank McTeague
Caldari Shadow Warri0rs
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 07:45:00 -
[575]
Originally by: ByFstugan Edited by: ByFstugan on 30/10/2009 06:07:44
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
The Hel has had its hit points adjusted to reflect a primary shield tanking role.
All Supercarriers have had their base jump drive range increased from 4LY to 5 LY.
Docking: Plz don't just state "no docking" but instead motivate the reason (if U have anyone else than it seems hard for U to fix). And when that's done plz change your mind again, the ability to dock is a really good feature imo since being trapped in POS's is poop.
Size: As another thing I agree with those who wants Super Carriers bigger, perhaps not insane much larger than a regular Carrier, but so it's noticed there's something big on the field.
Active tank: Another VERY important comment imo; I'd like to see either an XXL-rep/booster for supercaps or an x00% effectivity to the regular capital reppers. Without that a regular carrier in triage get 4x more effective active rep than a Super Carrier, and the Super Carrier tanks will ONLY be about EHP, since active rep gives like nothing compared to that.
Implants: Since Super Carriers is REALLY expensive ships and EVE get's more and more a very deadly place for this behemoths (now with Titans/SC's who specilize in killing them also) the best way to go concerning implants should be to also make crystals make for shield tankers (or make an new Shield implant-set for Shield-HP-buff and make only crystals not work for capitals as it is).
Hel: A good move to adjust the HP on this. I got a small thought about it's new bonus to fighters. Isn't it more in Minmatars style to get extra speed to their fighters instead of an resist bonus? Anyone is fine by me, it's just a thought.
Something tells me you've taken a lot of special ed classes in your time.
|
Zaisig Murakk
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 08:12:00 -
[576]
Originally by: SXYGeeK supercarries now get 1 extra drone per level as opposed to 3, with no damage buff to compensate ?
|
Jaxx Blackfox
Minmatar Outlaw-Star Brotherhood of Outlaws and Miners
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 10:15:00 -
[577]
When I logged into the test server yesterday and tried to launch my 25 fighters against a target only to max out at 15 I had thoughts of setting flame to the forums, but after reading the last several pages since the change took place I have come to a new light.
While I agree that the ability to drop 20 fighters with carrier lvl 5 and no DCU's is essential for a ship its size and cost I can also see where CCP is coming with making these ships over powered. Putting a limit to how many Fighter Bombers one can launch and leave the regular fighters/drones at their original limits would be a better middle ground then simple making it an overpriced tier 1 carrier. This could also compensate for its inability to dock but if you do allow it to dock then the current change of +2 Bonus seems fair.
The lowered price is something I won't fight if it was to come about. My goal in the game has always been to get into the Nyx and making it easier is certainly not something I would object to. I do think that it would be unfortunate to those who have already spent all the time and effort to get into one of these wonderful ships, I don't however agree with the compensation as it would cause an inflation increase like no other. On the flip side it would make it so that the ships are used more in battles and lost as a result. I believe a good compensation would be to give all current Super-Carriers free Platinum insurance with the pay out at 10 to 12 billion isk. This will compensate the current pilots for their initial investment into the ships without handing out a load of isk only to get the ships insured the second they dock and receive even more isk on their destruction.
In Summery:
Super-Carriers Unable to Dock: Leave the +3 Drone bonus but only allow Max 20 Fighter Bombers to launch. Everything else Unchanged from what it was.
Supper-Carrier Able to Dock: +2 Drone bonus across all drones. Decrease in cost of ship it is now a Tier 2 Cap ship not a Super-cap like Titan. Compensation to existing Super Carrier pilots in the form of Free Platinum Insurance with the payout at 10 to 12 Billion isk.
Just my Honest Opinion, Jaxx
|
Zyleina Kzorvern
Coronene Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 10:54:00 -
[578]
Edited by: Zyleina Kzorvern on 15/11/2009 10:55:59 Of all the changes made, the one I find the hardest to understand is the build cost.
I can see reducing the number of drones if the dps was thought to be too high. But changing the build cost is a direct way for ccp to reduce the cost and increase the availability of a ship.
I can't see a good reason for it. People are already complaining of capital blobs. Now you want to make a 20+ million EHP, EW immune ship available to everyone. If they can't dock, numbers will go up, if you allow them to dock, numbers will really go up.
And then what? Supercarriers will be the new standard. Every fleet will need tons and tons of these to be competitive. My guess is that huge fleets of these ships will be so powerful that ccp will be forced to nerf them again in a year. They will probably loose their EW immunity, maybe have reduced HP, or even the ability to remote rep. Then you will ruin these ships forever.
Right now there aren't that many supercarriers around. I think I ready someone say the number is 300-400. That is a very small number compared to how many cap pilots are in game.
Don't reduce production costs and don't do reimbursements. You're just making everything even more complicated and creating new problems. If you are going to reimburse supercarrier pilots, you will need to reimburse a lot of other people for game decisions. And that is the last thing you need.
Keep the build costs the same, make small changes if you need to. I think the version you had before all these random and crazy changes was pretty well balanced. No one was complaining. Everyone who tried them out on the test server liked them.
So why make changes when everything is working so well?
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 12:09:00 -
[579]
Originally by: Kraken Kill If you go back to the Original Idea for SuperCarriers You dont need to impliment further fixes. ALL of your suggestions only cause further imbalance and require more fixing.
Allowing them to dock will create massive imbalance, if someone can afford a Carrier and Dread (which a massive number of people can do) you will see everyone have one of these ships and dock it up and pull it out. fleets of 50 motherships for luls easy- from each 0.0 side in regular fleets replacing the carriers they used to have.
The docking will mean that its safe to undock kill something, redock, repair undock etc- you nerfed the moros' drones for this reason so your reimplimenting it with the supercarrier, a ship with even more firepower and EHP? So you would need to fix the docking time for these ships- another fix required.
You have broken the fighterbombers- they only do half damage to dreadnaughts and to carriers moving they do vastly reduced amounts of damage. Using 15 of these bombers does about the same damage as a Dread, they are not anticapital ships what so ever. The claim that they can leave the field much sooner- in capital combat it can last an hour. an hour and bubbles will be everywhere. there will be no leaving the field. You cant leave the field anyway with your fighters on a target or they will warp off, or at least warp off once the target is down, then you would have to warp back in.
As i see it those who saved and grinded for the ship pre-patch, they were your veteren players, they put a lot of effort into it and play tested the ship on sisi. Right now its these vets who are less likely to fly the new version and you will find those who had no intentions of flying one getting one- because they can just put it in the station and its all cheap and chearful.
So that leaves the Titan as the end game ship- and in its current version its a POS orniment. A tool purely for bridging fleets. The damage is pointless to make it practical to use.I have no desire to sit in a pos and bridge people with a dedicated char now.
So I dont know whats going on at CCP HQ, but with 15 days to go these changes are really bizarre, Im still in denile over most of them, they surely cant go live because they are so bizarrely awful. They Break so much, the end game is removed and there is seemingly no point to much of anything anymore.
This Whole patch is a nerf to 0.0 . Fighterbombers should have 1500 Explo radius and 75ms Explosion Velocity on the Compact torpedos. Citadel Torpedo explo radious should also be around 1500.
1500 allows you to hit dreads at full damage and 75ms allows you to hit moving capitals at full damage. It would mean that support ships are still relatively unharmed. You should make the Supercarriers have 20 drones. Its about firepower relative to a carrier- Twice the firepower with conventional drones.
If the 20 Bombers do too much damage reduce the damage they do, two Dreads worth of damage is appropriate damage for these ships, 8000dps. So at lvl 5 Fighterbomber, divide 8000/20, 400 dps per fighterbomber at lvl 5, so 200 dps per bomber base. is it 15 second ROF for the torps? 3000 damage from each torpedo Base.
Sorry I had to remove some, the entire post are here.
Well I have said it before, and I say it again. The changes to the xMoms are not balanced. Please hit the emergency brake and release the changes to the xMom in Dominion 2.0 in Mars 2010 or whenever you had time to think this over...
If you want the xMom to be a capital killer it has to do at least the same damage as a Dreadnought! Compare the price and it should do a lot more dps then a dread...
Regards
// Zork
|
Zaethiel
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 22:01:00 -
[580]
Edited by: Zaethiel on 15/11/2009 22:01:54 When they first added bombers to test i tried them and even with 20 i wasn't overly impressed with their damage vs capitals. It seemed pretty balanced as it still took a while to kill capitals esp if they siege. -----
|
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 23:21:00 -
[581]
It basically comes down to this, as I see it.
What does CCP really want from Supper Carriers? A nice trophy ship that might get used in non gated plexes (at the most) or a real combat efficient ship that can contribute to a fleet battle or to repp stations or these new marker things coming out in Dom?
If its trophy ships that sit at a POS, then do this patch as is.
If it's a combat ship you want, boost the dps, keep the cost the same and keep the 20 fighter/FBs (or boost their dps). If it is true that multiple SCs takes 7 min or more to take down a single Dread in siege than it is not the anti anything you say you want it to be.
It's a simple question; What do you really want them to be? I await your answer as I am not going to put my nyx in the cooker tell you decide. thanks
|
Zaethiel
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 00:42:00 -
[582]
Edited by: Zaethiel on 16/11/2009 00:43:49 They need to get on test and modify SC damage with bombers to a point where they are happy that 1 or 2 SC can kill a dread in siege with a tank in X amount of minutes or seconds. Not this im going to change SC by this much just bc without actually modifying the damage to a specific point where they can accomplish what they are meant to accomplish.
Also take into account how hard/easy it is for them to kill HICs and BS. Not only with Bombers but also with Heavies and sentries. -----
|
Mike Yass
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 06:57:00 -
[583]
Originally by: Mike Yass The real problem with reducing the cost of motherships is it reduces the desire to gank them.
With the intended buff to tanking, they are essentially immune to subcaps. The change to price also affects how many caps you're willing to commit to kill one. At 15 bil/ship plus another 2-3b in fittings it's worth risking around ~15 dreads to take it out. At 6b per ship, it's worth risking ~5 dreads to take it out.
The increase to HP also drastically increases enemy response time. Currently supercaps die to dread fleets before repping triage carriers can undock. After the patch, the defender is going to get 3-4 minutes after the attacking dreads enter siege to rescue a super cap. This is a massive, massive increase in risk to the attacker. Unfortunately, the logic behind cap fleets is that you always deploy as many caps as possible, and that when you lose, you tend to lose everything. The result is that risk of killing a mothership goes way, way up, and with the price nerf, the reward of killing one goes way, way down.
The end result is that motherships will be ****ing everwhere, and no one is going to try and kill them. Your patch will eliminate a nice source of cap fights. Please don't do that.
I think this is relevant to this thread as well.
|
Avatoin
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 08:02:00 -
[584]
OMG I'm so slow. I just realized what CCP did. They reduced the number of Supercaps to just one (ie the Titan) and are making the supercarrier more like a tier 2 carrier instead of a supercapital. Its like the tier 1 carriers are basic support and logistics now while supercarriers are the DPS ships now.
From what I've read as long as the cost of a supercarrier is about the same as a dreadnaught then the changes will probably work out in the end. It will hurt alot for all those people who paid billions of isk to get the Moms but it will probably bring in more supercarriers to the battlefield a little on the same level as carriers and a bit closer to dreadnaughts.
Now if only the fighter's range was limited to the grid range of the carriers to prevent POS hugging then the transformation of carriers will be complete.
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 10:19:00 -
[585]
It appears nozh came in nd ****ed on seleenese parade.
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Nozh
this is the guy who brought us the proposal for a carrier nerf two years ago which resulted in the largest forum rage ever
..
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 10:37:00 -
[586]
Originally by: Mike Yass
Originally by: Mike Yass The real problem with reducing the cost of motherships is it reduces the desire to gank them.
With the intended buff to tanking, they are essentially immune to subcaps. The change to price also affects how many caps you're willing to commit to kill one. At 15 bil/ship plus another 2-3b in fittings it's worth risking around ~15 dreads to take it out. At 6b per ship, it's worth risking ~5 dreads to take it out.
The increase to HP also drastically increases enemy response time. Currently supercaps die to dread fleets before repping triage carriers can undock. After the patch, the defender is going to get 3-4 minutes after the attacking dreads enter siege to rescue a super cap. This is a massive, massive increase in risk to the attacker. Unfortunately, the logic behind cap fleets is that you always deploy as many caps as possible, and that when you lose, you tend to lose everything. The result is that risk of killing a mothership goes way, way up, and with the price nerf, the reward of killing one goes way, way down.
The end result is that motherships will be ****ing everwhere, and no one is going to try and kill them. Your patch will eliminate a nice source of cap fights. Please don't do that.
I think this is relevant to this thread as well.
Great, I hadn't eve thought of it that way, this only makesit worse :P
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Lord Eremet
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 12:11:00 -
[587]
If they become dockable then they can't keep that massive hitpoint boost - or they become overpowered in absurdum.
And if that happens I buy one
|
Arzal
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 13:57:00 -
[588]
Don't make them dock able
Don't make them cheaper to produce
Put back the 20 fighter bombers
sort out their ability to hit caps, cause atm a non moving dreadnought is a pain to kill... oh and moving carriers, they are also a pain.
p.s love the hp buff, and if you did do what you see above, you would find alot more "super carriers" being used.
Thanks noza!
|
Ruby Lionheart
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 15:01:00 -
[589]
Originally by: Sokratesz It appears nozh came in nd ****ed on seleenese parade.
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Nozh
this is the guy who brought us the proposal for a carrier nerf two years ago which resulted in the largest forum rage ever
..
He just createt the second largest forum rage.
|
R0ze
Exile Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 16:49:00 -
[590]
Originally by: Sokratesz It appears nozh came in nd ****ed on seleenese parade.
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Nozh
this is the guy who brought us the proposal for a carrier nerf two years ago which resulted in the largest forum rage ever
..
Besides if you look at http://www.eve-search.com/search/author/CCP%20Nozh and go through the pages - how can one man cover so many areas (supercaps / Agility / Tech3 / Blackops,bombers / Missiles / Speed and so on) ..
|
|
Sarah Moonshine
The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 17:20:00 -
[591]
Edited by: Sarah Moonshine on 16/11/2009 17:21:01 I wouldn't be surprised if Zulupark (oh, hai!) is pulling the strings here. There's this disturbing pattern...
Edit: talk about the devil (ie, check sig). --
|
The Economist
Logically Consistent
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 17:21:00 -
[592]
Originally by: R0ze how can one man cover so many areas (supercaps / Agility / Tech3 / Blackops,bombers / Missiles / Speed and so on) ..
By being terrible in all of them?
|
Criss AngeI
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 18:56:00 -
[593]
Originally by: Buxaroo whine whine ***** ***** whine whine im quitting whine
poor you
|
FawKa
Gallente Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 19:44:00 -
[594]
Originally by: Sokratesz It appears nozh came in nd ****ed on seleenese parade.
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Nozh
this is the guy who brought us the proposal for a carrier nerf two years ago which resulted in the largest forum rage ever
..
You already got my vote, just get enough to get CSM'd and kick butt for the Mom's
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:11:00 -
[595]
WHERE IS ABATHUR!?
The clock is ticking to Dominion launch...
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:26:00 -
[596]
Originally by: FawKa
Originally by: Sokratesz It appears nozh came in nd ****ed on seleenese parade.
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Nozh
this is the guy who brought us the proposal for a carrier nerf two years ago which resulted in the largest forum rage ever
..
You already got my vote, just get enough to get CSM'd and kick butt for the Mom's
Oh I bloody will
ps. tell your friends
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Severion Atarkos
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:49:00 -
[597]
Edited by: Severion Atarkos on 16/11/2009 20:49:38 It's got to be a massive troll, I really don't see where CCP see this as a good change.
Sorry nozh but I don't think you've played the game enough to understand that a rack of dcu's/TP on a capital ship is not going to work.
On top of that the damage is worse and what once took one ms 4 minutes to kill (dread) now takes 7 minutes for three ms's to kill. Doesn't sound very anticapital shipish to me, what about you nozh???
|
Isaac Starstriker
Amarr The Confederate Navy Forever Unbound
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 21:59:00 -
[598]
Originally by: CCP Abathur A few quick updates:
Supercarriers will not be docking in Dominion. If this ever happens it will be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade.
I'm very sorry to quote CCP on this, but thanks for lying to all of us on this. I sincerely hope your just screwing around on Si-Si for kicks and giggles and that your not going to implement Supercarriers docking in stations. Otherwise, remove the whole name of "supercap".
--Isaac Signature is now under construction: check back in a couple weeks.
AMAAR VICTOR!
"You just can't fix stupid"
|
CrazzyElk
Big Shadows Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 00:34:00 -
[599]
Edited by: CrazzyElk on 17/11/2009 00:36:25 If CCP wants these ships to be in fleets and not just for ganks and lowsec games then I think these changes are hitting the spot.
The servers will never be able to handel +3 dorone if these things start to get more frequent flyer miles so people will just have to accept that if they are to be usefull ships in fleets they also have to get fewer drones.
The fighter bomber dps on a sieged dread seams to be ****, and that of course needs to be looked at but I presume it's being looked into.
Buildcosts isnt really sutch a concern for everyone not having one already. But if the ship is being made into something else then the current E-Peen pos hugger then I assume costs need to be adjusted as well.
Docking is and probably will be the make or break thing for these things. If you want them to be a frequent sight and see huge fleets of these things then it needs to be able to dock, if you just want it to be a curieuse plaything for people with to many accounts then by all means keep them out of stations.
Regardless of everything else I think the insurance should be removed. These things arent meant to be easily replaceable in either of the two forementioned versions of it.
|
1nsan1ty
Darkwave Technologies Kahora Catori
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 00:58:00 -
[600]
These changes sound fine to me, for a ship that is called Supercarrier (what a lame name..).
By the looks, it indeed is a t2 varient of a Carrier, and depending on the price cut, the insurance should be tweaked maybe (lower then t1, higher then t2 of course; make it t1.5 insurance!).
If I remember correctly CCP said that they want to make Motherships something huge and "wtfpwn", so be patient, and you'll get your Motherships back "soon" :D
|
|
Salam Farooj
INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 2009
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 01:16:00 -
[601]
When are we going to get some more feedback from CCP about this? Does anyone there realize how far out you plan to fly one of these?
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 05:42:00 -
[602]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 17/11/2009 05:42:45
Originally by: Salam Farooj When are we going to get some more feedback from CCP about this? Does anyone there realize how far out you plan to fly one of these?
I *really* want to hear ccp's reply on the situation. If it isn't something very serious then I might just end up being the first ccp rep without any active accounts.
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Taco Torpedo
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 11:17:00 -
[603]
Free Cpr fitted Wyvern for Sok if he gets the reply I have in mind
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 13:48:00 -
[604]
*sigh* Welp, guess we better get used to super ****ty super carriers. Dominion will be here in less than two weeks. So glad I never bought one now.
Let us all have a moment of silence for the super carriers (a.k.a. motherships)...
Imagine what could have been...
|
Gaogan
Gallente Solar Storm Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 17:03:00 -
[605]
Why take away the ability to fit triage module and warfare links compared to the normal carrier? Give it back the 3 warfare links and if not the triage module, at least give it an in built -50% bonus to capital repper/remote rep/shield transfer/energy transfer duration.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 17:45:00 -
[606]
Edited by: Oljud Zork on 17/11/2009 17:47:39
Originally by: Stafen
The formula for calculating missile damage.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=901280
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er;1);(Ev/Er*sig/vel)^(log(drf)/log(5.5)))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile drf = Damage Reduction Factor of missile
"Compact Citadel Torpedoes"
Explosion Radius 3500m (2187,5m for Hel with Minmatar Carrier V) Explosion Velocity 60m Damage Reduction Factor 6,5 Base Damage 3200 (4000 for Nyx with Gallente Carrier V)
I did the calculations and here are the results for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" with the current information given by CCP Nozh.
Originally by: Oljud Zork
The targets: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity. Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: No difference between standstill or full thrust. The same results are for all the Super Carriers and Titans as well.
Aeon and Wyvern against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 1724 dps and using 5 DCU 2299 dps. Nyx against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2155 dps and using 5 DCU 2874 dps. Hel against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2759 dps and using 5 DCU 3679 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 869 dps and using 5 DCU 1158 dps. Nyx against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1086 dps and using 5 DCU 1448 dps. Hel against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1456 dps and using 5 DCU 1941 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 2619 dps and using 5 DCU 3493 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3274 dps and using 5 DCU 4366 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1288 dps and using 5 DCU 1717 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1610 dps and using 5 DCU 2147 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 2158 dps and using 5 DCU 2877 dps.
Aeon, Wyvern and Hel against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps. Nyx against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 4000 dps and using 5 DCU 5333dps.
The calculations clearly show that 15 Fighter Bombers against a siegeŠd dread do less damage than a regular dread in Siege, a Revelation deal ~4000 dps with 2 heat sinks...
The same against a carrier, less dps then a dread do. But against a xMom or a Titan will they do some nice dps starting at 3200 and the Nyx beats all with its 5333 dps using 5 DCU modules.
Conclusion; The new Super Carriers are intended to be used against Super Carriers and Titans.
Why shall we bring a xMom to the capital battlefield when it deal 50% less dps against a Dread then a Dread do?
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom cant bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
Regards
// Zork
|
SolarKnight
Gallente ORIGIN SYSTEMS Shadows of Light
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 18:10:00 -
[607]
Originally by: Oljud Zork Edited by: Oljud Zork on 17/11/2009 18:08:52
Originally by: Stafen
The formula for calculating missile damage.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=901280
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er;1);(Ev/Er*sig/vel)^(log(drf)/log(5.5)))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile drf = Damage Reduction Factor of missile
"Compact Citadel Torpedoes"
Explosion Radius 3500m (2187,5m for Hel with Minmatar Carrier V) Explosion Velocity 60m Damage Reduction Factor 6,5 Base Damage 3200 (4000 for Nyx with Gallente Carrier V)
I did the calculations and here are the results for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" with the current information given by CCP Nozh.
Originally by: Oljud Zork, from iT Alliance Forum
The targets: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity. Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: No difference between standstill or full thrust. The same results are for all the Super Carriers and Titans as well.
Aeon and Wyvern against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 1724 dps and using 5 DCU 2299 dps. Nyx against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2155 dps and using 5 DCU 2874 dps. Hel against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2759 dps and using 5 DCU 3679 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 869 dps and using 5 DCU 1158 dps. Nyx against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1086 dps and using 5 DCU 1448 dps. Hel against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1456 dps and using 5 DCU 1941 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 2619 dps and using 5 DCU 3493 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3274 dps and using 5 DCU 4366 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1288 dps and using 5 DCU 1717 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1610 dps and using 5 DCU 2147 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 2158 dps and using 5 DCU 2877 dps.
Aeon, Wyvern and Hel against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps. Nyx against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 4000 dps and using 5 DCU 5333dps.
The calculations clearly show that 15 Fighter Bombers against a siegeŠd dread do less damage than a regular dread in Siege, a Revelation deal ~4000 dps with 2 heat sinks...
The same against a carrier, less dps then a dread do. But against a xMom or a Titan will they do some nice dps starting at 3200 and the Nyx beats all with its 5333 dps using 5 DCU modules.
Conclusion; The new Super Carriers are intended to be used against Super Carriers and Titans.
Why shall we bring a xMom to the capital battlefield when it deal 50% less dps against a Dread then a Dread do?
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
Regards
// Zork
This please! The Light in the Darkness
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 19:33:00 -
[608]
Originally by: Oljud Zork Edited by: Oljud Zork on 17/11/2009 18:10:34
Originally by: Stafen
The formula for calculating missile damage.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=901280
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er;1);(Ev/Er*sig/vel)^(log(drf)/log(5.5)))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile drf = Damage Reduction Factor of missile
"Compact Citadel Torpedoes"
Explosion Radius 3500m (2187,5m for Hel with Minmatar Carrier V) Explosion Velocity 60m Damage Reduction Factor 6,5 Base Damage 3200 (4000 for Nyx with Gallente Carrier V)
I did the calculations and here are the results for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" with the current information given by CCP Nozh.
Originally by: Oljud Zork, from iT Alliance Forum
The targets: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity. Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: No difference between standstill or full thrust. The same results are for all the Super Carriers and Titans as well.
Aeon and Wyvern against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 1724 dps and using 5 DCU 2299 dps. Nyx against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2155 dps and using 5 DCU 2874 dps. Hel against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2759 dps and using 5 DCU 3679 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 869 dps and using 5 DCU 1158 dps. Nyx against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1086 dps and using 5 DCU 1448 dps. Hel against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1456 dps and using 5 DCU 1941 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 2619 dps and using 5 DCU 3493 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3274 dps and using 5 DCU 4366 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1288 dps and using 5 DCU 1717 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1610 dps and using 5 DCU 2147 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 2158 dps and using 5 DCU 2877 dps.
Aeon, Wyvern and Hel against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps. Nyx against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 4000 dps and using 5 DCU 5333dps.
The calculations clearly show that 15 Fighter Bombers against a siegeŠd dread do less damage than a regular dread in Siege, a Revelation deal ~4000 dps with 2 heat sinks...
The same against a carrier, less dps then a dread do. But against a xMom or a Titan will they do some nice dps starting at 3200 and the Nyx beats all with its 5333 dps using 5 DCU modules.
Conclusion; The new Super Carriers are intended to be used against Super Carriers and Titans.
Why shall we bring a xMom to the capital battlefield when it deal 50% less dps against a Dread then a Dread do?
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
Regards
// Zork
/Signed CCP here.. Wait me, in agreement with IT.. the world is not right. but yea this works
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 01:02:00 -
[609]
Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 18/11/2009 01:04:34
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Solution: * +1 Drone / Fighter / Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * +20% to Fighter Bomber Hitpoints + Damage per Carrier Level * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 3200m. * Compact Citadel base damage to 3500 * Explosion Velocity back to 45 m/s
Would make more sense this way if you ask me.
Puts more emphasis on the anti-capital role compared to the anti-everything role, would actually make it worthwhile to fit the DCUs and leave some room for damage reduction by speed and signature.
|
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 04:11:00 -
[610]
Originally by: Oljud Zork Edited by: Oljud Zork on 17/11/2009 18:10:34
Originally by: Stafen
The formula for calculating missile damage.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=901280
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er;1);(Ev/Er*sig/vel)^(log(drf)/log(5.5)))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile drf = Damage Reduction Factor of missile
"Compact Citadel Torpedoes"
Explosion Radius 3500m (2187,5m for Hel with Minmatar Carrier V) Explosion Velocity 60m Damage Reduction Factor 6,5 Base Damage 3200 (4000 for Nyx with Gallente Carrier V)
I did the calculations and here are the results for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" with the current information given by CCP Nozh.
Originally by: Oljud Zork, from iT Alliance Forum
The targets: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity. Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: No difference between standstill or full thrust. The same results are for all the Super Carriers and Titans as well.
Aeon and Wyvern against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 1724 dps and using 5 DCU 2299 dps. Nyx against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2155 dps and using 5 DCU 2874 dps. Hel against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2759 dps and using 5 DCU 3679 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 869 dps and using 5 DCU 1158 dps. Nyx against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1086 dps and using 5 DCU 1448 dps. Hel against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1456 dps and using 5 DCU 1941 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 2619 dps and using 5 DCU 3493 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3274 dps and using 5 DCU 4366 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1288 dps and using 5 DCU 1717 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1610 dps and using 5 DCU 2147 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 2158 dps and using 5 DCU 2877 dps.
Aeon, Wyvern and Hel against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps. Nyx against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 4000 dps and using 5 DCU 5333dps.
The calculations clearly show that 15 Fighter Bombers against a siegeŠd dread do less damage than a regular dread in Siege, a Revelation deal ~4000 dps with 2 heat sinks...
The same against a carrier, less dps then a dread do. But against a xMom or a Titan will they do some nice dps starting at 3200 and the Nyx beats all with its 5333 dps using 5 DCU modules.
Conclusion; The new Super Carriers are intended to be used against Super Carriers and Titans.
Why shall we bring a xMom to the capital battlefield when it deal 50% less dps against a Dread then a Dread do?
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
Regards
// Zork
I cant beliieve it but I am agreeing 100% with a member of IT....very nice work put into these calculations Zork, It's amazing how the community base can see this stuff for what it truly is and the game developers seem to overlook it. /signing off on this as the proper fix to the dps problem |
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 04:50:00 -
[611]
Well well this explains it.
Oljud Zork's calculations explains why I was seeing odd damage outputs from the fighterbombers. Nice work.
|
Merbok
Gallente The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 06:35:00 -
[612]
Quote: Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield. This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights. Regards // Zork
SIGNED! --------
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 08:04:00 -
[613]
What baffles me most about these changes is the lack of foundation.
If CCP said 'we want motherships to do x and therefor we have changed them y' it would be much easier to comment on it and provide proper feedback, instead of the massive rage and speculation going on now.
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Kkhaarn
Black Serpent Technologies R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 08:44:00 -
[614]
Originally by: Achura Calda So if they can dock now , does that mean we can also build them in stations ?
They can't dock. They didn't get the x2 drone bonus back. Seems like a CCP cover up to douse the flames. *shrugs*
|
Noxious IV
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 11:45:00 -
[615]
sooo we gonna hear from ccp on this matter perhaps a live Q&A with devs would be a good idea
|
Lusin Gando
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 12:10:00 -
[616]
Originally by: Oljud Zork Edited by: Oljud Zork on 17/11/2009 18:10:34
Originally by: Stafen
The formula for calculating missile damage.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=901280
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er;1);(Ev/Er*sig/vel)^(log(drf)/log(5.5)))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile drf = Damage Reduction Factor of missile
"Compact Citadel Torpedoes"
Explosion Radius 3500m (2187,5m for Hel with Minmatar Carrier V) Explosion Velocity 60m Damage Reduction Factor 6,5 Base Damage 3200 (4000 for Nyx with Gallente Carrier V)
I did the calculations and here are the results for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" with the current information given by CCP Nozh.
Originally by: Oljud Zork, from iT Alliance Forum
The targets: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity. Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: No difference between standstill or full thrust. The same results are for all the Super Carriers and Titans as well.
Aeon and Wyvern against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 1724 dps and using 5 DCU 2299 dps. Nyx against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2155 dps and using 5 DCU 2874 dps. Hel against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2759 dps and using 5 DCU 3679 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 869 dps and using 5 DCU 1158 dps. Nyx against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1086 dps and using 5 DCU 1448 dps. Hel against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1456 dps and using 5 DCU 1941 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 2619 dps and using 5 DCU 3493 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3274 dps and using 5 DCU 4366 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1288 dps and using 5 DCU 1717 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1610 dps and using 5 DCU 2147 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 2158 dps and using 5 DCU 2877 dps.
Aeon, Wyvern and Hel against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps. Nyx against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 4000 dps and using 5 DCU 5333dps.
The calculations clearly show that 15 Fighter Bombers against a siegeŠd dread do less damage than a regular dread in Siege, a Revelation deal ~4000 dps with 2 heat sinks...
The same against a carrier, less dps then a dread do. But against a xMom or a Titan will they do some nice dps starting at 3200 and the Nyx beats all with its 5333 dps using 5 DCU modules.
Conclusion; The new Super Carriers are intended to be used against Super Carriers and Titans.
Why shall we bring a xMom to the capital battlefield when it deal 50% less dps against a Dread then a Dread do?
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
Regards
// Zork
/signed |
A Skywalker
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 12:12:00 -
[617]
Originally by: Oljud Zork Edited by: Oljud Zork on 17/11/2009 18:10:34
Originally by: Stafen
The formula for calculating missile damage.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=901280
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er;1);(Ev/Er*sig/vel)^(log(drf)/log(5.5)))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile drf = Damage Reduction Factor of missile
"Compact Citadel Torpedoes"
Explosion Radius 3500m (2187,5m for Hel with Minmatar Carrier V) Explosion Velocity 60m Damage Reduction Factor 6,5 Base Damage 3200 (4000 for Nyx with Gallente Carrier V)
I did the calculations and here are the results for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" with the current information given by CCP Nozh.
Originally by: Oljud Zork, from iT Alliance Forum
The targets: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity. Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: No difference between standstill or full thrust. The same results are for all the Super Carriers and Titans as well.
Aeon and Wyvern against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 1724 dps and using 5 DCU 2299 dps. Nyx against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2155 dps and using 5 DCU 2874 dps. Hel against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2759 dps and using 5 DCU 3679 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 869 dps and using 5 DCU 1158 dps. Nyx against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1086 dps and using 5 DCU 1448 dps. Hel against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1456 dps and using 5 DCU 1941 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 2619 dps and using 5 DCU 3493 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3274 dps and using 5 DCU 4366 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1288 dps and using 5 DCU 1717 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1610 dps and using 5 DCU 2147 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 2158 dps and using 5 DCU 2877 dps.
Aeon, Wyvern and Hel against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps. Nyx against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 4000 dps and using 5 DCU 5333dps.
The calculations clearly show that 15 Fighter Bombers against a siegeŠd dread do less damage than a regular dread in Siege, a Revelation deal ~4000 dps with 2 heat sinks...
The same against a carrier, less dps then a dread do. But against a xMom or a Titan will they do some nice dps starting at 3200 and the Nyx beats all with its 5333 dps using 5 DCU modules.
Conclusion; The new Super Carriers are intended to be used against Super Carriers and Titans.
Why shall we bring a xMom to the capital battlefield when it deal 50% less dps against a Dread then a Dread do?
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
Regards
// Zork
/Signed Sorry 4 the spelling, don't have english as level 5, yet |
Kindjal
Amarr Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 12:17:00 -
[618]
/agree
|
ESF Hyperion
Minmatar 1st In Last Out
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 12:18:00 -
[619]
/signed
|
Toshi Lee
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 12:23:00 -
[620]
/signed
|
|
Brother Theos
Big Guns Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 12:52:00 -
[621]
/signed.
Much better than the current xMoM stats.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 12:57:00 -
[622]
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
With these changes will the xMom be able to hit all moving capitals, but the total dps are still 3200 and it is lower then a Dreadnought...
About the size of the Fighter Bomber, today is it 7500m3 per unit comparing it to a Fighter which is 5000m3.
For example, an AeonŠs drone bay are 200 000m3 and the smallest of all the Super Carriers. Before when it was a Mom could it hold 40 Fighters and launch 20. Now lets play with the idea that we get my suggested change +3 Fighters and regular drones and +1 Fighter Bomber per racial carrier level. This will give the Aeon space for 13 Fighter Bombers and 20 Fighters or 40 Fighters or 26 Fighter Bombers if the pilot decide to carry only Fighters or Fighter Bombers. This works fine but if an Aeon can launch 10 Fighter Bombers do I think that having 3 to 16 in spare are little to much, therefore increase the size of the Fighter Bomber to, lets say 10 000m3, and now are we on the same ratio as the Mom was. With 10 Fighter Bombers to launch and 10 spare, if the pilot decide to carry both Fighters and Fighter Bombers can he/she fit a full rack of both but no spare drones, and now to my point; This will encourage the pilot to bring Fighter Bombers and take part in the anti capital fleet, and can loose all the Fighter Bombers and still be able to replace them one time!
Considering the dps; 3200 are to low for using against a dread. I want the Fighter Bombers as they were intended by CCP Abathur but I donŠt want 20 of them I want 10 doing the same dps, fleet fights are always laggy and reducing lag with lesser drones at the same dps are a nice way.
A suggestion for changes on the "Compact Citadel Torpedo" for the dps so that the Super Carrier really become super and can deal real damage on a siegeŠd dread.
Base Damage 8000 <- Nuts? No, let me show you! Explosion Radius 3500m Explosion Velocity 75m/sec Damage Reduction Factor 6,5
Aeon vs. SiegeŠd Naglfar: 4311 dps and using 5 DCU 5748 dps. Aeon vs. Naglfar Full Thrust: 2775 dps and using 5 DCU 3700 dps. Aeon vs. Nidhoggur, Standstill: 6549 dps and using 5 DCU 8731 dps. Aeon vs. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 4094 dps and using 5 DCU 5459. Aeon vs. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 8000 dps and using 5 DCU 10667 dps. Aeon vs. Apocalypse, Standstill: 914 dps and using 5 DCU 1219 dps. Aeon vs. Apocalypse, Full Thrust: 577 dps and using 5 DCU 769 dps.
You wanted an Anti-Capital ship this is a anti-capital ship. It deals the same dps as a siegeŠd dread and it can hit moving dreads with reduced damage. Most of all it deal a lot of damage on Super Carriers and Titans. Using 5 DCU will increase the dps a lot but itŠs risky and I highly doubt that any Super Carrier pilot will fit that many DCUŠs...
Regards
// Zork
|
Ryan Coolness
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 13:08:00 -
[623]
Edited by: Ryan Coolness on 18/11/2009 13:10:38 For a 6b (9b on open market prolly) ship that can dock the damage figures seem acceptable, even though they are not very impressive in all honesty. Are the numbers with current 10 f/b or with the proposed but not implemented 15 f/b btw ?
Still, imho the whole direction it is still the completely wrong approach, they should:
- cost double the above amount (12b build, ~18b market)
- do double that dps, be it with 10, 15 or 20 f/b, doesnt matter
- be able to carry at least 1 spare wave of f/b (meaning either 10 f/b get damage boost or drone bay gets increased if we go back to 20 f/b)
- and that is the most important part: not be able to dock
Yes, that is pretty much what Seleene suggested (man has a clue really) and far more balanced and problematic then the recently suggested changes.
PS: oh and if you seriously want to encourage fitting drone control units, increase their bonus to +2 (+3 if you go back to 20 bombers), so equivalent of 1 carrier level, makes sense huh?
|
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 14:41:00 -
[624]
New patch on SiSi and still +1 fighter/lvl
When are we going to get a CCP Response or the mythical DevBlog... Dominion is only 13 days away now.
FREE ABATHUR INFORM THE COMMUNITY
This is a big change to the game, it may not effect the majority of pilots but it will have a major impact on 0.0 which is what Dominion was supposed to be centered on. 13 days is all that's left to make sense of it and we still don't have a finalized or even CCP verified decision on Motherships.
Please fill in the gaps here, we've got nothing but questions and after nearly a week and 3 sisi patches no answers....
|
ArmagedonLT
Amarr Thundercats RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 15:27:00 -
[625]
Abathur just published a new devblog but nothing about moms or titans in it, what is he doing! SAVE US ABATHUR!
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 16:01:00 -
[626]
Originally by: Oljud Zork Base Damage 8000 <- Nuts? No, let me show you! Explosion Radius 3500m Explosion Velocity 75m/sec Damage Reduction Factor 6,5
Sounds a bit risky to me, because there are things like webs and target painters. Bombers are not meant to wtfbbq sub-capitals with relatively little effort.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Grath Telkin
Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 18:01:00 -
[627]
Psst, Hey, guys, secret time:
Have you noticed that CCP have been trying to downsize drone populations on ships for some time now?
Smaller drone bays, bandwith, the proposed carrier/mom nerf of legend.
All of these had one thing in common, CCP's driving goal to reduce the number of drones encountered in any single combat situation to manageable numbers, to assist in the overall reduction of lag.
If you REALLY want to get your "low DPS" views across, you need to start thinking of ideas along those lines, not with situations that increase the number of drones present in an engagement.
Higher overall dps from the 10 fighter bombers, and increase in standard fighter damage, maybe, JUST MAYBE, make Drone Control Units act like Heat sinks or Mag stabs for carriers (this could even be made a mod for smaller ships like the Ishtar, Domi) where instead of increasing the NUMBER of drones you put out, it increases the DAMAGE your drones put out.
I think you'll find CCPs goal is to severely limit the amount of drones you see in combat, if your not working along those lines for a solution, I think you'll find yourself banging your head against a brick wall.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 18:56:00 -
[628]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Base Damage 8000 <- Nuts? No, let me show you! Explosion Radius 3500m Explosion Velocity 75m/sec Damage Reduction Factor 6,5
Sounds a bit risky to me, because there are things like webs and target painters. Bombers are not meant to wtfbbq sub-capitals with relatively little effort.
You are absolutely right about that! Did you bather to read the lines showing dps against an Apocalypse?
Originally by: Oljud Zork Aeon vs. Apocalypse, Standstill: 914 dps and using 5 DCU 1219 dps. Aeon vs. Apocalypse, Full Thrust: 577 dps and using 5 DCU 769 dps.
If you face sub-capitals use Fighters or regular drones. Or you might be the dude that field Fighters against Frigates??? Which is pretty daft.
The Fighter Bombers are intended to be used against Super Capitals hence the huge Explosion Radius and slow Explosion Velocity. You counter that with being small and use speed...
577 dps against a Battleship are **** when you can field 15-20 Fighter and perform 1500-2000 dps, donŠt you think? Why do you want to web and target paint a battleship to deal ~600+ dps?
Dreads and Carriers in Siege and Triage are EWAR immune and using a Target Painter and webs wonŠt work on them...
My suggested changes to the "Compact Citadel Torpedo" are just to show how wrong CCP Nozh are with his changes if he wants to use the Super Carriers as anti-capital ships.
By downgrading the Explosion velocity from 75m/sec to 45m/sec will it deal ~290 dps against an Apocalypse but still deal a hell of a lot dps on Super Capitals, but a lot less on moving capitals. The 45ms/sec are the one CCP Abathur suggested in the first place.
Regards
// Zork
|
Jack Sparroxx
Honour Bound Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 19:15:00 -
[629]
The way I read you math I can only agree with your suggestion 100%
But it also shows that CCP Nozh seems to be totally clueless about the basic mechanics in this game
|
Kaitou Shiroi
Hakata Group Blade.
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 20:47:00 -
[630]
/signed
Nice math, Oljud. We need more of this in this discussion, and less screaming, whining, and otherwise flaming of CCP Nozh. Destroy him with facts and numbers, not with emo-raging and weeping. ---
Unless specifically stated otherwise, the opinions expressed in my posts do not reflect those held by my corporation or alliance.
|
|
Impolite Andevil
The Shadow Knights
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 22:26:00 -
[631]
I also agree that Oljud's suggestion seems like a good one. I'd still rather have Abathur's original idea, but this is workable.
|
Becq Starforged
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 03:51:00 -
[632]
My take, for what it's worth:
I like the addition of fighter-bombers, the ability to dock, and the lower price. While I would never consider flying one of the current motherships (because I'd be locked into it) I would certainly consider the new version. At the same time, I can see how certain aspects of the change (specifically, the price reduction) creates a problem in terms of reimbursement or lack thereof.
Instead of changing Motherships into Supercarriers, why not just take the proposed stats and make a new ship? Call it the Assault Carrier (a much better name, in my opinion), and seed BPOs for it. The new ship will either succeed or fail on it's own (probably involving some post-expansion tweaks), and existing mothership owners are unaffected by the change. Motherships themselves might get a revision better suited to them later.
For those who prefer the new design, allow existing mothership pilots to petition to trade their mothership in for an assault carrier plus the difference in capital components needed to build the two. The pilot can then either (a) sell the components, (b) use the components to (almost) build a second assault carrier, or (c) melt the components back into minerals to either use or sell. In addition, allow the current mothership BPs to be exchanged by petition the same way (with possible isk to reimburse the difference in NPC price only). If deemed necessary, make this offer time-limited (perhaps a few months from patch day).
This makes for an extremely fair reimbursement of the cost differential, and would cover mothership owners and producers, including those with motherships already in construction. In addition, it allows those who love their existing design to keep it.
-- Becq Starforged
The Flame of Freedom Burns On! |
Miss Shifty
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 06:46:00 -
[633]
Edited by: Miss Shifty on 19/11/2009 06:51:12
Originally by: Kaitou Shiroi /signed
Nice math, Oljud. We need more of this in this discussion, and less screaming, whining, and otherwise flaming of CCP Nozh. Destroy him with facts and numbers, not with emo-raging and weeping.
no need to destroy him, just make him play the game!
after some hours on testserver with both titan and mom i can only hope that the version on testserver at the moment will be subject to major change.
and /signed for Oljud's proposals. although i still can't see a proper bang vs. buck ratio on moms.
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 08:04:00 -
[634]
Originally by: Becq Starforged Instead of changing Motherships into Supercarriers, why not just take the proposed stats and make a new ship?
CCP has said in the past that they always thought the name mothership should imply something more 'grand' than the current state of motherships. In a way, I think the nerf has a dual purpose to free up the name for a later expansion that re-introduces a mothership but for a completely different purpose. One can only speculate as to what it would do. Lets just hope that the size of the ship when it comes out, graphically speaking, has the feel of a mothership.
|
Luna Negra
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 10:42:00 -
[635]
I wonder why CCP want's to make current mom's as supercarries and then create mom's again instead of changing current mom's to fit the role of a real MotherShip and create Supercarriers to fill the void of anti-cap ships from the scratch? First they downgrade current mom's pilots then they present the ship again so current mom pilots can then buy a "real MS"... _________________________ Gravity you win again! |
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 11:24:00 -
[636]
Originally by: Sokratesz What baffles me most about these changes is the lack of foundation.
If CCP said 'we want motherships to do x and therefor we have changed them y' it would be much easier to comment on it and provide proper feedback, instead of the massive rage and speculation going on now.
I'm pretty sure they don't know themselves to be honest. CCP Abathur presented a role for them, the initial changes on SiSi went perfectly in-line with that role, so we got the xMoms.
What didn't fit, is the recent changes. Presented by Nozh. The fun thing is how these current SiSi-stats actually goes totally against everything CCP Abathur suggested original, so we have a conflict here. Nozh gave us the Carrier 2.0.
The only reasonable explanation I can make out of this is that Abathur just brainstorms, present ideas, then they test it (and in this case, used our help). Eventually tho, the decision to do or die, is left to his superior - Nozh, who simply disagrees with Abathur.
I hope I'm wrong, but what I just posted seems logical, and would explain alot of things. I.e. to get back to the topic - I'm not even sure it's possible to get a designated 'role' to fill for the xMom's, since CCP can't even communicate or decide this internally (that too, would explain why we have no dev blog yet, since they quite possibly still discuss this internally and still - less than 2 weeks to Dominion - havn't decided on a role for these ships).
Quite guttered tbh, if I'm even remotely right here, then I'm worried not only about the state of the future Motherships, but the game as a whole. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
arbiter reformed
Minmatar Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 12:14:00 -
[637]
yeh but guys, new planets Signature graphics that may only contain your character name, corporation logo, corporation or personal slogan or other text that is directly related to your in-game persona, or content directly related to Eve Online. All content must be in good taste.Applebabe |
Unfamed II
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 14:49:00 -
[638]
Originally by: Luna Negra I wonder why CCP want's to make current mom's as supercarries and then create mom's again instead of changing current mom's to fit the role of a real MotherShip and create Supercarriers to fill the void of anti-cap ships from the scratch? First they downgrade current mom's pilots then they present the ship again so current mom pilots can then buy a "real MS"...
Good question. Also, lol @ mom changes. I'm happy that I did not buy one 2 weeks ago.
Originally by: Sandslinger of CA
So this wasn't a straightoff logoffski from our point of view, rather a tactical manoeuvre
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 17:13:00 -
[639]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 19/11/2009 17:13:19
Originally by: Becq Starforged While I would never consider flying one of the current motherships (because I'd be locked into it) I would certainly consider the new version.
Now the real question is: is that a good thing or a bad thing? Because it depends on whether or not you want lots of people in supercaps, and lots of people wanting a supercap (at least a supercarrier).
Things people like must not necessarily be good things. "No taxes anymore" is one such example.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Digital Gaidin
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 17:21:00 -
[640]
Maybe the goal is to have the primary ships in a Capital ship fleet be the Supercarriers and Titan's, with Dreadnoughts acting as "cheap" DPS and Carriers acting as more of a logistics platform.
With the current amount of Titan's both in game and being built CURRENTLY (seriously, what alliance doesn't have 3-5 of these in production right now), and with Supercarriers about to become common enough to travel in packs... along with the massive hitpoint boost of both Supercarriers and Titans...
Dreadnoughts/Carriers become support ships (in a similar fashion to the role Destroyers and Frigates provide in Naval Warfare) while the center of the fleet is the more expensive hulls (once again using the naval warfare analogy: Cruisers, Battleships, Carriers). Support ships are still needed for these capital ships fleets, but primarily as a means of removing tacklers to provide an escape route or fleet relocation mid-combat.
|
|
Kiri Serrensun
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 20:41:00 -
[641]
Originally by: Sokratesz What baffles me most about these changes is the lack of foundation.
If CCP said 'we want motherships to do x and therefor we have changed them y' it would be much easier to comment on it and provide proper feedback, instead of the massive rage and speculation going on now.
Exactly. Even if people don't like a certain change, they won't mind so much if they can understand the logic behind the change, and what the changer wants to achieve. Arbitary-seeming changes where the good results are hard to see are bad, and they're worse when they abruptly displace changes announced a long time ago and playtested. Regardless of how the SC's turn out, this is a good example of how not to do PR.
|
Hakaru Ishiwara
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 21:11:00 -
[642]
Originally by: Kiri Serrensun
Originally by: Sokratesz What baffles me most about these changes is the lack of foundation.
If CCP said 'we want motherships to do x and therefor we have changed them y' it would be much easier to comment on it and provide proper feedback, instead of the massive rage and speculation going on now.
Exactly. Even if people don't like a certain change, they won't mind so much if they can understand the logic behind the change, and what the changer wants to achieve. Arbitary-seeming changes where the good results are hard to see are bad, and they're worse when they abruptly displace changes announced a long time ago and playtested. Regardless of how the SC's turn out, this is a good example of how not to do PR.
As well as project change control. And overall project management.
CCP has a client-base willing to work hand-in-hand with them. Let's hope that they pull their heads up before they release this monstrosity of a patch to see and correct the ongoing customer relations mess.
With all of CCP's newly hired employees, I find it difficult to believe that they are unable to allocate some project manager person-hours to communicating (*cough* dev blog addressing the titan and mom changes) with this community.
|
Lao Dok
Monolith Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 23:03:00 -
[643]
WHAT??? And now you (CCP) leave the motherships as they are? Know what? Under this circumstances, with titans having their capkilla, there will be no motherships on the field!! They defn need the HP buff, not talking about the bombaz and yes the right amount !!!
strange days.
|
Hangman69
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 23:07:00 -
[644]
The fact that you can't think of a unique role just shows how stale your personnel recruiting practices are. To recruit only former ingame players or noob programmers/gms makes you stale. The role needed once titans must be on the field is a strong rr platform that can't be jammed and also does dps. Forget about docking. Give moms a cap use bonus, repair amount bonus to go along with a slightly farther rr range (75k) (moms and titans and bounce like hell when jumped in) Make the rr bonus slightly less than triage. Give moms a fighter bomber dps of around 8k dps vs a dread or carrier. Not having the dps of 2 dreads is a joke. Get rid of the damage bonus on the nyx and give it a self rep amount bonus or something, they already will be fotm enough. Leave the price the same, shift components around if you still want the gang link bonus and triage cpu bonus off of it.
|
Tappits
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.19 23:25:00 -
[645]
Edited by: Tappits on 19/11/2009 23:29:18 Right So let me get this right you Nerf? Titans so thay have a anti cap DD mod then you boosted supper carriers HP so thay can last longer and not be insta poped by 2-3 titans then you renerf MoMs and say your not doing anything but are leaveng an anti mothership guns+DD on titans but no HP boost on MoMs mmm yer good plan ?????
whos going to be 1st to DD a mom then come pach time????
Realy CCP you need to start thinking about things first. ---------------------------------------------- Pro BOB????? I fail At forums |
Shayleigh Snowflower
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 00:03:00 -
[646]
who would fit 5 DCUs on anything?? ---
|
Tappits
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 00:44:00 -
[647]
Originally by: Shayleigh Snowflower who would fit 5 DCUs on anything??
DEVS?????? I mean people that don't know how to fit ships???? Whas a DCU???? me skilling carrier 5 on 3 acounts at 40+ days each not ok any more? ---------------------------------------------- Pro BOB????? I fail At forums |
the teddybear
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 01:52:00 -
[648]
Originally by: Oljud Zork Edited by: Oljud Zork on 17/11/2009 18:10:34
Originally by: Stafen
The formula for calculating missile damage.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=901280
Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er;1);(Ev/Er*sig/vel)^(log(drf)/log(5.5)))
Where sig = ship's signature vel = ship's velocity Er = Explosion Radius of missile Ev = Explosion Velocity of missile drf = Damage Reduction Factor of missile
"Compact Citadel Torpedoes"
Explosion Radius 3500m (2187,5m for Hel with Minmatar Carrier V) Explosion Velocity 60m Damage Reduction Factor 6,5 Base Damage 3200 (4000 for Nyx with Gallente Carrier V)
I did the calculations and here are the results for "Compact Citadel Torpedoes" with the current information given by CCP Nozh.
Originally by: Oljud Zork, from iT Alliance Forum
The targets: Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, In Siege, 1886m sig, 0m/s velocity. Naglfar with 3x Lg CDFE I, Full Thrust, 1886m sig, 106m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Standstill, 2865m sig, 0m/s velocity. Nidhoggur, Full Thrust, 2865m sig, 112.5m/s velocity. Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: No difference between standstill or full thrust. The same results are for all the Super Carriers and Titans as well.
Aeon and Wyvern against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 1724 dps and using 5 DCU 2299 dps. Nyx against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2155 dps and using 5 DCU 2874 dps. Hel against a SiegeŠd Naglfar: 2759 dps and using 5 DCU 3679 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 869 dps and using 5 DCU 1158 dps. Nyx against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1086 dps and using 5 DCU 1448 dps. Hel against a Naglfar, Full Thrust: 1456 dps and using 5 DCU 1941 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 2619 dps and using 5 DCU 3493 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3274 dps and using 5 DCU 4366 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Standstill: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps.
Aeon and Wyvern against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1288 dps and using 5 DCU 1717 dps. Nyx against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 1610 dps and using 5 DCU 2147 dps. Hel against Nidhoggur, Full Thrust: 2158 dps and using 5 DCU 2877 dps.
Aeon, Wyvern and Hel against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 3200 dps and using 5 DCU 4267 dps. Nyx against Hel, Standstill and Full Thrust: 4000 dps and using 5 DCU 5333dps.
The calculations clearly show that 15 Fighter Bombers against a siegeŠd dread do less damage than a regular dread in Siege, a Revelation deal ~4000 dps with 2 heat sinks...
The same against a carrier, less dps then a dread do. But against a xMom or a Titan will they do some nice dps starting at 3200 and the Nyx beats all with its 5333 dps using 5 DCU modules.
Conclusion; The new Super Carriers are intended to be used against Super Carriers and Titans.
Why shall we bring a xMom to the capital battlefield when it deal 50% less dps against a Dread then a Dread do?
Solution: * +3 To all regular drones and Fighters per Carrier Level. * +1 Fighter Bomber per Carrier Level. * Reduce the Explosion Radius of missile from 3500m to 1500m. * Increase the Explosion Velocity from 60m/sec to 75m/sec * Increase the volume of the Fighter Bombers so a xMom canŠt bring to many to the battlefield.
This will allow the xMoms to defend themselves against smaller ships and deal dps on capitals, using lesser drones resulting in less laggy fights.
Regards
// Zork
I support this 250% LISTEN TO THIS GUY CCP HE HAS A GOOD IDEA!!
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 05:49:00 -
[649]
Woah, I wake up and suddenly NARGLES..err..devblog
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Das Coperial
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 06:52:00 -
[650]
I was recently asked by someone I respect a lot to use specific words in this thread... "I am unhappy with the changes that have been made to super carriers, you have effectively nerfed a super capital many train, and work hard for. Please restore them to their original glory and make them super capitals again. E.G. +3 drones per carrier level, able to fit triage module, ability to fit a clone vat bay."
I can only support the first part of that request. I am very unhappy with the changes which have been made to super carriers. To the rest I will say this.
Nut up. This is only the latest of many nerfs to skill intensive aspects of game play and won't be the last time this happens to something we put a lot of value into.
It took me ages to get awesome exploration skills. It would have taken anyone a long time, but doing so was a pet project of mine that I did while I could sneak time away from the stuff my last CEO decided I needed to be doing. Ten months later I was there. Put some Sisters gear on board and I was the bomb. Then with one keystroke, brimming with finality, CCP wiped all that away. That was all.
That nerf was central to the strategic goals CCP has and so is this one. Customer feedback is invaluable, but it is most important when it tells a business how to accomplish its mission. Say what you want about those Althingers, but they know a lot about business. Almost as much as they know about beer! A letter writing campaign to their forums isn't any more likely to affect their strategic plan via this nerf than it did the others. Thanks to Obsidian Hawk for crafting those words which have been kicking around in my head, and thanks to all the other well crafted arguments about this string, but I am not convinced.
I expect the game to change because it must. I trust, based on long years of experience, that CCP has a diverse management team that is quite capable of seeing its vision both because of and despite its customers.
|
|
Tiger's Spirit
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 07:09:00 -
[651]
NO CHANGES WILL BE MADE TO MOTHERSHIPS IN DOMINION. Since they are part of the original rebalancing effort, the DEPLOYMENT OF FIGHTER BOMBERS WILL ALSO BE POSTPONED.
|
Cyno Girli
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 08:43:00 -
[652]
How about the Hitpoints? They won't change ,too? Then a Titan kills a Mothership with one DD. PLs think about this!
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 09:52:00 -
[653]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 20/11/2009 09:54:51
Originally by: Cyno Girli How about the Hitpoints? They won't change ,too? Then a Titan kills a Mothership with one DD. PLs think about this!
Not quite one..my wyvern has 3.7mil ehp so 'll end up somewhere in armour and a well fitted aeon should be able to take 2 dd's, but still..it's extremely imbalanced.
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Jack Sparroxx
Honour Bound Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 10:49:00 -
[654]
Hardly worth the risk having a MS fielded considering 2 titans can pewn a MS, or as it is now. a smal dread fleet can vaporize a MS. So with nothing done to this ship class with thtis patch, I think it would be fair if CCP told us when there will be a change.
this may be out of topic for this thread, and then agin not. For those mothership pilots out there, what are you guys actually using your motherships for at the moment? I'm getting the sence they are used for basically nothing at the moment, since they have no role, and cant take a beating what so ever.
So for those out that have MS, what are you using it for now, and what do you think you will be using it for post-dominion since the ship wont be changed at all?
|
Rose Nuke
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 13:37:00 -
[655]
so lets see Abathur puts in loads of work and makes motherships/super carriers worth something than nozh comes along and undoes all of it, ok bad time for Abathur.
what was good ideas have now been abandoned and now mothership changes abbonded alltogether will you ever now see one on the field, no not when a titan can nearly kill one in one shot.
what idiotic thinking lead you to this how can you sit back and say yes they can wait they don't need a hp buff all that work on fighter bombers we don't need motherships don't need a role the pilots have delt with them been almost pointless for this long lets keep it like that.
WTF get a clue guys!
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 13:43:00 -
[656]
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Originally by: EVOL Mothership pilot I want to use the mom, I want to risk it, I want to kill and eventually be killed in it, it's part of the cycle of life in eve. build -> use -> die.
By launching Dominion and using the nerfbat on the Motherships will be a sad chapter in the history of EvE. Please donŠt rush with these changes. I would be a very happy pilot if CCP hit the EMERGENCY BRAKE and realise that the changes to Motherships needs a rethink and that the changes to xMomŠs will come in Dominion 2.0.
Originally by: CCP Nozh Motherships still on the drawing board
Regrettably, we've come to the point where we can no longer commit to making Motherships the monsters they're supposed to be for Dominion. However, we are going to continue refining their schematics, keep our welding torches hot and you should see them undocking from the shipyards again once we and the community are happy with their balancing.
This means NO CHANGES WILL BE MADE TO MOTHERSHIPS IN DOMINION. Since they are part of the original rebalancing effort, the DEPLOYMENT OF FIGHTER BOMBERS WILL ALSO BE POSTPONED.
Thank-you-very-much!
If CCP wants to use the Mothership or Super Carrier whatever they wants to call it in Dominion as an Anti-Capital ship, do they really need to take a long time thinking of how to change it, and not nerf it back to the stone age. If itŠs going to be a "monster" then it has to deal more dps against a dread then a siegeŠd dread do! My mathematics showed how silly they were going to be concerning the dps against a siegeŠd dread...
- * eHP Buff needed.
* Increased Jump Range needed. * +3 Drones (Vanilla and Fighters) needed. * Fighter Bombers (10 or 20 doing the dps shown first place by CCP Abathur on SiSi.) needed. * Remote ECM Burst needed. * EWAR immune needed.
Regards
// Zork
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 14:08:00 -
[657]
Way to go CCP. ITS TO HARD Lets just not do it.
You had it right when you 1st decided to boost MS just go back to that, simple! really, not hard at all!! What made everone want to dust off their old MSs was the boost. The rants only started when you went back on that.
|
Kiri Serrensun
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 14:54:00 -
[658]
Originally by: Tiger's Spirit NO CHANGES WILL BE MADE TO MOTHERSHIPS IN DOMINION. Since they are part of the original rebalancing effort, the DEPLOYMENT OF FIGHTER BOMBERS WILL ALSO BE POSTPONED.
This is all some elaborate psychology experiment in punishment and reward, isn't it?
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 15:05:00 -
[659]
Originally by: Kiri Serrensun
Originally by: Tiger's Spirit NO CHANGES WILL BE MADE TO MOTHERSHIPS IN DOMINION. Since they are part of the original rebalancing effort, the DEPLOYMENT OF FIGHTER BOMBERS WILL ALSO BE POSTPONED.
This is all some elaborate psychology experiment in punishment and reward, isn't it?
Don't know who to vote for? Find out with CSM matchmaker!
|
Jon Brutor
Minmatar hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 17:59:00 -
[660]
Originally by: Dev Blog
These are massive ships that require amazing amounts resources to produce.
Make the models bigger
|
|
Aequitas Veritas
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 18:18:00 -
[661]
/signed
I can see CCP being worried about huge fleets of nothing but motherships in the future. So to combat that maybe one should leave the RR bonus to carriers? Mixed fleets are always good?
Given that Titans also gets more incentives to fit guns (if they change it back up to 200%) maybe the motherships should continue to fit warfare links as well?
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
|
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 18:20:00 -
[662]
lol @ unsticky'ing this thread ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Alison Seriya
Snuggle Muffins
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 18:38:00 -
[663]
/signed
Give Super Carriers a Purpose!!!!
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:35:00 -
[664]
IŠd like to share my thoughts about how to give the Motherships a unique role in the capital fleet in the future and I will give some suggestions for changes to them. I will also give some comments to the alternatives that I will share.
- They all have in common that the build price stays more or less the same since I believe that messing to much with the costs affect the EvE economy too much.
- Motherships or of they are called Super Carriers shall never ever be able to dock. The reasons are numerous, all stated before in this thread.
Alternative 1 Leave the Mothership as they are today on TQ, but change:
- Increased Jump Range to 5AU, as suggested.
- Give it the eHP change, as suggested.
This will not effect the game to much, it gives the current momŠs a better survivability. If they are not eHP buffed will they die to 2-4 focused Dooms Days depending on resists...
Alternative 2 Give us the MomŠs shown by CCP Abathur on SiSi, including 20 hardcore Fighter Bombers. Important; keep the high building price and forget the ability to dock! This is a true Anti-Capital ship. But it will heavily change the way a capital fight will be done, and therefore not the best way to solve the unique role the momŠs need. This will result in that the momŠs will be taken back to the drawing board...
Alternative 3 Give us the MomŠs shown by CCP Nozh, including the 15 "meh nerfed" Fighter Bombers. This is a bad idea if the momŠs can dock and cost 6 billion will we see swarms of those and the imbalance will be to large. Everyone and their dog will have a mom instead of a carrier... This will also result in that the momŠs will be taken back to the drawing board...
Alternative 4 Leave the Mothership as it is today on TQ, but change:
- Increased Jump Range to 5AU, as suggested.
- Give it the eHP change, as suggested.
- Give it an increased range to remote repair modules 75-100km
- Give it a hefty bonus to remote repair modules, the bonus shall be the same level as a triage bonus or even better without fitting the Triage Module.
The unique role for alternative 4 are obvious, it is a movable remote repairing beast. The purpose are to use it together with titans and keeping the titans alive, so that the titans can be the Anti-Capital weapon shown by CCP Abathur.
If CCP change the mothership and tweak it to be a logistic pilots dream machine, do I not want to see it with CCP Abathurs nber cool Fighter Bombers. Since it will imbalance the capital field to much. Instead give the mothership either; No Fighter Bombers at all or CCP Nozh nerfed Bombers, ~1700 dps on a siegeŠd dread are not too bad if your job are to keep the titan alive.
The remote repair bonus can be limited to only Super Capitals and therefore only be useful if either multiple momŠs are fielded and spider repairing each other or saving the titan from being killed by the hostile capital fleet.
Personally do I want alternative 4 without the Fighter Bombers, the Bombers are cool but using 20 regular Fighters are more appealing to me than changing the momŠs to a Anti-Capital ship and rendering the titan useless. I want the titan to do the killing stuff and the momŠs to be its saver!
A bit out of the content, I also want all Super Capitals to be immune to bubbles. This can be done either with a bonus like the EWAR immunity or adding subsystems to the Super Capitals. The later are more appealing to me and gives them more versatility, subsystems on Super Capitals has been mentioned before and needs considering...
Regards
// Zork
|
Mercostol
Gallente Black Nova Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:12:00 -
[665]
Edited by: Mercostol on 20/11/2009 20:12:26 immune to bubbles but not to the the hic focused script
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:25:00 -
[666]
Originally by: Mercostol Edited by: Mercostol on 20/11/2009 20:12:26 immune to bubbles but not to the the hic focused script
lol dude, just look at urself ;(
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
King Dave
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:31:00 -
[667]
So they arn't even getting the hp boost? Which means that 2 titans will be able to pop a mom?
|
Nerd Attack
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:01:00 -
[668]
CCP Nozh you are a complete ****in ******. Good job on taking a **** on everyone. You don't know game mechanics from the dildo stuck up your ass. Ya, we're mad, go target paint a sieged dread about it.
|
Zerixx
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:24:00 -
[669]
stick those MS up yours CCP
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 00:52:00 -
[670]
Originally by: King Dave So they arn't even getting the hp boost? Which means that 2 titans will be able to pop a mom?
yup :) altho i think it gonna be more like 2 titans will get it to low structure or something
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
|
dracice
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 01:02:00 -
[671]
there you have it, the mass whining by like 300 people.
now you still have a **** ship, with **** range, and **** HP.
at least you were getting a huge HP boost, and a damage boost.
and a jump range boost. now you get nothing and your left with your pos decorations and holding alts still doing nothing. congrats
and ccp whats the timeline on new stuff? answer: most likely like everything you said you were tweaking, example nos: overpowered for 3 years before being fixed.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 03:59:00 -
[672]
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Base Damage 8000 <- Nuts? No, let me show you! Explosion Radius 3500m Explosion Velocity 75m/sec Damage Reduction Factor 6,5
Sounds a bit risky to me, because there are things like webs and target painters. Bombers are not meant to wtfbbq sub-capitals with relatively little effort.
You are absolutely right about that! Did you bather to read the lines showing dps against an Apocalypse?
Originally by: Oljud Zork Aeon vs. Apocalypse, Standstill: 914 dps and using 5 DCU 1219 dps. Aeon vs. Apocalypse, Full Thrust: 577 dps and using 5 DCU 769 dps.
Web and target paint to deal 600 dps? Those numbers are without web and target painters. And I was referring to sub-capitals. No need trying to lecture me about capitals, because I know sieged dreads can't be painted. I also don't use fighters against frigates. Don't go overboard with your assumptions.
Torpedo damage is massively mitigated by speed and signature. This means if you apply painters and webs, damage will scale up. Would you care doing those numbers including some support? If it's not exceeding standard fighter damage, then I'm fine. If it does, it will just make some support mandatory to wtfbbq stuff.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 04:10:00 -
[673]
Edited by: Zeba on 21/11/2009 04:10:13
Originally by: Letifer Deus lol @ unsticky'ing this thread
SC changes have been axed for this expansion so why further confuse the masses with it still being stickied?
|
Spectre Wraith
Darwin Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 07:29:00 -
[674]
I just can't understand at all why they'd take a perfectly well designed, well received, redesign of motherships from Abathur, and put the changes into the hands of someone who sincerely has little to no grasp of how or what their role should be. This was a very poor decision from all angles.
Oljud, great ideas and adjustments. Keep up the fight, and dare I say, bring back Abathur.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 11:07:00 -
[675]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Base Damage 8000 <- Nuts? No, let me show you! Explosion Radius 3500m Explosion Velocity 75m/sec Damage Reduction Factor 6,5
Those numbers are without web and target painters. And I was referring to sub-capitals. No need trying to lecture me about capitals, because I know sieged dreads can't be painted. I also don't use fighters against frigates. Don't go overboard with your assumptions.
Torpedo damage is massively mitigated by speed and signature. This means if you apply painters and webs, damage will scale up. Would you care doing those numbers including some support? If it's not exceeding standard fighter damage, then I'm fine. If it does, it will just make some support mandatory to wtfbbq stuff.
Like I said above, you are right about not letting the Fighter Bombers be the omg-wtf-bbq drones. End of this discussion.
Yes those numbers are without target painters and webs. If I donŠt need to lecture you why did you ask for a calculation showing the dps with painters and webs? I know I am an elitist bastard and I am also a carrier/mothership lover and will cry rivers if I loose the 20 Fighters on the momŠs.
The following numbers are the torps I suggested and are quoted above and the target are an Apocalypse.
Apocalypse, Standstill: 914 dps without Target Painter and web and Using 5 DCU 1219 dps. Apocalypse, Full Thrust: 299 dps without Target Painter and web and using 5 DCU 399 dps.
Apocalypse, Standstill: 1257 dps using a Target Painter and Web (the web do nothing since the target already are at a complete standstill) and using 5 DCU 1676 dps. Apocalypse, Full Thrust: 1257 dps using a Target Painter and Web, and using 5 DCU 1676 dps. The web did nothing to the damage, it is just the Ships Signal Radius that do matter. Therefore a Target Painter on a Battleship do wonders.
This shows that my figures work against a Battleship, but might need a tweak for not being overpowered. The original Mothership could deal 2000 dps with itŠs 20 Fighters. I am sorry I donŠt have a spreadsheet shoving the effective dps from Fighters against Battleships for doing a better comparability...
Using the Compact Citadel Torpedoes suggested by CCP Nozh give us this figures.
Base Damage 3200 Explosion Radius 3500m Explosion Velocity 60m/sec Damage Reduction Factor 6,5
Apocalypse, Standstill: 366 dps without Target Painters and Webs and using 5 DCU 488 dps. Apocalypse, Full Thrust: 94 dps without Target Painters and Webs and using 5 DCU 125 dps. Apocalypse, Standstill: 503 dps using Target Painters and webs and with 5 DCU 670 dps. Apocalypse, Full Thrust: 503 dps and using a Target Painter and Web, and using 5 DCU 670 dps.
The difference between this two calculations shows that a Target Painted Battleship can handle the dps from CCP Nozh Fighter Bombers and that the Fighter Bombers I suggested might be to much dps. But still I am convinced 20 Fighters do more dps against any battleship with or without target painters then my suggested torpedoes do. Therefore will mom pilots use Fighters against sub capitals and Fighter Bombers against capitals.
Conclusion none of the suggested Fighter Bombers exceed standard fighter damage!
Regards
// Zork
|
RoCkEt X
Hostile.
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 11:25:00 -
[676]
Originally by: dracice i'm a huge dork
Fixed
**[.-H-.] Hostile.**
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 15:45:00 -
[677]
Originally by: dracice Rabble Rabble Rabble
Why do you even post?
|
dracice
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 17:04:00 -
[678]
because look what you did. you mad now? enjoy the continued pos ornament, goes well with christmas decorations.
|
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 18:20:00 -
[679]
Edited by: Letifer Deus on 21/11/2009 18:26:43
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Conclusion none of the suggested Fighter Bombers exceed standard fighter damage!
Out of curiosity, do your figures on the apoc with a max skilled rapier running 3x TPs as support. This will show you the absolute max F/Bs could do against subcaps.
Originally by: dracice because look what you did. you mad now? enjoy the continued pos ornament, goes well with christmas decorations.
I would much rather have it done right a little later than done terribly wrong now and never looked at again because moms were "already boosted". ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 18:59:00 -
[680]
Originally by: Letifer Deus Edited by: Letifer Deus on 21/11/2009 18:26:43
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Conclusion none of the suggested Fighter Bombers exceed standard fighter damage!
Out of curiosity, do your figures on the apoc with a max skilled rapier running 3x TPs as support. This will show you the absolute max F/Bs could do against subcaps.
No I did not, I used a single Target Painter II giving a Signal Radius boost of +30% to the target.
Quote: Target Painter II A targeting subsystem that projects an electronic "Tag" on the target thus making it easier to target and Hit.
Penalty: Using more than one type of this module or similar modules that affect the same attribute on the ship will be penalized.
If I redo my calculations with a Rapier and max skills will the Signal Radius increase to +51,56% on the target. But what about the stacking penalty?
You suggest that I shall use 3 Target Painters to show the absolute max F/Bs could do against subcaps. What will the Signal Radius be if I use 3 Target Painters???
Give me the Signal Radius a Rapier pilot with maximum skills and using 3 Target Painters II do on a target, and I will gladly redo the maths for you using Fighter Bombers against subcapitals.
Thank you all for the feedback on my calculations!
Regards
// Zork
|
|
Letifer Deus
Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 19:05:00 -
[681]
Edited by: Letifer Deus on 21/11/2009 19:07:52
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Give me the Signal Radius a Rapier pilot with maximum skills and using 3 Target Painters II do on a target, and I will gladly redo the maths for you using Fighter Bombers against subcapitals.
If projected effects in EFT is accurate, I believe it would be 1136m ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 19:33:00 -
[682]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 21/11/2009 19:36:16
Originally by: Oljud Zork Yes those numbers are without target painters and webs. If I donŠt need to lecture you why did you ask for a calculation showing the dps with painters and webs?
Isn't it obvious? "Dreads can't be target painted" is a simple piece of knowledge. How much damage the fighter-bomber torps you propose would deal to a webbed and painted BS is a matter of time-consuming calculations, and I just happen to be lazy.
Anyways, 1257 dps would probably not be game-breaking, since it's less than standard fighter dps. I was just worrying that two or three bonused TPs (on a Rapier for example) might push the dps up into the region of 3-4000 dps, which would be far too much.
-edit- Glad Letifer already covered that.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 19:45:00 -
[683]
Originally by: dracice because look what you did. you mad now? enjoy the continued pos ornament, goes well with christmas decorations.
As Letifer Deus said, it's better they are done right.
From the sounds of it, you're mad you didn't get your cheap 5b docking mommy.
|
Natasha Nikolaev
|
Posted - 2009.11.21 22:46:00 -
[684]
I went ahead and made a long mothership proposal including new mothership-specific modules and even another fighter-class drone (yay!).
Take a look =)
Mothership Proposal
|
WhiteSavage
Ever Flow Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 01:24:00 -
[685]
The latest info on supercarrier changes look very fair/balanced. Keep it CCP listening to your players is a good thing but remember that a lot of people are idiots. 6 bil supercarriers with the dps of 2-3 dreads the invulnerability to ecm/point etc is more then buff enough.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 10:42:00 -
[686]
Originally by: Natasha Nikolaev I went ahead and made a long mothership proposal including new mothership-specific modules and even another fighter-class drone (yay!).
Take a look =)
Mothership Proposal
I liked the logistic parts of your ideas!
I did not like the idea to have both Fighters and Capital repair drones and Fighter Bombers!
The reason are that the AeonŠs and WyvernŠs Drone Bay are only 200 000m3. That give them room for 26 Fighter Bombers or 40 Fighters, today can an Aeon field 20 Fighters and have 20 in spare, but this never ever happens because it need other drones then just fighters, a more common Fighter load are between 30 and 35 Fighters and the free space occupied by vanilla drones...
I argued on Page 9 in this thread, that the momŠs should have larger drone bays to be able to accommodate either a mixed load of Fighters and Fighter Bombers or be able to field a full rack of Fighter Bombers and have several spare Bombers in the bay.
If CCP introduce another drone like the Capital Maintenance Bot you suggest, will the momŠs run out of space in their drone bay, I just canŠt see how to fit in 20 Fighters and a nice mix of Fighter Bombers and Capital Maintenance Bots. Unless the Bots are ridiculous small compared to a Fighter.
Personally do I like the MomŠs 20 Fighters and would rather see an increased jump range and the eHP buff over introducing the Fighter Bombers. I like the carriers and motherships logistic roles, and I am not sure that momŠs shall be the new Anti-Capital ship CCP Nozh wants but nerfed beyond recognition...
Originally by: Letifer Deus
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Give me the Signal Radius a Rapier pilot with maximum skills and using 3 Target Painters II do on a target, and I will gladly redo the maths for you using Fighter Bombers against subcapitals.
If projected effects in EFT is accurate, I believe it would be 1136m.
edit: tested on tq just now. EFT's numbers seem about right
Here we go: Aeon vs. Apocalypse using the 8000 dps torps I suggested and the 3* Target Painter from a Rapier on the Apoc at a complete standstill results in 2597 effective dps. If the Apoc moves at full thrust does it take 941 dps. It does not matter if the target are moving or webbed at all.
Aeon vs. Apocalypse using the 3200 dps torps CCP Nozh suggested and the 3* Target Painter from a Rapier on the Apoc at a complete standstill results in 1039 dps effective dps. If the Apoc moves at full thrust does it take 295 dps. Again using a web on the Apoc does not increase the dps, it is only the increased Signal Radius from the ship that increase the received dps.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Anyways, 1257 dps would probably not be game-breaking, since it's less than standard fighter dps. I was just worrying that two or three bonused TPs (on a Rapier for example) might push the dps up into the region of 3-4000 dps, which would be far too much.
No need to worry mate, ~1000 dps from a full rack of Fighter Bomber are pretty lame comparing to a full rack of Fighters. I donŠt know any Rapier pilot that do fit 3* Target Painters to make this possible. Anyway now do we have some solid numbers that prove that Fighters are better on Subcapitals even if the Fighter Bombers receive the maximum bonuses from a Rapier with 3 Target Painters.
Regards
// Zork
|
takeaway1031
Caldari inFluX.
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 16:12:00 -
[687]
WOW.... CCP, once again you have proven to me that you let the few dictate the fate of many.
I for one was happy to see the current changes in the mothership, accually made the ship worth while to invest in. I think your only big problem was cutting the cost of production, which in turn made all current MS owners cry to no end. When the details where given I dedicated my toon to be ready come expantion day to be properly skilled to use a ship which I've said for the longest time I would never fly.
TBQFH even the production chages wouldn't have been that bad current build cost is roughly 11.5 bil, but it's the leg work the pos and protection till build complete ie: sov 4 that made these ships expencive, and come dominion with the sov changes and being able to build supper caps anywhere now except high sec( I assume thats the case may be wrong) the risk is their more then ever.
Don't take all the ideas off the board, fighter bombers where a good idea, the EHP boost was practicaly a must, Docking was said to only be in upgraded stations suited for that, you can trash that idea for all I care. This ships new role was to be a titans best friend in epic battles. (good job and completly f'ing that up)
CCP leaving the mother ship as is with the up coming patch is a mistake. In the almost 4 years I've been playing, I've never been excited about a patch till the anouncment of this one, And your current let down on this might just be my end game, as I've found myself spending more and more time away from the game and questioning why I'm still paying for 3 accts I do nothing but train skills on.
for those that need the TL,TLDR etc CCP you f'ed up royally good job at ruining something that accually excited me to get back into this game, may dev land burn in a fire ingame ofc
|
Natasha Nikolaev
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 18:59:00 -
[688]
Edited by: Natasha Nikolaev on 22/11/2009 19:04:55
Originally by: Oljud Zork I just canŠt see how to fit in 20 Fighters and a nice mix of Fighter Bombers and Capital Maintenance Bots. Unless the Bots are ridiculous small compared to a Fighter.
I specifically made the cap maint bots too large to realistically fit F/Bs and the bots (however you can fit regular fighters and bots). This way you have to choose whether you want to be more DPS oriented (F/Bs in bay, but no cap maint bots) or more logistically oriented (cap maint bots in bay, but no F/Bs, only reg. fighters)
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Aeon vs. Apocalypse using the 8000 dps torps I suggested and the 3* Target Painter from a Rapier on the Apoc at a complete standstill results in 2597 effective dps. If the Apoc moves at full thrust does it take 941 dps. It does not matter if the target are moving or webbed at all.
I am confused by this. The DPS drops by nearly 2/3rd when apoc goes from 0 m/s to full speed (around 120? I dont have eft/eve on work comp) yet a web has no effect? I don't see how that can be correct.
|
Kraken Kill
Arcana Imperii Ltd. Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.22 22:43:00 -
[689]
Edited by: Kraken Kill on 22/11/2009 22:43:23 the people who are coming in saying they dont see what the problem is with the proposed terrible changes...
Read. Reducing the price is unacceptable. Simple as that. This ship should not be More accessable. It completely screws over current builders and owners and BPO owners. Its completely terrible thinking.
The proposed bombers- they came at a price, a stupid price. The price of losing 20 fighters. Reducing drone usage down to 10 or 15 on all drones was what was proposed. What the hell? People said ok- use 20 fighters/drones and set it so they can only use 15 bombers. CCP did not do this at any point. All drones were restricted to 10/15. losing 5/10 drones from current motherships use is unacceptable.
The proposed bombers were completely useless. No there are not! yes they are. It worked out that sodding 20 fighters did more damage that the origianlly proposed 3600 explo radius bombers on dreads or moving carriers. Needing to target paint and web your targets- especially when your targets cant be webbed (supercaps) or target painted (supercaps/sieged/triaged caps) is just ******ed. Might as well use fighters.
Graphs saying but if you could use 2 webs and 3 target painters and 5 drone control units everything would be fine is just FACEPALM SPECTACULAR.
The suggestions given to us were just terrible in their given ways. The playerbase SCREAMED ideas to fix the caps, the player base said DONT REDUCE COST, the player base said DONT LET THEM DOCK, the player base said THEY NEED 20 FIGHERS, the player base said RESTRICT BOMBERS to 15 if needed.
Right now- this is what is on sisi. The sisi version is getting something like it should be. Whats needed now are for the bombers to do roughly 2 dreads worth of damage- somewhere from 6000 to 8000 dps with bombers on DREADNAUGHTS without needing any target painters or webbers on those dreads in or out of siege.
From there take off triage and clone vat bays and the jobs a good un. These ships will be balanced, used, require carrier and supports to help protect them, will do damage reasonable to their cost, will provoke a fight having them used on the field, will see systems without sov 4 with CSAAs get more hostile attention.
This is good. Docking 6b EHP monsters with 10 bombers which only damage non-moving carriers is not good. The community should be proud they got these terrible suggestions stopped. The original design worked, was Dev suggested, player supported, CCP have only their own selves to blame for U-turning on them and creating havoc with such terrible 'new' or 'totally bizarre no role made up no brain' ideas which crap on the eve 0.0 playerbase.
When you have Alliance LEADERS from the top 10 0.0 alliances in numbers (thats about 60k members or something?) saying the changes are bad, they speak for 99% of their membership. The other 1% of their members are idiots who post with noobcorp alts who want a cheap 6b ****** ship and have no reguard for the Massive losses their exsisting pilots and super cap producers would suffer isk wise.
-Take that! |
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 11:05:00 -
[690]
Originally by: Natasha Nikolaev Edited by: Natasha Nikolaev on 22/11/2009 19:07:47
Originally by: Oljud Zork I just canŠt see how to fit in 20 Fighters and a nice mix of Fighter Bombers and Capital Maintenance Bots. Unless the Bots are ridiculous small compared to a Fighter.
I specifically made the cap maint bots too large to realistically fit F/Bs and the bots (however you can fit regular fighters and bots). This way you have to choose whether you want to be more DPS oriented (F/Bs in bay, but no cap maint bots) or more logistically oriented (cap maint bots in bay, but no F/Bs, only reg. fighters)
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Aeon vs. Apocalypse using the 8000 dps torps I suggested and the 3* Target Painter from a Rapier on the Apoc at a complete standstill results in 2597 effective dps. If the Apoc moves at full thrust does it take 941 dps. It does not matter if the target are moving or webbed at all.
I am confused by this. The DPS drops by nearly 2/3rd when apoc goes from 0 m/s to 117m/s (full speed w/o armor rigs) yet a web has no effect? I don't see how that can be correct.
About the drones.
Well by introducing the Capital Maintenance Bots the momŠs might be too much of a Swiss Army knife? Being able to choose to be either a Anti-Capital Ship and/or Super Capital logistic... As long as the momŠs can fit in a full rack of Fighters and some spare Fighters am I pleased. Anyway I get your point about choosing your set of drones.
About the damage from Fighter Bombers.
I used full speed 171 m/s in my calculation, and not 117 m/sec. The reason the dps drops by nearly 2/3rdŠs depend on the calculations formulas for missile damage. A large Ship Signal Radius does effect the dps more than the ships speed. Therefore if a Target Painter are present does it increase the dps a lot, and more important the Explosion Velocity for the Fighter Bombers are 60m/sec and travelling faster than 60m/sec also reduce the received damage. But the formula seems to favour a large Signal Radius over speed. The Fighter Bombers are designed to do damage against Big and Slow ships like Capitals and Super Capitals and the calculations seems to work for me...
This Link refer to how the effective missile damage are calculated, I hope it makes it more clear to you why the dps behaves as it does. I just used that missile calculation formula for my calculations, I linked to this page in my first post...
Regards
// Zork
|
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 11:14:00 -
[691]
Capital remote reppers only usable on capital ships perhaps and capital remote bots is a good step forward Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
meanato
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 11:28:00 -
[692]
hello ccp, i must say well done on the s/c revamp with the hp boost ect, i sad face about fighter bombers a little bit but this is not the reason for my post.
self repping on super carriers is pointless on the sisi i had a gm look at my mom because it looked like I was not boosting any shield at all with duel C.S.B's please can you give the carriers a roll bonus of something like 100% to rep amount.with a slight cap penalty something like 10% extra cap usage or something like that.
i have tested a number of solo set up and died in a blaze of glory every time because i cant rep the damage back, I've also tried remote rep and buffer tanks as well as self rep and remote rep set-ups and the only time we could manage to rep up back to max shield was with 2 capital shield booster and 5 remote reps now thats a little sucky if you consider in a cap battle there will be a lot more dps flying around the battle field that 3 titans.
so please ccp just TRY giving the S/C a rep bonus or at least do some testing on the matter. please
thanks
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 12:47:00 -
[693]
Problem with a rep bonus would be that aside from hge battles, smaller fleets will have hard times of breaking a supercarriers tank. With the current hp changes it will take a sizeable group quite some time to kill a SC but it can do it, which seems only fair to me.
Usually SC are fielded with escorting carriers which also will be able to rep it rather quickly, so it souldnt be much of a concern, imo it makes them rather more interesting. -
|
meanato
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 13:05:00 -
[694]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists Problem with a rep bonus would be that aside from hge battles, smaller fleets will have hard times of breaking a supercarriers tank. With the current hp changes it will take a sizeable group quite some time to kill a SC but it can do it, which seems only fair to me.
Usually SC are fielded with escorting carriers which also will be able to rep it rather quickly, so it souldnt be much of a concern, imo it makes them rather more interesting.
see this i understand, and im glad someone bothered to reply lol, but as i see it ccp want to make "super caps" super. so they need some sort or chuck Norris factor. and if they are going to remove some dps then they need to have more survivability on the battle field. if they do (and i pray to god,budda,and alla that they dont) remove the 20 drones from the s/c then they need to have something that makes people think "well cap op il bring the s/c along" or they are going to be made redundant yet again. i have flown a mom for about 4 months and in that time field'd it about 3 maybe 4 times mother ships or super carriers should be seen and used when taking space not sitting at a pos with a 40million sp toon just sitting there gathering dust and costing money.
giving them the rep bonus BUT WITH AN ADDED CAP REQUIREMENT would mean that smaller gangs would be able to nute them down to that the tank turns off or at least it cant boost or run a rep cycle.
I mean no one wants to see super carrier popped by a 15 man hac gang. or something like that ( well maybe some alliances ) you should need caps to take on caps or at the very least a large battle ship gang i.e. 25 man +
or am i just being stupid for thinking this ? i dunno
btw thanks rex for the reply :)
|
Soldur
Helljumpers
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 13:51:00 -
[695]
all of you crying about the moms are dumb you say wtf stop leave them the way they are cry...5b :(:( now they leave them the way they are and you say aww what 2 shotted by a titan wtf fix it. Congratulations on having a truly useless ship now.
|
meanato
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 14:21:00 -
[696]
Originally by: Soldur all of you crying about the moms are dumb you say wtf stop leave them the way they are cry...5b :(:( now they leave them the way they are and you say aww what 2 shotted by a titan wtf fix it. Congratulations on having a truly useless ship now.
once again another valid input from hell jumpers thanks :)
|
Gober Pile
Minmatar Invicta.
|
Posted - 2009.11.23 23:50:00 -
[697]
You can unsticky our threads but you never take our rage
|
MonkeyFit
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 01:00:00 -
[698]
Just from reading the specs before they scrapped the rebalance, those looked more like something a tech 2 carrier should be. 5-6billion, ability to carry new fighter bombers. Perhaps give a tech 2 carrier more of a combat role than a logistics role. Why even bother with tech 2 capitals you ask? If not, then why bother with advanced capital components at all? as it stands, the tech 2 cap component market is broken (read: nonexistant). The only ships that use them are jump freighters, and the only people who build them have access to pos reactions and the like. You can't even buy the components on the market. I realize this is sort of a derail. But it seems like CCP intended to introduce tech 2 capitals at some point and then either scrapped the idea for lack of role or just forgot about it. And the specs they released seem perfect for a tech 2 carrier IF they give it more of a combat role and not much of a logistics role. As mentioned earlier in the thread, motherships could then be rebalanced as super logisitics ships meant to keep the capital fleet alive.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 09:59:00 -
[699]
The original post are found here.
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk
Originally by: Viggen
Motherships have gone back to there TQ state, but still have there HP buffs:-
BASE STATS:- Aeon TQ Hull - 287,500 ... SISI - 575,000 TQ Armour - 275,000 ... SISI - 1,100,000 TQ Shield - 212,500 ... SISI - 490,000
Nyx TQ Hull - 300,000 ... SISI - 600,000 TQ Armour - 262,500 ... SISI - 1,050,000 TQ Shield - 225,000 ... SISI - 540,000
Wyvern TQ Hull - 275,000 ... SISI - 550,000 TQ Armour - 237,500 ... SISI - 590,000 TQ Shield - 250,000 ... SISI - 1,000,000
Hel TQ Hull - 262,500 ... SISI - 525,000 TQ Armour - 250,000 ... SISI - 600,000 TQ Shield - 237,500 ... SISI - 990,000
Confirmed.
Now with the HP buff in place this will be much more interesting to see motherships.
Would people please relay this to all yoru mothership pilots that they will be getting an hp buff?
Any more news from SiSi? I am currently away from EvE due to my work and canŠt log in at all...
I did a proposal for the Motherships and would like to quote myself now. Here is the entire post.
Originally by: Oljud Zork
Alternative 1 Leave the Mothership as they are today on TQ, but change:
* Increased Jump Range to 5AU, as suggested. * Give it the eHP change, as suggested.
This will not effect the game to much, it gives the current momŠs a better survivability. If they are not eHP buffed will they die to 2-4 focused Dooms Days depending on resists...
I really, really wants to see the eHP boost to the momŠs they really need it to survive. As long as CCP donŠt take away my 20 regular Fighters and vanilla drones am I going to stfu!
I believe that a lot of MS pilots will agree that having only the eHP bonus and nothing else of the intended changes such as the Fighter Bombers and the increased jump range are a by far better solution then nerfing the amounts of drones and all the other stupidityŠs like the ability to dock and the hilariously low price comparing to now...
ThatŠs all for now.
Regards
// Zork
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 11:12:00 -
[700]
Tech 2 carriers are coming and then a between class ( motherships) between tech 2 supercarriers current motherships and titans. in the 15-25b isk range Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
|
Terianna Eri
Amarr Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 11:35:00 -
[701]
Originally by: HeliosGal Tech 2 carriers are coming and then a between class ( motherships) between tech 2 supercarriers current motherships and titans. in the 15-25b isk range
stop making stuff up, or proof or stfu ________________
Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 11:44:00 -
[702]
Originally by: Terianna Eri
Originally by: HeliosGal Tech 2 carriers are coming and then a between class ( motherships) between tech 2 supercarriers current motherships and titans. in the 15-25b isk range
stop making stuff up, or proof or stfu
well ccps redifining of roles makes something up. Plus with so many SC-MOM pilots now getting into the ships some form of infill is required and ccp more than likley has some little gems hidden on the test servers ( closed beta i would assume) it would make a lot of sense for them to add them especiall yto create a market for advanced capital construction modules. And capital cousins for the jump freighters.
Perhaps the tech 2 variants could have reduced mass making harder to hit, more dps outputs, racial roles or further jump range. ANother side issue is perhaps tech 2 capial ships could incorparate 1 sub system giving them not overpwoered but perhaps consuimng tech 3 materials and at the same time giving small rig gains ( subsystem would be the rig slot) 10% damage boost, 10% extra resists, 50% more sublight speed 25% jump range bonus stuff like this. The subsystems would cost about 700m each
It might satisfy the tech 3 industry, at the same time saisifying the complaining mothership pilots, an extra tech 2 supercarrier filling niche roles would satsify the tech 2-3 crowd. Create an isk sink but a fleet useful but not overpowered role.
Might also incorparate pirate faction capital ships ( missing) but whose bpcs and give them special racial bonuses ( 20% extra damage on racial guns) sanshas could have a smartbomb range bonus or a range distance bonus Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Natasha Nikolaev
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 18:02:00 -
[703]
Sigh, ehp and jump range boosts off sisi.
|
Severion Atarkos
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 21:25:00 -
[704]
CCP,
I understand you are wanting to make the game balanced and fair and that's fine, however you are not making it balanced at all.
By keeping Moms at their current TQ specs you are assuring they are severely nerfed and broken.
The fact that a double DD can instapop a "SUPERCAP" is ******ed. I think the majority of us would be happy with just 2 changes that will not overpower the ship.
1) Boost the HP so they will not die to 2-3 DDs which is very common.
2) Increase jump range so they can move with carrier/dread fleet.
TBH I just want the HP buff so I don't die instantly or forced to sit in a pos until you make up your mind what you want to do with the ship.
I know you are very busy CCP Hammer but reconsider and give the HP buff to the moms, as they stand they are severely nerfed and hardly balanced for a supercap.
|
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 23:28:00 -
[705]
So, I have stopped looking at these threads for 2 weeks now to see if CCP has come to their senses or anything has been changed. Nope, I see talk about the motherships getting the HP and jump range boost at least.....and now those have been taken away according to the post above. Why can't we get an answer about this? I can settle for the HP and jump range boost (because any subhuman moron knows that motherships have zero use if 2 titans can insta pop a mothership AND not to mention the ****tiest jump range in the game). My mothership account has until the 5th to be renewed. Tell us something. If no changes, I have no reason to have my mothership account because it's not even useful as a logistics ship to move ships cus of the ****ty range.
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 00:19:00 -
[706]
Id stop looking at em till patchday but they are so much fun making everyone guess what the final cut will be. It changes 50 times a day. The clone bay is another wtf type moment. Motherships will change to supercarriers by late december anyway. Id just stop using motherships-SC for 2 months and wait go bash around in a bs instead Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Battle Tested
Shiva
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 03:54:00 -
[707]
Originally by: HeliosGal Id stop looking at em till patchday but they are so much fun making everyone guess what the final cut will be. It changes 50 times a day. The clone bay is another wtf type moment. Motherships will change to supercarriers by late december anyway. Id just stop using motherships-SC for 2 months and wait go bash around in a bs instead
people have been waiting for almost two years already |
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 04:10:00 -
[708]
and in another two years theyll still be watching the bash a bs in late december game after post patch fever Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 04:27:00 -
[709]
Originally by: HeliosGal and in another two years theyll still be watching the bash a bs in late december game after post patch fever
yeah, but a LOT of people have been making the rush to get these ships [b]before[/i] patch day because of the sov issues and how supercaps wont be so easy to produce and not to mention all of the 99% approval rating of the super carrier changes that was on the test server 3 weeks ago. This isn't about someone who bought up a bunch of stealth bombers to make a quick buck, this about some SERIOUS time and effort into getting these ships together. Not to take away from the guys who have had them for the last 2 years or so.
|
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 04:32:00 -
[710]
Edited by: Buxaroo on 27/11/2009 04:32:30
Originally by: HeliosGal and in another two years theyll still be watching the bash a bs in late december game after post patch fever
yeah, but a LOT of people have been making the rush to get these ships before patch day because of the sov issues and how supercaps wont be so easy to produce and not to mention all of the 99% approval rating of the super carrier changes that was on the test server 3 weeks ago. This isn't about someone who bought up a bunch of stealth bombers to make a quick buck, this about some SERIOUS time and effort into getting these ships together. Not to take away from the guys who have had them for the last 2 years or so.
|
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 04:55:00 -
[711]
A lot of people have rushed to get them nut understanding ccps usual approach which is turn turn it all upside down because they can. The original supercarrier changes before nozh got to them was 99% approval yes. This serious time should have been the benefit of diversified produces. The effort is and should be based on final patch day implementation not speculation.
For those that have had them 2 years put them into storage until ccp sorts it out. End of story
It is serious but when ccp annouce changes u need to expect dramatic about faces to Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
The Mach
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 05:53:00 -
[712]
They need a HP bonus or you may as well dock all the MOMs so their pilots don't have to fly them until you figure out what to do.
|
Severion Atarkos
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 14:32:00 -
[713]
Edited by: Severion Atarkos on 27/11/2009 14:33:40
Originally by: The Mach They need a HP bonus or you may as well dock all the MOMs so their pilots don't have to fly them until you figure out what to do.
Agreed
CCP this must be addressed ASAP!
Either one of the two need to happen
1) Give moms the hp buff/jumprange boost
or
2) let us dock them so we don't have to fly the piece of **** you call a supercap
|
Ximen
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 14:38:00 -
[714]
save your breathe guys. its pretty obvious by now that opinions of the masses mean sweet f all to the people at ccp who make the decisions.
Abathur is either sacked or gagged by exec order. Otherwise, dont you think we'd have seen something from him, even if it was a none commital "hello"
|
Jade Kitana
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 17:11:00 -
[715]
Edited by: Jade Kitana on 27/11/2009 17:13:21 In my opinion, when they get to addressing these, these should be the changes implemented.
Super Carrier: Gain HP boost Gain jump range increase Gain 5 mil m3 ship maint bay volume Gain Bridge capability Gain Lower build price Gain docking ability Loose all remote repair bonuses Loose triage mode Loose all gang link bonuses
No fighter bombers!
Titan Gain 250% per level turret dmg bonus Loose 2.5 mil m3 ship maint bay volume Loose Bridge capbility Looses Clone Vat Bay
I see six major roles in two different groups. Damage: Siege Damage "Dreads" Non Siege Damge "Titans" Super Weapon "Titans" Logistical: Siege Repair "Carriers" Bridge "Super Carriers" Massive Ship Maint Bay "Super Carriers"
Each Cap ship fills one of the above roles. Each Super Cap fills two of the above roles.
Carriers are the remote repair kings. Dreads are the cost effective damage kings. Super Carriers are the logistical kings. Titans are the overall damage kings.
Even the most recent Trailer shows that they want the Titans to be the most feared damge dealing ship in the game. They should just get over it and make the change. The titan looses most of its logistical abilities, and the Super Carrier gains them.
End of story.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 17:52:00 -
[716]
Originally by: Jade Kitana
Even the most recent Trailer shows that they want the Titans to be the most feared damge dealing ship in the game.
Indeed... fear my Titan equipped with the following optional features:
New DD with improved "take-biobreak-and-go-make-your-tea" timers.
New deadlier turret/launchers with "I-can-bite-less-than-I-bark" damage output.
Let's not get started with the supercarriers.
Not to mention the trailers portraying the supercapitals change at every release.
Once again Abathur's work was almost perfect compared to the joke it is now on sisi. I wish devs will sit down and chat with us once again so we can see what they have in mind and the concerns they had and brainstorm together.
The silence treatment we are getting now is driving us crazy.
|
dracice
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 18:08:00 -
[717]
sorry fellas ccp zulupark has taken over this design,
|
The Internets
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 18:48:00 -
[718]
Originally by: Serena Ku
Once again Abathur's work was almost perfect compared to the joke it is now on sisi. I wish devs will sit down and chat with us once again so we can see what they have in mind and the concerns they had and brainstorm together.
It was far from perfect. Unlike people who search for instant gratification, 30m HP 10k DPS+ supercarriers would become very problematic when everyone and their dog would be flying one, especially since a moving target would make Dreads unreliable as a counter.
Heck, right now there are hundreds of motherships in game despite being fairly terrible, with the proposed buffs they initially had for Dominion, there would be thousands of these things flying around as demand and production would skyrocket.
CCP has to plan for the future. Players only see the present. The Supercarrier changes were a AoE Titan DDD level of 'bad idea'. But since these are the EVE forums, everything was met with whines and knee-jerk crying.
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 19:14:00 -
[719]
It is never perfect far from it. Instant gratification wont be met. The moving anti dread target as said prices would go up without a 10 minute redock timer they would be common place.
Knee jerk crying results in a redesign of the concept and ccp will be back later with a improved version Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Trishtan DeMore
Caldari Seraphin Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 20:52:00 -
[720]
Originally by: The Internets It was far from perfect. Unlike people who search for instant gratification, 30m HP 10k DPS+ supercarriers would become very problematic when everyone and their dog would be flying one, especially since a moving target would make Dreads unreliable as a counter.
Heck, right now there are hundreds of motherships in game despite being fairly terrible, with the proposed buffs they initially had for Dominion, there would be thousands of these things flying around as demand and production would skyrocket.
CCP has to plan for the future. Players only see the present. The Supercarrier changes were a AoE Titan DDD level of 'bad idea'. But since these are the EVE forums, everything was met with whines and knee-jerk crying.
Try to fly one first. Think about it and comment later.
What would be the problem if the MS finally would've had it's role as a cap killer. On Sisi I could tank an MS quite fine over 5 minutes until I was down in a triage carrier with 20 Fighter Bombers on me. That's more than a reasonable time for a capkiller to kill it's prey. Not to mention the effect of RR carriers against you. Double damage compared to a Dreadnaught was excellent. 10 MS = 20 dreads and this is a picture you often see. ISK commited: 150bn to 30bn(probably insured). 1:5 ratio ISK wise, 1:2 damage ratio. So what is your trouble with a ship ****ty expensive finally worth something?
Oh, you don't have or can't fly one.
Well, whatever
|
|
Buxaroo
Gallente The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 22:14:00 -
[721]
Originally by: Trishtan DeMore
Originally by: The Internets It was far from perfect. Unlike people who search for instant gratification, 30m HP 10k DPS+ supercarriers would become very problematic when everyone and their dog would be flying one, especially since a moving target would make Dreads unreliable as a counter.
Heck, right now there are hundreds of motherships in game despite being fairly terrible, with the proposed buffs they initially had for Dominion, there would be thousands of these things flying around as demand and production would skyrocket.
CCP has to plan for the future. Players only see the present. The Supercarrier changes were a AoE Titan DDD level of 'bad idea'. But since these are the EVE forums, everything was met with whines and knee-jerk crying.
Try to fly one first. Think about it and comment later.
What would be the problem if the MS finally would've had it's role as a cap killer. On Sisi I could tank an MS quite fine over 5 minutes until I was down in a triage carrier with 20 Fighter Bombers on me. That's more than a reasonable time for a capkiller to kill it's prey. Not to mention the effect of RR carriers against you. Double damage compared to a Dreadnaught was excellent. 10 MS = 20 dreads and this is a picture you often see. ISK commited: 150bn to 30bn(probably insured). 1:5 ratio ISK wise, 1:2 damage ratio. So what is your trouble with a ship ****ty expensive finally worth something?
Oh, you don't have or can't fly one.
Well, whatever
Shhhhhhh, reason and experience has no place in this here thread
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 22:19:00 -
[722]
You should also add that if one side depends on the supercarrier dps the other fc has plenty options to neutralize that dps. 3-4 bombers would take out a fighterbomber i assume - or a few snipehacs or even bcs could inflict serious damage if prepared with an oversetup and their own target calling. -
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 03:51:00 -
[723]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists You should also add that if one side depends on the supercarrier dps the other fc has plenty options to neutralize that dps. 3-4 bombers would take out a fighterbomber i assume - or a few snipehacs or even bcs could inflict serious damage if prepared with an oversetup and their own target calling.
qft; I had to constantly yo-yo my FBs or recall them to bay when fighting some pilots who actually knew how to fight such as Tri, PL, IT, etc.
SC/Mom + FBs were not overpowered as some say, and even in a gang their only offensive method can be easily countered and destroyed by a 25m isk ABing ship in most situations. Then there's the laggy large battle scenarios with support mowing away your Fighters or Fighterbombers, oh and good-luck recalling them in the lag.
|
The Internets
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 04:14:00 -
[724]
Originally by: Trishtan DeMore
Try to fly one first. Think about it and comment later.
What would be the problem if the MS finally would've had it's role as a cap killer. On Sisi I could tank an MS quite fine over 5 minutes until I was down in a triage carrier with 20 Fighter Bombers on me. That's more than a reasonable time for a capkiller to kill it's prey. Not to mention the effect of RR carriers against you. Double damage compared to a Dreadnaught was excellent. 10 MS = 20 dreads and this is a picture you often see. ISK commited: 150bn to 30bn(probably insured). 1:5 ratio ISK wise, 1:2 damage ratio. So what is your trouble with a ship ****ty expensive finally worth something?
Oh, you don't have or can't fly one.
Well, whatever
I've flown all of them minus the Wyvern and currently own a Nyx that's been sitting on an account for the last year.
ISK cost isn't particularly smart to balance around. In early EVE Battleships were sights to behold, just a few years back a single capital kill would warrant a post in CAOD with lengthy replies. Power creep at it's finest.
A giant blob of ewar immune supercarriers, remote repping eachother, with the capability to put out ridiculous DPS is what was going to happen, and CCP stopped it before it happened. The majority of current mothership pilots are just too boo-hoo hurt because their toys didn't become horrifically imbalanced.
20 supercarriers with the initial proposed changes would be able to tank ~110+ Dreadnoughts comfortably. Weapon system can be destroyed? Guess what! You could use those pilots who used to fly Dreadnoughts (now practically useless) to come along in support ships!
At some point super capital blobs will be common place. Remember when ASCN lost a Titan? Now there's around 260 of them (known) with scores of them being destroyed. CCP reports were guessing at around 600-800 motherships (in their currently practically useless state in actual combat)?
The proposed buffs would bring THOUSANDS of these ships in the future.
But since the majority of you are too dense to see past the personal ramifications that these withdrawn buffs caused to yourselves, you'll call me a troll and keep crying. Idiots.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 05:03:00 -
[725]
Edited by: Serena Ku on 28/11/2009 05:06:18
Originally by: The Internets stuff
I agree with some points you brought up, but if you really feel the original HP buff idea made the motherships overpowered, then clearly you gotten too used to hotdropping poor solo ratting Ravens or never used them in a large scale fight.
At this point I'm happy with just a HP buff on top of the existing TQ motherships if anything. I disagree with the whole idea of cheap docking supercarriers which I personally feel is imbalanced.
Just my 2 cents.
|
Li Na
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 18:49:00 -
[726]
Well final dominion patch supposedly out on SISI Motherships are the same as on live right now so they are now worse than what they were before congrats CCP.
|
The Internets
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 20:23:00 -
[727]
Originally by: Serena Ku Edited by: Serena Ku on 28/11/2009 05:25:44
Originally by: The Internets stuff
I agree with some points you brought up, but if you feel the original HP buff idea made the motherships overpowered... then I don't know what to say to you about that. At this point I'm happy with just a HP buff on top of the existing TQ motherships if anything. I disagree with the whole idea of cheap docking supercarriers which I personally feel is imbalanced.
Just my 2 cents.
Oh no, HP buff is more than reasonable for their production cost, it was just that coupling it with the new weapon system while still retaining the ability to be a part of spider capital tanking was overboard. Frankly removing supercarrier's ability to use remote rep/cap transfers would have probably been a decent solution to the entire mess.
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 20:36:00 -
[728]
investing 15bil into a ship that can die in 15 secounds to 3 titans \o/
CHANGE THE GODDAMN HEL BONUS OMG ... Its the only MS that has bonus that's even usefull for self survival ... Aeon / Wyvern - more resists = more ehp, better survivalibility Nyx - more dps = hostiles die faster, better survivalibility Hel - less RR cycle = lmao
Just change the HP and that fail bonus for now and most ppl will even shut up (at least for some time) since it's ******ed to have a SUPERCAPITAL that can die within secounds EVEN IN LOWSEC ;O
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Arzal
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 04:01:00 -
[729]
Originally by: LoveKebab investing 15bil into a ship that can die in 15 secounds to 3 titans \o/
CHANGE THE GODDAMN HEL BONUS OMG ... Its the only MS that has bonus that's even usefull for self survival ... Aeon / Wyvern - more resists = more ehp, better survivalibility Nyx - more dps = hostiles die faster, better survivalibility Hel - less RR cycle = lmao
Just change the HP and that fail bonus for now and most ppl will even shut up (at least for some time) since it's ******ed to have a SUPERCAPITAL that can die within secounds EVEN IN LOWSEC ;O
i agree with LK, except that the hell bonus is not the most important change, tbh changing it so moms can survive ibn a normal cap fight would be a start.
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 08:13:00 -
[730]
yea hel bonus is not THAT important but still its the only bonus that's not useful for hel itself compared to other motherships
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
|
Johndalar
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 10:38:00 -
[731]
As it stands now CCP made a ship that has no use in this game, it is a useless ship. The Hel's bonus does not scale well like the others. There is no reason to use one over a Niddy they rep the same! Mom's with resist bonus get better with more ehp (with the ehp boost it is pushes it over the top as the best bonuse/ never look at the other Mom's) Nix get more dps with more Fighters to control Hel's bonus works the same on the Niddy, no real benefit to use this ship.
Now I know they were looking into changing its bonus but in the mean time just pop its bonus to 7.5 so there is a reason to own one.
(I will always call them Mom's, till judgment day takes me, when I see one I see a Mothership)
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 11:35:00 -
[732]
The Patch notes for Dominion.
Take a look on FIXES and scroll down to MODULES.
- Remote ECM burst modules now has a chance of affecting the target ship.
- The description of the Remote ECM Burst I module and skill was improved.
What have CCP done to the Remote ECM Burst?
Regards
// Zork
|
Cpt AngelKnight
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 12:03:00 -
[733]
Edited by: Cpt AngelKnight on 29/11/2009 12:03:40
Originally by: Johndalar As it stands now CCP made a ship that has no use in this game, it is a useless ship. The Hel's bonus does not scale well like the others. There is no reason to use one over a Niddy they rep the same! Mom's with resist bonus get better with more ehp (with the ehp boost it is pushes it over the top as the best bonuse/ never look at the other Mom's) Nix get more dps with more Fighters to control Hel's bonus works the same on the Niddy, no real benefit to use this ship.
Now I know they were looking into changing its bonus but in the mean time just pop its bonus to 7.5 so there is a reason to own one.
(I will always call them Mom's, till judgment day takes me, when I see one I see a Mothership)
How about we let supper carriers be super carriers and open up the door for CCP to create REAL Motherships. Granted some more brainstorming needs to be done around actual motherships but there are some good ideas out there.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1200517&page=6
EDIT: Fixed Link
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 12:59:00 -
[734]
Originally by: Johndalar As it stands now CCP made a ship that has no use in this game, it is a useless ship. The Hel's bonus does not scale well like the others. There is no reason to use one over a Niddy they rep the same! Mom's with resist bonus get better with more ehp (with the ehp boost it is pushes it over the top as the best bonuse/ never look at the other Mom's) Nix get more dps with more Fighters to control Hel's bonus works the same on the Niddy, no real benefit to use this ship.
Now I know they were looking into changing its bonus but in the mean time just pop its bonus to 7.5 so there is a reason to own one.
(I will always call them Mom's, till judgment day takes me, when I see one I see a Mothership)
doesnt matter if it gets 7.5% per level, dont tell me u would use Hel for RR if u can lose it or use 2 nidds with 5% while losing them is not rly a blow to ur wallet ... there was a sugestion of changing Hel bonus to Fighter hp once and imo it was a very good idea
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Natasha Nikolaev
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 01:46:00 -
[735]
Edited by: Natasha Nikolaev on 30/11/2009 01:50:47
Originally by: Oljud Zork
What have CCP done to the Remote ECM Burst?
I'm guessing it means that right now the ship you select as the centerpoint for the burst didn't have a chance of getting jammed, but now it does and that they made the description of the ecm burst longer/more accurate/clearer/whatever.
In other words: they didn't fix the biggest thing broken with it: it's lack of usefulness
Originally by: LoveKebab
there was a sugestion of changing Hel bonus to Fighter hp once and imo it was a very good idea
Agreed. Fighter hp is much more useful.
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 17:29:00 -
[736]
I don't understand. I thought the increase in hit points, Hel getting fighter and bomber hit point bonus, +2 fighter/bomber/drones per level and the ability to dock and the cost being reduced was good.
I was really looking forward to "Capital Killers" which I thought was a nice role. With the current TQ version, they are only good for doing plexes it seems. Now with focuses titan doomsday, no way anyone would take one into actual combat.
Also, does the remote ECM burst decloak anything in range of the blast radius?
|
Natasha Nikolaev
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 22:13:00 -
[737]
Edited by: Natasha Nikolaev on 30/11/2009 22:17:13
Originally by: Marlona Sky I don't understand. I thought the increase in hit points, Hel getting fighter and bomber hit point bonus
Yep, these were good
Quote: +2 fighter/bomber/drones per level
I personally saw no need to drop it from +3 but along with the price drop (which I didn't like, either) I could have lived with it.
Quote: and the ability to dock and the cost being reduced was good.
docking was a terrible idea. While it would make the life of each individual mom/sc owner much less of a hassle, the overall effect on EVE (esp. when combined with the price cut) could have been terrible.
However, the main point I personally hated about Nozh's changes was the explosion velocity because while his other changes (imo) were not great, this one single-handedly ruined their "cap killer" potential almost completely.
Quote: I was really looking forward to "Capital Killers" which I thought was a nice role.
Me too. It is a shame that instead of working harder on it, and working with us to make changes to calm their fears of potential OPness and proliferation, they tried making enormous changes on their own that ultimately failed and the whole idea got scrapped.
Increasing build time significantly (50-100%, I don't know) on titans and SCs plus removing the RR range bonuses on SCs would have been a good way to help safeguard against OPness, but leave the killing potential/incentive to actually be in the fight intact.
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 22:35:00 -
[738]
aaaaaaand back to the top
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
McFly
C0LDFIRE
|
Posted - 2009.12.02 04:23:00 -
[739]
Real question is when do we see the next phase of Mom/SC development?
|
Luna Negra
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.02 07:44:00 -
[740]
Time to start working on the Mom's as you promised CCP. Good start would be to open a new sticky to the Features and Ideas Discussion forums so we could get a clue whats going on atm. And also to combine the ideas gives here so we see the overall development process. It was stated CCP wants our input in this so keep your word on it. _________________________ Gravity you win again! |
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.12.02 11:08:00 -
[741]
Edited by: Misanth on 02/12/2009 11:08:52 Just confirming I only logged my mothership to slowboat further inside the POS shield yesterday, CCP.
My crew is unsettled, they are worried about my mental health. I'm starting to see cloaked titans, with massive jaws and thousands of long sharp teeth, licking their lips and waiting for me to go 0.1km outside the safety of the shield.
Perhaps it would be best to end the misery. I hear that walking into the light (well at least the Amarr deathray), is at least a pretty sight. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 19:10:00 -
[742]
40 days of irrelevant training down the tubes. thx ccp
|
Natasha Nikolaev
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 20:32:00 -
[743]
Originally by: Luna Negra Time to start working on the Mom's as you promised CCP. Good start would be to open a new sticky to the Features and Ideas Discussion forums so we could get a clue whats going on atm. And also to combine the ideas gives here so we see the overall development process. It was stated CCP wants our input in this so keep your word on it.
^this
|
Kel Arkir
Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 21:38:00 -
[744]
I guess they are looking for a way to reduce the HP of a MS so that a Titan can actually instahit it, now its quite possible that it will survive and this simply is not fair to the Titan community at all.
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 21:58:00 -
[745]
Originally by: Kel Arkir I guess they are looking for a way to reduce the HP of a MS so that a Titan can actually instahit it, now its quite possible that it will survive and this simply is not fair to the Titan community at all.
I know, it's so overpowered for it to take 2 titans to kill a supercapital - heck, one DD should be able to instapop multiple MSs to get them out of the game quicker!
Come on CCP, give them at least the HP buff so they aren't clay pigeons in space.
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 11:50:00 -
[746]
Edited by: Kate Pole on 04/12/2009 11:52:59 15 or 20 drones, IDC
FB should have the ability to ATLEAST match the DPS of a seiged dread. + HP!!!! + Jump Range No docking This, IMO, is the bare minimum of what needs to be done, tbh I would like to see a bonus to Remote Capital Armor/Shield repping to support the Titans that you obviously want to stay on the field during a fight.
I do not think his is asking to much. Please do not allow them to dock and please do not make them cheap. The way I look at it is like this. The Titan is the upgrade from a dread and a SC should be the upgrade from the carrier.
I hope CCP knows that while in regards to the whole population of EVE goes, the SC pilots are not a huge % but we are probably among the most dedicated and multi account holding players, I don't want this to sound like a threat but why continue to pay for an account that is never really used?
CCP GET-IR-DONE!
|
Trev Kachanov
STK Scientific The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 12:17:00 -
[747]
With the fact most major 0.0 alliances can field multiple titans on the field at once, you won't see a single mothership pilot with half a brain in a capital fleet engagement. The motherships need an HP buff at least, otherwise these ships will not see the outside of a pos shield anytime soon.
Don't trip |
Daenosa
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 13:23:00 -
[748]
can people stop using the cost of a ship as a reason to why it needs balancing. seriously 3 titans can kill a mothership, of course it should be able to. O no 3 cruisers can kill a battleship, buff the battleship so it wont happen.
Yes everyone and their monkey has a titan but with the recent changes i cant see that lasting long...
|
Nasty Thug
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 14:21:00 -
[749]
If you were involved in the testing of the MS, or own a MS, or were affected by these decisions, please support my petition to CSM/CCP for GM's to be given the powers to allow MS pilots a one time petition option to dock their MS in station for the duration of this nerf/"rebalance". I feel its grossly unfair we have been left in a situation were we continue to pay for an account for a ship rendered useless or need to pay/use time to maintain a POS simply to stop it being instajibbed. If CCP want us MS pilots to co-operate on future testing it is about time they did something for us in return!
Calling all Mothership pilots affected by this nerf.
I have created a petition thread to request that all mothership owners + pilots who wish to do so, should have their motherships docked in a station by a GM for the duration of this nerf so they can free their pilots from them and no longer be required to support the timesink/cost of running a pos to keep them safe.
Mothership Petition
it is GROSSLY unfair of CCP to go ahead with the titan changes that allow titans to roam lowsec/nullsec at will and insta-pop any MS unfortunate enough to be caught by them, it is simply intolerable that we be forced to hide a 25bn inc fittings ship in a POS or at a deep-safe to avoid being insta-shot by a ship we have no chance or ability to kill or defend against.
CCP did not consider the side effects of buffing titans EHP whilst doing nothing for motherships, therefore effectively nerfing AGAIN an already nerfed class to make it combat ineffective in any role.
This request is to allow all Mothership pilots who wish to do so, have a GM dock their motherships in a station so they can leave them safely mothballed until CCP sort out this mess, this is a FAIR and DECENT action CCP can take to undo the mess they have left all MS owners in, it is GROSSLY unfair that we are being forced to pay a monthly subscription and tie up a pilot to keep a ship that the dev team have made both obsolete and completely vunerable to drive-bys.
This is NOT a request that MS should be dockable/undockable by design, only that the pilots who wish to do so can request a one time docking of their MS by a GM and leave them safely stored until they are properly balanced again.
I love my nyx, i worked my entire eve career to get it and i do not want to be forced to sell it, but also think it grossly unfair i have to keep a pilot offline for a ship I cannot use for any fleet benefit in any situation, therefore I would like to free my pilot to be able to fly a dread or another ship for the duration of this nerf.
please, apart from the ranting at CCP, all pilots who were affected by this please support the petition to get the CSM to urgently resolve this matter - its really just awful of CCP to expect us all to pay a monthly subscription charge and lose our main supercap pilot due to their lack of planning.
posting on an alt, due to being terrified of tracked down and jibbed by a titan griefer :(
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 15:12:00 -
[750]
Edited by: LoveKebab on 04/12/2009 15:17:26
Originally by: Daenosa can people stop using the cost of a ship as a reason to why it needs balancing. seriously 3 titans can kill a mothership, of course it should be able to. O no 3 cruisers can kill a battleship, buff the battleship so it wont happen.
nice comparing ... 3 cruisers can kill a bs so it's perfectly normal for 3 titans to kill MS ... omg how stupid u are :(
well i was thinking about something like this since i think its quite balanced (not giving moms superBBQ dps but it surely gives them a nice boost):
- HP boost (equal to titans so 300% for main buffor and 150% for secoundary and hull hp) - add fighter bombers and since they are using a COMPACT citadels they would have to be properly adjusted (explo sig and a bit more explo velocity maybe? - that i didnt think about yet) - keep 3 additional drones per carrier level and add +1 or +2 bombers per level (10 bombers is doing way more dmg than 20 fighters - almost 2x more)
atm motherships are obviously broken compared to titans since they die to 2-3 doomsdays and i would love to see them as titan killers, atm its gonna be nearly impossible to predict where and when titan gonna jump cuz they can pick their own targets (most likely caps) before dominion when ppl were making fleet large enough they also had means of tackling titan if it actually comes to the grid and even then it was hard to tackle one but now ppl dont rly know when and where titan gonna jump in since they only jumping to kill a single ship and warp out so IF u r lucky enough to tackle a titan at least have some chance to kill it for gods sake - make motherships capable of killing titans i would go as far as giving them even +2 fighter bombers per level so u dont need like 20 moms to kill a titan but 10 would do the job fairly quickly in like 8-10 minutes maybe (it's still quite long time)
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
|
Trev Kachanov
STK Scientific The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 20:50:00 -
[751]
Originally by: Daenosa can people stop using the cost of a ship as a reason to why it needs balancing. seriously 3 titans can kill a mothership, of course it should be able to. O no 3 cruisers can kill a battleship, buff the battleship so it wont happen.
Yes everyone and their monkey has a titan but with the recent changes i cant see that lasting long...
3 cruisers cant 1 shot a bs. A bs can kill 3 cruisers easily depending on fitting. That fight can go either way depending on fitting. Worst analogy ever
Don't trip |
New ones
Caldari Koln united
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 21:16:00 -
[752]
CCP trying to ignore they have a problem, thread not sticky any more.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 22:02:00 -
[753]
Originally by: New ones CCP trying to ignore they have a problem, thread not sticky any more.
That is the norm on things where there is no more need to hear feedback. Since there was no change and there are no current plans for them to test, the thread is no longer stickied. When they have something resembling a working ship figured out, they will test it here and we will get a new sticky thread to complain about the changes.
|
Butter Dog
Gallente The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 22:34:00 -
[754]
It is quite shockingly poor that they have not responded to the valid concerns in this thread, or highlighted what it is they plan to do.
One would almost suspect there are internal disagreements which are preventing sensible actions or interim statements. Bizarre. ----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
Armadaus Baldwin
International House of PWNCakes
|
Posted - 2009.12.05 02:27:00 -
[755]
One would almost suspect my Mothership account has been canceled, shocking.
In honor of 02-05-09, and our new Goon Overlords.
|
Blade BKA
|
Posted - 2009.12.06 10:50:00 -
[756]
No need to speculate cos it only takes 1 doomsday to kill a Mothership ask me, I know...
Gotta say Nozh I love the fact that you made it so that my 16 BILLION ISK ship was killed with 1 shot! This game is a joke.
2009.12.06 10:26
Victim: Blade BKA Corp: Therapy. Alliance: District Asylum Faction: NONE Destroyed: Nyx System: Aunenen Security: 0.4 Damage Taken: 1161977
Involved parties:
Name: Caletha Reborn (laid the final blow) Security: 4.5 Corp: Rionnag Alba Alliance: Triumvirate. Faction: NONE Ship: Leviathan Weapon: Oblivion Damage Done: 1157923
Name: Umberto Tann Security: -1.4 Corp: D00M. Alliance: Triumvirate. Faction: NONE Ship: Nidhoggur Weapon: Garde II Damage Done: 4054
Name: F4ze Security: -1.7 Corp: D00M. Alliance: Triumvirate. Faction: NONE Ship: Erebus Weapon: Aurora Ominae Damage Done: 0
|
xXxZeroCoolxXx
Caldari B'haxed Productions Freedom of Elbas
|
Posted - 2009.12.06 11:17:00 -
[757]
Damn Blade, your loss really sucks = / IMO the changes really ****ed up the game. I mean, after we all saw alliances can just drop an entire fleet of titans and bomb the grid, a change was needed. Voila, now the new possibility is having a pack of titans just take out all your logistics. ...Oh wait! No one even wants to bring Moms out on the field anymore! For the last year I've been polishing my carrier skills to 5, anticipating the chance of flying a MoM, well no point in that anymore until they fix something.
At least sov isnt a fight of who can pump more fuel in a tower. But problems are yet to come possibly.
|
LoveKebab
Caldari Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.12.06 11:27:00 -
[758]
and ppl actually saw this comming but hey... aparently it's supose to be like this lmao...
xVid4PSP MKV Encoding Tutorial |
Arzal
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.12.06 11:31:00 -
[759]
aww man, sorry for your loss, but i agree this game is such a joke in certain areas....
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries
|
Posted - 2009.12.06 16:30:00 -
[760]
Edited by: Misanth on 06/12/2009 16:30:04 Nozh gets his will through. First he wants us to have 5 drones on Carriers, but he fails. Then he wants us to have 10 drones on Motherships, but he fails. Then he manage to stop the Fighterbombers, and with his latest strike, he managed to stop us from assining Fighters at a POS.
Poor drones, they get so much hate from that man. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2009.12.06 20:08:00 -
[761]
Originally by: Petition Hi,
This morning I one-shotted a Nyx mothership in Aunenen with my titan. (mail: http://www.klevis.net/rakb/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=58005)
This is ******ed. Please fix your game and reimburse the sucker.
- Sok.
|
DOARota
Gallente BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2009.12.07 05:08:00 -
[762]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Petition Hi,
This morning I one-shotted a Nyx mothership in Aunenen with my titan. (mail: http://www.klevis.net/rakb/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=58005)
This is ******ed. Please fix your game and reimburse the sucker.
- Sok.
Don't reimburse him. We all got the memo from ccp that said our motherships are to stay logged off .The only time you're allowed to log in is to change skills.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.12.07 09:44:00 -
[763]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Petition Hi,
This morning I one-shotted a Nyx mothership in Aunenen with my titan. (mail: http://www.klevis.net/rakb/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=58005)
This is ******ed. Please fix your game and reimburse the sucker.
- Sok.
The man has honor.
PS - Seriously CCP, I also have a Nyx and using it in extreme cases with scouts galore, hands hovering over Cntl+Q, sweat dripping over my eyes as I unblinkingly stare at local, and hair prematurely falling off... Fix this stupid problem with Motherships asap please.
|
Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises Babylon Project
|
Posted - 2009.12.07 10:00:00 -
[764]
:) (sorry, but losing MS pwn mobiles in low sec makes me laugh)
However,
the way it's done is obviously silly now. Being able to one shot a MS is beyond silly I guess, for the price difference and the way super caps work.
But how many shots should a MS be able to take? One? Two? Five? For that matter how many should a Titan be able to take? Would people not just driveby with 2 (like the last kill) titans, or 3? And would giving a MS so much EHP as to be able to withstand 3 or more DDs not make it nearly impossible to take down with a good subcap fleet before it can get help?
CCP just unbalanced the game by not fixing MS but releasing the new DD, that much is true. But I'd rather see a relatively small increase in EHP so that subcaps can still kill a MS in a good attack, and, to counter the new DD, a basic bonus of 15% reduction in DD damage per level carrier (ie 75% redux at carrier 5, 3-5 DDs inc EHP increase).
Obviously I'd also like to see driveby titans have it a bit harder, something like firing a DD makes warp impossible for a very little while so you could 'bait' and actually try and get a titan with a cloaked hic or summin
All the stuff above does not necessarily reflect my corp, my alliance or even me.. Drone guide.. |
Xavieer Naidoo
Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.12.07 17:55:00 -
[765]
Edited by: Xavieer Naidoo on 07/12/2009 17:56:04
Originally by: Blade BKA
Gotta say Nozh I love the fact that you made it so that my 16 BILLION ISK ship was killed with 1 shot! I am a joke because I have spent a lot of time grinding virtual money, yet my virtual hard earn asset went poof! in a matter of 15 seconds and now I feel a bit stupid about it.
Fixed that for you bro.
|
John Zorg
Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.12.07 22:06:00 -
[766]
Any news on when the Motherships are going to be fixed?
I need to login soon the change skills :P
|
King Dave
|
Posted - 2009.12.07 22:26:00 -
[767]
Originally by: John Zorg Any news on when the Motherships are going to be fixed?
I need to login soon the change skills :P
CCP CBA
|
Kel Arkir
Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.12.07 23:23:00 -
[768]
I'm hearing rumors that they just restarded the "balancing process" for MS since the majority of the playerbase was against their changes.
Selective perception for the win. I knew reading/listening comprehension skills ain't that big anymore, but this is ....
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno
|
Posted - 2009.12.09 10:48:00 -
[769]
Something i would like to see, for all capitals, but motherships would be a good start, is a similar subsystem-system t3 ships have. Part of why t3 ships are so interesting is because they can switch their roles and have several unlike specialized recons as example.
Something similar was actually proposed by tuxford after the first carrier changes didnt go through, t3 subsystems would fit this perfectly. It would eliminite the search for its roles etc as the owner could decide it themselfes mroe or less.
Something like more resistance or more tank, gang mod or no gangmod, maybe even a hictor point vs 100km normal point, remote rep bonus or more drones - theres plenty things that can be done. It would prolly be wise to test this for quite some time on the testserver to make sure theres alternatives and notone unbalanced cookiecutter fit, but im sure every mothership pilot would love it as it makes it alot more interesting. -
|
jdubs
|
Posted - 2009.12.10 02:46:00 -
[770]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists Something i would like to see, for all capitals, but motherships would be a good start, is a similar subsystem-system t3 ships have. Part of why t3 ships are so interesting is because they can switch their roles and have several unlike specialized recons as example.
Something similar was actually proposed by tuxford after the first carrier changes didnt go through, t3 subsystems would fit this perfectly. It would eliminite the search for its roles etc as the owner could decide it themselfes mroe or less.
Something like more resistance or more tank, gang mod or no gangmod, maybe even a hictor point vs 100km normal point, remote rep bonus or more drones - theres plenty things that can be done. It would prolly be wise to test this for quite some time on the testserver to make sure theres alternatives and notone unbalanced cookiecutter fit, but im sure every mothership pilot would love it as it makes it alot more interesting.
This is too complicated. Just fix motherships and implement some crazy configuration for super carriers, in the next release.
|
|
TurboLover
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.10 08:00:00 -
[771]
WTB CCP Response on the issue.
Quote: As designers we need to do is take a few steps back, deliberate more (with your help), go through more testing (also with your help) and really perfect the Mothership redesign.
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.12.11 11:52:00 -
[772]
Originally by: TurboLover WTB CCP Response on the issue.
Quote: As designers we need to do is take a few steps back, deliberate more (with your help), go through more testing (also with your help) and really perfect the Mothership redesign.
I think there as been a number of threads with options that most of the player base has supported. All of them implement about the same changes.. Again I think universally they are. + HP + Jump range
At least 15 FB with at least the dps of a seiged dread, some ideas of 15/F,FB and 20 normal drones have been out there as well. Hell 10 FBs is fine as long as DPS is good.
No docking Do not make them cheaper.
Some other random, but good ideas are out there that address, special gang bonus that "SC" can have in their abilities or a Remote Cap repping bonus.
CCP, you had it right a while back.(for the most part) The Coding should be there. Just put it out. PLEASE DO SOMETHING!! are "SC" going to be like Alliance Logo's? Coming soon?
|
Tobias Sjodin
Ore Mongers
|
Posted - 2009.12.11 12:37:00 -
[773]
I find it amusing that still to this date people blame CCP for their own losses (that aren't server-related).
Everyone knew full and well that motherships were going to be one-shotted in this patch and until the change.
But did you choose to be restrictive with your use of said ships? No.
Simple causality. Sure it sucks, but you could most likely have avoided losing your ship.
---
On the other hand I think changes to motherships should be high up on the prirority list. For obvious reasons. All MS-pilots currently being useless (as they are locked into said ships by mechanics designed by CCP).
|
dracice
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.12.11 14:52:00 -
[774]
you know whats even more funny...?
the fact that that mothership got doomsdayed in low sec in a 0.4 system. 2 days before the 1.02 patch which put it back to pre-dominion. (titans not being able to doomsday in low sec)
i dont know which is more funny that you died 2 days before the changes... or simply the fact that you got doomsdayed in low sec.
as an aside, can I have your stuff?
|
Peryner
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 18:52:00 -
[775]
Originally by: dracice you know whats even more funny...?
the fact that that mothership got doomsdayed in low sec in a 0.4 system. 2 days before the 1.02 patch which put it back to pre-dominion. (titans not being able to doomsday in low sec)
i dont know which is more funny that you died 2 days before the changes... or simply the fact that you got doomsdayed in low sec.
as an aside, can I have your stuff?
learn to read
the person didn't lose a mothership, it was a titan pilot, that KILLED a mothership, and is saying that the mothership pilot should get his ship back.
It's at the point where the TITAN pilots are saying mothership pilots should get their ships back.
|
dracice
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 03:32:00 -
[776]
no its that guy whining that he lost his MS.
that guy that posted his KM, so you need to lrn2red.
anyway im not arguing against the fact they need to be changed im laughing at the whole situation that ccp have a 15bil isk ship useless, they say they want each ship to have a niche, well thats certainly one.
uselessness.
then theres the fact people whined about 15 fighter bombers, more hp, more jump range and got those changes nerfed and are left with this.
|
Tobruk
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 03:41:00 -
[777]
boot.ini ----------------------------------------------
Sig removed. Elmo Pug removed my sig because he hates me
|
Igor 77
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 11:16:00 -
[778]
Originally by: dracice no its that guy whining that he lost his MS.
that guy that posted his KM, so you need to lrn2red.
anyway im not arguing against the fact they need to be changed im laughing at the whole situation that ccp have a 15bil isk ship useless, they say they want each ship to have a niche, well thats certainly one.
uselessness.
then theres the fact people whined about 15 fighter bombers, more hp, more jump range and got those changes nerfed and are left with this.
In some nice magic way people stating its our own fault the ship is useless they seem to forget about the price of those changes. Yes i am talking about 6-8bilj price reduction per MS so that all players could fly the ships with less effort on the cost of other players. What a nice way to strain at your own bellybutton there dear sir... And BTW remember it was 10 fighter bomber or 10 fighters and you could get 15 with 5 DCU's also it could DOCK!
|
meanato
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:36:00 -
[779]
wow ccp know how to break the game lol they nerf the s/c to hell and back and there are like 15 threads about it but yet nothing gets done..... could you imagen if the hulk go a lil nerf like -1% mining amount or 3% mining distance omfg there would be a change in 2 / 3 minuets. of the patch going live. but when its a section of the player base that has invested a Lots of money to get to the stage of having that ship, ccp just turn a stick a finger up at them its a lil sad as they are now useless
rage over
|
Lira West
|
Posted - 2009.12.14 11:56:00 -
[780]
This has been outstanding for way too long now. I have a great idea... could CCP please allow us to dock, preferably at a refinery so that I can repro my mothership. I am tired of waiting for a fix for these ships. There has been years of time for them to be fixed. It's not like you have to create anything new. All that is needed is attribute changes.
CCP, your attempts at making this useless ******ed class cool is clearly never going to happen.
Some feedback, even some general ideas of where you want to go with these ships would be appreciated. TBH this is getting very annoying...
|
|
Kel Arkir
Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.12.16 10:45:00 -
[781]
Bumped cause I still care about the topic and Im still waiting some announcement about the future of our MS' PS: Telling people that since they havent been changed in the patch that they can be used as before is insulting.
|
Kersh Marelor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.12.16 17:00:00 -
[782]
Originally by: Kel Arkir PS: Telling people that since they havent been changed in the patch that they can be used as before is insulting.
Truth be told they can and should be used as before. In fact one would be insane to use them in any other way than a static POS decoration... Still no answer from CCP, busy with all the forked stuff in Dominion. Wondering when they started working on it, must two or three days before the first build was on SiSi. Anyways I wouldn't really count on any development in the next few months, CCP already hit the 'Ignore all' button on motherships :(
|
london
Gallente Dark-Rising IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.16 22:47:00 -
[783]
And the holidays are upon us, so I wouldn't expect much from CCP until after the new year when the hang-over wears off.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2009.12.17 11:05:00 -
[784]
It's time to re-sticky this. Ignoring it will NOT make it go away.
When will TQ hit the 100K PCU mark? Place a bet! |
Yon89
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.12.17 11:44:00 -
[785]
Edited by: Yon89 on 17/12/2009 11:44:07 Yeh it would be nice if they gave us a hp boost for the holidays. It is realy the least they could do. ============= SIG SIG SIG |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno
|
Posted - 2009.12.17 12:57:00 -
[786]
Having a mom sittin a pos id rather they work ont he lag and dominion problems that make playing with my other 3 accounts not that fun either.
Of course i wouldnt mind if someone in ccp hq would steal abarthurs floppy disk with his proposed supercarrier changes and slipss those onto tranq ;) -
|
Cassius Hawkeye
Minmatar Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.12.17 21:40:00 -
[787]
Not letting this non-stickied thread sink. CCP please sort this out - do 'something' to make moms remotely useful (for remotely useful read - not being 1 shotted by Titans-Sok)
Free Abathur aswell. The original ideas for moms were very good!
|
fairimear
Gallente Esto Perpetua BiffCo.
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 01:08:00 -
[788]
During to night's XFIRE live chat the MS subject came up a few times. The official and only time it was answered was to the effect of "As previously stated. we are looking at it"
Several other times it was brought up. Firstly By myself well included in a question about blackops. This was entirely ignored. I asked if we could atleast have some more descriptive update on at least a EHP buff.
The next time it came up was when multiple people asked for a temporary docking of ms untill they got fixed (a idea in theory easy to support but in practice alot of effort and could lead unforseen problems imo.
I think the one thing to take away from this is that it seems a official company line is in place with direct order's not to give details beyond it..
CCP Take your MS and give you a sailboat in return. Happy Xmas.
Bringing a type of class to PL. |
Kersh Marelor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 01:13:00 -
[789]
Originally by: Cassius Hawkeye Free Abathur aswell. The original ideas for moms were very good!
Current CCP's policy on MS makes me wonder if one day we're going to read that Abathur never existed and there were no ideas to fix moms whatsoever. The XF chat shows CCP has absolutely no intention to work with the player base on the issue. most probably they will wait for a few months and then push whatever sick changes Nozh or some other fail dev comes up with.
|
Luna Negra
FinFleet IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.19 11:39:00 -
[790]
UP! Issue still not addressed. _________________________ Gravity you win again! |
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.12.19 23:52:00 -
[791]
CCP is wining this battle. This topic has died just like they wanted.
|
Ammath
Amarr Burning Technologies Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2009.12.20 13:15:00 -
[792]
CCP doesn't care about Cap people.
|
Serena Ku
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.12.20 13:35:00 -
[793]
Edited by: Serena Ku on 20/12/2009 13:35:20 How many people does it take to change a lightbulb? In this case, how many months does it take to finalize a mothership design?
Edited for spelling, need moar coffee.
|
Cassius Hawkeye
Minmatar Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.12.20 17:46:00 -
[794]
Originally by: Kersh Marelor
Originally by: Cassius Hawkeye Free Abathur aswell. The original ideas for moms were very good!
Current CCP's policy on MS makes me wonder if one day we're going to read that Abathur never existed and there were no ideas to fix moms whatsoever. The XF chat shows CCP has absolutely no intention to work with the player base on the issue. most probably they will wait for a few months and then push whatever sick changes Nozh or some other fail dev comes up with.
I simply don't understand how they managed to create some amazing - well supported ideas - that got the player base genuinely excited, before near enough reversing them completly then abandoning it and any discussion the the virtual scrapheap.
Confusing stuff - and i worry that what you describe is going to happen.
Also Up!
|
|
CCP Abathur
C C P C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.21 08:33:00 -
[795]
Please see this thread for updates.
|
|
Ammath
Amarr Burning Technologies Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2009.12.21 17:45:00 -
[796]
CAN YOU DIG IT!
CAN YOU DIIIIG IT!!!!
|
Kate Pole
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 10:39:00 -
[797]
This is everything I wanted. TY
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: [one page] |