EVE Search - Massive Supercarrier nerf intentional?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Massive Supercarrier nerf intentional?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] 40 50 .. 54 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Jana Tanaka Caldari Tanaka Industries Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:15:00 - [871] Edited by: Jana Tanaka on 13/11/2009 18:17:48 Originally by: The Internets Also, their pre-nerf sis version was frankly, overpowered. People think that lowering the cost will cause swarms of them to appear, but what if they had their pre-nerf versions released? Prices of supercarriers shot up 3-4b on speculation of this change, people started mass-producing them, being bought up very quickly on the sell orders forum. Imagine a fleet of 'pre-nerf' supercarriers. Each has 80,000,000+ EHP They all do 12,000+ DPS Immunity to e-war (can't break those spider tanks, ever) Can obliterate heavy interdictors with 20 drones each How, exactly, would you kill a large group of supercarriers? Keep in mind that there are large numbers of them already in existance and they aren't all that great. A massive boost would GREATLY increase the amount being produced since demand would skyrocket. So, say you had to kill a group of 20 pre-nerf supercarriers? Their combined pre-nerf DPS takes out a dreadnought in around 20 seconds. They have around 500,000 DPS tanked spider. You can't break their spider, ever, since they're immune to ewar. You know what the counter to supercarriers would be? More supercarriers. Normal carriers/dreads get completely annihilated. CCP probably realized that they were making a very, very bad move and decided to stop it before fleets of supercarriers became ridiculous. I wrote a very very lengthy scenario as reply to show how wrong you are. Then I realized that a few simple number should illustrate it: 20 dead space fitted Motherships = > 150 faction fitted Dreads with T2 rigs. 150 Revelations = 750 Berserker II = 257 dps * 133 = 34.181 DPS. 20 Motherships = 400 Mallei = 400 * 26.500 EHP = 10.600.000 EHP Time to Live for the Mallei = 10.600.000 / 34.181 = 310 seconds The pre-nerf Super Carrier Fleet in your example and based on your numbers, would be luckily to destroy a couple of dozen dreads before their slow and painful death would follow.
Larkonis TrassIer Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:17:00 - [872] This is going from bad to worse. Roll back to the original new design spec for 'Super Carriers' and the new Titans. Everyone was happy with those.
Rewt ed	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:17:00 - [873] that's smart, make it so a ship with the effective hit points of a large tower can now play station games. now we're back to the solo super carrier pwn mobile but now station camping. 63,000 bugs in the code 63,000 bugs, get one whacked with service pack, 63,005 bugs in the code.
Edmund Khan Destructive Influence IT Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:18:00 - [874] 3 per level, no docking preety please :)
Kerdrak Big Guns Inc. Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:18:00 - [875] Edited by: Kerdrak on 13/11/2009 18:19:54 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 Just not nerf the building cost please, if you think there is a need for a 5b carrier, just make a new ship. Put your designers at work, but don't make us feel like stupid for building/buying motherships now. ________________________________________
fairimear Gallente Esto Perpetua	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:19:00 - [876] Edited by: fairimear on 13/11/2009 18:23:44 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 NOZH Seriously. just put it back the way it was and leave it like that for a year and see how it goes. EVERY 1 paying 16-18 bill for a sc is happy. every 1 who has one was happy. every 1 who was going to get was happy. IF you put this in at 6-8 bill + docking. you will have like probably 5x more ships in a year than would be. you then will have undocking spam. and issues with their size and bumping. You will have people fielding like 17 fb's owning carriers/dreads/jump freighter. then redocking. YOU WILL THEN BE FORCED TO LOOK AT THESE SHIPS AGAIN AND AGAIN ANNOY PEOPLE WITH A NERF. the previous change made them better and made them useable again. but at the same time if they people field hundreads + new sov they will eventually lose more than can replace. the previous change made a good ship + allowed for the game to find its own balance of the ships getting used or not. It may have resulted in a few high isk battles seeing 10-20 supercarriers or 12 titans dieing but eventually this would of evened out to adjust for new numbers of them. build cost. risk ect. now u just making a future broken game mechanic to address a possible issue that probably wnt happen any way. *Bringing a type of class to PL.*
Pattern Clarc Blue Republic	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:19:00 - [877] The bottom line is that there either tier 3 carriers, and should be heavily nerfed to refect the fact, (OR WELL, HOW ABOUT MAKING A NEW SHIP CLASS INSTEAD??) or the end game content that most pilots consider them to be. ____ Domination Balance (Or how we fix the Tempest)
Angelus X Reikoku IT Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:20:00 - [878] Edited by: Angelus X on 13/11/2009 18:24:28 Originally by: CCP Nozh HFurthermore we're looking into solutions to reimburse current mothership pilots for the drop in construction cost. Unless you found a way to tie this in with a reduced cost for new skills, or modules that mothership pilots may end up using now or in the future, i'm strongly against this idea. People knew from the start the cost of the mothership was going down. Nobody was complaining then because they assumed their mothership was about to become a pwnmobile. Sure 6 bil instead of what, 9-12bil it was supposed to be is a bigger reduction than most people were expected or told, but suddenly they should get that ISK back because CCP are bending over after a mistake on their own part? As an alliance mate of mine says; "they gonna reimburse me for teh cnr i payed a bil for 3 years ago?" or how about reimbursing people who own falcon BPOs since the falcon got nerfed? or any of the other hundreds of nerfs that have occured over the years. I think not For those people who have invested in a mothership since the first information was leaked about a motehrship boost.. sorry, but suck it up! Over the years a f**kton of people have invested ISK based on dev blogs, suggestions, rumors, of things to change in new releases, and plenty have been burned before, you aren't the first. (Not to mention the fact a lot of MS have been built by taking advantage of the fact Sov 4 still exists, perhaps the risk of waiting till after dominion compared to the risk of loosing your MS in build was one that should have been examined closer..) So, changes, yes! better changes than at the start of this thread, yes!, reimbursement, No! My 0.02$
Herar Domain	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:20:00 - [879] I think this is a dissatisfied compromise.What is wrong with keeping the old stats and keeping old prices or even rise the price of the ships.What is wrong about 20 Drones? Reduce the fighter bomber damage a bit more and give us moms pilot our beloved 20 drones back.Come on u have to admit that the 20 drones were always the epic thing for a moms. But this cookie at least does not make me cry it just ****es me now a bit off.
The Mittani GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:20:00 - [880] Edited by: The Mittani on 13/11/2009 18:27:06 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 Once again, who are you, and why are you being allowed to diddle with Abathur's excellent work on supercapitals? There's no need for this nonsense. The chaos unleashed by docking motherships (which still do less dps than a dread, even with your post) after the hp buff is enormous. That you even consider such a change at all is galling, because I truly think it's impossible for you to have considered the ramifications of this change in a balanced way - especially since the Moros just ate a dps nerf not a month ago precisely because of the chaos it could cause while playing docking games. Hiding behind 'guys guys it's just the test server' doesn't shield you from the fact that your prior post wiped out 40% of market value in one stroke. Most other CCP devs have at least a modi****of consideration in their posting. Back off what had been a solid, settled project with lots of player feedback. Go work on network code fixes or one of the other billion things broken in this game that need attention. Peace out~ edit: m o d i c u m is censored? wow, all those threatening lawyer words Sins of a Solar Spymaster: my ~fair and balanced~ column TheMittani @ Twitter

Khefron GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:21:00 - [881] 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 since you don't mention explosion radius, I'm assuming that it's still over 3000m, meaning that fighter bombers will be doing 1/2 dps against dreadnaughts in siege. Is that how you intend for them to work?
Ivanna Nuke Gallente Daralux	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:21:00 - [882] If they are being nerfed to hell, at least let them be used in high sec.
Greg DaimYo Caldari Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:22:00 - [883] 1. I am happy that you are actually listening to us. 2. What the hell? You do realise that making the things dockable and much less expensive will give you a massive headache in 3-4 months. MOM-squads that'll pwnzor everything in their path is all I have to say about this. 3. The problem of not hitting Capitals for full damage still remains, which doesn't make sense. 4. An explanation why the former version of the Supercarriers were in need of tweeking. Because this version now is the sure road to Supercarriers Online whereas before i didn't see this issue.
DOARota Gallente BURN EDEN	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:22:00 - [884] Originally by: Commander Ogir Edited by: Commander Ogir on 13/11/2009 18:12:54 Originally by: CCP Nozh Super Carrier Changes: Can deploy 2 additional Fighter or Drone per level Can dock at stations 3 per level, no dock! No questions! No flames! Everyone happy!
Soleil Fournier AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:22:00 - [885] Also, while I 100% support docking in stations, I agree that docking at every station would open up pandoras box of docking games and griefing. The docking should be an upgrade at 00 stations, and I would say 5 billion isk per station would be reasonable.
Fogy Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:23:00 - [886] 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 Go away. This isnt even thought through. This changes will make the super carriers, a tire 2 carrier insted of a supercapitol ship (docking rights). It doesnt adress the issue with the increased explosion radius issue. EXPLOSION VELOCITY WONT HELP US WHEN SHOOTING STATIONAIRY(sieged) DREADS FOR ~50% of the potential DPS. As capital ship killers (acording to previous dev blogs testing events and so on) dreads will be our primary targets. It will help against moving carriers, but we'd still be at a maximum ~50% of our damage potential even when they arent moving. WAKE UP! Norwegian Wood, for hire!
Dramaticus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:23:00 - [887] at ~6b in cost, the ability to dock and 25-50m ehp, these things will get nerfed to **** later Please don't use RL pictuers of players in Sig without permission. - WeatherMan
Lubomir Penev Dark Nexxus	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:24:00 - [888] Originally by: CCP Nozh Can dock at stations At list you could hotdrop a ***got ganking people at a station undock with a Moros or a carrier and pop it before he could redock. Not too realistic with a supercarrier EHP, nor is bumping it out of range. You just created the new unbeatable griefmobile, congratulation. Is your main in "the united"? -- 081014 : emoragequit, char transfered to a friend, 090317 : back to original owner blog
Lynn de'Marco Divine Power. Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:24:00 - [889] My opinions on the latest changes (as an owner of a supercarrier) Docking - No no no no no, i know this would make my life a lot easier but supercarrier docking games will be rubbish. 2 drones per level - better but i stil would like 3 :) reimbursement - no, i'd still rather have them worth their current build cost even if CCP were to add the difference in value to my wallet. supercap blobs will be horrible.
Ragel Tropxe DEATHFUNK Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:26:00 - [890] Well from the proposed explosion radius / velocity numbers from the Cit torps / cruise I think the only conclusion I can come to is that the devs don't actually understand the consequences of their design decisions and the missile mechanics. Its fair therefore to assume that FBs will still wont be doing full damage to Caps (just like Capital missile weps won't).

Nye Jaran	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:26:00 - [891] Nozh, since these can dock now and are effectively Tier 2 Carriers, can you also change the requirement that they can only be built in CSAAs? That change would be hugely beneficial to all lowsec dwelling corps.
Rainus Max Fusion Enterprises Ltd	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:26:00 - [892] Quote: Furthermore we're looking into solutions to reimburse current mothership pilots for the drop in construction cost. Are you looking at dropping the BPO prices? If so are you going to reimburse the difference?
Linas IV	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:27:00 - [893] Originally by: Nye Jaran Nozh, since these can dock now and are effectively Tier 2 Carriers, can you also change the requirement that they can only be built in CSAAs? That change would be hugely beneficial to all lowsec dwelling corps. QFT
RuriHoshino Minmatar Stimulus Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:29:00 - [894] Originally by: Larkonis TrassIer This is going from bad to worse. Roll back to the original new design spec for 'Super Carriers' and the new Titans. Everyone was happy with those. Quoting for great justice. Honestly. You propose new changes, put them on the test server, everyone tests them and adds feedback, and you come out with good changes to the game that satisfied the majority of the people involved. Then some moppet scraps all that and throws in a bunch of random changes that no one had any input on and are almost universally decried as being stupid and unfocused. Why even pretend to care anymore? Dockable motherships is a ****ing terrible idea, anyone who actually played the game would be able to tell you that. Maybe you should just stop.
Arcanim Al'Seif Volatile Nature Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:31:00 - [895] Thank you for actually taking the time to respond, and you have taken a lot of the complaints into consideration. However, by allowing them to dock you will have essentially created a ship-bound darwinism that will lead to Carriers getting the finger due to the supercarrier being a more expensive, yet much more "profitable" ship to fly now by comparison. Bearing in mind that the main difference here is that the carrier is able to go into Triage which is great in the right scenario but in numbers is not needed (see the Clarion Call 2: Pantheon vid). It is a great idea for sure, but by allowing supercarriers to dock you are just going to breed standard carriers out of existence except for moving rigged ships around. There were some other nice compromises here posted by players, I'm not sure if they have been taken into consideration or not, but the one that appealed the most was simply increasing the bandwidth of the fighter bombers so that you would only be able to field 10 (or 15) at max skills. Perhaps by including a "XX% in fighter-bomber bandwidth per level" or something like that. Arca
tx eight Minmatar Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:32:00 - [896] Originally by: RuriHoshino Maybe you should just stop. Agreeing with Rote, haha, history repeating, in what, just 4 days.
Traxio Nacho Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:32:00 - [897] Quote: The chaos unleashed by docking motherships (which still do less dps than a dread, even with your post) after the hp buff is enormous. That you even consider such a change at all is galling, because I truly think it's impossible for you to have considered the ramifications of this change in a balanced way - especially since the Moros just ate a dps nerf not a month ago precisely because of the chaos it could cause while playing docking games. This You have just given a ship with a good few million HP the ability to sit on an undock point aggroing stuff to kingdom come(assuming it has a large radius)without any real risk
Lubomir Penev Dark Nexxus	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:32:00 - [898] Originally by: Soleil Fournier -10 points for rolling out this change without warning or explaination +20 points for listening and implementing changes on feedback. I don't think you perceive how the ability for them to dock along with the reduced cost will ruin lowsec. They could as well remove their ability to move and dedicate them to station camping. -- 081014 : emoragequit, char transfered to a friend, 090317 : back to original owner blog
Trent Nichols Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:33:00 - [899] On one hand, given CCP's recent behavior, I am relieved to see even a compromise. I may still buy a MS now. On the other hand, The original model for MS on singularity was still better. Unfortunately I don't think CCP will realize this until howls of "MS blobbing" and "MS docking games" are heard all across the forums. Colonies and Capitals
ByFstugan Caldari Big Shadows Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:33:00 - [900] Edited by: ByFstugan on 13/11/2009 18:34:02 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 I'm in whole very satisfied with what we see atm, especially since U made them able to dock. I'd like to suggest one thing that could make the things finalized in my opinion and knowledge though: - Make the Drone Control Unit add 2 drones/fighters per module on SC's to not make the nerf from 3 to 2 drones/fighters per level take to hard (for example "Can deploy 2 additional Fighters per level and Drone Control Unit" and U get it in same bonus). I think it's in line with it's bonuses in general compared to carriers that it has higher boost from this otherwise pretty useless module. Thx for response and listening. _______________________________ The wise knows what he knows not.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] 40 50 .. 54 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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