a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs

A hitpoint reduction is really necesary for both super carriers and titans - Very well done...
With the massive resist they can obtain and the many RR carriers on the field in battles I still believe a bigger hitpoint reduction would be in place without jeopardizing balance too much.
Also perhaps since Super capitals never seems too be active tanking perhaps a reduction in capacitor and recharge would make the fights better balanced and more interesting.

Limiting drones is a super choice. Good choice. You will still have a fleet problem of multiple ECM bursts. I would consider giving certain tacklers & supportships ecm burst immunity or higher sensor strength. Also plz make sure ecm bursts won't be able to negate the effects of bubbles (Getting paranoid here or am I?)

The doomsday weapon is not necesarily the most dangerous part of the Titan. The tracking of the guns can easily hit BC's while moving and not commiting as a Dread would have to. Also remote tracking in the current state of those guns fit on a titan will be very powerfull.

Don't hesitate too long about dreadnoughts. Those guns are really bad at hitting even a stationary pos. Making them hit better won't be a huge threat to battleships however still have a valid chance of hitting more than towers and capitals.

A reason while subcapitals have trouble with supers is not necesarily due to the supers themselves, however the massive RR capitals in support have a very easy time supporting with the massive resistance and hitpoints available. I am not convinced a 20% reduction in hitpoints is enough as RR support rarely have trouble keeping up with the damage taken after the massive resists.

Would it be too much to have a built in 20-50 % Hitpoints received on shield/armor transfer?

Anyway nice to see CCP giving a few shipclasses a major overhaul with well thought adjustments... Now you just need the last little details, kinks and perks to make it super usefull :p

Pinky Denmark

and for the numb skulls whining about a hic or sabre tackling an SC....Its a fleet ship you shouldnt be using it as a solo pwnmobile/low sec gankathon in the first place. Once again A FLEET SHIP.

Why would a Titan ever doomsday an Orca anyways? lol.

and a 60b Titan? ^^

supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;)

Single small ships should not be able to solo kill a Super Carrier. It is unrealistic.

A 6 bil Jump Freighter canGÇÖt do that either, a 1 bil Freighter same thing GǪ. What exactly is your point? The ship was not design for that GǪ simple as that. A super is immune to EW, has an insane amount of HP and it was design to fight caps.

"Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"

3) Electronic Attack Frigates. Yup you read that right.
This diminuitive vessel rarely seen outside of alliance tournaments and hilarious lossmails could use a bit more of a purpose in life. In the same way that HICs bypass the supercap immunity to tackling, EAFs should bypass their immunity to ewar.
The best part about this change is that it balances itself:
EAFs are already made of paper, which means that any supercap fleet with a supporting fleet of any description will be able to swat them down with ease. It provides a counter to the exponential remote-repping and tracking links of hundred-strong supercap fleets, especially when faced under a cynojammer. Plus of course it opens up an avenue for the Eve Newbie. Remember that guy? Well now he can be taking on the big boys in a few short weeks of training, helping to make a difference to that fight.

By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!

If you think, that solo bs can without heavy neut and little bit of luck do anything about decent tackler, you are wrong. Standard t2 fitted rifter will kill your warriors in 30-40 seconds, orbiting sader with locus rigs even faster and you have no chance of hitting them with guns.

Tackle inties can kite even heavy neut range btw.

Go pod youself sir. oh can i has your super cap?

Hey GǪ donGÇÖt get me wrong GǪ You are giving the wrong arguments here. (At least in my humble opinion)

You started by pointing out the cost difference, obviously it was a wrong example. Now you are pinning on the name, on the same logic we could have assume a JUMPFreighter shold have a bigger cargo hold, well even if itGÇÖs 6 x times the price it has a cargo hold 1/3 (+/-) of the Freighter GǪ

Try making an objective comparison between ships and most important ship classes / ship roles. Each ship in a specific class has advantages and disadvantages (also present across races). In your case: a carrier can field normal drones, but then again is more vulnerable because it lacks the EW immunity of SUPERCarriers GǪ A carrier can fit a triage while a SUPERCarrier a remote ECM GǪ and so on ... A carrier was design for support while a SUPERCarrier for killing carriers (capitals)/structures ...

E

EDIT: you do realize that titans can still hit stuff and receive tracking links to help them with that, right?

If this breaks the game for you, then gtfo :) we wont miss you.

Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?

Right?

Same as now, except that one ship class cannot do it all any more.

So what other aspects change, do you think?

Quite. Which is why one has to ask: what is all the whinging about?

So in other words, things changeGǪ

Or, more accurately, things only change if you're doing it wrong GÇö ships that were envisioned as fleet ships now become fleet ships (which is no more of an artificial limitation than freighters having no offence or defence whatsoever). They're having their role defined more clearly. This rather sounds like a good thing.

.

[quote=Grath Telkin]
Yes but those three ship types can more or less defend themselves against other capital ships. A carrier can not. Where they require a support fleet against sub-cabs, carriers require a support fleet against supercaps. Dreads are the arguable exception, but personally I don't see why they can't keep at least a small drone bay.

Monkeys and typewriters do not write Shakespeare. And the certainly can't build bridges.

In CCP own description, for example the Thanatos it decribes itself as a cheap version of a Nyx. The Nidhogger as a pared-down version of the Hel.Therefore it is a invalid argument to presume that the Nyx / Hel etc shouldn not be able to carry out the their roles and much more.

Sensing the need for a more moderately-priced version of the Nyx, Federation Navy authorities commissioned the design of the Thanatos

I could undertand your need to quote me a reply if you actually had a point or something to say.......

Quotes? Page Numbers? Other DEV posters quoted in YOUR post that apply to what I had to say or proves my points have already been covered multiple times?

Kind of noticed you didn't have any of those..... because as far as I have read no DEV has talked about these topics specifically.

So again, I don't see your point.

Just saying.

Thank you for your participation in the discussion.



edit: put in the "Dev" requirements.

What? I missed that one. Not that I dislike this change. Where is the dev post about this?


/me finish amarr dread V tonight.