EVE Search - "Tiericide" for capitals?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

"Tiericide" for capitals?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dibblerette The Phantom Regiment THE ROYAL NAVY 103	Posted - 2012.11.10 04:25:00 - [1] - Quote With the enormous rebalancing initiative underway, will this be hitting capital ships? Now I know capitals don't have real tiers like cruisers do (did!), but if you ask most people, you will get a very clear hierarchy of capitals. Something like Archon>Thanatos>>Chimera>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nidhoggur And Moros/Rev>>>Naglfar>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Phoenix And Aeon/Nyx>>Wyvern>>>>>>Hel>>lolRevenant(?) And Avatar/Erebus>Ragnarok>Leviathan (not as clear on this one, but still) From what I've seen, this is due to a couple things. (No particular order) 1. Lack of Shield version of Slave implants 2. Capital Missiles 3. Fitting (Chimera and Nidhoggur especially) 4. Tanking momentum (Always used armor caps, thus armor caps will always be used) 5. Large fleets (IE typical carrier fights) tend to involve armor ships, whereas shield subcaps tend to rely more on mobility (not capitals' strong spot once ongrid) SO, are there plans to adress this? What should be done, in your opinion, if anything?
PhatController Mum Rider Alliance 4	Posted - 2012.11.10 05:54:00 - [2] - Quote A lot of these problems fit into the 'Fix the module, not hull" , for example, capital missiles and shield slaves. That being said, fitting needs taking a look at.
Demolishar United Aggression 399	Posted - 2012.11.10 13:49:00 - [3] - Quote PhatController wrote: shield slaves.. The shield supers are actually competetive it's just that the majority of supers built were all armored, so shield ones just don't fit doctrine. All it would take to make shield titans balanced against armor ones is the removal of in-combat refitting. Currently an armor titan can sit with 3 magstabs or heatsinks, then quickly swap out to hardeners if he sees yellow boxes, gaining huge amount of EHP. Shield titan can't do this as effectively as their lowslot tank modules are fairly weak in comparison.
PhatController Mum Rider Alliance 4	Posted - 2012.11.10 14:16:00 - [4] - Quote Demolishar wrote: PhatController wrote: shield slaves.. The shield supers are actually competetive it's just that the majority of supers built were all armored, so shield ones just don't fit doctrine. Yes, but there is a reason more armor are made then shield..... one of them being Slaves. If both where equal then we would see just as many all shield fleets as all armor fleets. I can't think of any way to make it so, but they need to make it so fleets can be a mix of armor and shield and be just as effective as an all amour or all shield fleet.
Val'Dore PlanetCorp InterStellar 237	Posted - 2012.11.10 15:22:00 - [5] - Quote Even before Capitals and Slave implants, armor was the more popular fleet tank. Star Jump Drive
Inkarr Hashur Ministry of War Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2012.11.10 15:52:00 - [6] - Quote PhatController wrote: Demolishar wrote: PhatController wrote: shield slaves.. The shield supers are actually competetive it's just that the majority of supers built were all armored, so shield ones just don't fit doctrine. Yes, but there is a reason more armor are made then shield..... one of them being Slaves. If both where equal then we would see just as many all shield fleets as all armor fleets. I can't think of any way to make it so, but they need to make it so fleets can be a mix of armor and shield and be just as effective as an all amour or all shield fleet. Make a slave equivalent with shields then. And for good measure make an armor equivalent with crystal. Uniqueness isn't that good if it massively imbalances an entire line of the most expensive ships in EVE.
TomyLobo Posthuman Society 27	Posted - 2012.11.10 16:02:00 - [7] - Quote The Chimera is better than Thanatos for pvp but the Thanatos sees more use due to various reasons.
Nex apparatu5 Wormhole Exploration Crew R.E.P.O. 379	Posted - 2012.11.10 16:12:00 - [8] - Quote PhatController wrote: Demolishar wrote: PhatController wrote: shield slaves.. The shield supers are actually competetive it's just that the majority of supers built were all armored, so shield ones just don't fit doctrine. Yes, but there is a reason more armor are made then shield..... one of them being Slaves. If both where equal then we would see just as many all shield fleets as all armor fleets. Actually Wyverns and Aeons are about on par in terms of EHP, and the Wyvern actually wins with overheating. Same with the Nyx/Hel. The reason no one flew shield supers were there were 1) no a-type invulns, only CN and silly expensive officer ones and 2) shield bonuses, when applied on jump in, didnt refill shields. After everyone went armor, the fixes to these problems came too late, as all super fleets were already armor.
Derath Ellecon Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal 431	Posted - 2012.11.10 16:12:00 - [9] - Quote I think you would need Tiers to "cide" them.
Syrias Bizniz Carnivore Company To be Announced. 20	Posted - 2012.11.10 16:23:00 - [10] - Quote The discrepancy in Armor Capitals vs Shield Capitals doesn't come from Slave implants. At least not on the Super-Capital scale. It is based on the extraordinary strong position the Archon has within the Carrier lineup, as well as the differences between Armor-RR and Shield-RR. Shield-RR requires more cap and has severe fitting issues - their CPU usage is 100 units higher than the armor variant's - while the Chimera, using a huge chunk of it's cpu already vor it's local shieldtank, only has 250 CPU more than the Archon. Not to mention the lack of rigs suited for shield logistics reducing it's capneed. And also, here comes in the Slave implant set. Being able to come out at ~50% more armor hitpoints simply by plugging in some implants without an alternative for shields puts the Archon in a position far ahead of every other carrier - and therefor being able to deliver reps far more efficient than the shield Carriers are able to do. Even though Shield Supers are able to reach by far higher resistances than the Armor Supers. An Archon, fully fit for armor reps requires 1 Cap-In out of another Archon. It's not stable with all 5 reps running, but it is with 4 of them. The 'Battery-Archons' need 2 cap in them selves, thus are able to give cap to 3 RR Archons. A Chimera, fully fit for shield reps requires 3 Cap-In out of another Chimera and even then, it won't run near stable. The 'Battery-Chimeras' need 2 cap in them selves. So basically, 2 Battery Chims can give enough cap to ... well, not even 2 RR-Chims. With lower EHP (Here comes DD in your face and you die) and less sensor resolution (---> longer locking times). You could go for Talisman Imp sets on the battery chims and get to 2 Chims delivering cap to 3 RR chims. That is, in fact, an incredible boost, and makes them half as efficient as the Archons are. You could boost the efficiency slightly by delivering cap to Nidhoggurs, but then you struggle even more with EHP and fitting than the chims already do - unless you go for 4 reps only per chim, which would almost make the rep-bonus obsolete. So basically: Armor Supers OP because Archon OP. Give Shield RR Rig, more CPU to Nidhoggur and make Slave Set not affect capital shiphulls, and there ya go, Shield Capital Fleets become viable!

Dorian Wylde Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 167	Posted - 2012.11.10 20:42:00 - [11] - Quote While I'm compelled to point out there are no capital teirs to icide, I would love to see a balance pass on them. Most likely it won't be until after the Tech 2 sweep, which isn't until after all the tech 1 ships are done. Still, the newest blog is already talking about command ships, so maybe it isn't that far off. Please oh please if you do do this CCP, get rid of the split weapons on the Nag. Split weapons only worked on the Typhoon (no I'm not counting drone ships), and now you're scrapping that, so please get rid of it everywhere.
Rroff The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 61	Posted - 2012.11.10 22:29:00 - [12] - Quote Way past time some tweaks were made to capitals. Obvious one being chimera (still) needs more CPU amd nag needs its weapons looked at (tho making it just another moros but with projectiles would be kind of boring). Thanatos tho a favorite ratting ship is outdated in triage fits and IMO all carriers should have a viable triage role even if they aren't all as good at being pure repping nodes as the archon - i.e. to make the thanny even in the same ballpark as a T2 fit archon (with faction eanms) you have to throw around 16bn ISK at the thanny. Would be nice to see fighters get some love (tho not sure how that would affect super caps) would be nice if thanny could put out a little bit more than battleship level dps with fighters. Nid has a nice RR bonus but struggles on fitting and base stats to use that for much more than POS repping or emergency burst repping in some PVP situations (again its something that used to work well but has become outdated as the game moved on).
Jack Miton Aperture Harmonics K162 777	Posted - 2012.11.10 23:29:00 - [13] - Quote there are no tiers in caps so no teiricide. I really do hope they balance dreads at some point tho. PS: **** off with shield slaves, do not want. shield and armour tanks are different, as they should be.
Dibblerette The Phantom Regiment THE ROYAL NAVY 103	Posted - 2012.11.10 23:43:00 - [14] - Quote Dibblerette wrote: Now I know capitals don't have real tiers like cruisers do (did!) Read the whole post, then complain. I do think capital missiles definitely need some love, as well as the Nid, and probably fitting on the capital shield stuff.
Marcus McTavish EnC Heavy Industries Rolling Thunder. 49	Posted - 2012.11.18 07:16:00 - [15] - Quote They will probably fix them up a bit next year. BUT aren't torps getting an applied damage boost. Maybe that Phoenix will be able to hit Capitals moving in the speeds of 0.0001 m/s to 5 m/s for near-full damage.
Paikis Vapour Holdings 265	Posted - 2012.11.18 09:33:00 - [16] - Quote Marcus McTavish wrote: They will probably fix them up a bit next year. BUT aren't torps getting an applied damage boost. Maybe that Phoenix will be able to hit Capitals moving in the speeds of 0.0001 m/s to 5 m/s for near-full damage. Even with 100% perfect damage application... a Moros is still better in terms of raw damage.
Noisrevbus 285	Posted - 2012.11.18 10:12:00 - [17] - Quote It's somewhat amusing... I've spent a number of posts now speaking out against armor-shield complaints in other threads where attention is on the Caldari and Minmatar ships. What i've argued there is that popularity (in large, uniform, fleets using the ships in the most conventional way) should not be the only validation for a ship and it's performance. I've hinted about how it crosses over on larger ships and now this thread pop up complaining about that very thing. That puts a slight smirk on my face. The thing with Capitals, similar to the Battlecruisers, is that the ships considered lesser or underperforming generally (note: not always) just perform in areas- or have physical advantages that the average player of today value less. Take the Hel for example. Once you begin to scale down it's one of the most popular SC because to a smaller group utilizing SC for quick and heavy punches against a generally superior enemy the agility is important. They know they can't tank a straight up show of force so they value the tank less. Is it egoism? The question you have to ask yourselves here when you plead for buffs based on the performance you value (because you don't want to train a new ship) is wether that serves the game or not. CCP's response to most of these issues they have touched so far have been to streamline the ships. The Hel is likely to get similar bonuses to the Wyvern and all of a sudden we have no "nano SC" that an undermanned force can use to punch holes in a larger, slower-churning, fleet amassing on a grid. You can't pop that triage Carrier and extract to even out a battlefield before hostile escalation is a go. That tactic disappear from the game. We end up with less where a straight up show of force with the numbers and resources for it become more and more exclusively important. Where event attempting to engage against odds become more and more pointless. It doesn't matter if ships become more and more affordable, if the likelyhood of succeeding drop so low that attempting goes from risky to stupid. It still baffles me why CCP can't see those effects in the game, where making more ships fitting into the illustruous "blob" just reinforce the "blob" in it's relation to other ways of playing the game. We're slowly running out of alternatives, in part, because the mechanics are outdated and CCP seem to fear touching them; but also in part because they keep re-balancing ships away from alternative use and making certain roles or performance scarce. You should think about that just as much when it comes to Capitals as it did with Battlecruisers. The omitted approach Maybe you should diverse popular gameplay to match more ships rather than changing more diverse ships to fit the one most popular way to play the game. If the ambition is to make the Hel appealing the best approach is to make smaller scale gameplay more useful, not turn into the same ship as the Wyvern, Nyx or Aeon and having it do the very same things either of them do. The shifting of goalposts currently going can be summarized like this: they are adding twice as many new classes but they are cutting the races down by half. The end result is the same amount of ships while making racial choices and training matter less to appease or avoid the amount of stupid players shallowly comparing race within class, expecting all ships of one class to perform the same roles (projecting damage in large fleets). Meanwhile, actual gameplay is yet to be adressed. We still have long defensive timers that only respond to amassment of resources, we still have major economy faucet-sink balance issues, active-passive or player-alliance gameplay; and amusingly enough the changes that have gone through so far have mostly made those issues worse. We get more ships that cost nothing so the lack of overarching sink is becomming a more severe problem.
Lin-Young Borovskova Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 946	Posted - 2012.11.18 14:38:00 - [18] - Quote PhatController wrote: Yes, but there is a reason more armor are made then shield..... one of them being Slaves. You misunderstand the reason why there are so many armor supers/titans compared with shield ones, but I'm all ok for shield slaves if on the other side armor gets crystal armor implants. You simply don't kill supers/titans as fast as drakes not because of implants but because they're expensive and you don't put them on the line that easy, the false idea about supers/titans uber armor tanking is only due to the fact the majority of those actually build are armor, thus when you put a single shield super/titan on that fleet it just doesn't stack correctly. Then you can not understand why when you join some alliance or coalition having already those armor ones will tell you to keep your shield titan at the pos for bridging, it's not a problem or armor/shield tanking, it's a matter of fleet doctrine consistency. brb
Daniel Plain Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 431	Posted - 2012.11.23 01:37:00 - [19] - Quote looking forward to exploration caps. "I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF
Daniel Plain Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 431	Posted - 2012.11.23 01:46:00 - [20] - Quote Lin-Young Borovskova wrote: PhatController wrote: Yes, but there is a reason more armor are made then shield..... one of them being Slaves. You misunderstand the reason why there are so many armor supers/titans compared with shield ones, but I'm all ok for shield slaves if on the other side armor gets crystal armor implants. You simply don't kill supers/titans as fast as drakes not because of implants but because they're expensive and you don't put them on the line that easy, the false idea about supers/titans uber armor tanking is only due to the fact the majority of those actually build are armor, thus when you put a single shield super/titan on that fleet it just doesn't stack correctly. Then you can not understand why when you join some alliance or coalition having already those armor ones will tell you to keep your shield titan at the pos for bridging, it's not a problem or armor/shield tanking, it's a matter of fleet doctrine consistency. while this is true, there are other major reasons for flying armor. one of them is that shield gang links used to only increase your max shields, not your current shields. so if a shield cap joined fleet, it did not instantly gain buffer, unlike the armor cap. also, for a cap pilot, mid slots are usually much more valuable than low slots. you want those tracking computers and sebos in there, as they are more useful than their low slot counterparts. lastly, it just so happens that the shield dreads relied on missiles, which are, well, crap. in addition to the slaves issue, these are very sound reasons to prefer an armor over a shield capital. doctrine is also part of the reason but not even the major part. "I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF

Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance 576	Posted - 2012.11.23 02:58:00 - [21] - Quote Nosirevbus makes some interesting, if exremely belaboured philosophical points. Interesting, but worthless. Worthless because in amongst all the theorycrafting EFT-wankery bulldust philosophical mumbo jumbo, Nosirevbus fails to actually address the real discrepancies with the capitals and instead clangs on like a broken drum about how terrible the metagame is and how CCP panders to the metagame instead of against the metagame. Yes, CCP is indulging in tiercide. This is homogenising the performance of cruisers and frigates in terms of EFT DPS. In tandem with this are a few tweaks to ECM, EWAR in general, missiles, and fiddling the fitting capabilities of the Cane. Yes, this is chopping the heads off a few tall poppies (the cane, tengu) but in concert with this it is adding some unique and in my opinion awesome capabilities to currently utterly repulsively useless ships (Scythe, Augoror, Burst, etc). How does a 450 DPS HAM Caracal ply into the existing meta? How does a kitey Stabber which has half the capabilities of a Vaga play into the cruiser meta? Just because it can be nanoed doesn't make it an Omen. Which is soon to be a viable T1 armour DPS cruiser, versus an impossible-to-fit joke. The Celestis becomes reasonable, the Maulus a potential OP monster playing directly into the Gallente EWAR philosophy - not turning into another Punisher as alluded to. Amarr is lasers + drones, with T2 missile boats. Yeah, that's exactly a Caldari or Gallente lineup. The Minmatar, I agree, is getting less quirky now the Bellicose lost its turret slots. But it isn't a Caracal, and it isn't a Moa, and never will be. The funny thing is that on the T1 cruiser scale (and ignoring slaves, boosts, etc) armour T1 logi's exceed the abilities of the shield RR logis - especially the Execquror vs Scythe. But even then, the team logi cruisers (Augoror, Osprey) outperform the solo by a vital margin, for the same reasons that Archons dominate in PVP over Nidhoggurs; cap, efficiency of repairs, and the tanking philosophies effect on midslot choice. The armour logis, as I would fit them, have utility EWAR and the shield logis do not. Carrying this back up to capitals, I can't see that homogenisation of ship performance in the field vs EFT (which egregiously misleads people into thinking the Phoenix is useful outside of structure grind) will be detrimental to the game. Taking Nosirevbus' claims about the Hel, and its apparent use as an ambush super, perhaps the problem you are grappling with is the fact that as power blocs coagulate and entrench, as the playerbase gets older and wiser and more furnished with cyno alts, it is harder to utilise a super as an ambush device. Or maybe it is less effective. The whole argument here is also in any fact beyond the argument about tanking philosophy; if you are ganking well enough with a Hel you won't need to tank. Certainly the few times I've seen supers ganking things they utilised DPS exclusively on woefully outclassed opponents. In any case, nano Hel or not nano Hel, the kill is in selecting the target for the gank, and not selecting the tanking style. For fleet work, there is a need to provide shield capitals with the same capabilities of the Archon, which requires addressing inequalities in capacitor use and module effects on tanking (eg, CPR's), and fitting. You can address those, and make Chimeras viable triage beasts, and Nidhoggurs viable nano-carriers and enhance the Niddhogur's ability to be the uber repping thug assisting a lowsec gank and jumping out. Will it upset the doctrines? No. Will it allow the out-of-box specialists to become even more effective? Absolutely. Homogenise away, I say. I will be using my Bellicose with Caracal DPS as a kiting nano ship which the Caracal can never be, all thanks to the tiercide. Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed.
Daniel Plain Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 431	Posted - 2012.11.23 04:40:00 - [22] - Quote i'll see your wall of text and raise you two fluffy kittens. "I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance 576	Posted - 2012.11.23 04:58:00 - [23] - Quote I am as shocked by your kitten attack as a baby red panda. Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed.
CaptainFalcon07 Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost 48	Posted - 2012.11.23 07:08:00 - [24] - Quote Make Crystals affect Capital Shield Boosters. Armor gets their Slaves for their Capitals and Shield gets Crystals for theirs. Now off to EFT to see how much a chimera can tank if Crystals were to work.
YuuKnow Inner 5phere 436	Posted - 2012.11.23 11:28:00 - [25] - Quote Caps and supercaps are still the 800mil ton gorilla in the room when it comes to the ship rebalancing. CCP really doesn't know what they want to do with these things. yk
Zarnak Wulf Imperial Outlaws 742	Posted - 2012.11.23 19:08:00 - [26] - Quote This is also one of the areas with the most potential for new ships down the road. There is quite the skill gap between BS and caps. Something to fill that gap would be interesting. a light carrier that can go through gates? A T2 BS with immense firepower and/or tank that can't? A cap ship dedicated to crowd control would be interesting. As a side note, I'm not really using my 3 billion isk dread. Something that expensive getting one shotted...... Uhm. No.
Daniel Plain Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 435	Posted - 2012.11.24 04:54:00 - [27] - Quote i never bothered to read up on the new doomsdays. what do the interwebs think about it; is it a good idea to have dreads the 'official' counter to titans being oneshot by the latter? and if titans are supposed to be the counter to dreads, why not give dreads more tracking so they can actually get something done without heavy web and paint support? "I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF
HydroSan GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 8	Posted - 2012.11.24 05:30:00 - [28] - Quote Derath Ellecon wrote: I think you would need Tiers to "cide" them. Don't confront the OP with things like "facts"!
ilammy 12	Posted - 2012.11.24 08:50:00 - [29] - Quote Daniel Plain wrote: i never bothered to read up on the new doomsdays. what do the interwebs think about it; is it a good idea to have dreads the 'official' counter to titans being oneshot by the latter? and if titans are supposed to be the counter to dreads, why not give dreads more tracking so they can actually get something done without heavy web and paint support? Since when dreadnoughts cannot hit capital targets (phoenix aside), and webs & painters work on supercaps?
Daniel Plain Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 437	Posted - 2012.11.24 14:30:00 - [30] - Quote ilammy wrote: Daniel Plain wrote: i never bothered to read up on the new doomsdays. what do the interwebs think about it; is it a good idea to have dreads the 'official' counter to titans being oneshot by the latter? and if titans are supposed to be the counter to dreads, why not give dreads more tracking so they can actually get something done without heavy web and paint support? Since when dreadnoughts cannot hit capital targets (phoenix aside), and webs & painters work on supercaps? you misunderstood me. the reasoning is: if titans are supposed to counter dreads (which they do), then dreads are by definition not supposed to be useful against titans. on the other hand, they are just about as useless against subcaps unless you bring your own support with massive web and painting. this leaves me wondering if dreads' role needs to be defined better; pos bashing doesn't quite cut it as the only effective application of an entire ship class. then again, i never flew a dread so that's why i'm asking. "I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.