Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 86 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
300
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
My rival for the title of tallest CCP employee, CCP Tallest, wants to tell you how capital ships will be re-balanced in our winter expansion.
Check out his dev blog right here, and as always...please give us your feedback. CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |
|
Hiram Alexander
Capital Enrichment Services
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
Oh dear, where's this gonna lead? :))) |
Squizz Caphinator
Woopatang
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
me gusta http://evewho.com - Alliance and Corporation Member Listings http://evechatter.com - Free Alliance and Corporation forums for all. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
Caving in for populism I see. Well it worked for most fascists.. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
KayTwoEx
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
The problem about the dread is not that it deals too few damage but that the tracking in siege is so crappy that even supercapitals such as SCs and Titans can "speedtank" them. Fix that one please! |
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
443
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:33:00 -
[6] - Quote
Oooo
|
|
Nopsa
Lithium Flower.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:34:00 -
[7] - Quote
kool, any chance for slight nerf on titan jump portals also, hotdropping isn't very rare occurance. |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
87
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
Awesome changes.
Are there plans to rebalance supercarriers within the class?
E.g. the Hel is barely used because its bonus is horrible and the EHP is much worse than the rest, reducing all EHP values by a straight 20% will simply make it worse. Additionally, shield supercarriers suffer greatly from the gang bonus mechanism, as armor ships gain the armor amount bonus instantly while the shield bonus is only added to amount, meaning shield supercaps have a tremendous additional drawback.
Also, are you looking at a rebalancing within the carrier class? I think dreads are pretty well-balanced as is, but carriers are far from that. (E.g. as described here: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=117449 ) |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
249
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:36:00 -
[9] - Quote
Me likey changes, and as Tallest says, this isn't a 1 time thing. If you have objections, please post em here.
One thing the CSM would like to see changed is to remove the ability to remote tracking link dreads. CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog What does CSM 6 do? |
FlopSter
Paragon Fury Cascade Imminent
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
Nopsa wrote:kool, any chance for slight nerf on titan jump portals also, hotdropping isn't very rare occurance.
That mechanic works fine...they can't bridge very far as it is... |
|
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:37:00 -
[11] - Quote
Quote:After a player logs out, there is a check for player aggression every 15 minutes. If you have been aggressed, the timer extends for 15 minutes; if you have not been aggressed, you disappear as before. Note: this is only for player aggression and will not change what happens when you log off during fights against NPCs.
Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? |
Mar Drakar
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:40:00 -
[12] - Quote
That logofski button... they took it away... :D
and then all was silent |
Alexandra Alt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:40:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Quote:After a player logs out, there is a check for player aggression every 15 minutes. If you have been aggressed, the timer extends for 15 minutes; if you have not been aggressed, you disappear as before. Note: this is only for player aggression and will not change what happens when you log off during fights against NPCs. Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute?
Oh my, do you understand English ? |
Sin Meng
Creative Assembly
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
Winter is Coming Elements of the past and the future combining to make something not quite as good as either. |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
87
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:41:00 -
[15] - Quote
Nopsa wrote:kool, any chance for slight nerf on titan jump portals also, hotdropping isn't very rare occurance. Speaking of which, any news on the "Cyno Spoolup Time"? Was that scrapped or is it still on the list? :-)
|
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:42:00 -
[16] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. |
|
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:42:00 -
[17] - Quote
Brilliant changes, perhaps it will be worth going for the dreads now :) But yes, a tracking boost might be nice though. |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
This Devblog pleases gaga. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
473
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:44:00 -
[19] - Quote
This is all good. You missed titan gun tracking - the biggest problem subcaps have - which is going to be an issue, but that titan fleets will actually die if you put them in the field may make up for that. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
Reserved for future |
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:44:00 -
[21] - Quote
So supercaps still have a crapload of EHP (crapload multiplied by 0.8 is still a crapload, you know), total EW-immunity and no commitment? Moreover, instead you decide to reduce commitment for dreads.
Meh. Why so shy? 2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is" 2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?" Nice progress, guys. |
|
CCP Zirnitra
CCP Eve Tv
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:45:00 -
[22] - Quote
I AM ZULUPARK! |
|
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
473
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:45:00 -
[23] - Quote
titans with tracking computers / remote tracking links can reliably blap subcaps left and right |
Karbowiak
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:45:00 -
[24] - Quote
Squizz Caphinator wrote:me gusta
|
ovenproofjet
The Illuminatii Mildly Intoxicated
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:45:00 -
[25] - Quote
You kinda just nerfed the standard carrier there with the change to the fighter sensor res, carriers are gonna have trouble doing what you say here: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier"
Perhaps add the sensor res reduction as a penalty to supercarriers so as to avoid a knock on effect on the ordinarty carrier
Other wise good changes, especially to the Dreads, siege timer change is long overdue |
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:45:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP - can you buff carriers, just a little bit?
Up the fuel bay from 3 to 5k m3 so they can carry a bit more fuel and stront for triage. Up the cargo bays to 1k. Up the CHA to 15k. Make Liquid Ozone a charge so that it doesn't need to be constantly moved in and out of ships in the SMA.
As it is, capital modules are just too damn large to be moved around nicely. |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
976
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:45:00 -
[27] - Quote
It will be interesting to see how these changes play out, and I look forward to many more balancing devblogs in the future. CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism! CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
Well CCP, thanks for removing my initial post. I did not violate any forum rules. However, I'll explain since you didn't get it:
Caving in for populism I see. Well it worked for most fascists..
Edit; to elaborate, as we know populist choices gets the blind sheeps running and they might miss the goal..
1) removing regular drones on motherships is ******** beyond belief, this is what Zulu and CCP wanted and tried to do repeatedly. Everytime this has idea has been put to rest. Now that moms need a rebalance, CCP finally can do their long-wet-dream - something that isn't even required.
2) the only issue with supers is their damage output, they had a hp boost for a reason, remember how even small industrialist corps in lowsec would drop a few mixed shield/armor carrier/dread-groups and kill them like they were nothing? Their hp is reasonable, after years of being nerfed, but their damage isn't. Fighterbombers and changed doomsdays made them from "laughable and mocked" to "way overpowered". The nerf should be to FB's and Fighters, not to dronebays and hp.
(and quite frankly, with supers doing same ridicilous damage to other supers and structures, they will have same strenght in sov war so this nerf could end up still promoting super-blobs)
3) The logoff timer change should be universal, for all ships, or it's a stupid change. The blog does not specify if this is for capitals only, but the blog is for capitals only. This needs to be addressed. Game mechanics should in general be universal, else they by themselves become a balance issue. TL;DR state if this is for capitals only, or all ships.. should be the latter.
CCP is showing ignorance on this issue, ignorance, populism, and of course they got their holy grail "death to all drones" slotted into this. I hope players arn't ignorant enough to miss out on this, it's quite embarrassing how you might just finally after four years get away with a stupid change nobody asked for. Nobody but you, CCP. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Mortis vonShadow
Balanaz Mining and Development Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:46:00 -
[29] - Quote
CCP Zirnitra wrote:I AM ZULUPARK!
Sure you are. And I'm the Frito Bandito :)
Some days you're the bug, and some days your the windscreen. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á And some days, you're just a man with a gun. |
Bienator II
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:46:00 -
[30] - Quote
CCP Tallest is now even taller. You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
|
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:46:00 -
[31] - Quote
Faith = restored. Really looking forward to winter now. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:47:00 -
[32] - Quote
FlopSter wrote:Nopsa wrote:kool, any chance for slight nerf on titan jump portals also, hotdropping isn't very rare occurance. That mechanic works fine...they can't bridge very far as it is... So what? Doomsday couldn't shoot very far, too - merely in grid 2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is" 2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?" Nice progress, guys. |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:49:00 -
[33] - Quote
Confirming that logoff timer change is for all ships and not just capitals. |
|
Kiree Chancel
Phantom Squad Atlas.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:50:00 -
[34] - Quote
Good changes for the most part.
But since Fighters have been nerfed into the ground, whats the point of them anymore? They don't have a role that bombers dont already do 10x better...
|
Tokino Kaalakiota
Kaalakiota Logistical Serivces
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:50:00 -
[35] - Quote
Awesome changes.
As an ex/current supercap owner I applaud these changes.
CCP fixed the real problem - DDing subcaps and did a couple other changes that will primarily affect ratting faggots who improperly use their supers.
This won't effectively change anything about how supercaps are used except for the DDing subcaps, which WAS op. and the sentry blob from SCs.
Mittani and the rest of the "supercap blob" whiners can go cry themselves to sleep while smart individuals can make use of existing tactics to counter supercap blobs, which are made even MORE obvious now that CCP has basically bitchslapped the community in the face with obvious hints on how to beat supercap "blobs".
-Tokino/Lords (alt char courtesy of CCP's forumban) |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:51:00 -
[36] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Confirming that logoff timer change is for all ships and not just capitals.
Thank you very much, appreciated. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:52:00 -
[37] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression.
Aw, so no fix thus far for jump-in -> Logoffski. What if logging off within a minute of the conclusion of the session change timer triggered the 15 minute timer? |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:53:00 -
[38] - Quote
Remove Dronebay from the Titan and Dreadnought sucks also that the DD dont work on Sub-Caps ... ppff ... F*** O**
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
a Citadel Torpedo vs a Hurricane dont work. or a Siege Autocanon vs. Hurricane also dont work.
at the moment there are only Drones to fight them.
so this realy realy sucks ! |
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
305
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:54:00 -
[39] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:CCP Tallest is now even taller.
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!! CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |
|
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
858
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:54:00 -
[40] - Quote
Great blog. I do have one gripe, and it's fairly significant: Remote tracking links must not be allowed to boost a Titan's tracking.
As it stands now, a Titan can use its guns to take out the very Hictors who are supposed to be tackling it with no impact on its full-tank fit due to tracking links. In Goonswarm, we often fit remote links on our carriers and supercarriers, and use them to turn our Titans into subcap-blenders.
If Titans could not receive remote tracking boosts, should they want to try to shoot subcaps down, they would have to sacrifice some of their tank in order to do so. |
|
|
GM Homonoia
Game Masters C C P Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:54:00 -
[41] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
The awesome weapon of a buddy in a ship that can hit those targets. GM Homonoia | Info Group | Game Master |
|
St Mio
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
87
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:55:00 -
[42] - Quote
|
WarFireV
The Maverick Navy Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:55:00 -
[43] - Quote
I think you missed the point with Titans, doomsday was never a major problem. It's the fact that they can be ganked fit(Using officer tracking computers, and officer tracking enhancers) and pretty much kill any ship in two shots no matter what with capital turrets.
Still though this is prertty good, just make sure you look into what I posted above or you will just end up with Titan blobs. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:56:00 -
[44] - Quote
Excellent.
Let the map burn. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Di Mulle
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:56:00 -
[45] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:Remove Dronebay from the Titan and Dreadnought sucks also that the DD dont work on Sub-Caps ... ppff ... F*** O**
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
Like other ships of your fleet, you know.
CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:57:00 -
[46] - Quote
WarFireV wrote:I think you missed the point with Titans, doomsday was never a major problem. It's the fact that they can be ganked fit(Using officer tracking computers, and officer tracking enhancers) and pretty much kill any ship in two shots no matter what with capital turrets.
Still though this is prertty good, just make sure you look into what I posted above or you will just end up with Titan blobs.
The DD was (still is) a major problem, but yeah I think they should have nerfed tracking somewhat.
That said if he's serious about ongoing balance reviews, then we can see how this plays out on the battlefield. If it turns that that Titans not being able to clear the field of logis in the first 10 minutes of a fight tips the balance, then fair enough. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Amsterdam Conversations
Cheesecake Starshine
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:58:00 -
[47] - Quote
I really like everything, except for one thing:
Moms will still be overpowered. They will own dreads like they used to. Instead of 70m EHP they'll have 50m EHP, which is still WAY too much.
Moms should not have titan EHP and damage.
You'll see a sudden surge of dreadnought use, which will mostly get owned by moms, then no one will use dreads again.
Also: Nerf fighter speed please? This is the real reason why they're so strong against subcaps. |
Kozmic
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:00:00 -
[48] - Quote
Good stuff. About time.. |
Shadoo
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:00:00 -
[49] - Quote
The only change that was needed -- was the logoff timer, now that even the biggest whiners had figured out how to force the enemy to avoid committing supercaps without support fleet.
So, good change with logoff timer.
The ehp reduction will not work the way you intended. It will simply encourage more people to move to Titans and ensure whoever has more titans will always win the engagement since no one will want to risk third of their fleet being wiped by DDs on the first jump in.
There was nothing wrong with supercapital EHP, except it was hard to kill them in a lagged system with the logoff timer. All your EHP reduction now does is make titans even more king than before. Was this your intention?
Dronebays -- fine, but I'd consider allowing every class of a supercarrier to store one flight of BOTH fighters and fighter bombers.
Siege Timer -- good, will make small ninja stuff viable.
ECM Burst -- good, seemed like a bug to begin with tbh.
I would have much rather personally seen a complete redesign of the supercapital shipclass and taken them off the battlefield. This one will simply buy you a bit of time, without really addressing the issue at all. It will stealth boost titans, and make entities who can regularly field 30+ of them more overpowered than before.
The longer you prolong the titan issue, the bigger problem you face when you finally face up to the fact they need a no-combat role and you have to somehow make 2k+ titan accounts worthwile in a non-combat role. |
Vicar2008
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:00:00 -
[50] - Quote
"To fix this, we are changing the superweapon so that it cannot fire upon sub-capital ships"
Maybe I picking this up wrong, but no matter the Titans tracking it still wont be able to kill anything unless it huge ass big Capital size and above...... |
|
Zhentar
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:01:00 -
[51] - Quote
2 things to adjust for SC drones:
1) Full flights of both bombers and fighters. If that's all we get, we should at the very least be able to carry a flight of each.
2) Some way for SC's to attack POS's. |
jm24
CRICE Corp Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:01:00 -
[52] - Quote
I would like to understand the logic behind ECM Invulnerability on ship as this has been excluded from the changes.
Certain friendly type ECM, notable RSB and Tracking Links work on these ships. Should it not be either to allow ECM at all, or not at all? Allowing a favourable subset of ECM to these ship classes hardly seems to be working as intended. Could there be more light shed on this oversight? |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:04:00 -
[53] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Excellent.
Let the map burn.
That's quite short-sighted. Supers will be doing (nearly) same damage as they do today. The only difference is they won't engage subcaps, and those superblobs might be more likely (than they used to) too. What differs is they might carry a subcap fleet with them. Subcap fleet can be cynoed around with the superblob, using bridges.
So in essence, for blobs and powerblocs, this is no nerf. This is a nerf to smaller alliances and/or groups. Especially the removal or regular drones, which is going to make non-blob moving alot more dangerous.
This game just goes more into a blob-game than ever, and looking at the map.. well it might not burn, as you say, it's more likely it'll stay stagnant than before these changes. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Raquel Smith
Freedom-Technologies The Jagged Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:04:00 -
[54] - Quote
I have to echo the thoughts to add fighter and fighter bomber signature resolution as a penalty to the appropriate ships. It seems to impose an unnecessary penalty to carriers. |
Mekia Buelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:04:00 -
[55] - Quote
So umm no capital buffs? |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:04:00 -
[56] - Quote
I think a normal drone bay for titans and Dreads is mandatory
and a tracking or what ever bonus for the normal capital weapons
Turrets and Missles |
fencejumper
Serenity Engineering and Transport Company Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:06:00 -
[57] - Quote
So with your 20% HP reductions, the hel now gets 21mil ehp, which is nearly 20% less then the nyx.
With your removal of normal drone bays, it makes my hel's logistical uses null, as i wont have any rep drones. so you might as well change the bonus of the hel from 5% remote armor/shield reps to a 5% shield hitpoint bonus. which would bring it closer to a nyx, while still being horribly short. |
Hiram Alexander
Capital Enrichment Services
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:06:00 -
[58] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:Great blog. I do have one gripe, and it's fairly significant: Remote tracking links must not be allowed to boost a Titan's tracking.
As it stands now, a Titan can use its guns to take out the very Hictors who are supposed to be tackling it with no impact on its full-tank fit due to tracking links. In Goonswarm, we often fit remote links on our carriers and supercarriers, and use them to turn our Titans into subcap-blenders.
If Titans could not receive remote tracking boosts, should they want to try to shoot subcaps down, they would have to sacrifice some of their tank in order to do so. Amen |
Chruker
Universe 9
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:06:00 -
[59] - Quote
How about renaming the supercarrier's Drone Bay to Fighter Bay |
Cronyx Ravage
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:07:00 -
[60] - Quote
Can someone explain why, exactly, it makes sense for fighters to have a hard time shooting subcaps? Theyre *fighters*, right? With a pilot inside. It would be like a Viper Mk.2 having a hard time shooting something the size of Colonial One, as far as cruisers go, a heavy raider to relate to frigates, or a frakin Basestar to relate to battleships. Making them only effective against capitals is like saying Vipers are only effective against Hiveships, Resurection hubs, or colony ships. Or a more real world example, F-16s are only effective against.... What? Something the size of an Independence Day city destroyer? (there is no real world exame for this size difference) |
|
Nomad I
University of Caille Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:07:00 -
[61] - Quote
Excellent! |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:07:00 -
[62] - Quote
GM Homonoia wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote:
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
The awesome weapon of a buddy in a ship that can hit those targets. Or, you know, you can fit a large or medium gun on your dreadnought, as those were designed to attack those targets. /me hides from the rain of rotten tomatoes.
Very smart idea, nerf something for blob. Muahaha |
Bring Stabity
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:07:00 -
[63] - Quote
Please fix shield supercaps, thanks |
Unjust Arbiter
Two Brothers Mining Corp. GIANTSBANE.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:07:00 -
[64] - Quote
As a Capital pilot, I approve of this Dev Blog. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
476
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:08:00 -
[65] - Quote
Cronyx Ravage wrote:Can someone explain why, exactly, it makes sense for fighters to have a hard time shooting subcaps? Theyre *fighters*, right? With a pilot inside. It would be like a Viper Mk.2 having a hard time shooting something the size of Colonial One, as far as cruisers go, a heavy raider to relate to frigates, or a frakin Basestar to relate to battleships. Making them only effective against capitals is like saying Vipers are only effective against Hiveships, Resurection hubs, or colony ships. Or a more real world example, F-16s are only effective against.... What? Something the size of an Independence Day city destroyer? (there is no real world exame for this size difference)
game balance > what the names of things sound like they should do |
Kel'taith
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:09:00 -
[66] - Quote
So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes. |
Proximus Altima
Un4seen Development True Reign
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:09:00 -
[67] - Quote
I'm very excited to see the ship balancing plans by CCP. It will be fun to see what bomber fleets can do against all those fighters and fighter bombers now. I do also have to agree with The Mittanni on his point about remote tracking links and echo his concerns. |
adopt
We Need A Home
40
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:10:00 -
[68] - Quote
Suddenly, small gang and dread warfare returns. Shadoo > Always remember to fit Cynosural Field Generator I, have 450 Liquid Ozone in your cargo and convo a friendly Pandemic Legion member if you have a capital or super capital ship tackled. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:10:00 -
[69] - Quote
Bring Stabity wrote:Please fix shield supercaps, thanks
this also
Boost the Hel !!! there have about 20-25% less EHP then the Nyx
so what is with this balancing ?
|
Bring Stabity
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:10:00 -
[70] - Quote
Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes.
i believe your ceo flies a single dic, this is a change you should like |
|
Sir HappyPants
Phantom Squad Atlas.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:11:00 -
[71] - Quote
So with the fighter nerf, normal carriers are pretty useless now? Especially the thanny with a bonus to fighter damage and not a bonus to reps.
I agree with Shadoo. Changing log off mechanics is good. Rest is not going to have the results CCP is looking for.
Also, allow 20 fighters and 20 Fighter Bombers in the drone bay of a super. Two full flights is only logical (imho). Member of the #TweetFleet@thisurlnotfound |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
87
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:11:00 -
[72] - Quote
Has anyone run the numbers on the fighter change? Einherjis orbit with 300m/s at 1km. With a tracking speed of 0.125, the new sig res means they now do zero damage against even a stationary BS. Is this intentional? |
farraguat
Caucasian Culture Club Narwhals Ate My Duck
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:11:00 -
[73] - Quote
completely ******* supercarriers in the ass. Only using fighters and fighter-bombers thats ******* ******** |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
476
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:11:00 -
[74] - Quote
Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes. "a smartbomb"
"someone, anywhere, who likes you enough to shoot a single dictor in the 23 hours (probably actually forever as I bet it can't beat shield regen) it takes to grind down an SC" |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:12:00 -
[75] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Malcanis wrote:Excellent.
Let the map burn. That's quite short-sighted. Supers will be doing (nearly) same damage as they do today. The only difference is they won't engage subcaps, and those superblobs might be more likely (than they used to) too. What differs is they might carry a subcap fleet with them. Subcap fleet can be cynoed around with the superblob, using bridges. So in essence, for blobs and powerblocs, this is no nerf. This is a nerf to smaller alliances and/or groups. Especially the removal or regular drones, which is going to make non-blob moving alot more dangerous. This game just goes more into a blob-game than ever, and looking at the map.. well it might not burn, as you say, it's more likely it'll stay stagnant than before these changes.
I'm in a smaller alliance. We're pretty happy about these changes. The DD change is the big deal, with the log-off change close behind. We already have doctrine to deal with supercarriers, and the drone bay changes will only make that easier. Likewise, we have doctrine prepared to deal with titans that can't DD subcaps.
if CCP actually deploy changes, we anticipate a merry winter of boat-violence amongst our neighbours. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:13:00 -
[76] - Quote
farraguat wrote:completely ******* supercarriers in the ass. Only using fighters and fighter-bombers thats ******* ********
Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes.
Yes ... SCs now are only to shoot in iHubs / TCU / Stations
so no more POS Shooting or other things ... and a titan has no chance to kill a single DIC/HIC that he tackled
why ?? we have no more Medium / Heavy / Sentry Drones left
This REALY SUCKS !!!
GREAT WORK F*** CCP |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:13:00 -
[77] - Quote
Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo?
Only if the SC is "brave" enough to log off vs a single dictor.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:14:00 -
[78] - Quote
After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
476
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:15:00 -
[79] - Quote
xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary?
preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat |
Sir HappyPants
Phantom Squad Atlas.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:16:00 -
[80] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? Only if the SC is "brave" enough to log off vs a single dictor.
Nope... Fighter nerf means the SC would never hit the dic/hic no matter how long both parties are logged in. Also safe to assume that the dic/hic would be smart enough to stay outta smartbomb range. Member of the #TweetFleet@thisurlnotfound |
|
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:17:00 -
[81] - Quote
Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:Mittani and the rest of the "supercap blob" whiners can go cry themselves to sleep while smart individuals can make use of existing tactics to counter supercap blobs
I recommend you to look up "Welpfleet" and the distribution of supers; it would be nice if you had a clue before posting.
|
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:17:00 -
[82] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:Has anyone run the numbers on the fighter change? Einherjis orbit with 300m/s at 1km. With a tracking speed of 0.125, the new sig res means they now do zero damage against even a stationary BS. Is this intentional?
Also, this? |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:17:00 -
[83] - Quote
Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers. But I might be a bit biased |
cBOLTSON
Star Frontiers BricK sQuAD.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:17:00 -
[84] - Quote
Raquel Smith wrote:I have to echo the thoughts to add fighter and fighter bomber signature resolution as a penalty to the appropriate ships. It seems to impose an unnecessary penalty to carriers.
I agree. I like the changes for the most part, I do definatly still think you will need to tweek things as this all progresses.
I honestly dont like the fighter changes however. Also removing drones full stop from dreads seems a bad idea.
|
Kel'taith
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:19:00 -
[85] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes. "a smartbomb" "someone, anywhere, who likes you enough to shoot a single dictor in the 23 hours (probably actually forever as I bet it can't beat shield regen) it takes to grind down an SC"
Even a ******** dictor pilot can orbit out of range of a smartbomb. |
Emmerik
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:19:00 -
[86] - Quote
is there going to be a range buff on the fighers (bombers) as in; so they can hit POS ?
(https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19838) |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
167
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:20:00 -
[87] - Quote
This thread made my day =)
Now I want to hear about the hybrid buff! |
KayTwoEx
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:20:00 -
[88] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers. But I might be a bit biased They didnt say that regular Carriers cant use normal drones anymore.
Quote:In fact, we found that drones on capital ships in general to be detrimental to the way fleet fights should work. If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier. Supercarriers will now have a smaller drone bay and will only be able to put fighters and fighter bombers in it. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:20:00 -
[89] - Quote
Kel'taith wrote:Weaselior wrote:Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes. "a smartbomb" "someone, anywhere, who likes you enough to shoot a single dictor in the 23 hours (probably actually forever as I bet it can't beat shield regen) it takes to grind down an SC" Even a ******** dictor pilot can orbit out of range of a smartbomb.
make the Smartbomb range up to 20-30km :-))) and more DPS on smartbombs
|
Sakaali
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:20:00 -
[90] - Quote
1) Without sentry drones supercarriers are unable to attack POS. Is this intentional then?
2) Will anything be done about being able to use remote tracking links on titans? If capitals are not intended to fight subcaps it seems like this should be addressed. |
|
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:21:00 -
[91] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat
Bingo. That is exactly why. |
|
Cedric deBouilard
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:21:00 -
[92] - Quote
Quote:Fighters
- Increase signature resolution to 400
that's x4 increase from 100 to 400. isn't that a bit too much? 250-300 is ok. but 400 is overkill. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
477
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:21:00 -
[93] - Quote
Kel'taith wrote:Weaselior wrote:Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes. "a smartbomb" "someone, anywhere, who likes you enough to shoot a single dictor in the 23 hours (probably actually forever as I bet it can't beat shield regen) it takes to grind down an SC" Even a ******** dictor pilot can orbit out of range of a smartbomb.
im gonna guess the 'friends' thing didn't go well for you either |
Raptor217
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:21:00 -
[94] - Quote
The only thing i can think of that still needs to be implemented is a tracking bonus while dreads are in siege. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:22:00 -
[95] - Quote
If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter
Keep an eye out for the blogs. |
|
Helothane
Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:22:00 -
[96] - Quote
Perhaps someone can explain to me how these changes change the fact that dreads are underutilized today? At best all they are good for now is shooting structures, for which SCs are far better suited. Cutting siege mode timer down by half I guess allows for some quicker attacks on smaller POSs, but they are still sitting ducks in a fight with other capitals. If dreads are meant to be used against other capitals, they will need a lot more help. Increasing the tracking of the weapons themselves will just make Titan boosted tracking even more of an issue, so it would need to be something inherent to the Dread class itself.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:22:00 -
[97] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Misanth wrote:Malcanis wrote:Excellent.
Let the map burn. That's quite short-sighted. Supers will be doing (nearly) same damage as they do today. The only difference is they won't engage subcaps, and those superblobs might be more likely (than they used to) too. What differs is they might carry a subcap fleet with them. Subcap fleet can be cynoed around with the superblob, using bridges. So in essence, for blobs and powerblocs, this is no nerf. This is a nerf to smaller alliances and/or groups. Especially the removal or regular drones, which is going to make non-blob moving alot more dangerous. This game just goes more into a blob-game than ever, and looking at the map.. well it might not burn, as you say, it's more likely it'll stay stagnant than before these changes. I'm in a smaller alliance. We're pretty happy about these changes. The DD change is the big deal, with the log-off change close behind. We already have doctrine to deal with supercarriers, and the drone bay changes will only make that easier. Likewise, we have doctrine prepared to deal with titans that can't DD subcaps. if CCP actually deploy changes, we anticipate a merry winter of boat-violence amongst our neighbours.
I know alot of people from your alliance since the short time I was in Pure. I considering your alliance another blobby powerbloc, fyi. Most of your "roams" is dozens/tens of people, alot of the people that used to fly ceptors now fly supers, etc. Your alliance is a perfect example of people who used to be good small scale (5-10 man) roaming pvpers, who now turned into a super-blob.
Even tho yes, you're not big compared to the biggest blobs, but compared to young alliance who wants to move out to nullsec, alliance like your own will be boosted by these changes and even less likely to lose their space to younger competition. It's not like when Triumvirate used smaller blobs and harrassed Pure in their homeland, or when Pure roaming gangs did it against whoever. Nowadays smaller alliance just can't roam like we used to, and you guys, and your supers, are part of the problem. And these changes did nothing at all, to help. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
WarFireV
The Maverick Navy Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:23:00 -
[98] - Quote
Sakaali wrote:1) Without sentry drones supercarriers are unable to attack POS. Is this intentional then?.
Then use dreads dumby :P |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:23:00 -
[99] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Weaselior wrote:xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat Bingo. That is exactly why.
why you not only make the DroneBay smaller ??
but remove normal drones are realy sucks
|
Sakaali
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:23:00 -
[100] - Quote
Also, has anyone looked at the math of giving the moros a rate of fire bonus? It seems like with the way hybrids currently function its going to be brutal on its cap usage. |
|
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:24:00 -
[101] - Quote
Cedric deBouilard wrote:Quote:Fighters
- Increase signature resolution to 400
that's x4 increase from 100 to 400. isn't that a bit too much? 250-300 is ok. but 400 is overkill.
Yeah this is a little extreme. It relegates fighters to fighting capitals. And in that situation, fighterbombers are going to be preferable (for supercarriers at least). This needs a slight change so that Carriers are still able to hit BS and (maybe) battlecruisers. |
Jackk Hammer
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:25:00 -
[102] - Quote
Cedric deBouilard wrote:Quote:Fighters
- Increase signature resolution to 400
that's x4 increase from 100 to 400. isn't that a bit too much? 250-300 is ok. but 400 is overkill.
It's actually 125 but I would be grateful for any nerd who can work out if this means thanatos won't be good for doing sanctums anymore. |
Ilarra
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:25:00 -
[103] - Quote
Are there any plans to bring the leviathan up to speed with the turret dreads for anything other than shooting structures? The explosion radius/velocity of the citadel cruises/torps missiles is so large that it doesn't do full damage against anything smaller than a structure, and there are no remote booster modules for missiles like there are for tracking on the turret titans.
With the DD no longer being able to be fired against sub-capitals that further nerfs its usefulness in fleet battles, making it clearly an inferior choice compared to the other three. This is not even considering the fact that the shield bonus isn't instant, thus requiring a ton of remote rep capability every single time the ship jumps in order to get the benefit of the bonus.
(oh god, such a dumb decision settling on a lev expecting the titans to be brought roughly in line with each other) |
Kabaos
Capital Group Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:25:00 -
[104] - Quote
You are crazy?
Mothership without small,medium and large drones.. Yes , eve goes down.. |
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:25:00 -
[105] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Malcanis wrote:Misanth wrote:Malcanis wrote:Excellent.
Let the map burn. That's quite short-sighted. Supers will be doing (nearly) same damage as they do today. The only difference is they won't engage subcaps, and those superblobs might be more likely (than they used to) too. What differs is they might carry a subcap fleet with them. Subcap fleet can be cynoed around with the superblob, using bridges. So in essence, for blobs and powerblocs, this is no nerf. This is a nerf to smaller alliances and/or groups. Especially the removal or regular drones, which is going to make non-blob moving alot more dangerous. This game just goes more into a blob-game than ever, and looking at the map.. well it might not burn, as you say, it's more likely it'll stay stagnant than before these changes. I'm in a smaller alliance. We're pretty happy about these changes. The DD change is the big deal, with the log-off change close behind. We already have doctrine to deal with supercarriers, and the drone bay changes will only make that easier. Likewise, we have doctrine prepared to deal with titans that can't DD subcaps. if CCP actually deploy changes, we anticipate a merry winter of boat-violence amongst our neighbours. I know alot of people from your alliance since the short time I was in Pure. I considering your alliance another blobby powerbloc, fyi. Most of your "roams" is dozens/tens of people, alot of the people that used to fly ceptors now fly supers, etc. Your alliance is a perfect example of people who used to be good small scale (5-10 man) roaming pvpers, who now turned into a super-blob. Even tho yes, you're not big compared to the biggest blobs, but compared to young alliance who wants to move out to nullsec, alliance like your own will be boosted by these changes and even less likely to lose their space to younger competition. It's not like when Triumvirate used smaller blobs and harrassed Pure in their homeland, or when Pure roaming gangs did it against whoever. Nowadays smaller alliance just can't roam like we used to, and you guys, and your supers, are part of the problem. And these changes did nothing at all, to help.
You're the problem, not the blobs. More exactly, your lack of ingenuity. |
Mekia Buelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:26:00 -
[106] - Quote
You better post them "DAMN" FAST YOU HEAR ME?
CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs.
|
Sakaali
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:26:00 -
[107] - Quote
Do you at all feel that the 20% reduction in shields/armor may be too much when considered in addition to the logoff mechanic change? This seems a bit harsh for titans at least. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
169
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:27:00 -
[108] - Quote
If you can't afford losing a ship, you should not be flying it.
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:27:00 -
[109] - Quote
You need to extend that all remote ewar does not work for them as well like tracking links and sensor boosters. If you don't do this you can still vaporize sub capital fleets with your titans.-á
For example, you can drop armor tanked triage carriers that remote sensor boost and tracking link an Erebus or Rag and one shot sub caps as fast as the turrets cycle. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:27:00 -
[110] - Quote
Ilarra wrote:Are there any plans to bring the leviathan up to speed with the turret dreads for anything other than shooting structures? The explosion radius/velocity of the citadel cruises/torps missiles is so large that it doesn't do full damage against anything smaller than a structure, and there are no remote booster modules for missiles like there are for tracking on the turret titans.
With the DD no longer being able to be fired against sub-capitals that further nerfs its usefulness in fleet battles, making it clearly an inferior choice compared to the other three. This is not even considering the fact that the shield bonus isn't instant, thus requiring a ton of remote rep capability every single time the ship jumps in order to get the benefit of the bonus.
(oh god, such a dumb decision settling on a lev expecting the titans to be brought roughly in line with each other)
Signed
|
|
Tokino Kaalakiota
Kaalakiota Logistical Serivces
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:28:00 -
[111] - Quote
David Carel wrote:Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:Mittani and the rest of the "supercap blob" whiners can go cry themselves to sleep while smart individuals can make use of existing tactics to counter supercap blobs I recommend you to look up "Welpfleet" and the distribution of supers; it would be nice if you had a clue before posting.
I am not referring to "welpfleet" and I am quite aware that your alliance currently (appears to) lack the ability to deploy any sort of supercap force.
As a previous/current owner of MULTIPLE personal supercaps, I would encourage you to take your own advice, and get a clue before posting.
Welpfleet is no counter; it's just a way for goons to leverage their numbers majority in cheap ships to apply dps. If you look at some of the tactics RnK have used in the past to destroy supercarrier/carrier fleets in the past you'd maybe understand what I'm saying. (They beat a FA/WIdawt supercarrier/carrier gang that more than outnumbered them in supercarriers/carriers alone, killing 1 SC and several carriers, without ANY caps/scaps of their own.)
tl;dr - Learn more about game mechanics before you go all bitter.
-Tokino/Lords |
chunorris
Jabonosos
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:28:00 -
[112] - Quote
In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance.
Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers
Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.
|
SloMoJoe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:29:00 -
[113] - Quote
Nerfing the Moros drone bay and applying that bonus to a rate of fire bonus without adjusting the cap usage of hybrid guns isn't such a great trade. Here's hoping the rumored hybrid re-balance straitens this out. |
Joshua Samson
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:29:00 -
[114] - Quote
So your supercarrier can get tackled by a single HIC and its hard to get out. Well tough **** cupcake, how about you bring that support that should go with your massive capital?
Awesome changes. Only thing i would also like to see is titan gun tracking nerf and a cyno spin-up timer thingy.
|
Fuujin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:29:00 -
[115] - Quote
I like the changes overall; I think giving carriers a sig buff to fighters as a role bonus might be the best option to balance them out.
Out of the changes that remain to be made, two in particular stand out: 1: tracking links on supercapitals (and dreads) make them very powerful agains the very things that this rebalance was intended to make them impotent against. It's a loophole, and one that will be abused.
2: Shield-tanking ships in general (and especially pronounced on supercapitals) have gang bonuses unfairly applied to them. Armor gang bonuses are applied immediately and allow for jumping without concern. Shield tankers have to regenerate their gang bonuses and need to do so every single time they jump through a gate or cyno. This means the effective HP of shield tankers is far less than their armor brethern--which is compounded even further by the slave implant set. Change the bonus application behavior. |
Chee
hirr Morsus Mihi
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:29:00 -
[116] - Quote
Please fix slavesets to no longer give bonus to supercaps. In an EHP game this buff cannot be overlooked in a patch. Jump distance would be 7.876 lightyears but your jump drive only allows for jumps within 7.875 lightyears. |
Wen Jaibao
Aperture Harmonics K162
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:30:00 -
[117] - Quote
So now fighters are even more useless for normal carriers. Are you planning on removing the dronebay from normal carriers too, or are they staying as is? |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
479
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:30:00 -
[118] - Quote
chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.
actually balance is precisely that, that the counter to a supercarrier fleet is something other than "a bigger supercarrier fleet" |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
92
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:30:00 -
[119] - Quote
Quote:We are increasing the signature resolution on fighters so that they deal less damage to smaller targets. Sanctum stealth nerf |
Lord Okinaba
Zandathorn Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:31:00 -
[120] - Quote
Lovely stuff. |
|
Emmerik
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:31:00 -
[121] - Quote
Fuujin wrote:
2: Shield-tanking ships in general (and especially pronounced on supercapitals) have gang bonuses unfairly applied to them. Armor gang bonuses are applied immediately and allow for jumping without concern. Shield tankers have to regenerate their gang bonuses and need to do so every single time they jump through a gate or cyno. This means the effective HP of shield tankers is far less than their armor brethern--which is compounded even further by the slave implant set. Change the bonus application behavior.
Or give us something like a Shield/Cap implant set, so boost it a little |
Helothane
Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:31:00 -
[122] - Quote
400m is the resolution of all 'Large' turret weapons. Those appear to work just fine on BS and even BC-sized NPC ships, so I don't see why fighters should not still be effective in running sanctums. Not as effective as they have been, but still effective. |
Royaldo
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:31:00 -
[123] - Quote
I dont quite get the nerf to carriers. The rest seems ok. |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
866
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:31:00 -
[124] - Quote
chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.
Excuse me sir, but the forums have taught me that the CSM is a completely powerless entity and that the Chairmanship is a title without meaning.
Try to keep up! |
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:32:00 -
[125] - Quote
SloMoJoe wrote:Nerfing the Moros drone bay and applying that bonus to a rate of fire bonus without adjusting the cap usage of hybrid guns isn't such a great trade. Here's hoping the rumored hybrid re-balance straitens this out.
To be fair they haven't announced the hybrid rebalance yet in detail. I'll save judgment till then on this. |
Xue Slick
The Damned Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:33:00 -
[126] - Quote
Hi CCP,
Interesting changes...
I like the changes to Dread, glad to see them get a boost. Titans, meh, still no incentive for me to sub titan pilot again. What about a HP buff to the Dreads? The reason people don't use them is because of the Titan DDs, not the siege timers.
Maybe rather than remove all drones from Super Carriers, leave everything as is, just double the drone bandwidth of fighter bombers. This way you can only launch 10 which effectively halves the dps and saves your servers from the load monster. As said above, super carriers are often used by smaller alliance for small fights, now they going to be practically useless.
This is not really a change more then a massive nerf...
My 5c. |
Ilarra
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:33:00 -
[127] - Quote
chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.
Perhaps instead of bringing only supercarriers to a fight against a bunch of hurricanes, you might consider mixing in some other kinds of ships that are better capable of dealing with the hurricanes? One might even surmise that the developers are encouraging fleets to bring a mix of different ship classes, such that winning every engagement isn't as simple as "bring a crapton of supercaps." |
Cynthia Ysolde
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:34:00 -
[128] - Quote
well played ccp. These are all good changes. I am slightly worried about the Moros cap problem, and there is the matter of Minmatar supercaps. After this change a Hel will be in the same EHP range as an archon almost. Ragnoroks will not have much more HP.
Please nerf Minmatar supercaps slightly less, as they were already horribly underpowered as far as ehp, dps, and pretty much any relevant metric. |
DangerosoDavo
EVE Is Dead
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:34:00 -
[129] - Quote
CCP did a good job here, i see alot of whiners complaining that supers are still good... yeah they are but not really vs sub caps, they are good anti-capitals which i believe is what they are designed for.
There is no point making super carrier completely useless, now they are vulnerable to subcaps and log off is fixed to they are vulnerable in a big way. taking scs out of the game totally would be a bad choice. now there is much more room for tactics on the battlefield. so stop whining thats what eve is about. |
FlameOfSurvival
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:35:00 -
[130] - Quote
I like the changes but it's really sad that the Titans get the -20% hit too
I was sure the EHP span between scaps/titans will now increase :/ |
|
BrokenBC
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:35:00 -
[131] - Quote
2 cains insta popped by a titan without using DD http://www.fatal-ascension.com/killboard/?a=kill_related&kll_id=48540
copy past link.This forum breaks it. |
Bienator II
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:35:00 -
[132] - Quote
is there an upgrade plan for all those cap pilots which have now to switch from analog modem to a DSL connection? :) You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:36:00 -
[133] - Quote
Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:I am not referring to "welpfleet" and I am quite aware that your alliance currently (appears to) lack the ability to deploy any sort of supercap force.
You obviously have no clue what you're talking about - we can field dozens at the drop of a hat.
Welpfleet works because the ships are cheap and we can get 200+ on the field pretty quickly. We are not RnK. |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:36:00 -
[134] - Quote
Helothane wrote:400m is the resolution of all 'Large' turret weapons. Those appear to work just fine on BS and even BC-sized NPC ships, so I don't see why fighters should not still be effective in running sanctums. Not as effective as they have been, but still effective. Because Fighters orbit at 1km, meaning their own orbit speed hurts their gun hit chance. With 0.125 tracking, you need to go about 250m/s at 1km to reduce damage to close to 0 dps - fighters orbit at 300m/s, meaning their damage output will be almost nonexistent. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:36:00 -
[135] - Quote
David Carel wrote:You're the problem, not the blobs. More exactly, your lack of ingenuity.
You're cute. Can I keep you? Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
ArchenTheGreat
Pulsar Nebulah Army of Lovers.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:37:00 -
[136] - Quote
chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance.
Paper, rock, scissors. You counter supercarrier fleet with sub-cap fleet. It should work like that. It's like a battleship that can be killed by a frigate. |
steave435
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:37:00 -
[137] - Quote
Yeah, the fighter nerf combined with the drone bay nerf is too much. Capitals need to be able to affect the sub capital fight for there to be any point in fielding them other then reinforcing stuff, and if there's no point in being the first to deploy caps, neither side will do it since the other side can just ignore them if they don't have a larger capital force themselves, or kill them if they do. If these changes go trough, the only thing worth dropping in would be a small number of triage carriers since any other type won't lock in time, and with fighter tracking being nerfed to less then a third of what it used to be, the carriers won't be able to do any damage to the sub caps either.
Keep the drone bays at their current sizes while limiting supers to only fielding fighters and fighter bombers without touching the tracking and see how it goes. If it's still too much, considering that fighters orbit in smartbomb range and the supers can't spit out endless streams of them like they can with the normal drones they have now, give supers a penalty to fighter tracking or damage that doesn't touch regular carriers (they're already balanced) at that point.
These ships are very expensive, skill intensive and requires a dedicated pilot to fly them, so please be careful and take small steps with this so you don't turn them back into the POS ornaments that they used to be. |
Raid'En
Apprentice Innovations
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:37:00 -
[138] - Quote
ovenproofjet wrote:You kinda just nerfed the standard carrier there with the change to the fighter sensor res, carriers are gonna have trouble doing what you say here: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier"
Perhaps add the sensor res reduction as a penalty to supercarriers so as to avoid a knock on effect on the ordinarty carrier
Other wise good changes, especially to the Dreads, siege timer change is long overdue this. don't nerf the normal carriers with supercarriers
also pretty surprised by the size of the change on SC / titans, didn't though it would go this far. and if remote tracking still allow them to kill small targets, then yeah, that shoul also be nerfed.
also there something that would be nice, but hard to do ; make some stats scale with the number of super on the field, as this is to lower the power of super when there are lots of them on the field, while they aren't that op on small numbers. for example, the HP nerf only apply if X SC/titans are on field |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:37:00 -
[139] - Quote
Xue Slick wrote:Hi CCP,
Interesting changes...
I like the changes to Dread, glad to see them get a boost. Titans, meh, still no incentive for me to sub titan pilot again. What about a HP buff to the Dreads? The reason people don't use them is because of the Titan DDs, not the siege timers.
Maybe rather than remove all drones from Super Carriers, leave everything as is, just double the drone bandwidth of fighter bombers. This way you can only launch 10 which effectively halves the dps and saves your servers from the load monster. As said above, super carriers are often used by smaller alliance for small fights, now they going to be practically useless.
This is not really a change more then a massive nerf...
My 5c.
This.
|
Mekia Buelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:37:00 -
[140] - Quote
So with the fighter chances that means that wont be able to HIT npc battleships? That apply`s to the titan weapons as well or? |
|
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
479
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:37:00 -
[141] - Quote
I am vaugely suspicious that dreads will still have any role with this change. Their dps is still nothing impressive and they're made of paper compared to supercap fleets: their sole use is sieging pos (which SC's can't touch). They're the wrong answer for a hub or a station, and I think that's a mistake. Their role now is pretty much glass cannons, but they're not damaging enough to fill that role well. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:38:00 -
[142] - Quote
chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.
A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
FlameOfSurvival
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:39:00 -
[143] - Quote
Can we get Triage modules on supercaps? plz plz plz :D |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
479
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:40:00 -
[144] - Quote
obviously with the 5m siege timer they can ninja towers better but that's a sort of niche role and not one that really justifies the training: it's now just something people who got the skills when they were useful will use on rare occasions |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:40:00 -
[145] - Quote
Misanth wrote:A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase.
Everything has to be a conspiracy to you morons, doesn't it? |
Raivi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:40:00 -
[146] - Quote
Good changes. Possibly haven't gone far enough, but as long as you guys will iterate on them as needed this is the way to go.
The logoffski change is spectacular, will go a huge way towards fixing the problems with supercaps. |
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:41:00 -
[147] - Quote
Raid'En wrote:ovenproofjet wrote:You kinda just nerfed the standard carrier there with the change to the fighter sensor res, carriers are gonna have trouble doing what you say here: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier"
Perhaps add the sensor res reduction as a penalty to supercarriers so as to avoid a knock on effect on the ordinarty carrier
Other wise good changes, especially to the Dreads, siege timer change is long overdue this. don't nerf the normal carriers with supercarriers
Not empty quoting. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:41:00 -
[148] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:is there an upgrade plan for all those cap pilots which have now to switch from analog modem to a DSL connection? :)
People still analog modems? Don't think I seen one in fifteen years.. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:41:00 -
[149] - Quote
Misanth wrote:A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase.
This change was needed, to be perfectly honest. Super Capitals have been making EVE Online a worse game for ages by representing an absolute ultimate that is incredibly difficult to beat. The guys QQing about not being able to hotdrop with their super carriers to win smaller scale fights represent the problem these ships constitute to the strongest degree. If this is the kind of change that will drive you out of the game, good riddance.
To the rest of the players that left the game because of the utterly ludicrous power Super Capitals held over the battlefield, welcome back. |
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din Fatal Ascension
50
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:43:00 -
[150] - Quote
I like and welcome the changes, maybe they will need a little tuning later but good start.
As for dreads and tracking, fit tracking mods, think about fitting for the job you want tehm to do. Titans can track subcaps? Yes they should be able to, though at a worse and worse capability down to no chance of hitting frigates.
Supercarriers most definitely do need this nerf, anyone saying they dont clearly either A: has lots of them, or B: Has never seen them in action.
The end of logoffski: Awesome stuff. Can we have killmails for self destructed ships too please? Fine to have the modules all destroyed but at the end of the day the people shooting the ship actually killed it by forcing the pilot to choose self destruct, so it should be reflected in those pilots statistics. |
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
54
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:43:00 -
[151] - Quote
i think the term Doomsday needs to be scrapped and replaced with "Anti-capital Weapon" cos it no longer implies doomsday if it cant hit sub caps too |
Fonac
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:44:00 -
[152] - Quote
So am i the only one worried about SC's still dominating everything larger than Battleships?
It's nice that the log-off-ski is fixed, LONG overdue. I also like the fact that the ridiculous EHP of the SC's are being nerfed.
But, there it ends.
Why nerf the carriers even further? Fighters are hardly a problem against any fleet, the fact that you can field no less than 20 of them is. SC's needs to do less damage not just nerf their EHP. Am i the only one seeing a problem with a 50 million EHP, 8000 dps spewing monster?
Carriers are hardly fielded for anything but emergency suicide triage, for repping up dieing supers or trying to keep up an Ihub, not an actual engagement, and before you ask... Yes i own two of them and i can count on one hand how many times ive used they in combat.
After this we'll still have carriers and dreads being alphad to death in seconds, what good does it, to reduce a siege timer if you know you're going to die before the 5 minuts timer is up anyway.
Make dreads and carriers usefull, buff their EHP, i dont see why this change makes much of a matter, SC's will still dominate the field and still make dreads and carriers look like puppies.
Sorry for the grammar, and sorry for the cluttering of words and sentences, i'm extremely tired and just had a 16 hour shift.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:44:00 -
[153] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:I am vaugely suspicious that dreads will still have any role with this change. Their dps is still nothing impressive and they're made of paper compared to supercap fleets: their sole use is sieging pos (which SC's can't touch). They're the wrong answer for a hub or a station, and I think that's a mistake. Their role now is pretty much glass cannons, but they're not damaging enough to fill that role well.
Shoot POS. Supers won't. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Easley Thames
The Maverick Navy Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:44:00 -
[154] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs.
I just want to thank you for listening. I know there are going to be angry super-cap pilots who disagree, but these changes are a huge step forward in game balance.
Supers will go from being imbalanced pwn-mobiles to a powerful tool that has some obvious weaknesses when used without support.
This was the right thing to do. After all, even the Death Star had to launch a few TIE fighters to keep people away from the thermal exhaust port. Nothing in Eve should be too "safe," and the more ships blow up, the better.
Focusing on flying-in-space (FIS) is the single best decision you guys have made since Dominion, and I think this is only the first pay-off of CCP's internal shift in priorities.
The adjustments you guys made, especially to dreads and fighters, are really well thought-out and carefully tuned. I applaud your careful approach. Sometimes CCP has been a bit too heavy-handed, and luckily this is not that kind of change.
In particular, I think people are under-appreciating how amazing the log-off change is. A ship with aggression will never just "disappear" ever again while being shot-at. It makes me misty-eyed thinking about all the people who will die to small roaming gangs because they can't just "ctrl + Q" as soon as they get tackled.
Thanks CCP, and keep up the the current trend of good work. |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
146
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:45:00 -
[155] - Quote
These changes are interesting, but I hope that you guys continue to follow the situation afterwards and make sure that you are continuously make balancing changes if you see that you haven't gone far enough/have gone too far. |
Kari Trace
Nox Imperium
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:45:00 -
[156] - Quote
"...We are changing the logoff mechanics in such a way that as long as your enemies are actively engaged in fighting you, logging off is not going to save your ship...."
This, THIS! one statement: whoever did this understand `internet spaceships is serious business`. Whoever did this deserves to be in charge.
Or, |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:45:00 -
[157] - Quote
Andski wrote:Misanth wrote:A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase. Everything has to be a conspiracy to you morons, doesn't it?
Why so serious. U mad? Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Sanguine Sky
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:46:00 -
[158] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Weaselior wrote:xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat Bingo. That is exactly why.
There is a problem with is that Fighters and bombers are designed for two different roles. Essentially you are telling super pilots you can reinforce structures with your fighter bombers all day long and if a bunce of BS come you have 5 fighters to defend yourself with.
That's a stupid idea. They are SUPER captials. They should be capable of both fighting structures and subcap with correct types of drones. We all already know how well fighter bombers do against battleships.
The HP nerf seems doesn't make any sense. WIth the extention of the log off timer due to aggro you effectively answered the problem of capitals logging in combat. With the reduction in HP your just making our ships weaker.
Of all of these the only thing that make sense is the removal of regular drones. I'm not disagreeing with the log off timer change either, but overall I would say you are dropping the ball hard on this one. |
rodyas
The Scope Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:46:00 -
[159] - Quote
SloMoJoe wrote:Nerfing the Moros drone bay and applying that bonus to a rate of fire bonus without adjusting the cap usage of hybrid guns isn't such a great trade. Here's hoping the rumored hybrid re-balance straitens this out.
Yeah would be interesting if CCP takes away our drone dps so much, then decrease cap usage from guns. Forgot that the drones gave cap free dps to some ships. Would be annoying with no balance to that, or so. |
Aprudena Gist
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:46:00 -
[160] - Quote
Capital Turrets that titans and Dreadnoughts should not be a 400m sig radius it should be much larger they should not be doing full damage to battleships.
Also all pos modules should have their sig radiuses dramatically increased since they are designed to be sieged by capitals like the dreadnought it doesn't make any sense by the smaller guns have sig radius's as low as 125m. |
|
Cuisinar
The Circle White Noise.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:46:00 -
[161] - Quote
proud ? lol
ya proud to be doing goons bidding..
change by change, exactly as goons asked for, in the myriad of forum spam you mention .. so proudly BIASED |
chunorris
Jabonosos
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:47:00 -
[162] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want. Excuse me sir, but the forums have taught me that the CSM is a completely powerless entity and that the Chairmanship is a title without meaning. Try to keep up!
Shut up lier manipulator. Now you have what you wanted last 3 years. Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:47:00 -
[163] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Misanth wrote:A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase. This change was needed, to be perfectly honest. Super Capitals have been making EVE Online a worse game for ages by representing an absolute ultimate that is incredibly difficult to beat. The guys QQing about not being able to hotdrop with their super carriers to win smaller scale fights represent the worst of the problem these ships constitute, and they do it to the strongest degree. If this change that will drive you out of the game, good riddance to bad rubbish. To the rest of the players that left the game because of the utterly ludicrous power Super Capitals have held over the battlefield for the past two years, welcome back. To make these changes really stick though, the Titan tracking issue must be addressed alongside the extraordinary potency of slave implants. The slave set's bonuses should not apply to super capital ships, else the HP nerf simply will not have enough impact.
Lol you should read through my posting history before making stupid assumptions. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Micerinos
De Mairenas Followers
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:47:00 -
[164] - Quote
Yeahhh Welcome to hurricane online...... |
Sanguine Sky
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:48:00 -
[165] - Quote
Fonac wrote:So am i the only one worried about SC's still dominating everything larger than Battleships?
It's nice that the log-off-ski is fixed, LONG overdue. I also like the fact that the ridiculous EHP of the SC's are being nerfed.
But, there it ends.
Why nerf the carriers even further? Fighters are hardly a problem against any fleet, the fact that you can field no less than 20 of them is. SC's needs to do less damage not just nerf their EHP. Am i the only one seeing a problem with a 50 million EHP, 8000 dps spewing monster?
Carriers are hardly fielded for anything but emergency suicide triage, for repping up dieing supers or trying to keep up an Ihub, not an actual engagement, and before you ask... Yes i own two of them and i can count on one hand how many times ive used they in combat.
After this we'll still have carriers and dreads being alphad to death in seconds, what good does it, to reduce a siege timer if you know you're going to die before the 5 minuts timer is up anyway.
Make dreads and carriers usefull, buff their EHP, i dont see why this change makes much of a matter, SC's will still dominate the field and still make dreads and carriers look like puppies.
Sorry for the grammar, and sorry for the cluttering of words and sentences, i'm extremely tired and just had a 16 hour shift.
This is something they should have done. Not so much nerf the guys on top, but bring the other capitals closer to there level. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
479
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:48:00 -
[166] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:Misanth wrote:A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase. This change was needed, to be perfectly honest. Super Capitals have been making EVE Online a worse game for ages by representing an absolute ultimate that is incredibly difficult to beat. The guys QQing about not being able to hotdrop with their super carriers to win smaller scale fights represent the worst of the problem these ships constitute, and they do it to the strongest degree. If this change that will drive you out of the game, good riddance to bad rubbish. To the rest of the players that left the game because of the utterly ludicrous power Super Capitals have held over the battlefield for the past two years, welcome back. To make these changes really stick though, the Titan tracking issue must be addressed alongside the extraordinary potency of slave implants. The slave set's bonuses should not apply to super capital ships, else the HP nerf simply will not have enough impact. Lol you should read through my posting history being making stupid assumptions.
why would you ever think you're important enough someone should bother researching your posting history |
Jean hunt
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:48:00 -
[167] - Quote
Dread's changes make this ship vunerable to anything that has a point even a hauler coz its guns cant hit diddly thats moving and small.
why would anybody train for it or waste over 1 bill on it either
CCP rethink the dreadnought or remove it from the game ! |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
867
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:49:00 -
[168] - Quote
chunorris wrote: Shut up lier manipulator. Now you have what you wanted last 3 years. Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets
If death2allsupercaps is wrong, baby, I don't want to be right.
|
Syekuda
Hell's Revenge
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:50:00 -
[169] - Quote
To the devs: how to you learn about making changes ? From your blogs it seems like you guys only read forum threads, read every single post about everything that has to do about caps. Same thing with emails probably ? I wonder did you ever watch cap fights before or do you made your changes only on words and forum threads ?
Just wondering since most of the decisions in the past seems like the decisions of an office worker who doesn't want to see the light outside...
And lastly, what about the people that ejects from ships. This "tactic" (if its considered one) pisses lots of people off including that logoff mechanic.
ps: this aint a sarcastic post, it's very serious thoughts. Helmar's post made me post this by the way. ps2: if you didn't watch a cap fight, please do and don't stop until the next expansion before confirming those changes. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
254
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:51:00 -
[170] - Quote
chunorris wrote:The Mittani wrote:chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want. Excuse me sir, but the forums have taught me that the CSM is a completely powerless entity and that the Chairmanship is a title without meaning. Try to keep up! Shut up lier manipulator. Now you have what you wanted last 3 years. Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets
Yep, as good as I had hoped. |
|
Zagdul
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:52:00 -
[171] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:Great blog. I do have one gripe, and it's fairly significant: Remote tracking links must not be allowed to boost a Titan's tracking.
As it stands now, a Titan can use its guns to take out the very Hictors who are supposed to be tackling it with no impact on its full-tank fit due to tracking links. In Goonswarm, we often fit remote links on our carriers and supercarriers, and use them to turn our Titans into subcap-blenders.
If Titans could not receive remote tracking boosts, should they want to try to shoot subcaps down, they would have to sacrifice some of their tank in order to do so. ^^ This
Remote sensor boosting could/should = EWAR
Just for clarification and how I understood the blog: Regular carriers will still retain their drone bays, correct?
If not they'll need an escape mechanism such as the ability to fit a remote ecm burst.
It's not Rocket Surgery |
Micerinos
De Mairenas Followers
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:52:00 -
[172] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:chunorris wrote: Shut up lier manipulator. Now you have what you wanted last 3 years. Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets
If death2allsupercaps is wrong, baby, I don't want to be right.
The Mittani = CSM Capital Super Murderer |
Bettoesai
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:52:00 -
[173] - Quote
I like what you guys are trying to do here, but the changes to fighters is a bad idea. I think all the other changes should work out well. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:52:00 -
[174] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Misanth wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:Misanth wrote:A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase. This change was needed, to be perfectly honest. Super Capitals have been making EVE Online a worse game for ages by representing an absolute ultimate that is incredibly difficult to beat. The guys QQing about not being able to hotdrop with their super carriers to win smaller scale fights represent the worst of the problem these ships constitute, and they do it to the strongest degree. If this change that will drive you out of the game, good riddance to bad rubbish. To the rest of the players that left the game because of the utterly ludicrous power Super Capitals have held over the battlefield for the past two years, welcome back. To make these changes really stick though, the Titan tracking issue must be addressed alongside the extraordinary potency of slave implants. The slave set's bonuses should not apply to super capital ships, else the HP nerf simply will not have enough impact. Lol you should read through my posting history being making stupid assumptions. why would you ever think you're important enough someone should bother researching your posting history
What makes you think I think I am. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Htrag
The Carebear Stare Hydroponic Zone
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:53:00 -
[175] - Quote
The topic definitely needs to be addressed, although I'm not a huge fan of most of those changes. |
Djakku
Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:53:00 -
[176] - Quote
TEARS OF JOY |
Tanaka Aiko
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:53:00 -
[177] - Quote
The Mittani wrote: Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets
killing faction fitted tengus with rifterswarn is damn fun you know |
Ale Tricio
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:55:00 -
[178] - Quote
Again CCP just hoping to hold onto their new pubbie players by screwing those that have spent years earning their supercaps
-3 accounts |
Mallikanth
Awakened Brotherhood The Brotherhood Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:55:00 -
[179] - Quote
In two words: impressive start! Look forward to more FiS *stuff*
Believe in what they do, not what they say.
|
Sylar McIntyr
Konstrukteure der Zukunft The Initiative.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:55:00 -
[180] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:titans with tracking computers / remote tracking links can reliably blap subcaps left and right
This. Please consider adding them to the blockes EWAR-effects, so that titans can't use their guns on sucaps (and farm anomalies like mad) |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
140
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:56:00 -
[181] - Quote
Ale Tricio wrote:Again CCP just hoping to hold onto their new pubbie players by screwing those that have spent years earning their supercaps
-3 accounts
And good riddance. |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
55
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:58:00 -
[182] - Quote
Micerinos wrote:Yeahhh Welcome to hurricane online......
wait aint hybrid's getting buffed again? soon tm it will be brutix online |
Adan Natrier
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:59:00 -
[183] - Quote
I can't possibly keep up with this threadnaught but i'll do my best to summarise;
By removing regular drones you remove too much effectiveness of supercarriers against subcaps, which means there's even less attrition of them from being used in smaller numbers, which becomes too unsafe.
So these changes probably only push super cap deployment further into the super blob domain - for mutual security. And when you have 90 SC's drop 20 fighters each at the time your fleet is trying to enter system, it doesn't matter how many replacements they have, or don't have, because about 50% of the incoming fleet will blackscreen, and the other will get slaughtered. This happened in geminate, vale and trib more than once this year.
So generally, make them more gankable. Remove their ability to fit a cloak, make them much slower to get into warp, whatever. Reduce their EHP way more.
And make them vulnerable to ewar. this is the solution to SC's speedtanking sieged dreads (you can web them, and bring a new definition to hero rifter), and significant super blobs with distributed ewar on subcaps. Fine, give them super strong sensors so they're not automatically jammed up by 150 unbonused multispectrals or 2000 ec-300's, and whatever the numbers work out to require say 50 sensor damps to be useful. But this makes them into normal ships, with normal vulnerabilities. Why isn't this the correct course?
But I don't care that much, I'll take any nerf whether I think it's heavy handed or not, I've been on the receiving end of super blobs all year.
Thanks for not reading. \o |
Mrrshal
Next Gen Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:59:00 -
[184] - Quote
Gallenteans must protest! They killed carriers, logistic- and combat utility drones, and yes, fighters are now useless. |
Nova Soldier
ROMANIA Renegades ROMANIAN-LEGION
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:59:00 -
[185] - Quote
1. When are we going to test it on the Singularity Test Server? 2. Any more changes for the dreads planned such as more than 2 targhets , better sensor resolution, maybe some increase to damage? 3. Tracking nerf to Titans planned? |
Mekia Buelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:59:00 -
[186] - Quote
Ale Tricio wrote:Again CCP just hoping to hold onto their new pubbie players by screwing those that have spent years earning their supercaps
-3 accounts
Can i have your stuffz?! |
GRIEV3R
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:00:00 -
[187] - Quote
As a Nyx pilot, here are some of my thoughts: Supercarriers are too hard to kill -Only for subcaps. In capital/supercapital engagements they pop like balloons. When you drop that much isk into a single ship, it should be extremely difficult for subcaps to kill you. I don't feel that supercarriers need the HP nerf.
Supercarriers are too versatile I completely agree. I think the drone bay changes are an excellent change.
Titan DD's Again I think this is a good change.
No more drones on Dreads, but Siege module +700% damage This is good but I don't think it's enough. Dreads need to have better tracking in Siege Mode. The changes to cycle time and fuel consumption are excellent.
Moros RoF bonus I anticipate that this is going to cause capacitor problems for Moros. However, with the upcoming hybrid turret buff that's been hinted at, perhaps it won't be a problem.
tl;dr: Great changes overall. I don't think Supercarriers need less HP, if anything I think they need more. I think the RoF bonus on the Moros is going to screw up its cap. |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
54
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:00:00 -
[188] - Quote
Adan Natrier wrote:I can't possibly keep up with this threadnaught but i'll do my best to summarise;
By removing regular drones you remove too much effectiveness of supercarriers against subcaps, which means there's even less attrition of them from being used in smaller numbers, which becomes too unsafe.
So these changes probably only push super cap deployment further into the super blob domain - for mutual security. And when you have 90 SC's drop 20 fighters each at the time your fleet is trying to enter system, it doesn't matter how many replacements they have, or don't have, because about 50% of the incoming fleet will blackscreen, and the other will get slaughtered. This happened in geminate, vale and trib more than once this year.
So generally, make them more gankable. Remove their ability to fit a cloak, make them much slower to get into warp, whatever. Reduce their EHP way more.
And make them vulnerable to ewar. this is the solution to SC's speedtanking sieged dreads (you can web them, and bring a new definition to hero rifter), and significant super blobs with distributed ewar on subcaps. Fine, give them super strong sensors so they're not automatically jammed up by 150 unbonused multispectrals or 2000 ec-300's, and whatever the numbers work out to require say 50 sensor damps to be useful. But this makes them into normal ships, with normal vulnerabilities. Why isn't this the correct course?
But I don't care that much, I'll take any nerf whether I think it's heavy handed or not, I've been on the receiving end of super blobs all year.
Thanks for not reading. \o
You might be right to some degree, so here's hoping we can hold CCP on continuing to iterate on capital balance once these changes go live. However, you did leave out Time Dilation from the equation, which should, in theory, help prevent the problem of the black screen on jump in. Time will tell. |
Junko Sideswipe
Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:01:00 -
[189] - Quote
This thread is basically Nulli Secunda and White Noise vs the rest of the game. I don't see PL complaining. |
Cyalume
Helljumpers White Noise.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:01:00 -
[190] - Quote
This should be interesting! With the nerf of Supers, the price will surely fall.
How will this effect the lottery prices of Darkness and Chribba?
It's an important question. Surely ticket prices will change since the prize won't be worth as much anymore.
All in all, I like most of the changes. Flying various ships is enjoyable but I still think Dread tracking needs to be a bit more.
Other than that, fair enough. |
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
55
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:02:00 -
[191] - Quote
Bettoesai wrote:I like what you guys are trying to do here, but the changes to fighters is a bad idea. I think all the other changes should work out well.
yup ccp will make fighters useless vs a single bomb. 400 sig radius will mean a single bomb with vaporize them |
Azock
Hitmen Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:02:00 -
[192] - Quote
Cause I feel like it is needed to repeat something someone else has said for the sake of CCP noticing!
Titan tracking needs to be fixed period. I have been in too many fleets where they had 40 Titans all gank fit, and our 400-500 man battleship blob, etc, gets raped by their guns and we lose over half our fleet. |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:03:00 -
[193] - Quote
This is awesome. A greater reduction in Supercarrier EHP (-50%) would have been nice but all of this sounds good so far.
Btw what happened to the increased ship bay for Carriers ? |
Mors Magne
Astral Adventure
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:03:00 -
[194] - Quote
I agree with all the changes.
I'd like to see a bigger role for (covert ops) bomber frigates and black ops battleships. If they could do extra damage against capital ships and supercapitals, that could make things interesting.
It might give black ops battleships a coherent, specific, useful role. |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
249
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:03:00 -
[195] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:I am vaugely suspicious that dreads will still have any role with this change. Their dps is still nothing impressive and they're made of paper compared to supercap fleets: their sole use is sieging pos (which SC's can't touch). They're the wrong answer for a hub or a station, and I think that's a mistake. Their role now is pretty much glass cannons, but they're not damaging enough to fill that role well.
They still have a role in w-space, where life is good because there are no supers... CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog What does CSM 6 do? |
Udran
Caldari War Machine STR8NGE BREW
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:03:00 -
[196] - Quote
CCP instead of using your powerful nerf bat. FIX THE BUGS!!!!!! |
Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
131
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:04:00 -
[197] - Quote
but this means 100 super carriers can't solo 1000 battleships, im quitting eve. /sarcasm |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
521
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:05:00 -
[198] - Quote
Now this game can be renamed to sub capitals online. This patch is making plain capitals useless against sub caps.
You done goofed CCP.
I demand whoever thought up this idea get dragged outback and shot with cheap bullets. Why the fighter nerf! why!
I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT. |
Richard de'Astley
Coriault Combat Solutions Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:09:00 -
[199] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Aren't you the one who wanted more microtransactions in the game? Can we get someone more qualified to tell us what we're likely to enjoy? |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:09:00 -
[200] - Quote
Adan Natrier wrote:I can't possibly keep up with this threadnaught but i'll do my best to summarise;
By removing regular drones you remove too much effectiveness of supercarriers against subcaps, which means there's even less attrition of them from being used in smaller numbers, which becomes too unsafe.
So these changes probably only push super cap deployment further into the super blob domain - for mutual security. And when you have 90 SC's drop 20 fighters each at the time your fleet is trying to enter system, it doesn't matter how many replacements they have, or don't have, because about 50% of the incoming fleet will blackscreen, and the other will get slaughtered. This happened in geminate, vale and trib more than once this year.
So generally, make them more gankable. Remove their ability to fit a cloak, make them much slower to get into warp, whatever. Reduce their EHP way more.
And make them vulnerable to ewar. this is the solution to SC's speedtanking sieged dreads (you can web them, and bring a new definition to hero rifter), and significant super blobs with distributed ewar on subcaps. Fine, give them super strong sensors so they're not automatically jammed up by 150 unbonused multispectrals or 2000 ec-300's, and whatever the numbers work out to require say 50 sensor damps to be useful. But this makes them into normal ships, with normal vulnerabilities. Why isn't this the correct course?
But I don't care that much, I'll take any nerf whether I think it's heavy handed or not, I've been on the receiving end of super blobs all year.
Thanks for not reading. \o
Your first three paragraphs were good. Then it collapsed.. the blob comment is correct. However, you're wrong that they needs to be more gankable and unable to fit cloak and/or be vulnerable to ewar. That'd be a regular carrier (that can dock). These are supercaps for a reason. I've myself flown and killed several supers in smaller to bigger scale combat. EHP is fine, and they're already vulnerable to neuts, hics, bumps, numbers, that's quite alot already.
Supers (moms as well as titans) need a nerf, that's for sure. But the only issue with them is damage, nothing else. FB's were a dumb idea (and as a mom-pilot before they even came into game I suggested that before we even had them). I've myself benefitted from them, so I should be biased towards them. But at the end of the day, the only issue with moms and titans are their damage output. And the only solution that would be needed is a nerf/removal of FB/DD. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
|
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:09:00 -
[201] - Quote
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and lose the subcap battle, you also just permanently lost 15 supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead. |
Baillif
AQUILA INC
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:09:00 -
[202] - Quote
So what is the spread on the bet CCP ignores the tracking links for titans and dreads problem and has to get I told you soed by the EVE community before next summer? |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:10:00 -
[203] - Quote
Btw how about keeping a Dronebay on dreads and just give them -125 bandwith while in Siege ? |
Selene D'Celeste
The D'Celeste Trading Company ISK Six
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:11:00 -
[204] - Quote
xxxak wrote:This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and lose the subcap battle, you also just permanently lost 15 supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Oh no, that means there might be large scale subcapital engagements where both sides are afraid to commit their supercapital assets. Now that would just be terrible.
Visit www.eohpoker.com and enjoy EVE's oldest ISK gaming service! |
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:12:00 -
[205] - Quote
Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:As a previous/current owner of MULTIPLE personal supercaps, I would encourage you to take your own advice, and get a clue before posting. Challenge accepted, enjoy the decontruction of your post.
Quote:I am not referring to "welpfleet" Earlier: "while smart individuals can make use of existing tactics to counter supercap blobs" So wait, Welpfleet is not an existing tactic against supercap blobs? I guess our definitions of tactic differ.
Quote:I am quite aware that your alliance currently (appears to) lack the ability to deploy any sort of supercap force. IDC about "our lack of ability to deploy supers", this is about subcaps countering supercaps.
Quote:Welpfleet is no counter; it's just a way for goons to leverage their numbers majority in cheap ships to apply dps. It's a pretty good counter as it severely impedes supers by neuting their cap off and thus shutting down their hardeners, allowing them to be killed pretty quickly. Even with passive hardeners, they can't jump until they have restored cap to 70%.
Quote:If you look at some of the tactics RnK have used in the past to destroy supercarrier/carrier fleets in the past you'd maybe understand what I'm saying. (They beat a FA/WIdawt supercarrier/carrier gang that more than outnumbered them in supercarriers/carriers alone, killing 1 SC and several carriers, without ANY caps/scaps of their own.)
http://rooksandkings.com/killboard/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=25860 has been the only SC kill on FA or WIdot by RnK I could find on their killboard. Now, let's see what we've got there: 60-70 BS shooting 6 supers, 2 dreads, 10 carriers. Nothing more than a variation of "dish out enough DPS to kill them in 15 minutes" Hm, where's FA? No FA on related kills and no FA super has died by RnK hands either... I'm puzzled. Oh wait, there's no advantage in numbers of the capital fielding side. Sure nice memory you've got there. Or nice naive mind, believing everything people tell you.
Yeah, I guess a person owning SEVERAL PERSONAL SUPERCAPS should have more of a clue. Unlike common folks like me who don't want to live in a space tomb, right?
(CCP, that quote limit/BBCode could not be parsed thingy is awful. Also, your forums ate my first draft :() |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:12:00 -
[206] - Quote
Two step wrote:Weaselior wrote:I am vaugely suspicious that dreads will still have any role with this change. Their dps is still nothing impressive and they're made of paper compared to supercap fleets: their sole use is sieging pos (which SC's can't touch). They're the wrong answer for a hub or a station, and I think that's a mistake. Their role now is pretty much glass cannons, but they're not damaging enough to fill that role well. They still have a role in w-space, where life is good because there are no supers...
There are blob alliance there too, like yours, but apart from that you're right. W-space is where it's it, atm. Anyone who want smaller scale PvP and the 'danger' of old EVE should go live in w-space. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Walextheone
The Red Circle Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:13:00 -
[207] - Quote
Firstly. Dedicated resources on ship balancing is super. Can't understand why CCP haven't done this in a structure way before. It's a competitive game and doing changes on the most important ingredient: the ships, is cruical.
Love the aggresion timer fix and hope that Dreads will get a better tracking.
|
PAGAN585
EON Solutions Narwhals Ate My Duck
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:13:00 -
[208] - Quote
now that my dread has no drones i guess it will be even more useless for doing anything other than shooting a structure. well as long as that structure doesn't start moving cause then you just screwed.
how about you do something that makes playing more fun rather then screwing with **** that never gets used.
or how about you make it so i can warp cloaked in my black ops. that bastard has collected more dust then the dread. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:13:00 -
[209] - Quote
Richard de'Astley wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Aren't you the one who wanted more microtransactions in the game? Can we get someone more qualified to tell us what we're likely to enjoy?
He's also the one that got major angry at players when criticised in the alliance tournament section, during AT. So he felt like raging and insulting the playerbase. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Goodtime Girl
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:15:00 -
[210] - Quote
Again CCP and the Goonie Devs act like a bunch of retards.
Maybe if the Goonies had built more Supers they wouldn't have cried and got such a stupid change.
So CCP you fools why should some now save and train for a super when a carrier is now 10x better for 20x less.
Utter stupid. |
|
Kenerian
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:15:00 -
[211] - Quote
I dont usually Voice myself in the forums but.....
I don't think The Sig should be increased on Fighters... They are already easy enough to kill... (I was always under the impression that fighters were fast and nimble, not the size/sig of a BS/drake)
However for fighter bombers it makes More sense. (As there are so many plus the insane dps they put out on larger ships)
I would also like to Note that the reduced time in Siege for Dreads is long overdue and it will be great to see them as a viable class of ships in eve once more.
Not to Mention Lord Maldoror must be really happy with the new log off mechanics.
It will be nice to see that Supers/Titans will not be as over powered, but still worth having. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
480
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:15:00 -
[212] - Quote
soundwave made a dumb once but is a whole lot better than the weeeeee incarna crowd and actually gets the spaceship part of eve |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
151
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:17:00 -
[213] - Quote
my thoughts, 400mm res on fighters maybe a bit extreme. Tone it back to 350
Next to all the whiners about normal carriers
10 Ogre II's with a republic fleet target painter is a very very mean thing.
Other thoughts
people in rapiers and huggins with their massive target painter bonus will now have a purpose in capital fights, along with that minmatar ewar frig. Despite the huge change in scan resolution changes, there are modules that help negate this.
The changes here make it so you just can't have capitals in a fleet fight. YOU WILL have to have sub cap support, with webs painters, ewar.
Yay for dread buff.
Normal carrier pilots rejoice as those super cap pilots are going to have to rely on you to save their asses now with your massive ammounts of ewar drones and normal drones.
Final thought, normal carriers should have a bonus that reduces the sig of fighters. |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
91
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:17:00 -
[214] - Quote
xxxak wrote:[b]This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in. You know, you could, like, have your support fleet kill off the hostile tackle.
I know, fancy idea. |
cpu939
Volatile Nature White Noise.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:17:00 -
[215] - Quote
simple question ccp how are you removing the drones and extra fighters/fighter bombers |
Bring Stabity
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:17:00 -
[216] - Quote
Kenerian wrote:I dont usually Voice myself in the forums but.....
I don't think The Sig should be increased on Fighters... They are already easy enough to kill... (I was always under the impression that fighters were fast and nimble, not the size/sig of a BS/drake)
However for fighter bombers it makes More sense. (As there are so many plus the insane dps they put out on larger ships)
I would also like to Note that the reduced time in Siege for Dreads is long overdue and it will be great to see them as a viable class of ships in eve once more.
Not to Mention Lord Maldoror must be really happy with the new log off mechanics.
It will be nice to see that Supers/Titans will not be as over powered, but still worth having.
Fighters have the ehp of a cruiser/battlecruiser, and those are anything but nimble? |
Turrican 2
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:18:00 -
[217] - Quote
So there i have this "Super Carrier", that can't even carry the same things as a carrier anymore after the patch...
In this light i have a few questions to CCP: -Why was it called Super Carrier again? Will it be renamed to mothership now?
-Why can a "Super Carrier" not fit mining drones in the drone bay after the patch? Was it able to kill subcaps with mining drones?
-How about logged off "Super Carriers"? When they log on after the patch, will they be stuck in space? Or how can they get rid of the useless drones?
|
Abrazzar
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:18:00 -
[218] - Quote
Sooo, I guess mineral prices will go up? Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Iohet Nolafew
Star Frontiers BricK sQuAD.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:19:00 -
[219] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:farraguat wrote:completely ******* supercarriers in the ass. Only using fighters and fighter-bombers thats ******* ******** Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.
I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes. Yes ... SCs now are only to shoot in iHubs / TCU / Stations so no more POS Shooting or other things ... and a titan has no chance to kill a single DIC/HIC that he tackled why ?? we have no more Medium / Heavy / Sentry Drones left This REALY SUCKS !!! GREAT WORK F*** CCP
Every ship has a role. There is no reason for a supercap to not have a role.
Bring a support fleet. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
151
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:19:00 -
[220] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote:Btw how about keeping a Dronebay on dreads and just give them -125 bandwith while in Siege ?
Actually this is a better idea, this will allow dread to have some sort of defense against subs while out of siege mode. |
|
Aversun
Systems Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:20:00 -
[221] - Quote
cpu939 wrote:simple question ccp how are you removing the drones and extra fighters/fighter bombers
cutting torches and plasma welders? :) |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:20:00 -
[222] - Quote
xxxak wrote:This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Can you explain (using diagrams if required) how you achieved the level of cognative dissonance needed to equate "my ship is less powerful without a support fleet" with "EVE is dead"? |
Mareck001
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:21:00 -
[223] - Quote
I agree with all the changes here but the fighter nerf. On one hand you do a good job with Supercarrier and Titan balancing. Then you take away the the only reason to train a carrier.. There is no reason to do anything to fighters, they're already pretty balanced. Carriers in general barely see direct combat, except to triage. This game just became Subcaps Online |
Just Another Toon
University of Caille Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:23:00 -
[224] - Quote
some decent changes there CCP.
However one serious consideration MUST be looked at. Supers and Titans in low sec, its just not right. Remove offensive capabilities in low sec altogether. This mass SC/Titan blobbing by failed 0.0 alliances in Low sec is killing it...big time...
Please consider low sec. as well as 0.0.....pretty please...low sec is getting better for pvp, well it was until this happens... |
Xue Slick
The Damned Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:23:00 -
[225] - Quote
Simple solution... want less super capitals on the field... make them 4 times as expensive so there is less of them?
CCP, you have made it so easy to make ISK that any Joe can get one now.
Easy changes:
- Double the bandwidth required for fighter and fighter bombers. Half the DPS and helps with system lag. - Reduce Super Carrier and Titans EHP by 20% - Increase Dreads and Carriers EHP by 20% ( Will solve your DD problem ) - Reduce the Siege cycle to 5 minutes - Remove the Drone bays as stated and buff damage to Dreads - Rework the cost of Super Capitals so less people can get into them. 2x, maybe 3x the price?
Do it CCP. |
Largo Coronet
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:24:00 -
[226] - Quote
I applaud the efforts your team has achieved so far, but there is one glaring problem that simply cannot be left unaddressed. If you're not going to remove the immunity to negative EWAR effects such as jamming from supercapitals, then allowing then to still take advantage of positive EWAR effects such as target painting is unbalanced. This should not be difficult to understand. It should not be easy for capital ships to swat frigates out of space. They should have to fight their battles in accompaniment with smaller ships who have that function. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
414
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:24:00 -
[227] - Quote
David Grogan wrote:yup ccp will make fighters useless vs a single bomb. 400 sig radius will mean a single bomb with vaporize them
imagine this 400 sig radius jumps to 2000 when the fighter is mwd'ing about
1 bomb will instapop them They're not changing the sig radius GÇö they're changing the sig resolution, i.e. how well (or in this case poorly) they track smaller target. It will have absolutely no effect on how durable the fighters are.
Kenerian wrote:II don't think The Sig should be increased on Fighters... They are already easy enough to kill... (I was always under the impression that fighters were fast and nimble, not the size/sig of a BS/drake) Same goes for you GÇö signature resolution is not the same thing as signature radius GÇö they're changing the resolution. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Giselay
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:25:00 -
[228] - Quote
As the tracking of Dreads is still aweful the only thing they can hit are posses. Any BS can "speed tank" a dread. Worthless junk of metals they are unless you need to tak edown a POS, and for that they are too expensive and logistic intensive. |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:26:00 -
[229] - Quote
Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed. |
|
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
92
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:27:00 -
[230] - Quote
The Moros change is drastic. For gank setups, the Moros (blasters, triple MFS) right now with no drones does 6416 theoretical dps. Add 25% RoF and it will now hit 8555 dps(!) - that's far above any other dread's damage output. Considering the last dread rebalance made dreads very much alike with regard to range, there is no particular advantage over blasters anymore.
Additionally, capital missiles take serious damage drawbacks against moving targets (10% dps reduction even against a moving carrier for citadel cruises), which reduces the effectiveness of Phoenixes and Naglfars even further.
The drone bonus of the Moros right now adds about 8% raw damage over the Naglfar - I do not quite see how a 33% damage bonus is supposed to compensate for that. These changes will make the Moros vastly more powerful than any other dread. Please try to re-think this to keep the different dreads closer to each other. |
|
Heimdallofasgard
APEX ARDENT COALITION NEM3SIS.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:27:00 -
[231] - Quote
YOU NERFED THE VELDNAUGHT! YOU MONSTERS!
Edit: Apart from that... I approve :) |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
123
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:27:00 -
[232] - Quote
BAD: No remote tracking link / titan tracking nerf - (Make Ewar immunity = no RTL's or any other form of electronic remote assistance) BAD: No shield/armor EHP balancing - (deadspace invuls) BAD: No real solution to supercarrier/titan roles - (they just seem to be cap killers?) BAD: Weird dread changes, Moros capacitor is ****** now, Naglfar pointless again - (Moros should tank better than it will, Naglfar should come close to out ganking the moros (due to split weapons). Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
KeLLaX
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:27:00 -
[233] - Quote
What a watse of time, CCP you have made super Carriers Crap once again, Titans are worthless. Why even train for it. Why even spend the billions of isk to achieve a goal you CCP set for us. I am disapointed and frustrated by your desicions. Do any of you in CCP even play this game or do you even fly a Super? |
Shin Dari
The Vendunari Warped Aggression
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:28:00 -
[234] - Quote
Chribba wrote:Oooo "Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts." - Why you be hating on the Veldnaught /c Just ask for Capital Mining Lasers. If 'you' ask nicely they just might do it.
@CCP
1. Please improve dread tracking. 2. Move Remote ECM Burst to Dreads and give Dreads an extra slot for it. 3. Have the fighter nerf only affect SC. 4. Please extend that even all the positive remote ewar (remore tracking links and sensor boosters) does not work for supers. |
Mekia Buelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:29:00 -
[235] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
That sounds good but will you consider the changes to the fighers and carriers in general or that is a final decision? |
ScheenK
Constantine.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:29:00 -
[236] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:Remove Dronebay from the Titan and Dreadnought sucks also that the DD dont work on Sub-Caps ... ppff ... F*** O**
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
a Citadel Torpedo vs a Hurricane dont work. or a Siege Autocanon vs. Hurricane also dont work.
at the moment there are only Drones to fight them.
so this realy realy sucks !
titans and dreads have special roles, you dont jump a titan or dread in to kill a battlecruiser u nubbincake, that hurricane should fly around you all day long
|
Bring Stabity
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:29:00 -
[237] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
This is really bad, please change your mind. Quickly. |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
55
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:30:00 -
[238] - Quote
PAGAN585 wrote: or how about you make it so i can warp cloaked in my black ops. that bastard has collected more dust then the dread.
lol i agree with ya my sin is just as dusty.... even my phoenix was used more recently |
ThaWolf
The Executives Executive Outcomes
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:30:00 -
[239] - Quote
Changes in general are good.
But leave Fighters alone, Carriers need a Buff not a nerv, with the limited drone-bay SC damage is reduced good enough, fighters can be killed an that not hard at all. (Killmails for Fighter and Fighter-bombers would increase the fun shooting them)
If you still want to reduce SC damage on Subcaps then limit the ability to launch Fighters and FB-¦s to max 10 and buff Fighter-bombers so that they are as strong and resilient as 2 were before. So you would have the dmg of the Fighter-bombers unchanged, but on Subcaps a SC is down to Carrier lvl, and you decrease lag. But again dont touch my Fighters!
Dreads need a tracking Bonus or they will remain useless in Capfights. |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:30:00 -
[240] - Quote
Mekia Buelle wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed. That sounds good but will you consider the changes to the fighers and carriers in general or that is a final decision?
Yes I will consider it. |
|
|
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
481
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:31:00 -
[241] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
That's probably a mistake and you can figure it out pretty quickly in eft just how effective certain titans are against subcaps. However I'm sure we can demonstrate that effectively on sisi when we tracking link some titans and start blowing up subcaps at obscene rates.
Keeping supercaps too powerful is much more of a problem than keeping them underpowered: overpowered supercaps make a lot of people irrelevant, underpowered supercaps make a tiny minority of people less relevant. I get that you don't want to over-nerf titans but this is going to mean that titans are still an overpowered answer to everything: thats just going to be kept in check (for a little while) by increasing the risk of deploying one. However I suspect you'll just see a move to even bigger titan fleets as a response. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
152
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:32:00 -
[242] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
Translation for the stupid people that post on the forums.
All nerfs are subject to change based on feed back on the test server forums. If you think some of these changes are bad, please state which nerf is bad, and give us a well thought out and well written reason on why.
We wont listen to random whining.
But if you give good supporting issues / arguement and dont rage we will listen.
Anyway after reading some of the posts.
Fighter changes are hit or miss 400 maybe too extreme. change it to 350 or 325 so it can hit battleships effectively.
Dreads - dont remove drone bays, while in siege mode set the amount of controllable drones to 0, either by direct mechanic of say -10532890532 bandwidth while in siege mode.
please look at tracking for normal dreads
for normal carriers look at a boost for them for regular fighters and drones to make them more benificial.
Finally - tactics are coming back to eve online. |
Barbie D0ll
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:33:00 -
[243] - Quote
OMFG!! CCP ACTUALLTY DOING SOMETHING WONDERFUL!!! |
Centra Spike
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:34:00 -
[244] - Quote
Now that supercarriers can't run Sanctums, the top, titan-owning 1% of EVE will get richer. Is this what you call balance?
occupyiceland.org |
Jackk Hammer
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:35:00 -
[245] - Quote
Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan? |
TheButcherPete
StoneWall Metals Productions Rebel Alliance of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:35:00 -
[246] - Quote
YESSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!
**** THE SUPERCAP BLOBS! Now the Carriers are useful again :D
GLORY TO CCP
...
DEATH TO AMARR!!!
Disclaimer: My viewpoints are not shared by my corporation, nor my alliance. |
Ilarra
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:35:00 -
[247] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
Either you are ok with titans being able to hit smaller ships (see: avatar/erebus/ragnarok) or you are not (see: leviathan). There's no good reason why missiles should be so inferior in this situation. At least consider adjusting the sig radius on citadels so they can hit small POS mods (e.g., small guns) and slowboating carriers/dreads for full damage.
And how about the issues with shield tanking caps/supercaps? Why should shield tankers need a crapton of remote repping to take advantage of the leviathan bonus when none of the other ships do? |
Heimdallofasgard
APEX ARDENT COALITION NEM3SIS.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:35:00 -
[248] - Quote
BUT YOU NERFED THE VELDNAUGHT!!!! |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:36:00 -
[249] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
What about the overall reality that supers now have almost ZERO ability to remove subcaps from the field, thus making them dead if their supcap fleet gets welped?
Was that an intended consequence of the overall nerfs? |
Bring Stabity
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:36:00 -
[250] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed. Translation for the stupid people that post on the forums. Finally - tactics are coming back to eve online.
Not really, titans still demolish everything |
|
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
481
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:36:00 -
[251] - Quote
Jackk Hammer wrote:Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan?
why would you put the remote tracking links on a carrier |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
416
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:36:00 -
[252] - Quote
Centra Spike wrote:Now that supercarriers can't run Sanctums GǪyou can run them in some other ship instead.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:37:00 -
[253] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
Question here is; do you want to see super carriers (and titan) pilots log in to game or not?
Titan DD nerf is good, it allows using expensive ships like t3 cruisers to be used against titans.
If the opposing force does not have capital ships, you render the other sides super capital fleet to useless dead weight.
You don't want to see these end game devices used on combat?
You made the supercarrier a new dreadnaught with the exception that pilot is stuck with it and has less targets to shoot than real dreadnaught. (dreads can shoot capitals, towers and sov structures).
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
123
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:37:00 -
[254] - Quote
I'll rephrase, what specifically are the roles of each class of capital ship combat wise? It kinda feels like this is a very reactionary (although necessary change) that lacks the *vision* needed to be understood by us. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:37:00 -
[255] - Quote
I think this all a huge step in the right direction, but I have a few caveats.
1) Titans ability to track targets much smaller than their own class using XL turrets. A solution might be to drop the base tracking on XL turrets but reduce the siege mode tracking penalty on dreadnaughts to compensate.
2) The Hel is inferior to the other SC's, and might be even worse off with the HP cut. Interesting to see it gets a larger drone bay, but why does the nyx get the same edge?
3) The fighter changes do impact on carriers as well as super carriers. Is this desirable?
On the point of SC's not being able to carry a full flight of fighters AND fighter bombers...I'm actually not sure that would be such a bad thing. http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
MastahFR
ANZAC ALLIANCE RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:38:00 -
[256] - Quote
At least make the Hel worth flying ... The nyx as more fire power and more tank than the Hel wtf ... ? Also the Aeon will still have way too much HP against other Supercarrier. Just don't be stupid by doing -20% everything, instead do it smarter ...
Hel should have more tank than the Nyx since the nyx deal more dps. Wyvern should be at same tank lvl than the Aeon.
And both Aeon and Wyvern should only have +15-20% more HP than the Hel |
Archestratidas
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:39:00 -
[257] - Quote
Excellent changes.
Additionally, I'd propose removing the ability of supers to receive remote sebo/tracking links. The only purpose such a setup has is to squash subcap fleets which I believe is not the intended purpose of titans, non?
The change to the logoffski mechanics is the money change though. Cheers for that, most important change that could be made. |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:39:00 -
[258] - Quote
xxxak wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed. What about the overall reality that supers now have almost ZERO ability to remove subcaps from the field, thus making them dead if their supcap fleet gets welped? Was that an intended consequence of the overall nerfs?
Yes. http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
flipfragz
Toxic State Terra Axiom
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:39:00 -
[259] - Quote
For the most part a lot of these changes make a lot of sense. However there is one issue I can see and thatGÇÖs the shield super caps.
A 20% reduction on shields is a little extreme for the most part I havenGÇÖt done all the maths yet but hels have just been made pointless.
It already has the worse bonus compared to the others in its class. It doesnGÇÖt have an implant set that can help boost like a slave set (same said for all shield super caps) It relies on active tanks (for better resis) fair more than its armour counter parts (same with all shield super caps) Fleet bonuses might as well not be there (same with all shield super caps) It has the smallest EHP out of all the super carriers and we are not talking 1-2 mil difference after fits are added.
This 20% reduction across the board makes me think that you have only taken into account the ship hull stats and not what the average ship stats are across the board with fits and implants added. Yes I have a shield super cap alt but if you get EFTing and take costs into account with fits your see that the shield super caps are already nerfGÇÖed by the lack on modules compared to their armour counter parts that they can use not to mention the cost difference at the top end of the high meta modules.
|
Strider Hiryu
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:40:00 -
[260] - Quote
If I was a Hel pilot, I would be sad (weak as ****)
If I flew a sheild Supercap, I would be sad (jumping in at 50% sheilds, awsome!)
If I flew in a small alliance, I would be sad (buff to the blob)
I approve the seige timer change
I approve the logoff change
I would like to see less supers. I would like it to be harder to make supers. I look foward to the hybrid buff especially (please fix rail guns well) I look forward to the other changes planned.
Cheers, lets keep improving this game! |
|
Jackk Hammer
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:40:00 -
[261] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan? why would you put the remote tracking links on a carrier
that is what the other goonNoob was saying...I guess he didn't want to say you guys couldn't kill a logi putting tracking links on a titan
|
Amber Dupreez
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:41:00 -
[262] - Quote
these are good changes on the whole, but perhaps leaving a small drone bay on supercaps would be balanced?
I'm talking like 500 - 1000 m3, so just large enough to have some emergency drones for those occasions you get in a wtf situation, but also small enough that choosing which drones actually fill that space represents a significant opportunity cost. |
Xython
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:41:00 -
[263] - Quote
Jackk Hammer wrote:Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan?
Sure we can. Hell, we do it in cruisers (Welpcanes), just cause it's hilarious.
And if anyone was ever stupid enough to show up with one (UND EXACTLY WUN) we would do so and laugh at them for a few hours.
The problem is that the current nullsec isn't nearly as spacepoor as CCP thought they would be, and EXACTLY WUN supercap never happens. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:41:00 -
[264] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:Remove Dronebay from the Titan and Dreadnought sucks also that the DD dont work on Sub-Caps ... ppff ... F*** O**
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
a Citadel Torpedo vs a Hurricane dont work. or a Siege Autocanon vs. Hurricane also dont work.
at the moment there are only Drones to fight them.
so this realy realy sucks ! That was the point . . . . did you even read the blog? let me spell it out for you
YOURE NOT SUPPOSED TO FIGHT SUB-CAPS WITH CAPS, THATS WHY YOU NEED SUPPORT FLEETS NOW! |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:42:00 -
[265] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
what is with the Levi ??? and his missles / Torps ?
|
Cedric deBouilard
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:42:00 -
[266] - Quote
Quote: ..stuff about making changes... CCP Tallest wrote:Yes I will consider it.
Regarding Moros, a gallente ship that can't use drones is silly and makes no sense. Everything about gallente (using armor and being slow etc) is for the sake of using drones. Also, we don't know what changes you're going to make in regard to hybrid guns, so taking drones away from Moros don't really help with anything. Oh and taking away 20% drone hp and damage and giving simply faster firing isn't the best solution.
Lore wise, gallente suck at everything big time, except drones. A gallente capital ship without drones? thats dumb.
Whatever you do, make it feasible lore-wise. It's the internet-spaceships-frenchmen-with-radio-controlled-robots we're talkin about. |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:42:00 -
[267] - Quote
Way to bow down to goons...
Way to bow down to the people who sold there supers for isk and than cried about it when used against them.
Are you going to allow titan and supercarrier pilots to retrain skillpoints since those points are now wasted on ships you screwed over!
I hope so...
That is not re-balancing that is totally screwing over the super capital community.
let the trolls begin... but oh well... no faith in ccp... 6 accts were just turned off... and troll on carebears and whiners. |
R0ze
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:42:00 -
[268] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:That's probably a mistake and you can figure it out pretty quickly in eft just how effective certain titans are against subcaps. However I'm sure we can demonstrate that effectively on sisi when we tracking link some titans and start blowing up subcaps at obscene rates. Though demonstrating something on SiSI (read - fitting 6 TCs/TEs/having 10 oneiroses) because the result doesn't affect anyone (read - the ISK loss) and doing the same in "real case scenario" on TQ are quite a different things .. |
Wu Phat
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors 0ccupational Hazzard
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:42:00 -
[269] - Quote
Problem is 10 dreads can't gank a SC but 10 Sc can gank a Titan... breath let that sink in
Mothership still has it's immunity to Ewar or Give the dread a Capital point that can hold down super carriers.
Give the dread the the hit points to hold on to the SC.
Titans are Defensive/Logistical tools not offensive tools. Separate the Jump Drive and the Jump Protal. The Jump range on titans should be lower then what it is now while keping the portal range what it is at.
|
B'atou
Projekt Erzengel Eternal Evocations
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:43:00 -
[270] - Quote
xxxak wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed. What about the overall reality that supers now have almost ZERO ability to remove subcaps from the field, thus making them dead if their supcap fleet gets welped? Was that an intended consequence of the overall nerfs?
So you have to plan fighting the enemy properly, and try to support the subcap fleet. When the subfleet is dead, you have serious problems, although you can try to kill the enemy with fighters.
i like the changes, great idea CCP!
------------------------------------------- Every winner needs a looser, only idiots need a leader! |
|
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:43:00 -
[271] - Quote
Ale Tricio wrote:Again CCP just hoping to hold onto their new pubbie players by screwing those that have spent years earning their supercaps
-3 accounts It's worth pointing out that while I did click 'like' on your post, it wasn't for the reason you think. |
Discordance Axis
Snuff Box
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:43:00 -
[272] - Quote
Nopsa wrote:kool, any chance for slight nerf on titan jump portals also, hotdropping isn't very rare occurance.
Despite the fact that my corp tends to use them from time to time, I wouldn't mind a nerf to jump portals. Perhaps small to medium sized roaming gangs will become a more common sight in low sec that way. |
Spacing Cowboy
Rule of Five Ultra Vires.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:43:00 -
[273] - Quote
I think its a exelent change/nerf...
however, - please reconsider the nerf of the carriers / the option to use fighter against battleship size targets , without having to whip out bloody sentry's
- In return, a option for the moms to hit pos'es would be more then fair, give fighters or fighter bombers in a mom the option to take a whip at the towers.
and last.. to please Chribba ... give every dread/mom a mining-drone bay... |
Harassment Panda
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:43:00 -
[274] - Quote
As a Moros pilot I approve of this product or service |
Lan Caden
SKULLDOGS RED.OverLord
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:43:00 -
[275] - Quote
Cry cry.. "Your guns can hit my hurricane!"
"They better hit 1,800 of your hurricanes before I explode."
1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK 1 Hurricane = 50,000,000 ISK
1 Titan = 1,800 Hurricanes |
Just Another Toon
University of Caille Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:44:00 -
[276] - Quote
CCP Tallest - Will you please consider low sec implications of what is happenign with supers and titans... |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
105
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:45:00 -
[277] - Quote
Does fighter tracking nerf means we will see an T3 cost inflation, and general ISK value inflation?
Them people who rat with normal carriers gonna be mad xD Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
483
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:46:00 -
[278] - Quote
Jackk Hammer wrote:Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan? why would you put the remote tracking links on a carrier that is what the other goonNoob was saying...I guess he didn't want to say you guys couldn't kill a logi putting tracking links on a titan
this is a dumb argument and you are a dumb person
tracking links are stupid cheap and stupid effective and you can hide them nearly anywhere, and playing the "find the tracking links and destroy them while titans are blowing subcaps up with impunity" isn't a fun combat mechanic that aids in making combat interesting and balanced
saying moronic things like "goonNoob can't kill the links" is annoying when you have failed to think through how you'd deploy the links to avoid them getting blapped (and this is stupid easy to figure out and you should have done it before posting) and keep them in numbers that avoid them easily getting cleared out before the battle is already over; you don't understand how the pieces fit together so you have no useful input on the effects of changing the pieces or failing to change them |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
105
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:47:00 -
[279] - Quote
Lan Caden wrote:Cry cry.. "Your guns can hit my hurricane!"
"They better hit 1,800 of your hurricanes before I explode."
1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK 1 Hurricane = 50,000,000 ISK
1 Titan = 1,800 Hurricanes
If this is true, then my dread should be able to kill 60 hurricanes before it explodes. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:49:00 -
[280] - Quote
I've noticed that the majority of people in favour of these changes write in nice, structured sentences with decent spelling. They tend to put forward a balanced argument and still point out where the nerfs may possibly to far, using logical reasoning.
However the majority of people against the changes rite in ..... horrible brokne english... .. . with generous levels of punctuation!!!!!! and spelllling that cums from........ the facebook skool of bashing ur....... hed agnst the keybaord lol?!?!1oneoneone/ MINUS TENN HUNDRAD ACCOUNTS CCP FK UUUU
Why is that? |
|
Mia Restolo
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:50:00 -
[281] - Quote
Most of the changes look pretty good. I do have concerns with the dread changes.
The siege timer changing to 5 min is good. The removal of the drone bay in favor of higher primary weapon damage doesn't seem all that great a move, it removes even more of the dread's limited flexibility.
|
Cuhlen
Tower of Ravens The Laughing Men
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:50:00 -
[282] - Quote
Kenerian wrote:I dont usually Voice myself in the forums but.....
I would also like to Note that the reduced time in Siege for Dreads is long overdue and it will be great to see them as a viable class of ships in eve once more.
I agree with you about the siege timer, but I must have missed the part where they said they are increasing the number of targets and improving tracking on dreads.
|
Acks
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:50:00 -
[283] - Quote
SOOOO full of win :)
Way to go CCP. |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:51:00 -
[284] - Quote
Xue Slick wrote:Simple solution... want less super capitals on the field... make them 4 times as expensive so there is less of them?
At no point in EVE's history has making a powerful thing be expensive actually succeeded in limiting its proliferation. Outposts, capitals, super capitals, T3 cruisers...they all became commonplace because players are wiling to go to great lengths to acquire them.
And that is why this very concept went into CCP Greyscales new null sec design rules. http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:52:00 -
[285] - Quote
Not bad at all. |
Indeterminacy
THORN Syndicate BricK sQuAD.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:52:00 -
[286] - Quote
Micerinos wrote:Yeahhh Welcome to hurricane online......
Where've you meen m8?
Also, I predict hilarious killmails as a direct result of the logoffski nerf. |
Vicar2008
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:52:00 -
[287] - Quote
Posting in a "Long overdue thread......" but I suppose wortht he wait |
Joshua Samson
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:53:00 -
[288] - Quote
Lan Caden wrote:Cry cry.. "Your guns can hit my hurricane!"
"They better hit 1,800 of your hurricanes before I explode."
1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK 1 Hurricane = 50,000,000 ISK
1 Titan = 1,800 Hurricanes
So thats what 2 weeks of botting for you and your comrades? |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
483
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:54:00 -
[289] - Quote
Joshua Samson wrote:Lan Caden wrote:Cry cry.. "Your guns can hit my hurricane!"
"They better hit 1,800 of your hurricanes before I explode."
1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK 1 Hurricane = 50,000,000 ISK
1 Titan = 1,800 Hurricanes So thats what 2 weeks of botting for you and your comrades?
hurricanes come from our technetium spigot |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:55:00 -
[290] - Quote
Sakaali wrote:Also, has anyone looked at the math of giving the moros a rate of fire bonus? It seems like with the way hybrids currently function its going to be brutal on its cap usage. This.
We can only wait and see what changes hybrids are getting I guess, but I hope that CCP haven't overlooked that this change will nerf the Moros in more ways than one.
CCP Zulu.....Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
|
Jackk Hammer
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:55:00 -
[291] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan? why would you put the remote tracking links on a carrier that is what the other goonNoob was saying...I guess he didn't want to say you guys couldn't kill a logi putting tracking links on a titan this is a dumb argument and you are a dumb person tracking links are stupid cheap and stupid effective and you can hide them nearly anywhere, and playing the "find the tracking links and destroy them while titans are blowing subcaps up with impunity" isn't a fun combat mechanic that aids in making combat interesting and balanced saying moronic things like "goonNoob can't kill the links" is annoying when you have failed to think through how you'd deploy the links to avoid them getting blapped (and this is stupid easy to figure out and you should have done it before posting) and keep them in numbers that avoid them easily getting cleared out before the battle is already over; you don't understand how the pieces fit together so you have no useful input on the effects of changing the pieces or failing to change them
you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think. |
MastahFR
ANZAC ALLIANCE RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:55:00 -
[292] - Quote
CCP need to consider balancing the super carrier then. because the blind -20% everything is dumb.
What about shield supercarrier especially the Hel ?!
Should I be in a giant supercoffin that i know will be primary because i'm the weakest ?
As said before, you need to balance the SC so the Hel get better tank than Nyx, and about just 15-20% less HP than Wyvern/Aeon
|
Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:56:00 -
[293] - Quote
Sounds good. Ships should be functionally destructible.
Please keep iterating on this CCP, I'm looking forward to seeing more positive tweaks Soon(tm). |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
483
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:56:00 -
[294] - Quote
Jackk Hammer wrote: you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think.
quotin dis so you can't edit it |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:57:00 -
[295] - Quote
Best nerf ever! +1 CCP |
FeralShadow
Black Storm Cartel
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:58:00 -
[296] - Quote
#1: Supercaps are still perfectly fine for the role with which they were intended; Killing Other Capitals
#2: Dreadnaughts have heightened survivability because they only need to last 5 minutes under enemy fire before receiving remote reps, while being able to damage those darn structures easier.
#3: Supercaps have a defense against subcaps; their friends. In what world are you living where you can field a single ship against multiple ships and expect to easily win? You field a super in a fight, you are committed and if the enemy has the ability and gonads to engage you, you should have backup ready. Supers aren't IWIN buttons any more, and they never should have been in the first place.
Thank god for the changes.
As an edit, I do agree the Hel is a badly tanked super, and now with the changes it is even more dangerous to fly. The Hel should be brought in line. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
123
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:59:00 -
[297] - Quote
Also, what do fighters do exactly? Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
976
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 18:59:00 -
[298] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:[Excuse me sir, but the forums have taught me that the CSM is a completely powerless entity and that the Chairmanship is a title without meaning.
I can confirm that this is indeed the case. All CSMs are mostly useless, and the Chairman is the most mostly useless of us all.
CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism! CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
Zhade Lezte
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:00:00 -
[299] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.
Excellent to know this isn't set in stone...but could you tell us the reasoning for leaving out this change? To me it seems you're leaving the ability for titans (and dreadnoughts) to easily destroy subcaps while making it significantly more difficult for the other kind of supercap (and carriers using fighters) to take out subcaps. Granted the doomsday nerf is a step in the right direction, but it seems weird to significantly nerf fighters (especially if they can't even hit stationary battleships anymore) and leave XL turrets as is. Especially, as previously mentioned, with titans being immune to hostile EWAR but not friendly EWAR. If someone can tracking link a titan I don't see why I should be prevented from using a tracking disruptor on one.
Like many others, I think the fighter nerf might need to be lessened slightly and XL gun tracking should absolutely be looked at. Hopefully SISI combat tests will illustrate this. |
Heimdallofasgard
APEX ARDENT COALITION NEM3SIS.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:00:00 -
[300] - Quote
BUT YOU NERFED THE VELDNAUGHT!!!! |
|
demonfurbie
Covert-Nexus The Obsidian Front
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:00:00 -
[301] - Quote
the issue with supers isnt the ship its self its the ability to move them with such ease
a fleet shouldnt consist of 1 plated out cyno ship a few hics and 150+ sc/titans that can jump to the 1 cyno
the sc should be able to have 20 fighters and 20 bombers in its drone bay, seeing thats all it can use now anyway the fighter change is a little too drastic, a triple extended shield rigged rokh thats being painted cant be hit if the changes go3 it also hurts the less used carrier.
the moros is gonna have huge cap issues unless they buff the cap amt/recharge
it seams like they are trying to make blobs bigger with the removal of drones, less ability for the bigger ships to kill the smaller means more people in smaller ships
the dd change is fine (still wanna see it like the the vid were it dd's a station) |
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:00:00 -
[302] - Quote
Sigras wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote:Remove Dronebay from the Titan and Dreadnought sucks also that the DD dont work on Sub-Caps ... ppff ... F*** O**
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
a Citadel Torpedo vs a Hurricane dont work. or a Siege Autocanon vs. Hurricane also dont work.
at the moment there are only Drones to fight them.
so this realy realy sucks ! That was the point . . . . did you even read the blog? let me spell it out for you YOURE NOT SUPPOSED TO FIGHT SUB-CAPS WITH CAPS, THATS WHY YOU NEED SUPPORT FLEETS NOW!
^ that |
Dirk Tungsten
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:01:00 -
[303] - Quote
Ok heres the bread and the butter of things.
Thers are by all means alot of pros that will mean fleet fights could be more Ballz deep coming from the patch, but alot of crutial badly influenced cons. The loggoff timer relooping, yes a good idea, but why introduce 20% decrease in shield/armor/structure aswell. This is giving supers/titans relatively no chance. with the aggro relooping, should keep the stats tank wise for supers/titans, but maybe balance out what currently is there. For instance Aeon should have less HP as has an isaine tank, wyvern and Nyx should tank wise be relatively unchanged. The Poor Hel should get a buff. Make it competitive.
DDs on titans should be able to hit BSs if not give them a slight tracking bonus so they are at least able to hit BSs well and have some sort of a tank lol
It seems ccp are carebearing up eve for newer players or alot of the subcap players. What they are failing to realise is that this patch will be a tradgedy for a few of those crutial points. Alot of other vets are thinking of hanging up there boots when this patch is released.
It seems heirachy has been too influenced by certain GMs CSMs that revolve around fountian region,we all know who they are. What this patch allows is certain entities that live in fountian (cough cough) to use mass blob fleets of 2000+ again and lagg out systems. There is no counter to this. What this patch is going to allow is lagg tactics and mass 2000+ man fleets to rule eve over better organised,structured & skilled alliances. Its basically allowing a bunch of noobs with no structure in there fleet to be successful. Carebearing it down. If you want to kill a titan/super then an aggressing fleet should at least have a well thought through structure an plan to there fleet, they do not deserve and should not expect to kill any supers/titans unless that is implemented.
When alot of the narrow minded people out there eventually realise what this patch will do, the pros from this patch will be massively overlooked, as this will not balance things, its only going to be putting the weight on the other end of the scales. |
mkint
127
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:02:00 -
[304] - Quote
These changes are good, I guess, except they won't fix the problem of "blobbing = winning".
Unless there's a SPECIFIC counter to supers, these changes are promoting even bigger blobs. CCP's RMT friends will still own null because they will be the only people able to meet the new standards of even bigger blobs.
Blackops should be able to solo-kill supers. |
De Bom
Iwahira Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:03:00 -
[305] - Quote
Sorry i dont understand. I dont have mothership and titans, but i can fly dreadnoughts and carriers. so basically i cant say much to supercapitals and titans I wanted to see a buff to dreadnoughts, instead i dont see that just a reduced cycle timer and half fuel consume which is quite a small buff but doesnt really make a difference because i was used that some helpful corpmate always deployed a can next to me while shooting down a pos. And i really dont care much about a can of fuel.
Dreadnoughts still are only usefull to kill statoinary targets. So please tell me where here is a balance ?
I also really dont understand why no drone bays on dreadnought, it was the only way have a chance kill a smaller ship and once run out of ammo sentry II have been quite useful. Also getting rid of a small tackler with ecm drones had a small chance to get away, but this is now all nerfed to death.
Dreadnoughts need love, not nerf.
Now fighters got a nerf which hits carrier pilots a lot. Why is is necessary to nerf carriers with fighter nerf ? I understand that supercapitals needs a rebalance, but this hits carrier pilots hard. I didnt know that it was necessary to nerf carriers. But i know that its necessary to buff dreadnought.
So for my humple view this looks like a fail.
Or please explain someone to me. |
Aversun
Systems Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:04:00 -
[306] - Quote
mkint wrote:These changes are good, I guess, except they won't fix the problem of "blobbing = winning".
Unless there's a SPECIFIC counter to supers, these changes are promoting even bigger blobs. CCP's RMT friends will still own null because they will be the only people able to meet the new standards of even bigger blobs.
Blackops should be able to solo-kill supers.
convert blackops in super-cap hunter/killer? or iterate a anti-super cap hullclass? |
Leon Razor
Measure Zero
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:04:00 -
[307] - Quote
Nice to finally see some balance changes. I wonder how this will effect hot drops (I'm a little surprised there wasn't a slight change to cyno mechanics). I can't really comment on the impact of many of the changes since it's outside my experience, but I will say great to see the log off button nerfed. That should never have been a tactical option and always felt like a cheap trick.
One more thing I would like to see added to the list is longer self destruct timers for larger ship classes (really just capital ships). Or, if a ship has taken too much damage, disable self-destruct. Now, when capital pilots know they are dead they will just self-destruct instead of logging off. Arguably, this is better, but still feels like a cheat. Also, if you ever read about some of the wormhole conflicts: when a corp under siege didn't want to fight back and would rather give up, they would hide behind their POS shield and self-destruct all of their ships before the attacker could take down the shield (reinforcement timers make this easy). While I think destroying valuable assets to keep them from you enemy is very much in the spirit of EVE and should be supported, I think it's a bit to easy. Longer timers and / or preventing self-destruct inside a POS would prevent abuse and be more in the spirit of how EVE values the risk reward dynamic. |
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:04:00 -
[308] - Quote
Jackk Hammer wrote:you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think.
I, too, fit my titans with Tracking Computers instead of Cap Rechargers. |
Sir HappyPants
Phantom Squad Atlas.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:05:00 -
[309] - Quote
FeralShadow wrote:#1: Supercaps are still perfectly fine for the role with which they were intended; Killing Other Capitals
Agreed, but that role was when people would drop caps on sub-caps (present day). Once the nerf goes live, there is no reason at all to ever drop caps in any battle outside of structure shoots. Both sides of any fight will know that a sub-cap fleet can engage and win against another sub-cap fleet AND a supercarrier fleet. Capital fleets can ONLY win against other capital fleets.
Supers are going to be POS decorations again. Member of the #TweetFleet@thisurlnotfound |
Jackk Hammer
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:06:00 -
[310] - Quote
David Carel wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think. I, too, fit my titans with Tracking Computers instead of Cap Rechargers. you guys are so dumb...how do you think the PL titans that **** you are fit? |
|
KeLLaX
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:07:00 -
[311] - Quote
Here is a Suggestion CCP, Take the Super Carrier out of the Game and give the Isk back to the pilot. This is your mistake now you should either fix it. or return the isk and take the ship out of game. You have wasted your paying members time. |
Dirk Tungsten
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:08:00 -
[312] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Ok heres the bread and the butter of things.
Thers are by all means alot of pros that will mean fleet fights could be more Ballz deep coming from the patch, but alot of crutial badly influenced cons. The loggoff timer relooping, yes a good idea, but why introduce 20% decrease in shield/armor/structure aswell. This is giving supers/titans relatively no chance. with the aggro relooping, should keep the stats tank wise for supers/titans, but maybe balance out what currently is there. For instance Aeon should have less HP as has an isaine tank, wyvern and Nyx should tank wise be relatively unchanged. The Poor Hel should get a buff. Make it competitive.
DDs on titans should be able to hit BSs if not give them a slight tracking bonus so they are at least able to hit BSs well and have some sort of a tank lol
It seems ccp are carebearing up eve for newer players or alot of the subcap players. What they are failing to realise is that this patch will be a tradgedy for a few of those crutial points. Alot of other vets are thinking of hanging up there boots when this patch is released.
It seems heirachy has been too influenced by certain GMs CSMs that revolve around fountian region,we all know who they are. What this patch allows is certain entities that live in fountian (cough cough) to use mass blob fleets of 2000+ again and lagg out systems. There will be no counter to this after the patch. What this patch is going to allow is lagg tactics and mass 2000+ man fleets to rule eve over better organised,structured & skilled alliances. Its basically allowing a bunch of noobs with no structure in there fleet to be successful. Carebearing it down. If you want to kill a titan/super then an aggressing fleet should at least have a well thought through structure an plan to there fleet, they do not deserve and should not expect to kill any supers/titans unless that is implemented.
When alot of the narrow minded people out there eventually realise what this patch will do, the pros from this patch will be massively overlooked, as this will not balance things, its only going to be putting the weight on the other end of the scales.
Mark my words im right almost all the time =) |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:09:00 -
[313] - Quote
Excellent.
Maybe from now on we'll start seing mixed fleets of caps/supers and mostly (I hope) sub caps.
I'd like to see something else than boring overviews of arty Maelstroms, 100+ super/titans landing on some POS for that exciting activity like POS bashing or alpha stuff...
Nice move, I just can't wait for hybrids changes now !! |
Lan Caden
SKULLDOGS RED.OverLord
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:09:00 -
[314] - Quote
1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK 1 Hurricane = 50,000,000 ISK
1 Titan = 1,800 Hurricanes 1 Titan = 1 Hurricane a day for 5 years
Do I get mad when I explode to one of these behemoths? No, I think, "well, that makes sense."
The log off change is great IMO. Supers will now have to be very confident in their subcap support before they expose themselves.
Just dying once, just one mistake is enormous--like you just lost a hurricane every day for the next 5 years, and there is no more "pull the internet cord" failsafe. Titans will explode more often, or at least be used less often since the log off change.
Please don't make it so they can't explode hurricanes, it's the whole reason I save money in this game. The idea that "one day" I can murder small fleet all by myself.
|
Heimdallofasgard
APEX ARDENT COALITION NEM3SIS.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:10:00 -
[315] - Quote
KeLLaX wrote:Here is a Suggestion CCP, Take the Super Carrier out of the Game and give the Isk back to the pilot. This is your mistake now you should either fix it. or return the isk and take the ship out of game. You have wasted your paying members time.
wow... he mad... hah
BUT YOU NERFED THE VELDNAUGHT!!!! *SADFACE* |
Molyse Shakiel
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:10:00 -
[316] - Quote
Hp nerf od supers is too big for shield sc and much to low for armors1.
Titans still have insane tracking, right now on sisi u can insta kill bs without any tracking modules. With them any ship
Dread after patch will still colect dust in hangars. |
Pilk
Evolution The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:10:00 -
[317] - Quote
xxxak wrote:So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. We often enjoy comparing EVE SCs to the real-life ones. In this scenario, you're telling me that my USS Enterprise cannot do anything to stop some dude standing on the deck of a tugboat, vigorously slapping her across the bow with a piece of fresh mozzarella, from sinking her.
I think the Enterprise's captain, if faced with a similar scenario and if saddled with a bunch of planes that for some reason cannot hit the tugboat, would climb down from the tower himself in order to shoot the tugboat captain in the face. I mean, honestly, what is your goal here? If you want to reduce the number of fights that happen in EVE, this is a great way to do it. The probability of me wanting to go into a battle we might not win just dropped to zero; at least before, I might be able to work with my fellow supers and clear off the tacklers to get more people home safely. Now I'm just committing a 20B ISK bullet-sponge.
Fix the logoff timer, fine. Limit the number of drones of a given type--a little crazy, but okay. But being unable to even hit subcaps? Why am I not just flying a dread, then?
One last note: it was already a PitA that you didn't give us room to carry a full flight of both FBs and fighters, along with even a single additional light drone, in any SC but the Nyx. Now that the supposed reason for that decision is gone, we're further restricted to only carrying less than a flight-and-a-half of ONE type of drone? Before you say we can swap out at will, try it. Move 125,000 m3 out to a supercarrier in a POS and back for me. Let me know how enjoyable that is, let alone doing it for a fleet of 20 supers that are deployed in hostile territory, ten jumps from the nearest friendly station.
Then again, given these changes, I suppose there won't be hostile territory, let alone supercaps therein, pretty soon.
--P |
Andrea Griffin
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:10:00 -
[318] - Quote
CCP Zirnitra wrote:I AM ZULUPARK! And I am confused. Was there a name change? It's not you guys who need to repair what has been broken, it's us. CCP Wrangler |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
483
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:10:00 -
[319] - Quote
Jackk Hammer wrote:David Carel wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think. I, too, fit my titans with Tracking Computers instead of Cap Rechargers. you guys are so dumb...how do you think the PL titans that **** you are fit?
seriously i want you to go into eft and play with serpentis tracking links and figure out why all I bothered to do was quote your post so you couldn't edit it |
wolftin21
The Colonial Forces ROMANIAN-LEGION
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:11:00 -
[320] - Quote
Why in the heck Is CCP not going to boost the Black ops ships frist,as the black ops ship have been needing a boost for a very long time now,I suggest dealing with the black ops ships frist, then deal with the capitals. I know about the issues with the capital but, dont yall think the blops need the winter patch frist? if yall are wanting more pvp with the blops then boost them frist or put both the blops and the capitals patch in one.So get off yalls lazy butts stop nerfing/boosting with out hearing what the players have to say after all its the players that keeping the game and CCP alive, Am I correct? I am confindent that the pvp players of eve will argee with me. So chop chop with the blops boost and make eve even better on the blops pvp side. Thanks
Wolftin21 |
|
mkint
127
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:11:00 -
[321] - Quote
Aversun wrote:mkint wrote:These changes are good, I guess, except they won't fix the problem of "blobbing = winning".
Unless there's a SPECIFIC counter to supers, these changes are promoting even bigger blobs. CCP's RMT friends will still own null because they will be the only people able to meet the new standards of even bigger blobs.
Blackops should be able to solo-kill supers. convert blackops in super-cap hunter/killer? or iterate a anti-super cap hullclass?
Whichever. However, I think it would be a suitable upgrade to existing blackops. They are useless in a fight right now, they are mostly just a support ship. Their tank is weak enough that it wouldn't take a lot of subcaps to kill one. Their DPS is weak enough and their expense is high enough that they wouldn't be a suitable replacement for a subcap fleet.
In other words, they would be a good counter mostly as is. A good counter promotes SMALLER fleets, not bigger. |
TommyMc88
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:11:00 -
[322] - Quote
Solid changes and good to see, I've just re-started my Revelation training.
One suggestion on the SC nerf though, since they can no longer carry Sentry drones it would be nice if their FighterBombers had some way of hitting the Control Tower of a POS.
Atleast that way they serve more than 1 purpose of pos killing other than incapping mods. I think SC's should have the ability to deal direct damage to control towers. Would make the whole pos bash thing less boring. And it's not as though this change will have a major effect on gameplay. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:11:00 -
[323] - Quote
Sir HappyPants wrote:
Supers are going to be POS decorations again.
yeah , and this is ****
|
Nagapito
the muppets RED.OverLord
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:11:00 -
[324] - Quote
demonfurbie wrote: the sc should be able to have 20 fighters and 20 bombers in its drone bay, seeing thats all it can use now anyway the fighter change is a little too drastic, a triple extended shield rigged rokh thats being painted cant be hit if the changes go3 it also hurts the less used carrier.
CCP Tallest wrote: Increase signature resolution to 400
Why you say that you need to paint a ship that already as a sig radius higher then 400? BS's have a sig radius higher then 400, so I dont understand this problem with the fighters. In my opinion, FB should have a higher sig resolution, like 1000! They are not meant to shoot sub-caps!!!
demonfurbie wrote: less ability for the bigger ships to kill the smaller means more people in smaller ships
I like the way you realize the objective but still in denial! |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:12:00 -
[325] - Quote
I'm going on a roam now, so I'll develop later, but I am very disappointed in these changes.
1/ the biggest issue with motherships wan't their offense, but their near invulnerability when in large groups. Nothing has been done about that.
2/ The dred boost turn out not to be a boost after all. it's not those change that will make them used.
3/ To kill a supercap, a subcap fleet will have to be built around battlecruisers and battleships. Fighters will still be fairly effective against those, so a subcap escort isn't mandatory.
4/ titan tracking: nothing done about that.
This is still Supercap Online.
Need to go, I'll expand later. |
iudex
State Protectorate Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:12:00 -
[326] - Quote
Can you create NPC buy orders for MS BPOs ? I'd like to sell researched ones for 80-90% of their NPC value, now that you made them completely useless. |
Camar
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:12:00 -
[327] - Quote
David Carel wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think. I, too, fit my titans with Tracking Computers instead of Cap Rechargers. quotin this to lol @ later |
BuBuKiGeR
No.Mercy Merciless.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:12:00 -
[328] - Quote
Super carriers only being able to carry fighters and bombers is fine. But why nurf the drone bay size and the damage of fighters subcaps? that is stupid. You not only super carriers but now carriers? So we just suppose to use carrier to move our ships around now I guess? |
glepp
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:13:00 -
[329] - Quote
My God, CCP actually doing stuff right?
What happened to my favorite Icelandic Indie Company?
(Btw, while you're at it with doing stuff right, the Moros needs a cap recharge boost to go with the increased rate of fire) |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
483
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:13:00 -
[330] - Quote
wolftin21 wrote:Why in the heck Is CCP not going to boost the Black ops ships frist,as the black ops ship have been needing a boost for a very long time now,I suggest dealing with the black ops ships frist, then deal with the capitals. I know about the issues with the capital but, dont yall think the blops need the winter patch frist? if yall are wanting more pvp with the blops then boost them frist or put both the blops and the capitals patch in one.So get off yalls lazy butts stop nerfing/boosting with out hearing what the players have to say after all its the players that keeping the game and CCP alive, Am I correct? I am confindent that the pvp players of eve will argee with me. So chop chop with the blops boost and make eve even better on the blops pvp side. Thanks Wolftin21
i too wonder why subcap buffs were not discussed in a supercap nerf blog |
|
Mik kyo
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:14:00 -
[331] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:David Carel wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think. I, too, fit my titans with Tracking Computers instead of Cap Rechargers. you guys are so dumb...how do you think the PL titans that **** you are fit? seriously i want you to go into eft and play with serpentis tracking links and figure out why all I bothered to do was quote your post so you couldn't edit it
Quoting to prevent edit. |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:14:00 -
[332] - Quote
CCP really?
I understand the need to nerf super carrier drone options, however limiting super carriers to a load out of fighters OR bombers based on drone bay size doesn't make sense. Allow supers to fit a flight of 20 bombers AND 20 fighters in a drone bay.
EHP nerf is really un-called for. Supers die pretty quick as it is. Perhaps considering a change to the Aeon's slot layout is in line, like 7 lows 5 mids, but sub and cap gangs can down a super pretty quickly in today's EVE.
You really didn't do anything for dreads. What is the logic behind the timer reduction? To benefit large alliance in sov warfare? Are you going to drastically reduce POS hit points? At current in EVE if you have enough dreads to down a large tower in 5 minutes, no one is going to want to "hot drop' that gang, or at least 99.99% of the time wouldn't have the force put together in the 10 minutes the dreads are sat there for. So I ask what does the 5 minute timer do for a small group of dreads when they will have to sit on the tower for 20 to 30 minutes anyway?
The results I see from your changes: Titans will still dominate in large cap fights, super carriers will suck unless you are in a massive blob, dreads will still suck, sub caps will own super caps even more than they do at current in EVE.
|
Kelly O'Connor
Resilience. Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:14:00 -
[333] - Quote
20% less of everything on my already pretty 'lacking in tank' Rag.
Sad day indeed :(
Kelly |
Zhade Lezte
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:16:00 -
[334] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Ok heres the bread and the butter of things.
Thers are by all means alot of pros that will mean fleet fights could be more Ballz deep coming from the patch, but alot of crutial badly influenced cons. The loggoff timer relooping, yes a good idea, but why introduce 20% decrease in shield/armor/structure aswell. This is giving supers/titans relatively no chance. with the aggro relooping, should keep the stats tank wise for supers/titans, but maybe balance out what currently is there. For instance Aeon should have less HP as has an isaine tank, wyvern and Nyx should tank wise be relatively unchanged. The Poor Hel should get a buff. Make it competitive.
DDs on titans should be able to hit BSs if not give them a slight tracking bonus so they are at least able to hit BSs well and have some sort of a tank lol
It seems ccp are carebearing up eve for newer players or alot of the subcap players. What they are failing to realise is that this patch will be a tradgedy for a few of those crutial points. Alot of other vets are thinking of hanging up there boots when this patch is released.
It seems heirachy has been too influenced by certain GMs CSMs that revolve around fountian region,we all know who they are. What this patch allows is certain entities that live in fountian (cough cough) to use mass blob fleets of 2000+ again and lagg out systems. There is no counter to this. What this patch is going to allow is lagg tactics and mass 2000+ man fleets to rule eve over better organised,structured & skilled alliances. Its basically allowing a bunch of noobs with no structure in there fleet to be successful. Carebearing it down. If you want to kill a titan/super then an aggressing fleet should at least have a well thought through structure an plan to there fleet, they do not deserve and should not expect to kill any supers/titans unless that is implemented.
When alot of the narrow minded people out there eventually realise what this patch will do, the pros from this patch will be massively overlooked, as this will not balance things, its only going to be putting the weight on the other end of the scales.
I love this post so much. "Carebearing" is apparently now extended to all pvp pilots who don't fly capital ships.
:tinfoil: Developerswarm :tinfoil:. Look up time dilation in the latest blogs, no one likes lag. With all hope there will be one less excuse for the losers of a fight soon enough. Blobbing will happen no matter what so v0v, chuckling at the thought that Goonswarm and allies are never outnumbered in, say, Euro TZ.
I wouldn't particularly mind battleships being doomsdayable, but if they put a crucial support role in the battleship class that might make things difficult. A tracking bonus to titans when they can already track subcaps with links is laughable.
And I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you that minmatar supercaps (and capital missile weapons) could use some looking at.
|
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
484
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:16:00 -
[335] - Quote
Mik kyo wrote:Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:David Carel wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:you're just another goonNoob talking what you know nothing about...
stacking penalties combined with the fact that you end up with a higher tracking speed by using 3 x faction/officer tracking computers than having 3 x tracking link put on you means they are nowhere near as useful as you think. I, too, fit my titans with Tracking Computers instead of Cap Rechargers. you guys are so dumb...how do you think the PL titans that **** you are fit? seriously i want you to go into eft and play with serpentis tracking links and figure out why all I bothered to do was quote your post so you couldn't edit it Quoting to prevent edit.
oh i'm not agreeing with the cap recharger guy either |
steave435
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:17:00 -
[336] - Quote
Nagapito wrote:demonfurbie wrote: the sc should be able to have 20 fighters and 20 bombers in its drone bay, seeing thats all it can use now anyway the fighter change is a little too drastic, a triple extended shield rigged rokh thats being painted cant be hit if the changes go3 it also hurts the less used carrier.
CCP Tallest wrote: Increase signature resolution to 400
Why you say that you need to paint a ship that already as a sig radius higher then 400? BS's have a sig radius higher then 400, so I dont understand this problem with the fighters. In my opinion, FB should have a higher sig resolution, like 1000! They are not meant to shoot sub-caps!!! demonfurbie wrote: less ability for the bigger ships to kill the smaller means more people in smaller ships
I like the way you realize the objective but still in denial! You don't understand how tracking works, sig is just a multiplier to tracking. This change cuts the fighters tracking down to one third of what it used to be.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:17:00 -
[337] - Quote
Sakaali wrote:Also, has anyone looked at the math of giving the moros a rate of fire bonus? It seems like with the way hybrids currently function its going to be brutal on its cap usage.
I'd really appreciate some comment on this. My cap usage in a Moros is borderline unstable without the reps running as it is now and I have almost perfect skills. Stick a rate of fire bonus on and you risk being unable to fire constantly for a whole siege cycle, especially if you're sieging straight from a jump. |
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:17:00 -
[338] - Quote
Jackk Hammer wrote:That reply to my previous post. I misquoted and cannot be arsed to find that abomination of his.
https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/view_kill.php?id=342709 Like that perhaps? |
Needa3
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:18:00 -
[339] - Quote
thank you CCP for just making me not really want to care about your game anymore
I like how certain groups in Eve got their "things" implemented
was a fun 6 years but if this is what needs to bring your players back .... keep trying... someday you might get it right |
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:18:00 -
[340] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Ok heres the bread and the butter of things.
I knew not you could deliver such things upon us lesser folk! Guide us oh prophet.
Dirk Tungsten wrote: Thers are by all means alot of pros that will mean fleet fights could be more Ballz deep coming from the patch, but alot of crutial badly influenced cons. The loggoff timer relooping, yes a good idea, but why introduce 20% decrease in shield/armor/structure aswell. This is giving supers/titans relatively no chance.
No chance? In that context no chance = no chance to run off using a broken game mechanic. There shouldn't have been a chance in the first place.
I know what you are trying to say, but in that regard it is faulty logic as well. The super is still super, it still has more EHP than a dozen subcaps combined. These changes will allow for the subcapitals to matter in a much greater capacity than before, your supers now need support to take out the smaller ships. Rather than wiping all the meaningful subcap primaries whenever they please. There is now some more strategy to consider, some more angles to fight from instead of barreling through with the same ****.
What does this add? More teamwork, less separation between the cap squads and subcap squads. Plus the ability for the subcaps to matter when your side has less caps but more of them.
Dirk Tungsten wrote: It seems ccp are carebearing up eve for newer players or alot of the subcap players. What they are failing to realise is that this patch will be a tradgedy for a few of those crutial points. Alot of other vets are thinking of hanging up there boots when this patch is released.
Oh I am sorry do you mean to say that you actually have to participate and get involved in the majority of your alliance membership? That you actually need to be listening in the same TS channel? Oh the tragedy of having to rely on your 'lesser' corp mates to save your back once in a while. The ******* horror!
Dirk Tungsten wrote: It seems heirachy has been too influenced by certain GMs CSMs that revolve around fountian region,we all know who they are.
More great insights into our collective minds! |
|
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
484
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:19:00 -
[341] - Quote
David Carel wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan? why would you put the remote tracking links on a carrier that is what the other goonNoob was saying...I guess he didn't want to say you guys couldn't kill a logi putting tracking links on a titan https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/view_kill.php?id=342709Like that perhaps? that was a bad fit fyi |
Ogogov
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:20:00 -
[342] - Quote
So now the Moros will suck even more?
|
Nemesis Factor
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:20:00 -
[343] - Quote
Kelly O'Connor wrote:20% less of everything on my already pretty 'lacking in tank' Rag.
Sad day indeed :(
Kelly
Fakeedit: Can we have Low Sec DDs now since we can't drive by undocking BSs? :)
Go get it blown up for a change. When was the last time you got out of that ship anyway? I'll bet your pod smells like New Jersey. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:20:00 -
[344] - Quote
Ogogov wrote:So now the Moros will suck even more?
Looks that way atm. CCP Zulu.....Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:20:00 -
[345] - Quote
steave435 wrote: You don't understand how tracking works, sig is just a multiplier to tracking. This change cuts the fighters tracking down to one third of what it used to be.
That's pretty stupid and unintuitive by the way. While CCP is on it, they should do something about that as well |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:21:00 -
[346] - Quote
Just some observations from my perspective...
While I agree supercaps are currently overpowered; I feel you're only addressing the concerns of the 0.0 power blocks here with these changes to capital ships. Don't forget the smaller groups using capital ships and smaller scale capship fights (that will hopefully now happen again more frequently).
My concerns regarding capitals (and the proposed changes) are that:
1. (a) Titan Bridging is ruining a lot of low sec (sub-capital) fleet fights. The ability for an entire subcap fleet to appear on the field with perhaps 1 second of warning is...yes I'm going to say it....unfair. 1. (b) While I'm at it I think the whole jump mechanics need changing to give a little more warning after a cyno goes up to pilots on the field. - My suggestion is that there is some delay mechanic for jumping through a portal. This could be achieved by either 30 second spool up of the cyno field, the cyno changing colour for 30s when it gets locked onto by the jump portal or some such. Perhaps even staggering the arrival of the jumping ships on grid by mass, i dunno.
2. Removing all point defense from dreadnaughts in the form of their dronebays is unnecessary. It has been a long time now since I saw a station gank Moros - I think you're unnecessarily making these ships even more vulnerable. I agree with it to a degree on supercapitals, but why dreadnaughts too? - Dreads should at least have 25m3 of light drones to stop getting killed after 3 hours from being pointed by a solo dramiel that happened to see you undock from a kickout station. I don't agree that to even undock a dread means you should need to have have some massive support fleet.
Other than that I support the changes to Titans, Supercarriers (for the most part) and the dread seige timer. One last thing, please differentiate the new Block ops cyno effect from the ordinary cyno effect and we are getting there.
Cheers. |
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:21:00 -
[347] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:David Carel wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Weaselior wrote:Jackk Hammer wrote:Are goons not capable of killing a carrier putting remote tracking links on a titan? why would you put the remote tracking links on a carrier that is what the other goonNoob was saying...I guess he didn't want to say you guys couldn't kill a logi putting tracking links on a titan https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/view_kill.php?id=342709Like that perhaps? that was a bad fit fyi
The only PL Avatar I could find with a fit on it. Their Erebuses all have Tracking Computers but then again they don't use lasers.
|
Darius III
Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD.
155
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:22:00 -
[348] - Quote
The CSM has spent a lot of time working with CCP on this issue.For myself, I stayed on the logoffski issue more than anything else-as this too, will help reduce the SC hulls. While I do not think that this nerf package is 'the perfect solution' it is great steps in the right direction. As Two-Step pointed out, if you have something to add, this thread would be a good place.
This shows that CCP is taking to heart player concerns and moving forward in a timely manner. Hats off to them for taking initiative and getting this done sooner than later. It is my honest belief after having seen Hillmars blog-that CCP will be delivering us many more good fixes in the near future.
"We are changing the logoff mechanics in such a way that as long as your enemies are actively engaged in fighting you, logging off is not going to save your ship."
If Women aren't supposed to do the cooking, why are their bodies full of milk and eggs? |
gfldex
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:25:00 -
[349] - Quote
"CCP Tallest" wrote:Increase signature resolution to 400
Have a look here.
If you don't want to bring a rapier you can have the same effect with a gallente commandship/T3 giving bonus to paintes on any ship that got a few spare med slots. Drone tracking links help too, ofc. That's a huge nerf for shield tanked carrier/SC.
The main problem of dreads was not the length of the siege timer. If you require to be in siege for 5 minutes and 1 second, you are sill in siege for 10 minutes because you can't break a running siege cycle. So not only wont it solve any problems, it's not even doing the intended thing.
Real problems of dreads:
You can't have RR in siege on you. Given the lack of HP compared to SC this is a huge back draw. If you have lots of HP you can get quite a few remote repper cycles on you before you pop. Armor dreads start with less HP and can't reach the same resistance because they have to fit damage mods. Lowering base HP for SC wont change anything.
Jump in mechanics. Some dreads need capa to run their guns. Big disadvantage to SC. In a big fight you will most likely be bumped right after jump in/warp in. If you siege right away you will hit jack all and be low on capa. Another problem not addressed. (Why was that *beep* added to the game anyway?) SC _like_ being bumped because it makes them harder to hit. Big disadvantage for dreads.
Painters work much better for fighters/fighter bombers then for guns because of bigger base values. As shown above SC will still do just fine if they bring painters. At the other hand dreads can not receive tracking links while in siege.
Lock time and esp. maximum locked targets. In a lag free fight or with time dilation targets pop so quickly compared to lock time of dreads that SC/Titans have a huge advantage. You can actually get a lock on targets. You can remove SeBo supers, you can't with dreads in siege.
If your enemy is to stupid to bomb your fighters/f-bombers SC will be much much better all the time. In the situations where you use f-bombers bombs are tricky to use. There are plenty of ships that can kill a bomber before it's bomb goes off.
About the logoff mechanics: Do you intend to add the micro smart bomb back into the game too? |
Florestan Bronstein
United Engineering Services
93
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:25:00 -
[350] - Quote
Pilk wrote:We often enjoy comparing EVE SCs to the real-life ones. In this scenario, you're telling me that my USS Enterprise cannot do anything to stop some dude standing on the deck of a tugboat, vigorously slapping her across the bow with a piece of fresh mozzarella, from sinking her. hmm... you think the USS Enterprise was engineered to provoke fun & interesting fights? |
|
Kim Wilde
Covenant
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:27:00 -
[351] - Quote
my only annoyance here is that titans are now completly dependant on sub caps to remove tackle for em allow the doomsday to atleast shoot on hic's/dic's so they remain with a slim chance to get out of any cluster fucks that the node create from lag etc |
Bratwurst0r
Austrian Industrial Corporation Universal Constant Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:27:00 -
[352] - Quote
Finally. I have been waiting so long for this, its LONG overdue.
Now, as mentioned already, a few kinks to work out:
- fighters.....well, doing it like this = making carriers suffer alot. Also, making fighters obsolete as they don't even hit BS anymore for full dmg? Its unnecessary. With the dronebay nerf and the possibility to kill the damn things you don't need to nerf them into uselessnes.
- EW immunity: it should be simple, EW immunity should also negate friendly ew, = tracking links etc. Why this wasn't like that from the beginning i don't know.
- ehp nerf. well, ok, if you need to. but there is no reason really. loggofski is fixed, more time in battle is a GOOD thing. they don't have to die faster. If you do it, look at the HEL and rebalance that ship.
- Titans: good so far, just in conjunction with remote-friendly-ew there is still a problem. you can fix this on the ship, or genereally.
- Carriers: now here it gets hairy. thy can't kill caps as it is (intended), now they have a hard time with subcaps too (fighters?). Give them fighter boni, but better yet, don't nerf fighters |
DeDe hungry
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:28:00 -
[353] - Quote
Quote: 1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK
Wait... WHAT?
Quote: These changes are good, I guess, except they won't fix the problem of "blobbing = winning".
Sub-cap Blob? You have tools to counter them (but that requires brain, and skill ), or supercap blobing? Eh with this future modifications, without a good support fleet, You will counter them too.
So for super pilot you can, right clic and self dstruct like a B****.
Also, i love this devblog, But the Moros, with new Bonus that not really good idea (Or with the re-balancing of Hybrid weapons! mmmh! Want to see that).
Cap Usage on Hybrid... rate of fire Bonus
|
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
63
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:29:00 -
[354] - Quote
...my faith is being restored...
I'm getting the itch (almost!) to return to null sec...
These are great changes!
I think the other problems addressed in this thread are being looked at... btw
I'm for one looking forward to how CCP tackles the logistics "teleporting across the galaxy" problem and logistics in general... (my personal deal maker) but I will say that this is the right way to go and the way we should have been going all along!
Nice work! Bring supercappocalypse fights!
I have ships to buy... ALL GëívGëí Ships | Odd-áGëívGëí Items | <-- Links to showInfo in-game |
Zhade Lezte
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:29:00 -
[355] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:CCP really?
I understand the need to nerf super carrier drone options, however limiting super carriers to a load out of fighters OR bombers based on drone bay size doesn't make sense. Allow supers to fit a flight of 20 bombers AND 20 fighters in a drone bay.
EHP nerf is really un-called for. Supers die pretty quick as it is. Perhaps considering a change to the Aeon's slot layout is in line, like 7 lows 5 mids, but sub and cap gangs can down a super pretty quickly in today's EVE.
You really didn't do anything for dreads. What is the logic behind the timer reduction? To benefit large alliance in sov warfare? Are you going to drastically reduce POS hit points? At current in EVE if you have enough dreads to down a large tower in 5 minutes, no one is going to want to "hot drop' that gang, or at least 99.99% of the time wouldn't have the force put together in the 10 minutes the dreads are sat there for. So I ask what does the 5 minute timer do for a small group of dreads when they will have to sit on the tower for 20 to 30 minutes anyway?
The results I see from your changes: Titans will still dominate in large cap fights, super carriers will suck unless you are in a massive blob, dreads will still suck, sub caps will own super caps even more than they do at current in EVE.
Not going to frankly even bother to go over where I strongly disagree with you ("sub caps will own super caps even more than they do at current in EVE."...uhhh) but some comments.
Giving supers (and maybe carriers just cause) a larger drone bay to be able to have a full flight of bombers and fighters compensated with an EHP nerf on those fighters/bombers would be something to consider. As a drone using pilot I like having drone versatility as well, but the idea is to make taking out a supercarrier's drones a viable strategy. Make their build costs lower as well if replacing more lost drones is a significant complaint.
The timer reduction is so that if your scouts see someone forming up to hotdrop and gank your dreads you actually have some hope to get the heck out, since currently a dreads tank is like paper to supercaps. This means that a smaller alliance can actually hope to use dreads to siege a tower or whatever without making them incredibly vulnerable to a larger alliance with a large supercapital fleet like the DRF, PL, or say...Goonswarm Federation. Note the reduction in fuel for the cycle as well, nothing is being changed to the rate dreads can siege a tower.
|
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:30:00 -
[356] - Quote
0.008 with 4x Serpentis Tracking Link, 0.009 with 2x Serpentis TC, both with Tracking Speed.
But you can't always cynoout (cap <70%), and you have reduced neut resistance. Hell yeah.
|
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:30:00 -
[357] - Quote
while i agree with most of teh changes, why are you screwing the moros again? no drones. your joking right? CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:31:00 -
[358] - Quote
Florestan Bronstein wrote:Pilk wrote:We often enjoy comparing EVE SCs to the real-life ones. In this scenario, you're telling me that my USS Enterprise cannot do anything to stop some dude standing on the deck of a tugboat, vigorously slapping her across the bow with a piece of fresh mozzarella, from sinking her. hmm... you think the USS Enterprise was engineered to provoke fun & interesting fights?
^ That
This is a game, a lot of complexity in it sure, and in the end it has to be fun. These changes, and the clear iterations upon them, will bring about the said fun in far greater bundles than ever before. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
417
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:31:00 -
[359] - Quote
Pilk wrote:We often enjoy comparing EVE SCs to the real-life ones. In this scenario, you're telling me that my USS Enterprise cannot do anything to stop some dude standing on the deck of a tugboat, vigorously slapping her across the bow with a piece of fresh mozzarella, from sinking her. Suggested reading: USS Cole and Millennium Challenge 2002. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Spectre80
The Knights Templar Cascade Imminent
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:32:00 -
[360] - Quote
Ale Tricio wrote:Again CCP just hoping to hold onto their new pubbie players by screwing those that have spent years earning their supercaps
-3 accounts
good riddance to you and your supers.
|
|
SXYGeeK
Tera Incognita Rolling Thunder.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:32:00 -
[361] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Weaselior wrote:xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat Bingo. That is exactly why.
fighter and fighter bombers are large in volume. Having a bay that can not contain even 1 full flight of each option will force the supercarrier pilot to decide if it's fighter or bombers before leaving their control tower. and make logistics of moving the spare fighters around a real pain.
I think it would be acceptable to give the pilot the choice of having all of one type in order to replace some as they are lost, or the versatility of one flight of each. |
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:33:00 -
[362] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:while i agree with most of teh changes, why are you screwing the moros again? no drones. your joking right?
Keep in mind: Hybrids are being overhauled. in this same patch.
Wait and see the latter dev blogs on them before complaining that they have broken your Gallente submarine. |
Zhade Lezte
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:34:00 -
[363] - Quote
Spectre80 wrote:[quote=Ale Tricio]Again CCP just hoping to hold onto their new pubbie players by screwing those that have spent years earning their supercaps
-3 accounts
<< 3 accounts that won't be leaving this game due to ridiculous supercaps right here.
|
Blake Zacary
Volatile Nature White Noise.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:37:00 -
[364] - Quote
When will this be deployed on sisi for testing ?
Are the future changes intended to encourage blobs is this why time dilation is being pushed so much or can we expect more changes that will promote tactics.skill and imagination into pvp,instead of just gathering en masse and pressing F1 ? |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:37:00 -
[365] - Quote
SXYGeeK wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Weaselior wrote:xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat Bingo. That is exactly why. fighter and fighter bombers are large in volume. Having a bay that can not contain even 1 full flight of each option will force the supercarrier pilot to decide if it's fighter or bombers before leaving their control tower. and make logistics of moving the spare fighters around a real pain. I think it would be acceptable to give the pilot the choice of having all of one type in order to replace some as they are lost, or the versatility of one flight of each.
If only Jumpf Freighters could jump as far as Supercaps and carry a lot of FBs in their cargohold to restock them between engagements.
|
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
103
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:37:00 -
[366] - Quote
Bratwurst0r wrote: - Carriers: now here it gets hairy. thy can't kill caps as it is (intended), now they have a hard time with subcaps too (fighters?). Give them fighter boni, but better yet, don't nerf fighters
I agree with this. What exactly are the carriers supposed to do? They are too weak to fight other caps and too blunt to fight subcaps. Are they reduced to pure logistics ships or what? |
Draculina Alucardi
New.Lab.Era
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:38:00 -
[367] - Quote
gimme a good reason, to do not stop training a SC pilot, and not canceling the account which i made specially for it, to use it for PVE and sometimes for PVP (i mean superbs); CCP please take away the drone bay from carriers too, so we could use them only for moving stuff and RR fleet <3
|
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:39:00 -
[368] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:Bratwurst0r wrote: - Carriers: now here it gets hairy. thy can't kill caps as it is (intended), now they have a hard time with subcaps too (fighters?). Give them fighter boni, but better yet, don't nerf fighters
I agree with this. What exactly are the carriers supposed to do? They are too weak to fight other caps and too blunt to fight subcaps. Are they reduced to pure logistics ships or what?
it looks like there only expensiv logistics with no tank , nothing more , nothing less
|
Sir HappyPants
Phantom Squad Atlas.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:39:00 -
[369] - Quote
All the debate over 1 full flight of fighter bombers and fighters is pointless. If fighters can no longer hit anything BS and smaller, then we just need to stuff fighter bombers in the drone bay all the time. Fighter Bombers can hit caps and structures for full damage for the most part. Nerfing fighters just made them completely obsolete. Member of the #TweetFleet@thisurlnotfound |
Lu Yuan
Missions Mining and Mayhem Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:41:00 -
[370] - Quote
Did you'z ever consider its not the supers or the capitals that need nerfed its all the rest of the ships ingame need a boost...,.. caus most r useless to some certain extent |
|
Sarrgon
Avalonians United
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:41:00 -
[371] - Quote
Also what I think a lot are forgetting is the effect this will have on the mineral market. For how many of them are now going for caps and super caps, with a big reduction in the demand for caps of any kind, means a lot more minerals that will remain on the market and prices will crash. Needs to be some sort of balance in there to equal it out. Or Eve's economy will be worse then what it is now. |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:42:00 -
[372] - Quote
steave435 wrote:Nagapito wrote:demonfurbie wrote: the sc should be able to have 20 fighters and 20 bombers in its drone bay, seeing thats all it can use now anyway the fighter change is a little too drastic, a triple extended shield rigged rokh thats being painted cant be hit if the changes go3 it also hurts the less used carrier.
CCP Tallest wrote: Increase signature resolution to 400
Why you say that you need to paint a ship that already as a sig radius higher then 400? BS's have a sig radius higher then 400, so I dont understand this problem with the fighters. In my opinion, FB should have a higher sig resolution, like 1000! They are not meant to shoot sub-caps!!! demonfurbie wrote: less ability for the bigger ships to kill the smaller means more people in smaller ships
I like the way you realize the objective but still in denial! You don't understand how tracking works, sig is just a multiplier to tracking. This change cuts the fighters tracking down to one third of what it used to be.
CCP feels fighters should only be effective in capital combat.... because carriers don't fill a support / anti-support role in this game.
I was hopeful when CCP's CEO sent the "I'm sorry for doing stupid things to this game letter", now I just feel broken inside.
|
BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:43:00 -
[373] - Quote
First reactions...
Quote:We are increasing the signature resolution on fighters so that they deal less damage to smaller targets. As a carrier pilot, I hope this isn't enough to affect the damage fighters do to battleships. Smaller targets sure, fine, but IMO carriers are a good in between for the subcap/supercap line. They should be able to do a good amount of damage to both without being OP. I'm not a super pilot, so I'll let someone else comment on that, but I don't think the amount of damage a fighter from a carrier can do to a battleship should be changed.
Quote:We are also completely removing the drone bays of titans and dreadnoughts. Underlined the part I'm concerned with. Dreads aren't like supers, they can't launch 20 of (X) drone type, and they don't have a huge bay that can hold hundreds of (X), (Y), and (Z) drone. I'm not a titan pilot, but I would think the same would go for them. Perhaps reducing some of the drone bays into the 100m3 or below range, but not completely removed. I think this change should be dropped. The rest of the (dread) changes I agree with, it'll make dreads much more useful.
Quote:Logging off should not be a viable tactic Does this affect other capital/subcapitals as well? I like this part though.
The only real part I don't like is what the fighter change will do to a normal carrier. I think it's intended to be an additional nerf to supers and prevent them from welping subcap fleets, but I don't think a change to carriers is needed. They weren't addressed anywhere in this dev blog. I know from first hand experience that subcap fleets can and will take down a carrier very quickly. I urge CCP to address and revisit what may be an unintended change to standard carriers. |
Kuhn Arashi
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:43:00 -
[374] - Quote
Question:
Now that Dreads and Titans do not have drone bays, will the need for Capital drone bay parts be needed in their construction? If not, you just made capital ships a little cheaper, by how much I don't feel like calculating.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Concern: Fighter resolution.
Understandable that you want to limit Supercarrier effectiveness against subcaps. However In the same blog you said we should bring carriers to deal with subcaps.
I know that carriers can still use smaller drones, but those are easily taken out with smartbomb blobs from the supers the subcaps are supporting, and easily taken out with a bomber run.
Carriers main weapons should still be fighters, and fighters deployed from carriers should be able to fight battleships at the very least. If this does not occur when these changes are put out, carriers will be resigned to supporting supercaps as rep fleet instead of supporting subcap and dread fleets.
|
PAGAN585
EON Solutions Narwhals Ate My Duck
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:43:00 -
[375] - Quote
And now what am i going to do if i want to be that guy that only has rep drones in my sc drone bay?
you cant keep taking the option of being a bad pilot out of the equation.
also as many have stated the hel is a piece of garbage. there really is no good reason to upgrade from a nid to the hel if you are a minmi purist. |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:44:00 -
[376] - Quote
Metis Laxon wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:while i agree with most of teh changes, why are you screwing the moros again? no drones. your joking right? Keep in mind: Hybrids are being overhauled. in this same patch. Wait and see the latter dev blogs on them before complaining that they have broken your Gallente submarine.
yeh i have thought about that, but unless there getting a massive boost to hybrids. blasters are god dam useless at even shooting a pos, much less fleet fights, rails are so meh on damage currently its laughible, you have just made the moros worthless, next to a rev, instant ammo swaps, ammo taht dosnt run out. the same dps.. ok why am i bothering with a moros again?
rest of teh changes make sence, but this one to me dosnt.
CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
417
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:44:00 -
[377] - Quote
Lu Yuan wrote:Did you'z ever consider its not the supers or the capitals that need nerfed its all the rest of the ships ingame need a boost...,.. caus most r useless to some certain extent No, because that just leads to power inflation and even more balance issues.
The problem is that (super)caps are too good. The proper solution to that problem is to make them less good. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
DeadDuck
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:45:00 -
[378] - Quote
Right on target CCP right on target. Specially the log off mechanics.
+10 |
Aunt Tom
Dark Voodoo Cult Red Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:45:00 -
[379] - Quote
Well, nice changes for an usual pilot. Sub-capital battles became definitely more interesting.
But what about err.. "unusual" pilots? Who learnt skills during a years and payd a lots of isk to receive a Very-Large-Structure-Grinding-Machine?
At least give supercapitals the docking ability - after refining the Nyx one can build tons of funny Hurricanes.
Next. Moros without drones is ridiculous. In combination with 'balancing' Nyx and Erebus, gallents will have only one playable ship - Thanatos. After this step you definitely need to boost gallentians because there will be no way to nerf them more
And finally. Am I right that Leviathan without drones, doomsday and with ugly capital launchers became an absolutely useless ship? |
Camar
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:45:00 -
[380] - Quote
David Carel wrote:0.008 with 4x Serpentis Tracking Link, 0.009 with 2x Serpentis TC, both with Tracking Speed.
But you can't always cynoout (cap <70%), and you have reduced neut resistance. Hell yeah.
lol faction TC |
|
kasai zenpachi
Seal Team Six
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:46:00 -
[381] - Quote
I like most of the changes but i think the removal of the drone bay from dreads is a mistake and they do need a tracking bonus other than that a great start. I can hear the Russian's drinking themselves stupid over the lost of their one and only advantage. |
Needa3
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:46:00 -
[382] - Quote
i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
491
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:47:00 -
[383] - Quote
Draculina Alucardi wrote:gimme a good reason, to do not stop training a SC pilot, and not canceling the account which i made specially for it, to use it for PVE and sometimes for PVP (i mean superbs); CCP please take away the drone bay from carriers too, so we could use them only for moving stuff and RR fleet <3
Supercaps will still be incredibly powerful ships, with ten times the tank and more DPS than any other ship class, plus EW immunity. "Normal" capitals will still be chaff in the breeze to supers.
If that's not enough reason, then I don't know what to say. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:47:00 -
[384] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Metis Laxon wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:while i agree with most of teh changes, why are you screwing the moros again? no drones. your joking right? Keep in mind: Hybrids are being overhauled. in this same patch. Wait and see the latter dev blogs on them before complaining that they have broken your Gallente submarine. yeh i have thought about that, but unless there getting a massive boost to hybrids. blasters are god dam useless at even shooting a pos, much less fleet fights, rails are so meh on damage currently its laughible, you have just made the moros worthless, next to a rev, instant ammo swaps, ammo taht dosnt run out. the same dps.. ok why am i bothering with a moros again? rest of teh changes make sence, but this one to me dosnt.
Hmm, but you are still just comparing to existing hybrids. The change would have to be relatively drastic for them to 'fix' hybrids in the first place. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
491
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:47:00 -
[385] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game
I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac.
Superb!
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
489
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:48:00 -
[386] - Quote
David Carel wrote:0.008 with 4x Serpentis Tracking Link, 0.009 with 2x Serpentis TC, both with Tracking Speed.
But you can't always cynoout (cap <70%), and you have reduced neut resistance. Hell yeah.
you'd use an officer tracking computer, but the point is the tracking links are a much better idea than filling your mids with more officer tracking computers |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:48:00 -
[387] - Quote
Anile8er wrote: You really didn't do anything for dreads. What is the logic behind the timer reduction? To benefit large alliance in sov warfare? Are you going to drastically reduce POS hit points? At current in EVE if you have enough dreads to down a large tower in 5 minutes, no one is going to want to "hot drop' that gang, or at least 99.99% of the time wouldn't have the force put together in the 10 minutes the dreads are sat there for. So I ask what does the 5 minute timer do for a small group of dreads when they will have to sit on the tower for 20 to 30 minutes anyway?
Reducing the cycle time by half means that your dread is stuck in one place only 5 minutes instead of 10. That improves your options for running the hell away or leaving siege to receive remote reps. Cutting the fuel usage by half means that you use the same amount of fuel for the time spent in siege (2 cycles of 5 mins using the same stront as 1 cycle of 10mins).
Your current abilities are not affected, but you are now more flexible in deployment. http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
Malzra
Black Eclipse Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:48:00 -
[388] - Quote
This just means when supers are deployed they'll be used in overwhelming numbers with massive support fleets, which does nothing to fix the superblob problem. It goes on to reduce the likelyhood that smaller alliances/groups will bring supers to a fleet fight (and pretty much negates the setting of traps for those who like to hotdrop with solo/few supercarreirs). Furthermore, those who choose (stupidly) to rat/anom in supercarriers won't be able to do so with the fighter/drone changes, thus depriving roaming gangs of potential ganks. Dreads will still generally sit in hangers unused.
Supers being too hard to kill: That all depends on what the opponent brings. With the logoff change, the EHP nerf isn't really needed, as if your fleet has the numbers and the lockdown capability, you'll get the kills. Supers still die darn quick to other supers and massed BS fleets. The Hel, as others stated, does need some balancing love though. Mass groups of SC's will still spider tank fairly well.
Fighter changes: Fighters have always been intended to chew through battleships and to a lesser extent, bc's depending on fit / target painting, if you don't want them shooting smaller ships, then just make them 'unable to lock anything below battlecruiser.' Current proposed change is just shortsighted and turns carriers into logistic coffins.
Titans: Fair enough with the DD. I still think a script allowing for a smaller range area DD (100 or 150km) would make fleet warfare interesting as potential anti-blob options. Obviously with the same 30 second locked in place timer (and other effects post DD firing) to keep the risk factor there.
Drone bays: Nerfing the drone pay totally of titan/dreads isn't really needed, just make them unable to carry heavy/sentry drones. You could do this for supercarriers too (with limited bandwidth) so they at least have some measure of self defense against solo tacklers (a couple tacklers could easily kill the drones). Thus the veldnaughts can live on.
Dreads: Ref drone changes above. This would at least give owners an excuse to undock them, especially Moros pilots who'd be out of cap in a fight. Only performing a partial fix still equals a broken product (aka post details on hybrid changes). Siege timer change just reduces risk factor for using them.
Logoff change - good. However, at least make it easier to log back in after a crash during a fleet fight. Sitting at a black screen unable to even flip on hardeners sucks.
In summary, you are really just encouraging the massive blob warfare without addressing it effectively at all. The counter to the blob of course being to bring a bigger blob. As Shadoo said, these changes are just putting off the inevitable.
|
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:48:00 -
[389] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Draculina Alucardi wrote:gimme a good reason, to do not stop training a SC pilot, and not canceling the account which i made specially for it, to use it for PVE and sometimes for PVP (i mean superbs); CCP please take away the drone bay from carriers too, so we could use them only for moving stuff and RR fleet <3
Supercaps will still be incredibly powerful ships, with ten times the tank and more DPS than any other ship class, plus EW immunity. "Normal" capitals will still be chaff in the breeze to supers. If that's not enough reason, then I don't know what to say.
^ That multiplied by 100
Plus now you get a deeper and more engaging experience with your gangs and large fleets. |
Cedric deBouilard
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:50:00 -
[390] - Quote
Malzra wrote:Fighter changes: Fighters have always been intended to chew through battleships and to a lesser extent, bc's depending on fit / target painting, if you don't want them shooting smaller ships, then just make them 'unable to lock anything below battlecruiser.' Current proposed change is just shortsighted and turns carriers into logistic coffins.
so true |
|
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:51:00 -
[391] - Quote
Malzra wrote:This just means when supers are deployed they'll be used in overwhelming numbers with massive support fleets, which does nothing to fix the superblob problem.
Save for the fact that supers will now die in much larger quantities. Which would end up balancing out not only the market, but the size of these cap blobs. They take plenty of real time to manufacture, and they still take plenty of money to replace. There are physical limitations to the 'overwhelming numbers' you foresee. |
Clolo
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:51:00 -
[392] - Quote
Sarrgon wrote: Also what I think a lot are forgetting is the effect this will have on the mineral market. For how many of them are now going for caps and super caps, with a big reduction in the demand for caps of any kind, means a lot more minerals that will remain on the market and prices will crash. Needs to be some sort of balance in there to equal it out. Or Eve's economy will be worse then what it is now.
Removing ore from the low end wormholes will help with this a little. |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:52:00 -
[393] - Quote
Metis Laxon wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Metis Laxon wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:while i agree with most of teh changes, why are you screwing the moros again? no drones. your joking right? Keep in mind: Hybrids are being overhauled. in this same patch. Wait and see the latter dev blogs on them before complaining that they have broken your Gallente submarine. yeh i have thought about that, but unless there getting a massive boost to hybrids. blasters are god dam useless at even shooting a pos, much less fleet fights, rails are so meh on damage currently its laughible, you have just made the moros worthless, next to a rev, instant ammo swaps, ammo taht dosnt run out. the same dps.. ok why am i bothering with a moros again? rest of teh changes make sence, but this one to me dosnt. Hmm, but you are still just comparing to existing hybrids. The change would have to be relatively drastic for them to 'fix' hybrids in the first place.
well unless they make it insta swap and not take cargo space, rev will come out on top. anyone wanna buy a max skilled moros pilot, will trade for the same in amarr...lol CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Needa3
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:52:00 -
[394] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Needa3 wrote:i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac. Superb!
i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
147
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:54:00 -
[395] - Quote
Aren't carriers SUPPOSED TO BE a logistics platform?
I mean, the triage module is there for a reason, and most carriers have wonderful buffs for remote repair. And there are capital remote repair modules for them.
They're also awesome for personal logistics, because of the ship bay and gigantic jump range. |
gfldex
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:54:00 -
[396] - Quote
Will the 15 min timer spill over DT? If not we wont be able to sleep in anymore. Lots and lots of siegeing right before DT. |
Venetian Tar
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:55:00 -
[397] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:Malcanis wrote:Needa3 wrote:i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac. Superb! i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up
Internet tough-guy.
Amazing! I don't hate you, I'm just not necessarily excited about your existance. |
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:55:00 -
[398] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:Malcanis wrote:Needa3 wrote:i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac. Superb! i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up
What does he need to stand up to? The same **** on the other side of that connection? :/ Good one brohime.
"their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win"
Actually that is the way caps contribute right now. And that is what this patch will be changing. Suddenly you have to **** your pants instead of logging off for a powernap. |
BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:57:00 -
[399] - Quote
Second reaction (after reading through some of the responses) My question regarding log off timer was answered. Several responses to the dread drone bay, it seems to be an even divide with this and I doubt CCP will change it at this point.
It does seem like most people agree with my earlier post regarding fighters and normal carriers though. (CCP just accidently the whole standard carrier...). Any chance we can get a more in depth answer on if this change was intentional (i.e. standard carriers were meant to be nerfed as well) or if it wasn't, will this change be revisited, perhaps changed to something like an idea I saw earlier to give supercaps a negative bonus (penalty) to fighter resolution so that carriers aren't affected? |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:57:00 -
[400] - Quote
i see the 1000+ Drakeblobb comes back with this nerf
hurray ... FLEET LAG **** FIGHTS |
|
Shtu Lix
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:58:00 -
[401] - Quote
Nice changes, too bad you just killed normal carriers in the process... Quoting from the blog: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier." With fighters nerfed, you won't do much with unbonused drones, you know...
Also please check if dreads in siege can hit moving caps/supercaps. |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:59:00 -
[402] - Quote
EI Digin wrote: If you want to kill things in a capital ship, that's what dreadnaughts, supercaps, and titans are for.
Not if you want to kill subcaps. Carriers are obviously too weak to attack other capital ships, but they can defend a capital fleet against subcaps, something no other capital can do. But not any more... |
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:59:00 -
[403] - Quote
Okay, you've identified the problem but seem to have forgotten to solve it.
-Super blobs are still invincible. Try removing RR from supercarriers. -Dreads are still completely worthless. Still volleyed by 20 supercarriers or one doomsday. |
Metis Laxon
Zero Point Group
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:59:00 -
[404] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Aren't carriers SUPPOSED TO BE a logistics platform?
I mean, the triage module is there for a reason, and most carriers have wonderful buffs for remote repair. And there are capital remote repair modules for them.
They're also awesome for personal logistics, because of the ship bay and gigantic jump range.
If you want to kill things in a capital ship, that's what dreadnaughts, supercaps, and titans are for.
^ That too. People seem to be forgetting that they were not intended to be the be all and end all of warfare as they happen to be treated now. |
Needa3
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:59:00 -
[405] - Quote
Venetian Tar wrote:
Internet tough-guy.
Amazing!
lol, goon |
SXYGeeK
Tera Incognita Rolling Thunder.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:00:00 -
[406] - Quote
" Supercarriers
Drone bay can only hold fighters and fighter bombers. "
what about mining drones ? or can you add "Fighter Miners" ? |
Bring Stabity
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:00:00 -
[407] - Quote
Blake Zacary wrote:When will this be deployed on sisi for testing ?
Are the future changes intended to encourage blobs is this why time dilation is being pushed so much or can we expect more changes that will promote tactics.skill and imagination into pvp,instead of just gathering en masse and pressing F1 ?
you're from white noise
heh |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:01:00 -
[408] - Quote
I'm a bit unfamiliar with scan res: Could a painted+webbed battleship be hit by a fighter with the new resolution? |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:01:00 -
[409] - Quote
Shtu Lix wrote:Nice changes, too bad you just killed normal carriers in the process... Quoting from the blog: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier." With fighters nerfed, you won't do much with unbonused drones, you know...
Also please check if dreads in siege can hit moving caps/supercaps.
they dont need to check, its ccp hope and prayer will see them through CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Mathias Karsten
New Eden Regimental Navy Rebel Alliance of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:01:00 -
[410] - Quote
DevBlog wrote:....so having your sub-caps take down fighters and fighter bombers will have more of an impact on the fight.
When am I going to ever have drones turned on in my overview in the fleet fights described? It's a nice tactical idea for sub-caps to target them, but ... you just can't. Mathias Karsten
"Director of Doing Something" New Eden Regimental Navy [NERN] Rebel Alliance of New Eden [RANE] |
|
Venetian Tar
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:01:00 -
[411] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:Venetian Tar wrote:
Internet tough-guy.
Amazing!
lol, goon
You're in NCdot. I fail to understand how this makes you any better than I. I don't hate you, I'm just not necessarily excited about your existance. |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:02:00 -
[412] - Quote
Zhade Lezte wrote:
The timer reduction is so that if your scouts see someone forming up to hotdrop and gank your dreads you actually have some hope to get the heck out, since currently a dreads tank is like paper to supercaps. This means that a smaller alliance can actually hope to use dreads to siege a tower or whatever without making them incredibly vulnerable to a larger alliance with a large supercapital fleet like the DRF, PL, or say...Goonswarm Federation. Note the reduction in fuel for the cycle as well, nothing is being changed to the rate dreads can siege a tower.
Yeah, just enhancing dreads tanks wouldn't be smart, in addition to the timer reduction. I never said I didn't like the reduction, I just don't see how it will make the dread ~good~.
Zhade Lezte wrote:
but the idea is to make taking out a supercarrier's drones a viable strategy
What drones? My fighter bombers that I deploy to try to kill a HIC cause thats all I have in my bay? Yeah, CCP is doing great things here. **** a supercarriers ability to do anything other than kill caps and structures, without force fields mind you, and then make the other drone option, fighters, useless against killing support. BUT you cant fit a full flight of both anyway so what does it matter and why would you fit fighters anyway being they are useless.
But it doesn't matter anyway because with my EHP I will get downed by a subcap blob in under 5 minutes and I won't be able to do **** all about the tackler who holds me down while the gang forms up to kill me. And yeah I won't have 37mil EHP after the second cycle of neuts hit me from the subcap blob, will be more like 15 mil. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:04:00 -
[413] - Quote
I think these changes are for the best overall.....
Thank you CCP, I like the direction this is going.
My thoughts:
The loss of a SC's ability to field a full flight of both Fighters & FB's is fairly harsh.... but reasonable. Now SC's need to decide before the engagement whether they will focus on killing BS's (fighters) or capitals (FB). They don't get the best of both worlds, but must make a choice! Note, their plethora of utility high's still provides a fair amount of defense. They can neut hics, smartbomb warp disruptor probes, etc....
The Fighter Sig Res change is a good step. Fighter's should not be anit-cruiser weapons... but anti-BS weapons. This change ensures that.
The log-off change is amazing!!!
The siege module change is much needed!!!
The changes to the moros sound reasonable, although a lot depends on the hybrid changes.
I can't wait to see the changes to sov!!!! |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:04:00 -
[414] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:I'm a bit unfamiliar with scan res: Could a painted+webbed battleship be hit by a fighter with the new resolution? You're actually better off not webbing them at all as their speed is your friend, as long as it's not higher than your fighters speed. The optimal is if they keep the exact same speed as the fighters. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
489
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:04:00 -
[415] - Quote
Mathias Karsten wrote:DevBlog wrote:....so having your sub-caps take down fighters and fighter bombers will have more of an impact on the fight. When am I going to ever have drones turned on in my overview in the fleet fights described? It's a nice tactical idea for sub-caps to target them, but ... you just can't.
you can't. |
Delegado Cero
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:04:00 -
[416] - Quote
Titans will still be able to touch subcaps inappropriately with their ill-gotten super tracking. The alliance with the most titans will field them more confidently, the rest leaving theirs home. |
Glenda Roan
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:04:00 -
[417] - Quote
quote: After a player logs out, there is a check for player aggression every 15 minutes. If you have been aggressed, the timer extends for 15 minutes; if you have not been aggressed, you disappear as before. Note: this is only for player aggression and will not change what happens when you log off during fights against NPCs.
I understand the need to stop this practice of logging out during a fight. but what about the people who start a fight and in the middle lose there internet connection. Was that not the reason for warpping off in the first place. |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:05:00 -
[418] - Quote
Add to all ordinary carriers the following bonus: +10% fighter signature resolution reduction per carrier level
PS. Otherwise, a good start, just don't forget to watch how things develop and introduced additional changes, if necessary. (Hint: it will be necessary)
Edit: I meant signature resolution, not radius, corrected. |
Tactalan
Argon .Inc STR8NGE BREW
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:05:00 -
[419] - Quote
All sounds good to me.
One thought; what impact is the Fighter nerf going to have on PvE? Running hordes/sanctums is boring enough without making it take longer! |
Tendence
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:06:00 -
[420] - Quote
If u nerfe the logoff timer i would in same patch/extension add Killmails for selfdestructed Ships ,kind of top damage dealer gets it or so .... |
|
Elisha Starkiller
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:06:00 -
[421] - Quote
CCP need to make a change, I for one welcome it :D
having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start...
cant wait to hear what the rest of the winter has in store :D
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
419
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:06:00 -
[422] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:I'm a bit unfamiliar with scan res: Could a painted+webbed battleship be hit by a fighter with the new resolution? Webbed will either not make any difference, or quite possible make it worse. since the fighter will then start to orbit and thus increase the tracking it needs to deal with.
A single TP should increase the damage done from ~3.5% of its DPS to ~9%.
Karim alRashid wrote:Add to all ordinary carriers the following bonus: +10% fighter signature radius reduction per carrier level Again: they're not changing sig radius GÇö they're changing sig resolution.
That said, not a completely insane idea. At lvl V, it increases the aforementioned 3.5% DPS to 27%. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
steave435
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:06:00 -
[423] - Quote
Tactalan wrote:All sounds good to me.
One thought; what impact is the Fighter nerf going to have on PvE? Running hordes/sanctums is boring enough without making it take longer! You'll have to use regular drones, so you'll basically be a big Domi. |
Elisha Starkiller
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:07:00 -
[424] - Quote
Glenda Roan wrote:quote: After a player logs out, there is a check for player aggression every 15 minutes. If you have been aggressed, the timer extends for 15 minutes; if you have not been aggressed, you disappear as before. Note: this is only for player aggression and will not change what happens when you log off during fights against NPCs.
I understand the need to stop this practice of logging out during a fight. but what about the people who start a fight and in the middle lose there internet connection. Was that not the reason for warpping off in the first place.
they log back in and they will still be in the fight, if the connection is gone..... well bummer its only a game :D and get some decent internet!
|
ScheenK
Constantine.
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:08:00 -
[425] - Quote
removing the focused dd would change alot, no longer will caps get insta'd in the beginning of the fight, and dreads will play the role they are intended for
bring back AOE dd, with shorter range, remain on field for 10mins and have an hourly cycle
ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
105
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:11:00 -
[426] - Quote
ScheenK wrote:removing the focused dd would change alot, no longer will caps get insta'd in the beginning of the fight, and dreads will play the role they are intended for
bring back AOE dd, with shorter range, remain on field for 10mins and have an hourly cycle
ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
So how will 18 titans on field, all using AoE DD one after the other affect the battle? Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:11:00 -
[427] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:I'm a bit unfamiliar with scan res: Could a painted+webbed battleship be hit by a fighter with the new resolution? Webbed will either not make any difference, or quite possible make it worse. since the fighter will then start to orbit and thus increase the tracking it needs to deal with. A single TP should increase the damage done from ~3.5% of its DPS to ~9%. Karim alRashid wrote:Add to all ordinary carriers the following bonus: +10% fighter signature radius reduction per carrier level Again: they're not changing sig radius GÇö they're changing sig resolution. That said, not a completely insane idea. At lvl V, it increases the aforementioned 3.5% DPS to 27%.
Sorry, I meant signature resolution, of course, correcting. |
Baki Yuku
Nordgoetter Viking Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:11:00 -
[428] - Quote
CCP Tallest I'd like to ask a serious question here if you realy take 20% armor/hull/shield away from the Hel what will be left will be a very expansiv ship with about as much tank as a Dread.. I think you should take a serious look at the Hel and her tank/slot layout because it is ********.
Also does 20% reduction in armor/shield etc mean that the required Capital Armor Plates and Shield Emitter to build one will be reduced by 20%? Because that only seems fair..
best regards, Chris |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:14:00 -
[429] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:I'm a bit unfamiliar with scan res: Could a painted+webbed battleship be hit by a fighter with the new resolution?
As far as I know, Signature Resolution of guns is used to calculate a tracking modifier.
Target signature divided through gun signature resolution = tracking modifier
BS shooting frigs would be 40/400 = 0.1 aka tracking penalty of 90 %
Fighter shooting BS would be 400/400 = 1 nothing happens, even without a TP (Webs are a different story). |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:14:00 -
[430] - Quote
If we look at fighters from the perspective of fighters instead of carriers, we could ask ourselves; what use will they have now?
* For ships that can use FBs they are worse in every way (can't hit smaller ships, makes less damage than FBs against larger ships), so they aren't going to be used there. * For ships that can't use FBs (i.e. carriers) they are also useless because they can't hit the smaller targets that the carrier itself might survive, and they don't make a dent in larger targets, which the carrier will die against anyway.
So what are they supposed to be used for? Ratting carriers with dual TPs? |
|
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:16:00 -
[431] - Quote
Camar wrote:David Carel wrote:0.008 with 4x Serpentis Tracking Link, 0.009 with 2x Serpentis TC, both with Tracking Speed.
But you can't always cynoout (cap <70%), and you have reduced neut resistance. Hell yeah.
lol faction TC
Your alliance uses them all the time, at least the dead ones did. |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
92
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:17:00 -
[432] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well?
Exactly how it should be.
5 years ago, flying a capital without proper support made you a laughing stock. Why shouldn't flying supers without proper support ALSO make you a laughing stock? If you want to protect your supers, then bring the proper amount of support.
Therefore we have a sort of rock-paper-scissors formula for balance: sub-caps beat supers supers beat caps caps beat sub-caps (could probably use some more work). |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:17:00 -
[433] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:I'm a bit unfamiliar with scan res: Could a painted+webbed battleship be hit by a fighter with the new resolution? Webbed will either not make any difference, or quite possible make it worse. since the fighter will then start to orbit and thus increase the tracking it needs to deal with. A single TP should increase the damage done from ~3.5% of its DPS to ~9%. Karim alRashid wrote:Add to all ordinary carriers the following bonus: +10% fighter signature radius reduction per carrier level Again: they're not changing sig radius GÇö they're changing sig resolution. That said, not a completely insane idea. At lvl V, it increases the aforementioned 3.5% DPS to 27%.
A base of 27% vs battleships sounds about right to me. Have a Hyena or Rapier fly with you and and it should be back up near full damage. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:17:00 -
[434] - Quote
ScheenK wrote: ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
it is only 10month ago were CCP give the Moms the EHP boost .. and now you take it away ?? why ??
! CCP answer ! |
David Carel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:18:00 -
[435] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote: If only Jumpf Freighters could jump as far as Supercaps and carry a lot of FBs in their cargohold to restock them between engagements.
Evelopedia wrote: Jump Freighters have a base jump range of 5 Light Years. Motherships have a base jump range of 4 Light Years. Titans have a base jump range of 3.5 Light Years.
|
Spartan dax
0utbreak Outbreak.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:18:00 -
[436] - Quote
Not reading through 22 pages but unless it's been said already;
Poses will need a buff if you're going through with 5 minute siege timers on dreads. |
Nova Soldier
ROMANIA Renegades ROMANIAN-LEGION
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:19:00 -
[437] - Quote
I don't think the dreads have been boosted to a point where they are usefull again.
The damage increase is nothing considering they removed the drones. The targheted ships is still at 2. Sensor resolution is 1/2 in siege than a Supercarrier with a Cloaking devince.
Hoping to see some impruvments to dreads. |
Infinimo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:19:00 -
[438] - Quote
CCP: **** you PL!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
493
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:19:00 -
[439] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:Malcanis wrote:Needa3 wrote:i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac. Superb! i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up
Yes indeed, I give thanks every day that I don't have to face the incredible rage of ~Internet Hardman~ Needa3 with his amazing power of warping zealots solo into hostile fleets while his alliance mates laugh at his noobitude in local.
Tell me sir, does your girlfriend kickbox by any chance? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:21:00 -
[440] - Quote
God damn the shrieking and crying from the Elite Pee Vee Peers is just as good as I'd hoped it would be. |
|
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:21:00 -
[441] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well?
SIGNED !!! |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:22:00 -
[442] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up
I'm standing up at my keyboard just to make this post just fyi |
DeadDuck
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:22:00 -
[443] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:ScheenK wrote: ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
it is only 10month ago were CCP give the Moms the EHP boost .. and now you take it away ?? why ?? ! CCP answer !
Cause they did it wrong... . Or you think the ship is actually balanced ? 100M EHP
|
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:23:00 -
[444] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:If we look at fighters from the perspective of fighters instead of carriers, we could ask ourselves; what use will they have now?
* For ships that can use FBs they are worse in every way (can't hit smaller ships, makes less damage than FBs against larger ships), so they aren't going to be used there. * For ships that can't use FBs (i.e. carriers) they are also useless because they can't hit the smaller targets that the carrier itself might survive, and they don't make a dent in larger targets, which the carrier will die against anyway.
So what are they supposed to be used for? Ratting carriers with dual TPs?
This wouldn't be the first time a Dev from CCP, who clearly doesnt play EVE, has supported the use of target painters as a main stay fit on capital ships.
|
L1m9n1663r
The Treehugger Corp None Of The Above
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:24:00 -
[445] - Quote
- When a ship can not be sensor boosted or tracking disrupted, it should not be possible to remote sensor boost or tracking link. It makes no sense at all.
If you make cap size rigs, that should solve the issue with EHP without touching the numbers. Make shield extender rigs and Armor extender rigs take 200 rig-power-thingies, so you then lose 1 rig slot if buffer tanking. Make cap rigs only T1, that means tanked damage type HP * 1,15^2 instead of HP * 1,2^3. This will help for the HP's.
(Give the Hel some love first)
Destroy all T1 rigs in titans / supercaps (LOL-T1 rigs) Make all T2 rigs the T1 cap size. Any rigs that exeed the rig-power, eject rig in slot 3 to cargo bay. --
Make a rig that takes 150 rig power that will allow you to field 250 m3 of HEAVY drones. That is, sentries, heavy armor/shield bots, heavy EW drones. This will again cost you 15% of your 'tanked' HP buffer. That means your SC will have 70% less shield if you want to field 20 regular drones.
-- Throw the Super pilots a bone... Make Supercaps and Titans dockable at stations with a SUPER CAP UPGRADE mod. This mod should cost 100 billion isk, and it should be impossible to board a super-cap if the station fitting services are offline. Undocking super caps should do so with 0 CAP and all high slots offline. Gives people a reason to own some space.
--
Remove 1 gun / turret from each Titan. Remove DD.
Make a titan sitting at a CUSTOM OFFICE, tapping into its coordinate flux power generator able to start a 5 min 2 way bridge to another titan within 3-5 AU, at another CUSTOM OFFICE. (able to run freighters through)
Give Amarr titans a 50km radius energy neutralizing field that triggers every 30 seconds while in 'enforcer mode' (as in, stuck there for 75 seconds) neuting like a medium neut, not stackable with other amarr titans.
Give Minmatar titans a 50km web-field. (not stackable with other minmatar titans) while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Caldari titans a 25 km cloaking field, that will cloak any ship moving slower than 30 m/s and not targetting anyone. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Gallente titans a 40 km radius warp disruption field (same as large T2 bubble) with a scramble strength of 1. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Make Gallente and Minmatar able to trade eachothers Enforcement mods by use of a 200 power rig. (and Amarr / Caldari) |
Malzra
Black Eclipse Corp
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:24:00 -
[446] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:ScheenK wrote:removing the focused dd would change alot, no longer will caps get insta'd in the beginning of the fight, and dreads will play the role they are intended for
bring back AOE dd, with shorter range, remain on field for 10mins and have an hourly cycle
ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
So how will 18 titans on field, all using AoE DD one after the other affect the battle?
Make capitals immune to area DD and you get dead titans. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:25:00 -
[447] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote:ScheenK wrote: ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
it is only 10month ago were CCP give the Moms the EHP boost .. and now you take it away ?? why ?? ! CCP answer ! Cause they did it wrong... . Or you think the ship is actually balanced ? 100M EHP
today you can take down a SC with about 50Hurricans in less then 10minutes ... with the patch you only need 5minutes |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:25:00 -
[448] - Quote
Mostly look pretty good to me except dreads loosing their drones. 100m3 at least IMO. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:25:00 -
[449] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote:ScheenK wrote: ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
it is only 10month ago were CCP give the Moms the EHP boost .. and now you take it away ?? why ?? ! CCP answer ! Cause they did it wrong... . Or you think the ship is actually balanced ? 100M EHP
It'll also be ~2 years since the super buff in Dominion when these changes come into effect. |
L1m9n1663r
The Treehugger Corp None Of The Above
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:26:00 -
[450] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote: today you can take down a SC with about 50Hurricans in less then 10minutes ... with the patch you only need 5minutes
No you don't.
|
|
Spartan dax
0utbreak Outbreak.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:27:00 -
[451] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Daedalus II wrote:If we look at fighters from the perspective of fighters instead of carriers, we could ask ourselves; what use will they have now?
* For ships that can use FBs they are worse in every way (can't hit smaller ships, makes less damage than FBs against larger ships), so they aren't going to be used there. * For ships that can't use FBs (i.e. carriers) they are also useless because they can't hit the smaller targets that the carrier itself might survive, and they don't make a dent in larger targets, which the carrier will die against anyway.
So what are they supposed to be used for? Ratting carriers with dual TPs? This wouldn't be the first time a Dev from CCP, who clearly doesnt play EVE, has supported the use of target painters as a main stay fit on capital ships.
Well, I just think we've found a proper bonus for the Hel. Job done. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
420
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:28:00 -
[452] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:A base of 27% vs battleships sounds about right to me. Have a Hyena or Rapier fly with you and and it should be back up near full damage. Fun fact: the best result in such a situation would not be to TP the battleship, but to web the fightersGǪ
Anile8er wrote:This wouldn't be the first time a Dev from CCP, who clearly doesnt play EVE, has supported the use of target painters as a main stay fit on capital ships. GǪthe difference being that last time, it was supposed to be used against ships that couldn't be painted GÇö in this case, they can. So no, it's not quite the same thing. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Camar
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:29:00 -
[453] - Quote
David Carel wrote:Camar wrote:David Carel wrote:0.008 with 4x Serpentis Tracking Link, 0.009 with 2x Serpentis TC, both with Tracking Speed.
But you can't always cynoout (cap <70%), and you have reduced neut resistance. Hell yeah.
lol faction TC Your alliance's pilots use them all the time, at least the guys with dead titans did. Our pilots used them all the time. With meta guns out and more people trained to fly blap titans I would wager most of our titan pilots have more isk in midslots than most people have in their supercarrier+fit combined. .009 is half of what I get in blap fit. And as far as cap fit goes, I don't plan on jumping in to just jump right back out unless I'm travel fit. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:29:00 -
[454] - Quote
L1m9n1663r wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote: today you can take down a SC with about 50Hurricans in less then 10minutes ... with the patch you only need 5minutes
No you don't.
oh sorry it was a titan not a SC
and it takes 12minutes with 44Hurricans and cyclones
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q97pyRfzztQ
check this
|
TheButcherPete
StoneWall Metals Productions Rebel Alliance of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:30:00 -
[455] - Quote
I love you, CCP.
Too bad I don't have the ability to have your babies >.> |
Haseo Smith
Wrecking Shots BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:31:00 -
[456] - Quote
Kuhn Arashi wrote:Question:
Now that Dreads and Titans do not have drone bays, will the need for Capital drone bay parts be needed in their construction? If not, you just made capital ships a little cheaper, by how much I don't feel like calculating.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Concern: Fighter resolution.
Understandable that you want to limit Supercarrier effectiveness against subcaps. However In the same blog you said we should bring carriers to deal with subcaps.
I know that carriers can still use smaller drones, but those are easily taken out with smartbomb blobs from the supers the subcaps are supporting, and easily taken out with a bomber run.
Carriers main weapons should still be fighters, and fighters deployed from carriers should be able to fight battleships at the very least. If this does not occur when these changes are put out, carriers will be resigned to supporting supercaps as rep fleet instead of supporting subcap and dread fleets.
Aside from the Fighter nerf affecting carriers that everyone else has brought up His first point is pretty valid.
Are we gonna need the capital drone bay parts/PBO's anymore for those hulls?
and if not will they be replaced with more parts of another category to keep the costs roughly the same?
or are gonna have cheaper dreads and titans?
|
Nye Jaran
The Bad Touch Gryphon League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:32:00 -
[457] - Quote
Why do you hate my Thanny CCP? As other's have suggested, make the fighter tracking a role penalty for Supers, not a change to fighters in general. |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:32:00 -
[458] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Fun fact: the best result in such a situation would not be to TP the battleship, but to web the fighters...
True, but you'd need 20 webs vs 1 painter. |
Zarian Uphius
Red Sky Morning BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:32:00 -
[459] - Quote
Why nerf fighters and destroy normal carriers all at the same time?
-You already limited Supers to having to chose between FighterBombers and Fighters. So if they jump in to kill caps they will not be effective vs SubCaps and vice-versa. So if you go in with 20 FBs and 5 Fighters sub caps really have nothing to be afriad of.
The changes are not bad but nerfing fighters just seems to screw ALL carriers over. Sicne when can fighters not shoot little stuff?
Maybe we should rename fighters to FighterBombers and the current FBs to TorpedoBombers.
-Also, way to completly miss why dreads were not used in combat, nice timer change but it ends there for dreads.
-Titans tracking is still entirly to high when boosted.
All in all to fix your fix...return fighters to their original stats and give dreads better tracking while reducing the titans ability to get ******** tracking.
Titans = Awesome at everything SC = Sov/cap shooting only Dread = Sov shooting only Carrier = pointless since it will still die within 1 min of entering triage |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:32:00 -
[460] - Quote
David Carel wrote:Akara Ito wrote: If only Jumpf Freighters could jump as far as Supercaps and carry a lot of FBs in their cargohold to restock them between engagements.
Evelopedia wrote: Jump Freighters have a base jump range of 5 Light Years. Motherships have a base jump range of 4 Light Years. Titans have a base jump range of 3.5 Light Years.
While I can understand that you honor the traditions of WIdot badposting please go back and read the post I have replied to in order to understand what I tried to point out Thanks in advance. |
|
Aerious
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:33:00 -
[461] - Quote
Thank you CCP, you have saved me 50b isk in 2 super caps + fit, i am so glad i didn't train up for a titan, i would so p1553d off with the upcoming nerf.
Any suggestions what i can do with my glorified wheelbarrow's? A chimera + thanatos!
WTS: 1x WYVERN + 1x NYX BPC packs. |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:33:00 -
[462] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:A base of 27% vs battleships sounds about right to me. Have a Hyena or Rapier fly with you and and it should be back up near full damage. Fun fact: the best result in such a situation would not be to TP the battleship, but to web the fightersGǪ Anile8er wrote:This wouldn't be the first time a Dev from CCP, who clearly doesnt play EVE, has supported the use of target painters as a main stay fit on capital ships. GǪthe difference being that last time, it was supposed to be used against ships that couldn't be painted GÇö in this case, they can. So no, it's not quite the same thing. I don't know what is most ridiculous; the fighter nerf or our ways to undo it :p |
Orakkus
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:33:00 -
[463] - Quote
My hat is off to you, CCP Tallest, and thank you VERY much for all these changes. They have been sorely needed for years and while I don't agree with all of them, I certainly think that many of the changes are great!
A couple of the concerns have already been mentioned, particularly how the change in Sig resolution will affect standard Carriers and if all E-war will be unable to affect supercaps.. including beneficial ones like Tracking links. I also am very glad to see that this is just the beginning and that you are willing to make necessary adjustments while in testing. I can't ask for any more than that.
Kudos to you sir, and don't let the pilots who whine like little spoiled girls bring you down. Don't let the illogical and non-sensical arguments of those who think that supercarriers should be solo ships make you fret. Most have forgotten that the original intent of Supercarriers was meant that an entire alliance would have maybe 2 or 3 total. Think of those people merely as little fat boys and girls, who for years stuffed their cheeks with everyone else's candy and have become so obese from AFK'ing all the time that even a little actual interaction is too much for their poor, frail fingers.
They have long forgotten what it is like to live in Eve. I'm glad you have had the guts now to remind them.... painfully and with much fear. |
VaL Iscariot
The Concilium Enterprises Spectrum Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:33:00 -
[464] - Quote
dreads need more tracking, not shorter siege cycles. |
DeadDuck
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:33:00 -
[465] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:today you can take down a SC with about 50Hurricans in less then 10minutes ...
Sorry it only works if the SC is using active hardeners. If is using passive, non cap dependant hardeners...GL with that. Oh and btw it helps if the SC is not receiving cap transfers also from their buddies.
|
PCaBoo
Ammo and Tag Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:34:00 -
[466] - Quote
What a lazy and sad way of nerfing supers. Most will agree, some sort of nerf was required, but it seems like CCP's ignored pretty much every reasonable suggestion and imposed a bunch of half-assed ideas that noone wanted (Except logoff timer).
I'm glad I don't have a sc anymore. This would have put me into an emo-rage. :p |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:35:00 -
[467] - Quote
Taedrin wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Exactly how it should be. 5 years ago, flying a capital without proper support made you a laughing stock. Why shouldn't flying supers without proper support ALSO make you a laughing stock? If you want to protect your supers, then bring the proper amount of support. Therefore we have a sort of rock-paper-scissors formula for balance: sub-caps beat supers supers beat caps caps beat sub-caps (could probably use some more work).
There is a difference between "proper support" and "losing = loss of 200 billion isk."
I agree that supers should not be used to hot drop on a roaming BC gang for ***** and gigs.
But I also don't think that a 200 vs 200 subcap battle where one fleet gets lucky in lag means that the losing fleet should also lose 10-20-30 supers, and meanwhile the supers literally don't have a chance to defend themselves.
|
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:37:00 -
[468] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Taedrin wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Exactly how it should be. 5 years ago, flying a capital without proper support made you a laughing stock. Why shouldn't flying supers without proper support ALSO make you a laughing stock? If you want to protect your supers, then bring the proper amount of support. Therefore we have a sort of rock-paper-scissors formula for balance: sub-caps beat supers supers beat caps caps beat sub-caps (could probably use some more work). There is a difference between "proper support" and "losing = loss of 200 billion isk." I agree that supers should not be used to hot drop on a roaming BC gang for ***** and gigs. But I also don't think that a 200 vs 200 subcap battle where one fleet gets lucky in lag means that the losing fleet should also lose 10-20-30 supers, and meanwhile the supers literally don't have a chance to defend themselves.
This will make sure supers stay the **** away from fights as often as possible. Dunno but... Win ?
|
Denuo Secus
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:38:00 -
[469] - Quote
Great changes, this could lead to more mixed fleets (with different roles) and interesting fights. Only 3 (already mentioned) concerns:
(@Caps won't be able to hit sub-caps anymore): the proposed solution seems not balanced (btw: it's not balanced atm as well). Turret capitals (Dreads and Titans) are able to receive remote tracking support and ARE able to instapwn sub capitals. A Missile Dread or Titan cannot do this.
(@HP nerf) HP bonus of shield capitals isn't applied instantly. This + the absence of shield HP inplants is a huge disadvantage of shield capitals.
(@Fighter nerf): Carriers should be able to handle sub capitals better than Super Carriers IMHO. So a fighter nerf applied to Super Carriers only sounds better for me. It would give Carriers an additional bonus (role) over Super Carriers as well. |
Casey CIA
An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:39:00 -
[470] - Quote
If you limit the Fighter nerf to Super Caps, at least you give Carriers some sort of offensive subcap fleet role.
Carriers could even take a slight fighter bonus empowering them to provide some subcap fighting capability while still remaining fairly weak to super caps and large sub cap fleets, thus balancing out and providing a pvp offensive role that isn't over powered.
Edit: I am ok with the other changes |
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
63
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:40:00 -
[471] - Quote
Do not nerf shield tankers as they are already nerfed by lack of an equivalent to Slave implants.
If you slash 20% from ships like the Wyvern, it will be far weaker than the armor tanks which it is all ready far weaker than.
Reducing fighter damage to smaller targets also makes regular carriers less useful in wormhole escalations. |
Paskis Robinson
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:42:00 -
[472] - Quote
As usual, everything that needs to be said has been said in the first 3 pages, then there's 20 pages of overanalytical crap from people who think too much.
The changes are great, the only problem I have with them is we're almost at the point where Thanatos > Hel
|
ScheenK
Constantine.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:42:00 -
[473] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:ScheenK wrote:removing the focused dd would change alot, no longer will caps get insta'd in the beginning of the fight, and dreads will play the role they are intended for
bring back AOE dd, with shorter range, remain on field for 10mins and have an hourly cycle
ehp removal was not needed, you buffed the ehp on captials because it was needed now your taking it away when its needed most
So how will 18 titans on field, all using AoE DD one after the other affect the battle?
i think its a better solution to fleet fights, when 18 titans instapop the first 18 dread/carriers that are put into the field
|
Jooce McNasty
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:43:00 -
[474] - Quote
I would suggest removing the limitations from the dread siege module. (let them be repped and have cap transferd to them) This coupled with a carrier support would allow for dread/carrier teams to become worthwhile, with a sub cap fleet. Still keep them locked in place and keep the timer at 10 minutes. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
144
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:44:00 -
[475] - Quote
Lan Caden wrote:1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK 1 Hurricane = 50,000,000 ISK
1 Titan = 1,800 Hurricanes 1 Titan = 1 Hurricane a day for 5 years
Do I get mad when I explode to one of these behemoths? No, I think, "well, that makes sense."
The log off change is great IMO. Supers will now have to be very confident in their subcap support before they expose themselves.
Just dying once, just one mistake is enormous--like you just lost a hurricane every day for the next 5 years, and there is no more "pull the internet cord" failsafe. Titans will explode more often, or at least be used less often since the log off change.
Please don't make it so they can't explode hurricanes, it's the whole reason I save money in this game. The idea that "one day" I can murder small fleet all by myself.
I should be able to fit estamel's invulns on a drake and murder a supercap fleet by myself
~ lan caden, 2011 |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
335
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:44:00 -
[476] - Quote
I don't see anything wrong with fighters as they are - no matter if they're fielded from a Supercarrier or a Scrubcarrier.
Also Moros changes will take it out of line with other dreads, but then again, I don't really care - as long as I get easily chewed up by virtually any ship class on the field and get speedtanked by SCs, I'll keep my dread docked for another three years... morons-áare recruiting. We're good at breeding! |
decaneos
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:44:00 -
[477] - Quote
so ive only read the first few pages but they made me giggle, there missing the point sooo much, the whole point of nerfing the supercaps is so subcabs are actaully used, its to stop fleets just warping in with only supercaps and nothing else.
this way you need a better balace of ships incedently making big fleet battles more accesable to newer players and they dont need to of trained in supercapitals to be allowed to fight.
|
steave435
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:45:00 -
[478] - Quote
David Carel wrote:Akara Ito wrote: If only Jumpf Freighters could jump as far as Supercaps and carry a lot of FBs in their cargohold to restock them between engagements.
Evelopedia wrote: Jump Freighters have a base jump range of 5 Light Years. Motherships have a base jump range of 4 Light Years. Titans have a base jump range of 3.5 Light Years.
Evelopedia is wrong then. JFs, SCs, dreads and Rorquals all have 5 LY base jump range.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:45:00 -
[479] - Quote
Most of this looks pretty good, and long overdue.
Outstanding issues, though I somehow doubt they'll get read at this point of the thread:
Rather than removing hitpoints, why not simply remove the rig slots, as this would have a roughly similar effect (supercap rig slots are only ever used for CDFEs or Trimarks) with the added bonus of un-skewing the Large T2 Rig market and removing the anomaly of the same sized rigs being used for battleships as titans? Aside from that, a flat hitpoint nerf across the board does little to resolve the shield vs armour disparity - in particular, the Hel is still vastly inferior to the rest of the range. Any chance the Hel can be granted a hitpoint-nerf amnesty? Or failing that, replace the Remote Rep bonus with something more appropriate?
Capital guns can still track and kill subcaps easily with assistance from tracking links. The logical solution would seem to be to treat remote assistance modules as e-war and so making supercaps "immune" to them in the same way as debilitating e-war modules (since a tracking link is basically a reversed tracking disruptor, this seems to make sense).
Dreadnoughts still look underpowered, while the 5 minute siege mod is good, it basically gives them a higher chance of avoiding a fight, rather than of winning a fight. Their role now seems to be to act as bait to get a hostile supercap force to come out and play so you can counter-drop with a subcap fleet. Random crazy idea - siege mode makes a warp disruptor into a heavy-dictor-style focused infini-point?
|
Orisa Medeem
Hedion University Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:46:00 -
[480] - Quote
Here are my two cents:
TL;DR version: the nerf is a bit too big without really solving the problem with the N+1 counter.
1) the 20% EHP reduction seems to be too much with the concurrent changes. Looking back, it only took some small changes to turn the SCs into overpowered ships. don't make the inverse mistake.
2) even if it takes more development effort, I'd rather see the ewar immunity replaced by some form of ranked ewar system for all kinds of ewar, more or less like the jamming system works.
3) capital and supercapital ships should be a lot more strategic than tactical. I think it would be better to see a limit on how often a capital ship can jump based on the hull ship size (the bigger the ship, the less often it can do). A titan jumping at most once a week seems more ok to me. May need to adjust ranges a bit though. |
|
Woo Glin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:50:00 -
[481] - Quote
my carrier ratting backbone |
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:51:00 -
[482] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:I've noticed that the majority of people in favour of these changes write in nice, structured sentences with decent spelling. They tend to put forward a balanced argument and still point out where the nerfs may possibly to far, using logical reasoning.
However the majority of people against the changes rite in ..... horrible brokne english... .. . with generous levels of punctuation!!!!!! and spelllling that cums from........ the facebook skool of bashing ur....... hed agnst the keybaord lol?!?!1oneoneone/ MINUS TENN HUNDRAD ACCOUNTS CCP FK UUUU
Why is that?
I noticed this too. After clicking on some names, all the tears seem to be coming from russians, russian pets and noobcorp alts. I think this is a good sign. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
495
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:53:00 -
[483] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Taedrin wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Exactly how it should be. 5 years ago, flying a capital without proper support made you a laughing stock. Why shouldn't flying supers without proper support ALSO make you a laughing stock? If you want to protect your supers, then bring the proper amount of support. Therefore we have a sort of rock-paper-scissors formula for balance: sub-caps beat supers supers beat caps caps beat sub-caps (could probably use some more work). There is a difference between "proper support" and "losing = loss of 200 billion isk." I agree that supers should not be used to hot drop on a roaming BC gang for ***** and gigs. But I also don't think that a 200 vs 200 subcap battle where one fleet gets lucky in lag means that the losing fleet should also lose 10-20-30 supers, and meanwhile the supers literally don't have a chance to defend themselves.
200v200 fights don't lag any more, even on unreinforced nodes.
So that's OK then!
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
495
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:55:00 -
[484] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote: Dreadnoughts still look underpowered, while the 5 minute siege mod is good, it basically gives them a higher chance of avoiding a fight, rather than of winning a fight. Their role now seems to be to act as bait to get a hostile supercap force to come out and play so you can counter-drop with a subcap fleet. Random crazy idea - siege mode makes a warp disruptor into a heavy-dictor-style focused infini-point?
A 9k DPS blaster moros seems pretty butch to me. It's essentially a 3 kilometer gank brutix.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
135
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:55:00 -
[485] - Quote
David Grogan wrote:yup ccp will make fighters useless vs a single bomb. 400 sig radius will mean a single bomb with vaporize them
imagine this 400 sig radius jumps to 2000 when the fighter is mwd'ing about
1 bomb will instapop them Oh god...you didn't...yes, yes you did. Reading comprehension. Train it. "Shoot at anything that moves. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway, it might move later."
"Do not be too positive. The light at the end of the tunnel could be a train." - Franz Kafka |
LiMu Bai
Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:56:00 -
[486] - Quote
As long as Doomsdays still hit for 3 mio Dmg, Dreads still will be useless (also carriers). Youre doing alot of efford to change Dreads, but as long as they can be zapped in one second, they remain absolutly useless. Titanblobs of many dozens are quite common. And those numbers will even rise in future. So just think about it: 100 Dreads vs. 50 Titans.....Titans will DD 50 dreads @ cyno-in......10 mins later 2nd wave of DDs will kill the remaining ones.... Is this what you want?
You need to nerf the Dmg amount of DDs down to 1 million or something. To make Capitals viable again....just do it! Also a SC will just be able to tank like 5 DDs.....it will pop in 1 sec. Nerf DDs! If you dont change DDs, it will be a concealed titan buff.
Another thing is the planned fighter nerf...just let them as they are. It would hurt carriers also. Supercarries should be able to carry 1 set of bombers and one set of Fighters....otherwise theyre pretty pointless.
Rest of the changes are ok. Looks good so far. Think about the 3 Mio dmg DDs. You cant nerf HP and everything and let the DDs untouched. They need to go down! Also keep in mind that titans can still butcher subcaps with their guns: Tracking nerf!! |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
211
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:57:00 -
[487] - Quote
I don't think it makes sense to have larger ships be *completely* defenseless against smaller ships. Even the largest, most specialized naval vessels have basic defenses against smaller threats.
At least make XL smart bomb modules or something for dreads and above. |
Darkwilly
XI-CORP Revival Of The Talocan Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:59:00 -
[488] - Quote
Ok so theres lots of bitching and crying. Some people giving their 5cents. And some really good ideas out there. CCP has said they should be listening to their players so lets see if they do.
Supercarriers
"-Drone bay can only hold fighters and fighter bombers." Ok... How are we add a fighter bay and reduce the drone bay massivly? Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers)
"-Reduce Shield, Armor and Hull hitpoints on all Supercarriers by 20%." I can live with this.
"-Reduce drone capacity. " Ok, heres the smaller drone bays. Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 875m3 Hel and Nyx:: 1000m3
Fighters
"-Increase signature resolution to 400" How about we dont nerf all the carrier pilots, since the problem is that super carriers do "too much damage" So lets make this only effect Fighter Bombers. And while were at it lets change how fighters orbit? maybe give them a little more range? Maybe fighter bombers can shoot towers? just a thought...
Dreadnoughts
"-Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts." Why? so they can be even more glass cannons who no way to defend themselves? I know most real cap pilots have been in that spot where they are alone with no support available to them. its a crappy place to be in but you know that your drones save lives. So lets change this to -125 drone bandwidth while sieged. thats fair, just like the carriers lose their drones while in triage.
"-Siege Module I: Boost damage bonus from 625% to 700% to compensate for loss of drones." Perfect, this still works out just fine.
"-Siege Module I: Duration time reduced to 5 minutes. Fuel cost -50%." Thank you! we have wanted this for a long time.
"-Moros: Remove drone bonus." and "-Moros: New bonus: 5% bonus to Capital Hybrid Turret rate of fire per level." Thank you again! I could go into a rant about how my moros will cap out now and be useless, but i wont, I know theres changes comming to hybrid weapons and i trust that CCP wont screw us over. This change brings the moros more into line with the other dreads and i think everyone is happy about it.
Titans
"-Remove drone bay from all titans." i dont think this will have much impact on anything honestly.
"-Reduce Shield, Armor and Hull hitpoints by 20%." I wont go there. I know titans cost a ton of isk, and should be hard to kill. But i agree that the titan blob is a very un-fun way to play a game, for both sides.
"-Superweapon: Cannot shoot sub-capital ships." As much fun as it is to DD a cyno frig. I dont see how this change hurts the game at all.
Logoff timer
"-After a player logs out, there is a check for player aggression every 15 minutes. If you have been aggressed, the timer extends for 15 minutes; if you have not been aggressed, you disappear as before. Note: this is only for player aggression and will not change what happens when you log off during fights against NPCs."
This change has been needed for a long time. One of the first things i was told when i started to play this game was "If you cant afford to lose it, then dont fly it". And i think this should go for everyone. If you get deployed into a no-win fight, sorry but you are pooched, theres no saves in this game. Its not your fault, FCs make bad calls sometimes and you lose ships. But thats part of the game.
I know i'll get flamed and whatever. Dont care. This is my opinion and i am free to express it. Some others have been posting the same things i am saying. I am happy for that, if the devs read what we think and act on it then the system is working how it should. I wont threaten to kill my subs or bomb jita if they dont listen to us, but it think it only fair they have a chance to see what we want from this game. |
Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:00:00 -
[489] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want. Excuse me sir, but the forums have taught me that the CSM is a completely powerless entity and that the Chairmanship is a title without meaning. Try to keep up!
So you won't be seeking re-election or will you? Can I get a quote here please? |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:00:00 -
[490] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:I don't see anything wrong with fighters as they are - no matter if they're fielded from a Supercarrier or a Scrubcarrier.
Also Moros changes will take it out of line with other dreads, but then again, I don't really care - as long as I get easily chewed up by virtually any ship class on the field and get speedtanked by SCs, I'll keep my dread docked for another three years...
i was hoping for so much for dreads and this is what happens, my moros is even more worthless than now and dreads willl still get raped almost instantly by scaps. not to mention carriers getting the shaft with the fighter changes..i mean carriers were so over powered and everyone was moaning about carriers right. has this ccp tallest dude played eve. i mean the online game not the eve card game?? CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
|
oprime
S0utherN Comfort Controlled Chaos
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:01:00 -
[491] - Quote
Don't know if this was mentioned yet. But can carriers get a EHP boost when in triage. Also a Cap boost or reduction in cap usage on reps would be nice. It would make Triage carriers more viable.
ATM when you use a triage carrier in combat it shocks the enemy at first. But then they just laugh at the users and pop it quickly or alpha it with a titan dooms day. The changes made to Triage last time were great but still not enough to make them viable.
Carrier and dread pilots are still too scared to use them in combat. Maybe allowing Dreads to be able to hit a Super doing more then 20m/s and a carrier to not get alpha by a white noise or raiden titan blob. That would be awesome. |
Denuo Secus
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:02:00 -
[492] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:I don't think it makes sense to have larger ships be *completely* defenseless against smaller ships. Even the largest, most specialized naval vessels have basic defenses against smaller threats.
At least make XL smart bomb modules or something for dreads and above.
Then all Dreads would need an additional (pure) tool slot to fit it without gimping it's main purpose. Would give dreads some defence ability against smaller stuff (smart bomb or hvy neut) and at least some flexibility. I'd like it. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:05:00 -
[493] - Quote
How were Dreads fixed exactly? Numbers were just moved around and they had functionality reduced.
Death to all supercaps!
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |
Aurora Egnald
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:06:00 -
[494] - Quote
What we have going on here is the punsihment of the supercapital pilots espically supercarriers because they are too "versatile" and can defend themsleves. So CCP is bowing to the whishes of the isk poor pilots who cant afford a supercarrier themselves , or have been killed by one,so they whined until they got their way. It seems to me that of you spend billions of isk on a supercarrier it should have more capibility than a regular carrier. It should be able to field alot of drones and it shoudl be able to fend for itself. But noooooooo CCP bows to the will of the less fortunate and envious. Instead of buffing up the smaller ships they are going to harm the producers of eve by nerfing supercapitals. This is by far the worst idea in eve. Eve should be moving forward not backards. Dont nerf the supers but buff the regular caps and smaller ships. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:07:00 -
[495] - Quote
David Grogan wrote:yup ccp will make fighters useless vs a single bomb. 400 sig radius will mean a single bomb with vaporize them
imagine this 400 sig radius jumps to 2000 when the fighter is mwd'ing about
1 bomb will instapop them
HAHA! omg! =) dude u should just log onto eve account management and cancel ur account! do yourself, your eve fleetmates and your bank account all a favour.
|
Di Mulle
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:07:00 -
[496] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:
i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up
Not sure what "not lacking the balls to actually stand up" would mean. Is that what you actually do ?
CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
kralz
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:07:00 -
[497] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well?
well my super cap is now retired..yay shiny shiney trophy ship i never log in...hurray. why would i EVER drop it any where when i cannot shoot whoever is attacking me...sub caps can kill caps, but caps cannot hurt sub caps...effectively yes super caps online will be dead, but no one is gonna do anything with caps period, not when i can utterly wipe u whole cap fleet out with out fear and with out dropping my own caps....the whole cap field is wasted now.
one more time....attacking alliance drops supers to kill ihub, defending alliance counter attacks with a 50 or 70 abaddons and some hicters...supers all get bubbled. cant log/jump/warp or fight back point of capitals is now??...i guess i always wanted some place that could not get captured or reinforced when i am away from eve to store my expensive ships and bpos...thanks CCP, i always wanted a 28 billion isk garage and storage room. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
420
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:08:00 -
[498] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:What we have going on here is GǪbalancing. It's a good thing for everyone involved.
kralz wrote:one more time....attacking alliance drops supers to kill ihub, defending alliance counter attacks with a 50 or 70 abaddons and some hicters...supers all get bubbled. cant log/jump/warp or fight back Maybe they shouldn't have been such idiots then and brought some backup to kill those Abaddons and HICs. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Daemon Angel
Beyond Divinity Inc Excuses.
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:09:00 -
[499] - Quote
Some very nice changes. though i do hope u deside to change titan guns as well, as they are to overpowerd.
But a very nice step in the right direction.
|
rodyas
The Scope Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:10:00 -
[500] - Quote
SC quote of the day.
"It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.'"
-charles dickens
Nothing could have been written better for this moment. |
|
Saki Sintora
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:11:00 -
[501] - Quote
Too many changes at once. Poor EVE |
inexistin
Rubbish and Garbage Removal Atlas.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:11:00 -
[502] - Quote
KayTwoEx wrote:The problem about the dread is not that it deals too few damage but that the tracking in siege is so crappy that even supercapitals such as SCs and Titans can "speedtank" them. Fix that one please!
Also, tracking/damage ration is too good on titans, since they have no siege module and, therefore, no penalty. One titan can kill a battleship every few minutes during a fleetfight. Bring 20 titans and a meager support fleet and you can butcher a fleet 3 times your size without any problems (provided they don't have the balls to bring their own supers in). |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:11:00 -
[503] - Quote
While your on the road to making all these great changes, please remember to boost the deimos
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
rodyas
The Scope Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:13:00 -
[504] - Quote
kralz wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? well my super cap is now retired..yay shiny shiney trophy ship i never log in...hurray. why would i EVER drop it any where when i cannot shoot whoever is attacking me...sub caps can kill caps, but caps cannot hurt sub caps...effectively yes super caps online will be dead, but no one is gonna do anything with caps period, not when i can utterly wipe u whole cap fleet out with out fear and with out dropping my own caps....the whole cap field is wasted now. one more time....attacking alliance drops supers to kill ihub, defending alliance counter attacks with a 50 or 70 abaddons and some hicters...supers all get bubbled. cant log/jump/warp or fight back point of capitals is now??...i guess i always wanted some place that could not get captured or reinforced when i am away from eve to store my expensive ships and bpos...thanks CCP, i always wanted a 28 billion isk garage and storage room.
Worst adventure time episode ever. |
Crucis Cassiopeiae
EvE-COM
593
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:13:00 -
[505] - Quote
please dont nerf regular carriers with fighters nerf... they cant do their role then...
and... if you can... a little boost to dread tracking so that they can shoot capitals... |
Hartzenen
Fairlight Corp Rooks and Kings
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:17:00 -
[506] - Quote
Please, remove slave set fot supercaps, this will balance shield SC vs armor SC. |
Aurora Egnald
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:18:00 -
[507] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:What we have going on here is GǪbalancing. It's a good thing for everyone involved.
So why we are it why dont we just empty everyones isk and then evenly divide it between the players.. Since your such a great fan of balancing!!!!!!
Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the isk poor and the envious. |
Tokino Kaalakiota
Kaalakiota Logistical Serivces
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:18:00 -
[508] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode |
CMUX
Rim Collection Productions Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:18:00 -
[509] - Quote
Quote:Of all the dreadnoughts currently in existence, the versatile Moros possesses perhaps the greatest capacity to fend off smaller hostiles by itself while concentrating on its primary capital target
Nope!
Also, are you going to remove the Capital Drone Bay requirement from Dreads and Titans manufacturing? |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:19:00 -
[510] - Quote
What should have been done, imho:
- Make supercarriers immune to cap boosting and RR. They simply don't need it. Any supercarrier can have by itself a massive active tank and enough EHP to make a big subcap fleet take a lot of time chewing them down. We're still speaking about multiple millions of EHP, and that should be enough for any ship, regardless of cost. Ships with more than than a large POS are ridiculous. That immunity might also be extended to cap drain, if you fear they'd come down too fast.
- Nerf titan tracking by one hell of a lot, enough that they can't hit a BS with a 100m/s transversal at 50km, even when tracking boosted.
- If supercarriers are supposed to be good only against capitals and structures, as it seems to be the intend, then go all the way and make them carry only bombers. That way you can lower the 400 sig res on fighters so carriers aren't hit that hard.
- Dreds need a real boost, not something that just hurt their already extremely limited polyvalence. If they aren't used now, those changes aren't going to make them used more. They need some way to fight back if they get jumped by a supercap blob and be able to inflict at least some losses, if they severely outnumber the supercaps. Right now there's to much EHP and spider-tanking on the supercap's side for it to be practical. If first suggestion is applied, just boosting the tracking in siege mod a bit should be enough. |
|
August Hayek
PILSGESCHWADER Monkey Circus
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:20:00 -
[511] - Quote
good nerf, but please:
1. buff dreads --> 20% more tank, better tracking 2. buff carriers --> 20% more tank, more fuel bay 3. let fighters as they are now, with the nerf they get somewhat useless |
Dirk Tungsten
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:20:00 -
[512] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Ok heres the bread and the butter of things.
Thers are by all means alot of pros that will mean fleet fights could be more Ballz deep coming from the patch, but alot of crutial badly influenced cons. The loggoff timer relooping, yes a good idea, but why introduce 20% decrease in shield/armor/structure aswell. This is giving supers/titans relatively no chance. with the aggro relooping, should keep the stats tank wise for supers/titans, but maybe balance out what currently is there. For instance Aeon should have less HP as has an isaine tank, wyvern and Nyx should tank wise be relatively unchanged. The Poor Hel should get a buff. Make it competitive.
DDs on titans should be able to hit BSs if not give them a slight tracking bonus so they are at least able to hit BSs well and have some sort of a tank lol
It seems ccp are carebearing up eve for newer players or alot of the subcap players. What they are failing to realise is that this patch will be a tradgedy for a few of those crutial points. Alot of other vets are thinking of hanging up there boots when this patch is released.
It seems heirachy has been too influenced by certain GMs CSMs that revolve around fountian region,we all know who they are. What this patch allows is certain entities that live in fountian (cough cough) to use mass blob fleets of 2000+ again and lagg out systems. There will be no counter to this after the patch. What this patch is going to allow is lagg tactics and mass 2000+ man fleets to rule eve over better organised,structured & skilled alliances. Its basically allowing a bunch of noobs with no structure in there fleet to be successful. Carebearing it down. If you want to kill a titan/super then an aggressing fleet should at least have a well thought through structure an plan to there fleet, they do not deserve and should not expect to kill any supers/titans unless that is implemented.
When alot of the narrow minded people out there eventually realise what this patch will do, the pros from this patch will be massively overlooked, as this will not balance things, its only going to be putting the weight on the other end of the scales. Mark my words im right almost all the time =)
How is CCP going to ensure if some1 DC's that this looping aggro timer doesnt unjustly kill there super/titan?
|
Tokino Kaalakiota
Kaalakiota Logistical Serivces
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:21:00 -
[513] - Quote
1. I have briefly owned/flew a nyx on the character Lord's Servant. I owned and flew extensively 2 wyverns on separate occasion on the character Servant's Lord.
2. While Welpfleet -IS- an existing tactic, it is not the tactic I am referring to...I believe I specifically stated that it was in fact a tactic. I'm not sure where I said it wasn't a tactic.....
3. I count 36 BS on the wyvern km, not "60-70"...but simple math is too difficult for you I suppose. There are a total of 41 battleships on the ENTIRE battle report.
18 Capitals/Supers appear on the WIdawt side in that fight. I am fairly certain there were more actually there, but seeing as they killed very little, and logoffski'd not many showed up on the BR. 18, however stands as the only number able to be proved as there, so I stand corrected.
Irregardless, if 36 BS + mixed support can engage 6 supers with 12 capitals as backup and win without a significant loss (hictors/support don't really count....but 15 losses totalling about 700m for almost 30b isk killed) how can goons not lrn2eve and win with similar odds?
The tactics I refer to are dedicated neuting and smartbombing BS. RnK did a similar thing later with 3 triage carriers(2 for most of the fight) utilizing an understanding of game mechanics to force 4 SC + mixed support to logoff/die. Oh yeah..they also had around 11BS + a handful of support in this fight. BR can be found here http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?229-Low-Sec-Empire/page4 9 posts down, or the first post by Lord Maldoror on that page with all the pictures.
That is only a simple 2:1 numbers advantage. On certain, *alternative* forums, a number I see getting tossed around is 500 v 100. If goons can bring a 5:1 advantage to the table, outside of the broken logoffski mechanic, why aren't you utterly dominating eve?
4. The whelpfleet is designed around cheap, high dps, easy to train for ships. You would be flying Tempests if you wanted any sort of actual neuting power/more dps(oh hey PL has done this), however, those cost quite a bit more and are less noobie-friendly. Hurricanes do all that you say, but the main point is their price/ease of training.
Everything I say is backed up by facts. As to goonswarm's ability to field supers, I have not seen nor heard of goonswarm fielding more than a dozen or at any one time. Even assuming you CAN field "dozens of supers at the drop of a hat" those supers are most likely inexperienced and lack confidence, unlike individuals who have used them on a regular basis.
Alas, I am not a current super owner, but I'm fairly certain that my understanding of game mechanics in relation to supers is quite a bit above your own.
-Tokino/Lords
PS-That BBCcode thing is driving me nuts too..as always the victor is :CCP: lol ;) |
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:23:00 -
[514] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:Has anyone run the numbers on the fighter change? Einherjis orbit with 300m/s at 1km. With a tracking speed of 0.125, the new sig res means they now do zero damage against even a stationary BS. Is this intentional?
as a carrier pilot myself i feel the fighter nerf has just screwed me over royaly , and fighters dont do that much against caps anyway. that and the SC's have bombers which would do the job 10X more effectively than fighters so it looks like fighters have become the new defenders. |
Jetro Grissom
Free Space Tech Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:23:00 -
[515] - Quote
In my humble opinion, CCP killing best game whih i ever saw... titans for example... they making second nerf... aoe dd - ok it was imba weapon, but now they making it bin of trash on battlefield... same thing with supercarriers... as a supercarrier pilot i can say they i see really close look brain at person who decided to approve such nerf.. Nothing personal, but with Incursion you killed nullsec balance and now you do same thing again. I will sell my supercarrier. In current way i don't need it anymore. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
421
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:23:00 -
[516] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:So why we are it why dont we just empty everyones isk and then evenly divide it between the players.. Since your such a great fan of balancing!!!!!! One has nothing to do with the other.
Quote:Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the isk poor and the envious. No.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Dinta Zembo
Snuff Box
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:25:00 -
[517] - Quote
Quote:We are changing the logoff mechanics in such a way that as long as your enemies are actively engaged in fighting you, logging off is not going to save your ship.
Quote:Fighters
GÇó Increase signature resolution to 400
How about giving carriers a -...% sig resolution bonus to fighters so that fighters still have some use? Carriers are much easier to take out, and with these changes fighters will be completely useless. |
Captain Byte
RingWorld Engineering
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:27:00 -
[518] - Quote
I'd like to see Dreads be useful for something other than POS bashing. They should have the ability to take down SCs and Titans without having to go into siege. After all, they should be to a BS what a SC is to a carrier. That would make for some great capital ship engagements.
Also, why should supercaps be impervious to ECM effects. How about creating a SC with supercap ECM capabilities, similar to the Scorpion in the BS class.
On the fighter issue, I agree with the critique of nerfing fighters and reducing carriers to useless in combat. Fighters by definition should be able to hit anything down to a BC at least. And any carrier should be able to carry a full complement of fighters and/or lesser drones for self-protection. If you want to use them to balance SC's, don't let SC's carry fighters! |
Aurora Egnald
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:29:00 -
[519] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:So why we are it why dont we just empty everyones isk and then evenly divide it between the players.. Since your such a great fan of balancing!!!!!! One has nothing to do with the other. Quote:Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the isk poor and the envious. No.
Actually it is the same principle. You spend billions of isk on a ship and have just limited its capability and usefulness by half. Therefore taking half of the value out of it. balancing is just that. Taking isk form someones wallet and puttign it somewhere else.. Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the poor and envious. All they needed to do was to make the smaller ships more capable not nerf the supers. |
Klytior Am'jarhs
Amarrian Retribution
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:32:00 -
[520] - Quote
Fighters Increase signature resolution to 400
-Might be a bit to much for carriers but fighters need some nerf atleast for the SC. -Titan jumpbridge in lowsec is just to powerfull and feels just strange.
Really like these changes so far.
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
421
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:33:00 -
[521] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Actually it is the same principle. Actually, no, it's not.
The principle is simple: bigger is not better and money does not buy you success. The SCs have broken these fundamental design rules for quite some time now, and are being pulled back into a more balanced state. This benefits everyone because it allows for more variety, more fun, and more stuff getting blown up.
No-one is being punished. In fact, the producers of EVE are being outright rewarded. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Saki Sintora
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:34:00 -
[522] - Quote
Measures taken r too simply to deploy full effects in intended direction. The changes appear hastily and thoughtlessly. As they would have incurred in the canteen on the napkin.
Poor EVE
|
Sorran Tor
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:40:00 -
[523] - Quote
The Moros, being a capital ship with a weapon system that sucks down capacitor at record speeds and can't recieve cap transfers in siege mode, previously only had one redeeming feature: Its drone bay and damage bonus.
So naturally, CCP has removed this one redeeming feature and replaced it with a bonus that makes the Moros' cap problems even worse.
I'll want to see what you're doing to fix hybrids across the board before I pass judgement on this change. As it stands, this makes the Moros actually THE worst dread. |
Daiys Erkkinen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:40:00 -
[524] - Quote
Anybody wtb a wyvern ? ccp, can i have my skilltime back ?
......not even destroyed by some powergoons in defence of our space ..... just made useless by it's own creators....
spend so much time to get my dreamship for "producing" salvage on mass in sanctums
This is nonsense, i dont by the car i ever wanted for my hard owned money and after a few months the company cuts it in half for "balancing issues" ....... and for sure I'm paying money for eve. |
MuppetsSlayed
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:44:00 -
[525] - Quote
What would happen if I sat in a corp pos with an ECM burst runing? I take it everyone else there would just sit there till downtime even if they had logged off.
Hitpoints on Hel shouldnt be nerfed, even with a 20% reduction to the other 3 Hels would still always be the primary.
The drone bay nerf wont have the intended effect on supers since you can put 15 fighters into your corp hanger and swap out using another carrier or super in fleet.
Shield bonuses are rediculous compared to armour - its most apparent on supers. Has any of the dev's ever joined a fleet with Levi bonuses applied to in a Wyvern? Unless you have 12 hours to charge yourself up it takes the rep of an entire fleet of chimeras to get the bonus armour ships get instantly.
Should half a single squad of bombers really be able to completely eliminate all of the DPS from a blob of supercaps? The way i see the first fight going down after this is introduced is, supers cyno in, launch fighter bombers, a squad of bombers launch one bomb each. Then the entire blob of supercapitals go home as they dont have other drones. |
Fras Siabi
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:45:00 -
[526] - Quote
Daiys Erkkinen wrote:Anybody wtb a wyvern ? ccp, can i have my skilltime back ? ......not even destroyed by some powergoons in defence of our space ..... just made useless by it's own creators.... spend so much time to get my dreamship for "producing" salvage on mass in sanctums
If thats what you're using a wyvern for, you're doing it wrong.
Have we lost Fountain yet? |
Baron Holbach
Ammo and Tag Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:47:00 -
[527] - Quote
fighters nerf seems .. strange as this is mostly carriers nerf what is balanced as they are atm
Rico Minali wrote:The end of logoffski: Awesome stuff. Can we have killmails for self destructed ships too please? Fine to have the modules all destroyed but at the end of the day the people shooting the ship actually killed it by forcing the pilot to choose self destruct, so it should be reflected in those pilots statistics.
and this!!! |
DurrDurrDurr
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:48:00 -
[528] - Quote
Baron Holbach wrote:fighters nerf seems .. strange as this is mostly carriers nerf what is balanced as they are atm Rico Minali wrote:The end of logoffski: Awesome stuff. Can we have killmails for self destructed ships too please? Fine to have the modules all destroyed but at the end of the day the people shooting the ship actually killed it by forcing the pilot to choose self destruct, so it should be reflected in those pilots statistics. and this!!!
They're nerfing carrier ratting. |
Haseo Smith
Wrecking Shots BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:48:00 -
[529] - Quote
Daiys Erkkinen wrote:Anybody wtb a wyvern ? ccp, can i have my skilltime back ? ......not even destroyed by some powergoons in defence of our space ..... just made useless by it's own creators.... spend so much time to get my dreamship for "producing" salvage on mass in sanctums This is nonsense, i dont by the car i ever wanted for my hard owned money and after a few months the company cuts it in half for "balancing issues" ....... and for sure I'm paying money for eve.
Sure, I'll give you a billion isk. a pretty good deal for a useless ship no?
|
nahtoh
Vanguard Frontiers Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:49:00 -
[530] - Quote
well at lest let the SCs dock for they can refined.
At lest tharts the most probable thing thats going to happen to my moros, which has probably just taken one up the ass. |
|
Khlat Mohel
Fleetworks ROMANIAN-LEGION
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:50:00 -
[531] - Quote
I dont read the forums much and I post even less, but after I read this article I'm going to put my 2 cents out there. The Nagalfar needs its weapons brought in line with the rest of the Dreadnaught class. I would gladly give up the skill points I have trained in capital launchers to be able to fly a Nagalfar with 3 Projectile slots. In many cases the current configuration keeps many pilots from flying it and many alliances banning it from fleets
cheers |
Aryndel Vyst
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
101
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:50:00 -
[532] - Quote
Anyone that doesn't want their SC anymore feel free to contract it to me for 0 isk. I'll put it to use you big babbies. |
Daiys Erkkinen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:50:00 -
[533] - Quote
Fras Siabi wrote:Daiys Erkkinen wrote:Anybody wtb a wyvern ? ccp, can i have my skilltime back ? ......not even destroyed by some powergoons in defence of our space ..... just made useless by it's own creators.... spend so much time to get my dreamship for "producing" salvage on mass in sanctums If thats what you're using a wyvern for, you're doing it wrong.
Can use it "wrong" for whatever i like ^^
|
PricklyPoo
Mafia Redux Merciless.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:51:00 -
[534] - Quote
Looks pretty good to me.
I can't help but laugh at all of the supercap pilots complaining about how their ship is now useless, because they can't survive a fleet of 100+ hurricanes or a few dreadnaughts anymore. Sucks having some game balance, huh guys? I guess next time you think about hotdropping your supercarrier fleet on ****, you might actually have to think about the risk, tough luck....
It's only fair that subcaps are now useful and you can't go into fights insta-raping everything with only titans and nyxs, while never having any chance of dying.
|
DurrDurrDurr
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:51:00 -
[535] - Quote
MuppetsSlayed wrote:What would happen if I sat in a corp pos with an ECM burst runing? I take it everyone else there would just sit there till downtime even if they had logged off.
Hitpoints on Hel shouldnt be nerfed, even with a 20% reduction to the other 3 Hels would still always be the primary.
The drone bay nerf wont have the intended effect on supers since you can put 15 fighters into your corp hanger and swap out using another carrier or super in fleet.
Shield bonuses are rediculous compared to armour - its most apparent on supers. Has any of the dev's ever joined a fleet with Levi bonuses applied to in a Wyvern? Unless you have 12 hours to charge yourself up it takes the rep of an entire fleet of chimeras to get the bonus armour ships get instantly.
Should half a single squad of bombers really be able to completely eliminate all of the DPS from a blob of supercaps? The way i see the first fight going down after this is introduced is, supers cyno in, launch fighter bombers, a squad of bombers launch one bomb each. Then the entire blob of supercapitals go home as they dont have other drones.
Isn't that what happens in subcapital fights, except with their ships instead?
bombing runs are very hard. |
Emmerik
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:51:00 -
[536] - Quote
Wyvern and Hell should indeed have some kind of buff. As in a shield implant set or something... or what people say something to get the shield up to strenght faster with bonusses. |
Lykouleon
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
154
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:53:00 -
[537] - Quote
Just to clarify, is the Orca being considered a capital ship by the changes to the DD? Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER SO I CAN HIT THEM WITH MY SWORD |
Vereesa
Gallivanting Travel Company Band of Wanderers
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:56:00 -
[538] - Quote
As a capital pilot with a dreadnought and a max trained battle carrier rusting in lowsec I was glad when I saw that CCP was rebalancing supers. the logoffski mechanic changing is great, really. that was half of what makes the supers broken, mixed with their high EHP. Nerfing both is excessive. All you need is a ibis popping a civilian rail into the side of a logged cap and its not going to dissapear so you have all the time in the world to kill them. Pretty sure a decent bs/cap gang could take them apart pretty quickly as long as they have someone agressing each ship (hell one ship could warp from logged ship to logged ship resetting the timers with a HIC watching local to see if anyone's logged on and tackle them if they do).
Another dreadnought nerf :-( I remember the days of the super moros where it felt like all that isk you just sank into the ship was worth it since given enough time to lock it could destroy almost anything that sailed the dark skies. Now only being able to kill poses and sieged dreads it just feels like a huge let down, which is why its rusting in lowsec.
Carriers being unable to attack anything smaller than other caps- well thats its one non logistic job gone. Why bother training fighters to 5? you can't even help kill poses with them. I remember using my carrier to clear anomalies, that was fun if not nerve shredding watching local and intel for signs of a hot drop. Just wasted about a hundred days of training getting fighters and carrier to 5 for the battle Thanatos. Haven't deployed it once and probably won't be able to get into another alliance fast enough to use it before the nerf. Sigh. |
BoltsBitch
Star Frontiers BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:57:00 -
[539] - Quote
My carriers fighters allready occasionally totally miss battleships and now you are saying they will only have ONE THIRD of thier current tracking? What the hell? |
Lili Lu
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:57:00 -
[540] - Quote
Lykouleon wrote:Just to clarify, is the Orca being considered a capital ship by the changes to the DD?
Looks to me like they are referring to Rorqual and not Orca |
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 21:58:00 -
[541] - Quote
Crosspost from features / ideas (welp)
Sup CCP duders.
I really like some of your proposed changes, and really dislike others.
1. Logoff mechanics: hell yes. Fantastic. Luv2shred logged off spaceship. :twisted::twisted: etc
2. DD Changes: a good start (though personally I think auto-1-shot megadeath weapons of any kind are just dumb and DDs should probably just go entirely)
3. Dread changes: siege cycle time, excellent. Total removal of all drones? Not really necessary IMHO. They didn't have huge bays and could only field 5 at a time, I don't see how this breaks gameplay especially given their awful, awful locktimes.
4. Fighter changes: Silly? As a person who's spent plenty of time using fighters, I can tell you that they're not exactly overpowered. They don't hit frigates and destroyers terribly well (or in the case of frigates, at all), they miss often enough on cruisers, and the only targets they're currently doing full dps to are BCs and up. Fighters already have pretty bad tracking and close / fast orbits-- changing their weapon sigs to 400 is going to render them far less useful for PvE without substantially changing how they're used in PvP (since you already pop normal drones to deal with cruisers and below in PvP rather than fighters).
5. Supercarrier changes (relates to dread changes too): I agree that supercap sub-fighter drone capabilities are literally insane right now. There's no way one should be able to sit back, sip one's mojito, and launch infinite waves of Valkyrie IIs at any tacklers on grid until all hostile tackle is dead. It's dumb. However, I think removing *all* SCs sub-fighter drone capabilities is similarly dumb. How about installing two drone bays-- one for fighters and bombers using your proposed numbers, and another for regular drones with, say, 250-350m3 capacity? This would allow SCs to carry one flight (20) of a variety of normal drones (say, a flight of heavies, a flight of mediums, 1-2 flights of lights and a flight of logistic / ewar drones) but would avoid the infinite drones scenario we face currently. I think this would leave solo / small numbers of SCs able to defend themselves against an unplanned tackle (say you hotdrop someone's ratting carrier in your Nyx, and just as you enter system, a hostile in a dictor *happens* to jump into system, sees a cyno, and warps to it) while still leaving them hosed in the case of a planned trap.
Under the proposed changes, a supercarrier would be totally unable to defend itself even against a solo Eris, since unless the dictor pilot is *edit* developmentally-challenged */edit* enough to fly into smartbomb range there's literally no way a SC could ever kill it with 400m gun-sig fighters or FB. Drones aren't that hard to deal with-- a bombing run or two or a couple of smartbombing BS would quickly dispatch 250m3 worth of drones. Leaving a 20b isk ship completely unable to defend itself against a single, 20m isk tackler seems kind of excessive, especially if the reason for doing so is "people are too lazy or unimaginative to find ways to kill 40 light drones." I think the same notion applies to dreads and titans as well-- there's no way that these ships being able to field as many drones as a battleship is unfair. Sorry. Dreads (nevermind Titans) cost 10x as much as a BS, you'd think that the inclusion of equivalent self-defense capabilities wouldn't be a point of contention, especially given that they'll be sieged much of the time anyway and their terrible, terrible scan-res will still make it incredibly hard to kill a skillful dictor pilot.
6. The Single Most Important Thing You Missed: Mother of God! The guns, they track the same! Titan gun tracking needs an adjustment. Badly. I don't know if you guys noticed or not, but DDs are currently the least of a subcap fleet's problems when attacking a Titan ball. Yes, its a pain in the ass to lose your commandships and T3s in short order to doomsdays, but what's a lot worse is when the Titans start locking up and alpha'ing all your battleships as well. I've seen cruiser-sized ships die to Titan guns, for god's sake. Compounding this problem is the fact that, on top of already excellent tracking, Titans can be tracking-linked. This doesn't make much sense given that they're immune to ewar (sieged Dreads are immune to ewar, but cannot be "remote assisted" by links, reps, or cap transfers), and it results in Titans being able to easily demolish BS / BC in fleet fights. Titan subcap demolition is as much if not more of a problem in fleet fights than supercarrier drones are, even with the current infinite drones situation. Please, please fix this problem (or at least, in the interests of fairness, improve dread gun tracking to be equivalent and don't strip Supercarriers of all their sub-fighter drones).
Overall I like where these changes are headed. I think Supercaps as currently implemented are stupidly overpowered, especially Titans. I would urge you to consider not *completely* eliminating the defensive abilities of supercarriers, especially given the incoming 20% ehp nerf and logoff mechanics change, which I think more than compensates for their lack of killability. Infinite drones are dumb, but I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed a flight or two of light drones. The same goes for Dreads.
I'd also consider removing DDs from the game entirely. Un-dodgeable, one-shot instagib weapons just aren't a good idea in a multiplayer game. They were a bad idea when they killed fleets with an AOE, they're a bad idea now when they kill people's fancy subcaps, and they'll still be a bad idea when they're relegated to one-shotting people's capital ships. Consider trading DDs for some other kind of useful perk / capability.
Wow, :words: |
Dr 0wnage
The Dark Tribe Checkmate.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:00:00 -
[542] - Quote
You guys are on the right track, but are missing a few things here...
Super HP nerf - Reducing 20% across the board is the WRONG way to go about this! Please look at the ships individually! As it is currently the Aeon has nearly 3x the ehp of the Hel, and more then some of the titans. That imbalance will not change with a generic HP reduction. Fixing the logoff mechanic will solve much of the "theyre too hard to kill" problem. Go for a balance, not a straight up nerf!
Fighters - Right idea, but wrong way to implement it. All this will do is make regular carriers that much less valuable in fleet fights. If a fighter can't hit a sub cap then wth is it supposed to hit?? Simply reduce the number of fighters supers can deploy and problem is solved.
Dreadnoughts - These ships are currently combat ineffective. There are no changes here that will change that. The 5 minute siege timer will help them avoid getting dropped by supers easier, but that in no way changes their effectiveness in a fleet fight. Dreads need their HP doubled (with an increase in production cost) and need a damage bonus to specifically supercaps. A general damage increase will not work as it will make them more effective against sub-caps and other dreads / carriers.
Titans - Can we say turret tracking anyone??
All in all its definitely a step in the right direction. One thing we all should consider is why do so many super pilots bring their ship to a fight? Well they can't swap to a smaller ship very easily now can they?? ;-) Is it time yet for docking rights?
More wonderful ideas on doc's super balance thread here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=13411 |
ScheenK
Constantine.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:04:00 -
[543] - Quote
MuppetsSlayed wrote:What would happen if I sat in a corp pos with an ECM burst runing? I take it everyone else there would just sit there till downtime even if they had logged off.
Hitpoints on Hel shouldnt be nerfed, even with a 20% reduction to the other 3 Hels would still always be the primary.
The drone bay nerf wont have the intended effect on supers since you can put 15 fighters into your corp hanger and swap out using another carrier or super in fleet.
Shield bonuses are rediculous compared to armour - its most apparent on supers. Has any of the dev's ever joined a fleet with Levi bonuses applied to in a Wyvern? Unless you have 12 hours to charge yourself up it takes the rep of an entire fleet of chimeras to get the bonus armour ships get instantly.
Should half a single squad of bombers really be able to completely eliminate all of the DPS from a blob of supercaps? The way i see the first fight going down after this is introduced is, supers cyno in, launch fighter bombers, a squad of bombers launch one bomb each. Then the entire blob of supercapitals go home as they dont have other drones.
to bad you cant run ecm burst since you cant target inside a pos |
Vaffel Junior
NorCorp Security
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:04:00 -
[544] - Quote
Gratz to Goonswarm and allies. You have won this game. |
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:05:00 -
[545] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:Lykouleon wrote:Just to clarify, is the Orca being considered a capital ship by the changes to the DD? Looks to me like they are referring to Rorqual and not Orca Correct. The Rorqual is a valid target, the Orca is not
|
|
kralz
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:06:00 -
[546] - Quote
point and case is this: if i dont need caps to eliminate a capital ship threat to my sov i wont field them.
if i cant defend my caps from sub caps effectively using weapons native to the caps themselves they are a huge liability and i will just stick to using sub caps for my goals.
i just dont get the complaining i am really really lost. a small nano gang and ruin a carriers day, sabers, vaga's and drams will demolish a ratting carrier in no time, and already all those ships can speed/sig tank a carriers fighters.
nerf supers a bit, buff dreads ALOT. dont kill the moros by making its guns **** the cap even more...didnt think it was possible to ruin the moros any worse...proved wrong on that point yet again...
these nerfs will affect the market hugely as well. i wouldnt be suprised if prices of everything from jump fuel, minerals and pos's all the way to bpo's and jump freighters drops hugely, i know personally my 35 billion isk investment in cap bpo's is wasted now. who the hell is gonna fly/and loose a carrier...so who is gonna buy one. the fighters patch makes regular carriers worse them worthless. cant hit pos, much less damage on sov structures, cant hit sub caps, cant rat.....ok guys only bring ur carriers out to rep stations. thats why u spend 1.5 billion isk on ur new archon, for a really shiney big, slow, station repair service. triage carriers ftw....
if this patch goes live as proposed i know of 6 accounts that will be unsubbing immediatly, eve has never been and should never be a noob friendly game, grow up or go home. roll big and heavy and stay in empire, dont fly what u cant afford to loose...and the logs show nothing u wont be getting reembursed we(the gms) are sorry for your loss.
|
Tefeyel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:06:00 -
[547] - Quote
Vereesa wrote:As a capital pilot with a dreadnought and a max trained battle carrier rusting in lowsec I was glad when I saw that CCP was rebalancing supers. the logoffski mechanic changing is great, really. that was half of what makes the supers broken, mixed with their high EHP. Nerfing both is excessive. All you need is a ibis popping a civilian rail into the side of a logged cap and its not going to dissapear so you have all the time in the world to kill them. Pretty sure a decent bs/cap gang could take them apart pretty quickly as long as they have someone agressing each ship (hell one ship could warp from logged ship to logged ship resetting the timers with a HIC watching local to see if anyone's logged on and tackle them if they do).
Oh noes, you wouldn't be able to hotdrop solo with your supercap on random subcaps or subcap fleets with no risk whatsoever.
Don't log off in space with aggression, just log off in a POS? Cloak if you have no POS? Wait for aggression to come off? Get a subcap support fleet? |
Sakaali
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:07:00 -
[548] - Quote
CMUX wrote:Quote:Of all the dreadnoughts currently in existence, the versatile Moros possesses perhaps the greatest capacity to fend off smaller hostiles by itself while concentrating on its primary capital target Nope! Also, are you going to remove the Capital Drone Bay requirement from Dreads and Titans manufacturing?
Good question |
H3llHound
Nex Exercitus Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:07:00 -
[549] - Quote
@CCP: Will the loss of 20% EHP also come with an adjustment to the respective supercarrier BPO's, thus make them use less components? As it happened with removal of the clone bay |
Peter Powers
FinFleet Raiden.
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:08:00 -
[550] - Quote
hello,
first of all, i welcome most of the changes proposed, however there are a few details that are kinda off.
a) removing non-fighter drones from supercarriers, while that might seem desireable, its a bad choice.. non-fighters dont have too much of an impact to real fleet fights, since they are deployed there rarely - however it totally kills alot of the npc stuff you can do with a SC while that might sound desireable to a few, its simply unfair - if you are stuck in one ship that cannot be changed, you should have a bit of variety in the things you actually can do. Either you allow a set of drones to be kept (just limit the amount of fighter/fighter bombers to one set of one type (+ a hand full of spares), so you can either have fighters or bombers in that category, but still regular drones OR allow supercarriers to dock.
b) the nerf hits all supercapitals the same way, which means you do not take the current imbalance between shieldsupers in account. there is a reason why the more successfull alliance all are full armor with the supers, and thats simply because armored supers are superior to shield supers - since you are actually looking at the supers balance NOW would be a good time to get shields back in line with armors.
besides that +1 on the changes (IF you manage to take the concerns i mentioned into account) |
|
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:09:00 -
[551] - Quote
So when can I get a GM to put my aeon in an outpost so I can refine it ? Should I start my petitions now ? Supercap ratting ship is no longer so Yo I need to refine it. :) Yes I am serious. Thanks while it lasted. |
GreGh Rakrot
Rionnag Alba Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:12:00 -
[552] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:good stuff
Basicly what he said, changes in right direction although some arent really needed imo and there are some other tweaks needed.
POS guns need buffing, they need this even know with 10 min siege now with 5 min cycle there is even less chance any dread will ever be in danger of getting killed by POS.
Moros needs capacitor rebalanced if these changes go through.
EHP nerf isnt really needed since it was only problem because supercaps were unkillable when they logged off, with new log off mechanics it doesnt really matter if it has 20% EHP more, it will die.
Fighters nerf isnt really needed either, or at least not so drasticly.
Removal of drone bays on SCs, you dont need to remove it completely its a bit too much. Just give them ALOT smaller drone bay where you cant field endless waves of drones. |
buck herrick
101st Space Marine Force Nulli Secunda
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:14:00 -
[553] - Quote
omg, omg, omg.
coupled with the 'other' changes yet to be announced in full detail, this is just spectacularly awesome-sauce.
i wish i hadnt sold my other toons, oh well, lets see how this plays out then i may try to buy them back. |
kralz
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:17:00 -
[554] - Quote
ecm burst is omni directional mod, not the projected ecm burst of a super carrier. |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies THE UNTHINKABLES
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:17:00 -
[555] - Quote
i'm glad to see these changes. FCs will have to employ more tactics rather then bridge supers = win. and i can allready tell you how much machs will go up in price after this ;). |
Diehard15
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:18:00 -
[556] - Quote
Some good changes here. Fighters Increased signature resolution to 400 is too big of a nerf especially to normal carriers. A nerf to Titans using tracking computers would be nice, currently they track subcaps too well. |
JP1981
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:19:00 -
[557] - Quote
Massive stealth carrier nerf is LAME. CCP should try making dreads truly better instead of relatively better vs now crippled carriers. Moros still sucks (even worse than before?) and Machariel prices are about to go through the roof as null-sec citizenry discover they can no longer effectively carrier-rat, nor for that matter hit anything at all of importance with their carriers.
Does CCP have ANYONE in their employment capable of fully thinking through the consequences of the changes they come up with? Feels like they are run by 12-year olds. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:21:00 -
[558] - Quote
Glad I liked BF3 ..9 eve accounts 135 a month....BF3 50 bucks once play the brakes off it..Sold..Thanks CCP your going to save us all some money :) Love you guys. |
Kersh Marelor
HUSARIA Curatores Veritatis Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:25:00 -
[559] - Quote
Stupid changes proving CCP is still detached from the game and doing more of theory-crafting than looking at the issues at hand.
1. HP Nerf Just how is a super-cap too hard to kill atm? It obviously is time consuming if done with some 50 BSes, not so much when using 10 supers. Are you trying to say with those changes htat supercarriers should be generally vulnerable to some random mid sized BS gang? the reason for the HP buff was the fact everyone could kill those ships without great effort. You want those times to come back? They are easy to kill really IF you bring a proper tool to get the job done. With those changes we may go a step further and make a gift for all the gankers by making freighters more vulnerable - after all they are hard to insta-pop with 15 BSes atm, so should be changed, aye?
2. Fighters and drone bays This fighter change is a nerf to carriers really... any reason behind that other than you just not realizing what the hell you're doing? However removing all drones other than fighters and fighter bombers from SCs is good and must be done.
3. Dreads Good idea about siege module and stuff - but really doesn't fix the issue if super carriers and titans can jump in, RF the station in a few minutes and get out. Who needs dreads for that even with a shorter timer? Suggested fix: ban super-caps from locking and engaging structures making them CAPITAL KILLERS. Dreads then get the thing they are most lacking atm - a purpose.
4. Agression timer Great change - this ensures supers cannot just randomly jump in and forget about having proper sub-cap support.
I think you are giving in to all the whiners willing to get a super-cap KM with their nano roaming gang and alliances not able to adapt to modern eve-warfare. I really like how you want to boost the role of sub-caps and it really must be done. But making supers easier to kill is not the way. The beatiful thing about EVE is that everything has its purpose and role. Super-caps were designed to do massive fleet stuff and killing capitals. Carriers were designed as support for capital/sub-cap fleet. dreads are damage dealers and powerhouse of the sov grabbing entity. It seems you now want to totally demolish that principle instead of fixing the areas where it went horribly wrong (supers taking dreads place, carriers/dreads becoming baits for super gangs, supers not caring about anything due to log-off machenic).
So... tl:dr version: - only Fighters and Fighter Bombers on super-carriers, (20+10 for most, more for the Nyx), - supers are not able to target and punish structures (making Dreads golden standard for that job), - leave HP alone since supers should be killable by capital/super-cap/massive sub cap fleets - not random gangs, - leave Fighters alone, - maintain changes proposed to Remote ECM Burst, Siege Module, DD, log-off timers (solving the 'too hard to kill even with 4-5 supers' issue), - give the promissed new titan super weapons (yeah, some of us still remember that promise, you know). |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:25:00 -
[560] - Quote
Adapt or die people ... nerfs are needed to balance things around.
Also would love an official answer to this: @CCP: Will the loss of 20% EHP also come with an adjustment to the respective supercarrier BPO's, thus make them use less components? As it happened with removal of the clone bay + a decrease in Capital Drone Bay requirements? (to be inline with the reduced drone bay)
Anyone? E |
|
Bettoesai
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:25:00 -
[561] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Final thought, normal carriers should have a bonus that reduces the sig of fighters.
That is a good idea.
|
Proats
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:26:00 -
[562] - Quote
Fiberton wrote:Glad I liked BF3 ..9 eve accounts 135 a month....BF3 50 bucks once play the brakes off it..Sold..Thanks CCP your going to save us all some money :) Love you guys. :) |
Kalissa
Sacred Templars RED.OverLord
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:28:00 -
[563] - Quote
I'm pretty much in support of the changes made, I own both a SC and Titan and I think they're a generally good change.
I would still encourage CCP to do something about the shield bonus on the Levi as it's quite obvious the armor tankers have a huge advantage as they get their extra HP instantly while the Levi had to charge up the shields to their full capacity plus once you jump to a new system you're back to square one and have to begin again.
Also I would have gone a little further and made it to SC's could use Fighter Bombers ONLY.
This would have made it unnessessary to change the fighters stats and wouldn't have nerfed Carriers.
Still hoping to see the spool up timer things for jump drives make an appearance soon too. |
Giimlee
Firebirds Song Firebird Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:29:00 -
[564] - Quote
re-balancing the capitals is needed i do agree with you on that however the ways in which you (ccp) have chosen to do so are crap.
first and for most super caps do have a bit of an excessive hp and the only way to effectively compete with them is to use the same class ship to combat them making it possible to kill one with sub-capital class ships does need to happen however taking away their ability to defend them selves against the sub-caps by removing their smaller drones will lead to the same current issues that plague the dreadnaught.
secondly the Dreads do need a fixed fixing them in the proposed manner also makes them defenseless against sub-caps which is further hindered by only being able to target 2 targets in siege mode and compounded by the fact that once in they are committed until all enemy ships are destroyed or they are. considering the dread class ship can not hit a sub cap with their weapon systems currently taking away their drones will only make it worse and they will still sit on the sidelines under used for the time to come as they will be easy prey for any sub cap fleet. As for the Moros the proposed rate of fire bonus will only further make the ships cap unstable as the hybrid weapons use capacitor to fire effectively taking one of the best dreads and making it the one of the worst. as everything including super capitals will be able to speed tank them until the capacitor is empty at witch time the ship will be easy prey.
while the titian class ships can hit a battleship class changing the super weapons to not hit anything but a capital class ship makes sense. removing its drone bay will also leave them utterly defenseless to a sub-cap fleet.
this is all further compounded by the fact that once warp/jump scrambled by a heavy interdicter an entire capital fleet could be killed by a fleet of t3s with out being able to fight back ......
now how is that smart?
are you trying to loose subscriptions?
while i do agree that they ships should be kill-able removing their ability to fight or fend off lesser ship should be there other wise whats the point of having one?
if you cut too deep into the hp and the ability for super capitals to fight then they will be no more than a trophy ship and no longer used in the game in which case you might as well let them back into high sec and able to dock them there so they can be just that all they well be after those changes
An over grown Trophy
|
Usurpine
Galactic Defence Consortium United Pod Service
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:30:00 -
[565] - Quote
CCP you do it the wrong way.
If you have 3 kids, one has 4 chocolades, one has 6 and one has 7 chocolades and you need to rebalance this situation its a good way to give everyone 10 chocolades (upgrade to 10). Everybody will have same amount of chocolates and everyone will be very happy.
Instead you give the first one 1 extra chocolades, take 1 from the second and 2 of the third kid, which results in a balance but propably making one kid a little more happy but the others think you badly suck and call you that this is action is a fail.
I dont know exactly if this now balance it out, but what i see is, you nerfed fighters, which is a nerf to all carrier pilots and you didnt buff dreadnoughts enough, but they badly need a buff and you heavily nerfed supercapitals, more then necessary to make them sort of pos decoration. You nerfed the end game reward of people who played eve for more then 4 years and invested hell of time and isk into something they really liked. you already nerfed titans weapons in the past and now they again are nerfed. You are listening to the wrong people ccp, i would call this populism and not a good way to rebalance ships.
I cant tell you how to make it right in detail but this way imho and obviosly is a fail. CCP, please, you can do that better. Just listen to what people tell you and make the right and psychological good decision. This is wrong. |
Lili Lu
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:33:00 -
[566] - Quote
Disclaimer to start <- Cap pilot, not a Supercap pilot. Still gonna comment because I killed supercaps and was killed by supercaps. That is qualification to comment.
Seems like a set of decent nerfs to me. Supercaps online had to end.
As to fighter nerf being stealth carrier nerf, so what. You can still field them or other drones to fend off subcaps, it's just that you will have to decide what drones are appropriate. Fighters against supercaps and other caps; Heavy drones or sentries against a BS blob; Medium drones against . . . Carrier blobbage not an available (if less effective) step down tactic, might have been a worry by CCP as to why they nerfed fighters for carriers as well.
Regardless, I think the real consternation being voiced here is that carrier fighters will no longer be anom clearing machines. Seems ok to me. Always struck me as stupid to bring capitals into anoms. Plenty of BSs or other subcap whether solo or with second account repping that can clear anoms.
Titan tracking or remote tracking receiving at least does need a nerf as well. Good to see that Tallest is "considering" it again for the upcoming rebalance patch.
Shield hp whinage? As a Nidhoggur pilot who could theoretically be in a Hel I'll say I don't care. This mechanic affects all shield ships of all sizes. On the flip side you see plenty of shield fleets. Shields do get passive regen. Shield transfers operate at beginning of cycle. Two things armor lacks.
This issue has been haggled over at many levels of ships. The answer has always been that the tanks are different. Active shield implants exist but no active armor rep implants, differing hp boost, differing cap efficency, shield boost amps but no armor, shield regen but armor does not regen etc etc. Nothing new here. Having a differntial nerf would necessitate a wholesale change to the tanking mechanisms for all ships. I don't blame CCP for not addressing the issues here. If, and I say if, it were to be viewed a problem, it would be one hell of a game alteration to take on and not miss some unintended consequences.
All in all it seems like a good set of nerfs. Naked supercap blobbage will disappear. Subcaps and regular caps will have varying importance again. WIth the supercap proliferation it had to happen. I'm sure lots of people will come up with the next preferred fleet tactics and I doubt supercaps will be relgated to not or hardly ever being used (unlike some other ship classes such as eaf and af). Oh, because your ship cost so much in comparison it should remain op. Sorry nope.
The consolation for those unhappy is that this process of balancing will never end. Some day you may get a re-buff. Relax, you had a pretty long ride as op. Adapt to the change. |
Abinadi9
NerdHerd Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:34:00 -
[567] - Quote
CCP,
What will happen with the BPOs? Will capital drone bays be needed for the dreads and titans after the patch? |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
48
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:40:00 -
[568] - Quote
Usurpine wrote:CCP you do it the wrong way.
If you have 3 kids, one has 4 chocolades, one has 6 and one has 7 chocolades and you need to rebalance this situation its a good way to give everyone 10 chocolades (upgrade to 10). Everybody will have same amount of chocolates and everyone will be very happy.
And next time you give them an additional 5 chocolates ending up in 15, and then 20 and then 30 and then all of a sudden you have 3 very fat kids with diabetes that can't even get out of their beds. How is that good? |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:40:00 -
[569] - Quote
Giimlee wrote: while the titian class ships can hit a battleship class changing the super weapons to not hit anything but a capital class ship makes sense. removing its drone bay will also leave them utterly defenseless to a sub-cap fleet. this is all further compounded by the fact that once warp/jump scrambled by a heavy interdicter an entire capital fleet could be killed by a fleet of t3s with out being able to fight back ......
If you would explain how a T3/Subcap gang can kil lets say 20 Supers with an average ehp of 30m (600m ehp) before the supers can get reeinforcements from their supportfleet ? If you deploy your supers so far away from your support that they have none effectively you deserve to lose them. Its like saying that a frigate gang could destroy a BS fleet because they can shot the drones and BS cant do anything against them then... |
DeadEye One
Up2-NoGood Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:40:00 -
[570] - Quote
I guess this is going to be like everything else CCP does with the game. They are going to start chasing people off the game. Why would anyone both training these ships anymore. They won't even make a decent paperweight. |
|
kralz
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:43:00 -
[571] - Quote
CCP for real, when this goes live, can i have a pop up window asking me if i want to be refuned both isk for the carrier and capital mod skill books and every single SP i invest in them? all of my training is cap oriented with every account and every toon, this patch totally ruins my game...
carrier pve ruined...and no one is gonna buy carriers, so my bpos are worthless, SC are utterly worthless, wasted toon, just lemme go back about 2 years of sp and relocate skills and i may keep playing, i trained my skills on known ship pros and cons....note i fly a nyx....its really not fair that i should have 5 accounts totally screwed over because some whiny noobs cant compete.
its cool tho, goons have won the game indeed.
does CCP actually play the game? in any way? or is there some really strong drug in jove space us mere us meer mortals cannot dare to try? i mean are u guys really really this stupid?
|
Trillian Nero
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:44:00 -
[572] - Quote
CCP hates CCCP
Long live the fighters...
oh... send me isk... beatchs.
|
MezriDax
BlackWatch Industrial Group Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:47:00 -
[573] - Quote
As with everything CCP likes to kill, Supercaps are now even more useless than they were before. Good job, another shot in the foot CCP. Keep killing the game, you'll be joining the millions on the unemployment lines real soon.
They are called "super" caps for a reason. It's a different class and type of ship, it's not supposed to be competing with sub caps. They are different purpose and the power should be there for the efforts put into it. Glad the U.S. Navy doesn't think like you or our carriers would have the effectiveness of a French gunboat.
Thank you for getting everyone in our alliance talking about moving to another game (again). Always fun to loose my friends as they quit the game. Soon I won't have any reason to give you my $11 per month and my wife will be SO happy that she can spend the money. She thanks you from the bottom of her wallet. |
Usurpine
Galactic Defence Consortium United Pod Service
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:48:00 -
[574] - Quote
kralz wrote: its cool tho, goons have won the game indeed.
does CCP actually play the game? in any way? or is there some really strong drug in jove space us mere us meer mortals cannot dare to try? i mean are u guys really really this stupid?
^this. |
J'J'J'Jita
Ch'Ch'Ch'Chia Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:49:00 -
[575] - Quote
Bring back lowsec doomsday: they can't hit subcaps anymore. How dumb is it that you have a weapon which can't fire depending on system security status?
The titan nerfs are amazingly huge. |
Canine Fiend
Hidden Refuge
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:51:00 -
[576] - Quote
I'm not quite sure why in an effort to balance 0.0 blob warfare you decided to nerf regular carriers. Carriers that are used by players who have no interest in large 0.0 PVP at all. It ruins people who use carriers/fighters for missions, it ruins people who use carriers/fighters for lowsec/small engagement PVP and it's an unnecessary nerf. If fighter-bombers are just for supercaps, then why make fighters unable to hit battleships? You've esentially made carriers obsolete for 0.0 warfare and ruined them for everything else.
Make the nerf to the Supercarriers as others have suggested and not to the fighters. This is an absurd change that needs to be looked at. You're not just messing with 0.0 warfare here. |
RDevz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:51:00 -
[577] - Quote
kralz wrote:CCP for real, when this goes live, can i have a pop up window asking me if i want to be refuned both isk for the carrier and capital mod skill books and every single SP i invest in them? all of my training is cap oriented with every account and every toon, this patch totally ruins my game...
Sure, if and only if I can get back my skillpoints for training into a Raven (following the torpedo PVP nerf of the Cold War expansion), Dominix (following the Comedy Dominix Nerf of '06), T2 railguns (following their nerf), a Raven again (following the change to torps which made them less useful for ratting), and so on and so forth.
In other words, no. Shut up. |
Xorth Adimus
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:53:00 -
[578] - Quote
1. Titans XL weapons can pulverise battleship fleets easily.. doomsday or not, fit right for instance they can one shot a moving battleship or a stationary BC whilst getting reps and remote effects.
Meanwhile supercapitals move and hence are difficult to hit properly by dreads in siege today.
2. Quote:Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts increase rate of fire for weapons that can only hit a pos in seige.
... so you are effectively nerfing all dread's minor protection (when the issue was with supercaps) Tracking in siege needs to be improved. Phoenix is good as it is. They also need a HP boost whilst in siege.
3. Fighters are now made utterly pointless. Fighters should have a larger signature and be vulnerable to subcap damage but they should be able to hit battleships.
4. Siege and triage should be the thing to balance all caps, if you want to use the special functions you need to siege them but if you do it makes you vulnerable to capacitor warfare and of potentially running out of Stront. Siege and Triage also help prevent people using remote effects to boost tracking locking and repping and reduces lock speed and tracking and stops them for 5 minutes.
- Titans should have to enter siege mode to gain damage bonuses on weapons and doomsday. Doomsday should be signature radius based.
- Super carriers should have to enter triage mode to be able to launch or use bombers or use the ECM burst ability. They need a reduced drone bay of 250m3 and a maximum bandwidth of 125m3.
- Only fighters/ bombers should go in the fighter/bombers bay and they should only be able to carry two wings of fighters and one wing of bombers.
This then also requires player skill as you need to cycle siege on and off and organise/cycle reps in a fleet.
5. super cap resistance to EW 100% resistance is somewhat overpowered and I would like to see them be at least slightly vulnerable to some forms of EW. |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:54:00 -
[579] - Quote
GM Homonoia wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote:
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
The awesome weapon of a buddy in a ship that can hit those targets. Or, you know, you can fit a large or medium gun on your dreadnought, as those were designed to attack those targets. /me hides from the rain of rotten tomatoes.
this is complete and utter ****. hello thats why they are called super capitals... not everyone oculd afford one... and not enough had the balls to use them... now ccp bows down to what goons want... nerfing ships by people who used them properly and had the balls too. pure and total crap. and gm's and people who work at ccp trying to make jokes out of it is ****... are you going to allow people to get here skill points back since you s*** on supers that people spent momths and months training for??? no trust in ccp anymore... way to go CCP! Failed again in many pilots... and definately no professionalism! |
LORD DRAGUIL
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:57:00 -
[580] - Quote
Huge nerf for supercaps , I consulted the ole crystal ball and it says in the near future it see's some subscriptions being canceled ie..supercap pilots . who would now want a supercap 20-60 bil ship that cant defend itself except against other supercaps . guess ccp hasnt seen the welp fleet kill 2 super carrier in 2 minutes or so . i suggest you make the supercarriers dockable so they can atleast do somthing constructive with those toons..
o/ |
|
Usurpine
Galactic Defence Consortium United Pod Service
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:57:00 -
[581] - Quote
JP1981 wrote:Massive stealth carrier nerf is LAME. CCP should try making dreads truly better instead of relatively better vs now crippled carriers. Moros still sucks (even worse than before?) and Machariel prices are about to go through the roof as null-sec citizenry discover they can no longer effectively carrier-rat, nor for that matter hit anything at all of importance with their carriers.
Does CCP have ANYONE in their employment capable of fully thinking through the consequences of the changes they come up with? Feels like they are run by 12-year olds. ^this. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:58:00 -
[582] - Quote
One of the problems that has not been discussed at all is that supercaps represent the end-game of EVE (currently).
Nerf them, and you nerf the entire game.
I would be less worried about the changes if we had a clear vision from CCP about the new EVE endgame. |
Tefeyel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:58:00 -
[583] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:GM Homonoia wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote:
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
The awesome weapon of a buddy in a ship that can hit those targets. Or, you know, you can fit a large or medium gun on your dreadnought, as those were designed to attack those targets. /me hides from the rain of rotten tomatoes. this is complete and utter ****. hello thats why they are called super capitals... not everyone oculd afford one... and not enough had the balls to use them... now ccp bows down to what goons want... nerfing ships by people who used them properly and had the balls too. pure and total crap. and gm's and people who work at ccp trying to make jokes out of it is ****... are you going to allow people to get here skill points back since you s*** on supers that people spent momths and months training for??? no trust in ccp anymore... way to go CCP! Failed again in many pilots... and definately no professionalism!
You want balance ships around their name? They are still "super" anyway.
And it took balls to use supercap blobs? LOL.
Maybe if your alliance was not built around their superblob, you wouldn't be crying so hard. |
Just Another Toon
University of Caille Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:59:00 -
[584] - Quote
to help the carrier tear - add bonus to fighers +5% per level damage +5 to sig for carriers only |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:01:00 -
[585] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Weaselior wrote:xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat Bingo. That is exactly why.
What the hell is the point of owning a super carrier... if it aint even a supercarrier anymore but an over priced piece of sh**!
Awesome job CCP... you guys Fail again! |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:02:00 -
[586] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs.
Already cancelled all other subscriptions since EVE and CCP has gone to total sh**! |
Lili Lu
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:05:00 -
[587] - Quote
Another comment on the comments, and another disclaimer
<-- not a goon and never have been, and killed my share of them
Whining that this is a buff for goons is misguided. It is a nerf to supers. (not a buff for rifters ) Goon subcap fleets are fun to fight. Hell half the time they shoot each other Conversely, supercap blobs have been wrecking the game. It had to stop.
Blobbage in general will always be in the game to some extent. Goon blobbage really only was a problem with 1400 sized fleets and that only occurred with NC allies. That ain't happening anymore (well, unless the rumored goon marriage to that soon to be less dashing DRF husband comes to pass). Frankly any large group will only create a countervailing equal sized coalition. But, if one side has an op ship class advantage, or moon min monopoly, now those are problems. Goons in rifters or Maelstroms or whatever they might prefer to fly these days are not equivalent to DRF op titan and sc blobs.
We should be hopeful that this ship nerf in conjunction with some other changes hopefully coming "soon" to sov mechanics will diversify, open up, and enliven the political circumstances in 0.0
|
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:09:00 -
[588] - Quote
5 stars change.
Only some minor discussion points that CCP should address in these changes.
My questions for the Devs:
1 - Fighters nerf
By doing this you are nerfing the carriers. You are imposing an unnecessary penalty to carriers. - Are you aware of this? - is that your objective also? - If not, can this fighter nerf be done in a way that don't affect the fighters deployed from a carrier?
2 - Moros boost
Moros will get a cap problem. - Are you aware of this issue? - There is a solution for it from your side or you are going to leave it like that?
3 - Minmatar supers
Minmatar supers are all inferior to the others of the same class...statistics help prove this point. - Can you consider using this nerf to fix this issue, by not nerfing so much the ehp of minmatar supers?
4 - Supers
Super are EWAR invulnerable but they can still receive RSB and Tracking Links. - Is that not also a form of electronic transmittion? - What is CCP position about this issue?
5 - Dreads
I'm a dread pilot. I don't use a dread for the last 18 months for 2 reasons: siege time + paper ship! Siege time is fixed, but they are still paper and die to 1 DD and cannot tank 1 super, while in siege. - Is CCP aware of this last issue? - Do you consider improving the tank in siege mode so at least a dread can tank 1 DD and 20 fighter bombers (IN SIEGE)?
6 - Carriers
They need a little love. The fuel bay is too small. For example, if I want to jump 14 AU to rep a POS, do 3 cycles of triage and jump back, there is no space for the all the stront I need > 600 units use 1800m3 of space! - Is CCP aware the fuel bay is small when the carrier is used for triage since stront space needs are huge? - Can we expect some love here? |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
158
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:10:00 -
[589] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Already cancelled all other subscriptions since EVE and CCP has gone to total sh**!
no one cares about obvious alt posts. you will still be here and you will still be flying your caps.
Quit your whining and get back to farming out your 0.0 space. |
JamesCLK
Lone Star Exploration Narwhals Ate My Duck
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:12:00 -
[590] - Quote
You know what makes me the happiest about this change?
Subcaps. In fleet fights. While there are supers on the field.
Anything that pushes blob warfare closer to the Dominion trailer (fights within fights within battlefields within systems) is a good thing.
/me goes back to hiding in his wormhole. |
|
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:17:00 -
[591] - Quote
I came up with some other good ideas for supercaps CCP.
1st: Super capital class ships will be unable to fit cloaks.
2nd: Super capital class ships will be unable to move or warp, they can only be cyno'd in and are then stationary.
3rd: Super capital class ships will be unable to use energy neutralizers.
4th: Super capital class ships will be unable to use EWAR mods.
Might aswell consider these options too for the patch.
Edit: troll for the slow people. |
Raneru
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:18:00 -
[592] - Quote
Wow what a week for devblogs. Things are getting better with each one! |
Memoocan
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:19:00 -
[593] - Quote
xxxak wrote:This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and lose the subcap battle, you also just permanently lost 15 supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
This makes is aaaalll worth it.
Oh the delicious tears, how they flow. Good to see tactics and thinking will win the day.
Maybe people will finally start learning and come to wormholes...you know...true nullsec. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:20:00 -
[594] - Quote
There is now only one somewhat viable use for super caps that I can see:
a) During a fleet battle, your huge, utterly superior (numerically) subcap fleet obliterates the enemy supcap fleet. You then cyno in your supers to assist the subcap fleet as you rapidly destroy the enemy structures after the battle is over. (Note, such a large subcap fleet can kill structures really really fast anyways. However, supers will speed things up. \0/ )
It is no longer possible to use supers (without massive, dominant, subcap support) in a system where there is a single hostile ship, as that hostile ship could be a covert cyno ship linked to a titan bridge. Such ship could easily allow a small group of HICs to land on your super fleet, which could then hold all supers down indefinitely until other subcaps arrive to kill the supers. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:21:00 -
[595] - Quote
I too want SP for Titan toons / super toons to be reorganized as I will no longer need them. Is this your plan for SP for PLEX ? This was asked at the last confrence in Iceland. It is all becoming clear now. I will take 16 SP toon reorganizations thanks. ..
Thanks.
kralz wrote:CCP for real, when this goes live, can i have a pop up window asking me if i want to be refuned both isk for the carrier and capital mod skill books and every single SP i invest in them? all of my training is cap oriented with every account and every toon, this patch totally ruins my game...
carrier pve ruined...and no one is gonna buy carriers, so my bpos are worthless, SC are utterly worthless, wasted toon, just lemme go back about 2 years of sp and relocate skills and i may keep playing, i trained my skills on known ship pros and cons....note i fly a nyx....its really not fair that i should have 5 accounts totally screwed over because some whiny noobs cant compete.
its cool tho, goons have won the game indeed.
does CCP actually play the game? in any way? or is there some really strong drug in jove space us mere us cannot dare to try? i mean are u guys really really this stupid?
|
KFenn
Percussive Diplomacy
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:24:00 -
[596] - Quote
+1 Centillion* for this. Make supercaps and titans a PART of a viable fleet, not the be-all-and-end-all of fleet fights. To the butthurt supercap pilots, you have a racial battleship skill at 5. Use it!
One thing I will say though - give Supercap pilots a viable way to keep their supers safe should they want to jump into a subcap, because these changes are really gonna bring the days of the battleship roaming gangs back.
*that's a one followed by 303 zeroes. Commanding Officer of the Treacle Tart Brigade SLAPD Director |
Soldarius
Peek-A-Boo Bombers
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:27:00 -
[597] - Quote
Supers/titans still immune to EWAR? Bummer. Would have given recons and their cheap T1 versions a role in fleet combat. Would also have been a simple and effective way to reduce the effectiveness of supers.
But, these changes should have a positive effect as well. Efforts appreciated, CCP.
:polite-applause: "How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Ekrund
Serenity Prime Cascade Imminent
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:29:00 -
[598] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. Ah sweet, that answers my questions. I occasionally get disconnected jumping through gates, so it would suck to get disconnected with no aggression and get pounded on the other side ... well for me any way ... probably a lot of fun on the other side killing me |
John Hand
Lions Of Judah Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:29:00 -
[599] - Quote
The Drone Bay nerf was not really needed. What should be done (if you want to nerf the bay anyways) is just make it smaller but still allow the the use of normal drones. So say 25 (as that is max with full DCU's) Fighter Bombers, 25 Fighters and 50 heavys which can be split up to allow for either more med, lights ect. At any rate having the bay like that would mean fewer drones total that the ship has to fight with, meaning a limit on the number of drones a super can field in a fight. I am assuming that was the intention of the drone bay nerf but you are going about it wrong.
Fighter nerf? Did you mean Fighter bombers? Really Fighters and Fighter bombers already have what they need to fight against what they were made for. FB's were made to fight against other caps and not much else. Reality.....FB's cant do much damage against battleships, so a nerf is not needed. Fighters were made to fight against battleships as they are useless against caps (ever see two carriers going at it?), well fighters can't hit battlecruisers very well at all. So again, why a fighter nerf?
Removing drone bays from dreads seems kinda silly. Maybe you should remove the drone bays from the battleships too. Drone bays on dreads and titans are the same size as some of the battleships (typhoon, Megathron, Domi, Geddon). Meaning they can only deploy heavy drones (or sentries) and really.....thats not a lot of damage. So that nerf is really pointless and not needed.
Other then those 3 issues, it all sounds ok. EHP nerf might be too steep but only time will tell on that one. |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:35:00 -
[600] - Quote
Wow I'm glad I sold my NYX.
Any news of regular carrier changes?
|
|
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:36:00 -
[601] - Quote
August Hayek wrote:good nerf, but please:
1. buff dreads --> 20% more tank, better tracking 2. buff carriers --> 20% more tank, more fuel bay 3. let fighters as they are now, with the nerf they get somewhat useless
CCP, do this.
|
S8nt
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:36:00 -
[602] - Quote
Xue Slick wrote:Simple solution... want less super capitals on the field... make them 4 times as expensive so there is less of them?
CCP, you have made it so easy to make ISK that any Joe can get one now.
Easy changes:
- Double the bandwidth required for fighter and fighter bombers. Half the DPS and helps with system lag. - Reduce Super Carrier and Titans EHP by 20% - Increase Dreads and Carriers EHP by 20% ( Will solve your DD problem ) - Reduce the Siege cycle to 5 minutes - Remove the Drone bays as stated and buff damage to Dreads - Rework the cost of Super Capitals so less people can get into them. 2x, maybe 3x the price?
Do it CCP.
This! |
Cambarus
Clearly Compensating
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:36:00 -
[603] - Quote
The tracking penalty for the siege mod has got to go. Make dreads and carriers anti-BS platforms, while supers kill caps, BSs kill BCs, BCs kill HACs, etc. |
Klam
Viziam Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:41:00 -
[604] - Quote
1 big concern... fighter weapon sig changes...
The impact the fighter weapon sig change will have on standard carriers. Carriers were usable for small raiding support and PvE Level 5 missions. This has the potential to dramatically impact their effectiveness in these roles. Both functions which have very little to do with fleet blobs. Please consider not having this sig change impact standard carriers.
If standard carriers didn't get the fighter nerf, I suspect it would add some additional flavor to fleet battles, as softer standard carriers could be used as anti-subcap.
In truth i'm not sure the fighter weapon sig change is necessary with the drone bay changes for supers. If killing all the fighters defangs the supers completely against subcaps; then a counter already exists. Once they are defanged, the logout changes ensure that a well run subcap fleet just earned itself a super killmail.
As the sig penalty currently stands described in the dev blog it apears to have many unintended side effects. If the intention is to also nerf Standard carriers please make that intention clear. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:46:00 -
[605] - Quote
Another thing-- an additional small change to logoff mechanics would be good: allow ships to be agressed until their ewarp has ended. I can't tell you the number of kills I've missed out on because I wasn't flying a dictor and a hostile ship either jumps through a gate or cynos to a cyno-beacon and just logs out before their 60/30s of invulnerability are up. At that point, even if you tackle their ship when it decloaks / starts to ewarp, the ship vanishes before you can kill it.
Change the mechanic so that a ship that is agressed while ewarping stays in space. Quit letting idiots get away with horrifically poor-decision making by simply pressing ctrl-q while invulnerable.
e: for example, I remember a while back we had a rapier camping a cyno-beacon on a de-fanged pos (only the beacon was left online), with a supercarrier in system. An Archon cynoed to the beacon. The Rapier decloaked and started trying to lock the carrier. Before the carrier's 30 second invulnerability timer was up, he control-q'ed. As soon as his ewarp started, the rapier was able to lock and got a point, but the carrier disappeared a minute later, well before it was possible to kill it.
The other day, we chased a Maelstrom through a gate. He logged out before our dictor could burn back to zero on the gate and drop a centered bubble. Although we interrupted his ewarp with a bubble when he control-q'ed, he disappeared before we could pop him.
This mechanic is developmentally challenged. |
kralz
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:46:00 -
[606] - Quote
dear ccp, when and if this patch goes live as outlined. will one of you please light me a cyno in jove space? i guess when ur time is dont in this world its time to go on to the next. jove empire is a good enough place to retire. i wont make much noice i promise, just crash my nyx into a nice green planet some where and look for these awesome drugs u guys are on.
thanks, your sincerely kralz, hot dropper, super cap, cap, black op...
PS wtf is that black ops buff? werent they supposed to be super killing machines? some one mentioned that...either way...i digress, cyno in jove space for me please. thanks |
Baron vonDoom
Scorn.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:48:00 -
[607] - Quote
Don't nerf fighters - they're fine. |
Mekia Buelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:51:00 -
[608] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Already cancelled all other subscriptions since EVE and CCP has gone to total sh**!
Since people have leaving so "quickly" can i have your stuffz as well? I promise i`ll keep it safe
|
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:51:00 -
[609] - Quote
so will we get the option to have super cap/dread/carrier skills reimbursed? ill even give you aur for it(only cos you keep dumping that **** into my wallet) CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
106
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:56:00 -
[610] - Quote
People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
|
Luara Vherok
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:58:00 -
[611] - Quote
Should also reduce the damage inflicted on sub-capital ships from guns fitted on a titan. When you make this change, with the other ones, titans will become balanced (in my biased opinion of course). You'll give meaning to support fleets for capitals.
I like all the other changes, I think they're a step in the right direction. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
146
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:59:00 -
[612] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later.
It's more fun to see them throw tantrums about their space wangs being nerfed. |
Cheekything
Black Lance Executive Outcomes
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:01:00 -
[613] - Quote
One minor change and it'll be nearly perfect.
Increase Fighter Bomber Prices, current ones are far too cheap.
Fighter = > 15 mill => Similar Stats to a Tier 4 cruiser Fighter Bomber => 20 mill => Similar Stats to a Tier 3 battleship. |
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:02:00 -
[614] - Quote
Baron vonDoom wrote:Don't nerf fighters - they're fine.
Gonna keep quoting the truth until someone at CCP recognises it. Might be here a while |
kralz
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:03:00 -
[615] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later.
HAAAA ur smoking crack bro. people who fly broken lame stuff are stupid for wasting time to train it.
people who train to fly stuff that is awesome actually LOOKED INTO WHAT THEY WERE TRAINING...only to have years of training ruined because lame ass loosers very much like youself who cannot hang with some super cap pilots ruining their day
1st time i got hot dropped i laughted i died so fast...and decided THATS HAT I WANNA DO with MY life. cuz it works its mean its moral jarring to know that i can drop 26 million hit points on u and **** ur skull off with 20 fighters and u cant do nothing about it. people do whats effective. and people who cant do it like me cry about it.
still i challenge CCP to not be ******** and nerf carriers like they intend. and i challenge u to try and get one. u might actually like not being a looser. |
JuGGeR
Phantom Squad Atlas.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:04:00 -
[616] - Quote
only have 1 small hope that maby could be added , docking of supers , since they utter bullcrap after this patch , plz give us the option to drop em in a hangar so we can reprocess and build something usefull from em ...
and also thanks for clearing out some of me accounts .. keep it up , saves me more and more money on subs.
o/ |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:12:00 -
[617] - Quote
Everyone will be unsubbing there cap alts.
|
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:14:00 -
[618] - Quote
Silence iKillYouu wrote:Everyone will be unsubbing there cap alts.
90 % of them will resub them as soon as they see caps are still wanted. As for Supercaps, well thats an unconventional way to reduce their numbers, but it seems to work. :tinfoil: |
Mynas Atoch
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:22:00 -
[619] - Quote
A few of the changes aren't what we expected and a few expected are not there, but whatever. As long as you have changed your internal process to enable frequent rebalancing when something is patently not working or the fotm is dominating.
Supercarriers
- consider the Revenant solution of +1 per level and buff the damage and h.p. to balance. Less fighter bombers on grid in mass battles is good and brings the Drone Control Unit back into play in pve as each one becomes a +10% buff rather than their current +5% buff which again puts pressure on pilots at their fittings choices.
- consider leveling down the nyx slightly relative to the wyvern and aeon and leveling up the Hel. The difference in popularity between nyx and hel is a balance issue.
Titans
- gun stats, both tracking speed and signature resolution need looked at .. consider the titan blob and how its power scales
- leviathan's weapons
Capital force and logistics projection
- consider a five minute limitation on consecutive cyno jumps - slow down capital travel - my jump freighter and capitals can get to the other side of the map very fast indeed - make space bigger
- capital fuel consumption - consider scaling it much more viciously so that supercap fleets literally need jump freighters and rorqals following them with more fuel
- consider reducing the supercarrier and titan carrying capacity for fuel - again make force projection harder for us - eve is too small |
Bluemelon
Polaris Rising PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:22:00 -
[620] - Quote
All I am gonna say is, this is a massive **** you to the older players who have earnt their isk without RMT'ing and being whiny faggots.
Titans can be killed by 90 Hurricanes. Simple. They are balanced. Supers, are not. If I choose to put my titan stationary and in a system for 10mins for doomsdaying a ******* loki, thats my choice.
Stupid change |
|
rodyas
The Scope Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:30:00 -
[621] - Quote
kralz wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later. HAAAA ur smoking crack bro. people who fly broken lame stuff are stupid for wasting time to train it. people who train to fly stuff that is awesome actually LOOKED INTO WHAT THEY WERE TRAINING...only to have years of training ruined because lame ass loosers very much like youself who cannot hang with some super cap pilots ruining their day 1st time i got hot dropped i laughted i died so fast...and decided THATS HAT I WANNA DO with MY life. cuz it works its mean its moral jarring to know that i can drop 26 million hit points on u and **** ur skull off with 20 fighters and u cant do nothing about it. people do whats effective. and people who cant do it like me cry about it. still i challenge CCP to not be ******** and nerf carriers like they intend. and i challenge u to try and get one. u might actually like not being a looser.
Man thank god this nerf went through now. So many faggots I didnt know existed, just so happy they are finally being dealt with and flushed away. So many retards being helped out with this nerf. So glad |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:31:00 -
[622] - Quote
Because CCP Devs play league of Legends more than they play Eve Online. Ask the Devs of LOL how CCP Devs being in LOL`s League of Developers server is working out ?
xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary?
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Dr Cedric
Orbital Industry and Research.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:34:00 -
[623] - Quote
So, this might be better in FnI, but here goes anyway...
Super carriers hold fighters and fighter bombers...they are the "damage dealers" in the capital class. I've not flown one, nor have I been blown up by one. I can't say what effect the changes to SC drone bay and fighter sig resolution will have. However, people seem to be saying that nerfing fighters will affect Carriers.
Long story short:
Make the carriers Drone boats with a vengeance, make SC's fighter boats (with or without the vengeance)
For example: Change carrier bonus from "Can deploy 1 additional Fighter or Drone per level" to "Can deploy 3 additional Drones per level." It would seem that the SC bonus is changing from "Can deploy 3 additional Fighters, Fighter Bombers or Drones per level" to " Can deploy 3 additional Fighters or Fighter bombers per level."
I think this gives each class a niche by allowing carriers to be the "poor man's" super carrier, and give more options for DPS in a Capital fleet that does not involve Titans and SC's.
We'll see, This is just my idea!
Ced |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:37:00 -
[624] - Quote
Yaaaaaaaay'z!
(I <3ulots CCP)
But yes, please do make an exception for Chribba's Veldnaught as long as it remains in his possession, and is flown by him. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:40:00 -
[625] - Quote
" Welpfleet " is a term used for psycological purposes. It means we are going to fail so accept defeat with a smile. Keeps their soldiers happy when they do lose a whole fleet. When they win and kill a fleet they recieve cudos as they were suppose to lose. It is an acceptance of failure. It is a very smart tactic. Although it can only last between 3 to 5 weeks at a time before the loud voices ( whiney rejects / turbulant spys ) drown out the mantra.
David Carel wrote:Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:Mittani and the rest of the "supercap blob" whiners can go cry themselves to sleep while smart individuals can make use of existing tactics to counter supercap blobs I recommend you to look up "Welpfleet" and the distribution of supers; it would be nice if you had a clue before posting.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:40:00 -
[626] - Quote
Cheekything wrote:One minor change and it'll be nearly perfect.
Increase Fighter Bomber Prices, current ones are far too cheap.
Fighter = > 15 mill => Similar Stats to a Tier 4 cruiser Fighter Bomber => 20 mill => Similar Stats to a Tier 3 battleship.
If my fighter bombers can hit a tier 3 BS I would agree with you. |
Gevlin
SMANews.net SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:40:00 -
[627] - Quote
RORQUAL now has the strongest Set of Drones in the GAME!!!!
I am so going to PWN You all!! |
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:43:00 -
[628] - Quote
2 things that I've found hilarious:
- Pilots saying "adapt or die" to supercap heavy alliances. When CCP adjusted supercaps the way they are today all you did was bawawawaw cry. The truth is "adapt or cry" huh?
- CCP Tallest said: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier." We have been saying for quite some time, dear biased Dev: "If you want to deal with super-capitals, you should bring your own super-capitals or dreads". But asking 6000 goons to put some "effort" it's too much, right? Lets just nerf-it to the ground and make Soundwave and Mittens happy.
GG
Flame away
|
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:52:00 -
[629] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Kari Kari wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Already cancelled all other subscriptions since EVE and CCP has gone to total sh**! no one cares about obvious alt posts. you will still be here and you will still be flying your caps. Quit your whining and get back to farming out your 0.0 space.
Actually dips*** I will not be already gave most of my assets away to friends. So your intelligence level is pretty low... CCP LOW! |
kralz
Angelus.Mortis RED.Legion
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:52:00 -
[630] - Quote
Samanta Raiolaser wrote:2 things that I've found hilarious:
- Pilots saying "adapt or die" to supercap heavy alliances. When CCP adjusted supercaps the way they are today all you did was bawawawaw cry. The truth is "adapt or cry" huh?
- CCP Tallest said: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier." We have been saying for quite some time, dear biased Dev: "If you want to deal with super-capitals, you should bring your own super-capitals or dreads". But asking 6000 goons to put some "effort" it's too much, right? Lets just nerf-it to the ground and make Soundwave and Mittens happy.
GG
Flame away
so true |
|
stupid monkey
Easy Co. Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 00:55:00 -
[631] - Quote
not sure if its been asked yet but due to drones being removed from dreads/titans as well as other changes to most capitals, will we see a reworking of the manufacturing requirements for said ship hulls?
if the above is true then how about at the same time remove that ******** single turret hard point on the phoenix?? |
Dansara
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:00:00 -
[632] - Quote
I must applaud CCP for attempting to fix the problem with supers at the moment.
Log off timer gets a massive big tick, although then the EHP nerf seems to try to address the same probelm. Which doesn't make sense. If I can keep the super tackled and aggressed, the EHP nerf is redundant.
If CCP were adamant about an EHP nerf, they should try and balance all super caps so that the Hel isn't nerfed to hell. (Pun intended)
Stealth nerf to carriers with sig changes to fighters seems rushed and not too well thought out. Maybe just sig nerf FB's only, to something like 250-300
Giving supers the ability to field 20 x Fighters and 20 FB's seems better than making them choose between having one or the other. Switching a flight of fighters to FB will be a massive issue, given that supers can't dock.
Siege timer reduction is a good start, although tracking needs to be looked at to make them dreads more viable. ROF bonues to Moros seems rushed and not too thought through again.
To echo my CEO's comments. Titans really need to be turned into a logistics/command platform and reducing their effectiveness as an offensive/combat vessel is crucial. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
159
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:01:00 -
[633] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote:Kari Kari wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Already cancelled all other subscriptions since EVE and CCP has gone to total sh**! no one cares about obvious alt posts. you will still be here and you will still be flying your caps. Quit your whining and get back to farming out your 0.0 space. Actually dips*** I will not be already gave most of my assets away to friends. So your intelligence level is pretty low... CCP LOW!
How about you get the balls to post with your main? Until you post with your main you get no respect. |
Warrrules
Beyond Control. Black Legion.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:02:00 -
[634] - Quote
One of the worse nerfs I have seen to date..
The log off timer is the only good part of this nerf...
All the EHP nerf is going to do is turn the super carriers into blob ships. No one will be willing to drop a ship that has zero defense against the only 2 ship classes that can tackle it. I guess my curse and dictor alts need to find a ratting supercarrier and solo it now...
The removal of standard drones will just force people into titans. Just like before fighter bombers, the supercarrier didn't hold the power for the price.. People just preferred to move straight into a ship that mattered (i.e. the titan.)
I agree with the dread buffs but it still needs more.. Dreads need to have a place in killing capitals again.. Not just dieing to them.
If you want to fix super carriers, limit the regular drones to deploying 5 at a time. This way they still have some defense against subcaps but are no better then the subcaps that can deploy the same drones. Revert the EHP back to normal so people will continue to use super carriers over titans.
If you want to fix titans, make them unable to receive remote tracking links, and alter the doomsday back to its original effect but LIMIT IT TO ONE PER SYSTEM for a set number of time, and make it scale off of sig radius so that smaller ships can tank it as well. This would cause the titan to become a strategic asset.. Alliances could no longer drop 30 and have an advantage. It would be all about the strategy of how it was deployed and used in the fight.. Titans should also be anchored in position for 3 mins after blowing the doomsday, making them targets to be tackled once they are used.
Stop taking ships to the extreme and think of ways to level them out.. Supers should not be defenseless against their much weaker, much CHEAPER counter parts (i.e. Battleships). |
Soldarius
Peek-A-Boo Bombers
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:11:00 -
[635] - Quote
/me posting more
Just saw the sigrad change for fighters. Were they really 100m? That must have sucked something fierce for subcaps. Now at 400m it means the only thing they will still be 100% effective against will be battleships and bigger.
So fighter-bombers for structures and fighters for cap-ships? Player escorts for subcaps? Sounds much better.
Now please remove the EWAR immunity. No system should be totally immune to EWAR. Highly resistant? Sure. "How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:14:00 -
[636] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:I'll rephrase, what specifically are the roles of each class of capital ship combat wise? It kinda feels like this is a very reactionary (although necessary change) that lacks the *vision* needed to be understood by us.
It's exactly what it is. Nerfing hp after buffing hp when it was needed. Not nerfing damage when the damage boost was causing the issue. Removing drones when they did nothing to make the ship overpowered or not.
TL;DR CCP have no clue what to do with supers, they just blantantly take populistic decisions. If CCP really looked at the issue with supers (titans as well as moms doing high damage), and thought through if they needed a damage role or not, they'd start nerfing those aspects. I.e. FB's, tracking links/guns and DD on titan. But no, they went with random populistic changes that makes no sense, and still not having a role for the ships. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
147
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:14:00 -
[637] - Quote
look at all you idiots trying to use cost as a balancing factor
ever heard of diminishing returns |
Lorren Canada
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
62
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:17:00 -
[638] - Quote
Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo?
If a supercarrier pilot dies to a dic you should take him behind the woodshed and promptly cut off his head. |
Lorren Canada
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
62
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:18:00 -
[639] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:I'll rephrase, what specifically are the roles of each class of capital ship combat wise? It kinda feels like this is a very reactionary (although necessary change) that lacks the *vision* needed to be understood by us. It's exactly what it is. Nerfing hp after buffing hp when it was needed. Not nerfing damage when the damage boost was causing the issue. Removing drones when they did nothing to make the ship overpowered or not. TL;DR CCP have no clue what to do with supers, they just blantantly take populistic decisions. If CCP really looked at the issue with supers (titans as well as moms doing high damage), and thought through if they needed a damage role or not, they'd start nerfing those aspects. I.e. FB's, tracking links/guns and DD on titan. But no, they went with random populistic changes that makes no sense, and still not having a role for the ships.
What do you know about supers? Go back to mining ice with your buddies so we can gank them again. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
159
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:22:00 -
[640] - Quote
Ok so here is a tl;dr of the first 32 pages.
RAGE from 1/2 of 0.0
Joy from the other half.
The rage part comes from alliances that rely only on supers and can't fly anything smaller. The joy is coming from the alliances who dont have 1051375023 super caps to field at one time.
Pandemic legion - doesnt care, they are still going to hot drop your capitals and make you lose money, just going to be more creative about it.
CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM summarized / suggestions
1. :arrow:] Please let dreads keep their drone bay - but have the siege module make it so dreads cannot use drones while in siege mode - similar to carriers triage mode.
2 . Nothing really wrong with fighters and their scan resolution, they are fairly easy to kill as is, so no real need to change them.
3. Hel is getting hit the worst and will have the lowest EHP of all the mom's please leave their hp alone and maybe look into changing the bonus from logi to something like drone rof.
4. Drone bay sizes should be able to take a full compliment of fighters and fighter bombers. 25 f / 25 FB. This will leave some versatility to moms to either assign fighters to sub caps to help them out or have a full wing of bombers for capital / sov fights.
5. Look into dread / titan tracking of turrets,
6. You should explain more in depth about hybrid changes to quell the fear about the changes it is going to receive, you already broke its poor little legs.
7. If regular carriers are going to be support ships to the supers, make sure they get some good bonuses to help defend against sub caps, 7a - small hp buff 7b - better tracking for all drones 7c - speed bonus drones ETC
8. A note to the community - THESE ARE PLANNED CHANGES AND ARE NOT YET IN STONE! Get on the test server and try it out and offer constructive help not whining and rage quitting.
9. This is not a slap to bitter vets, most bitter vets flew before tons of super caps and massive pwn mobiles, they are smart and can adapt, they know tactics, and will adapt before the nerf hits.
10. To those asking for a reduced cost since hp is getting nerfed - quit asking the prices haven't really changed since they were introduced into the game. Back before their buff moms barely had 1 million ehp total and were still 18 bill.
11. Finally to the devs - BEFORE YOU IMPLEMENT THIS, please post a second dev blog about community suggestions on these changes and talk more with us about what changes will be final and which ones will be left on the floor, or changes we can meet each other half way. |
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:24:00 -
[641] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:Does fighter tracking nerf means we will see an T3 cost inflation, and general ISK value inflation?
Them people who rat with normal carriers gonna be mad xD
Sanctumrunners getting a nerf is a great thing, they're already making stupid money and need a massive hit in the wallet.. but think about officer killing. No more super/carrier killing officers, and no more titan dd officers either. So either titan guns or bring a fullscale fleet with RR support to kill them? Officers were already ridicilous to kill, since people felt the need to use supers/caps on them, and now that state has gotten even worse. Roflcopter. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:26:00 -
[642] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later.
Seriously, I think when you train for a ship as long as we have as super cap toons, we hsould be able to b****, since we go cheated out of the ship we trained for. SO how about you noob go back to the noob alliance you came from thanks.
|
FHM
Power Absolute Absolute Damage Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:31:00 -
[643] - Quote
Very nice change's ! Finally small alliances that can field 100 experienced people will be able to take their stand and push for their own 0.0 I WIN BUTTON REMOVED
The most stupid complaints you hear about these balances answered:
1) We are veterans in this game ( Goons, PL, Raiden... ) we win every fight because we have the hardcore skill of being able to press I WIN button.
1) You are not veterans you only exist because of the I WIN button i am looking forward to High Sec mining corporations whelping PL, Raiden, Solar, WN, Goon fleets like its no tomorrow. Veterans adapt to changes not cry about them. Saying that most veterans will quit when having their supers nerfed shows how wrong your idea and meaning of the word: veteran really is.
If you need to quit because you got BUT HURT and are no longer able to press the I WIN button and call your self a veteran go and do it no one will miss you Q3 2011 reported 1k super capital pilots active in EVE well that's the FAT we can easily trim.
2) Super capitals can no longer defend them selves against sub-capitals.
Another stupid argument that can be made only by a stupid person. Super capitals are slow, big and clumsy logistical platform whit ability to counter other BIG things and should not be used for melting sub-capitals. If you field your super your should field it to a purpose knowing full well you can easily use it. Just because you payed 18 billion or 85 billion for your hull does not mean you are granted the I WIN button.
By bye ******** and arrogant corp mates that think they are so important based on the fact they have a SC.
3) I can no longer rat in my Carrier, Super Carrier, Titan.
If you ever did that you deserve to die in it. Titans and Super Carriers are meant to be an alliance investment not a personal investment. So they should not be cost effective or give you a 200 or 360mil/h bonus they are not ratting machines and if that is what you used them fore you need to go back and start doing L1's and learn a thing or two about the game.
4) 100 Canes can no kill a lone Super Carrier
Well ofc the outcome of that fight had to be reversed. It how it is in real life and whatever imaginary life you imagine.
5) Most common argument from Goons, PL, WN, Raiden, NC... In this topic is:
We can no longer use the I WIN button our super capital blob is dead we are about to loose super capitals on daily basis that will be caught ratting for our extreme veteran title.
Answer: Just learn to PVP learn to play.
6) Dreads will be OP
How cuss it to hard to put a scram on it when it exits sige? Or based on fact it cant hit anything that moved at 1m/s ? Or is it 2 hard to light a cyno from your spy alts to drop a SC fleet on them. Only thing this changed is taking the pace of this game to a new level where you will have to respond to assaults faster.
And even if their will be OP there is a counter CCP gave you and promised to buff them. They are the ships you so refuse to fly. You will find them under the market tab BLACK OPS finally a use for them. Have em standing by and you have a fleet ready for rapid deployment in your sov space.
7) I trained for 6 months but SC's are useless now give me back my skills
You were aware of what you were committing to and the fact everything is viable to change in game. So if you think it was a mistake going for a SC it is only your own problem. Also few years ago i trained for a Dread that are useless ATM you don't see me crying for years give me back my skills.
If you cry about these changes you are possibly the 13-25 year old kid that has a ton of time to spare and grinds those anomaly's, L4s and 10/10 DED's and logs off the second someone mentions CTA or Roam. |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:39:00 -
[644] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:I'll rephrase, what specifically are the roles of each class of capital ship combat wise? It kinda feels like this is a very reactionary (although necessary change) that lacks the *vision* needed to be understood by us. It's exactly what it is. Nerfing hp after buffing hp when it was needed. Not nerfing damage when the damage boost was causing the issue. Removing drones when they did nothing to make the ship overpowered or not.
You cant nerf the FB damage because the role of a supercarrier is to deal a lot of damage. They are anti sov dps plattforms and now they finally become this and not more. The hp nerf is actually pretty small but its going to have his effect with the log off changes.
Oh and just for the records: If you lose a Supercap to "a single hic" or a very, very small gang that means: you werent able to get some friends to come along for whatever you're doing and you werent able to figure out why this funny fitting you got from this wiki has neutralizer on it and you are unable to use a decent fit and you dont know a single person who could help you organise some backup and you were stupid enough to get your SC in a combat situation under this circumstances; then holy ******* **** you deserve whats comming to you.
Every ship in EVE has a role, every fleettype has a counter, the only ships that didnt fit into this were supercaps. Welcome back to (space)earth. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
140
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:48:00 -
[645] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:I'm going on a roam now, so I'll develop later, but I am very disappointed in these changes.
1/ the biggest issue with motherships wan't their offense, but their near invulnerability when in large groups. Nothing has been done about that.
2/ The dred boost turn out not to be a boost after all. it's not those change that will make them used.
3/ To kill a supercap, a subcap fleet will have to be built around battlecruisers and battleships. Fighters will still be fairly effective against those, so a subcap escort isn't mandatory.
4/ titan tracking: nothing done about that.
This is still Supercap Online.
Need to go, I'll expand later.
You really should stop roaming and get some experience fighting with/against motherships instead.
1) The biggest issue was their offense, not their survivability. Did you even know how horribad they were before they got their hp boost? The reason they're strong in big groups is not the EHP either, it's the damage that big group put out. If you'd field supers to face supers, you'd notice the RR would not be enough. It's a damage gank, not a tank game, so you're completely off here.
2) The 5min timer, and the removal of sentry drones from moms and nerfs to titan is enough of a boost to make them useful against POS. The nerfed hp (that shouldn't be) on supers is another boost to dreads. They're back on track as the damage dealing capital. Do you remember how they used to **** everything before supers were boosted? We're not going fully back to what was back then due to supers retaining damage now, but if we play with the thought: if supers got their current damage nerfed back to what they used to have pre-DD changes and pre-FB's, and if we let them keep their current EHP.. guess what, 5min dreads would be immensely popular.
3) Fighters travel extremely slow, fighters are extremely easy to kill for a supcab blob. A blob of fighters would be a different matter, but if you bring a blob of BS/BC to fight a blob of motherships/carriers you have to suit yourself for using wrong tools. If you bring a blob of BS/BC against one (or a few) mothers/carriers, you could supereasily kite (and if the cap pilot was **** and had his fighters on auto-follow, you could just perma warp out/in and they fighters would be 100% stuck in warp and useless) and kill them. I've used a SOLO Nighthawk to kill six of a Nyx' Fighters before he gave up and warped to a safe to cloak. Fighters are useless, or you are, if you sit still and try tank them.
4) That's the only thing you got right, that needs to be addressed. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Feydryn
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:50:00 -
[646] - Quote
This is one of THE worst balancing decisions I've ever seen in a games life cycle.
You have completely removed the counter-balance to "blob" warfare in one fell stroke.
On top of that, you've made these ships worth multiple billions of isk not worth flying at all. CCP, you have truly regressed backwards on this.
I'm fairly disgusted with your thinking process in this regard.
Yet again, you've shown favor to those that can field the most ships without any regard for the people who have spent their entire careers in-game working towards capitals and super capitals.
I can see myself easily cancelling 6 of my 7 accounts, as they are supremely and utterly useless.
Way to stick it to your veteran players CCP.
|
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:51:00 -
[647] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Ok so here is a tl;dr of the first 32 pages. 11. Finally to the devs - BEFORE YOU IMPLEMENT THIS, please post a second dev blog about community suggestions on these changes and talk more with us about what changes will be final and which ones will be left on the floor, or changes we can meet each other half way.
Excellent summary, quoting the most important section. |
Obiareus
Chosen Path
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:53:00 -
[648] - Quote
i gave an honest effort to read all the posts before adding my own, got to page 24 before calling it quits, skimmed to see CCP reps responses
concerns on fighters has been hammered into the ground as has hostile EWAR compared to friendly EWAR
i have concerns over more the method you used in coming up with these nerfs/changes understandably you cant get all the EVE pilots opinions before coming out with a release it would be ridiculous to ask such a thing
but you take and run a few numbers say... take the number of pilots who even interact with capital class ships of those who use them in PvP anyone who has taken a statistics course could tell you running a couple equations to find a random sampling of those pilots and get good experienced based input
because after all this is a game, we pay YOU to provide services sure you hold the intellectual rights to the game and its content... but its a business do restaurants give free samples of a new dish before putting it on the menu? yes
i havent seen a whole lot of sincere co-operation between the people coding this game and the ones paying to play it
i fully understand your position, you are based out of a country most of your players dont live in and a large part of your player base are willing to accept what you dish out and are happy enough to pay for PLEX or subscriptions
but maybe you should aim a little higher and try and be a better business and have more adaption in your customer service cause thats what we are customers
so when CCP Tallest said
CCP Tallest wrote:Mekia Buelle wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Regarding Titan gun tracking:
I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed. That sounds good but will you consider the changes to the fighers and carriers in general or that is a final decision? Yes I will consider it.
i really expect him to consider it, THAT'S HIS JOB
i do appreciate the fact you have to wade through **** to find some worthwhile posts and ideas and sincerely hope this release will be something of a turning point from 'ADD NEW CONTENT!' to just taking a step back and spending whatever time is needed to fix the existing content
with regards,
_Obi |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
140
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 01:55:00 -
[649] - Quote
Zhade Lezte wrote::tinfoil: Developerswarm :tinfoil:. Look up time dilation in the latest blogs, no one likes lag.
You're right that noone likes lag. But :tinfoil: time dilation is a blob boost, a deterrent to small/medium scale PvP, and only a boost to a very small minority of this game (given than 80% lives in high sec, some in low, and far from everyone in null are involved in the massive fleet fights). TL;DR a populist boost with no crucial game or PvP content. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:01:00 -
[650] - Quote
It's one small step into the right direction, but all of this doesn't change the major problem of 0.0, which would be the blobs of the few remaining powerblocs controlling all of the space.
Remove jumpbridges and jumpfreighters to make the logistics harder, remove the sovereignity-system that's based on structures and make it based on activity and finally remove the high-end-moons and make the high-ends available through alchemy only. |
|
Cpt Underpants
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:03:00 -
[651] - Quote
gfldex wrote:Drone tracking links help too, ofc. The only ship mod that affects fighters or fighter bombers is the Drone Control Unit. Omni-directional Tracking Link, Drone Navigation Computer etc only affect drones, not fighters.
A solution to the fighter nerf may be to allow these mods to have an effect on fighters.
Elisha Starkiller wrote: they log back in and they will still be in the fight, if the connection is gone..... well bummer its only a game :D and get some decent internet!
Some people are at the mercy of the incumbent telecommunications provider and can't get any better.
I live in an area which can barely get ADSL and occasionally drops out. The telco wont fix it because they have no competition.
Another member of my corp lives in South Africa and has good connections except when the copper phone lines are stolen (happens every few months).
Despite this, I agree on the proposed log off mechanics.
John Hand wrote:The Drone Bay nerf was not really needed. What should be done (if you want to nerf the bay anyways) is just make it smaller but still allow the the use of normal drones. So say 25 (as that is max with full DCU's) Fighter Bombers, 25 Fighters and 50 heavys which can be split up to allow for either more med, lights ect. Quite obvious many of the comments like this come from people who don't understand the size of fighters/bombers. Fighters/bombers are 5000m3. You only need to drop one fighter to be able to bring 200 heavies in its place.
I agree that the tracking links should not work on Titans. They shouldn't be a anti-subcap platform.
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:16:00 -
[652] - Quote
kralz wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later. Waah waaaaaaaaaaaah waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah waah waaaaaaaaah WAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!r.
So... hows that workin out for ya? xD Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:16:00 -
[653] - Quote
ok so my moros will do 11 k dps with ions and 6k dps with rails? wow good job ccp...
plus its cap stable for 5 min with the new bonus
[Moros, high V] Capital Armor Repairer I Damage Control II Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Shadow Serpentis Magnetic Field Stabilizer Shadow Serpentis Magnetic Field Stabilizer Shadow Serpentis Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Shadow Serpentis Sensor Booster, Targeting Range Shadow Serpentis Tracking Computer, Optimal Range Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II
Dual 1000mm Railgun I, Guristas Antimatter Charge XL Dual 1000mm Railgun I, Guristas Antimatter Charge XL Dual 1000mm Railgun I, Guristas Antimatter Charge XL Siege Module I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Anti-Explosive Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:24:00 -
[654] - Quote
MezriDax wrote:As with everything CCP likes to kill, Supercaps are now even more useless than they were before.
Supercaps were hideously overpowered: they could shoot everything. Frigate? Yup, blow that up with my endless supply of light and medium drones (20 warrior II drones against any frigate, where does that make sense). Cruiser? Blow that up too. Titan? Yeah, blow that up. Sovereignty structure? Yup, this ship was designed for blowing that stuff up. It was possible to hot drop a few super carriers on any roaming gang in low sec and wipe them off the field.
There was an interesting idea raised in the comments on Jester's "I need a doctrine" blog post: rather than simply reducing tracking on weapons, also increase the resolution of all weapons and increase the impact that mismatch between weapon resolution and target signature radius has on the damage dealt by that weapon on that target. This would allow DDs to be fired against any target, but due to a multi-kilometre weapon resolution they would do minimal damage against anything smaller than a carrier. Any weapon class should have a limited range of targets that it is effective against, without having specific game mechanics introduced to prevent that weapon class being used against certain targets.
I'm also wondering when CCP will be removing EWAR immunity altogether. It could be replaced with buffs to the appropriate stats, such as sensor strength GÇö but then super caps already have huge sensor strength which can be made even stronger using remote sensor boosters, thus increasing the reliance on a support fleet to provide the EWAR "immunity" rather than simply providing a unique (and stupid) mechanic to that ship class in the first place. Dreadnoughts could gain this immunity through siege mode providing a significant sensor strength increase.
This rebalance is a decent start. It could be better. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:24:00 -
[655] - Quote
FHM wrote:Very nice change's ! Finally small alliances that can field 100 experienced people will be able to take their stand and push for their own 0.0 I WIN BUTTON REMOVED
The most stupid complaints you hear about these balances answered:
1) We are veterans in this game ( Goons, PL, Raiden... ) we win every fight because we have the hardcore skill of being able to press I WIN button.
1) You are not veterans you only exist because of the I WIN button i am looking forward to High Sec mining corporations whelping PL, Raiden, Solar, WN, Goon fleets like its no tomorrow. Veterans adapt to changes not cry about them. Saying that most veterans will quit when having their supers nerfed shows how wrong your idea and meaning of the word: veteran really is.
If you need to quit because you got BUT HURT and are no longer able to press the I WIN button and call your self a veteran go and do it no one will miss you Q3 2011 reported 1k super capital pilots active in EVE well that's the FAT we can easily trim.
2) Super capitals can no longer defend them selves against sub-capitals.
Another stupid argument that can be made only by a stupid person. Super capitals are slow, big and clumsy logistical platform whit ability to counter other BIG things and should not be used for melting sub-capitals. If you field your super your should field it to a purpose knowing full well you can easily use it. Just because you payed 18 billion or 85 billion for your hull does not mean you are granted the I WIN button.
By bye ******** and arrogant corp mates that think they are so important based on the fact they have a SC.
3) I can no longer rat in my Carrier, Super Carrier, Titan.
If you ever did that you deserve to die in it. Titans and Super Carriers are meant to be an alliance investment not a personal investment. So they should not be cost effective or give you a 200 or 360mil/h bonus they are not ratting machines and if that is what you used them fore you need to go back and start doing L1's and learn a thing or two about the game.
4) 100 Canes can no kill a lone Super Carrier
Well ofc the outcome of that fight had to be reversed. It how it is in real life and whatever imaginary life you imagine.
5) Most common argument from Goons, PL, WN, Raiden, NC... In this topic is:
We can no longer use the I WIN button our super capital blob is dead we are about to loose super capitals on daily basis that will be caught ratting for our extreme veteran title.
Answer: Just learn to PVP learn to play.
6) Dreads will be OP
How cuss it to hard to put a scram on it when it exits sige? Or based on fact it cant hit anything that moved at 1m/s ? Or is it 2 hard to light a cyno from your spy alts to drop a SC fleet on them. Only thing this changed is taking the pace of this game to a new level where you will have to respond to assaults faster.
And even if their will be OP there is a counter CCP gave you and promised to buff them. They are the ships you so refuse to fly. You will find them under the market tab BLACK OPS finally a use for them. Have em standing by and you have a fleet ready for rapid deployment in your sov space.
7) I trained for 6 months but SC's are useless now give me back my skills
You were aware of what you were committing to and the fact everything is viable to change in game. So if you think it was a mistake going for a SC it is only your own problem. Also few years ago i trained for a Dread that are useless ATM you don't see me crying for years give me back my skills.
If you cry about these changes you are possibly the 13-25 year old kid that has a ton of time to spare and grinds those anomaly's, L4s and 10/10 DED's and logs off the second someone mentions CTA or Roam.
Holy christ you are developmentally challenged. Kindly remove yourself from the gene pool tia. |
Amsterdam Conversations
Cheesecake Starshine
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:24:00 -
[656] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:Adapt or die people ... nerfs are needed to balance things around.
Also would love an official answer to this: @CCP: Will the loss of 20% EHP also come with an adjustment to the respective supercarrier BPO's, thus make them use less components? As it happened with removal of the clone bay + a decrease in Capital Drone Bay requirements? (to be inline with the reduced drone bay)
Anyone? E Just curious, when they boosted them the first time, you didn't ask for them to cost 100b instead of 10b? |
Chitsa Jason
High Intellion Narwhals Ate My Duck
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:28:00 -
[657] - Quote
Awesome changes.
I have few notes though:
Moros will have Cap issues with new bonus. introducing this bonus is actually a nerf for this dread.
Carriers should be able to fight off sub caps with Fighters. Especially in wspace where supers can not be used. Using Carriers in wspace will be just a glorified guardian.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
143
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:30:00 -
[658] - Quote
Malzra wrote:This just means when supers are deployed they'll be used in overwhelming numbers with massive support fleets, which does nothing to fix the superblob problem. It goes on to reduce the likelyhood that smaller alliances/groups will bring supers to a fleet fight (and pretty much negates the setting of traps for those who like to hotdrop with solo/few supercarreirs). Furthermore, those who choose (stupidly) to rat/anom in supercarriers won't be able to do so with the fighter/drone changes, thus depriving roaming gangs of potential ganks. Dreads will still generally sit in hangers unused.
Supers being too hard to kill: That all depends on what the opponent brings. With the logoff change, the EHP nerf isn't really needed, as if your fleet has the numbers and the lockdown capability, you'll get the kills. Supers still die darn quick to other supers and massed BS fleets. The Hel, as others stated, does need some balancing love though. Mass groups of SC's will still spider tank fairly well.
Fighter changes: Fighters have always been intended to chew through battleships and to a lesser extent, bc's depending on fit / target painting, if you don't want them shooting smaller ships, then just make them 'unable to lock anything below battlecruiser.' Current proposed change is just shortsighted and turns carriers into logistic coffins.
Titans: Fair enough with the DD. I still think a script allowing for a smaller range area DD (100 or 150km) would make fleet warfare interesting as potential anti-blob options. Obviously with the same 30 second locked in place timer (and other effects post DD firing) to keep the risk factor there.
Drone bays: Nerfing the drone pay totally of titan/dreads isn't really needed, just make them unable to carry heavy/sentry drones. You could do this for supercarriers too (with limited bandwidth) so they at least have some measure of self defense against solo tacklers (a couple tacklers could easily kill the drones). Thus the veldnaughts can live on.
Dreads: Ref drone changes above. This would at least give owners an excuse to undock them, especially Moros pilots who'd be out of cap in a fight. Only performing a partial fix still equals a broken product (aka post details on hybrid changes). Siege timer change just reduces risk factor for using them.
Logoff change - good. However, at least make it easier to log back in after a crash during a fleet fight. Sitting at a black screen unable to even flip on hardeners sucks.
In summary, you are really just encouraging the massive blob warfare without addressing it effectively at all. The counter to the blob of course being to bring a bigger blob. As Shadoo said, these changes are just putting off the inevitable.
Exactly what I been posting as well. You could also say that the very reason CCP have no real "mission statement" (i.e. no role) for supers or capitals in general, is adding to these issues. If CCP would know what to use them for, they would not be as silly (I'd like to think!) as to paint themselves into a corner like this.
Judging by how time dilation is another blob boost, I think it's pretty safe to assume that CCP want's that very small minority (a generous guess would be 5% of the EVE population) to be dictating the gameplay and future of this game.
Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:32:00 -
[659] - Quote
Actually he is anti semetic. Having planned and started the oxygen Isotope profit embargo on Rosh Hashanah ( Jewish New Year ) . CCP obviously supports Mittani as he is the highest represenative of its online community. Which is highly offensive even to me who is not even a religious person of any faith.
The Mittani wrote:chunorris wrote: Shut up lier manipulator. Now you have what you wanted last 3 years. Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets
If death2allsupercaps is wrong, baby, I don't want to be right.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:35:00 -
[660] - Quote
You have got to be kidding me ?
What exactly is this supposed to balance ?
The low SP toons crying ?
You already put the nerf to titans when you took away the AOE doomsday. Now you take away the drone bay and can't use your doomsday on non caps ?
You don't let Super carriers have anything but fighters and fighter bombers ?
Dreds lose drone bays too ?
So apparently one guy in a heavy interdictor can point you and your never getting away. You didn't nerf them, you just made them unable to defend themselves. How is that balancing ?
Half the fun of super capitals is knowing you worked your ass off to get in one and it payed off. Now you make them worthless unless you have a huge support fleet surrounding you.
Why does it seem to me that every time there is a serious update to this game now, that low SP toons get the world and High SP toons have to bend over ? |
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:36:00 -
[661] - Quote
Fiberton wrote:I too want SP for Titan toons / super toons to be reorganized as I will no longer need them. Is this your plan for SP for PLEX ? This was asked at the last confrence in Iceland. It is all becoming clear now. I will take 16 SP toon reorganizations thanks. ..
Thanks. This is delicious.
Delicious delicious tears flowing from FOTM chasers~~~ 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Thor Fredricksen
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:39:00 -
[662] - Quote
would have been nice to see an increase to what carriers can carry . |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:39:00 -
[663] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Half the fun of super capitals is knowing you worked your ass off to get in one and it payed off. Now you make them worthless unless you have a huge support fleet surrounding you. Duh, that's what super capitals were always meant to be, lol. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Fyrdung Tyr
FISKL GUARDS The Kadeshi
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:39:00 -
[664] - Quote
I demand CCP place bottle of lube in the cargo hold of every SC in the game prior to the nerf. Just pretending like you care about easing our pain a bit might help.... |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
163
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:46:00 -
[665] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:You have got to be kidding me ?
What exactly is this supposed to balance ?
The low SP toons crying ?
You already put the nerf to titans when you took away the AOE doomsday. Now you take away the drone bay and can't use your doomsday on non caps ?
You don't let Super carriers have anything but fighters and fighter bombers ?
Dreds lose drone bays too ?
So apparently one guy in a heavy interdictor can point you and your never getting away. You didn't nerf them, you just made them unable to defend themselves. How is that balancing ?
Half the fun of super capitals is knowing you worked your ass off to get in one and it payed off. Now you make them worthless unless you have a huge support fleet surrounding you.
Why does it seem to me that every time there is a serious update to this game now, that low SP toons get the world and High SP toons have to bend over ?
1st look at sov warfare boards and see how many capitals / super caps are on kill mails
2. why should a titan be able to pop their tackle.
3....... you know what, **** trying to explain this.
IF YOU ARE IN A FUCKEN SOV 0.0 ALLIANCE this means you will need to work together as an alliance. All this does is make it so that people not in super caps have a role, and that role is to protect their super caps.
Example - EvE dominion trailer. Sub cap fleet clears out fodder for super caps. Super caps are no longer front line assault ships. If you jump in super caps w/o good support you deserve to die, everyone should be working together to achieve a goal, not the select 1% of your alliance in super caps blobbing. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:48:00 -
[666] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:FHM wrote:Very nice change's ! Finally small alliances that can field 100 experienced people will be able to take their stand and push for their own 0.0 I WIN BUTTON REMOVED
The most stupid complaints you hear about these balances answered:
1) We are veterans in this game ( Goons, PL, Raiden... ) we win every fight because we have the hardcore skill of being able to press I WIN button.
1) You are not veterans you only exist because of the I WIN button i am looking forward to High Sec mining corporations whelping PL, Raiden, Solar, WN, Goon fleets like its no tomorrow. Veterans adapt to changes not cry about them. Saying that most veterans will quit when having their supers nerfed shows how wrong your idea and meaning of the word: veteran really is.
If you need to quit because you got BUT HURT and are no longer able to press the I WIN button and call your self a veteran go and do it no one will miss you Q3 2011 reported 1k super capital pilots active in EVE well that's the FAT we can easily trim.
2) Super capitals can no longer defend them selves against sub-capitals.
Another stupid argument that can be made only by a stupid person. Super capitals are slow, big and clumsy logistical platform whit ability to counter other BIG things and should not be used for melting sub-capitals. If you field your super your should field it to a purpose knowing full well you can easily use it. Just because you payed 18 billion or 85 billion for your hull does not mean you are granted the I WIN button.
By bye ******** and arrogant corp mates that think they are so important based on the fact they have a SC.
3) I can no longer rat in my Carrier, Super Carrier, Titan.
If you ever did that you deserve to die in it. Titans and Super Carriers are meant to be an alliance investment not a personal investment. So they should not be cost effective or give you a 200 or 360mil/h bonus they are not ratting machines and if that is what you used them fore you need to go back and start doing L1's and learn a thing or two about the game.
4) 100 Canes can no kill a lone Super Carrier
Well ofc the outcome of that fight had to be reversed. It how it is in real life and whatever imaginary life you imagine.
5) Most common argument from Goons, PL, WN, Raiden, NC... In this topic is:
We can no longer use the I WIN button our super capital blob is dead we are about to loose super capitals on daily basis that will be caught ratting for our extreme veteran title.
Answer: Just learn to PVP learn to play.
6) Dreads will be OP
How cuss it to hard to put a scram on it when it exits sige? Or based on fact it cant hit anything that moved at 1m/s ? Or is it 2 hard to light a cyno from your spy alts to drop a SC fleet on them. Only thing this changed is taking the pace of this game to a new level where you will have to respond to assaults faster.
And even if their will be OP there is a counter CCP gave you and promised to buff them. They are the ships you so refuse to fly. You will find them under the market tab BLACK OPS finally a use for them. Have em standing by and you have a fleet ready for rapid deployment in your sov space.
7) I trained for 6 months but SC's are useless now give me back my skills
You were aware of what you were committing to and the fact everything is viable to change in game. So if you think it was a mistake going for a SC it is only your own problem. Also few years ago i trained for a Dread that are useless ATM you don't see me crying for years give me back my skills.
If you cry about these changes you are possibly the 13-25 year old kid that has a ton of time to spare and grinds those anomaly's, L4s and 10/10 DED's and logs off the second someone mentions CTA or Roam. Holy christ you are developmentally challenged. Kindly remove yourself from the gene pool tia.
Since I couldn't find the original post of this excessive comment (meaning i didn't look for it)
The so called "I win" button is something you press because your rich and have been playing this game for years. Those people probably busted their ass in low-sec and 0.0. Sorry if you sat in high-sec with your concord security blanket for your entire eve career. That is not our problem.
Also, if you think the alliances that can field large amounts of super caps can't fight without them, you have to be exceedingly stupid.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
499
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:50:00 -
[667] - Quote
Feydryn wrote:This is one of THE worst balancing decisions I've ever seen in a games life cycle.
You have completely removed the counter-balance to "blob" warfare in one fell stroke.
Excuse me sir, but I could not help noticing that your pants are on fire. Were you aware?
Further, your nose appears to be rapidly growing. Should I call for medical assistance as well as a fire engine?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Dr 0wnage
The Dark Tribe Checkmate.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:51:00 -
[668] - Quote
Ok, this thread is growing faster then i can read it now lol
What ive gathered from reading the first 25 pages is this...
1. HP nerfs = bad. Balancing the classes amongst themselves is more important (ie the poor Hel) 2. Drone bay changes to supers is generally good, but the fighter nerf is VERY BAD! 3. Titan turret tracking is a MAJOR issue that cannot be ignored. 4. Dreads still need more love, no excuses. 5. Everything else mentioned is generally good.
CCP Tallest,
By giving every class of ship a well defined role and purpose in this game, you ensure their use. In the "before time", when there was only a handful of motherships and titans in the game. Dreads and carriers had their defined roles being that carriers killed subcaps and dreads killed caps. By introducing the SC and Titan as cap killers the dreads effectively lost their role and carriers were made largely unable to fulfill their role (which was modified somewhat to a support role w/ triage) because they simply die to damn fast to perform their duties.
The carrier can still be a sub killer if we want it to be. I personally do. One thing that can make this happen without jacking everything too much is allowing carriers to deploy fighters while in triage. Possibly even give a fighter damage bonus to the triage module? This accompanied with a 50% HP boost would give carriers the firepower and longevity they desperately need in today's fleet battle.
Dreads are the difficult fix as they currently have no viable role and the role they used to fill has been moved to a different ship. After much thought and consideration ive decided that an anti-subcap role would best fit this ship. Originally i had tried to make the dread a viable anti-cap platform when used in numbers but again, there are already two classes of ships that fill that role much better. SO, what would happen if we made dreads effective against BC and BS class ships? This can easily be done by improving tracking. Along with a similar HP buff like the carriers this would give these ships new life and a very important place on the battlefield.
With the above changes to carriers and dreads along with many of the changes you are proposing to supers we find ourselves with a very happy balance between the three groups. Subs kill supers, caps kill subs, supers kill caps. |
Obiareus
Chosen Path
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:57:00 -
[669] - Quote
to give some credit to CCP we have come a long way
http://m-devillers.ruhosting.nl/rmrnstuff.html |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
143
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:05:00 -
[670] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:xxxak wrote:Taedrin wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Exactly how it should be. 5 years ago, flying a capital without proper support made you a laughing stock. Why shouldn't flying supers without proper support ALSO make you a laughing stock? If you want to protect your supers, then bring the proper amount of support. Therefore we have a sort of rock-paper-scissors formula for balance: sub-caps beat supers supers beat caps caps beat sub-caps (could probably use some more work). There is a difference between "proper support" and "losing = loss of 200 billion isk." I agree that supers should not be used to hot drop on a roaming BC gang for ***** and gigs. But I also don't think that a 200 vs 200 subcap battle where one fleet gets lucky in lag means that the losing fleet should also lose 10-20-30 supers, and meanwhile the supers literally don't have a chance to defend themselves. 200v200 fights don't lag any more, even on unreinforced nodes. So that's OK then!
It does in lowsec. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
|
Thomas Abernathy
Viziam Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:08:00 -
[671] - Quote
Bottom line is, You may as well bring a couple carriers instead of an overpriced target.
Only the largest Alliances will EVER use Supercarriers, since they control the unlimited moon-goo isk faucet to provide supercarrier reimbursement. So if this is somehow connected with the revitization of 0.0, you failed basic physcology. In fact, if this logoff aggression change applies to all ships as has been stated in this post, the average player may as well forget flying caps altogether. Now everytime you logon or undock, you face a real risk of losing your cap... And god forbid you have a bad ISP....
Since you've made the Supercarrier useless, you need to make them dockable, so they can rot in a station, instead of rotting a character that people invested a lot of time in.
|
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
180
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:09:00 -
[672] - Quote
Not sure if this will be read, but...
To CCP Tallest:
With the recent proposed changes to Dreads (removing drones, increasing damage when in siege to 700% as well as the 5% bonus to the Moros), will this see the Moros supplant the Naglfar as the Dread with the (potentially) most DPS?
If so, why should i spend the extra time training for Projectile weapons AND a whole host of missile skills, when i could just train for Blasters and be better?
IMO the nag SHOULD be the premier DPS Dread because of the extra training time involved. [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img] |
Stealthiest
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:15:00 -
[673] - Quote
How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!! |
Bluemelon
Polaris Rising PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:19:00 -
[674] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!!
to quote the guy above
simply bending over to the will of a bunch os low sp new players crying is not the answers. Titans are fine, dont change them. changing the DD is pointless, its fine as it is.
wanna have less supers?
Make them harder to build
simple |
Di Mulle
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:19:00 -
[675] - Quote
kralz wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later. HAAAA ur smoking crack bro. people who fly broken lame stuff are stupid for wasting time to train it. people who train to fly stuff that is awesome actually LOOKED INTO WHAT THEY WERE TRAINING...only to have years of training ruined because lame ass loosers very much like youself who cannot hang with some super cap pilots ruining their day 1st time i got hot dropped i laughted i died so fast...and decided THATS HAT I WANNA DO with MY life. cuz it works its mean its moral jarring to know that i can drop 26 million hit points on u and **** ur skull off with 20 fighters and u cant do nothing about it. people do whats effective. and people who cant do it like me cry about it. still i challenge CCP to not be ******** and nerf carriers like they intend. and i challenge u to try and get one. u might actually like not being a looser.
An epitome.
You just explained, very effectively, why supers needed to be nerfed. Like a 1,5 years ago. Why are you asking for other explanations, you have already mastered one ?
CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
Mavric
Viscosity Controlled Chaos
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:21:00 -
[676] - Quote
GM Homonoia wrote:ToXicPaIN wrote:
with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
The awesome weapon of a buddy in a ship that can hit those targets. Or, you know, you can fit a large or medium gun on your dreadnought, as those were designed to attack those targets. /me hides from the rain of rotten tomatoes.
Why not.. A BS does more damage then a non sieged dread.
Dreads are still going to be useless. They do crap damage against structures and no damage against anything that is moving. Oh wait.. When Dust actually arrives they will be useful for planetary bombardment. Maybe. (Not holding my breath)
Take away the ability for fighter-bombers to shoot structures. Then no one will use them either.
A moros without drones.. that's just sick.
Remove the ability for a single super to jump into a hostile POS and act with impunity. POS scrams and disruptors should stop anything from warping.
Everyone hates POS warfare. Give Dreads a damage bonus to structures. Make them worth while again. |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
180
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:23:00 -
[677] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!!
I think CCP Tallest is investigating a tracking bonus to x-large weapons, i got my fingers crossed for that [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img] |
Lucas Kell
Lost Enterprises... SOLAR WING
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:24:00 -
[678] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Weaselior wrote:xxxak wrote:After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.
Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary? preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat Bingo. That is exactly why. By "More interesting types of combat" you mean "can make a carrier a paperweight by shooting its weapons"
When I can shoot the guns off of other ships it will be interesting too. |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:26:00 -
[679] - Quote
After reading the proposed changes and the objective to change the way Capitals work. Perhaps it is time to take some lessens from the real world.
Carriers and Super Carrier are dependent on there fighter screans to protect them. What about giving us more control over the Fighters and Drones. ie - ATTACK Targets Drones / Fighters / Bombers.
Then a enemy fleet would warp in and try to take out your capitals. You can launch Fighters from a normal carrier with an objective to kill the SC's Bombers before they kill your ships. Effectively it would be a NPC battle after the first command freeing up the players to deal with other things and just have fun.
Could this be done. Smarter AI on the drones would mean less clicking by the players and reduce lag.
|
Aurora Egnald
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:27:00 -
[680] - Quote
This is all about screwing the high skill pilots over period. Apperantly CCP is now practicing in game welfare in favor of the lower skilled/isk poor pilots. Looks like thay are really tryin to ruin this game in favor of their newest product world of darkness that caters to the twilight crowd. |
|
Martinez
T-Cells Moar Tears
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:32:00 -
[681] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression.
Dumb.
If you dont log your ship in a safe place it should be at risk. The only reason to keep this in the game is to allow people to avoid combat when they are caught off guard.
Lets be honest, 99% of the time its not a person actually crashing, its lame ass pilots trying to save their ships off line. |
Mikelsengen
Intaki Armaments Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:38:00 -
[682] - Quote
I like all the changes I see, except for the Fighters change.......... Why do regular carriers get the nerf as well?Just seems to me regular capitals need some attention, in a positive manner, Not just Dreadnaughts. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
500
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:41:00 -
[683] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!!
Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
IZZY EPIC
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:41:00 -
[684] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. Aw, so no fix thus far for jump-in -> Logoffski. What if logging off within a minute of the conclusion of the session change timer activated the 15 minute timer for remaining in space?
This is a good point, it's pretty annoying having a freighter pilot jumpthrough unscouted realizing there is small gang waiting for him. And he simply loggs out to save his ship!?! Pretty lame exploit to game mechanics for his mistake.
You want cap fleets to commit to the fight?
well make pilots commit in general too.
Make jumping through unscouted have a risk, because Log off should not be a get out jail free card in this situation.
Ccp what is your thoughts on this? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
500
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:42:00 -
[685] - Quote
Martinez wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. Dumb. If you dont log your ship in a safe place it should be at risk. The only reason to keep this in the game is to allow people to avoid combat when they are caught off guard. Lets be honest, 99% of the time its not a person actually crashing, its lame ass pilots trying to save their ships off line.
Hi, let me tell you about probes. There's no such thing as a "safe place" to log off.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Herr Rambler
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:43:00 -
[686] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:Helothane wrote:400m is the resolution of all 'Large' turret weapons. Those appear to work just fine on BS and even BC-sized NPC ships, so I don't see why fighters should not still be effective in running sanctums. Not as effective as they have been, but still effective. Because Fighters orbit at 1km, meaning their own orbit speed hurts their gun hit chance. With 0.125 tracking, you need to go about 250m/s at 1km to reduce damage to close to 0 dps - fighters orbit at 300m/s, meaning their damage output will be almost nonexistent.
Thank you for the clarification. Posting with my main. |
Mavric
Viscosity Controlled Chaos
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:46:00 -
[687] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs.
Is it just me or does this look like a bot post?
Really? We need cheerleaders now?? |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
180
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:48:00 -
[688] - Quote
Mavric wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Is it just me or does this look like a bot post? Really? We need cheerleaders now??
Nah it's just CCP Cashflow lookin to hustle lol
Seriously though, am looking forward to see what else is on offer! [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img] |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:50:00 -
[689] - Quote
IZZY EPIC wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. Aw, so no fix thus far for jump-in -> Logoffski. What if logging off within a minute of the conclusion of the session change timer activated the 15 minute timer for remaining in space? This is a good point, it's pretty annoying having a freighter pilot jumpthrough unscouted realizing there is small gang waiting for him. And he simply loggs out to save his ship!?! Pretty lame exploit to game mechanics for his mistake. You want cap fleets to commit to the fight? well make pilots commit in general too. Make jumping through unscouted have a risk, because Log off should not be a get out jail free card in this situation. Ccp what is your thoughts on this?
Done for the day. Nobody in local, so you log off. 5 minutes later someone comes in knowing that a sitting duck will be around for 15 minutes. Drops a probe and POP. Next time you log in you are in your pod.
Now if CCP could make it so you will stick around for 15 minutes after jumping through a gate. Well then fine, short of that forget it. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:51:00 -
[690] - Quote
I too think CCP is scrambling to bring people back to the game at all costs. I always did like watching a in game corp or alliance cascade. The beauty of Chaos. I have never watched a real corp fail cascade. CCP thanks for the entertainment. Stay tuned as Directors and CEO`s put out a flurry of mails pleading they are sorry. O wait. CCP thank you for the 6+ years of training. The training to see through the fog of cascade. o/
"I seek Understanding in a world of 1`s & 0`s. I seek oneness in a world of chaos." Fiberton
Kari Kari wrote:Way to bow down to goons...
Way to bow down to the people who sold there supers for isk and than cried about it when used against them.
Are you going to allow titan and supercarrier pilots to retrain skillpoints since those points are now wasted on ships you screwed over!
I hope so...
That is not re-balancing that is totally screwing over the super capital community.
let the trolls begin... but oh well... no faith in ccp... 6 accts were just turned off... and troll on carebears and whiners.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
500
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:56:00 -
[691] - Quote
I love the idiots going on about "bowing down to goons", as if they were the only ones who wanted a supercap nerf. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Di Mulle
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:00:00 -
[692] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:
Done for the day. Nobody in local, so you log off. 5 minutes later someone comes in knowing that a sitting duck will be around for 15 minutes. Drops a probe and POP. Next time you log in you are in your pod.
Now if CCP could make it so you will stick around for 15 minutes after jumping through a gate. Well then fine, short of that forget it.
Reading comprehension Level I. Search it at the market, like right now. CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:08:00 -
[693] - Quote
If you blind-cyno to a beacon to jump through a gate and there are hostiles on the other side, and those hostiles are able to aggress you before your enter your ewarp, you should be stuck in space. Period. This business of people jumping places and realizing they made a mistake, then just control-qing as long as you don't have a dictor bubble up is bull. |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
91
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:09:00 -
[694] - Quote
Di Mulle wrote:Simetraz wrote:
Done for the day. Nobody in local, so you log off. 5 minutes later someone comes in knowing that a sitting duck will be around for 15 minutes. Drops a probe and POP. Next time you log in you are in your pod.
Now if CCP could make it so you will stick around for 15 minutes after jumping through a gate. Well then fine, short of that forget it.
Reading comprehension Level I. Search it at the market, like right now.
What are you talking about ?
|
Di Mulle
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:11:00 -
[695] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:
What are you talking about ?
In a situation you described there was no aggression. Nor even a recent session change, as proposed by others. So where is the problem ? Nothing changes at all. You are gone in 1 minute.
CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
164
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:12:00 -
[696] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:This is all about screwing the high skill pilots over period. Apperantly CCP is now practicing in game welfare in favor of the lower skilled/isk poor pilots. Looks like thay are really tryin to ruin this game in favor of their newest product world of darkness that caters to the twilight crowd.
Hi 80 million plus sp character here.
Let me explain everything wrong.
1st alt posting.
2nd. They are giving defined roles to super cap - destroying other super caps and sov structures rather than being able to kill anything and everything that gets near them.
3rd. If you ever read a WoD book in your life, its is more brutal that eve online.
4th. Only reason super cap pilots are complaining is because they now run the real risk of losing their ships, and many of their alliances know they cannot afford to reimburse them nor can they replace it themselves. ONLY FLY WHAT YOU CAN AFFORD TO LOSE. #1 rule of eve online.
Every ship will now have a role in a fleet fight. fleet fights are no longer about capitals.
Titans can still open jump bridges and have clone bays. Mom's can still melt dreads and other super caps in groups along with sov structures. Dreads will now have a better chance of doing hit and run gangs for killing. Carriers will be needed to help keep supers alive and kill off stuff like hictors, dictors and dispense with neut ships.
Every capital will now has a role. |
Vaffel Junior
NorCorp Security
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:16:00 -
[697] - Quote
I guess this is the beginning of the end for EVE.
EVE closing up on WOW.
You need only 6 moths to train up to the largest usefull ship in eve... battleship !!! |
Martinez
T-Cells Moar Tears
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:16:00 -
[698] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Martinez wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. Dumb. If you dont log your ship in a safe place it should be at risk. The only reason to keep this in the game is to allow people to avoid combat when they are caught off guard. Lets be honest, 99% of the time its not a person actually crashing, its lame ass pilots trying to save their ships off line. Hi, let me tell you about probes. There's no such thing as a "safe place" to log off.
Hi, let me tell you about how long probes take. If a pilot logs and will be in space 30 secs. So you will have 30 secs to scan him down and point him. Even then if you happened to get a point on the pilot he should stay in space. Why? He didnt log in a safe location. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:16:00 -
[699] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:If you blind-cyno to a beacon to jump through a gate and there are hostiles on the other side, and those hostiles are able to aggress you before your enter your ewarp, you should be stuck in space. Period. This business of people jumping places and realizing they made a mistake, then just control-qing as long as you don't have a dictor bubble up is bull.
No no no you see I paid $1800 for my supercap therefore I should get a do-over when I make mistakes with it
(because I am ~elite~ you see)
(paying a lot of money for a ship is elite)
(I paid a lot of money for a ship so I should get special treatment, just in case that wasn't made clear) Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:18:00 -
[700] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:Di Mulle wrote:Simetraz wrote:
Done for the day. Nobody in local, so you log off. 5 minutes later someone comes in knowing that a sitting duck will be around for 15 minutes. Drops a probe and POP. Next time you log in you are in your pod.
Now if CCP could make it so you will stick around for 15 minutes after jumping through a gate. Well then fine, short of that forget it.
Reading comprehension Level I. Search it at the market, like right now. What are you talking about ?
He means that your ship will have disappeared within 1 minute if you log off with no aggro. So that guy who comes in 5 minutes later isn't going to do jack to you. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
180
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:19:00 -
[701] - Quote
Di Mulle wrote:Simetraz wrote:
What are you talking about ?
In a situation you described there was no aggression. Nor even a recent session change, as proposed by others. So where is the problem ? Nothing changes at all. You are gone in 1 minute.
Oh jesus.
Go and re-read what he quoted before he said that... [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img] |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:22:00 -
[702] - Quote
Fiberton wrote:I too think CCP is scrambling to bring people back to the game at all costs. I always did like watching a in game corp or alliance cascade. The beauty of Chaos. I have never watched a real corp fail cascade. CCP thanks for the entertainment. Stay tuned as Directors and CEO`s put out a flurry of mails pleading they are sorry. O wait. CCP thank you for the 6+ years of training. The training to see through the fog of cascade. o/
"I seek Understanding in a world of 1`s & 0`s. I seek oneness in a world of chaos." Fiberton The cry is strong in this one.
Use the Tears Luke, use the Tears. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
53
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:23:00 -
[703] - Quote
In general it all looks good. However the dreadnaught changes still feel "wrong", CCP Tallest, what exactly is your inspiration for these ships? Does the Siege timer still make sense? Would you really field a ship that big WITHOUT drones?
Thanks for the great information,
AG |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:23:00 -
[704] - Quote
Vaffel Junior wrote:I guess this is the beginning of the end for EVE.
EVE closing up on WOW.
You need only 6 moths to train up to the largest usefull ship in eve... battleship !!!
Hey everyone, look at this post.
Look at it.
It's a very bad post. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
91
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:23:00 -
[705] - Quote
EXACTLY, and whoever it was was saying this was a exploit.
SO I responded, you all are the ones that are failing the reading comprehension , not me.
|
Infinion
Awesome Corp
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:23:00 -
[706] - Quote
Maybe CCP should start considering targetable subsystems on capital ships so that subcap pilots can selectively incapacitate them rather than just outright nerfing supercap functionality for the subcaps?
In any case it looks like now's the time to be using the full potential of your supers before the expansion.
Winter is Coming |
Vaffel Junior
NorCorp Security
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:25:00 -
[707] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I guess this is the beginning of the end for EVE.
EVE closing up on WOW.
You need only 6 moths to train up to the largest usefull ship in eve... battleship !!! Hey everyone, look at this post. Look at it. It's a very bad post.
You are bad.. You are a goon pet
|
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
53
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:28:00 -
[708] - Quote
Also CCP tallest,
Low Sec is still EMPIRE space, why are caps allowed there at all? |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:29:00 -
[709] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!! Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it.
How is it bullshit ? Sorry that my 30+ billion isk ship that I had to wait like half a year to build and took me 4 years of training to get in can instantly destroy your 10 cent frigate. I mean seriously, what am I thinking its so unfair of me. Why would I ever assume that time and money could buy power in a game running on a capitalist economy ? To make me even more of a bad guy, why would I assume that my hard earned money and dedicated skill training would give me the right to fly ships untouchable by someone with less skills and dedication than me ?
I'm so ashamed of myself
|
Veinnail
FinFleet Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:29:00 -
[710] - Quote
Herping yourDerp wrote:but this means 100 super carriers can't solo 1000 battleships, im quitting eve. /sarcasm
1000 BS: approx value: 255billion.
100 SC: approx value(t2fit): 1.8 trillion.
in eve wealth makes you powerless lol |
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:30:00 -
[711] - Quote
Not every supercap pilot uses their ship in a blob context. If you're dead-set on stripping SCs of the little defensive capabilities they currently have (being able to field light drones) rather than simply reducing their drone bay sizes to 250-350m3 (which is the solution I think offers the best balance between the current "infinite drones" situation and SCs being utterly defenseless against any potential tacklers), then can you at least add in some logistical support perks to compensate?
I currently use my Nyx as a combination operations hub and ratting cap / dumb JF killing platform. If you're going to take combat usage in a small-gang context from "extremely risky" (currently, even with "infinite drones" it's extremely hard to fight off a competent hostile tackle-- all they need is a light dictor or two who know how to pilot their ships and you're gonna be stuck on the field for as long as they have warp disrupt probes left to deploy) to "near suicidal" (supers will be completely unable to fend off any hostile tackle at all, even baddies), then can you add some logistical capabilities to compensate?
Ideas I've been toying with for new / augmented logistical capacity are:
- Increased SMA / CHA space (can keep more people supplied with ships and gear) - "Repair bays" which could be used to repair items (for example, to rep fully heat-damaged modules) - Assembly lines that could produce the kinds of goods frequently consumed in small gang warfare-- nanite paste, bubbles, drones, possibly subcap-sized modules, etc. - Perhaps a limited variant of the jump portal generator-- perhaps only capable of bridging cruiser-sized hulls and smaller. This would leave fleet-level bridging to titans, but provide SCs an ability to augment small gang type warfare, similar to the way blops BS can at the moment.
Personally I think the idea of using supercarriers as logistics platforms is pretty cool. It would give SCs a continued use outside blob warfare for people like me who don't like unopposed structure bashing, and would help compensate for the fact that they'll be much less useful for combat in small gang contexts. |
IZZY EPIC
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:30:00 -
[712] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:IZZY EPIC wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. Aw, so no fix thus far for jump-in -> Logoffski. What if logging off within a minute of the conclusion of the session change timer activated the 15 minute timer for remaining in space? This is a good point, it's pretty annoying having a freighter pilot jumpthrough unscouted realizing there is small gang waiting for him. And he simply loggs out to save his ship!?! Pretty lame exploit to game mechanics for his mistake. You want cap fleets to commit to the fight? well make pilots commit in general too. Make jumping through unscouted have a risk, because Log off should not be a get out jail free card in this situation. Ccp what is your thoughts on this? Done for the day. Nobody in local, so you log off. 5 minutes later someone comes in knowing that a sitting duck will be around for 15 minutes. Drops a probe and POP. Next time you log in you are in your pod. Now if CCP could make it so you will stick around for 15 minutes after jumping through a gate. Well then fine, short of that forget it.
Wasn't talking about in general, if you actaully read what I quoted.
I was talking about the first minute or two after you jump through a gate. To deterr logg offs caused when a target jumps into a gang. If you waited the so called stargate timer then log off which could be a simple 90 second including the 60 seconds in which your cloaked. You disappear with in a minute. Earlier and then the agression is slapped on.
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
167
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:31:00 -
[713] - Quote
The true bitter vets of eve are the ones who manipulate the market, alliance politics, and resources out of the sight of peering eyes. Not the super cap pilots.
The proper vets know not to put their investments all into 1 ship that can go boom and cant get a good pay off of insurance |
Veinnail
FinFleet Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:32:00 -
[714] - Quote
create fighter bays,
reduce current drone bay to something logical.
make the SC pilot choose 1 flight of Heavy sized drones.
|
Camar
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:32:00 -
[715] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:The true bitter vets of eve are the ones who manipulate the market, alliance politics, and resources out of the sight of peering eyes. Not the super cap pilots.
The proper vets know not to put their investments all into 1 ship that can go boom and cant get a good pay off of insurance true bitter vets dont play eve anymore |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:38:00 -
[716] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Malcanis wrote:Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!! Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it. How is it bullshit ? Sorry that my 30+ billion isk ship that I had to wait like half a year to build and took me 4 years of training to get in can instantly destroy your 10 cent frigate. I mean seriously, what am I thinking its so unfair of me. Why would I ever assume that time and money could buy power in a game running on a capitalist economy ? To make me even more of a bad guy, why would I assume that my hard earned money and dedicated skill training would give me the right to fly ships untouchable by someone with less skills and dedication than me ? I'm so ashamed of myself
I can't even tell if you're being sarcastic, since everything you said is true in the literal, face-value sense.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:39:00 -
[717] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Not every supercap pilot uses their ship in a blob context. If you're dead-set on stripping SCs of the little defensive capabilities they currently have (being able to field light drones) rather than simply reducing their drone bay sizes to 250-350m3 (which is the solution I think offers the best balance between the current "infinite drones" situation and SCs being utterly defenseless against any potential tacklers), then can you at least add in some logistical support perks to compensate? Was the SC ever intended as a ratting platform?
Was the SC ever intended for solo ganking?
You will no doubt have a hard time finding support for that position. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:41:00 -
[718] - Quote
Do own a Erebus
Do 0wn in sub caps
Did own a Nyx
Do think all the changes are fine.
Carry on. |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
91
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:43:00 -
[719] - Quote
IZZY EPIC wrote:
Wasn't talking about in general, if you actaully read what I quoted.
I was talking about the first minute or two after you jump through a gate. To deterr logg offs caused when a target jumps into a gang. If you waited the so called stargate timer then log off which could be a simple 90 second including the 60 seconds in which your cloaked. You disappear with in a minute. Earlier and then the agression is slapped on.
Actually Izzy I was agreeing with you and just giving an example of what would happen if CCP stamped everyone with a 15 log off timer, aggro or not. Not that you were promoting one.
THen secondly I stated if CCP could instead imply a 15 minute timer once you jump through a gate then that would solve the issue of jumping through a gate and logging off before you get aggro.
I am not sure how to make it clearer. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:43:00 -
[720] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:The true bitter vets of eve are the ones who manipulate the market, alliance politics, and resources out of the sight of peering eyes. Not the super cap pilots.
The proper vets know not to put their investments all into 1 ship that can go boom and cant get a good pay off of insurance
Your right about the investments part. No smart cap pilot puts all their eggs in one basket. However, experienced pilots should benefit from having more SP. Hot dropping has always been part of the game. You know how you avoid it ? Don't be stupid and don't bite off more than you can chew. If you don't have the power to match -A- or PL then you don't do it. Hit them where it hurt instead and war dec them. Pop their haulers in high sec. Take their isk away. There are more ways to fight a war than military power. If you can't stand up with force, use other tactics. I don't see the need to nerf ships that are perfectly fine when only stupid people don't expect certain alliances to drop supers. If your too poor to replace your battleship because PL dropped 6 Supers on it, then perhaps you shouldn't be flying a battleship ? Why punish high SP characters that have money because the low SP characters that don't gather intel before they attack something.
As for the larger alliances promoting this change. I'm not suprised to see Goons and Initiative. here. Sucks getting kicked out of all your space by someone richer and more powerful than you, doesn't it ? |
|
Nephilius
Pillage and Plunder Salvage Co.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:45:00 -
[721] - Quote
Just real quick...
Velin Dhal wrote:The so called "I win" button is something you press because your rich and have been playing this game for years. Those people probably busted their ass in low-sec and 0.0. Sorry if you sat in high-sec with your concord security blanket for your entire eve career. That is not our problem.
This is self-entitlement. Read it, and understand that. Don't think you are special because you did something different than everyone else, because they did something you don't agree with. It isn't your game, or Goons, or NC or BoB or whomever the hell you think. It's everybody's game and we all know that these big azz ships are fielded in stupid numbers to tip the tide because it's easier that way.
Now, I'm not going to pretend I know alot about the mechanics of Carriers, Dreads, Moms, Super Caps or anything like that. I don't, so alot of these changes are just a tad bit over me. The logoffski mechanic getting fixed is easily the best thing, and I can see everyone pretty much agrees to that. Here's where I have to go into unfamiliar territory, and I am really going to just touch on one thing.
The whole Super Cap and Sub Cap thing seems to be more realistic if the Super Caps cannot own the Subcap ship classes. We're talking about gargantuan ships that were really designed to take on other gargantuan ships and large structures. Wiping the board clean of subcaps seems to me to be a broken mechanic. I'm not speaking of DD devices, I still believe that those should probably sterilize the battlefield of both sides. As far as subcaps taking out a Supercap, yeah, it should be possible, but you should need immense amounts of firepower to do it too. If it takes a 100+ Canes or Megas, then that's what it takes. It's not going to happen in a few minutes, nor should it. It should be possible, but only with coordination. Likewise, a Supercap should not enter the battlefield without subcap support, that would be stupid. Ultimately, it should be tactics versus tactics, not who brought the biggest or meanest ship.
I get the feeling that CCP is trying to make these monstrosities matter again, to make them special, something that isn't an everyday thing, but a commitment to a cause. A supercap should really be a last resort, or at the very least, the cornerstone of an assault. But no assault would be complete without fleet support, and I really see that CCP is trying to steer the game back in the subcap direction. I remember when a supercap being fielded or a DD device being used was something special, a Breaking News report that everyone read because it didn't happen everyday. But when it becomes commonplace, there's nothing special about it anymore. It's like hearing Tiger Woods won yet another championship, it's not momentous or awe inspiring, it just becomes meh.
Overall, I'm seeing alot of the big alliances pretty peeved about all this and it tells me that it's probably a good thing for the game. I think it will make people think twice about gratuitously throwing these ships on the field with an overriding sense of invulnerability. I hope it will make them special again, and therefore actually have some meaning once more. Make CQ and WiS an option, not a must.-á I don't play EvE for the toon spinning. |
Infinion
Awesome Corp
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:45:00 -
[722] - Quote
Camar wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote:The true bitter vets of eve are the ones who manipulate the market, alliance politics, and resources out of the sight of peering eyes. Not the super cap pilots.
The proper vets know not to put their investments all into 1 ship that can go boom and cant get a good pay off of insurance true bitter vets dont play eve anymore
the bitter vets that are still playing play only because they're optimistic for change. Apparently optimism is a brain defect |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:49:00 -
[723] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Was the SC ever intended as a ratting platform?
Was the SC ever intended for solo ganking?
You will no doubt have a hard time finding support for that position.
Intended for? Who gives a flying **** what was intended-- the ships' statistics and capabilities made them an excellent ratting platform, and a decent (if risky) platform for solo ganking other capitals.
There are very few ships in EVE that have a limited set of uses (industrials, dictors, and dreads are about the only ships I can think of that don't regularly get used for purposes other than the ones they were "intended for"). If I buy a battleship, I can fit it for fleet PvP, solo PvP, or PvE. Same with a BC. Same with a carrier, etc, etc. What's your problem with the idea that people want to continue using ships for purposes you don't consider appropriate? I'm not going to tell you how you should or shouldn't be able to use your Megathron, so stop suggesting you ought be able to dictate to me how I should use my supercarrier. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:51:00 -
[724] - Quote
.....I do not think any Super/Titan Pilots will be voting for your Serious CSM Position. Sorry Brosef o/
Darius III wrote:The CSM has spent a lot of time working with CCP on this issue.For myself, I stayed on the logoffski issue more than anything else-as this too, will help reduce the sheer number of SC hulls. While I do not think that this nerf package is 'the perfect solution' it is great steps in the right direction. As Two-Step pointed out, if you have something to add, this thread would be a good place. This shows that CCP is taking to heart player concerns and moving forward in a timely manner. Hats off to them for taking initiative and getting this done sooner than later. It is my honest belief after having seen Hillmars blog-that CCP will be delivering us many more good fixes in the near future. "We are changing the logoff mechanics in such a way that as long as your enemies are actively engaged in fighting you, logging off is not going to save your ship."
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Infinion
Awesome Corp
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:52:00 -
[725] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Was the SC ever intended as a ratting platform?
Was the SC ever intended for solo ganking?
You will no doubt have a hard time finding support for that position.
Intended for? Who gives a flying **** what was intended-- the ships' statistics and capabilities made them an excellent ratting platform, and a decent (if risky) platform for solo ganking other capitals. There are very few ships in EVE that have a limited set of uses (industrials, dictors, and dreads are about the only ships I can think of that don't regularly get used for purposes other than the ones they were "intended for"). If I buy a battleship, I can fit it for fleet PvP, solo PvP, or PvE. Same with a BC. Same with a carrier, etc, etc. What's your problem with the idea that people want to continue using ships for purposes you don't consider appropriate? I'm not going to tell you how you should or shouldn't be able to use your Megathron, so stop suggesting you ought be able to dictate to me how I should use my supercarrier.
I agree |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:52:00 -
[726] - Quote
Nephilius wrote:Just real quick... Velin Dhal wrote:The so called "I win" button is something you press because your rich and have been playing this game for years. Those people probably busted their ass in low-sec and 0.0. Sorry if you sat in high-sec with your concord security blanket for your entire eve career. That is not our problem. This is self-entitlement. Read it, and understand that. Don't think you are special because you did something different than everyone else, because they did something you don't agree with. It isn't your game, or Goons, or NC or BoB or whomever the hell you think. It's everybody's game and we all know that these big azz ships are fielded in stupid numbers to tip the tide because it's easier that way. Now, I'm not going to pretend I know alot about the mechanics of Carriers, Dreads, Moms, Super Caps or anything like that. I don't, so alot of these changes are just a tad bit over me. The logoffski mechanic getting fixed is easily the best thing, and I can see everyone pretty much agrees to that. Here's where I have to go into unfamiliar territory, and I am really going to just touch on one thing. The whole Super Cap and Sub Cap thing seems to be more realistic if the Super Caps cannot own the Subcap ship classes with impunity. We're talking about gargantuan ships that were really designed to take on other gargantuan ships and large structures. Wiping the board clean of subcaps seems to me to be a broken mechanic. I'm not speaking of DD devices, I still believe that those should probably sterilize the battlefield of both sides. As far as subcaps taking out a Supercap, yeah, it should be possible, but you should need immense amounts of firepower to do it too. If it takes a 100+ Canes or Megas, then that's what it takes. It's not going to happen in a few minutes, nor should it. It should be possible, but only with coordination. Likewise, a Supercap should not enter the battlefield without subcap support, that would be stupid. Ultimately, it should be tactics versus tactics, not who brought the biggest or meanest ship. I get the feeling that CCP is trying to make these monstrosities matter again, to make them special, something that isn't an everyday thing, but a commitment to a cause. A supercap should really be a last resort, or at the very least, the cornerstone of an assault. But no assault would be complete without fleet support, and I really see that CCP is trying to steer the game back in the subcap direction. I remember when a supercap being fielded or a DD device being used was something special, a Breaking News report that everyone read because it didn't happen everyday. But when it becomes commonplace, there's nothing special about it anymore. It's like hearing Tiger Woods won yet another championship, it's not momentous or awe inspiring, it just becomes meh. Overall, I'm seeing alot of the big alliances pretty peeved about all this and it tells me that it's probably a good thing for the game. I think it will make people think twice about gratuitously throwing these ships on the field with an overriding sense of invulnerability. I hope it will make them special again, and therefore actually have some meaning once more.
I do like your post. As opposed as I am to this change this was very well written. One thing I want to talk about here is your last paragraph. All in all, its not true. I watched a -A- fleet with 6 or so supers in it get attacked by a Black legion fleet with nothing but Scimitars and Munnins. Guess what. The -A- " I win" Button didn't work. These ships are not over powered and can be destroyed with the right fleet comp.
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
167
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:55:00 -
[727] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Not every supercap pilot uses their ship in a blob context. If you're dead-set on stripping SCs of the little defensive capabilities they currently have (being able to field light drones) rather than simply reducing their drone bay sizes to 250-350m3 (which is the solution I think offers the best balance between the current "infinite drones" situation and SCs being utterly defenseless against any potential tacklers), then can you at least add in some logistical support perks to compensate?
Surely the some 4000 people in your alliance give you some sort of defensive capability.
Remember most of this nerf is to end cowboy variety super cap fights. If you want to commit them it is no longer Ginger Magician style or reckoning style.
If you want to committ to a fight and survive, you will have to rely on your FC's, you will have to rely on your alliance, you will have to rely on your friend s for victory and safety. All they are doing is putting an end to solo super cap play.
|
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:55:00 -
[728] - Quote
@Supercarrier Drone Nerf: This looks like a good change, but seems to go a bit too far. It may be better to provide supercarriers with a limited drone bay, as has been suggested, which is separate from their fighter/bomber bay, and which would grant supercarriers limited defense against small ships. At the very least, supercarriers should be able to field a full wing of both fighters and fighterbombers (that is, one wing of fighters and one wing of fighterbombers).
@Titan/Dread Drone Nerf: Not sure why this was ever an issue. It seems more like an attempt to reduce the amount of drones on grid. If so, please just simply say so outright.
@Fighter Nerf: Not seeing too many issues. Sentry drones have a signature resolution of 400, so fighters should still be able to hit battleships without much difficulty.
@Logoff Timer: Good change, provided that a ship which is caught in a bubble and does not aggress before logging off still disappears from grid after a few minutes.
@Dread Buff: Good change. But keep in mind that dreads are still useless outside siege, and since local active tank is worthless in a fleet fight of any meaningful size dreads are still flying coffins. Also keep in mind that while in siege, a dread will have issues hitting an orbiting carrier even with remote tracking links, so it isn't really useful against capitals.
Good changes overall. Hopefully you'll be keeping an eye on their impact, however. |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
180
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:56:00 -
[729] - Quote
I think this sure opens the door to a potential sub-capital-brawler-cap, something that sits between a dread (out of siege) and a titan in terms of DPS and HPs, with bonuses to tracking rather than damage [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img] |
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
92
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:57:00 -
[730] - Quote
Awesome work, CCP. I'm looking forward to more balancing in the future! |
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:03:00 -
[731] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Was the SC ever intended as a ratting platform?
Was the SC ever intended for solo ganking?
You will no doubt have a hard time finding support for that position.
Intended for? Who gives a flying **** what was intended-- the ships' statistics and capabilities made them an excellent ratting platform, and a decent (if risky) platform for solo ganking other capitals. So if they were not 'intended' for any purpose and only the stats allow for, you should have no reason for objecting on the basis that the changes remove possible activities.
Since they weren't intended to perform any activities anyway, so what does it matter if some become impossible to do? 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:08:00 -
[732] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Was the SC ever intended as a ratting platform?
Was the SC ever intended for solo ganking?
You will no doubt have a hard time finding support for that position.
Intended for? Who gives a flying **** what was intended-- the ships' statistics and capabilities made them an excellent ratting platform, and a decent (if risky) platform for solo ganking other capitals. So if they were not 'intended' for any purpose and only the stats allow for, you should have no reason for objecting on the basis that the changes remove possible activities. Since they weren't intended to perform any activities anyway, so what does it matter if some become impossible to do?
Was it intended that 20 Battleships gank your JC in highsec and someone floats in with their hauler and scoops your 4 bil loot drop ? I doubt it. Maybe we should just take away the ability to shoot people at all. Hugs and bunnies in station walking !!! |
IZZY EPIC
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:13:00 -
[733] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:IZZY EPIC wrote:
Wasn't talking about in general, if you actaully read what I quoted.
I was talking about the first minute or two after you jump through a gate. To deterr logg offs caused when a target jumps into a gang. If you waited the so called stargate timer then log off which could be a simple 90 second including the 60 seconds in which your cloaked. You disappear with in a minute. Earlier and then the agression is slapped on.
Actually Izzy I was agreeing with you and just giving an example of what would happen if CCP stamped everyone with a 15 log off timer, aggro or not. Not that you were promoting one. THen secondly I stated if CCP could instead imply a 15 minute timer once you jump through a gate then that would solve the issue of jumping through a gate and logging off before you get aggro. I am not sure how to make it clearer.
Ahh dorry my bad :) |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:16:00 -
[734] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote: If you want to committ to a fight and survive, you will have to rely on your FC's, you will have to rely on your alliance, you will have to rely on your friend s for victory and safety. All they are doing is putting an end to solo super cap play.
...Except that solo supercaps were *never* the problem in the first place. This is the point of my argument-- they're talking about breaking one, nonproblematic form of gameplay in order to fix problems with another form of gameplay (supercap blobbing). I'm just saying SCs should be left with enough drones to perhaps make a difference in solo play, but without such a mass of drones that they remain problematic in big fights.
Being able to field a total of ~60 normal drones is not going to make the tiniest difference in a fleet fight, but it might just make or break a solo engagement. That said, it's not like being able to field drones is a get-out-of-jail-free card for SCs. Even now, with an essentially infinite supply of small drones, its not like a solo SC is going to be able to fight its way out of a properly set trap. For actual, real-world examples of this, see the incidents where Dabigredboat dropped his Nyx on a gatecamp in Cobalt Edge (IRC brought a couple of dictors, tackled him on a gate, and killed his Nyx with a titan, a supercarrier, 1-2 dreads and a kitchen sink gang of subcaps), or Zungen losing a Nyx in Delve to Brick Squad (they brought a couple of dictors, he was held on the field and killed by a subcap gang). If a solo supercap can't escape a small hostile gang now, with infinite drones, I find it hard to believe that keeping a couple of flights of drones in the future will somehow render SCs broken solo pwnmobiles.
What reducing SC drone bays to a reasonable size *will* do is prevent piles of SCs in a fleet fight fielding hundreds of Ogre IIs, wave after wave, and using them to obliterate all subcaps on the field. I think this current behavior is dumb, and that supercaps shouldn't be able to prevail over subcap fleets without their own subcap support in fleet fights. Taking all their drones is totally unnecessary though. |
Mirei Jun
Right to Rule THE UNTHINKABLES
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:18:00 -
[735] - Quote
Well, this is odd... But here we go:
VERY GOOD JOB
This addresses a large portion of the problems surrounding large fleet battles. I think there will certainly always be more adjustments to be made, but this is a massive step in the right direction.
KEEP IT UP
I know you are working to show the Eve community you're ready to focus on FiS. I hope after this expansion you don't simply let it go again.
MJ |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:18:00 -
[736] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Was it intended that 20 Battleships gank your JC in highsec and someone floats in with their hauler and scoops your 4 bil loot drop ? I doubt it. Maybe we should just take away the ability to shoot people at all. Hugs and bunnies in station walking !!! Reductio ad absurdum; to say that intended roles do not matter in balancing, means that nerfing the ship to be the same as a rookie ship is ok... Since there's no intended roles a rookie ship stats would be completely fine. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Cethrie
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:19:00 -
[737] - Quote
Shadoo wrote:
The ehp reduction will not work the way you intended. It will simply encourage more people to move to Titans and ensure whoever has more titans will always win the engagement since no one will want to risk third of their fleet being wiped by DDs on the first jump in.
There was nothing wrong with supercapital EHP, except it was hard to kill them in a lagged system with the logoff timer. All your EHP reduction now does is make titans even more king than before. Was this your intention?
Dronebays -- fine, but I'd consider allowing every class of a supercarrier to store one flight of BOTH fighters and fighter bombers.
I'm wondering why Shadoo has to point out that supers and titans will continue to proliferate in even greater numbers during the next year. Every ship in eve no matter how hard to skill for, how long to build will proliferate to the point where everyone can have one. Almost Every ship class you have released has done this (battleships, titans, t3 etc... etc.. ) This will make the EHP nerf even worse as the titan and super carrier blobs continue to grow. Not to mention the Hel goes from a terrible buffer, to which titan will get the KB.
I agree with Shadoo, the drone removal is fine (except now super carriers can't actually shoot online POS towers with the removal of sentry drones). However with supers unable to dock, its not like a super carrier can easily switch to a new setup without at least 2 runs in the biggest hauler possible. I thought you guys stated things in Eve were meant to be fun, now you are just delaying either the fight or the will of the FC to deploy the super carriers.
The fighter nerf seems unnecessary, there is no reason why carriers and super carriers shouldn't be able to deploy something that works against a Battleship. You have pretty much effectively halved the damage a battleship will take from figthers. I don't see the point of that, it's not fighters chewing through battleship fleets, it's titans 1 volleying the battleships every gun cycle.
|
Masamune Dekoro
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:24:00 -
[738] - Quote
David Grogan wrote:i think the term Doomsday needs to be scrapped and replaced with "Anti-capital Weapon" cos it no longer implies doomsday if it cant hit sub caps too
I think it should be scrapped because there is no day in space
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:28:00 -
[739] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Was the SC ever intended as a ratting platform?
Was the SC ever intended for solo ganking?
You will no doubt have a hard time finding support for that position.
Intended for? Who gives a flying **** what was intended-- the ships' statistics and capabilities made them an excellent ratting platform, and a decent (if risky) platform for solo ganking other capitals. So if they were not 'intended' for any purpose and only the stats allow for, you should have no reason for objecting on the basis that the changes remove possible activities. Since they weren't intended to perform any activities anyway, so what does it matter if some become impossible to do?
Because I already spent all my EVE gold on a ship based on its capabilities at the time, you moron. I bought a ship that was capable of ratting, ganking, and being used in fleets. Now CCP are effectively saying that, effective this winter, the ship will no longer be useful for either of the two purposes I had in mind when I purchased it, yet I won't be offered a refund of the money or training time I invested in procuring the ship. How exactly is this fair?
If CCP announced that, effective next week, CNRs would no longer be allowed through acceleration gates, you don't think there'd be hordes of pubbies in Jita shooting monuments about it and crying MY NAVY RAVEN all over the forums? I'd expect you'd probably be one of them.
I'm not suggesting that supercaps should be left as they are, I think they're broken and OP and they're ruining nullsec gameplay. I'm just saying that CCP need to figure out a way to fix their effect on fleet fights without eliminating their other existing uses, which the combination of the fighter-nerf and the removal of all sub-fighter drones would surely cause.
Alternatively, CCP could offer to disappear the ships and refund ISK / minerals / whatever, plus supercap-related skillpoints if pilots choose to do so. I wouldn't have a problem with this, and would seriously consider reprocessing my Nyx (I still might keep it as a space-truck, but that's a personal preference). |
Jita Alt666
337
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:30:00 -
[740] - Quote
This is good. |
|
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:32:00 -
[741] - Quote
Dont know if I will, but I do feel inclined to stop paying 15 bux to fly one ship that should be used even less then It is today.
It would be reasonable to allow supercarriers to dock in stations as a compensation, but thats asking too much I guess as the whole point its not balancing, its make people unsub thus removing supercaps from the game. |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:34:00 -
[742] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Because I already spent all my EVE gold on a ship based on its capabilities at the time, you moron. I bought a ship that was capable of ratting, ganking, and being used in fleets. Now CCP are effectively saying that, effective this winter, the ship will no longer be useful for either of the two purposes I had in mind when I purchased it, yet I won't be offered a refund of the money or training time I invested in procuring the ship. How exactly is this fair? Bo-ho, cry a river or a nile.
And remember kids; don't buy what you can't afford to have nerfed.
Ganthrithor wrote:If CCP announced that, effective next week, CNRs would no longer be allowed through acceleration gates, you don't think there'd be hordes of pubbies in Jita shooting monuments about it and crying MY NAVY RAVEN all over the forums? I'd expect you'd probably be one of them. You can barely afford a titan and then try to mock me as a poor mission runner? lol
Learn to live with change, else you'll always be the failure you are.
Ganthrithor wrote:I'm not suggesting that supercaps should be left as they are, I think they're broken and OP and they're ruining nullsec gameplay. I'm just saying that CCP need to figure out a way to fix their effect on fleet fights without eliminating their other existing uses, which the combination of the fighter-nerf and the removal of all sub-fighter drones would surely cause. Yes you are, you are suggesting they be left as they are. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:42:00 -
[743] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Was it intended that 20 Battleships gank your JC in highsec and someone floats in with their hauler and scoops your 4 bil loot drop ? I doubt it. Maybe we should just take away the ability to shoot people at all. Hugs and bunnies in station walking !!! Reductio ad absurdum; to say that intended roles do not matter in balancing, means that nerfing the ship to be the same as a rookie ship is ok... Since there's no intended roles a rookie ship stats would be completely fine.
What I'm saying is that just because a ship can do something it was not intended to do doesn't mean that it should have its ability to do it removed.
On a different note :
I see a lot of people thinking this update is a step in the right direction. I fail to see how. Your taking ships that work perfectly fine and making them crap. The basis that this is going to change anything is absurd. From my standpoint, this is going to screw over smaller alliances with super caps and the big alliances aren't going to hurt at all. In the end, not only are they going to lose sov that they once could protect and now can't, they're going to lose ships that costs billions of isk. Having the money to replace them or not is beside the point. Your forcing 0.0 combat into a path where either your in a massive alliance with thousands of people, or you don't hold space because the big guys will just give you the boot because your supers are worthless because you can't field a 500 man support fleet. So instead of these guys hot dropping you with Supers, they'll just find a new way to **** you off by bashing your sov units and costing you a fortune for a system they have no intention of holding. At least with Super caps the way they are, you can defend yourself as a small alliance effectively.
There are so many logistical problems with this update that it suprises me this is happening at all.
I would really like CCP to reconsider this. If this is what the CSM is promoting then I have definately lost my faith in them to speak for this community. I think as everyone can see this is a split issue and while it has its perks, it also has its massive downsides. I don't think its fair of CCP to promote a change based on an issue as divided as this one. I think at least one DEV needs to sit down and discuss this with the community a bit more. Not the CSM. The REAL community. The people on the forums. Posting in here. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:46:00 -
[744] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Bo-ho, cry a river or a nile.
And remember kids; don't buy what you can't afford to have nerfed.
Um, ok. Don't mind me when I nationalize your bank and confiscate all your wealth. Guess you shouldn't have worked for what you couldn't guarantee wouldn't be nationalized, sucker. Deal wiz it.
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: You can barely afford a titan and then try to mock me as a poor mission runner? lol
Learn to live with change, else you'll always be the failure you are.
I'm suggesting that, like 90% of EVEO, you're probably not qualified to speak on the subject of supercap balancing. If you don't own or even interact with the types of ships and gameplay in question, your opinions on the subject aren't all that valuable.
I'd also like to point out that I have no problem with change, as long as those affected have an opportunity to avoid being r aped by it.
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Yes you are, you are suggesting they be left as they are.
I'm not sure how suggesting their drone capacity be reduced from ~1750 to 60 counts as "suggesting they be left as they are," but by all means feel free to explain your logic to us.
|
northwesten
Trinity Corporate Services Terran United Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:48:00 -
[745] - Quote
Ok now the small guys can really play. ATM I am inactive and I haven't really been interested in playing EVE for the past 5 months.
I really didn't like the Direction how EVE was going and CCP was NOT listening to the public.
Now I have been reading the changes I am VERY impressed with this. Thing is they better do these changes and most of all the log off crap. That annoys me the most.
Though I not going to rejoin until I see these changes done. Miss eve for sure tho :( |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:49:00 -
[746] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Bo-ho, cry a river or a nile.
And remember kids; don't buy what you can't afford to have nerfed.
Um, ok. Don't mind me when I nationalize your bank and confiscate all your wealth. Guess you shouldn't have worked for what you couldn't guarantee wouldn't be nationalized, sucker. Deal wiz it. Rakshasa Taisab wrote: You can barely afford a titan and then try to mock me as a poor mission runner? lol
Learn to live with change, else you'll always be the failure you are.
I'm suggesting that, like 90% of EVEO, you're probably not qualified to speak on the subject of supercap balancing. If you don't own or even interact with the types of ships and gameplay in question, your opinions on the subject aren't all that valuable. I'd also like to point out that I have no problem with change, as long as those affected have an opportunity to avoid being r aped by it. Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Yes you are, you are suggesting they be left as they are.
I'm not sure how suggesting their drone capacity be reduced from ~1750 to 60 counts as "suggesting they be left as they are," but by all means feel free to explain your logic to us.
1. Good point
2. Totally Agree
3. I think a non fighter and fighter bomber penalty to damage would be more effective. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:51:00 -
[747] - Quote
northwesten wrote:Ok now the small guys can really play. ATM I am inactive and I haven't really been interested in playing EVE for the past 5 months.
I really didn't like the Direction how EVE was going and CCP was NOT listening to the public.
Now I have been reading the changes I am VERY impressed with this. Thing is they better do these changes and most of all the log off crap. That annoys me the most.
Though I not going to rejoin until I see these changes done. Miss eve for sure tho :(
If you don't even play the game then why should anyone listen to your opinion ? Not to be a complete ******* but seriously ? If you don't even pay for the game or play it why should your opinion matter ? On the promise that you'll "think" about coming back if this happens ? |
Premeir Eden
Invictus Industries Eternal Strife
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:54:00 -
[748] - Quote
I love most of the changes, but i do not think the dreads are getting enough attention. when something is named dreadnought, it should be awe inspiring, and very scary. when it shows up in a battle, players should feel dread, hence the name dreadnought! |
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:55:00 -
[749] - Quote
My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships. |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Silent Infinity
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:57:00 -
[750] - Quote
Dear CCP,
I have a concern here on the dreads. Dreads are not used within fleet fights because it's impossible to keep them alive. Without siege mode they don't really do more damage than a good battleship, but BSs can be moved around using regular gates and much more agile. When they go to siege mode, they just die, becuase the tanking bonus of the siege module is useless above a small fleet's scale.
So, as I've experienced, the problem with fielding dreads in large fleets, and against supercaps, is the tanking, they just can't be kept alive. If you could find a fair way for the dreads to recieve logistics AND do a decent damage, that'd be a start.
As a second point, carriers could hit smaller targets with fighters, that was pretty nice in small fleets. Smaller targets, like cruiser-sized vessels. Weren't 100% hitrate, but still was decent enough to be effective. If you nerf this even more, this might cause an issue. |
|
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:58:00 -
[751] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Bo-ho, cry a river or a nile.
And remember kids; don't buy what you can't afford to have nerfed.
Um, ok. Don't mind me when I nationalize your bank and confiscate all your wealth. Guess you shouldn't have worked for what you couldn't guarantee wouldn't be nationalized, sucker. Deal wiz it. Rakshasa Taisab wrote: You can barely afford a titan and then try to mock me as a poor mission runner? lol
Learn to live with change, else you'll always be the failure you are.
I'm suggesting that, like 90% of EVEO, you're probably not qualified to speak on the subject of supercap balancing. If you don't own or even interact with the types of ships and gameplay in question, your opinions on the subject aren't all that valuable. I'd also like to point out that I have no problem with change, as long as those affected have an opportunity to avoid being r aped by it. Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Yes you are, you are suggesting they be left as they are.
I'm not sure how suggesting their drone capacity be reduced from ~1750 to 60 counts as "suggesting they be left as they are," but by all means feel free to explain your logic to us.
The "supercaps cant use drones nerf "means they have to get a supportfleet to survive. That said this is probably the best and easiest to realize way to achieve that goal.
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
167
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:58:00 -
[752] - Quote
Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships.
First you are thinking of the nyx. moros is a dread
next
fighters can still hit subcaps with good support, so have your friends in hugginns near by.
20 fighters can and does hurt, 25 if you put on the +1 modules.
hitting towers - thats a dread's job anyway.
- as stated above have friends fly with you, they are not meant to be solo pwn mobiles. have some support by and all is well. |
CALPEPE
Tormentum Insomniae Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 05:59:00 -
[753] - Quote
CCP
At least people who have supers, you could allow us to dock for reprocessing.
My wife will be happy with an account unless to pay. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:03:00 -
[754] - Quote
The "supercaps cant use drones nerf "means they have to get a supportfleet to survive. That said this is probably the best and easiest to realize way to achieve that goal.
[/quote]
No ship should be 100% reliant on other ships to survive |
Draahk Chimera
Interstellar eXodus
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:05:00 -
[755] - Quote
Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships.
It's about fitting into a fleet. Guardians is currently extremely useful ships but you wouldn't go to a fleetfight in only guardians would you? [IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s302/nattravn/EVE/draakhchimeranaglfar.png[/IMG] |
CUBErt Doowkcalb
BlackWatch Industrial Group Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:06:00 -
[756] - Quote
CALPEPE wrote:CCP
At least people who have supers, you could allow us to dock for reprocessing.
My wife will be happy with an account unless to pay.
Or give us a pos mod for reprocessing them. I'm sure plenty of us have no use for them now. |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:09:00 -
[757] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Um, ok. Don't mind me when I nationalize your bank and confiscate all your wealth. Guess you shouldn't have worked for what you couldn't guarantee wouldn't be nationalized, sucker. Deal wiz it. Exactly.
If I didn't foresee the possibility of nationalization (or more likely, bankrupting of a bank) leading to a loss of deposited money, then sucks to be me.
Part of having a lot of money is knowing how to move it around, and you suck at it. Didn't sell your SC's months ago? Then you fail at reading the direction of the game.
Ganthrithor wrote:I'm suggesting that, like 90% of EVEO, you're probably not qualified to speak on the subject of supercap balancing. If you don't own or even interact with the types of ships and gameplay in question, your opinions on the subject aren't all that valuable. Sign of desperation; calling the other side a carebear.
Learn to adapt, or you'll never survive in 0.0.
Ganthrithor wrote:I'm not sure how suggesting their drone capacity be reduced from ~1750 to 60 counts as "suggesting they be left as they are," but by all means feel free to explain your logic to us. That doesn't fix the issues with SC~ 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
malet
FinFleet Raiden.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:14:00 -
[758] - Quote
kralz wrote:CCP for real, when this goes live, can i have a pop up window asking me if i want to be refuned both isk for the carrier and capital mod skill books and every single SP i invest in them? all of my training is cap oriented with every account and every toon, this patch totally ruins my game...
carrier pve ruined...and no one is gonna buy carriers, so my bpos are worthless, SC are utterly worthless, wasted toon, just lemme go back about 2 years of sp and relocate skills and i may keep playing, i trained my skills on known ship pros and cons....note i fly a nyx....its really not fair that i should have 5 accounts totally screwed over because some whiny noobs cant compete.
its cool tho, goons have won the game indeed.
does CCP actually play the game? in any way? or is there some really strong drug in jove space us mere us cannot dare to try? i mean are u guys really really this stupid?
Best post here tbh, Just goes to prove CCP are not playing the game. You are listening to the whiners . I have 3 accounts that are supercaptial trained, 2 titan and 1 nyx. Why should we suffer just because you fail to get a grip on what is happening in the game.
I have to agree i would like to see a pop up window asking if i would like all my skills for supercaps reallocated all the isk and time reimbursed. You have truly become detached from the wonderful game that you have created. Such a shame but at least star wars galaxies is out soon,, along with BF3, guess then you will see a few more unemployed GM`s in Iceland as i suspect a lot of people leaving this game in disgust.
Most of the whine comes from the people that don`` have the foresight to compete, and the ex northern coalition that gorged all their isk instead of investing it in super cap production for their alliances. Now they are homeless and bitching about it. So what do you do? You punish the people that invested time and money in their people.
The stealth carrier nerf is a joke, even CCP say in their blog to bring carriers to the field, why would you do that. The fighter nerf just makes them a large hauler to move ships around. Thats it.
You are killing the game and driving your player base to other forms of entertainment such as bf3 / s.wars etc. If that was your intention then good job!! Good luck with DUST514, If your lucky you may have a subscriber base of 50k people left.
And one final thing, if you think supercaps are too hard to kill, stick them up against a malestrom fleet of a welp fleet of canes, then come back to me and tell me they cant be killed!!!!
Dont expect any more cash from my wallet, or allow us 1 docking to reporcess these now completely useless ships and give us ourskillpoints back
|
Premeir Eden
Invictus Industries Eternal Strife
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:14:00 -
[759] - Quote
Magic Crisp wrote:Dear CCP,
I have a concern here on the dreads. Dreads are not used within fleet fights because it's impossible to keep them alive. Without siege mode they don't really do more damage than a good battleship, but BSs can be moved around using regular gates and much more agile. When they go to siege mode, they just die, becuase the tanking bonus of the siege module is useless above a small fleet's scale.
So, as I've experienced, the problem with fielding dreads in large fleets, and against supercaps, is the tanking, they just can't be kept alive. If you could find a fair way for the dreads to recieve logistics AND do a decent damage, that'd be a start.
As a second point, carriers could hit smaller targets with fighters, that was pretty nice in small fleets. Smaller targets, like cruiser-sized vessels. Weren't 100% hitrate, but still was decent enough to be effective. If you nerf this even more, this might cause an issue.
i just thought of a solution for dreads! just boost damage for dreads, pretty much give em all a base gun damage bonus, like the nightmare's 100% damage bonus, nothing too crazy though. figure out a way to boost their survivability, probally repair bonus or something. (resist bonus?) also give 'em back their drones at least, make 'em as sad as they were before their "boost" at least. if they are "overpowered", just put them back and change their name to something more wimpy, like carenought or something. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:14:00 -
[760] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote:[quote=Ganthrithor] The "supercaps cant use drones nerf "means they have to get a supportfleet to survive. That said this is probably the best and easiest to realize way to achieve that goal.
This is my point-- a SC being able to field, for example, two flights of light drones, a flight of mediums, and a flight of heavies is not going to allow them to operate without subcap support. It's not problematic. Allowing them to field limitless waves of whatever drones they want is problematic.
Dominixes can field several flights of drones. Noone would argue that Dominixes are overpowered. Clearing off a couple of waves of drones is no big deal. Clearing off hundreds of waves is a bigger problem. Fixing SCs in fleet fights doesn't require removing all of their drones, just 90% of them.
That said, if you actually look at fleet battles I think you'll see that Titans are a much bigger problem than Supercarriers under current mechanics. Why would you bring a SC and rely on drones, with their bugginess, travel time, and ability to be bombed / shot, to shoot at subcaps when you could simply bring Titans and one-volley battleship after battleship with your giant, tracking-linked guns?
I find it funny that CCP are taking such initiative in addressing a lesser problem while (so far) ignoring the most glaring one of the lot (though at least the DD restrictions are a step in the right direction). |
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:15:00 -
[761] - Quote
I think it is quite apparent that by implementing this update CCP is alienating a decent amount of it player base. It may not be the mass majority but its enough to greatly affect this game in a negative way.
Lets have a re-evaluation of this update and not just say this is how it is. Deal with it. CCP promised to listen to its player base more. Well here is the chance to listen. MANY players are obviously opposed to this update. Seeming that just about everyone who actually owns a Carrier, SC or Titan that is posting here is disagreeing with this update, that should mean something. |
Meeogi
Debitum Naturae RED.Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:18:00 -
[762] - Quote
I don't like the basic fighter Nerf one bit...Aren't fighters supposed to kill battleships? You bring a logi carrier to a sub cap fight... fighters seem pretty useless now.
Dread/logofski/superfighter bay was nice though. |
Meeogi
Debitum Naturae RED.Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:20:00 -
[763] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Akara Ito wrote:[quote=Ganthrithor] The "supercaps cant use drones nerf "means they have to get a supportfleet to survive. That said this is probably the best and easiest to realize way to achieve that goal.
This is my point-- a SC being able to field, for example, two flights of light drones, a flight of mediums, and a flight of heavies is not going to allow them to operate without subcap support. It's not problematic. Allowing them to field limitless waves of whatever drones they want is problematic. Dominixes can field several flights of drones. Noone would argue that Dominixes are overpowered. Clearing off a couple of waves of drones is no big deal. Clearing off hundreds of waves is a bigger problem. Fixing SCs in fleet fights doesn't require removing all of their drones, just 90% of them. That said, if you actually look at fleet battles I think you'll see that Titans are a much bigger problem than Supercarriers under current mechanics. Why would you bring a SC and rely on drones, with their bugginess, travel time, and ability to be bombed / shot, to shoot at subcaps when you could simply bring Titans and one-volley battleship after battleship with your giant, tracking-linked guns? I find it funny that CCP are taking such initiative in addressing a lesser problem while (so far) ignoring the most glaring one of the lot (though at least the DD restrictions are a step in the right direction).
Well.... I guess if you shoot the titans tracking linked ships.... the Titan would be as worthless to a sub cap fleet....as shooting a supers fighters. |
Officer Nyota Uhura
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:22:00 -
[764] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??
Sir:
I think you have misunderstood the role of Titans and Dreads. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
109
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:23:00 -
[765] - Quote
I will... just... leave this here:
3000 Miles to Graceland. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:25:00 -
[766] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:
Also, if you think the alliances that can field large amounts of super caps can't fight without them, you have to be exceedingly stupid.
Please describe the reason to field supercapitals after this nerf?
All combat in eve is consensual; both sides agree the fight. (there are very few number of fights where the opposing force does not decide to go in but gets involved in the fight).
Team A fights team B. Team A has large supercapital fleet. B knows this. B knows that fielding capitals is suicide so they will not do this. Team A has supercapital fleet, but they have nothing to shoot them with.
=> supercarriers will become pos ornaments, with nothing to shoot at.
You describe the awesome situtation where you have tackled supercapital fleet and you are going to kill them all because of the agression timer. In reality, this won't happen because the supercapitals will not be on. Shooting structures is already boring and if thats the only thing these ships will be good at, you wont see them in combat.
If titan gun tracking will be nerfed aswel, there is no reason to field them on combat either.
and: the side having supercapitals has lot of pilots stuck in ship that is useless for the fight and cannot swap into usefull ship as the ships are unable to dock. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:27:00 -
[767] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:
Learn to adapt, or you'll never survive in 0.0.
Sign of desperation: calling the other guy a carebear.
What are you, some bitter ex-BoB ******? Quit it with the EVOL slogans.
Ganthrithor wrote:I'm not sure how suggesting their drone capacity be reduced from ~1750 to 60 counts as "suggesting they be left as they are," but by all means feel free to explain your logic to us. That doesn't fix the issues with SC~[/quote]
And this opinion is based on your limitless experience fighting and flying supercaps, right?
If you think I haven't been considering selling my SC for several months now, you're dumb. I eventually decided not to sell it, hoping that CCP would do something sensible (limit drones) instead of implementing yet another heavy-handed nerf (removing drones entirely) to correct for their overly-enthusiastic buff.
Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking either.
That said, I still might hang on to my SC. Even if these changes do go through, they'll still be useful for moving and storing subcaps, and I'll still be able to gank morons in my Nyx. It will simply be riskier. I'm disappointed that I won't be able to rat in it anymore, but its not the end of the world for me, personally. I still think its wrong of CCP to remove functionality from a ship class without offering people refunds though. I'm sure there are others who will find their ships basically useless post-nerf, and they'll have to eat a massive loss if they try to sell their ships. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:27:00 -
[768] - Quote
The problem here is not capital ships. The problem here is people not understand fleet comp. A 60 man fleet of Muninns, Hictors, and scimitars can kill 3 super carriers with ease. If your not shooting their drones and letting them DPS you, how is that their fault ?
It may take a while to kill them but once they have no drones and no cap they're sitting ducks. Its not about a ship being to powerful. If a fleet of nothing but T2 cruisers can kill them, I wouldn't go to the extreme lengths to **** on them like is happening here. |
Officer Nyota Uhura
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:31:00 -
[769] - Quote
I'm happy to see these changes happen.
- Yes, logoffski was a ghey tactic that needed to be removed. (But how about a real DC situation?) - Yes, dread changes are great - Yes, DD changes are good
But:
- No, Titans should still be nerfed against subcaps - No, you shouldn't tanknerf all SCs with a fixed 20% - because only few of them are ubertanked - No, you shouldn't weaken regular carriers
Unfortunately, although I like these changes, my own SC got so much worse that ... [WTS Wyvern].
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:32:00 -
[770] - Quote
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:
Also, if you think the alliances that can field large amounts of super caps can't fight without them, you have to be exceedingly stupid.
Please describe the reason to field supercapitals after this nerf? All combat in eve is consensual; both sides agree the fight. (there are very few number of fights where the opposing force does not decide to go in but gets involved in the fight). Team A fights team B. Team A has large supercapital fleet. B knows this. B knows that fielding capitals is suicide so they will not do this. Team A has supercapital fleet, but they have nothing to shoot them with. => supercarriers will become pos ornaments, with nothing to shoot at. You describe the awesome situtation where you have tackled supercapital fleet and you are going to kill them all because of the agression timer. In reality, this won't happen because the supercapitals will not be on. Shooting structures is already boring and if thats the only thing these ships will be good at, you wont see them in combat. If titan gun tracking will be nerfed aswel, there is no reason to field them on combat either. and: the side having supercapitals has lot of pilots stuck in ship that is useless for the fight and cannot swap into usefull ship as the ships are unable to dock.
That was in response to comments saying that Alliances that can put out large numbers of them won't be able to fight without them. People forget that most people who can fly supers can fly many other ships. Just because they drops supers now doesn't mean they will be ineffective without them.
I'm also not saying I agree with this update at all. As you can see from my many other comments in this thread
|
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:33:00 -
[771] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:
Learn to adapt, or you'll never survive in 0.0.
Sign of desperation: calling the other guy a carebear. What are you, some bitter ex-BoB ******? Quit it with the EVOL slogans. Cry more little bee, cry more.
Your super e-peen is getting nerfed and you're all floppy. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:34:00 -
[772] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:The problem here is not capital ships. The problem here is people not understand fleet comp. A 60 man fleet of Muninns, Hictors, and scimitars can kill 3 super carriers with ease. If your not shooting their drones and letting them DPS you, how is that their fault ?
It may take a while to kill them but once they have no drones and no cap they're sitting ducks. Its not about a ship being to powerful. If a fleet of nothing but T2 cruisers can kill them, I wouldn't go to the extreme lengths to **** on them like is happening here.
Agreed, sort of. The current situation with SCs being able to **** out ~1800 drones is pretty dumb, you could be shooting drones all day before they run out.
If SCs could field a limited number of drones though, this argument definitely applies. Just look at that Rooks and Kings video where they fight a bunch of hostile dreads and carriers-- they warp in a few smartbombing Geddons on top of the carrier the hostiles had primaried and blammo-- a couple of bomb-cycles later the hostiles have no drones left. Bombers and anti-support BCs, HACs, etc can all kill hostile drones / fighters / FB as well.
Hell, even without going after the drones, a well-run Welpfleet can demolish supercaps with relative ease and extreme cost-efficiency. Why do you think no hostiles have been fielding supercaps in Delve lately? Hint: its not because supercarriers are overpowered pwn mobiles that can't be killed due to their ability to field drones... |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
167
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:35:00 -
[773] - Quote
malet wrote:
Best post here tbh, Just goes to prove CCP are not playing the game. You are listening to the whiners . I have 3 accounts that are supercaptial trained, 2 titan and 1 nyx. Why should we suffer just because you fail to get a grip on what is happening in the game.
I have to agree i would like to see a pop up window asking if i would like all my skills for supercaps reallocated all the isk and time reimbursed. You have truly become detached from the wonderful game that you have created. Such a shame but at least star wars galaxies is out soon,, along with BF3, guess then you will see a few more unemployed GM`s in Iceland as i suspect a lot of people leaving this game in disgust.
Most of the whine comes from the people that don`` have the foresight to compete, and the ex northern coalition that gorged all their isk instead of investing it in super cap production for their alliances. Now they are homeless and bitching about it. So what do you do? You punish the people that invested time and money in their people.
The stealth carrier nerf is a joke, even CCP say in their blog to bring carriers to the field, why would you do that. The fighter nerf just makes them a large hauler to move ships around. Thats it.
You are killing the game and driving your player base to other forms of entertainment such as bf3 / s.wars etc. If that was your intention then good job!! Good luck with DUST514, If your lucky you may have a subscriber base of 50k people left.
And one final thing, if you think supercaps are too hard to kill, stick them up against a malestrom fleet of a welp fleet of canes, then come back to me and tell me they cant be killed!!!!
Dont expect any more cash from my wallet, or allow us 1 docking to reporcess these now completely useless ships and give us our skillpoints back
you of all people are a 2004 player and know that there is more to this game than just super caps and should have adpated to all situations by now. You started the game before super caps were even introduced and some how, you made it in the game.
Carriers - lets see, they have triage, can field any drone type except fighter bombers, move stuff around, deploy extra ships to a contested system if a pilot gets podded.
Mom's can still drop dreads and other capitals with out blinking an eye, titans can still drop massive fleets with good support.
hot dropping will still occur.
Also you are a member of fin fleet, didn't you hold space back in bob long before the super cap prolliferation?
You sir need to get in touch with your roots.
ALL super vets need to get in touch with their original roots, back when there were no 230573208532 super caps out there and when we fought for sov with what ever we could find. in the ship hanger.
Seriously are super cap pilots soo out of touch where they came from that they dont remember, where they came from or how they played the game initially?
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:37:00 -
[774] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:The problem here is not capital ships. The problem here is people not understand fleet comp. A 60 man fleet of Muninns, Hictors, and scimitars can kill 3 super carriers with ease. If your not shooting their drones and letting them DPS you, how is that their fault ?
It may take a while to kill them but once they have no drones and no cap they're sitting ducks. Its not about a ship being to powerful. If a fleet of nothing but T2 cruisers can kill them, I wouldn't go to the extreme lengths to **** on them like is happening here. Agreed, sort of. The current situation with SCs being able to **** out ~1800 drones is pretty dumb, you could be shooting drones all day before they run out. If SCs could field a limited number of drones though, this argument definitely applies. Just look at that Rooks and Kings video where they fight a bunch of hostile dreads and carriers-- they warp in a few smartbombing Geddons on top of the carrier the hostiles had primaried and blammo-- a couple of bomb-cycles later the hostiles have no drones left. Bombers and anti-support BCs, HACs, etc can all kill hostile drones / fighters / FB as well. Hell, even without going after the drones, a well-run Welpfleet can demolish supercaps with relative ease and extreme cost-efficiency. Why do you think no hostiles have been fielding supercaps in Delve lately? Hint: its not because supercarriers are overpowered pwn mobiles that can't be killed due to their ability to field drones...
That would be a nerf I could live with. |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:40:00 -
[775] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:The problem here is not capital ships. The problem here is people not understand fleet comp. A 60 man fleet of Muninns, Hictors, and scimitars can kill 3 super carriers with ease. If your not shooting their drones and letting them DPS you, how is that their fault ?
It may take a while to kill them but once they have no drones and no cap they're sitting ducks. Its not about a ship being to powerful. If a fleet of nothing but T2 cruisers can kill them, I wouldn't go to the extreme lengths to **** on them like is happening here.
This man is right.
Supercaps are very killable for subcaps at the moment in EVE, it just requires planning and organization. Basically what CCP is saying with these changes is you shouldnt need a well thought out fleet to kill a supercap you should just need a blob.
I find it funny that these changes GREATLY FAVOR Goonswarm and TEST. And yes I have seen some Goon and TEST players post against these changes. The vast majority support the changes and have been pushing for a patch like this for the last year or so.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
50
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:40:00 -
[776] - Quote
Could you please add a removal of immunities when operating in empire space?
Thank you. |
malet
FinFleet Raiden.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:42:00 -
[777] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:malet wrote:
Best post here tbh, Just goes to prove CCP are not playing the game. You are listening to the whiners . I have 3 accounts that are supercaptial trained, 2 titan and 1 nyx. Why should we suffer just because you fail to get a grip on what is happening in the game.
I have to agree i would like to see a pop up window asking if i would like all my skills for supercaps reallocated all the isk and time reimbursed. You have truly become detached from the wonderful game that you have created. Such a shame but at least star wars galaxies is out soon,, along with BF3, guess then you will see a few more unemployed GM`s in Iceland as i suspect a lot of people leaving this game in disgust.
Most of the whine comes from the people that don`` have the foresight to compete, and the ex northern coalition that gorged all their isk instead of investing it in super cap production for their alliances. Now they are homeless and bitching about it. So what do you do? You punish the people that invested time and money in their people.
The stealth carrier nerf is a joke, even CCP say in their blog to bring carriers to the field, why would you do that. The fighter nerf just makes them a large hauler to move ships around. Thats it.
You are killing the game and driving your player base to other forms of entertainment such as bf3 / s.wars etc. If that was your intention then good job!! Good luck with DUST514, If your lucky you may have a subscriber base of 50k people left.
And one final thing, if you think supercaps are too hard to kill, stick them up against a malestrom fleet of a welp fleet of canes, then come back to me and tell me they cant be killed!!!!
Dont expect any more cash from my wallet, or allow us 1 docking to reporcess these now completely useless ships and give us our skillpoints back
you of all people are a 2004 player and know that there is more to this game than just super caps and should have adpated to all situations by now. You started the game before super caps were even introduced and some how, you made it in the game. Carriers - lets see, they have triage, can field any drone type except fighter bombers, move stuff around, deploy extra ships to a contested system if a pilot gets podded. Mom's can still drop dreads and other capitals with out blinking an eye, titans can still drop massive fleets with good support. hot dropping will still occur. Also you are a member of fin fleet, didn't you hold space back in bob long before the super cap prolliferation? You sir need to get in touch with your roots. ALL super vets need to get in touch with their original roots, back when there were no 230573208532 super caps out there and when we fought for sov with what ever we could find. in the ship hanger. Seriously are super cap pilots soo out of touch where they came from that they dont remember, where they came from or how they played the game initially?
Can i have some of what you are smoking? Malet is not a super pilot and pvp`s in all sub capital ships. You are missing my point completely. I enjoy pvp with him but the point is CCP created these monsters and after the whole debarcle of the hp on sc`s a couple of years ago they now back track on something yet again. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:42:00 -
[778] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:malet wrote:
Best post here tbh, Just goes to prove CCP are not playing the game. You are listening to the whiners . I have 3 accounts that are supercaptial trained, 2 titan and 1 nyx. Why should we suffer just because you fail to get a grip on what is happening in the game.
I have to agree i would like to see a pop up window asking if i would like all my skills for supercaps reallocated all the isk and time reimbursed. You have truly become detached from the wonderful game that you have created. Such a shame but at least star wars galaxies is out soon,, along with BF3, guess then you will see a few more unemployed GM`s in Iceland as i suspect a lot of people leaving this game in disgust.
Most of the whine comes from the people that don`` have the foresight to compete, and the ex northern coalition that gorged all their isk instead of investing it in super cap production for their alliances. Now they are homeless and bitching about it. So what do you do? You punish the people that invested time and money in their people.
The stealth carrier nerf is a joke, even CCP say in their blog to bring carriers to the field, why would you do that. The fighter nerf just makes them a large hauler to move ships around. Thats it.
You are killing the game and driving your player base to other forms of entertainment such as bf3 / s.wars etc. If that was your intention then good job!! Good luck with DUST514, If your lucky you may have a subscriber base of 50k people left.
And one final thing, if you think supercaps are too hard to kill, stick them up against a malestrom fleet of a welp fleet of canes, then come back to me and tell me they cant be killed!!!!
Dont expect any more cash from my wallet, or allow us 1 docking to reporcess these now completely useless ships and give us our skillpoints back
you of all people are a 2004 player and know that there is more to this game than just super caps and should have adpated to all situations by now. You started the game before super caps were even introduced and some how, you made it in the game. Carriers - lets see, they have triage, can field any drone type except fighter bombers, move stuff around, deploy extra ships to a contested system if a pilot gets podded. Mom's can still drop dreads and other capitals with out blinking an eye, titans can still drop massive fleets with good support. hot dropping will still occur. Also you are a member of fin fleet, didn't you hold space back in bob long before the super cap prolliferation? You sir need to get in touch with your roots. ALL super vets need to get in touch with their original roots, back when there were no 230573208532 super caps out there and when we fought for sov with what ever we could find. in the ship hanger. Seriously are super cap pilots soo out of touch where they came from that they dont remember, where they came from or how they played the game initially?
When you pay 20 something billion isk for a super and then have it nerfed to the point of useless, you really expect people to not be upset ?
Honestly who cares what the game was like 7 years ago ? That was before the ship existed. People have put countless amounts of isk into a ship type that has many uses and now its going to be epic fail at all of them EXCEPT killing other caps ?
There are other ways of fixing a problem that don't involve destroying every ship bigger than a battleship and wasting years of skill training. |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:43:00 -
[779] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:
Learn to adapt, or you'll never survive in 0.0.
Sign of desperation: calling the other guy a carebear. What are you, some bitter ex-BoB ******? Quit it with the EVOL slogans. Cry more little bee, cry more. Your super e-peen is getting nerfed and you're all floppy.
You realize the "Little Bee" coalition is in full support of this patch...... i dont think you do.
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:44:00 -
[780] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:
Learn to adapt, or you'll never survive in 0.0.
Sign of desperation: calling the other guy a carebear. What are you, some bitter ex-BoB ******? Quit it with the EVOL slogans. Cry more little bee, cry more. Your super e-peen is getting nerfed and you're all floppy.
Good to see that when one runs out of rational (or irrational, for that matter) arguments, continued trolling is always an option.
Don't cause yourself too much worry over the future of my e-peen. My SC sits flaccid most of the time as it is. I am, however, always hard for subcaps. |
|
Kuolematon
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United Monocle Overlords
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:44:00 -
[781] - Quote
Yeah, whatever. Just nerf everyone and make Amarr Akbar! |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:49:00 -
[782] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:
Honestly who cares what the game was like 7 years ago ? That was before the ship existed. People have put countless amounts of isk into a ship type that has many uses and now its going to be epic fail at all of them EXCEPT killing other caps ?
And CCP is saying that if your going to kill capitals in this ship class you better be part of a large alliance or coalition capable of providing safety in numbers.
They are also saying that the group with the biggest sub cap blob (Goons and TEST) will be able to dominate large scale PVP. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:50:00 -
[783] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:[quote=Velin Dhal]This man is right.
Supercaps are very killable for subcaps at the moment in EVE, it just requires planning and organization. Basically what CCP is saying with these changes is you shouldnt need a well thought out fleet to kill a supercap you should just need a blob.
I find it funny that these changes GREATLY FAVOR Goonswarm and TEST. And yes I have seen some Goon and TEST players post against these changes. The vast majority support the changes and have been pushing for a patch like this for the last year or so.
This isn't COAD, its not a place for propaganda and posturing-- its a place to discuss the future of gameplay. I would hope that people wouldn't just vote the party line on every issue here.
I'm mostly for these changes (I think supercaps are broken and killing gameplay) but there's just one particular point on which I disagree (that the total removal, rather than limitation of, drones on supercarriers is unnecessary). I'm not going to argue that this is necessary just because Mittani says I should, or because I think it would benefit our alliance (which I think it would, since we tend to be more subcap than supercap heavy). |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Cascade Imminent
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:56:00 -
[784] - Quote
My Thoughts,
I believe titan guns need nerfed - the ability for titans to be remote sensor boosted and trackling linked while unable to e-war'd in return is entirely broken. The fights earlier this year consisted of bait out the battleship gang then bring in X number of titans relative to the hostile fleet size, DD command and logi and then they would ALPHA STRIKE BATTLESHIPS AND CRUISERS OFF THE FIELD because they would be remote boosted and supported by superarriers which themselves would not kill anything but they would remote sensor boost and tracking enhance the titans while their guns completely destroyed the hostile fleets. In those instances the supercarriers would rarely deploy a drone of any kind and did not need to.
I believe the drone nerfing for supers will not have a major effect, that the fighter sig resolution nerf is silly as usually tracking on fighters usually mitigates that problem anyway. Also one of the problems ive noticed with fighterbombers is that they cannot be killed, even away from the supercarrier they've instantly redocked / warped off - you should be able to tackle and bubble fighterbombers and kill them.
Dreads - the moros has cap issues as is a ROF bonus is going to make that worse. the rest is good
Titans, i agree with the DD nerf but i believe the tracking for titans needs to be investigated further - my suggestion is to rebalance all the titan guns to be the same as in siege and at current then remove the tracking debuff from the siege modules, not like dreads ever needed the tracking for their dismal dps out of siege anyway.
the logoff mechanics i believe will be a double edged sword that will prevent the use of these giant expensive ships even further and with the way the game works will become a kind of highlander like scenario once the powerblocks actually commit to fighting with them.
My personal opinion is Supercarriers - remove the supercapital portion(remove the e-war immunity, allow to dock, remove remote ecm burst, siege module for fighterbombers, lower their HP) - make fighterbombers easier to kill
Titans, I agree with the proposed DD nerf - remove the gun dps bonus, implement siege module - basically its an oversized dreadnaught taxi thing.
Dreads - same as above
Logoff same as above
and my personal wishlist item - docking in capitals
Concept any ship that has a ship maint bay could have other players dock their ship rather than just store it - then all docked players jump with the capital when it moves.
I believe it could be implemented as part of walking in stations, allowing corp / alliance / fleet members within the same station to somehow share a lobby and board into carriers that would give a captains quarters environment to the docked players while the capital is in space that they can undock / redock from and they would travel with the ship.
I believe a large portion of supercapitals being game breaking in their current form is the macro's and bots that have farmed the resources to build these very expensive ships. which leads to...
The issue of botting has lead to the constant argument of removing local chat from updating players until they talk. I do not agree with making known space local like W-Space, it would allow cloaky griefing on a catastrophic scale, its already bad enough as is. I believe the compromise is delaying local chat by maybe 5-15min could have a large impact in catching bots. Also im sure bots could easily enough be recognized by statistics, and once recognized that they test the user with a simple read this then type thing like the forums do to prevent robots from registering or hot linking.
Now as this is not short and sweet i doubt it will be read by anyone -GeeBee
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:56:00 -
[785] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:The problem here is not capital ships. The problem here is people not understand fleet comp. A 60 man fleet of Muninns, Hictors, and scimitars can kill 3 super carriers with ease. If your not shooting their drones and letting them DPS you, how is that their fault ?
It may take a while to kill them but once they have no drones and no cap they're sitting ducks. Its not about a ship being to powerful. If a fleet of nothing but T2 cruisers can kill them, I wouldn't go to the extreme lengths to **** on them like is happening here. This man is right. Supercaps are very killable for subcaps at the moment in EVE, it just requires planning and organization. Basically what CCP is saying with these changes is you shouldnt need a well thought out fleet to kill a supercap you should just need a blob. I find it funny that these changes GREATLY FAVOR Goonswarm and TEST. And yes I have seen some Goon and TEST players post against these changes. The vast majority support the changes and have been pushing for a patch like this for the last year or so.
I'm going to have to agree with you. It seems to me that the alliances that would benefit the most from this are the people who have been backing this since the beginning. I'm going to have to add Initiative and former initiative mercs corps in here. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
436
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:56:00 -
[786] - Quote
Alice Katsuko wrote:@Fighter Nerf: Not seeing too many issues. Sentry drones have a signature resolution of 400, so fighters should still be able to hit battleships without much difficulty. No, they're not the same because sentries do not generate their own transversal GÇö fighters do. In addition, the two operate on vastly different ranges where that tracking change creates vastly different results. As a result, they will almost not be able to hit battleship at all (effective DPS output of 3.5%). GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:57:00 -
[787] - Quote
malet wrote:kralz wrote:CCP for real, when this goes live, can i have a pop up window asking me if i want to be refuned both isk for the carrier and capital mod skill books and every single SP i invest in them? all of my training is cap oriented with every account and every toon, this patch totally ruins my game...
carrier pve ruined...and no one is gonna buy carriers, so my bpos are worthless, SC are utterly worthless, wasted toon, just lemme go back about 2 years of sp and relocate skills and i may keep playing, i trained my skills on known ship pros and cons....note i fly a nyx....its really not fair that i should have 5 accounts totally screwed over because some whiny noobs cant compete.
its cool tho, goons have won the game indeed.
does CCP actually play the game? in any way? or is there some really strong drug in jove space us mere us cannot dare to try? i mean are u guys really really this stupid? Best post here tbh, Just goes to prove CCP are not playing the game. You are listening to the whiners . I have 3 accounts that are supercaptial trained, 2 titan and 1 nyx. Why should we suffer just because you fail to get a grip on what is happening in the game. I have to agree i would like to see a pop up window asking if i would like all my skills for supercaps reallocated all the isk and time reimbursed. You have truly become detached from the wonderful game that you have created. Such a shame but at least star wars galaxies is out soon,, along with BF3, guess then you will see a few more unemployed GM`s in Iceland as i suspect a lot of people leaving this game in disgust. Most of the whine comes from the people that don`` have the foresight to compete, and the ex northern coalition that gorged all their isk instead of investing it in super cap production for their alliances. Now they are homeless and bitching about it. So what do you do? You punish the people that invested time and money in their people. The stealth carrier nerf is a joke, even CCP say in their blog to bring carriers to the field, why would you do that. The fighter nerf just makes them a large hauler to move ships around. Thats it. You are killing the game and driving your player base to other forms of entertainment such as bf3 / s.wars etc. If that was your intention then good job!! Good luck with DUST514, If your lucky you may have a subscriber base of 50k people left. And one final thing, if you think supercaps are too hard to kill, stick them up against a malestrom fleet of a welp fleet of canes, then come back to me and tell me they cant be killed!!!! Dont expect any more cash from my wallet, or allow us 1 docking to reporcess these now completely useless ships and give us our skillpoints back
!! AGREE !!
SuperCarrier can be killed only with 77x Hurricanes
http://bdeal.org/killboard/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=48343
Titans can be killed only with 44x Battelcruisers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q97pyRfzztQ
there is no point to get a -20% HP Nerf , and also to remove the Normaldrones and the DD must be work on subcaps.
Please let me dock my SC and Titan ... please !!!! i want to reprocess him and build more Subcap ships for the N00bs in this game ... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
436
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:57:00 -
[788] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:No ship should be 100% reliant on other ships to survive 1. They're not. 2. Why not?
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:58:00 -
[789] - Quote
I read on Kugu that he was going to kick everyone out of Delve in 1 month. That was about 3 weeks ago. Delve still awaits his Shock and awe plan. He used his CSM intel to start pumping out dreads ahead of time. So everyone better keep up.
Manfred Sideous wrote:The Mittani wrote:chunorris wrote:In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance. Quote:Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want. Excuse me sir, but the forums have taught me that the CSM is a completely powerless entity and that the Chairmanship is a title without meaning. Try to keep up! So you won't be seeking re-election or will you? Can I get a quote here please?
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Joe Censored
Maru Ka'ge.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:59:00 -
[790] - Quote
So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that. |
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:01:00 -
[791] - Quote
GeeBee wrote:My Thoughts,
I believe titan guns need nerfed - the ability for titans to be remote sensor boosted and trackling linked while unable to e-war'd in return is entirely broken. The fights earlier this year consisted of bait out the battleship gang then bring in X number of titans relative to the hostile fleet size, DD command and logi and then they would ALPHA STRIKE BATTLESHIPS AND CRUISERS OFF THE FIELD because they would be remote boosted and supported by superarriers which themselves would not kill anything but they would remote sensor boost and tracking enhance the titans while their guns completely destroyed the hostile fleets. In those instances the supercarriers would rarely deploy a drone of any kind and did not need to.
I believe the drone nerfing for supers will not have a major effect, that the fighter sig resolution nerf is silly as usually tracking on fighters usually mitigates that problem anyway. Also one of the problems ive noticed with fighterbombers is that they cannot be killed, even away from the supercarrier they've instantly redocked / warped off - you should be able to tackle and bubble fighterbombers and kill them.
Hey look, someone who actually plays the game and knows what they're talking about. Cool. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
436
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:02:00 -
[792] - Quote
Joe Censored wrote:So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that. Yes there is something seriously wrong with that: the titan pilot's corp/alliance. They need to be fired from the job.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:02:00 -
[793] - Quote
Joe Censored wrote:So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that.
Not just a Titan...every capital in the game |
Vulfnaadur
Veris Explorers
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:03:00 -
[794] - Quote
Might as well let everyone fly a titan, heck let them go into high sec. Give them out to rookie pilots with cookies and milk. Your changes suck. Not just for the pilots who fly them and spent years training for them, but for the builders and those who deal in cap parts and prints.
|
mkint
131
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:03:00 -
[795] - Quote
you know... I cba'd to read the whole threadnaught... makes me wonder if CCP's gonna do the same thing. Usually they only read the first 5 pages, listen to only the first 2 posts of "great!" and assume everything will go fine.
Does anyone else have the feeling that CCP's gonna screw the pooch on this one somehow? |
Akiriy Azuriko
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:04:00 -
[796] - Quote
Nice work CCP. now wheres that hybrid buff ? |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:05:00 -
[797] - Quote
Joe Censored wrote:So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that.
signed ! |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:05:00 -
[798] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:
This isn't COAD, its not a place for propaganda and posturing-- its a place to discuss the future of gameplay. I would hope that people wouldn't just vote the party line on every issue here.
No its not COAD, but it is very clear to see that the changes that many of the Goons, a majority player base of lower SP/ new players no offense, have pushed for are on the plate for the patch.
Ganthrithor wrote:
I'm mostly for these changes (I think supercaps are broken and killing gameplay) but there's just one particular point on which I disagree (that the total removal, rather than limitation of, drones on supercarriers is unnecessary). I'm not going to argue that this is necessary just because Mittani says I should, or because I think it would benefit our alliance (which I think it would, since we tend to be more subcap than supercap heavy).
I 100% agree that Supercaps are broken in EVE and I have been posting to that effect for the last 18 months. However I 100% disagree that the changes to supercaps presented by CCP are the fix.
Perhaps being able to dock a supercarrier should be put on the plate if CCP really see's these changes as the way forward. Essentially they are telling a player that you have to fly a ship that can do one thing only and unless you have a sitting toon you are trapped in that ship. |
Joe Censored
Maru Ka'ge.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:05:00 -
[799] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Joe Censored wrote:So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that. Yes there is something seriously wrong with that: the titan pilot's corp/alliance. They need to be fired from the job.
Not every titan is part of the blob fest |
FearOwns
Origin. Black Legion.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:06:00 -
[800] - Quote
CCP,
I like your progress towards finally fixing a problem that has existed for over two years. However, the approach is not ideal. Supercarriers and Titans are very expensive investments to their owners. The proposed change is simply a slap in the face for those that took the time to actually train and purchase a supercarrier or titan. When I heard of these changes I initially thought it was goon propaganda until I read it here.
Log off timer The change to log off timers actually makes sense! Once your ships are on field they should remain until the bitter end.
Remote ECM Burst Change This makes sense!
Drones I agree that removing drones other then fighters and bombers make sense, however supercarriers should still be allowed to fit 20 fighters and 20 bombers. Especially when considering the fighter sig increase will not allow them to hit a BS that is moving over 100m/s.. You do realize this hurts regular carriers too right?
EHP Reduction/Drones As I mentioned before, titans and supercarriers are not cheap, by reducing their EHP its simply making them no better then regular carriers which are a fraction of the price, can be insured, require less SP, and can dock. Medium sized gangs can already take down supercarriers with ease. The usual complaint towards supercarriers is that they are extremely effective in killing carriers and dreadnaughts, the proposed changes do nothing to solve this problem. They are still extremely effective capital killers. A solution to this would be along the lines of actually making a supercarrier a "super" carrier and removing bombers completely(where did they even come from?), making supercarriers a viable support platform as they were intended when they were created. I personally would prefer not to have invested 20+Bil on a ship that will now not be able to launch full sets of fighters or bombers(or hit anything smaller then a capital), and can be killed by two hics and a dreadnaught. (The chance of ECM bursting two hics is very slim and killing them will be out of the question considering the fighter change.)
Dreadnaught Changes I actually agree with all of the proposed changes here. Dreadnaughts are under utilized and this should hopefully make them a bit more popular.
Titan Superweapon It makes sense to take away the titans ability to 1 shot mach's roaming around null sec. But completely removing their only defense mechanism towards hics/dics is a bit crazy. With the log off timer change, a single hic could hold a titan permanently until PL makes their 4 mid points and 30 minutes later to kill the poor guy. Along with the drone bay removal they have a 0% change of getting the single hic/dic off them.
There are better ways to answer the tears of the hurricane blobs.. Which if I remember correctly, do kill supercarriers quite effectively with the current mechanics.. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
437
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:09:00 -
[801] - Quote
Joe Censored wrote:Not every titan is part of the blob fest Well, that clears things up.
SC pilots in this game are so 1337 that they need an entire blob to kill a single sabre.
Come on, guys, L2P.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:11:00 -
[802] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:
This isn't COAD, its not a place for propaganda and posturing-- its a place to discuss the future of gameplay. I would hope that people wouldn't just vote the party line on every issue here.
No its not COAD, but it is very clear to see that the changes that many of the Goons, a majority player base of lower SP/ new players no offense, have pushed for are on the plate for the patch.
I agree, and I think its dumb of them to support the bits of these proposed changes that don't make sense.
Anile8er wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:
I'm mostly for these changes (I think supercaps are broken and killing gameplay) but there's just one particular point on which I disagree (that the total removal, rather than limitation of, drones on supercarriers is unnecessary). I'm not going to argue that this is necessary just because Mittani says I should, or because I think it would benefit our alliance (which I think it would, since we tend to be more subcap than supercap heavy).
I 100% agree that Supercaps are broken in EVE and I have been posting to that effect for the last 18 months. However I 100% disagree that the changes to supercaps presented by CCP are not the fix. Perhaps being able to dock a supercarrier should be put on the plate if CCP really see's these changes as the way forward. Essentially they are telling a player that you have to fly a ship that can do one thing only and unless you have a sitting toon you are trapped in that ship.
I completely agree. I think the SC drone nerf goes to far, that it will limit SCs to being either glorified, mobile SMAs/CHAs or relegate them to unopposed structure shooting, neither of which sounds very exciting to me. If my ship is going to be made as useless as a dread, I'd like it to be refunded, tia. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:12:00 -
[803] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Joe Censored wrote:So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that. Yes there is something seriously wrong with that: the titan pilot's corp/alliance. They need to be fired from the job.
Ok let me throw up a senario here. Tell me what you think.
TEST rolls into a system with a 200 man subcap fleet. The alliance that owns the system can field a maximum of 80 pilots. Currently they have a chance to defend themselves because we'll say they can field 6 Super carriers and 12 Carriers. After this patch, TEST can roll into that system and there is really very little the smaller alliance can do about it. The capitals become all but useless. The cycle times on capital reps make it stupid to choose them over logistics ships. So all in all, they lose everything because the people that don't have them are upset. |
Psymn
Spiritus Draconis
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:13:00 -
[804] - Quote
Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right? |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
77
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:13:00 -
[805] - Quote
Headerman wrote:Not sure if this will be read, but...
To CCP Tallest:
With the recent proposed changes to Dreads (removing drones, increasing damage when in siege to 700% as well as the 5% bonus to the Moros), will this see the Moros supplant the Naglfar as the Dread with the (potentially) most DPS?
If so, why should i spend the extra time training for Projectile weapons AND a whole host of missile skills, when i could just train for Blasters and be better?
IMO the nag SHOULD be the premier DPS Dread because of the extra training time involved.
In regards to the drone bays,
- Some time int he near future, i for one would love to see dedicated drone bays on SCs. One for fighters, one for fighter bombers, one for sentries and heavies, one for mediums, one for lights, one for e-war and one for logistics and mining drones. Would be much easier to control.
But please look at the Nag and Moros DPS situation
if you fit blasters on a moros you are daft. there so broken and hit by short range issue, you woudlnt do it, ever CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel Important Internet Spaceship League
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:15:00 -
[806] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:Joe Censored wrote:So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that. Yes there is something seriously wrong with that: the titan pilot's corp/alliance. They need to be fired from the job. Ok let me throw up a senario here. Tell me what you think. TEST rolls into a system with a 200 man subcap fleet. The alliance that owns the system can field a maximum of 80 pilots. Currently they have a chance to defend themselves because we'll say they can field 6 Super carriers and 12 Carriers. After this patch, TEST can roll into that system and there is really very little the smaller alliance can do about it. The capitals become all but useless. The cycle times on capital reps make it stupid to choose them over logistics ships. So all in all, they lose everything because the people that don't have them are upset.
Welcome to "Drake Online" |
FearOwns
Origin. Black Legion.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:15:00 -
[807] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right?
Your baddon doesn't cost 20 billion or more :) Lets not even get into the titans.. 80-120Bil... |
Joe Censored
Maru Ka'ge.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:15:00 -
[808] - Quote
FearOwns wrote:CCP,
I like your progress towards finally fixing a problem that has existed for over two years. However, the approach is not ideal. Supercarriers and Titans are very expensive investments to their owners. The proposed change is simply a slap in the face for those that took the time to actually train and purchase a supercarrier or titan. When I heard of these changes I initially thought it was goon propaganda until I read it here.
Log off timer The change to log off timers actually makes sense! Once your ships are on field they should remain until the bitter end.
Remote ECM Burst Change This makes sense!
Drones I agree that removing drones other then fighters and bombers make sense, however supercarriers should still be allowed to fit 20 fighters and 20 bombers. Especially when considering the fighter sig increase will not allow them to hit a BS that is moving over 100m/s.. You do realize this hurts regular carriers too right?
EHP Reduction/Drones As I mentioned before, titans and supercarriers are not cheap, by reducing their EHP its simply making them no better then regular carriers which are a fraction of the price, can be insured, require less SP, and can dock. Medium sized gangs can already take down supercarriers with ease. The usual complaint towards supercarriers is that they are extremely effective in killing carriers and dreadnaughts, the proposed changes do nothing to solve this problem. They are still extremely effective capital killers. A solution to this would be along the lines of actually making a supercarrier a "super" carrier and removing bombers completely(where did they even come from?), making supercarriers a viable support platform as they were intended when they were created. I personally would prefer not to have invested 20+Bil on a ship that will now not be able to launch full sets of fighters or bombers(or hit anything smaller then a capital), and can be killed by two hics and a dreadnaught. (The chance of ECM bursting two hics is very slim and killing them will be out of the question considering the fighter change.)
Dreadnaught Changes I actually agree with all of the proposed changes here. Dreadnaughts are under utilized and this should hopefully make them a bit more popular.
Titan Superweapon It makes sense to take away the titans ability to 1 shot mach's roaming around null sec. But completely removing their only defense mechanism towards hics/dics is a bit crazy. With the log off timer change, a single hic could hold a titan permanently until PL makes their 4 mid points and 30 minutes later to kill the poor guy. Along with the drone bay removal they have a 0% change of getting the single hic/dic off them.
There are better ways to answer the tears of the hurricane blobs.. Which if I remember correctly, do kill supercarriers quite effectively with the current mechanics..
+1 |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:16:00 -
[809] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right?
How would you feel about the change if you were unable to dock the said baddon and change into usefull ship?
|
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:16:00 -
[810] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right?
Yes if CCP took ECM drones or Warrirors II's from your Abaddon a single dramiel would probably hold you down forever. |
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:17:00 -
[811] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right?
Why do people keep claiming that SCs are these all powerful and indestructable ships ? They aren't. As i said before, the right fleet comp is what makes or breaks the fight.
Oh yeah....and your Abaddon doesn't cost 20-60 billion isk. |
Wen Jaibao
Aperture Harmonics K162
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:17:00 -
[812] - Quote
Honestly the nerf to fighters is a very small price to pay (never really used them anyways since all I do in a carrier is triage) in exchange for this complete and utter devastation of supercaps. Maybe I'll go on 0.0 roams once this hits, since I won't have to worry about someone dropping an iWin titan on me. |
malet
FinFleet Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:17:00 -
[813] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right?
And does your abbadon cost 85billion isk? you are tackled by a ship of the same value, then thats fair game. If your in a titan your net dies and some random dictors finds you before you disaapear you are then stuck there being held by a ship that cost 30 million isk..
its hardly the same is it?
|
KFenn
Percussive Diplomacy
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:17:00 -
[814] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
A million times this. Commanding Officer of the Treacle Tart Brigade SLAPD Director |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
438
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:18:00 -
[815] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Ok let me throw up a senario here. Tell me what you think.
TEST rolls into a system with a 200 man subcap fleet GǪwhich has nothing to do with the hyperbole Joe envisioned.
Quote:Why do people keep claiming that SCs are these all powerful and indestructable ships ? They aren't. As i said before, the right fleet comp is what makes or breaks the fight. GǪsomething that will be far more true now than it was before, when GÇ£the right fleet compGÇ¥ could always be reduced to GÇ£bring more SCsGÇ¥. That was bad, now it is being fixed by making it no longer true. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Cethrie
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:23:00 -
[816] - Quote
Fiberton wrote: He used his CSM intel to start pumping out dreads ahead of time.
Hilarious.. While your comment is off topic .. may I add a counter point or two.
A while ago, after goonswarm realised they had a lot of hostile pos's around them and the dread fleet was lacking because everyone had sold them off. Someone in command decided to offer dreads from the alliance to get the shooting done, i.e the fc's would have some dreads. Then PL using 10 super carriers, logged in, cyno 2 jumps and engaged before the siege timer was out, which relieved Goonswarm of those dreads, by killing 1 every 15 seconds. So I suspect your Kugu super spy is perhaps a little wrong or someone has run off with the legion of dreadnoughts The Mittani ordered built, because of his super secret inside knowledge and how this super dread buff will save them from that exact same fate.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
342
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:25:00 -
[817] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Learn to adapt, or you'll never survive in 0.0. Sign of desperation: calling the other guy a carebear. What are you, some bitter ex-BoB ******? Quit it with the EVOL slogans. Cry more little bee, cry more. Your super e-peen is getting nerfed and you're all floppy. You realize the "Little Bee" coalition is in full support of this patch...... i dont think you do. Yes, well aware... I'm just laughing at that little bee up there who is crying bawawawa~
Even funnier is that when he failed to counter me with reasoned arguments he started ad hominem attacks. Pretty failed ones at that.
Weak trolling for a little bee, too much crying, are you sure that he's not one of the 'pay 500m to join us' recruits that someone forgot to kick? 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:27:00 -
[818] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Ok let me throw up a senario here. Tell me what you think.
TEST rolls into a system with a 200 man subcap fleet GǪwhich has nothing to do with the hyperbole Joe envisioned. Quote:Why do people keep claiming that SCs are these all powerful and indestructable ships ? They aren't. As i said before, the right fleet comp is what makes or breaks the fight. GǪsomething that will be far more true now than it was before, when Gǣthe right fleet compGǥ could always be reduced to Gǣbring more SCsGǥ. That was bad, now it is being fixed by making it no longer true.
What I am saying here is that alliances with massive amounts of low SP toons will be able to completely dominate high SP toons just because we aren't sitting in a super alliance. Why should anyone be forced into an alliance they don't want to join just so they can own sov ? |
Elindreal
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:28:00 -
[819] - Quote
it's been said a number of times, but... tracking links on titans should be stopped tracking links on dreads should be allowed, even while in siege mode.
dreads are the baby cap which can quickly be nuked off the field by a titan DD and SC fighter bombers. yet dreads can fill the role of taking a sizable bite out of a subcap fleet.
someone also mentioned an issue with the phoenix/leviathan turrets can be remotely linked missile explosion radii/velocity cannot
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:28:00 -
[820] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Anile8er wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Learn to adapt, or you'll never survive in 0.0. Sign of desperation: calling the other guy a carebear. What are you, some bitter ex-BoB ******? Quit it with the EVOL slogans. Cry more little bee, cry more. Your super e-peen is getting nerfed and you're all floppy. You realize the "Little Bee" coalition is in full support of this patch...... i dont think you do. Yes, well aware... I'm just laughing at that little bee up there who is crying bawawawa~ Even funnier is that when he failed to counter me with reasoned arguments he started ad hominem attacks. Pretty failed ones at that. Weak trolling for a little bee, too much crying, are you sure that he's not one of the 'pay 500m to join us' recruits that someone forgot to kick?
Ok, you're loads of fun. Lets try this another way then.
Why is it necessary to remove all drones from supercaps, rather than limiting them to a few flights? Answer and I will explain to you why you're wrong. |
|
Psymn
Spiritus Draconis
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:31:00 -
[821] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right? Yes if CCP took ECM drones or Warrirors II's from your Abaddon a single dramiel would probably hold you down forever.
A dram fitted for cepting can 99% outrun ec-300's and 100% outrun warriors.
Sure guys SC's are expensive. Stop thinking about the hole in your wallet and start thinking about gameplay. Thats a bit harsh i know but maybe you all have milked the flavor-of-the-last-2-years and now have to learn to protect against their new weaknesses?
That was a rhetorical question btw. I have a feeling that caps will still be rarely deployed in low-sec off station since like has been said, supers can still make short work of them. Only difference is that someone might lose a super or two due to their expectation that with a large price tag comes immunity to risk. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
438
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:32:00 -
[822] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:What I am saying here is that alliances with massive amounts of low SP toons will be able to completely dominate high SP toons This is a good thing. SP is not a measurement of power GÇö we are not playing an XP/Level/Class game here.
Quote:Why should anyone be forced into an alliance they don't want to join just so they can own sov ? You shouldn't, but that is an issue with the sov system and with human nature far more than it is an issue with ships. In fact, ships are not a factor in that equation because your GÇ£pwn the n00bsGÇ¥ ship that you can use to kick those hordes out can (and will) be used against you to kick you out, and leaving it in is bad for balance.
Between broken game and you not holding sov and balanced game and you (still) not holding sov, the latter is better.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
BadBoyBubby
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:32:00 -
[823] - Quote
Most of these changes...meh.
But reducing the drone bay on supercaps to 25 fighters/bombers max? That is seriously dumb. You've already taken out all the drones. You've nerfed fighters and fighter bombers again (how people forget so quickly) on sig radius, so they can't do much to sub caps anyway. So why reduce the drone bay capacity to the point where you can't even load a full flight of each type?? Seriously, WTF????
I'll repeat the question asked so often and never answered: DO CCP DEVS ACTUALLY PLAY EVE??? |
Usurpine
Galactic Defence Consortium United Pod Service
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:34:00 -
[824] - Quote
Premeir Eden wrote:Magic Crisp wrote:Dear CCP,
I have a concern here on the dreads. Dreads are not used within fleet fights because it's impossible to keep them alive. Without siege mode they don't really do more damage than a good battleship, but BSs can be moved around using regular gates and much more agile. When they go to siege mode, they just die, becuase the tanking bonus of the siege module is useless above a small fleet's scale.
So, as I've experienced, the problem with fielding dreads in large fleets, and against supercaps, is the tanking, they just can't be kept alive. If you could find a fair way for the dreads to recieve logistics AND do a decent damage, that'd be a start.
As a second point, carriers could hit smaller targets with fighters, that was pretty nice in small fleets. Smaller targets, like cruiser-sized vessels. Weren't 100% hitrate, but still was decent enough to be effective. If you nerf this even more, this might cause an issue. i just thought of a solution for dreads! just boost damage for dreads, pretty much give em all a base gun damage bonus, like the nightmare's 100% damage bonus, nothing too crazy though. figure out a way to boost their survivability, probally repair bonus or something. (resist bonus?) also give 'em back their drones at least, make 'em as sad as they were before their "boost" at least. if they are "overpowered", just put them back and change their name to something more wimpy, like carenought or something. I really thought same. Fully agreed with this. |
Otrovakruf
Paragon Fury Cascade Imminent
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:35:00 -
[825] - Quote
There is one rule that everybody, except a few, seems to have forgotten! The most important rule of all!
If you can't afford to loose it, don't fly it!
and that goes for all ship classes and pilots. So stop complaining about you 80-120bil Titan or 20 something bil SC.
Your playing eve, Ships die, they are still gonna be hard to kill, but atleast we small guys have a chance to kill you now.
Good job CCP |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:37:00 -
[826] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Anile8er wrote:Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right? Yes if CCP took ECM drones or Warrirors II's from your Abaddon a single dramiel would probably hold you down forever. A dram fitted for cepting can 99% outrun ec-300's and 100% outrun warriors. Sure guys SC's are expensive. Stop thinking about the hole in your wallet and start thinking about gameplay. Thats a bit harsh i know but maybe you all have milked the flavor-of-the-last-2-years and now have to learn to protect against their new weaknesses? That was a rhetorical question btw. I have a feeling that caps will still be rarely deployed in low-sec off station since like has been said, supers can still make short work of them. Only difference is that someone might lose a super or two due to their expectation that with a large price tag comes immunity to risk.
Wow. |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:40:00 -
[827] - Quote
Otrovakruf wrote:There is one rule that everybody, except a few, seems to have forgotten! The most important rule of all!
If you can't afford to loose it, don't fly it!
and that goes for all ship classes and pilots. So stop complaining about you 80-120bil Titan or 20 something bil SC.
Your playing eve, Ships die, they are still gonna be hard to kill, but atleast we small guys have a chance to kill you now.
Good job CCP
I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship. |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:41:00 -
[828] - Quote
ITT: Crying nullbears grieving for their "IWIN!!!!111oneone!!1" buttons.
Adapt and evolve, or GTFO.
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:42:00 -
[829] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:What I am saying here is that alliances with massive amounts of low SP toons will be able to completely dominate high SP toons This is a good thing. SP is not a measurement of power GÇö we are not playing an XP/Level/Class game here.
Then why doesn't everyone get max skills from day 1 ? SP is a measurement of power. Thinking it isn't, is insanity. Given that if two players are max skilled at flying a hurricane it comes down to skill and fittings. If one player is max skilled and the other has barely enough SP to fly the ship, how can you say that SP is not a measurement of power in a situation like that ?
Not only does SP affect what ships you can fly but it effects just about every modification you put on said ship. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:45:00 -
[830] - Quote
Otrovakruf wrote:There is one rule that everybody, except a few, seems to have forgotten! The most important rule of all!
If you can't afford to loose it, don't fly it!
and that goes for all ship classes and pilots. So stop complaining about you 80-120bil Titan or 20 something bil SC.
Your playing eve, Ships die, they are still gonna be hard to kill, but atleast we small guys have a chance to kill you now.
Good job CCP
So you obviously assume that because super cap pilots are pissed that they can't afford to lose one ? That is laughable. I'm sure there are some that can't but many can afford to replace them. I have no issues about losing a ship in this game. It is when CCP makes them worthless to own that people start getting upset about it. |
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:46:00 -
[831] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:ITT: Crying nullbears grieving for their "IWIN!!!!111oneone!!1" buttons.
Adapt and evolve, or GTFO.
Here is an idea. Go macro in your Orca and hulk toons and STFU. Leave the topic to people who actually have pvp experience. |
Gevlin
SMANews.net SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:47:00 -
[832] - Quote
i guess my biggest complaint with the super carriers was their ability to just MOW though the sov structures like butter.
I though this was the primary task of dreadknots.
So now the only use for the deadknot is to just shoot Towers. |
Psymn
Spiritus Draconis
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:47:00 -
[833] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Otrovakruf wrote:There is one rule that everybody, except a few, seems to have forgotten! The most important rule of all!
If you can't afford to loose it, don't fly it!
and that goes for all ship classes and pilots. So stop complaining about you 80-120bil Titan or 20 something bil SC.
Your playing eve, Ships die, they are still gonna be hard to kill, but atleast we small guys have a chance to kill you now.
Good job CCP I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=10494486
No more falcon kills? Sorry bro |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:48:00 -
[834] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:Joe Censored wrote:So now a single sabre can solo hold a titan hostage for 23 hours straight, no way for a titan to kill it, or escape, in pretty much any circumstance.
Something seriously wrong with that. Yes there is something seriously wrong with that: the titan pilot's corp/alliance. They need to be fired from the job. Ok let me throw up a senario here. Tell me what you think. TEST rolls into a system with a 200 man subcap fleet. The alliance that owns the system can field a maximum of 80 pilots. Currently they have a chance to defend themselves because we'll say they can field 6 Super carriers and 12 Carriers. After this patch, TEST can roll into that system and there is really very little the smaller alliance can do about it. The capitals become all but useless. The cycle times on capital reps make it stupid to choose them over logistics ships. So all in all, they lose everything because the people that don't have them are upset. Welcome to "Drake Online" First of all, drakes can still be hit by the nerfed fighters because theyre still freaking huge.
Secondly, that scenario goes more like this:
TEST rolls into a system with a 200 man subcap fleet. The alliance that owns the system can field a maximum of 80 pilots. Currently they all stay logged off or in station because they know as soon as they deploy their 6 Super carriers and 12 Carriers they'll get ganked by 5x their number of supercaps
After the patch . . . pretty much the same thing happens |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:50:00 -
[835] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Otrovakruf wrote:There is one rule that everybody, except a few, seems to have forgotten! The most important rule of all!
If you can't afford to loose it, don't fly it!
and that goes for all ship classes and pilots. So stop complaining about you 80-120bil Titan or 20 something bil SC.
Your playing eve, Ships die, they are still gonna be hard to kill, but atleast we small guys have a chance to kill you now.
Good job CCP I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship. Oh no! you'll be forced to use the supercarrier to do what it was originally designed to do! the horror! the horror! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
438
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:51:00 -
[836] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Then why doesn't everyone get max skills from day 1 ? Non sequitur.
Quote:SP is a measurement of power. No. It's a measurement of time. Domain-specific SP is a measurement of closeness to some ideal 100% equipment effectiveness. Total SP could possibly be a hint towards versatility, but the skill system is too varied for it to tell us anything in detail. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:51:00 -
[837] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:What I am saying here is that alliances with massive amounts of low SP toons will be able to completely dominate high SP toons This is a good thing. SP is not a measurement of power GÇö we are not playing an XP/Level/Class game here. Then why doesn't everyone get max skills from day 1 ? SP is a measurement of power. Thinking it isn't, is insanity. Given that if two players are max skilled at flying a hurricane it comes down to skill and fittings. If one player is max skilled and the other has barely enough SP to fly the ship, how can you say that SP is not a measurement of power in a situation like that ? Not only does SP affect what ships you can fly but it effects just about every modification you put on said ship.
SP is not completely useless but you need a lot more than "All V" to be successfull. And thats how its meant to be, a very good Pilot with an "All IV" char should beat a average or bad pilot with an "All V" char if they fly comparable ships. This is a bit of the problem with supers. Subcap fleets can be countered with all kinds of stuff, a counter fleet concept, a better fc on the other side, better intel, better pilot motivation/reshipping etc. It doesnt matter how large a subcap fleet is as the pure numbers are allways just an indicator and good FCs will beat larger fleets then they command for example. Supers are a bit more simple and while tactic helps, I havent yet seen a single fight beeing won by the faction that compensated less supers with superior tactics. The general idea of this nerf seems to be to keep supers, especially supercarrier, out of subcap fights, and that sounds good for me because the things I mentioned above are now going to be more important.
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:53:00 -
[838] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Anile8er wrote:Otrovakruf wrote:There is one rule that everybody, except a few, seems to have forgotten! The most important rule of all!
If you can't afford to loose it, don't fly it!
and that goes for all ship classes and pilots. So stop complaining about you 80-120bil Titan or 20 something bil SC.
Your playing eve, Ships die, they are still gonna be hard to kill, but atleast we small guys have a chance to kill you now.
Good job CCP I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship. Oh no! you'll be forced to use the supercarrier to do what it was originally designed to do! the horror! the horror!
If it was only originally designed to kill capitals, then why exactly can it do everything it can currently ? Its not as though they just threw them on the server without testing them on the test server. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
438
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:54:00 -
[839] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:If it was only originally designed to kill capitals, then why exactly can it do everything it can currently ? Because the implementation did not follow the design.
Quote:Its not as though they just threw them on the server without testing them on the test server. Actually, they kind of did GÇö people warned them about this, but it fell on deaf ears. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Louis deGuerre
Malevolence. Void Alliance
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:56:00 -
[840] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Confirming that logoff timer change is for all ships and not just capitals.
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES !!!
FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES ! |
|
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:57:00 -
[841] - Quote
I too know that CCP does not play in 0.0. Go to highsec and CCP can work magic for you.
BoltsBitch wrote:My carriers fighters allready occasionally totally miss battleships and now you are saying they will only have ONE THIRD of thier current tracking? What the hell?
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Forlorn Wongraven
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:59:00 -
[842] - Quote
So tl;dr of the devblog:
maintaining and training supercarrier gets easier and cheaper (no drone skills except FB4/5), characters get cheaper on Bazaar - more supercap proliferation 25 mil skillpoints toons will be able to have everything needed at 5 longtime impact on supercarrier production: will get cheaper, probably soon only T2 fitted? you need more guys to cover your supercap fleet, so alliances will form bigger powerbloc if they want to get stuff done when sov mechanics gets changed supercarriers are useless again no ratting supercarriers/ carriers kills when roaming cause fighter changes small alliance with small blue list will have issues to do anything sov related, pretty sure that is what we all are looking forward dreadnoughts become viable again [*] titans can still hit subcaps Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:59:00 -
[843] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:What I am saying here is that alliances with massive amounts of low SP toons will be able to completely dominate high SP toons This is a good thing. SP is not a measurement of power GÇö we are not playing an XP/Level/Class game here. Then why doesn't everyone get max skills from day 1 ? SP is a measurement of power. Thinking it isn't, is insanity. Given that if two players are max skilled at flying a hurricane it comes down to skill and fittings. If one player is max skilled and the other has barely enough SP to fly the ship, how can you say that SP is not a measurement of power in a situation like that ? Not only does SP affect what ships you can fly but it effects just about every modification you put on said ship. SP is not completely useless but you need a lot more than "All V" to be successfull. And thats how its meant to be, a very good Pilot with an "All IV" char should beat a average or bad pilot with an "All V" char if they fly comparable ships. This is a bit of the problem with supers. Subcap fleets can be countered with all kinds of stuff, a counter fleet concept, a better fc on the other side, better intel, better pilot motivation/reshipping etc. It doesnt matter how large a subcap fleet is as the pure numbers are allways just an indicator and good FCs will beat larger fleets then they command for example. Supers are a bit more simple and while tactic helps, I havent yet seen a single fight beeing won by the faction that compensated less supers with superior tactics. The general idea of this nerf seems to be to keep supers, especially supercarrier, out of subcap fights, and that sounds good for me because the things I mentioned above are now going to be more important.
I agree that at the moment things are a little off. I think this patch is far in excess of what should be done however. Giving capitals a penalty to normal combat drone damage or lowing the amount they can deploy would be legit and something I think a lot of opposed pilots could live with.
Not to mention the fighter nerf is going to make regular carriers crap.
On the off hand as well, Capitals and Super Capitals are a part of 0.0 warfare. It is what they were designed for. True they get brought into low-sec on occasion but the real point here is that people are looking to exclude entire ship types from fleet fights just because one side can't or won't field Caps of their own. |
Acwron
Anormalii S.A. Vera Cruz Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:01:00 -
[844] - Quote
Joshua Samson wrote:So your supercarrier can get tackled by a single HIC and its hard to get out. Well tough **** cupcake, how about you bring that support that should go with your massive capital?
Awesome changes. Only thing i would also like to see is titan gun tracking nerf and a cyno spin-up timer thingy.
All I can see in the NERF side is : It's cool to be tackled by a lousy dictor and just can't hit it...After all, you fly a 17 bill Hull price SC and a dictor is like...how much? And he's playing with you LOL...and another LOL...here comes another LOL !!!
Let me guess...you never flew anything else but that lousy drake, did you?
I want all my SP spent on carrier 5, titan 5, capital turret 5, DD...
NERF NERF !!! The drake army shouts ! Nerf what you can't fly, boost what you can ! Good politics !
BIG GRIM at you guys...Eve is already old enough, dying soon...Was fun but hey, there are plenty of other options, really. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:01:00 -
[845] - Quote
I too feel like I have been playing a Beta since 2004.
Dr 0wnage wrote:You guys are on the right track, but are missing a few things here... Super HP nerf - Reducing 20% across the board is the WRONG way to go about this! Please look at the ships individually! As it is currently the Aeon has nearly 3x the ehp of the Hel, and more then some of the titans. That imbalance will not change with a generic HP reduction. Fixing the logoff mechanic will solve much of the "theyre too hard to kill" problem. Go for a balance, not a straight up nerf! Fighters - Right idea, but wrong way to implement it. All this will do is make regular carriers that much less valuable in fleet fights. If a fighter can't hit a sub cap then wth is it supposed to hit?? Simply reduce the number of fighters supers can deploy and problem is solved. Dreadnoughts - These ships are currently combat ineffective. There are no changes here that will change that. The 5 minute siege timer will help them avoid getting dropped by supers easier, but that in no way changes their effectiveness in a fleet fight. Dreads need their HP doubled (with an increase in production cost) and need a damage bonus to specifically supercaps. A general damage increase will not work as it will make them more effective against sub-caps and other dreads / carriers. Titans - Can we say turret tracking anyone?? All in all its definitely a step in the right direction. One thing we all should consider is why do so many super pilots bring their ship to a fight? Well they can't swap to a smaller ship very easily now can they?? ;-) Is it time yet for docking rights? More wonderful ideas on doc's super balance thread here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=13411
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:03:00 -
[846] - Quote
why is everyone whining about how much the supercaps cost? The whole point of counters in a game like this are that more expensive != more powerful and it never should!
If that ever happens, the richest will always win, and that should not be the case.
Sometimes your counters are more expensive: AHACs > Hellcats Sometimes your counters are cheaper: Drakes > AHACS
the key to this game is strategy not just bring the biggest sledgehammer. |
Trader 99
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:03:00 -
[847] - Quote
These changes are long overdue. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
438
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:04:00 -
[848] - Quote
[quote=AcwronAll I can see in the NERF side is : It's cool to be tackled by a lousy dictor and just can't hit it...After all, you fly a 17 bill Hull price SC and a dictor is like...how much?[/quote]GǪit is $irrelevant. You are flying a ship that is not meant to take on subcaps, and most certainly not cruisers; he is flying a ship that is meant to take on supercaps. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:05:00 -
[849] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Sigras wrote:Oh no! you'll be forced to use the supercarrier to do what it was originally designed to do! the horror! the horror! If it was only originally designed to kill capitals, then why exactly can it do everything it can currently ? Its not as though they just threw them on the server without testing them on the test server. Because of course CCP never does anything without fully thinking it through . . . |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:06:00 -
[850] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote: the real point here is that people are looking to exclude entire ship types from fleet fights just because one side can't or won't field Caps of their own.
This.
|
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:07:00 -
[851] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Lyrrashae wrote:ITT: Crying nullbears grieving for their "IWIN!!!!111oneone!!1" buttons.
Adapt and evolve, or GTFO.
Here is an idea. Go macro in your Orca and hulk toons and STFU. Leave the topic to people who actually have pvp experience.
I literally snorted coffee out my nose, this made me laugh so hard!
I have plenty of PvP experience, mate. Sov-warfare/super-blobbing is not anything I would remotely associate with actual proper PvP, at least as EVE's core-ethos defines it.
So....are you going to sell off some of your bot-accounts now that supers may be worth less? Time will tell, I suppose... |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:08:00 -
[852] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:i guess my biggest complaint with the super carriers was their ability to just MOW though the sov structures like butter.
I though this was the primary task of dreadknots.
So now the only use for the deadknot is to just shoot Towers.
Fighter bomber damage needs to be tuned down. Other than the Doomsday, the dread should be the final word in capital damage platforms, I have supported this since the supercap buff.
SC drone bays need to be left alone or tuned down in a less harsh manner.
For example enough space to fit 40 bomber or fighter size drones and 2000 m3 for smaller drones. This would greatly limit the "endless" ecm drone waves. However it would give supers a chance to deal with that "initial" 1 or 2 tacklers.
Also the change to fighters is pretty stupid. Has anyone ever looked at a fighter in the game? They are a bit smaller than an interceptor, they individually do the dps of a T1 frigate, the EHP of a buff Assault frigate, and they are about as fast as a frigate. So a "ship" that is smaller than a frigate, about the same speed and hit points has guns that can't hit a BS or BC well? what is the logic here? In theory fighters should be able to dual with frigate class ships based on size, speed and HP. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:08:00 -
[853] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Sigras wrote:Oh no! you'll be forced to use the supercarrier to do what it was originally designed to do! the horror! the horror! If it was only originally designed to kill capitals, then why exactly can it do everything it can currently ? Its not as though they just threw them on the server without testing them on the test server. Because of course CCP never does anything without fully thinking it through . . .
True enough. Though going from one extreme to the other isn't the right thing to do. This patch seems to be another case of CCP not thinking this through. With a little more thought and some DEVs actually reading this thread, I'm sure we could reach a median that everyone could live with. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
50
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:09:00 -
[854] - Quote
Forgot to add: Being able to keep an enemy ship in space indefinitely is really, really crappy design and while it allows for some loltastic mails it will do more harm than good.
I would recommend allowing one extension of timer (ie. 30 minutes maximum) and removing auto-repeat for modules on logoff. If someone is incapable of killing an unhardened ship in that much time they seriously need to re-evaluate their ship/friend/tactic choice .. goes double now that super EHP are to be lowered and the 'feature' confirmed to apply to all ships.
PS: With suggested changes I can solo kill an Aeon in my Slicer if in just shy of 20 hours .. great "lulz" but hardly appropriate. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:12:00 -
[855] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Also the change to fighters is pretty stupid. Has anyone ever looked at a fighter in the game? The are a bit smaller than an interceptor, they individually do the dps of a T1 frigate, the EHP of a buff Assault frigate, and they are about as fast as a frigate. So a "ship" that is smaller than a frigate, about the same speed and hit points has guns that can't hit a BS or BC well? what is the logic here? In theory fighters should be able to dual with frigate class ships based on size, speed and HP.
Have you ever seen a heavy drone? |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:13:00 -
[856] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship.
You can still dps structures as fast as 15 players in battleships, same against other capitals, and can absorb as much damage as 100 battleships. If an enemy fleet of your size and composition choose to focus you first, your sacrifice win the fleet battle. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
440
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:14:00 -
[857] - Quote
Might as well repost this in the correct thread:
Fighters vs. the GÇ£standardGÇ¥ 400m sigrad battleship:
Firbolg: currently 72% DPS GåÆ 7.2% (18% with a TP). Dragonfly: currently 98% DPS GåÆ 61% (77% with a TP). Einherji: currently 58% DPS GåÆ 3.4% (9% with a TP). Templar: currently 96% DPS GåÆ 59% (76% with a TP).
I retract my previous stance GÇö no skill bonus needed. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Leon Razor
Measure Zero
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:14:00 -
[858] - Quote
Well 16 hours and 42 pages later it's nice to see the community arguing (constructively?) over a FiS feature this time. I know something like this has been said at least once here, but I think they need to hear it again just in case they haven't gotten it yet.
CCP:
- Read this entire thread, there are reasonable suggestions here from both sides
- Make some adjustments
- Make another blog about it
- Read another 40+ page thread
- Maybe repeat this process a few times
- Then post a final list of balance changes well before the patch day
- Be prepared to make adjustments before the next big expansion
If you are really serious about listening to your player base and regaining their trust, you are going to need lots of two way communication. I know you gather a lot of info before deciding on changes like these, but you need to continue that process up to and after release. Most people feel like balance changes are simple database value updates that are easy to do, so since it's relatively quick to implement them, spend the extra time talking and listening to us, and don't wait 18 months to react.
Aside from the harsh vs effective (SC vs blob) arguments, a general issue people on both sides seem to have with these changes is that they are too flat, e.g.
- Overall HP -20% VS a variable HP nerf that considers the unique properties of each ship
- Removing all drones VS something like a smaller drone bay for non-fighters (like you did with the separate fuel cargo bays)
|
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:15:00 -
[859] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Lyrrashae wrote:ITT: Crying nullbears grieving for their "IWIN!!!!111oneone!!1" buttons.
Adapt and evolve, or GTFO.
Here is an idea. Go macro in your Orca and hulk toons and STFU. Leave the topic to people who actually have pvp experience. I literally snorted coffee out my nose, this made me laugh so hard! I have plenty of PvP experience, mate. Sov-warfare/super-blobbing is not anything I would remotely associate with actual proper PvP, at least as EVE's core-ethos defines it. So....are you going to sell off some of your bot-accounts now that supers may be worth less? Time will tell, I suppose...
lol your original post made me laugh as well. So I had to go with something extreme |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:15:00 -
[860] - Quote
You know it. CCP is so blind in order to get more subs they are willing to chop off their own nose.
Silence iKillYouu wrote:Everyone will be unsubbing there cap alts.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
|
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
216
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:15:00 -
[861] - Quote
I don't fly caps nor do I really want to anytime soon, but one thing that irks me about the changes is the general lack of creativity. Many changes seem to effect all ships of the size/class the same and none really play into racial themes at all. The changes are "easy." Nerfing and changing the ships is fine, but at least try to find a proper role for them while you're at it.
Dreads have siege mode - this is good, and the idea ought to be carried over to other capital ships. Specialized modes that fit with the theme of the ship's class.
Carriers have triage - this is bad. This role really ought to be moved to a special class of capital logistics ships. On carriers I would actually require a Theater Defense Module, which must be active in order to assign fighters to ships off-grid. Else fighters would be limitted to the grid.
Titans ought to be the ultimate mobile command platform. They should be the critical center of a large fleet. More than a bridge and a giant cannon, give them the role of as a sort of super command ship. An area of effect bonus to allied ships that are on grid with them. Also I'd like to see Doomsday removed entirely and replaced with something more useful and tricky than "big gun go boom." What if the Leviathan could field a massively powerful ECM burst? Or the Avatar had a pulse to sap a fleet's capacitors 50%? Some sort of powerful effect that could, when used at the right time, change the tide of battle. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:17:00 -
[862] - Quote
I too realize CCP is making bad choices.
Bluemelon wrote:All I am gonna say is, this is a massive **** you to the older players who have earnt their isk without RMT'ing and being whiny faggots.
Titans can be killed by 90 Hurricanes. Simple. They are balanced. Supers, are not. If I choose to put my titan stationary and in a system for 10mins for doomsdaying a ******* loki, thats my choice.
Stupid change
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:19:00 -
[863] - Quote
Leon Razor wrote:Well 16 hours and 42 pages later it's nice to see the community arguing (constructively?) over a FiS feature this time. I know something like this has been said at least once here, but I think they need to hear it again just in case they haven't gotten it yet. CCP:
- Read this entire thread, there are reasonable suggestions here from both sides
- Make some adjustments
- Make another blog about it
- Read another 40+ page thread
- Maybe repeat this process a few times
- Then post a final list of balance changes well before the patch day
- Be prepared to make adjustments before the next big expansion
If you are really serious about listening to your player base and regaining their trust, you are going to need lots of two way communication. I know you gather a lot of info before deciding on changes like these, but you need to continue that process up to and after release. Most people feel like balance changes are simple database value updates that are easy to do, so since it's relatively quick to implement them, spend the extra time talking and listening to us, and don't wait 18 months to react. Aside from the harsh vs effective (SC vs blob) arguments, a general issue people on both sides seem to have with these changes is that they are too flat, e.g.
- Overall HP -20% VS a variable HP nerf that considers the unique properties of each ship
- Removing all drones VS something like a smaller drone bay for non-fighters (like you did with the separate fuel cargo bays)
Signed |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:21:00 -
[864] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:I don't fly caps nor do I really want to anytime soon, but one thing that irks me about the changes is the general lack of creativity. Many changes seem to effect all ships of the size/class the same and none really play into racial themes at all. The changes are "easy." Nerfing and changing the ships is fine, but at least try to find a proper role for them while you're at it.
Dreads have siege mode - this is good, and the idea ought to be carried over to other capital ships. Specialized modes that fit with the theme of the ship's class.
Carriers have triage - this is bad. This role really ought to be moved to a special class of capital logistics ships. On carriers I would actually require a Theater Defense Module, which must be active in order to assign fighters to ships off-grid. Else fighters would be limitted to the grid.
Titans ought to be the ultimate mobile command platform. They should be the critical center of a large fleet. More than a bridge and a giant cannon, give them the role of as a sort of super command ship. An area of effect bonus to allied ships that are on grid with them. Also I'd like to see Doomsday removed entirely and replaced with something more useful and tricky than "big gun go boom." What if the Leviathan could field a massively powerful ECM burst? Or the Avatar had a pulse to sap a fleet's capacitors 50%? Some sort of powerful effect that could, when used at the right time, change the tide of battle.
For a pilot that doesn't fly caps, I think you just had the most creative and exciting idea in this entire thread. |
Velin Dhal
Blood Phage Syndicate The Dominion Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:22:00 -
[865] - Quote
Leon Razor wrote:Well 16 hours and 42 pages later it's nice to see the community arguing (constructively?) over a FiS feature this time. I know something like this has been said at least once here, but I think they need to hear it again just in case they haven't gotten it yet. CCP:
- Read this entire thread, there are reasonable suggestions here from both sides
- Make some adjustments
- Make another blog about it
- Read another 40+ page thread
- Maybe repeat this process a few times
- Then post a final list of balance changes well before the patch day
- Be prepared to make adjustments before the next big expansion
If you are really serious about listening to your player base and regaining their trust, you are going to need lots of two way communication. I know you gather a lot of info before deciding on changes like these, but you need to continue that process up to and after release. Most people feel like balance changes are simple database value updates that are easy to do, so since it's relatively quick to implement them, spend the extra time talking and listening to us, and don't wait 18 months to react. Aside from the harsh vs effective (SC vs blob) arguments, a general issue people on both sides seem to have with these changes is that they are too flat, e.g.
- Overall HP -20% VS a variable HP nerf that considers the unique properties of each ship
- Removing all drones VS something like a smaller drone bay for non-fighters (like you did with the separate fuel cargo bays)
Agreed
|
Psymn
Spiritus Draconis
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:22:00 -
[866] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Titans ought to be the ultimate mobile command platform. They should be the critical center of a large fleet. More than a bridge and a giant cannon, give them the role of as a sort of super command ship. An area of effect bonus to allied ships that are on grid with them. Also I'd like to see Doomsday removed entirely and replaced with something more useful and tricky than "big gun go boom." What if the Leviathan could field a massively powerful ECM burst? Or the Avatar had a pulse to sap a fleet's capacitors 50%? Some sort of powerful effect that could, when used at the right time, change the tide of battle.
Titans already do give racial boosts to their fleet. |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:23:00 -
[867] - Quote
WOW look at all the nyx's and other SC's for sale.
Titans cost 90bill on public forums atm. why shouldn't they be as good as they are?
|
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:24:00 -
[868] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:I don't fly caps nor do I really want to anytime soon, but one thing that irks me about the changes is the general lack of creativity.
You have to remember you are talking about company that used atleast 1 year of active development for a feature and after having it basically ready, realized that there is no content to for a game.
Lack of creativity indeed. |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:26:00 -
[869] - Quote
Kabaos wrote:You are crazy? Mothership without small,medium and large drones.. Yes , eve goes down..
No, your EVE goes down.
And this is a good thing. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
216
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:28:00 -
[870] - Quote
Psymn wrote:
Titans already do give racial boosts to their fleet.
Wow, that was quick!
I totally overlooked that boost. Oh well, like I said, I don't fly them. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
442
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:29:00 -
[871] - Quote
Silence iKillYouu wrote:Titans cost 90bill on public forums atm. why shouldn't they be as good as they are? Because cost is not a balancing factor and not a justification for imbalance.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
thoth rothschild
Imperial War Wolf
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:36:00 -
[872] - Quote
this change will bring back sov warefare.
The part which i like most is that without a decent support fleet your SC will be useless. No super Plexing, No Super Hot dropping noobs (You need small **** for that). I am highly pleased!
Once you will make sov warefare like
Super can not kill sub supers + Only supers can shoot stations + No damn claim units etc.
This might bring some nice sov warefare back to eve. |
Kompostor
Vanguard Frontiers Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:36:00 -
[873] - Quote
All in all I like those changes a lot, good job, CCP.
However the supercarrier nerf seems a bit too harsh. I do enjoy ratting in my Nyx and like to use use it in non-blob situations too. I really don-¦t see the harm in letting the supercarriers keep at least a small drone bay to counter a random solo Onyx pilot. I-¦m still a big, juicy target and it would be easy for a small gang to kill my drones. And it did take me a long, long time to make the billions to pay for the ship and the extra pilot. Shouldn-¦t I have the upper hand over a solo subcap? |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:37:00 -
[874] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Silence iKillYouu wrote:Titans cost 90bill on public forums atm. why shouldn't they be as good as they are? Because cost is not a balancing factor and not a justification for imbalance. My only regret is that I have but one like to give . . .
How many times do we need to say it? more expensive != more powerful
Nobody would design a game like that, if they did everyone would only go for the biggest most expensive, most powerful ship . . . oh wait . . .
This is why in strategy games (at least good ones) the basic units are not useless when the game gets going. |
Tish Magev
Nex Exercitus Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:40:00 -
[875] - Quote
Quote:Fighters - Right idea, but wrong way to implement it. All this will do is make regular carriers that much less valuable in fleet fights. If a fighter can't hit a sub cap then wth is it supposed to hit?? Simply reduce the number of fighters supers can deploy and problem is solved.
This tbh, the nerf to how many FIghters super carriers can deploy is already there with the drone bay nerf. Supers are pretty much going to have a full flight of fighter bombers in it's bay, the rest if needed could be filled with fighters.
So assume the nerf to fighters doesn't happen then the Nyx and Hel get a 50% dps reduction against subcaps (when using fighters, FBers don't do **** to subcaps and with the drone bay nerf they can't field sentries which is the bigger threat to subcap fleets). The Aeon and Wyvern get a 75% reduction in DPS against subcap fleets.
Now that's a pretty big reduction in DPS, given that most super carrier fleets consist of Nyxs (Nyx? Nyxi?) and Aeons the total super carrier fleet DPS reduction is probably around 60-66% against subcaps.
If the super have a full bay of fighters ready for a subcap fight then they make themselves vulnerable to a super cap hotdrop.
With all the changes planned imo the fighter nerf just isn't needed, drop the fighter nerf and you'll be a lot closer to a more balanced nerf and getting the desired effect. |
Anile8er
Origin. Black Legion.
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:41:00 -
[876] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Anile8er wrote:I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship. You can still dps structures as fast as 15 players in battleships, same against other capitals, and can absorb as much damage as 100 battleships. If an enemy fleet of your size and composition choose to focus you first, your sacrifice win the fleet battle.
What? Do you have any idea how fast super caps die in fleet fights?
20 SC focused on my Nyx and I'm down in just under 4 minutes, thats with my hardners on and overheated.
100 man BS gang can down me in about 2 minutes after they neut me completely of any cap and turn off my hardners.
This is the reality, for all those who cry about supercaps having "MASSIVE" EHP and being indestructable. All this talk about supercaps have 100MIL EHP! Really?
X-type buff tanks, T2 rigs, implants, not in gang, hardners on.
Hel - 25 million EHP Wyvren - 32 million EHP Nyx - 36 million EHP Aeon - 56 million EHP
Hardners off (it takes 50 BS each with a neut under 60 seconds to drain a supercap to 0 cap)
Hel - 7 million EHP Wyvren - 9 million EHP Nyx - 15 million EHP Aeon - 23 million EHP
Yeah 100 mil EHP super carriers with no weakness that just cant be killed by subcaps! right.....
|
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:42:00 -
[877] - Quote
You are missing the part where CCP needs people who unsubbed to resub. They would have done a risk assessment ( I hope ) after scribbling this LOL DEV player bull down on their handy mc donalds napkin. The risk assessment would be unsub vs sub. How many unsubbed when the north was lost ? How many unsubbed when they decided we needed fancy clothes ? THOUSANDS apone THOUSANDS. They will not tell you the number. Perception of instability creates more instability. Organizational concepts you have learned in EVE are real world concepts. They understand this very well my friends. Screw long term players we need more subs.
Feydryn wrote:This is one of THE worst balancing decisions I've ever seen in a games life cycle.
You have completely removed the counter-balance to "blob" warfare in one fell stroke.
On top of that, you've made these ships worth multiple billions of isk not worth flying at all. CCP, you have truly regressed backwards on this.
I'm fairly disgusted with your thinking process in this regard.
Yet again, you've shown favor to those that can field the most ships without any regard for the people who have spent their entire careers in-game working towards capitals and super capitals.
I can see myself easily cancelling 6 of my 7 accounts, as they are supremely and utterly useless.
Way to stick it to your veteran players CCP.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:51:00 -
[878] - Quote
Ale Tricio wrote:Again CCP just hoping to hold onto their new pubbie players by screwing those that have spent years earning their supercaps
-3 accounts
^^Let's hope this is only the beginning of some badly-needed/long-past-due herd-cuilling.
Bye! Don't let the door hit you on the way out!
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:51:00 -
[879] - Quote
Fiberton wrote:You are missing the part where CCP needs people who unsubbed to resub. They would have done a risk assessment ( I hope ) after scribbling this LOL DEV player bull down on their handy mc donalds napkin.
This theory is obviously spurious; McDonalds is not a thing in Iceland.
The more you know! |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:52:00 -
[880] - Quote
Feydryn wrote:This is one of THE worst balancing decisions I've ever seen in a games life cycle.
You have completely removed the counter-balance to "blob" warfare in one fell stroke.
On top of that, you've made these ships worth multiple billions of isk not worth flying at all. CCP, you have truly regressed backwards on this.
I'm fairly disgusted with your thinking process in this regard.
Yet again, you've shown favor to those that can field the most ships without any regard for the people who have spent their entire careers in-game working towards capitals and super capitals.
I can see myself easily cancelling 6 of my 7 accounts, as they are supremely and utterly useless.
Way to stick it to your veteran players CCP. I hate to be rude but hopefully you dont resubscribe so you can save us all from having to deal with your stupidity
How on earth are supercaps the counter to blob warfare? if anything they were a CAUSE of blob warfare because THEY were what people blobbed!
youre upset because your supercaps now have a role, before they had every role and whoever had the most won. |
|
Captain Evil
Tech 3 Constructions
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:53:00 -
[881] - Quote
Quote: Reduce drone capacity. Gùª Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Gùª Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers)
I wold like to add a Fighter Bay like the ones in the Dev blog and a Drone Bay for all the rest like 375 m3. so thay can have some but not a lot.
I like the "Logoff timer" the Dreadnoughts in Wormholes will not get a way this time. |
Elistea
G U N G N I R
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:53:00 -
[882] - Quote
Thank you CCP for listening and responding in kind.
0.0 large scale PVP will finaly open up a bit again.
(only sad thing is i wont be able to rat in carrier effectively:S)
Still GJ and keep moar balance changes comming! |
Psymn
Spiritus Draconis
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:57:00 -
[883] - Quote
Current Situation:
Cruiser tackled - LIGHT CYNO DROP SUPERS! BC tackled - LIGHT CYNO DROP SUPERS! BS tackled - LIGHT CYNO DROP SUPERS! Triage on field - LIGHT CYNO DROP SUPERS! Supers on field - LIGHT CYNO DROP MORE SUPERS!
After patch:
Cruiser tackled - burn it down with your sub caps BC tackled - burn it down with your sub caps BS tackled - burn it down with your sub caps Triage on field - try to neut it, drop your own triage or LIGHT CYNO DROP SUPERS! Supers on field - scramble the dictors and get more neuts or LIGHT CYNO DROP MORE SUPERS!
Seems like options are opening up which can only be a good thing imo.
Gotta be a shame for raiden and PL though. The two places where all the super caps congregate to protect themselves in numbers will have to think of somehting else. Im sure PL will bounce back, lets put it that way ;) |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:58:00 -
[884] - Quote
I never understood some ****** players why happy, when CCP changes to wrong direction something. Check weapon icons, 0.0 changes what need changes again because bad ideas.
Clap your hands buddies when capital nerf coming. :DDD
1. Supercarriers changes: The first problem is their too big damage output, but CCP nerfing their HP ??? 2. Unuseable Dreads still unuseable. Who want bring dreads to fight, when 300-400 supercarrier blobs moving to kill them ?
3. Fighter nerf, made carriers unusable against sub-cap fleets, but CCP say, bring carriers against subfleets. LOL We knew it always, they don't like drones and this is why they want to remove from caps. They got their chance to remove drones and say to player base, bring more man to fights instead of the drones, but everyone know that, if somebody bring more man he will bring more lag. We know supcarriers problems is their damage output and they useable with blob without support, but CCP why need nerfing fighters ??? They want to nerfing carriers too with fighter changes ???
4. Titan nerf: Old supercarriers changes made titans unusable, titan pilots using them just for titanbridges, because too dangerous using them against supercap blobs. But ccp idea more nerfing titans. LOL 3-4 supercarriers more useable than a single titan with same value. Who wanna use titans when too weak against SC hordes ? Grab HD or dictor and catch a titan without danger, because drone removing. LOL CCP read your backstories and chronicles from titans.
We know, need changes and rebalance but be smart and use brain and logic.
Supcarriers need damage nerf too for adding to chance to dread fleets. Fighter changes will make carrier nerf not just for supcarrier. (Remove fighters from supers and not need fighter nerf, but CCP your idea will succes, because supers will need support.) Need titan boost against supercarrier hordes. |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:59:00 -
[885] - Quote
Amsterdam Conversations wrote:iulixxi wrote:Adapt or die people ... nerfs are needed to balance things around.
Also would love an official answer to this: @CCP: Will the loss of 20% EHP also come with an adjustment to the respective supercarrier BPO's, thus make them use less components? As it happened with removal of the clone bay + a decrease in Capital Drone Bay requirements? (to be inline with the reduced drone bay)
Anyone? E Just curious, when they boosted them the first time, you didn't ask for them to cost 100b instead of 10b?
Where can I get a SC for 10b? Cheapest hull is 16.5b ... mins cost is, indeed, in the vicinity of 10b GǪ Requirements will have no impact on the ship cost any way GǪ people will still want to buy them.
Remember on the first nerf they removed the Cap Cone Vat Bay requirements and added fighter bombers (http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=696) GǪ the price skyrocketed. How would you explain that? - it got a boost of course ... The ship was actually cheaper to build, but it had an advantage GǪ FB.
|
Seth Darkness
Friends of Honor Initiative Mercenaries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 08:59:00 -
[886] - Quote
Is it me or with these changes people will start self-destructing they supers once they realize a fight cannot be won?
I've seen this happen a lot of time before. Changing the self destruct timer directly proportional with its mass would be a nice change.
120 sec is ok for a bs, but not for a cap.
What do you guys think? |
Stealthiest
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:05:00 -
[887] - Quote
ok, So arguably a nerf to MS and Titans needed to come. It is personal opinion that you have not only nerfed them but you basically made them completely useless. A carrier that cannot use drones? Ships that will essentially never log off. Now I have 3 characters trapped for eternity in ships that I cannot use. Not that I cannot use them but will not use them due to the log off risk and the inability of them to defend themselves.
I cannot sell them due to the massively increased numbers of supers on the forums for sale.
So the only thing I can do really is rush to get them killed. Remove all the expensive mods and replace them with t2 and go get killed.
While I hoped for something that would balance the game and get people back into the fight, I fear that you have again relegated vetern eve players to the backbenches.
I wish I had not subbed in 1 year blocks on all my accounts.
Perhaps a csaa could be used to convert the titan back into it's component parts so they can be taken back to station, melted and turned into other more usefull ships.
I hope someone in Iceland has left the lights on. This is a death knell to the game imo.
I worked very hard for 7 years to get into the end game ships and now that I am in them I wish I wasn't.
No I won't give them to you so don't ask. No I am not quitting the game yet. I am hoping for a bit of sanity before implementation of Mitani's Final Solution.
20 percent off all HP's and dd's that cannot hit subcaps would and should have been more then enough.
Next I guess you guys will turn my BPO's into BPC's in the name of balancing.
Yeah I am whining a bit but tbh this is very over the top and a knee jerk reaction.
Fly safe. |
Psymn
Spiritus Draconis
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:07:00 -
[888] - Quote
I dont mind them self-destructing. I think that this should generate a mail though. The advantage of SD at that point would be that your nyx doesnt drop the best part of its deadspace tank. |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:09:00 -
[889] - Quote
malet wrote:Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right? And does your abbadon cost 85billion isk? you are tackled by a ship of the same value, then thats fair game. If your in a titan your net dies and some random dictors finds you before you disaapear you are then stuck there being held by a ship that cost 30 million isk.. its hardly the same is it?
GÇ£And does your abbadon cost 85billion isk?GÇ¥ An officer fitted one yes, does it have a change against your 85b titan? Same price, right?
GÇ£If your in a titan your net dies and some random dictors finds you before you disaapear you are then stuck there being held by a ship that cost 30 million isk..GÇ¥ Get better net or donGÇÖt fly alone. CCP is not an ISP or an electricity provider, we are talking about balancing a ship class not preventing a natural disaster that cold (or cold not) disconnect you during an engagement.
E
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:13:00 -
[890] - Quote
I never understood some ****** players why happy, when CCP changes to wrong direction something. Check weapon icons, 0.0 changes what need changes again because bad ideas.
Clap your hands buddies when capital nerf coming. :DDD
1. Supercarriers changes: The first problem is their too big damage output, but CCP nerfing their HP ??? 2. Unuseable Dreads still unuseable. Who want bring dreads to fight, when 300-400 supercarrier blobs moving to kill them ?
3. Fighter nerf, made carriers unusable against sub-cap fleets, but CCP say, bring carriers against subfleets. LOL We knew it always, they don't like drones and this is why they want to remove from caps. They got their chance to remove drones and say to player base, bring more man to fights instead of the drones, but everyone know that, if somebody bring more man he will bring more lag. We know supcarriers problems is their damage output and they useable with blob without support, but CCP why need nerfing fighters ??? They want to nerfing carriers too with fighter changes ???
4. Titan nerf: Old supercarriers changes made titans unusable, titan pilots using them just for titanbridges, because too dangerous using them against supercap blobs. But ccp idea more nerfing titans. LOL 3-4 supercarriers more useable than a single titan with same value. Who wanna use titans when too weak against SC hordes ? Grab HD or dictor and catch a titan without danger, because drone removing. LOL CCP read your backstories and chronicles from titans.
We know, need changes and rebalance but be smart and use brain and logic.
Supcarriers need damage nerf too for adding to chance to dread fleets. Fighter changes will make carrier nerf not just for supcarrier. (Remove fighters from supers and not need fighter nerf, but CCP your idea will succes, because supers will need support.) Need titan boost against supercarrier hordes and need scriptable DD. |
|
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:16:00 -
[891] - Quote
As a proud owner of a Hel supercarrier can i get a pirate eye patch if a self destruct my ship?
By the wahy now that you are changing Supers and capitals is there a way you can boost the minmatar ones and caldari?Because they are a POS, and i'am not saying they are a player owned station either. |
WisdomLikeSilence
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:20:00 -
[892] - Quote
All changes welcome, in addition however, The Dreadnought is still not a viable ship.
Consider the difference between a Battleship and a cruiser. The battleship has Better tank and DPS, the cruiser - better speed and manoeverability.
In the similar matchup between Dreads and Supers, Supers have allt he advantages, Dreads have none. None at all.
Dreads need some advantage over Supers, and Im not sure what it should be. Perhaps simply being able to turn and burn a little faster would help. Or perhaps a further boost to their dps. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:21:00 -
[893] - Quote
1800.00 each ? How many you want ?
lol... CCP yes it is a joke.
Malcanis wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:If you blind-cyno to a beacon to jump through a gate and there are hostiles on the other side, and those hostiles are able to aggress you before your enter your ewarp, you should be stuck in space. Period. This business of people jumping places and realizing they made a mistake, then just control-qing as long as you don't have a dictor bubble up is bull. No no no you see I paid $1800 for my supercap therefore I should get a do-over when I make mistakes with it (because I am ~elite~ you see) (paying a lot of money for a ship is elite) (I paid a lot of money for a ship so I should get special treatment, just in case that wasn't made clear)
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:23:00 -
[894] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:What? Do you have any idea how fast super caps die in fleet fights?
20 SC focused on my Nyx and I'm down in just under 4 minutes, thats with my hardners on and overheated.
100 man BS gang can down me in about 2 minutes after they neut me completely of any cap and turn off my hardners.
And your own fleetmates are drinking tea while the enemy fleet has you focused?
Quote: This is the reality, for all those who cry about supercaps having "MASSIVE" EHP and being indestructable. All this talk about supercaps have 100MIL EHP! Really?
X-type buff tanks, T2 rigs, implants, not in gang, hardners on.
Hel - 25 million EHP Wyvren - 32 million EHP Nyx - 36 million EHP Aeon - 56 million EHP
Hardners off (it takes 50 BS each with a neut under 60 seconds to drain a supercap to 0 cap)
Hel - 7 million EHP Wyvren - 9 million EHP Nyx - 15 million EHP Aeon - 23 million EHP
Yeah 100 mil EHP super carriers with no weakness that just cant be killed by subcaps! right.....
The average pvp battleship has 150-200k EHP. Your Nyx would have enough HP to account for 150 of them.
If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.
If the enemy let your support fleet alive to kill your Nyx, they will lose the fight.
If you lose your Nyx after your support fleet was destroyed, then it's working as intended. |
Xue Slick
The Damned Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:25:00 -
[895] - Quote
Xue Slick wrote:Simple solution... want less super capitals on the field... make them 4 times as expensive so there is less of them?
CCP, you have made it so easy to make ISK that any Joe can get one now.
Easy changes:
- Double the bandwidth required for fighter bombers. Half the DPS and helps with system lag. - Reduce Super Carrier and Titans EHP by 20% - Increase Dreads and Carriers EHP by 20% ( Will solve your DD problem ) - Reduce the Siege cycle to 5 minutes - Remove the Drone bays as stated and buff damage to Dreads - Rework the cost of Super Capitals so less people can get into them. 2x, maybe 3x the price?
Do it CCP.
I still stand by it, the above is what CCP should do. Give Logistics some immunity to the DD if they are such a problem. |
Nomad I
University of Caille Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:25:00 -
[896] - Quote
- Give a malus to SC for the signature of fighter instead of blowing up the signature, so that you don't nerf carriers
- Give some of the dreads more cap so that they can use the dps.
- Give the dreads so much tracking, that they are able to shoot moving carriers.
|
Forlorn Wongraven
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:25:00 -
[897] - Quote
Last time when supercap changes were tested we got all our toons with all levels at 5 and supercaps as redeemable item. Please do again so we can actually test it without knowing somebody to hand over a titan on Sisi. Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
Kompostor
Vanguard Frontiers Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:25:00 -
[898] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:As a proud owner of a Hel supercarrier can i get a pirate eye patch if a self destruct my ship?
That-¦s an idea I like!
Or even better - seen that most supercarrier pilots spent a freaking long time making isk to pay for the ships and are now quite unhappy with them: Why not increase the insurance for a few days and let us selfdestruct our ships? Get-¦s the massive supercarrier blobs out of the way and will calm us hardcore players down. Yeah, I know: "Inflation, inflation" but we did sink a lot of time into them. |
iwasatoad
The Lost Disciple's
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:37:00 -
[899] - Quote
Ok this is the final straw i will be renouncing my eve charters and quit playing because ccp is now giving into even the smallest Winer's
Reason in point
Super carrirers Since day 1 my hole gole was to get into a mom get into 0.0 use the mom to make isk with as well has go out and defend space with.......
Now isk mkaing in 0.0 will be worthless if you cannot use a carrirer as i can make more in high sec running missions back to back in a nightmare
all because some one did not like the fact that some one had to grind there way up to sitting in a big ship that duh has the power to take on overwelming numbers or great deal's of time to kill
Argument point's
1 super carriers are to hard to kill..... I can link you over 20 video's of them dying in less than 15 min's so dont even try to say there to hard to kill
2 because of there vast drone bay theay have what seem's to be an unlimited supply of regular drones to kill sub cap's with... um duh what did you think carrier stood for a big shiney ship that does no damage to targets smaller than it because it would be to much reality to think that some one would put normal drones on it in case say owww i dono a little ship came at it... Get real if CCP goes through with this i could kill a mom by my self in a ammar e-war frig nute it down eventually and slowely kill it because hay it cant do any damage at all to me.. WTF
3. it should be immune to e-war as such it has such vast room to have plenty of back up systems for in case 1 goes down wonder where that idea came from .....
So in conclusion MoM's nurffed so that now you haf to fit 4 billion isk faction BS's to make more isk in 0.0 than high sec at 90 percent more risk of getting dropped on because no one is scared to come into a system beacuse all capitals are nurfed from what theay were ment to do ....
0.0 jump bridges were nerfed because it was to easy for people to move around in massive fleet's so now only 1 jump bridge per system <----- could of just reduced the ammount the jump bridge hold's so that i dont know a freighter would haf to come along to move a fleet 50 BS's verry far....
ok so while we are at it ccp here i would like to be a winer as well can u help here's my story
I cant make 30 bill isk a month in high sec because rat's are to hard to kill and bounties arnt high enougfh so i can't afford to PVP..... NOT but could you jump the bounties by about 300M isk day this update is released you will see alot of players start to drop as carrir's and mom's were main ship to use to make isk in 0.0 by killing rat's and it was riskey because you could get dropped on and pointed or bubbled slow speed and such. now you taking that factor out and making bs's that can mwd fit and just run away or warp off in a moments notice more usful ship than a dread carrir titan or mom....
yep release every thing u posted and see how menny peopple quit playing that have grinded to get where theay are or to get what theay want to just to be told oww we gave into reality |
Ramman K'arojic
Deep Black Development
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:41:00 -
[900] - Quote
CCP: Love your intent; CCP: You will probably fail.
You have provided no insentive for anybody to bring CAP to a fight; unless they bring 1 first; which they have no incentive to do so.
You need to allow someway to permit CAPS and SUB-CAPS to interact. Wether it fighters on Carries only; where they can not easly shoot small fast ships but could kill a BS with a little effort.
Otherwise you will kill the butterfly before it takes off
|
|
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:46:00 -
[901] - Quote
Ramman K'arojic wrote: allow someway to permit CAPS and SUB-CAPS to interact. Wether it fighters on Carries only; where they can not easly shoot small fast ships but could kill a BS with a little effort.
Count the capitals on both side, if the other has more than the other, dont field capitals.
Side A wont field capitals since they'd die. Side B wont field capitals since you can't do anything with them as opponent is not bringing them. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
446
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:47:00 -
[902] - Quote
iwasatoad wrote:Ok this is the final straw i will be renouncing my eve charters and quit playing because ccp is now giving into even the smallest Winer's The smallest winer's what? And what does grape farmers have to do with EVE?
Or are you saying that they're giving in to the smallest whiners? WeeellGǪ we'll see if they give in to you or not (and I'm being kind here and assuming that by GǣsmallestGǥ you mean GǣfewestGǣ so we don't have to make quips about your size).
Quote:I can link you over 20 video's of them dying in less than 15 min's so dont even try to say there to hard to kill Why would you want to provide that kind of proof when you're trying to argue the opposite? GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:52:00 -
[903] - Quote
iulixxi wrote: Where can I get a SC for 10b? Cheapest hull is 16.5b ... mins cost is, indeed, in the vicinity of 10b GǪ Requirements will have no impact on the ship cost any way GǪ people will still want to buy them.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArVlisPcgSHddGFZRGtwZ3YyT3dSUDB2YmJvQ053a2c&authkey=CKSKi7sL#gid=23
I even build for blues (but not for you, just because). |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:53:00 -
[904] - Quote
Pilk wrote:xxxak wrote:So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. We often enjoy comparing EVE SCs to the real-life ones. In this scenario, you're telling me that my USS Enterprise cannot do anything to stop some dude standing on the deck of a tugboat, vigorously slapping her across the bow with a piece of fresh mozzarella, from sinking her. I think the Enterprise's captain, if faced with a similar scenario and if saddled with a bunch of planes that for some reason cannot hit the tugboat, would climb down from the tower himself in order to shoot the tugboat captain in the face. I mean, honestly, what is your goal here? If you want to reduce the number of fights that happen in EVE, this is a great way to do it. The probability of me wanting to go into a battle we might not win just dropped to zero; at least before, I might be able to work with my fellow supers and clear off the tacklers to get more people home safely. Now I'm just committing a 20B ISK bullet-sponge. Fix the logoff timer, fine. Limit the number of drones of a given type--a little crazy, but okay. But being unable to even hit subcaps? Why am I not just flying a dread, then? One last note: it was already a PitA that you didn't give us room to carry a full flight of both FBs and fighters, along with even a single additional light drone, in any SC but the Nyx. Now that the supposed reason for that decision is gone, we're further restricted to only carrying less than a flight-and-a-half of ONE type of drone? Before you say we can swap out at will, try it. Move 125,000 m3 out to a supercarrier in a POS and back for me. Let me know how enjoyable that is, let alone doing it for a fleet of 20 supers that are deployed in hostile territory, ten jumps from the nearest friendly station. Then again, given these changes, I suppose there won't be hostile territory, let alone supercaps therein, pretty soon. --P
Also ITT:
Whinging nullbear SC pilots who are basing their complaints around the assumptions that all of EVE revolves around them, and sov-warfare, and seriously believing that the rest of us give two fucks.
Keep the tears coming, you poor, deluded, blinkered little princesses:
They keep my HM/Nano-Drake's windscreen looking like new!
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:58:00 -
[905] - Quote
Ramman K'arojic wrote:CCP: Love your intent; CCP: You will probably fail. You have provided no insentive for anybody to bring CAP to a fight; unless they bring 1 first; which they have no incentive to do so. You need to allow someway to permit CAPS and SUB-CAPS to interact. Wether it fighters on Carries only; where they can not easly shoot small fast ships but could kill a BS with a little effort. Otherwise you will kill the butterfly before it takes off Does nobody use carriers for what theyre, you know . . . intended for? why does everyone seem to use 750,000,000 isk carriers to do less damage than a 100,000,000 isk battleship?
Carriers are amazing logistics ships and are a force multiplier among subcap ships, so the progression goes like this:
1. subcap fight ensues 2. One side brings in a carrier(s) to rep their subcap fleet 3. The other side counters with dreadnaughts to kill the carrier(s) 4. The first side counters with Supercarriers to kill the dreads.
|
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 09:58:00 -
[906] - Quote
Draahk Chimera wrote:Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships. It's about fitting into a fleet. Guardians is currently extremely useful ships but you wouldn't go to a fleetfight in only guardians would you?
I'm not talking about not bringing support, I'm talking about... exactly what scenario would you say "Hey! Lets deploy supercarriers for that!". I mean.. yeah, sieging a dread might go badly, but you can lose quite a few dreads for the cost of a supercarrier.
Where does the SC fit into the fleet? Okay, it has a little bit of RR if fit as such, and dread-like damage vs capitals and Ihubs.
But you can bring the same deeps cheaper on a dread, and you bring better RR cheaper on a carrier. The only thing it really has going for it is EHP.
But it costs a lot more, and doesnt really bring a lot else to the field.
So it went from swiss army to an oversized screwdriver. Who uses oversized screwdrivers except that once a year oversized screw you find?. :-p |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:03:00 -
[907] - Quote
The problem with Super Carriers was never that they where hard to kill, it was that they could single handedly and without a support fleet, wipe the floor with any sub-cap fleet that faced it. The hit point reduction will, as has been stated earlier in the thread, simply create a greater proliferation of Titans. Your re-balance should be focused on forcing Super Capital deployment need a Sub-Capital support fleet to ensure its effectiveness rather than making people less likely to want to commit their mullti-billions investment, should they have them, or purchase a multi-billions investment should they not. Both these will impact on producers which in turn will impact on small gang PvP exacerbating the problems we alrady face in Eve. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
505
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:03:00 -
[908] - Quote
Ramman K'arojic wrote:CCP: Love your intent; CCP: You will probably fail. You have provided no insentive for anybody to bring CAP to a fight; unless they bring 1 first; which they have no incentive to do so. You need to allow someway to permit CAPS and SUB-CAPS to interact. Wether it fighters on Carries only; where they can not easly shoot small fast ships but could kill a BS with a little effort. Otherwise you will kill the butterfly before it takes off
Yeah I'm sure that not being able to hotdrop battlecruiser gangs with supers any more will "kill the butterfly". Alas, poor EVE. CCP what were you thinking when you nerfed that all-important playstyle of entire regions being empty of anything but bait-cyno Arazus and Drakes. What will happen to the butterflies now
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:04:00 -
[909] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:
Also ITT:
Whinging nullbear SC pilots who are basing their complaints around the assumptions that all of EVE revolves around them, and sov-warfare, and seriously believing that the rest of us give two fucks.
Keep the tears coming, you poor, deluded, blinkered little princesses:
They keep my HM/Nano-Drake's windscreen looking like new!
Thanks for your valued opinion, those of us who actually are involved with supercaps and sov warfare really appreciate the input of a ****-ship flying, scrublord, untermensch lowsec pirate. YARRRR!
Nullbears, lol. You spend your time in a place that forbids dictor bubbles, where sentry guns keep a watchful eye over you and a pre-aligned battleship one-shotting one of our cyno kestrels and immediately safing up constitutes adventurous pvp. Your posting in this thread is neither warranted nor tolerable, kindly get the **** out. |
Draahk Chimera
Interstellar eXodus
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:04:00 -
[910] - Quote
While changes (nerfs) to the supercapital roster is indeed welcome I do remain of the opinion that the only way to breathe new life into 0.0 warfare is to nerf remote repping. Fleets with 20 or more logistics can be nothing but negative; they promote blobbing and the homogenization of fleets, and is an absolute killer of small-but-elite fleets (such as BURN EDEN). While blobbing is to some extent the product of human nature, in a game enviroment where you cannot break a single enemy without hitting it with 100+ ships blobbing goes from an annoyance to a necessity.
Remote repping needs to be nerfed now in order to facilitate a game where people are free to bring any (useful) ship and aren't forced to train for and use artillery ships. Also with less remote repairs small-but-elite fleets can once again use teamwork and good knowlege of the game to actually hurt or even kill off much larger blobs of inexperienced players. [IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s302/nattravn/EVE/draakhchimeranaglfar.png[/IMG] |
|
Robert Lefcourt
Audentia et Artis E.B.O.L.A.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:05:00 -
[911] - Quote
As carriers can't even hit Control Towers because of fighter range, and therefore their use (apart from delivering logistics) is very limited in POS-fights, it would be a good thing, if they could get a bonus to fighter sig resolution. The 1,5-2k damage a carrier can put out, would not hurt the subcaps too much and preserve the ability to occasionally fend off some stragglers...
just my 2 cents... |
iwasatoad
The Lost Disciple's
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:06:00 -
[912] - Quote
Tippia wrote:iwasatoad wrote:Ok this is the final straw i will be renouncing my eve charters and quit playing because ccp is now giving into even the smallest Winer's The smallest winer's what? And what does grape farmers have to do with EVE? Or are you saying that they're giving in to the smallest whiners? WeeellGǪ we'll see if they give in to you or not (and I'm being kind here and assuming that by GǣsmallestGǥ you mean GǣfewestGǣ so we don't have to make quips about your size). Quote:I can link you over 20 video's of them dying in less than 15 min's so dont even try to say there to hard to kill Why would you want to provide that kind of proof when you're trying to argue the opposite?
was strictley stating my point that ccp is going to nurf the ship because of someting that does not exist ie a capital getting killed in under 15 min...
as for the whiners off ((( it's not fair theay have more capital's so we cant fight them))) duhh is that not how war's are one like some one els posted why even owne a titan or mom any more theay are usless once this up date hit's aside for taking down a station that theay wont want to show up to take down because a 50 man frig fleet could kill all of em with a few bubbles....
So you can troll all u want and say im wrong but i guess your just one of them that think's eve should become like wow and make the brain power put into battles a thing of the past
just a head's up CCP if this patch does go through you better get ready to nurf abbadon's there next then drake or hurricane then rupture then rifter but i guess that's all part of how u will end eve after all thease years.....
i was right about one thing when i got this game.... you would give into dulling the game down so bad that even a 5 year old kid could understand click here buy this go here in a line and shoot no stratigy needed |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
505
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:06:00 -
[913] - Quote
Relnala wrote:Draahk Chimera wrote:Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships. It's about fitting into a fleet. Guardians is currently extremely useful ships but you wouldn't go to a fleetfight in only guardians would you? I'm not talking about not bringing support, I'm talking about... exactly what scenario would you say "Hey! Lets deploy supercarriers for that!". I mean.. yeah, sieging a dread might go badly, but you can lose quite a few dreads for the cost of a supercarrier. Where does the SC fit into the fleet? Okay, it has a little bit of RR if fit as such, and dread-like damage vs capitals and Ihubs. But you can bring the same deeps cheaper on a dread, and you bring better RR cheaper on a carrier. The only thing it really has going for it is EHP. But it costs a lot more, and doesnt really bring a lot else to the field. So it went from swiss army to an oversized screwdriver. Who uses oversized screwdrivers except that once a year oversized screw you find?. :-p
And EW immunity. A a larger ship bay. And it does more damage. A LOT more damage even than dreadnaughts. Plus the Remote ECM burst.
But yeah, supers aren't worth flying now, sure, whatever you say buddy. I tell you what, just to help you out, I'll take your "useless" supercarrier - just the hull, no fittings - off your hands for a nice new carrier hull of your choice and 2 bill in cash. Since carriers are better than supercarriers, that's a great deal for you, right?
Send me an EVEmail and I'll arrange the deal tonight, OK? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:06:00 -
[914] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:The problem with Super Carriers was never that they where hard to kill, it was that they could single handedly and without a support fleet, wipe the floor with any sub-cap fleet that faced it. The hit point reduction will, as has been stated earlier in the thread, simply create a greater proliferation of Titans. Your re-balance should be focused on forcing Super Capital deployment need a Sub-Capital support fleet to ensure its effectiveness rather than making people less likely to want to commit their mullti-billions investment, should they have them, or purchase a multi-billions investment should they not. Both these will impact on producers which in turn will impact on small gang PvP exacerbating the problems we alrady face in Eve.
Umm, I'm pretty sure that subcap fleets kill solo SCs more often than solo SCs kill entire subcap fleets. Unless you're flying 8x officer point wyverns? |
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:08:00 -
[915] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Relnala wrote:Draahk Chimera wrote:Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships. It's about fitting into a fleet. Guardians is currently extremely useful ships but you wouldn't go to a fleetfight in only guardians would you? I'm not talking about not bringing support, I'm talking about... exactly what scenario would you say "Hey! Lets deploy supercarriers for that!". I mean.. yeah, sieging a dread might go badly, but you can lose quite a few dreads for the cost of a supercarrier. Where does the SC fit into the fleet? Okay, it has a little bit of RR if fit as such, and dread-like damage vs capitals and Ihubs. But you can bring the same deeps cheaper on a dread, and you bring better RR cheaper on a carrier. The only thing it really has going for it is EHP. But it costs a lot more, and doesnt really bring a lot else to the field. So it went from swiss army to an oversized screwdriver. Who uses oversized screwdrivers except that once a year oversized screw you find?. :-p And EW immunity. A a larger ship bay. And it does more damage. A LOT more damage even than dreadnaughts. Plus the Remote ECM burst. Yeah, supers aren't worth flying now, sure. I tell you what, I'll take your "useless" supercarrier off your hands for a nice new carrier hull of your choice and 2 bill in cash. Since carriers are better that supers, that's a bargain, right?
Have you looked at the new dread damage? Most dreads can put out about what the SC can. Theoretical, of course.
Also, I don't have an SC. Can I still have the carrier + 2bil? |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:11:00 -
[916] - Quote
"[..]mins cost is, indeed, in the vicinity of 10b[...]" You probably missed this part ... I know the production cost, direct me to a forum link where some one is selling a SC for 10b.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
446
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:12:00 -
[917] - Quote
iwasatoad wrote:was strictley stating my point that ccp is going to nurf the ship because of someting that does not exist ie a capital getting killed in under 15 min... So now you're saying that it's really a problem since capitals do not get killed in under 15 minutesGǪ Good thing they're trying to change that then.
Quote:why even owne a titan or mom any more theay are usless once this up date hit's aside for taking down a station In other words, they are not not useless, and there are plenty of reasons to own one.
Quote:So you can troll all u want and say im wrong I don't have to. You're doing it so nicely yourself. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
505
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:17:00 -
[918] - Quote
Relnala wrote:Malcanis wrote:Relnala wrote:Draahk Chimera wrote:Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships. It's about fitting into a fleet. Guardians is currently extremely useful ships but you wouldn't go to a fleetfight in only guardians would you? I'm not talking about not bringing support, I'm talking about... exactly what scenario would you say "Hey! Lets deploy supercarriers for that!". I mean.. yeah, sieging a dread might go badly, but you can lose quite a few dreads for the cost of a supercarrier. Where does the SC fit into the fleet? Okay, it has a little bit of RR if fit as such, and dread-like damage vs capitals and Ihubs. But you can bring the same deeps cheaper on a dread, and you bring better RR cheaper on a carrier. The only thing it really has going for it is EHP. But it costs a lot more, and doesnt really bring a lot else to the field. So it went from swiss army to an oversized screwdriver. Who uses oversized screwdrivers except that once a year oversized screw you find?. :-p And EW immunity. A a larger ship bay. And it does more damage. A LOT more damage even than dreadnaughts. Plus the Remote ECM burst. Yeah, supers aren't worth flying now, sure. I tell you what, I'll take your "useless" supercarrier off your hands for a nice new carrier hull of your choice and 2 bill in cash. Since carriers are better that supers, that's a bargain, right? Have you looked at the new dread damage? Most dreads can put out about what the SC can. Theoretical, of course. Also, I don't have an SC. Can I still have the carrier + 2bil?
Nyx can do 12.5k DPS. Blaster Moros now tops out at about 9k IIRC, and the other dreads rather less. That's a pretty big delta, especially when you take into account the very limited range and tank of the gank-fit dreads, plus the fact that while they're doing that damage they can't move or be repped or capped. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
iwasatoad
The Lost Disciple's
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:22:00 -
[919] - Quote
Tippia wrote:iwasatoad wrote:was strictley stating my point that ccp is going to nurf the ship because of someting that does not exist ie a capital getting killed in under 15 min... So now you're saying that it's really a problem since capitals do not get killed in under 15 minutesGǪ Good thing they're trying to change that then. Quote:why even owne a titan or mom any more theay are usless once this up date hit's aside for taking down a station In other words, they are not not useless, and there are plenty of reasons to own one. Quote:So you can troll all u want and say im wrong I don't have to. You're doing it so nicely yourself.
you are a horrible little ******* troll next time you try and quote me take thoe hole thing like tha fact than you can kill a mom in under 15 min as well as titan you little ****
like that fact that titan's and mom's will not have a use in the game becuase thay cant hurt any outher ship that show's up
Ya know what i dont have time for **** anit's for you go find a gun a pull the trigger |
Kyjaro
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:23:00 -
[920] - Quote
I can see 2 problems
- Carriers should remain deadly against sub-capitals, so give them a bonus to fighters to counter the penalty. I'm thinking about carriers ratting and the fact that carriers can be killed easily. They shouldn't have the penalty to fighters
- There should be a distinction between logging off and getting disconnected (or server down) |
|
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:24:00 -
[921] - Quote
Nyx can do 12.5k DPS. Blaster Moros now tops out at about 9k IIRC, and the other dreads rather less. That's a pretty big delta, especially when you take into account the very limited range and tank of the gank-fit dreads, plus the fact that while they're doing that damage they can't move or be repped or capped.[/quote]
3x Damage Mod Moros is about 10k DPS.
Or I guess on your theory, I should use like a 7x faction damage mod fit for numbers, since you're comparing it to a 5x DCU nyx which is about as unlikely... At which point that would be 11,750dps. Lawlz. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
446
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:26:00 -
[922] - Quote
iwasatoad wrote:you are a horrible little ******* troll next time you try and quote me take thoe hole thing I did quote the whole thing.
Quote:like tha fact than you can kill a mom in under 15 min as well as titan you little **** That wasn't what you said. You said that they were addressing something that didn't exist: SCs dying in less than 15 minutes.
Quote:Ya know what i dont have time for **** anit's for you go find a gun a pull the trigger Ok, so you thought you'd get yourself banned, now that your ship is still useful. That's logical. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
522
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:26:00 -
[923] - Quote
Kyjaro wrote:I can see 2 problems
- Carriers should remain deadly against sub-capitals, so give them a bonus to fighters to counter the penalty. I'm thinking about carriers ratting and the fact that carriers can be killed easily. They shouldn't have the penalty to fighters
Agreed. Carriers don't need the combat capability nerfed, at least not by that much; they're just not a problem in today's game.
Kyjaro wrote:- There should be a distinction between logging off and getting disconnected (or server down)
There should be but there isn't, because how can you tell the difference between a genuine disconnect and Timmy T. Titanpilot pulling the cord out of his router because he realised that he dun goofed?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:27:00 -
[924] - Quote
Kyjaro wrote:I can see 2 problems
- Carriers should remain deadly against sub-capitals, so give them a bonus to fighters to counter the penalty. I'm thinking about carriers ratting and the fact that carriers can be killed easily. They shouldn't have the penalty to fighters
Or they could just avoid senselessly nerfing fighters in the first place...
Kyjaro wrote: - There should be a distinction between logging off and getting disconnected (or server down)
People will just yank their network cables if there's an advantage in doing so. |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:29:00 -
[925] - Quote
You see that is why goons have one of the largest sc fleet in eve. |
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:29:00 -
[926] - Quote
Anyways, I think the easiest way to fix all this would simply be to make dreads unable to lock targets under 1000m sig radius while sieged, and take the tracking malus off the siege module. And maybe keep the 700% boost. And definitely keep the siege timer. Maybe even make it lower. I think the solution to supercaps is solely through boosting dreads. Not turning supercarriers into them as well. |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:32:00 -
[927] - Quote
Florestan Bronstein wrote:Pilk wrote:We often enjoy comparing EVE SCs to the real-life ones. In this scenario, you're telling me that my USS Enterprise cannot do anything to stop some dude standing on the deck of a tugboat, vigorously slapping her across the bow with a piece of fresh mozzarella, from sinking her. hmm... you think the USS Enterprise was engineered to provoke fun & interesting fights?
Both of you apparently think that EVE pixel-spaceships are even remotely comparable to R/L ocean war-ships...
|
Nomad I
University of Caille Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:35:00 -
[928] - Quote
Draahk Chimera wrote:While changes (nerfs) to the supercapital roster is indeed welcome I do remain of the opinion that the only way to breathe new life into 0.0 warfare is to nerf remote repping. Fleets with 20 or more logistics can be nothing but negative; they promote blobbing and the homogenization of fleets, and is an absolute killer of small-but-elite fleets (such as BURN EDEN). While blobbing is to some extent the product of human nature, in a game enviroment where you cannot break a single enemy without hitting it with 100+ ships blobbing goes from an annoyance to a necessity. .
Haha, someone from Burn Eden is whining masses of tears for being unable to adapt. |
Robert Lefcourt
Audentia et Artis E.B.O.L.A.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:35:00 -
[929] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Kyjaro wrote:I can see 2 problems
- Carriers should remain deadly against sub-capitals, so give them a bonus to fighters to counter the penalty. I'm thinking about carriers ratting and the fact that carriers can be killed easily. They shouldn't have the penalty to fighters Or they could just avoid senselessly nerfing fighters in the first place...
Oh, i see perfect sense in that. They want to prevent, that a mom can single-handedly take on fleets of every size and get away with it. This nerf will take care of the problem. To encounter a mixed fleet, you will need backup from now on.
Ganthrithor wrote:Kyjaro wrote: - There should be a distinction between logging off and getting disconnected (or server down)
People will just yank their network cables if there's an advantage in doing so.
That be true :-D
|
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:38:00 -
[930] - Quote
Robert Lefcourt wrote: Oh, i see perfect sense in that. They want to prevent, that a mom can single-handedly take on fleets of every size and get away with it. This nerf will take care of the problem. To encounter a mixed fleet, you will need backup from now on.
Because you see SCs deploying a lot of fighters in their current state. Wait, that was sentries and warriors. My bad.
Still think fighters should stay the same. With a decent drone bay.
|
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:40:00 -
[931] - Quote
Obviously this is a bit of a derail from the topic at hand, but I've thought for a while now that the best way to balance caps and supercaps would be to simply do to dreads what the supercap buff did to titans-- give their hulls a massive bonus to capital turret dps, remove the siege module.
This would allow dreads to do their current siege DPS without a tracking penalty (they can hit moving caps), while able to receive remote assistance (they can be repped by a carrier fleet against incoming dps), and while NOT immobilized (If the hostiles lack a proper subcap fleet, it will be difficult to keep them tackled. Primaries could also warp out + back if incoming DPS exceeds incoming reps, provided they aren't tackled).
I think this change would allow a large dreadfleet to at least stay more competitive with a supercap fleet, whereas currently even a much larger dread / carrier fleet might kill one or two hostile supercaps, but at the cost of literally all their sieged dreads. Local reps are utterly useless vs the kind of dps output provided by even a small supercap fleet, and immobilization means that dreads will simply be killed in quick succession regardless of whether the hostiles tackle them or not. Doing away with siege would help to alleviate these problems.
Of course, this would also open another can of worms-- without siege, no party is forced to really commit to a fight. Then again, under current mechanics, people almost never commit to a fight anyway, since sieging is essentially suicidal. At least the possibility of being able to field dreads without losing them all might coax more dreadfleets onto the field, providing, at minimum, more opportunities for mistakes to lead to Goodfights(TM). |
Draahk Chimera
Interstellar eXodus
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:42:00 -
[932] - Quote
Nomad I wrote:Draahk Chimera wrote:While changes (nerfs) to the supercapital roster is indeed welcome I do remain of the opinion that the only way to breathe new life into 0.0 warfare is to nerf remote repping. Fleets with 20 or more logistics can be nothing but negative; they promote blobbing and the homogenization of fleets, and is an absolute killer of small-but-elite fleets (such as BURN EDEN). While blobbing is to some extent the product of human nature, in a game enviroment where you cannot break a single enemy without hitting it with 100+ ships blobbing goes from an annoyance to a necessity. . Haha, someone from Burn Eden is whining masses of tears for being unable to adapt.
Interstellar Exodus for those unable to read. Have been shot at but never a member of Burn Eden. I used them as an example to the fact that fleets with 20+ logis cannot be hurt by small fleets no matter how pro. And it is not a matter of adapting, it is in fact the opposite of being adaptive and inventive when the only answer to a tactic is to bring a bigger blob. [IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s302/nattravn/EVE/draakhchimeranaglfar.png[/IMG] |
Jaari Val'Dara
United Warriors
51
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:42:00 -
[933] - Quote
Nerf seems nice, but there needs to be some changes: 1. Fighter nerf only applies to SC's. No need to stop carriers from fighting effectively against smaller ships. 2. Let SC's have a small drone bay, just enough to kill a single ship, not enough to be effective in a fleet fight. 3. Dreads need to get even bigger buff, 5 minute timer is probably okay, but they still need to hit capital ships effectively. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:49:00 -
[934] - Quote
Robert Lefcourt wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Kyjaro wrote:I can see 2 problems
- Carriers should remain deadly against sub-capitals, so give them a bonus to fighters to counter the penalty. I'm thinking about carriers ratting and the fact that carriers can be killed easily. They shouldn't have the penalty to fighters Or they could just avoid senselessly nerfing fighters in the first place... Oh, i see perfect sense in that. They want to prevent, that a mom can single-handedly take on fleets of every size and get away with it. This nerf will take care of the problem. To encounter a mixed fleet, you will need backup from now on.
I think you overestimate the degree to which fighters (or normal drones) from supercaps play a pivotal role in fleet fights. Even if they were used extensively, fighters are not as problematic as people keep making them out to be. They can be killed. As I keep mentioning, if people bring the right ships-- smartboming BS, bombers, or antisupport BCs (speaking of fleet diversity, remember when BCs and HACs used to be fielded alongside BS?) will *all* make short work of a fighter cloud. Once the fighters or drones are cleared, the supercapitals become deadspace-fit killmails waiting to happen. They're not like titans, where the only way to remove the dps from the field is to remove the ship. If people just kept that mind when putting together a fleet, they'd probably find it a lot easier to kill supercarriers.
E: Just to be clear, however, I do think that SCs need their normal drone bay sizes drastically reduced. Infinite waves of drones are no fun for anyone. |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
37
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:51:00 -
[935] - Quote
In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. |
|
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
77
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:53:00 -
[936] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
soem sence. can you please give teh moros its drones back as well? its short sighted to remove drones from dreads imo CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Aase Nord
Vikinghall
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:54:00 -
[937] - Quote
Thank you CCP/goons/allies/alts. Game is F.U.B.A.R
Its time for me to find an other game to spend my money on .
Bye |
Liranan
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:54:00 -
[938] - Quote
Quote:Fighters
Increase signature resolution to 400
That is seriously messed up. There is no point in nerfing fighters like this, they're rarely used in combat anyway and if you're nerfing them to prevent people from running anoms with them you are making a huge mistake there too.
Quote:Dreadnoughts Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts. Siege Module I: Boost damage bonus from 625% to 700% to compensate for loss of drones. Siege Module I: Duration time reduced to 5 minutes. Fuel cost -50%. Moros: Remove drone bonus. Moros: New bonus: 5% bonus to Capital Hybrid Turret rate of fire per level.
Do tell us how a dread uses all this new DPS when it has no cap or when the ship they're supposed to be hitting is moving. Either do something about tracking or increase super cap sig radius. I'm sure you guys never thought of this and just looked at DPS.
Please rethink the fighter nerf and nerf Titan tracking instead.
As for the Goon CSM: looking for a job at CCP? You guys are so desperate it's pathetic. http://www.youtube.com/user/zeitgeistmovie?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/23/Lio3n66bwOo This ****'s got to go - Jacque Fresco |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:55:00 -
[939] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Glad to hear there won't be a needless carrier nerf. They've already been relegated to repping pos, PVE, and hauling subcap hulls. It would have been a shame to see their utility further reduced.
I look forward to seeing what changes result from this next iteration of theorycrafting. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
450
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:56:00 -
[940] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers. Tbh, the problem is more that there are some pretty grave imbalances between the different fighters GÇö most notably that the close-orbiting ones do not have the tracking to support their own orbits (which sounds familiar somehowGǪ reminds me of a different weapon system that begins with a GÇ£bGÇ¥).
If that part was adjusted, you could probably go ahead with the proposed change and not do all that much damage to standard carriers. Yes, average DPS would be down by ~30% against battleships, but that still leaves them very capable, and if need be you could always balance that out with a sig res skill bonus.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
|
Just Another Toon
University of Caille Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:58:00 -
[941] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
nice back track... i say it again..carriers are not supposed to be offensive ships!! you bowing to the blobby carrier pilots YET AGAIN!!!! You know what why dont you just scrap the whole fecking idea! |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
78
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:59:00 -
[942] - Quote
Just Another Toon wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. nice back track... i say it again..carriers are not supposed to be offensive ships!! you bowing to the blobby carrier pilots YET AGAIN!!!! You know what why dont you just scrap the whole fecking idea!
ccp understand reason and logical arguments. wow did i actually just say that CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Tish Magev
Nex Exercitus Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:01:00 -
[943] - Quote
Quote:nice back track... i say it again..carriers are not supposed to be offensive ships!! you bowing to the blobby carrier pilots YET AGAIN!!!! You know what why dont you just scrap the whole fecking idea!
Shush, back to your bridge!
Quote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
Good move, because you know there's a nerf and then there's an obliterate it to within an inch of it's life so all it has is the fighting capability of wet doyley ..nerf. |
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:02:00 -
[944] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
You guys actually respond to critique before **** hits the fan now? WTF is happening there? You've all been replaced by aliens, are you? Stop with not giving us reasons to rage!!!11 |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:04:00 -
[945] - Quote
Many of them enjoy League of Legends. Wreck this game np..Work for LOL
BadBoyBubby wrote:Most of these changes...meh.
But reducing the drone bay on supercaps to 25 fighters/bombers max? That is seriously dumb. You've already taken out all the drones. You've nerfed fighters and fighter bombers again (how people forget so quickly) on sig radius, so they can't do much to sub caps anyway. So why reduce the drone bay capacity to the point where you can't even load a full flight of each type?? Seriously, WTF????
I'll repeat the question asked so often and never answered: DO CCP DEVS ACTUALLY PLAY EVE???
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:05:00 -
[946] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Malcanis wrote:Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!! Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it. How is it bullshit ? Sorry that my 30+ billion isk ship that I had to wait like half a year to build and took me 4 years of training to get in can instantly destroy your 10 cent frigate. I mean seriously, what am I thinking its so unfair of me. Why would I ever assume that time and money could buy power in a game running on a capitalist economy ? To make me even more of a bad guy, why would I assume that my hard earned money and dedicated skill training would give me the right to fly ships untouchable by someone with less skills and dedication than me ? I'm so ashamed of myself
I must say this is pure right on the dot for all super capital players. CCP you need to look at this post and understand frustrations by our community the super capital community. Bowing down to guys who fly battlecruisers and frigates and swarms and did not have the patience or the time and dedication to train for those super capitals in game. Thank you for wasting players time to train these ships and destroy as a whole a community that was over a years worth of training. CCP you fail!
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:05:00 -
[947] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Lyrrashae wrote:
Also ITT:
Whinging nullbear SC pilots who are basing their complaints around the assumptions that all of EVE revolves around them, and sov-warfare, and seriously believing that the rest of us give two fucks.
Keep the tears coming, you poor, deluded, blinkered little princesses:
They keep my HM/Nano-Drake's windscreen looking like new!
[Over-inflated sense of own importance ****-poster predictability]
Thank you for just proving every point I've tried to make.
No, you don't matter to the other 85+ per cent of the paying customer-base, arse-bag.
Go choke on your own **** and die, you self-important toddler, I'm not even going to start with this utterly disgusting ******* garbage you're spewing. "Untermensch?" Oh, ******* champion, you complete and utter imbecile. Tell me, what's it like being a bad joke?
|
Just Another Toon
University of Caille Gallente Federation
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:06:00 -
[948] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet!
Now im angry |
Nocturrne Primitive
Cloak and Daggers Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:07:00 -
[949] - Quote
Most of the changes look like a step in the right direction, but this indirectly nerfs carriers and leaves dreads broken. Removing some dps from one place and adding it back to another, leaves dreads just as useless as they are now. Normal capitals are within the reach of the average player and a nice goal for many people, if they were useful. It's the supers and titans that need to be nerfed.
Regards |
Usurpine
Galactic Defence Consortium United Pod Service
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:07:00 -
[950] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Uh, i cant believe, but ccp is reading this. I need to change my mind about ccp. This looks good. Well done. Please go on ! |
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:08:00 -
[951] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later.
While I somewhat agree with you: Some of us flew them before they were buffed, you know..
And I like how CCP wants to nerf the raw HP on supers. Quite short-sighted, maybe they have forgotten what happened before they got their HP buff in the first place? When new DD and FB hit SiSi, we had motherships dying to 3-4 DD's and/or a few moms. My own Aeon on SiSi, still oldschool fit tho with triple CCC and dual rep, died to a few doomsdays and a single Nyx on SiSi in very very short time. That was before the big titan/mothership spam we saw after that.
Given how some entities easily field 50+ supers, you'll probably see them volley 5-10 supers on their initial jump-in.
I'm one of those who flew supers before they were boosted, during the boost, and I've piloted multiple different supers both in small-, medium- and big scale combat. I'm one that agrees they needed a nerf. But nerfing the hitpoints and sub-fighter bay is ********, the only nerf titans and motherships needed was to Doomsdays and FB's. The damage output is the only real issue. That'd be another nice little boost to Dreads as well.
Edit; Oh and don't forget we'll now be able to tackle them infinately, so the HP nerf makes even less sense. It's only gonna make them easier to volley for the other superblob. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
ANGAL 2000
FinFleet Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:08:00 -
[952] - Quote
this is a act to kill super carrier you have 3000 toons in super carriers if not more and their useless let them dock.
they will get used after the patch and the ppl using them can use them for more then sitting in a pos waiting to die
LET SUPER CARRIER DOCK
|
Xue Slick
The Damned Legion
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:08:00 -
[953] - Quote
Just Another Toon wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet! Now im angry
And clearly a little touched... Carriers are perfect where they are. Cost to ability is about the best in the game. |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
78
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:09:00 -
[954] - Quote
Just Another Toon wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet! Now im angry
carriers are balanced, this change unbalances them and its good that it was reverted before it hit tq.
why dont you get that? you havnt flown a carrier have you? CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Furb Killer
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:16:00 -
[955] - Quote
Quote:Do tell us how a dread uses all this new DPS when it has no cap or when the ship they're supposed to be hitting is moving. Cap? Fit cap rechargers? CCC rigs if you want even.
And it would be nice if this myth that dreads cant hit orbiting supers would finally die. I would do the math again, but i cant be bothered. Serious just pick a dread from EFT and a supercarrier, do them in a damage graph. Sure if it orbits you at 500m you cant hit it, but if we talk about realistic fleet fights then both the dreads and the SCs will be spread, there is no way to orbit all dreads at clsoe range. And if you orbit at 10km distance the dreads do like 90% of their dps.
If we talk about ganking a super, with only a couple of dreads present, then you can also make sure the SC isnt orbiting your dreads at close range by bumping him.
The only result of boosting dread tracking is that they will start to dominate webbed/painted battleships at normal ranges. |
Evil Celeste
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:17:00 -
[956] - Quote
Stupid question : It is really that hard to adjust orbit ranges for fighters, so they can hit battleships "just fine" - lets say for 100% of dps with 2 target painters - but make them unable to seriously hurt sub bs ships?
Another question : Wouldnt be the easiest way to lower the performance gap between armor and shield caps simply making slave sets to not affect capitals, making bonus shield ehp from leadership or titan to take effect immediately and slightly lowering the cpu needs for cap shield transfers?
3rd question : Why are supercarriers capable of using ALL of their special bonuses in lowsec? Titans cant be build in lowsec - they cant fire dd in lowsec. No supercaps ca be build in wh space - they cant even enter. Supercarriers cant be build in lowsec - they can use ALL of their special abilities there... It would make perfect sense if they lost their point immunity in lowsec, especially if you take into account, how much harder is to keep mom tackled by focused point compared to bubble and how useless are hics in lowsec for anything else but pointing moms. |
Othran
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
57
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:17:00 -
[957] - Quote
As you're removing logoffski can you go a little further and remove the ability to initiate self-destruct while aggressed please?
You need to do this otherwise the :goodfights: you anticipate will not happen. The target will simply self-destruct if he can't logoff. It happens far too often now, but it'll be happening a lot more with your changes.
Simple change - you cannot self-destruct while aggressed. |
Shade Millith
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:18:00 -
[958] - Quote
Just Another Toon wrote:You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet!
Now im angry
Carriers do not need a nerf. He is backing down from an accidental nerfing of a ship type that didn't need it. |
Angel Lust
Vikinghall
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:19:00 -
[959] - Quote
CCP Why are you doing this ? Do you want so many to ragequit that lag isnt a problem anymore maby ? Well.... You got me.. |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:19:00 -
[960] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
You are my hero if you fix minmatar caps ;D |
|
ThaWolf
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:21:00 -
[961] - Quote
Maybe instead of nerving we should rather redo the Super-carrier as a whole, after reading this thread, i think they are not fitting in the game as they are, overpowered on one hand, mainly in larger groups, and close to useless if they get nerved that way, while the character is stuck in it.
So i came up with that:
New role, high end toy for all ppl who like to fly Caps, can do much but nothing Overpowered.
- Fighter Bombers will be pure Anti-Structure Weapons, bombing range 35km, anti Pos too, dmg should be like 2 Dreads
- Fighters stay like they are pre-nerv, the SCs should do Damage like 2 Carriers
- Drone bay gets nerved to 1 Bomber set 1 Fighter set and ~500m3 (yeah still normal Drones)
- SC cant use Remote repair mods, they should be only for Standard Carriers.
- ECM immunity stays
- remote ECM stays
- All SCs should be balanced to the defense Capabilities of a NYX (which i think is the most balanced EHP for SCs)
- balance production price of all SCs to the same amount
- SCs should be able to dock as a Compensation, and to make it possible that more ppl rely want to own them, so more can be killed |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:22:00 -
[962] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Tallest dev = best dev |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
452
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:22:00 -
[963] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Stupid question : It is really that hard to adjust orbit ranges for fighters, so they can hit battleships "just fine" - lets say for 100% of dps with 2 target painters - but make them unable to seriously hurt sub bs ships? It's tricky because it's the same variables on a continuous sliding scale GÇö making it possible to hit BS for 100% damage will pretty much automatically mean that you can hit sub-BS for roughly 20-30% damage. Whether that qualifies as "seriously hurt" is up for debate (yes, it's lower damage, but on the other hand, they have less HP).
It's not really a mechanic that lets you completely cut off the damage application when the differences in ship sizes are as small as they are. BS to frigate works, because by then, we're talking about a factor of 10 GÇö BS to cruiser (or, worse, BS to BC) is only a factor of 1-+GÇô3, and that's not enough to make a sizeable difference. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Bluemelon
Polaris Rising PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:23:00 -
[964] - Quote
As good as the response is: Still not solved the issue of making titans nothing but logistics ships now. 70bn in a logistics ship isnt worth it. They are the most powerful ship in game, and need massive support behind them for a reason.
stop making them useless |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
135
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:27:00 -
[965] - Quote
Just Another Toon wrote:You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet!
If Carriers are intended to be logistics ships, why are they called "carriers"? They have fighters, not just drones. Please reassess your assumptions.
I'd like to see fighters have their signature resolution bumped a little, so that fighters will be ineffective against cruisers. Rather than bumping them from 125m to 400m, a bump up to 200m should be enough: remember that fighters are also moving, which impacts on their chance to hit in the first place as opposed to Sentry drones for example, which have a resolution of 400m but are stationary.
The next step up from cruisers is battlecruisers, with sig radiuses between 240-280m (not including sig bloom from shield extender modules, shield extender rigs, T2 ammo etc). If you pack shield extenders onto a battlecruiser, expect to get smacked about by fighters. That's a consequence of a decision that you made.
If you're flying a carrier and want to get rid of those pesky HICs and EWAR cruisers, bring a support fleet.
Which reminds me: CCP should be removing EWAR immunity and replacing it with existing game mechanics, not adding EWAR immunity to more ships. Capital and super capital ships should get their "immunity" to EWAR through base stats of the hull and support from other ships in their fleet, not through specific game mechanics that only apply to those ships.
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:28:00 -
[966] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Lyrrashae wrote:
Also ITT:
Whinging nullbear SC pilots who are basing their complaints around the assumptions that all of EVE revolves around them, and sov-warfare, and seriously believing that the rest of us give two fucks.
Keep the tears coming, you poor, deluded, blinkered little princesses:
They keep my HM/Nano-Drake's windscreen looking like new!
[Over-inflated sense of own importance ****-poster predictability] Thank you for just proving every point I've tried to make. No, you don't matter to the other 85+ per cent of the paying customer-base, arse-bag. Go choke on your own **** and die, you self-important toddler, I'm not even going to start with this utterly disgusting ******* garbage you're spewing. "Untermensch?" Oh, ******* champion, you complete and utter imbecile. Tell me, what's it like being a bad joke?
umad bro?
So you get to call me a whinging, nullbear, poor, deluded, blinkered little princess, but if I call you an irrelevant and ill-informed nobody, you get pissy? How is that fair?
Don't shoot the messenger |
Drop Dead Sexy
University of Caille Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:28:00 -
[967] - Quote
as a sub cap pilot, lo sec roamer i second this nerf, thank you dev's, any chance on forbidding titans in low sec??? titan alfa kills are very annoying and must be looked at. super cap hot drops on a single ship becoming more and more popular taking away all chances of survival for solo warrior. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:29:00 -
[968] - Quote
Lorren Canada wrote:Misanth wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:I'll rephrase, what specifically are the roles of each class of capital ship combat wise? It kinda feels like this is a very reactionary (although necessary change) that lacks the *vision* needed to be understood by us. It's exactly what it is. Nerfing hp after buffing hp when it was needed. Not nerfing damage when the damage boost was causing the issue. Removing drones when they did nothing to make the ship overpowered or not. TL;DR CCP have no clue what to do with supers, they just blantantly take populistic decisions. If CCP really looked at the issue with supers (titans as well as moms doing high damage), and thought through if they needed a damage role or not, they'd start nerfing those aspects. I.e. FB's, tracking links/guns and DD on titan. But no, they went with random populistic changes that makes no sense, and still not having a role for the ships. What do you know about supers? Go back to mining ice with your buddies so we can gank them again.
More than you ever will know, I guess. I farmed you guys, with my main then in Cry Havoc, in Placid lowsec when your alliance entered the game. I flew several supers across multiple chars for years, way before they were boosted in the first place for one. As for this alliance I'm currently in, I have zero kills or losses and only been on one combat op. And I never mined ice or been on an ice mining op.. You'll have to ask my CEO why we're flying with them. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:30:00 -
[969] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
If you undo the fighter change, what are you going to do about supercarriers using fighters to kill battleships and battlecruisers?
How about you restrict supercarriers to bombers only? That would give normal carriers a specific offensive role, while keeping the apparent intent of those changes to make supercarriers an anti-cap, anti-structure platform. |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:31:00 -
[970] - Quote
I like most of the proposed changes, +1 to keep the fighters the way they are, if you want to nerf them on supers, add a "bonus" for supercarriers instead.
The removal of dronebays on other caps is understandable, even though its a bit drastic. You ppl have to understand that capitals ships are highly specialized equipment, and they are for destroying stationary structures and other caps mostly.
To the ones whining that their 30 bil ship is useless now: Your ship and 4 years of training shouldn't give you a BETTER ship, it should give you a DIFFERENT one.
The dread buff is a good start, but a little bit more love is needed. |
|
Di Mulle
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:33:00 -
[971] - Quote
iwasatoad wrote:Ok this is the final straw i will be renouncing my eve charters and quit playing because ccp is now giving into even the smallest Winer's
Reason in point
Super carrirers Since day 1 my hole gole was to get into a mom get into 0.0 use the mom to make isk with as well has go out and defend space with.......
Now isk mkaing in 0.0 will be worthless if you cannot use a carrirer
Your hole gole was 100% wrong from the very beginning. Noo need to continue even.
CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
Kern Walzky
x13 Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:33:00 -
[972] - Quote
ANGAL 2000 wrote:this is a act to kill super carrier you have 3000 toons in super carriers if not more and their useless let them dock.
they will get used after the patch and the ppl using them can use them for more then sitting in a pos waiting to die
LET SUPER CARRIER DOCK
i agree... let them dock |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:35:00 -
[973] - Quote
Crowd: NEFF SUPERS NOW
CCP: Ok
*removes ability of supers main weapons to hit subcaps*
Crowd: WAIT NOW I CAN'T RUN SANCTUMS IN MAH CARRIER. SUPERS AREN'T SO BAD PUT IT BACK THE OTHER WAY
CCP: Retards |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
78
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:36:00 -
[974] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
If you undo the fighter change, what are you going to do about supercarriers using fighters to kill battleships and battlecruisers? How about you restrict supercarriers to bombers only? That would give normal carriers a specific offensive role, while keeping the apparent intent of those changes to make supercarriers an anti-cap, anti-structure platform.
fighters do crap damage against full passive bc's with massive sigs, so meh thats balanced. yeh they hurt bs's, there ment too. fighter bombers effectly can only shoot ihubs stations and sbu's as it is, so why would you wnat to compleatly screw a whole ship class?
mom balance is ok as this now stands CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
129
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:38:00 -
[975] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. 11/10
I still have a reservation, I think my fundamental question is, why would you fly a dread over a Titan, if cost wasn't an issue? It relates to roles, and the performance of these ships when roles are considered. If the answer is, you wouldn't fly a dread over a titan if they cost the same, do you think that's an issue or not? Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Forlorn Wongraven
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:39:00 -
[976] - Quote
Hentes Zsemle wrote:I like most of the proposed changes, +1 to keep the fighters the way they are, if you want to nerf them on supers, add a "bonus" for supercarriers instead.
A negative bonus is called malus.
Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
216
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:40:00 -
[977] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Just Another Toon wrote:You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet! If Carriers are intended to be logistics ships, why are they called "carriers"? They have fighters, not just drones
Thank you. I get so tired of reading this carrier = logistics ship garbage. Carriers are carriers. Carriers are meant to launch fighters that pew pew things. I don't think Triage should even be a function of carriers. It's an unnecessary, tacked-on feature that doesn't fit the role of the ship. |
Baneken
The New Knighthood Apocalypse Now.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:41:00 -
[978] - Quote
Over all changes are good, though I would prefer to allow moms to still have their drones but limit the number to usual five along with a separate drone bay that can hold a 10 maybe more heavy drones. DCU's would wok with this limit ofc. but who is going put 5 DCUs in their mom ?
As for Dreads they should be able to still field drones, especially since it makes Moros a unique in it's class with drone bonuses and we all like unique ships. Besides AFAIK drones cannot be used while in siege anyway so drone dps is a rather moot when it comes to siege but they are very important part of a dread being able to do anything against sub capitals.
And Carriers really should have drone bonuses since they are meant to be support ships as well as drone ships. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin. Black Legion.
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:42:00 -
[979] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Thank you. I get so tired of reading this carrier = logistics ship garbage. Carriers are carriers. Carriers are meant to launch fighters that pew pew things. I don't think Triage should even be a function of carriers. It's an unnecessary, tacked-on feature that doesn't fit the role of the ship.
Carrier carries my ships around when I move from one region to another. Other than that, it's fighters barely do more DPS than a gank fit BS. |
Evil Celeste
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:43:00 -
[980] - Quote
Tippia wrote:It's tricky because it's the same variables on a continuous sliding scale GÇö making it possible to hit BS for 100% damage will pretty much automatically mean that you can hit sub-BS for roughly 20-30% damage. Whether that qualifies as "seriously hurt" is up for debate (yes, it's lower damage, but on the other hand, they have less HP).
It's not really a mechanic that lets you completely cut off the damage application when the differences in ship sizes are as small as they are. BS to frigate works, because by then, we're talking about a factor of 10 GÇö BS to cruiser (or, worse, BS to BC) is only a factor of 1-+GÇô3, and that's not enough to make a sizeable difference.
Today, if you are in cruiser doing 300m/s with mwd turned off - they will just slowboat after you and hit you with most of their dps. If you stop, they will outtrack some of their dps - but try sitting still in the middle of the fight with cruiser... Hell, they will hit even your stealth bomber if you are slowboating with mwd off.
Othran wrote:Simple change - you cannot self-destruct while aggressed. I-¦m ok with self destructing while aggressed, but i personally would increase time needed to sd supercarrier to 30+ minutes. Funny it takes same time to self destruct 50m big punisher and 12k big mom.
|
|
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises BricK sQuAD.
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:43:00 -
[981] - Quote
Another is walking in stations. Anyone remember 2006 ?
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:Jada Maroo wrote:I don't fly caps nor do I really want to anytime soon, but one thing that irks me about the changes is the general lack of creativity. You have to remember you are talking about company that used atleast 1 year of active development for a feature and after having it basically ready, realized that there is no content to for a game. Lack of creativity indeed.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Mashie Saldana
Veto. Veto Corp
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:43:00 -
[982] - Quote
Very good changes CCP, now don't bloody backtrack just because I decided to resub. [Insert signature image here] |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:43:00 -
[983] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Lyrrashae wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Lyrrashae wrote:
Also ITT:
Whinging nullbear SC pilots who are basing their complaints around the assumptions that all of EVE revolves around them, and sov-warfare, and seriously believing that the rest of us give two fucks.
Keep the tears coming, you poor, deluded, blinkered little princesses:
They keep my HM/Nano-Drake's windscreen looking like new!
[Over-inflated sense of own importance ****-poster predictability] Thank you for just proving every point I've tried to make. No, you don't matter to the other 85+ per cent of the paying customer-base, arse-bag. Go choke on your own **** and die, you self-important toddler, I'm not even going to start with this utterly disgusting ******* garbage you're spewing. "Untermensch?" Oh, ******* champion, you complete and utter imbecile. Tell me, what's it like being a bad joke? umad bro? So you get to call me a whinging, nullbear, poor, deluded, blinkered little princess, but if I call you an irrelevant and ill-informed nobody, you get pissy? How is that fair? Don't shoot the messenger
Way to miss the point, trailer-trash.
You lost any credibility you may have had (theoretical, anyway--you actually had/have none, regardless) with the use of "Untermensch," too by the way.
Get a clue, you mong.
0/10, keep practising. |
M1AU
Rheintal Underground Rising
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:45:00 -
[984] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Just Another Toon wrote:You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet! If Carriers are intended to be logistics ships, why are they called "carriers"? They have fighters, not just drones. Please reassess your assumptions. I'd like to see fighters have their signature resolution bumped a little, so that fighters will be ineffective against cruisers. Rather than bumping them from 125m to 400m, a bump up to 200m should be enough: remember that fighters are also moving, which impacts on their chance to hit in the first place as opposed to Sentry drones for example, which have a resolution of 400m but are stationary. The next step up from cruisers is battlecruisers, with sig radiuses between 240-280m (not including sig bloom from shield extender modules, shield extender rigs, T2 ammo etc). If you pack shield extenders onto a battlecruiser, expect to get smacked about by fighters. That's a consequence of a decision that you made. If you're flying a carrier and want to get rid of those pesky HICs and EWAR cruisers, bring a support fleet. Which reminds me: CCP should be removing EWAR immunity and replacing it with existing game mechanics, not adding EWAR immunity to more ships. Capital and super capital ships should get their "immunity" to EWAR through base stats of the hull and support from other ships in their fleet, not through specific game mechanics that only apply to those ships.
To the proposals in the initial blog post, I would fully support these proposals. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
148
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:46:00 -
[985] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote:Misanth wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:I'll rephrase, what specifically are the roles of each class of capital ship combat wise? It kinda feels like this is a very reactionary (although necessary change) that lacks the *vision* needed to be understood by us. It's exactly what it is. Nerfing hp after buffing hp when it was needed. Not nerfing damage when the damage boost was causing the issue. Removing drones when they did nothing to make the ship overpowered or not. You cant nerf the FB damage because the role of a supercarrier is to deal a lot of damage. They are anti sov dps plattforms and now they finally become this and not more. The hp nerf is actually pretty small but its going to have his effect with the log off changes. Oh and just for the records: If you lose a Supercap to "a single hic" or a very, very small gang that means: you werent able to get some friends to come along for whatever you're doing andyou werent able to figure out why this funny fitting you got from this wiki has neutralizer on it andyou are unable to use a decent fit andyou dont know a single person who could help you organise some backup andyou were stupid enough to get your SC in a combat situation under this circumstances; then holy ******* **** you deserve whats comming to you. Every ship in EVE has a role, every fleettype has a counter, the only ships that didnt fit into this were supercaps. Welcome back to (space)earth.
There's usually no reason to reply to you trolls (as is it's nature), but I'll make an exception since you are cute:
* The motherships never had a "damage role", they were given one in the changes a few years ago. Half their lifetime they been a logistic platform. And the damage role was unbalanced, the other was too weak, so you try find the issue here.. * Yup, they key is they "have become", but they were not initially, nor did they ever have such an outspoken role. * The hp nerf is enough to have a few titans + moms volley a super. Fielding 50+ supers (like most bigger entities can), they can easily dispatch of 5-10 supers in a few seconds.
Oh and for the record, if you lose a supercap to a single hic or a very very small gang, I agree with you that you as pilot did errors and deserve to die, I never argued against this (and this is not the reason they should keep their sub-fighter bay). The reason they should keep the sub-fighter bay is because a) FB's are ridicilously overpowered and should be removed b) Fighters are really weak, I personally solo-killed six of a Nyx Fighters while kiting them around in my Nighthawk, until he gave up, pulled the rest and warped off, they're underwhelming at best c) sentry drones serve a purpose when shooting POS. I'd agree point c is quite minor, but the first two is primary reasons, so your assumption about my reasons for arguing for a dronebay is quite wrong. If Fighters worked against POS and wasn't so easily kited, all motherships would need was Fighters. Drop FB and regular drones altogether. But that'd require a boost to mothership-Fighters (not affecting carriers).
So to get back to topic, before your assumptions pull this off the line again: Motherships had a logistic role. They were given a damage role but obviously went too powerful. I think anyone with half a brain would realise that in anything from those big fleet fights, to the smaller hotdrops and skirmishes, the mothers' would never been considered "too powerful" if they had Fighters alone, right? And FB's were never needed, they were given as an incentitive to put them on the combat field, not to actually have a combat role.
With the log-off changes, a EHP nerf is not needed at all. And frankly speaking, if you ever flew a super and have been tackled/shot at (especially by other supers), you know how they are virtually made of paper. Subcaps can and will kill supers already today. That EHP nerf is just gonna make the FB/DD/Titan guns even more powerful and unbalanced, and is not even addressing a) the ships role or b) the real issue that makes them overpowered. Which is the damage, not their health. And the health, once again as I just posted, has already had a major hit by the log-off timer (a good addition). Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
78
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:48:00 -
[986] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:
Get a clue, you mong.
lmao, my little boy just started saying this. i know i shouldnt laugh when he says it, but i cant help myself CCP-áare full of words and no action. We watch what they do and its nothing but false statements and lies.
|
Liranan
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:48:00 -
[987] - Quote
Furb Killer wrote:Quote:Do tell us how a dread uses all this new DPS when it has no cap or when the ship they're supposed to be hitting is moving. Cap? Fit cap rechargers? CCC rigs if you want even. And it would be nice if this myth that dreads cant hit orbiting supers would finally die. I would do the math again, but i cant be bothered. Serious just pick a dread from EFT and a supercarrier, do them in a damage graph. Sure if it orbits you at 500m you cant hit it, but if we talk about realistic fleet fights then both the dreads and the SCs will be spread, there is no way to orbit all dreads at clsoe range. And if you orbit at 10km distance the dreads do like 90% of their dps. If we talk about ganking a super, with only a couple of dreads present, then you can also make sure the SC isnt orbiting your dreads at close range by bumping him. The only result of boosting dread tracking is that they will start to dominate webbed/painted battleships at normal ranges.
This is the problem with the game, people who've never flown a ship whine so much that devs listen to them.
Now, why don't you fly a dread a few times and watch those lovely guns miss a pos and then tell us your maths. You ever seen a Sieged Moros barely hit an iHub? No? Those guns barely track targets the size of a star, let alone a moving target
But maths don't lie! http://www.youtube.com/user/zeitgeistmovie?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/23/Lio3n66bwOo This ****'s got to go - Jacque Fresco |
Mona X
Missions Mining and Mayhem Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:48:00 -
[988] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[quote=CCP Tallest] (which sounds familiar somehowGǪ reminds me of a different weapon system that begins with a GǣbGǥ).
I too think, that Auroras should have their tracking penalty removed. :) Winter Expansion is Coming. |
Liranan
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:52:00 -
[989] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Thank you, it's good to see you guys listening to your players, shame it takes thousands of people leaving the game for CCP to take notice.
I do think you guys shoot once again look at Selene's original MS/SC proposals. That was far more balanced than what we have today. http://www.youtube.com/user/zeitgeistmovie?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/23/Lio3n66bwOo This ****'s got to go - Jacque Fresco |
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:54:00 -
[990] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Why not go through with this nerf and give carriers a boost to fighters pr fighter level, meaning they would still be viable for use, while still reducing what supers could kill with them? |
|
Johnny3Tears
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:56:00 -
[991] - Quote
Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right?
You could always pop drones ie, Web drones and pop him. |
Acwron
Anormalii S.A. Vera Cruz Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:56:00 -
[992] - Quote
I recommend to all drake pilots to read this locked thread.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53327#post53327
This post is a pamphlet and should be treated as such.
Nerfing supers and titans is the worst thing you can do...boost others, don't nerf the BIGGEST SHIPS in the GAME ! I didn't spend gazillions of years training for them and now see them good for taking pictures with.
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Universal Consortium
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:56:00 -
[993] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Lyrrashae wrote:
Get a clue, you mong.
lmao, my little boy just started saying this. i know i shouldnt laugh when he says it, but i cant help myself
(/me chuckles) Hey, why not? It's a great little word
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:57:00 -
[994] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
Are you sure you're not bringing the game back to 2007-2008, replacing the super carrier blob with the equally boring carrier blob?
Logically a carrier can field: light drones against frigates medium drones against cruisers/battlecruisers heavy/sentry drones against battleships
fighters against ... what ?
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:58:00 -
[995] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Why not go through with this nerf and give carriers a boost to fighters pr fighter level, meaning they would still be viable for use, while still reducing what supers could kill with them?
Why even penalize SCs use of fighters? You realize that a SC's fighter dps output is only equal to 2 carriers' worth, right? It's not exactly game-breaking, outlandish dps capabilities you're talking about. |
Frabba
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 11:59:00 -
[996] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
Are you sure you're not bringing the game back to 2007-2008, replacing the super carrier blob with the equally boring carrier blob? Logically a carrier can field: light drones against frigates medium drones against cruisers/battlecruisers heavy/sentry drones against battleships fighters against ... what ?
Equally boring, nowhere near as hard to kill. its me im the best poster. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
452
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:00:00 -
[997] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Why even penalize SCs use of fighters? You realize that a SC's fighter dps output is only equal to 2 carriers' worth, right? It's not exactly game-breaking, outlandish dps capabilities you're talking about. Because it still makes them too good against subcaps. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:01:00 -
[998] - Quote
Othran wrote:As you're removing logoffski can you go a little further and remove the ability to initiate self-destruct while aggressed please?
You need to do this otherwise the :goodfights: you anticipate will not happen. The target will simply self-destruct if he can't logoff. It happens far too often now, but it'll be happening a lot more with your changes.
Simple change - you cannot self-destruct while aggressed.
That's the whole point of having the Self-destruct You seem very mad that you don't get a killmail.
|
malet
FinFleet Raiden.
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:02:00 -
[999] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:malet wrote:Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right? And does your abbadon cost 85billion isk? you are tackled by a ship of the same value, then thats fair game. If your in a titan your net dies and some random dictors finds you before you disaapear you are then stuck there being held by a ship that cost 30 million isk.. its hardly the same is it? GÇ£And does your abbadon cost 85billion isk?GÇ¥An officer fitted one yes, does it have a change against your 85b titan? Same price, right? GÇ£If your in a titan your net dies and some random dictors finds you before you disaapear you are then stuck there being held by a ship that cost 30 million isk..GÇ¥Get better net or donGÇÖt fly alone. CCP is not an ISP or an electricity provider, we are talking about balancing a ship class not preventing a natural disaster that cold (or cold not) disconnect you during an engagement. DonGÇÖt fly anything you canGÇÖt afford to loseGǪ Once you jumped into a fight you have to be aware that there is a chance of losing your ship, unlike now GǪ you jump 200 supers -> launch fighters -> go watch a movie -> come back -> jump out. Win E
Im not talking about an ISP, EVE is renowned in large fleet fights for random DC`s followed by staring at entering space for hours while the servers decide whether to log you in or not. As for flying what I cant afford to lose then think again.
Fact is that eve is notoriuos for crashing in large fleet fights so whats your answer to that? Are we supposed to just swallow the usual CCP BS " our logs show nothing out of the ordinary followed by the standard copy paste petition response because no body actually bothers to look into a petition , more likely they just like to put it to the side and hope it goes away!
if you are going to fly a officer fit abaddon worth 85bill then please please for the love of god come visit so I can dd you before the nerf!
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
136
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:02:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:I'm not sure how suggesting their drone capacity be reduced from ~1750 to 60 counts as "suggesting they be left as they are," but by all means feel free to explain your logic to us.
Fighters are 5000m3. If super carriers are allowed to carry drones too, you only have to drop 1 fighter in order to have a stock of 1000 light drones or 200 sentries.
Thus in order to prevent super carriers having something approaching an "infinite" supply of drones with which to smash cruisers, they need to lose their ability to field drones.
Is that logic simple enough to follow?
|
|
Kern Walzky
x13 Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:02:00 -
[1001] - Quote
why dont you give dreads in siege a range bonus? and half the trackingpenalty OR fix the bumping by fixing the warpin mechanics on capital ships... its really anoying to bumb... you dont even need more then 2 caps to bump... really...must be a problem you can fix..
Give supercarriers bigger fighter/bomber bays space for 1 set of each plus a few spares. remove normal drones is fine. Leave fighters alone...carriers will suffer aswell.
Leave Titan EHP alone...its a ship costing 60-80bill...
Create Shield slave implants...to balance shield ships. create armor crystal implants...to balance armor/shield sub-capital ships. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:03:00 -
[1002] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Why even penalize SCs use of fighters? You realize that a SC's fighter dps output is only equal to 2 carriers' worth, right? It's not exactly game-breaking, outlandish dps capabilities you're talking about. vOv
At the very least we're talking about fighters which can be taken off the field by shooting them, thus defanging the supercarrier, so I'm not exactly what you'd call hell-bent on penalizing fighters on supercarriers. I was just throwing another idea out into the ether in case it was something tallest hadn't thought of. |
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:04:00 -
[1003] - Quote
Johnny3Tears wrote:You could always pop drones ie, Web drones and pop him.
Web drones. Against the single fastest thing in game. Right.
(This statement and/or opinion may eb subjected to change, once the EWAR Drone DevBlog happens) |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:05:00 -
[1004] - Quote
Liranan wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Thank you, it's good to see you guys listening to your players, shame it takes thousands of people leaving the game for CCP to take notice. I do think you guys shoot once again look at Selene's original MS/SC proposals. That was far more balanced than what we have today.
It was selene(DEV) and the players that made sc the pawnmobiles they are today.
I really think that nerfing the drone bay off supers is a good nerf, the figther nerf was uncalled for because it wouldn't affect scars only it would destroy carriers as a class.Whay i would like to see is to remove the ability of bombers to attack sov styructures making the dreads be the main bulk of the fleet sov in 0.0.
And to people that are saying they get massacred by Scars and figthers guess what , warp out, kill figthers or just dont be dumb enougth to get caugth by a super fleet and die due to your stupidity.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:06:00 -
[1005] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:I love the idiots going on about "bowing down to goons", as if they were the only ones who wanted a supercap nerf.
Everyone wanted a supercap nerf. Most of us hoped CCP would be reasonable about it tho, you know, like having proper balancing (between ships, i.e. Hel vs Nyx vs shield supers etc), like addressing the real issue (their damage output), and making less blob boosts and more blob deterrents.
Obviously we were hoping for too much, like usual. this is a signature |
Le Cardinal
Spricer Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:07:00 -
[1006] - Quote
So CCP Tallest, Is this the place to point out that shield supers still get a penalty to shield when jumping in? Large parts of the nerf is fine, but with reduced HPs the shieldtankers gets an extra slap in the face compared to its fellow armortankers.
And +1 for actually considering community feedback.
|
Krimariol
Nordgoetter Viking Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:08:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Some suggestions in addition to the Devblog:
1. Give all Carrier a new buff: "Reduce Fighter Signature by 10% per Lvl" -- So that Carrier could use the fighter still against BS and with less damage against BCs -- With Carrier V this would still be a 60% decrease in the Signature Resolution of fighters
2. Increase the tracking of Dreads in Siege so, that they hit slow BS and "fast" Caps 3. Change the changed Bonus of the Moroes into +1-2% Damage per level -- This would resolve the cap problems mentioned AND the moroes won't make 20+% more damage than all other dreads
4. Change the Fighter Bomber so, that there is a possibility to attack a forcefield with some drawback like -50% Damage
5. Change the DD nerv into: "DD fuel cost is indirect proportional to the signature of the enemy ship" -- Something like 40k for 2000+ sig and 400k for 200- sig so a Titan has something against small ships but it comes at a price
6. Change the HP nerv into: "Slavesets only work on subcaps" -- Main Problem seems the enourmous Armortank of the SCs and Titans, the shieldtanks have a lot of HP less 7. Change the behavior of buffs -- Armor works instant, shield takes a long time or logistics to work (after each system change) -- This is beside the slave sets the main point, why armor is in fleetbattles leading 8. If the Changes come, think about the prices of Titans and SCs and the production needs, change them according to the nervs.
To some of the Poster
Yes a SC may have HP equal to 150 BS, this should be nerved a little bit, BUT it costs as much as 100+ BS and if you buy some expensive Supermilitaryvehicle it should be at least in the near of a breakeven in COmbat rating. Lets make a calculation: (without implants) Fail-fitted Dominix 130k EHP, 700 DPS, 100 MISK Deadspace-fitted Nyx 22810k EHP, 10000 DPS, 20 BISK so for the same Price 200 Domi 26M EHP, 140k DPS 1 Nyx 23M EHP, 10k DPS A short Battle (about 160 s) later: 13 Dominix were shot, 1 Nyx was scrapped ... 1.3 B vs. 20 B ... So it seems the Domis need more NERV ?
I am a "new" player without capitals. I just made some logical thoughts and played something with EFT.
Just my e Cents or something like that |
Aldarean
Eclipse Innovations Fabricated Confabulations
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:09:00 -
[1008] - Quote
Svennig wrote:Raid'En wrote:ovenproofjet wrote:You kinda just nerfed the standard carrier there with the change to the fighter sensor res, carriers are gonna have trouble doing what you say here: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier"
Perhaps add the sensor res reduction as a penalty to supercarriers so as to avoid a knock on effect on the ordinarty carrier
Other wise good changes, especially to the Dreads, siege timer change is long overdue this. don't nerf the normal carriers with supercarriers Not empty quoting.
I dont think the standard carrier has got nerf. Under the provision it can still field normal drones.
I dont think CCP when designing Carriers, SC and Titans thought they would be used on high level plex.
As far as bomber/fighter setup go, they should be intened purposes. Bomber = SC and TItan Fighters = Carriers/Dreads Heavy/Sentry = Battleships/BC Meduim = BC/Cruiser Light = Frigates/Destroyers
There always going to be a looser here. They would either nerf to much or not enough.
Currently it means that a good Battleship fleet, could destroy, or atleast survive a SC fleet.
Adapt or die......
I don't believe that this will sort the blobs out. 20% EHP reduction just means more ship will be field.
So yes it will hinder smaller alliances a little, If CCP can sort out a spool up time for Cyno that is balance then that would go a good way to helping the smaller alliance's |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:09:00 -
[1009] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Why even penalize SCs use of fighters? You realize that a SC's fighter dps output is only equal to 2 carriers' worth, right? It's not exactly game-breaking, outlandish dps capabilities you're talking about. Because it still makes them too good against subcaps.
2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk
Dps output from fighters: Identical
Supercarriers are the ones that need a fighter nerf?
...and if your first thought is "but SCs have so much more EHP" then you're thinking about it in the wrong way-- kill the fighters, not the carrier. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:11:00 -
[1010] - Quote
I don't like how they have backtracked on on the fighters change, yes ok 400 sig was too much but a change to 200 or something so there not as good as they are now but not a total wipeout is ok. Carriers are not really the main DPS in any fleet anyway, and SC's will just use FB's.
What i don't get is the change to Capital ships cannot kill sub-caps at all. This does not make sense. and if you need sub-caps to kill other sub-caps than you should also be forced to use only caps to kill other caps unless you have like 10/1 number advantage. If caps cannot do anything at all VS sub-caps then a BS's guns should be like throwing a water balloon at a car. |
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:12:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:I'm not sure how suggesting their drone capacity be reduced from ~1750 to 60 counts as "suggesting they be left as they are," but by all means feel free to explain your logic to us.
Fighters are 5000m3. If super carriers are allowed to carry drones too, you only have to drop 1 fighter in order to have a stock of 1000 light drones or 200 sentries. Thus in order to prevent super carriers having something approaching an "infinite" supply of drones with which to smash cruisers, they need to lose their ability to field drones. Is that logic simple enough to follow?
Take the pants off your head. SEPARATE DRONE BAYS. One for fighters / bombers, one for drones.
God you people are a dense bunch. |
Krimariol
Nordgoetter Viking Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:15:00 -
[1012] - Quote
Oh my
5.2 Change the way Jumpportals work -- let the Titan enter a "siege" mode for 5 to 10 min -- AND Portals may not opened in forcefields
got lost. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:15:00 -
[1013] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Not every supercap pilot uses their ship in a blob context. If you're dead-set on stripping SCs of the little defensive capabilities they currently have (being able to field light drones) rather than simply reducing their drone bay sizes to 250-350m3 (which is the solution I think offers the best balance between the current "infinite drones" situation and SCs being utterly defenseless against any potential tacklers), then can you at least add in some logistical support perks to compensate?
I currently use my Nyx as a combination operations hub and ratting cap / dumb JF killing platform. If you're going to take combat usage in a small-gang context from "extremely risky" (currently, even with "infinite drones" it's extremely hard to fight off a competent hostile tackle-- all they need is a light dictor or two who know how to pilot their ships and you're gonna be stuck on the field for as long as they have warp disrupt probes left to deploy) to "near suicidal" (supers will be completely unable to fend off any hostile tackle at all, even baddies), then can you add some logistical capabilities to compensate?
Ideas I've been toying with for new / augmented logistical capacity are:
- Increased SMA / CHA space (can keep more people supplied with ships and gear) - "Repair bays" which could be used to repair items (for example, to rep fully heat-damaged modules) - Assembly lines that could produce the kinds of goods frequently consumed in small gang warfare-- nanite paste, bubbles, drones, possibly subcap-sized modules, etc. - Perhaps a limited variant of the jump portal generator-- perhaps only capable of bridging cruiser-sized hulls and smaller. This would leave fleet-level bridging to titans, but provide SCs an ability to augment small gang type warfare, similar to the way blops BS can at the moment.
Personally I think the idea of using supercarriers as logistics platforms is pretty cool. It would give SCs a continued use outside blob warfare for people like me who don't like unopposed structure bashing, and would help compensate for the fact that they'll be much less useful for combat in small gang contexts.
Good god, a really awsome post from a goon, I think the end is coming..
Since I liked your post and I'm feeling generous, I'll even throw in my pet peeve wet-dream, which I was gonna leave out of these troll-scattered discussions but.. here goes: It'd be awsome if active tanking came back into the game as a whole. Blobs and alpha has completely taken over, imagine if supers could actually active tank again? Capital reps is extremely underwhelming (repping barely anything while sucking massive amounts of cap). Say, make the e-war immunity on supers mean they cannot recieve friendly RR at all, but instead give them alot of hp and quite decent self-rep capability.
It's just a wet dream, and no maths done, so I'll slowly back off now and let people throw rotten fruit and laugh at me for even suggesting it.. but hey, a girl can dream.. this is a signature |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:17:00 -
[1014] - Quote
Camar wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote:The true bitter vets of eve are the ones who manipulate the market, alliance politics, and resources out of the sight of peering eyes. Not the super cap pilots.
The proper vets know not to put their investments all into 1 ship that can go boom and cant get a good pay off of insurance true bitter vets dont play eve anymore
We play the forum, but we don't log in since aeons (see what I did there).. this is a signature |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:18:00 -
[1015] - Quote
It would make much more sense if scs couldnt use anything else but fighter bombers - not even fighters. But with bigger "fbomber bay" so they could replace lost fbombers. For example 1 flight + 50-100% of 2nd flight.
The more utility you give them to fight subcaps /fighters, drones/, the lower will be need for support fleet - and thats bad thing. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:19:00 -
[1016] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:21:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Aldarean wrote: As far as bomber/fighter setup go, they should be intened purposes. Bomber = SC and TItan Fighters = Carriers/Dreads Heavy/Sentry = Battleships/BC Meduim = BC/Cruiser Light = Frigates/Destroyers
QFT
|
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:22:00 -
[1018] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless.
I dont think you get it. |
Krimariol
Nordgoetter Viking Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:25:00 -
[1019] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless.
But cost should be at least partly a balancing factor. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:27:00 -
[1020] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote: If you want to committ to a fight and survive, you will have to rely on your FC's, you will have to rely on your alliance, you will have to rely on your friend s for victory and safety. All they are doing is putting an end to solo super cap play.
...Except that solo supercaps were *never* the problem in the first place. This is the point of my argument-- they're talking about breaking one, nonproblematic form of gameplay in order to fix problems with another form of gameplay (supercap blobbing). I'm just saying SCs should be left with enough drones to perhaps make a difference in solo play, but without such a mass of drones that they remain problematic in big fights. Being able to field a total of ~60 normal drones is not going to make the tiniest difference in a fleet fight, but it might just make or break a solo engagement. That said, it's not like being able to field drones is a get-out-of-jail-free card for SCs. Even now, with an essentially infinite supply of small drones, its not like a solo SC is going to be able to fight its way out of a properly set trap. For actual, real-world examples of this, see the incidents where Dabigredboat dropped his Nyx on a gatecamp in Cobalt Edge (IRC brought a couple of dictors, tackled him on a gate, and killed his Nyx with a titan, a supercarrier, 1-2 dreads and a kitchen sink gang of subcaps), or Zungen losing a Nyx in Delve to Brick Squad (they brought a couple of dictors, he was held on the field and killed by a subcap gang). If a solo supercap can't escape a small hostile gang now, with infinite drones, I find it hard to believe that keeping a couple of flights of drones in the future will somehow render SCs broken solo pwnmobiles. What reducing SC drone bays to a reasonable size *will* do is prevent piles of SCs in a fleet fight fielding hundreds of Ogre IIs, wave after wave, and using them to obliterate all subcaps on the field. I think this current behavior is dumb, and that supercaps shouldn't be able to prevail over subcap fleets without their own subcap support in fleet fights. Taking all their drones is totally unnecessary though.
Exactly this. The only reason CCP is removing the drone bays is same reasons titans/dreads are losing theirs: CCP hates drones and been trying to remove the drones from capitals since 2007. Each time players have been "quite upset" (to say the least). This time tho, CCP can disguise their drone-removal under the flag of 'capital revamp'.
The drone removals has nothing to do with actual gameplay, CCP just want less drones around. Probably for performance issues, but instead of being honest about it, they repeatedly keep trying to keep their reasons hidden and just blatantly try remove drones at every chance possible. this is a signature |
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:28:00 -
[1021] - Quote
Krimariol wrote:Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. But cost should be at least partly a balancing factor.
The last balancing factor. Tbh, atm you are getting for that 20b much more, than you should be.
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:28:00 -
[1022] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless.
Thanks for misconstruing my argument.
What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability?
People are throwing down huge sums of money for supercaps because of their fighter-bomber capabilities, as well as their ewar immunity and large tanks, not because they're excellent at killing subcaps (thats what titans are for ATM, lolololol). The EHP nerf will take away a good chunk of their tank, and FB are already useless against subcaps, so I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability. |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:30:00 -
[1023] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Why are you destroying the super capital community... are you going to allow for skillpoints that have no meaning in those ships to be placed else where? are you going to allow those ships to be put in stations and be reprocessed? I mean you totally destroyed the use of them... not only that but CCP needs to allow skillpoints to be moved and the ships to be reprocessed if they cannot be used with reg drones anymore. That's why people trained for those ships. pretty sad if you do not allow this. |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:31:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. Thanks for misconstruing my argument. What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability? People are throwing down huge sums of money for supercaps because of their fighter-bomber capabilities, as well as their ewar immunity and large tanks, not because they're excellent at killing subcaps (thats what titans are for ATM, lolololol). The EHP nerf will take away a good chunk of their tank, and FB are already useless against subcaps, so I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability.
i cannot believe I am saying this but this Goon has valid points on this matter. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:32:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:1. I have briefly owned/flew a nyx on the character Lord's Servant. I owned and flew extensively 2 wyverns on separate occasion on the character Servant's Lord. 2. While Welpfleet -IS- an existing tactic, it is not the tactic I am referring to...I believe I specifically stated that it was in fact a tactic. I'm not sure where I said it wasn't a tactic..... 3. I count 36 BS on the wyvern km, not "60-70"...but simple math is too difficult for you I suppose. There are a total of 41 battleships on the ENTIRE battle report. 18 Capitals/Supers appear on the WIdawt side in that fight. I am fairly certain there were more actually there, but seeing as they killed very little, and logoffski'd not many showed up on the BR. 18, however stands as the only number able to be proved as there, so I stand corrected. Irregardless, if 36 BS + mixed support can engage 6 supers with 12 capitals as backup and win without a significant loss (hictors/support don't really count....but 15 losses totalling about 700m for almost 30b isk killed) how can goons not lrn2eve and win with similar odds? The tactics I refer to are dedicated neuting and smartbombing BS. RnK did a similar thing later with 3 triage carriers(2 for most of the fight) utilizing an understanding of game mechanics to force 4 SC + mixed support to logoff/die. Oh yeah..they also had around 11BS + a handful of support in this fight. BR can be found here http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?229-Low-Sec-Empire/page4 9 posts down, or the first post by Lord Maldoror on that page with all the pictures. That is only a simple 2:1 numbers advantage. On certain, *alternative* forums, a number I see getting tossed around is 500 v 100. If goons can bring a 5:1 advantage to the table, outside of the broken logoffski mechanic, why aren't you utterly dominating eve? 4. The whelpfleet is designed around cheap, high dps, easy to train for ships. You would be flying Tempests if you wanted any sort of actual neuting power/more dps(oh hey PL has done this), however, those cost quite a bit more and are less noobie-friendly. Hurricanes do all that you say, but the main point is their price/ease of training. Everything I say is backed up by facts. As to goonswarm's ability to field supers, I have not seen nor heard of goonswarm fielding more than a dozen or at any one time. Even assuming you CAN field "dozens of supers at the drop of a hat" those supers are most likely inexperienced and lack confidence, unlike individuals who have used them on a regular basis. Alas, I am not a current super owner, but I'm fairly certain that my understanding of game mechanics in relation to supers is quite a bit above your own. -Tokino/Lords PS-That BBCcode thing is driving me nuts too..as always the victor is :CCP: lol ;)
Goonswarm field 40+ supers/titans under a cyno jammer an still lose supers. Goons are fail and dont have ballz to use supers/titans thats why they have influenced the change in patch so they can lagg out systems again an have no contest in doing so. Pro tactics I think not. Narrow minded people including ccp evidently say ohh who ever has the most supers/titans often claims the field. And how may I ask is this patch going to change that. It will be alot worse after the patch,the only thing this patch will change in that context is that supers/titans will only be counter dropped onto capital targets from the winter patch on, so who ever has the most supers/titans will still win in that scenario, they will rarely if ever be fielded equally especially after this patch. CCP please wake up, stop listening to goons fail before you make eve a tradgedy. Tell you what make goons there own server where they can lagg out systems on there own with no opposition, they will be having fun, an allow all the deserving people of eve to have a functioning enviroment. |
Zomg Panties
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:32:00 -
[1026] - Quote
Good job CCP on making a 15 billion dollar ship worth 500 mill, because a 10 man gang can now shut down a mothership in less than 2 minutes, as easy as it is to kill fighter bombers and fighters, mom's will never be able to defend themselves again, they arent even worth bringing to a supercap fight because all people have to do is tell their subcaps to start shooting enemy fighters, 10-15 minutes later the alliance with the biggest subcap fleet wins.
what this really does...
1) makes the carrier even more worthless than it already is as subcap blobs can alpha volley a carrier with 1 salvo it takes only 40 battleships to do this lol we cant even rat anymore trolololol
2) moms can no longer defend themselves/get away - once tackled 15bill down the hole - a 15 billion dollar ship shouldnt be able to be killed by 10 stealthbombers
3) moms have become glorified dreadnaughts (you remember when the only time we use to use them was when we sieged a pos?) oh wait moms cant do that anymore, we can attack stations yay!
4) shield supers are even more worthless than they already are particularly the hell
5) 5-6 months from now the new blobs will be 400 man titan fleets + outrageous numbers of subcaps
6) anyone who actually owns or just finished training for a supercap wasted 3 years of their eve life on something that is now more worthless than a dreadnaught
7) incomming faction battleship blobs (i predict mechariel and nightmare blobs in the hundreds) 40 nightmares can kill a carrier in less than 1 minute add 300 more and watch a nyx pop in under 15 seconds
8) greater lag than drones cause because of more missile and laser boats
9) cheering from 5 mill sp characters because they dont own and never will own a capital ship and don't understand how easy it already is to kill a mom i mean really lol, 20 man fleets can kill a nyx in 4 minutes i've seen it done in lowsec on more than 20 occasions...
---
you say it's too hard to kill a mom, I say its too easy especially on blob warefare
a ship that costs that much should never be killed by less than 30-40 ships it isnt fair to the time invested let alone the money invested by individuals and ALLIANCES!!!
making it this way is both unfair to the pilot who fronts the cost of the ship and the alliance that spends a whole month making it
you wanna make these nerfs fine then go ahead, be prepare to lose money a lot more people will quit eve because you are fixing **** that aint broke
you wanna make these changes than cut the cost in minerals to build the ships if my 15 billion dollar ship can be killed by a 10 man fleet than it should only be worth a 1bill imo, cause all it is now is a ship that can use only 25 fighters or bombers and has a high number of hitpoints...
---
i also suggest this to you herp derp derpity derp lets fix drone lag derp herp lets nerf sc
oh wait!!! how bout you fix the physic and graphics engine so that the server can support more than 400 people in a system?
hell World of Warcraft can have 1000 people in one location and their servers laugh at the pay load, I bet you it has nothing to do with the amount of money they paid on the hardware either *winky face*
fix your outdated stuff and maybe you would never of had these problems in the first place?
oh wait giving in to what 20 thousand noobs in highsec want is easier duhhhh i forgot haha silly me we arent trying to fix the actual cause of the problem we are making a short term fix that will make it worse later, i forgot how ccp fixes things silly me ill just shut up now |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:33:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Exactly this. The only reason CCP is removing the drone bays is same reasons titans/dreads are losing theirs: CCP hates drones and been trying to remove the drones from capitals since 2007. Each time players have been "quite upset" (to say the least). This time tho, CCP can disguise their drone-removal under the flag of 'capital revamp'.
The drone removals has nothing to do with actual gameplay, CCP just want less drones around. Probably for performance issues, but instead of being honest about it, they repeatedly keep trying to keep their reasons hidden and just blatantly try remove drones at every chance possible.
I don't know that its due to a conspiracy theory-- if they wanted to reduce drone counts for performance reasons, the easiest thing to do would be to leave carriers / SCs with 5 drones each and give them a corresponding bonus to drone damage and hitpoints to make them functionally equal to ten or twenty drones with a fraction of the performance cost. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:33:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:Aldarean wrote: As far as bomber/fighter setup go, they should be intened purposes. Bomber = carriers/dreads/SC and TItan Fighters = Bs's/Carriers/Dreads Heavy/Sentry = Battleships/BC Meduim = BC/Cruiser Light = Frigates/Destroyers
QFT
fixed, fighters are an anti bs drone. other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. i guess it could rep the bs while the bs shoots it.
fighters are fine the way they are CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:34:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. Thanks for misconstruing my argument. What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability? People are throwing down huge sums of money for supercaps because of their fighter-bomber capabilities, as well as their ewar immunity and large tanks, not because they're excellent at killing subcaps (thats what titans are for ATM, lolololol). The EHP nerf will take away a good chunk of their tank, and FB are already useless against subcaps, so I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability.
If people dont care about their anti subcap capability, why are they whining so much about scs losing it? |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:35:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Ok heres the bread and the butter of things.
Thers are by all means alot of pros that will mean fleet fights could be more Ballz deep coming from the patch, but alot of crutial badly influenced cons. The loggoff timer relooping, yes a good idea, but why introduce 20% decrease in shield/armor/structure aswell. This is giving supers/titans relatively no chance. with the aggro relooping, should keep the stats tank wise for supers/titans, but maybe balance out what currently is there. For instance Aeon should have less HP as has an isaine tank, wyvern and Nyx should tank wise be relatively unchanged. The Poor Hel should get a buff. Make it competitive.
DDs on titans should be able to hit BSs if not give them a slight tracking bonus so they are at least able to hit BSs well and have some sort of a tank lol
It seems ccp are carebearing up eve for newer players or alot of the subcap players. What they are failing to realise is that this patch will be a tradgedy for a few of those crutial points. Alot of other vets are thinking of hanging up there boots when this patch is released.
It seems heirachy has been too influenced by certain GMs CSMs that revolve around fountian region,we all know who they are. What this patch allows is certain entities that live in fountian (cough cough) to use mass blob fleets of 2000+ again and lagg out systems. There will be no counter to this after the patch. What this patch is going to allow is lagg tactics and mass 2000+ man fleets to rule eve over better organised,structured & skilled alliances. Its basically allowing a bunch of noobs with no structure in there fleet to be successful. Carebearing it down. If you want to kill a titan/super then an aggressing fleet should at least have a well thought through structure an plan to there fleet, they do not deserve and should not expect to kill any supers/titans unless that is implemented.
When alot of the narrow minded people out there eventually realise what this patch will do, the pros from this patch will be massively overlooked, as this will not balance things, its only going to be putting the weight on the other end of the scales. Mark my words im right almost all the time =)
How is the looping aggro timer going to affect people who Disconnect from no fualt of there own, are they also suppose to lose there supers from relooping aggro timers. I mean its a good idea if there is measures in place to make sure people who disconnect are not unjustly affected.
|
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:35:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:Why are you destroying the super capital community...
There's no such thing as "the supercapital community" just so you know. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Crucis Cassiopeiae
EvE-COM
890
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:36:00 -
[1032] - Quote
Tippia wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers. Tbh, the problem is more that there are some pretty grave imbalances between the different fighters GÇö most notably that the close-orbiting ones do not have the tracking to support their own orbits (which sounds familiar somehowGǪ reminds me of a different weapon system that begins with a GÇ£bGÇ¥). If that part was adjusted, you could probably go ahead with the proposed change and not do all that much damage to standard carriers. Yes, average DPS would be down by ~30% against battleships, but that still leaves them very capable, and if need be you could always balance that out with a sig res skill bonus.
This
|
Dr 0wnage
The Dark Tribe Against ALL Authorities
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:38:00 -
[1033] - Quote
Just Another Toon wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. nice back track... i say it again..carriers are not supposed to be offensive ships!! you bowing to the blobby carrier pilots YET AGAIN!!!! You know what why dont you just scrap the whole fecking idea!
Problem is we need the carrier to fill 2 specific roles...
1. as a logistical platform, specifically triage, to rep the fleet and be the hero. 2. to act as anti-sub support. a group of battle carriers w/ drone links and tackle can mess up a bs fleet, especially w/ triage support.
Problem is the carrier in its current form can't really do both, nor should it, as it would be op for its price tag. It may soon be time (once the current balance is tuned a bit) to introduce T2 "battle" carriers. Consider how a carrier w/ t2 resists that does maybe 200% more damage with fighters while in "siege" would fit into our capital battlefield. |
Aldarean
Eclipse Innovations Fabricated Confabulations
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:39:00 -
[1034] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Karim alRashid wrote:Aldarean wrote: As far as bomber/fighter setup go, they should be intened purposes. Bomber = carriers/dreads/SC and TItan Fighters = Bs's/Carriers/Dreads Heavy/Sentry = Battleships/BC Meduim = BC/Cruiser Light = Frigates/Destroyers
QFT fixed, fighters are an anti bs drone. other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. i guess it could rep the bs while the bs shoots it. fighters are fine the way they are
This wasnt to say that Fighter would be useless against BS. The same as Meduim are not useless against Frigates/Destoyers, and heavies are not useless against cruisers.
But the main source of DPS on a ship should be restricted to a class of drone. |
Lorna Sicling
Helix Pulse Rolling Thunder.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:40:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Good news generally. I agree with the "no remote sensor boosting" comments, but generally if you can afford a ship costing tens of billions, you should have enough friends around to help you defend it against those who you attack or who choose to attack you.
The US Navy would not send a carriers out on their own, but send a significant support fleet - these "adjustments" encourage this.
I do, however, think that maybe the fighter scan resolution nerf was a bit too much but time will, of course, tell.
Thank you CCP - keep the Devblogs flowing! |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:40:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:How is the looping aggro timer going to affect people who Disconnect from no fualt of there own, are they also suppose to lose there supers from relooping aggro timers. I mean its a good idea if there is measures in place to make sure people who disconnect are not unjustly affected.
Competent FCs already have to account for crashing fleet members and take precautions, so it'll affect them in much the same way as it does now. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:41:00 -
[1037] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:fixed, fighters are an anti bs drone. other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. i guess it could rep the bs while the bs shoots it. fighters are fine the way they are
Weird, you are saying here, that fighters are anti bs weapon here, and yet you are against their signature resolution reduction. Do you realize, that fighters now hit cruisers and bcs well?
Only way to avoid their dps in cruiser is go faster than them. Hm, or better, sit still. Try sitting still in 20-25k ehp cruiser in the middle of the fight. |
Robert Lefcourt
Audentia et Artis E.B.O.L.A.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:42:00 -
[1038] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. Thanks for misconstruing my argument. What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability?
Because for every Thana, you'll need a Pilot to sit in it.
hth
|
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:42:00 -
[1039] - Quote
ccp & there close borthers goons will officially be labeled for ruining eve, it was abit of a mess before, but after this patch its going to be up s.h.i.t. creek
Thing is with the fighters, they take a long time to travel to a target, so that should be more than enough of a natural penalty, they dont need to be tampered with. Hell the whole dynamic of supercapitals will have to be changed again after this patch this winter unless ccp/goons want this to be the beginning of the end for eve. Wich none of us want, but what is happening in this up an coming patch. Pure stupidness. |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:43:00 -
[1040] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:fixed, fighters are an anti bs drone. other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. i guess it could rep the bs while the bs shoots it. fighters are fine the way they are Weird, you are saying here, that fighters are anti bs weapon here, and yet you are against their signature resolution reduction. Do you realize, that fighters now hit cruisers and bcs well? Only way to avoid their dps in cruiser is go faster than them. Hm, or better, sit still. Try sitting still in 20-25k ehp cruiser in the middle of the fight.
or , warp out? |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:44:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Krimariol wrote:But cost should be at least partly a balancing factor. No. Cost should at most be the result of the balancing factors GÇö it should never be a factor itself. At best, it's an effect, not a cause. In many cases (especially in a dynamic economy), it's not even that.
Pesadel0 wrote:I dont think you get it. I get that cost is not a balancing factor. That's all there is to get.
Ganthrithor wrote:Thanks for misconstruing my argument. You're welcome. All I'm doing is pointing out that cost is not a factor in determining the power of a ship. Whether another ship gets more power for less money is entirely irrelevant GÇö what matters is whether the ships in question gets the respective ranges of abilities they are meant to have.
Quote:Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability? Because people is not an infinite commodity and because marginal benefits in this game tend to come at huge surcharges. Want to save one person or reassign one slot in the fleet for something else to increase your overall capability? WellGǪ that's going to cost you.
Quote:I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability. Because it makes them too good against subcaps. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:44:00 -
[1042] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
How is the looping aggro timer going to affect people who Disconnect from no fualt of there own, are they also suppose to lose there supers from relooping aggro timers. I mean its a good idea if there is measures in place to make sure people who disconnect are not unjustly affected.
Anybody who has thought about game balance for more than 5 minutes should realize a disconnect can be simulated by unplugging a network cable or just shutting the power off on their router/modem/PC.
There is no difference between a logoff and a disconnect. If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:47:00 -
[1043] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:
How is the looping aggro timer going to affect people who Disconnect from no fualt of there own, are they also suppose to lose there supers from relooping aggro timers. I mean its a good idea if there is measures in place to make sure people who disconnect are not unjustly affected.
Anybody who has thought about game balance for more than 5 minutes should realize a disconnect can be simulated by unplugging a network cable or just shutting the power off on their router/modem/PC. There is no difference between a logoff and a disconnect.
Lol thats the thing you can be right in a context, but what about the large majority of people who disconnect due to game lagg or other known issues, according to you they are to suffer. Not words of wisedom at all.
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:47:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. Thanks for misconstruing my argument. What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability? People are throwing down huge sums of money for supercaps because of their fighter-bomber capabilities, as well as their ewar immunity and large tanks, not because they're excellent at killing subcaps (thats what titans are for ATM, lolololol). The EHP nerf will take away a good chunk of their tank, and FB are already useless against subcaps, so I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability. If people dont care about their anti subcap capability, why are they whining so much about scs losing it?
I don't think anyone is whining about taking away SCs ability to field infinite waves of drones. I think most people agree that it's dumb and pretty imbalanced. What they're whining about is *totally* removing their ability to fend off subcaps. There's no way that you can honestly argue that a supercarrier being able to field a couple of flights of normal drones (just like a Dominix can) is overpowered.
By that logic, it is unfair and unbalanced to allow battleships to have drones. After all, battleship-sized turrets are designed to hit targets that are BC-sized and larger-- obviously allowing them to carry Warrior IIs makes them overpowered because it lets them kill frigates, which is not their "job" in a fleet fight.
...Except that fielding a few light drones *doesn't* make battleships overpowered frigate-death spewers. It gives them a *minimal* capacity to defend themselves against smaller ships that are not their primary targets. It's not unfair in the slightest. Without the ability to carry drones, BS gangs would easily find themselves perma-tackled (if not outright killed) by frigates. I think it stands to reason that Supercarriers should also be allowed some minimal ability to fend off smaller ships, even if that isn't their primary purpose. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:47:00 -
[1045] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:How is the looping aggro timer going to affect people who Disconnect from no fualt of there own, are they also suppose to lose there supers from relooping aggro timers They're going to reconnect and keep fighting with the aggro timers they already had and either win the fight (at which point the timer no longer matters), be able to deaggress and escape (timer no longer matters), or die (timer only matters if they try to logoffski). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:48:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Aldarean wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Karim alRashid wrote:Aldarean wrote: As far as bomber/fighter setup go, they should be intened purposes. Bomber = carriers/dreads/SC and TItan Fighters = Bs's/Carriers/Dreads Heavy/Sentry = Battleships/BC Meduim = BC/Cruiser Light = Frigates/Destroyers
QFT fixed, fighters are an anti bs drone. other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. i guess it could rep the bs while the bs shoots it. fighters are fine the way they are This wasnt to say that Fighter would be useless against BS. The same as Meduim are not useless against Frigates/Destoyers, and heavies are not useless against cruisers. But the main source of DPS on a ship should be restricted to a class of drone.
your right, fighters being cruiser sized and shoudl have max dps applied on bs's up. there dps on caps is laughible at best. for caps there are fighter bombers. which is actually balanced CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Aldarean
Eclipse Innovations Fabricated Confabulations
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:48:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Lorna Sicling wrote:
The US Navy would not send a carriers out on their own, but send a significant support fleet - these "adjustments" encourage this.
Thank you CCP - keep the Devblogs flowing!
Yes
Thought exactly,
A Carrier strike group is made up of Carriers, Missile Cruiser, Missile Destroyers and Logistic and fuel ships. To name a few.
Without that support the Carrier would die, eventually, to smaller, less values ships with greater numbers. |
Via Shivon
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
53
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:49:00 -
[1048] - Quote
omg SC isnt a rattingship anymore oooh QQ im glad those changes are coming...even the carriers dont need the drone nerf, and dreads need more love
|
Amanda Redman
Intenso Company
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:50:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Just design a super dreadnought. Something to hunt SC and titans with. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:50:00 -
[1050] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. Thanks for misconstruing my argument. What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability? People are throwing down huge sums of money for supercaps because of their fighter-bomber capabilities, as well as their ewar immunity and large tanks, not because they're excellent at killing subcaps (thats what titans are for ATM, lolololol). The EHP nerf will take away a good chunk of their tank, and FB are already useless against subcaps, so I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability. If people dont care about their anti subcap capability, why are they whining so much about scs losing it? I don't think anyone is whining about taking away SCs ability to field infinite waves of drones. I think most people agree that it's dumb and pretty imbalanced. What they're whining about is *totally* removing their ability to fend off subcaps. There's no way that you can honestly argue that a supercarrier being able to field a couple of flights of normal drones (just like a Dominix can) is overpowered. By that logic, it is unfair and unbalanced to allow battleships to have drones. After all, battleship-sized turrets are designed to hit targets that are BC-sized and larger-- obviously allowing them to carry Warrior IIs makes them overpowered because it lets them kill frigates, which is not their "job" in a fleet fight. ...Except that fielding a few light drones *doesn't* make battleships overpowered frigate-death spewers. It gives them a *minimal* capacity to defend themselves against smaller ships that are not their primary targets. It's not unfair in the slightest. Without the ability to carry drones, BS gangs would easily find themselves perma-tackled (if not outright killed) by frigates. I think it stands to reason that Supercarriers should also be allowed some minimal ability to fend off smaller ships, even if that isn't their primary purpose.
See even a goon doesn't agree with some of this horriffic mess. Although its only about the smallest of issues.
|
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:53:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Yeah, there really needs to be a definitive statement on what each class of capitals is for, atm, we're kinda lost. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:53:00 -
[1052] - Quote
Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
|
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:54:00 -
[1053] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:How is the looping aggro timer going to affect people who Disconnect from no fualt of there own, are they also suppose to lose there supers from relooping aggro timers They're going to reconnect and keep fighting with the aggro timers they already had and either win the fight (at which point the timer no longer matters), be able to deaggress and escape (timer no longer matters), or die (timer only matters if they try to logoffski).
No1 is argueing about that people should stay an fight an commit, im talking about as I will yet again repeat, how is it going to be fair and just that people who disconnect due to no fualt of there own should suffer the penalty?
|
Ms Freak
Ramtech Industries
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:54:00 -
[1054] - Quote
I'm an SC pilot and I gotta say that these changes are seriously harsh.
It's good to see the back-track on the fighters change but I'm pretty annoyed at the SC nerf.
Buff dreads? Yes - epic idea Slight EHP reduction? - Ok... Can a DD now 1 shot me unless I max resist? hope not... Nuke all my T2 drones? if you must but then only let me have 25 fighters MAX in a Wyvern?!
Come-on - I can almost USE more than that!! Carrier V & Advanced Drone Control 4 = 24 fighters with 1 spare? Seriously?
These changes may well help with balance in large fleet fights but for smaller alliances with only a few SC's we are sitll boned and blobing will just become the ONLY way to field SC's. Dropping 2/3/4 just won't be worth the risk any more.
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:54:00 -
[1055] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Karim alRashid wrote:Aldarean wrote: As far as bomber/fighter setup go, they should be intened purposes. Bomber = carriers/dreads/SC and TItan Fighters = Bs's/Carriers/Dreads Heavy/Sentry = Battleships/BC Meduim = BC/Cruiser Light = Frigates/Destroyers
QFT fixed, fighters are an anti bs drone.
OK, they may be now, but tell me why they SHOULD continue to be so?
Quote:other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs.
Why heavy and sentry drones cannot be used by carriers against BS?
|
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:55:00 -
[1056] - Quote
malet wrote:iulixxi wrote:malet wrote:Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right? And does your abbadon cost 85billion isk? you are tackled by a ship of the same value, then thats fair game. If your in a titan your net dies and some random dictors finds you before you disaapear you are then stuck there being held by a ship that cost 30 million isk.. its hardly the same is it? GÇ£And does your abbadon cost 85billion isk?GÇ¥An officer fitted one yes, does it have a change against your 85b titan? Same price, right? GÇ£If your in a titan your net dies and some random dictors finds you before you disaapear you are then stuck there being held by a ship that cost 30 million isk..GÇ¥Get better net or donGÇÖt fly alone. CCP is not an ISP or an electricity provider, we are talking about balancing a ship class not preventing a natural disaster that cold (or cold not) disconnect you during an engagement. DonGÇÖt fly anything you canGÇÖt afford to loseGǪ Once you jumped into a fight you have to be aware that there is a chance of losing your ship, unlike now GǪ you jump 200 supers -> launch fighters -> go watch a movie -> come back -> jump out. Win E Im not talking about an ISP, EVE is renowned in large fleet fights for random DC`s followed by staring at entering space for hours while the servers decide whether to log you in or not. As for flying what I cant afford to lose then think again. Fact is that eve is notoriuos for crashing in large fleet fights so whats your answer to that? Are we supposed to just swallow the usual CCP BS " our logs show nothing out of the ordinary followed by the standard copy paste petition response because no body actually bothers to look into a petition , more likely they just like to put it to the side and hope it goes away! if you are going to fly a officer fit abaddon worth 85bill then please please for the love of god come visit so I can dd you before the nerf!
My point there was that cost is irrelevant in your argument; I am surprised you missed that. I know EVE is notorious about random DC, had quite a few myself, hopefully time dilation will solve that.
E |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:56:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:No1 is argueing about that people should stay an fight an commit, im talking about as I will yet again repeat, how is it going to be fair and just that people who disconnect due to no fualt of there own should suffer the penalty? And I'm saying: it won't make any difference for them since they didn't disconnect on purpose and will therefore log right back in GÇö they wouldn't have stretched into that (potential) first renewal anyway.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:56:00 -
[1058] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch.
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
241
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:56:00 -
[1059] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote: And, since you brought it up, yes-- EVE does revolve around us. We're the active players who's participation in nullsec makes EVE what it is. If everyone was a risk-averse hi/low-sec denizen content to run missions and engage in petty squabbles and skirmishes in throwaway ships, EVE would be neither interesting nor noteworthy within the industry. Its the powerblocs that throw their weight around that put EVE in the spotlight of the gaming media and create the political atmosphere that makes EVE unique. So excuse us if we ask that CCP listen to us with regard to gameplay tweaks that directly affect us and have no effect on you whatsoever. We're not surprised you give no fucks about these issues. What we are surprised about is that you expect your opinions on them to be taken seriously.
You're not that important, and you never were--none of you. I hate to have to break that to you, but that's just the way it is, and I need no more proof of this than that no-one outside of null-sec, cares about nullsec anymore, nor yet wants anything to do with it. You're welcome to your stilted, broken mutual circle-jerk, the other 80-odd per cent (at least) of the player-base will be off doing fun...You know, kinda the whole reason one plays video-games in the first place.
Oh, and how, if I'm the "pirate," do sentry guns protect me, exactly?
EDIT: Post cleaned of unnecessary profanity, CCP Phantom. Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM 7! (Mittens, you may not want to admit it, but your day in the sun is over. Next!)
|
Ms Freak
Ramtech Industries
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:57:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Tippia wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:How is the looping aggro timer going to affect people who Disconnect from no fualt of there own, are they also suppose to lose there supers from relooping aggro timers They're going to reconnect and keep fighting with the aggro timers they already had and either win the fight (at which point the timer no longer matters), be able to deaggress and escape (timer no longer matters), or die (timer only matters if they try to logoffski). No1 is argueing about that people should stay an fight an commit, im talking about as I will yet again repeat, how is it going to be fair and just that people who disconnect due to no fualt of there own should suffer the penalty?
There is no way to know if someone dico's due to connection issues/whatever and those that simply pull the plug out the wall on purpose (to fake a disco).
If there was it would have been implemented way before now. |
|
George Holden
The Shadow Plague BLACK-MARK
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 12:59:00 -
[1061] - Quote
Might sound stupid but please enlighten me here.
Did some theorycrafting around XL guns and HICs. A Ragnarok with 6x2500 Repeating Artillery I (my EVEHQ doesn't have the meta guns handy) with 5 Federation Navy Tracking Links fitted on an Oneiros for the bonuses gets around 0.0212 rad/sec tracking.
A Phobos being webbed with a 60% web does 99 m/s in an orbit does around 0.02475 rad/sec right? So that does already outrun the guns basically. Since the Phobos only has a signature radius of 240m (without bubble its 162m) and the guns having a signature resolution of 1000m that adds another safety buffer to it.
Since I'm too lazy right now and the world is going down here in switzerland I've plugged the ships into EVEHQ.
In a 4k orbit chances to get hit by the target itself are close to 0 (000000.1% +/-)
Now I'm pretty sure that titan won't be alone on the field so lets assume you have a fleet of remote boosted ragnaroks on the field with a decent spread. Highest chance to hit will come out at around 75% on a range of ~45km if you shoot at the Phobos sitting on your buddy titan 45km off you might actually hit.
On the other hand if the HICs are not webbed down and keep their speed of 247 m/s your chance to hit them drops to around 45% at 60km range lower if closer.
I'd say it's doable but you gotta have a decent number of HICs and DICs and might focus more towards aHICs since the lower sig radius significantly increases the chance of survival |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:00:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:No1 is argueing about that people should stay an fight an commit, im talking about as I will yet again repeat, how is it going to be fair and just that people who disconnect due to no fualt of there own should suffer the penalty? And I'm saying: it won't make any difference for them since they didn't disconnect on purpose and will therefore log right back in GÇö they wouldn't have stretched into that (potential) first renewal anyway.
I give up after this, you dont seem to either want to answer the question or you just dont understand. More often than not when you DC you not able to do jack for a certian amount of time, until you either relog or have to reboot PC and then relog. with the lack of EHP supers/titans will enduce after this patch it is going to take 2-3minutes to kill each. Keeping in mind that your not on field or likely on comms due to Disconnection so cant bcast for reps from triage/logis either. How is it fair that these victims should lose there supers/titans due to disconnection.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:02:00 -
[1063] - Quote
Vulfnaadur wrote:Might as well let everyone fly a titan, heck let them go into high sec. Give them out to rookie pilots with cookies and milk. Your changes suck. Not just for the pilots who fly them and spent years training for them, but for the builders and those who deal in cap parts and prints.
We're getting there soon. NGE this is a signature |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:03:00 -
[1064] - Quote
The one other thing I think is missing here is defined roles for each class of ship, particularly the dreadnought. Supercaps exist to kill carriers and dreads, ok, that's fine, but what is the reason to deploy the carriers and dreads in the first place? Everyone can shoot at structures, and even with the reduced siege timer the dreads are the only shiptype that are fixed in place while they do so and cannot simply warp off if trouble arrives. It was mentioned that further boosts to dreadnoughts were on the drawing board - I'd encourage you to make these known so we can comment on them further.
There needs to be a reason to use our dreads in the first place so that supercaps will come out to counter them, rather than just sending in the subcap fleet every time. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:03:00 -
[1065] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
See even a goon doesn't agree with some of this horriffic mess. Although its only about the smallest of issues.
Don't get me wrong, I think these changes are headed in the right direction, for the most part. I just think it should be a matter of degrees, not "YOUR SHIP THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY USEFUL FOR MULTIPLE ACTIVITIES IS NOW UTTERLY USELESS FOR ANY PURPOSE BUT KILLING CAPITAL SHIPS. DEAL WITH IT."
Titans' subcap-murdering abilities are clearly overpowered-- the doomsday changes are a great start, although a tracking decrease or signature increase on their guns is clearly necessary as well to prevent them from routinely one or two-shotting BS, BCs, and even cruisers.
Supercarriers' ability to field infinite sub-fighter drones is also clearly overpowered-- SC drones should afford them minimal protection against tacklers, not the ability to wreck endless numbers of them.
I don't know that the EHP nerf is strictly necessary anymore with the proposed logoff mechanic changes, but I don't think it will ruin the ship classes either, and it will make killing them easier for smaller gangs or alliances that lack a large super fleet of their own, so I'm not opposed to it.
The logoff change is a great idea-- the only thing I'd add to the proposed changes is that ships that ctrl-q without agression should be agressable up until the point where their ship actually enters its ewarp (IE, while its aligning to ewarp). This would prevent people from cynoing / jumping into a nasty situation and (provided they aren't bubbled) simply ctrl-q'ing their way out of it. If they can safely ewarp out without being shot / whatever, then obviously they chose a safe logoff scenario (rather than trying to exploit their way out of a lossmail) and their ships should disappear promptly as normal. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:03:00 -
[1066] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:I give up after this, you dont seem to either want to answer the question or you just dont understand. I understand. Do you understand what the change does?
Quote:More often than not when you DC you not able to do jack for a certian amount of time, until you either relog or have to reboot PC and then relog. Does all of that take more than 15 minutes? If no, the change will make fuckall difference to you. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:03:00 -
[1067] - Quote
Nomad I wrote:Excellent! But the Moros is getting cap problems with a high rate of fire.
+1, deacrse cap conso for XL gun. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:04:00 -
[1068] - Quote
mkint wrote:you know... I cba'd to read the whole threadnaught... makes me wonder if CCP's gonna do the same thing. Usually they only read the first 5 pages, listen to only the first 2 posts of "great!" and assume everything will go fine.
Does anyone else have the feeling that CCP's gonna screw the pooch on this one somehow?
Noone blames you or anyone for not reading this whole poastfest. It's in CCP's interest to read it, however, they'd do corporate harakiri by not digging through threads like these. Ultimately it's their choice tho, so you can never be sure. this is a signature |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:04:00 -
[1069] - Quote
CCP Tallest,
As you add comments here, could you also update the devblog to help those just arriving.
Thanks AG Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.-áPeace out Zulu! Hope you land well! |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:07:00 -
[1070] - Quote
What i was trying to tell you is:
1- Nerf the ability of super using figthers?
2- all switch to carriers and the problem remaisn the same? |
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:08:00 -
[1071] - Quote
George Holden wrote:Might sound stupid but please enlighten me here.
Did some theorycrafting around XL guns and HICs. A Ragnarok with 6x2500 Repeating Artillery I (my EVEHQ doesn't have the meta guns handy) with 5 Federation Navy Tracking Links fitted on an Oneiros for the bonuses gets around 0.0212 rad/sec tracking.
A Phobos being webbed with a 60% web does 99 m/s in an orbit does around 0.02475 rad/sec right? So that does already outrun the guns basically. Since the Phobos only has a signature radius of 240m (without bubble its 162m) and the guns having a signature resolution of 1000m that adds another safety buffer to it.
Since I'm too lazy right now and the world is going down here in switzerland I've plugged the ships into EVEHQ.
In a 4k orbit chances to get hit by the target itself are close to 0 (000000.1% +/-)
Now I'm pretty sure that titan won't be alone on the field so lets assume you have a fleet of remote boosted ragnaroks on the field with a decent spread. Highest chance to hit will come out at around 75% on a range of ~45km if you shoot at the Phobos sitting on your buddy titan 45km off you might actually hit.
On the other hand if the HICs are not webbed down and keep their speed of 247 m/s your chance to hit them drops to around 45% at 60km range lower if closer.
I'd say it's doable but you gotta have a decent number of HICs and DICs and might focus more towards aHICs since the lower sig radius significantly increases the chance of survival
Titans don't shoot the HICs. They DD them. Then they train their guns on your battleship fleet and obliterate them. You can look on any killboard and find numerous examples of single titans doing 75-100% of damage on BS kills.
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:08:00 -
[1072] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch.
And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:08:00 -
[1073] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:I give up after this, you dont seem to either want to answer the question or you just dont understand. I understand. Do you understand what the change does? Quote:More often than not when you DC you not able to do jack for a certian amount of time, until you either relog or have to reboot PC and then relog. Does all of that take more than 15 minutes? If no, the change will make fuckall difference to you.
wouldnt take 15mins no, so after say disconnection from lagg it will take a good few minutes at least to reboot an relogg. Then will take some time to load grid aswell.By that time after this patch you could of been dropped 2-3 times, its for these eventuallitys im talking about. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises RED.Legion
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:08:00 -
[1074] - Quote
Yikes..The guy is not stupid ..Way to get your ass banned. Now that is stupid.
Just Another Toon wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet! Now im angry
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:08:00 -
[1075] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Karim alRashid wrote:Aldarean wrote: As far as bomber/fighter setup go, they should be intened purposes. Bomber = carriers/dreads/SC and TItan Fighters = Bs's/Carriers/Dreads Heavy/Sentry = Battleships/BC Meduim = BC/Cruiser Light = Frigates/Destroyers
QFT fixed, fighters are an anti bs drone. OK, they may be now, but tell me why they SHOULD continue to be so? Quote:other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. Why heavy and sentry drones cannot be used by carriers against BS?
heavys and sentrys do minimal damage against a bs. where as fighters will damage a bs.
if you change fighters that much, you may as well just turn carriers into big haulers.
im aslo fine with sc's being able to defend themselves to soem extent v bs's. thsi stil allows that.
fighters currently are balanced. why do you want to change that? CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Cassandra Kazan
Padded Helmets
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:09:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Titans don't shoot the HICs. They DD them. Then they train their guns on your battleship fleet and obliterate them. You can look on any killboard and find numerous examples of single titans doing 75-100% of damage on BS kills.
They mostly only DD hictors in real emergencies, generally a well-fitted armor titan can kill a hictor just with guns, maybe with some assistance from target painting / webbing / tracking link action. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:09:00 -
[1077] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch. And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die.
Pure stupidness.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:10:00 -
[1078] - Quote
Good start ...
... but don't stop now and remove jumpbridges, sovereignity and high-end-moons to make 0.0 interesting for small alliances again. Supercaps and all this stuff is only a problem because of the sov- and moongoo-system. |
Aldarean
Eclipse Innovations Fabricated Confabulations
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:11:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Amanda Redman wrote:Just design a super dreadnought. Something to hunt SC and titans with.
Maybe not a Super Destroyer, but along that path.
But maybe to increase Dreadnaught usage, have the ability to fit a Carrier scram... Here me out.
Yes, it is ridiculous that a HIC should be able to tie a SC/Titan down. Even normal carriers.
The power to hold down the ship, could be directional proportional to the size of ship.
A HIC shouldn't have power to hold that size of ship, without some major draw back (Dont know right now).
So making SC/Titan immune to normal Scrams and HIC Bubbles, but susceptible to a new Capital scrammer. Specific to Dreadnaughts, or other Capital class ship.
Balance, SC/Titan would have a get out clause for sub-cap engagements. But could still be held down by a specific setup. |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:12:00 -
[1080] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch. And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die. Pure stupidness.
If you are looking for solopwnmobile yes. If you are loking for balanced pvp enviroment with alot of variety, then its best way.
|
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:12:00 -
[1081] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:
This isn't COAD, its not a place for propaganda and posturing-- its a place to discuss the future of gameplay. I would hope that people wouldn't just vote the party line on every issue here.
No its not COAD, but it is very clear to see that the changes that many of the Goons, a majority player base of lower SP/ new players no offense, have pushed for are on the plate for the patch. Ganthrithor wrote:
I'm mostly for these changes (I think supercaps are broken and killing gameplay) but there's just one particular point on which I disagree (that the total removal, rather than limitation of, drones on supercarriers is unnecessary). I'm not going to argue that this is necessary just because Mittani says I should, or because I think it would benefit our alliance (which I think it would, since we tend to be more subcap than supercap heavy).
I 100% agree that Supercaps are broken in EVE and I have been posting to that effect for the last 18 months. However I 100% disagree that the changes to supercaps presented by CCP are the fix. Perhaps being able to dock a supercarrier should be put on the plate if CCP really see's these changes as the way forward. Essentially they are telling a player that you have to fly a ship that can do one thing only and unless you have a sitting toon you are trapped in that ship.
The minute you let motherships dock, the arguments is going to go about to remove the ewar immunity, and suddenly the motherships is not a supercap anymore. Supers should never be able to dock, and should be ewar immune. However, ewar immunity currently doesn't work the way the name suggests it does. Supers should be unable to benefit from friendly remote abilities (including remote reps), but they should be immune against all ewar (including neuts). this is a signature |
50K khouri
Norse'Storm Battle Group Cascade Imminent
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:13:00 -
[1082] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:This Devblog pleases gaga. EDIT: Regarding fighter bombers, it seems that the Super Carriers will still be the most powerful anti-structure weapon in an alliance arsenal. Would it be better if the fighter bomber's ability to attack sovereignty structures was removed?
Perhaps you want CCP to go the whole hog and completely remove Super Carriers. read the post below yours it might bring you up to speed.
|
Mezmeriza
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:14:00 -
[1083] - Quote
The problem wasnt so much that dreads were a bad ship, it was more that titans can one shot them and a super can drop a dread within 2 mins.
If you have 100 dreads and the enemy cynos in 25 titans and 75 SC, those dreads are dead and the Supers probably wont get killed. Reason being that the 25 titans DD 25 dreads in the first few seconds and then the SC get remote repps while beating the poo out of the remaining 75 dreads who are stuck still and cant recieve reps. Those dreads will still be lucky to kill a single SC, probably even after this nerf.
1- The Titan DD needs to really make more sense as a single shot like that really messes it up. Having the titan rooted stop still to the spot for 10 mins after the DD is a step forward. 2- The problem is that fighter bombers should be reduced to just shooting structures for high damage. Against capitals, the DPS total of all 20 bombers to be about 25% of a single sieged dread's DPS so they CAN kill capitals, but not as the primary anti-capital ship they are currently. 3- The SC is a CARRIER. Removing the drones it can carry is just dumb. Yes they can engage subcaps atm, but then so can every other ship in game. Now, changing the mechanics of carriers to have a Drone bay AND a Fighter bay would be more sense. Carriers get Fighter bay space for say 10 fighters and then say 2000M-¦ Drone bay. SC get a Fighter bay to hold 25 Fighter/FB mix but only a 250M-¦ Drone bay. 4- Removing drones from Dreads is an ok idea, but still kinda stupid as the dreads should have some sort of defence, even if its just a 25m-¦ drone bay for 5 scout drones. Not enough to defend against a BS fleet but enough to just get rid of that little annoying noob ship that keeps turning up. 5- Changing the Siege and Triage module to allow the capitals to move REALLY slowly ie 10M/s and cannot warp to change them from being static so that reduces the damage of FBs would be a start/ possible solution so the tracking of FBs could be solved. 6- The lag the fighter bombers produce should be countered by increasing DPS of FBs but reducing no. of FBs that can be deployed from say 20 to 5, turning them into heavy fighters if you will. The Hp of the FB should be quite low as theyre all about DPS not armour, so a small ship can slap them about if needed. 7- Fighters shouldnt be touched. TBH, theyre just right for what they are. 8- I'd have left the log off as it was, but reducing the EHP of the SCs was a good idea. Having such a large buffer is why the log off was used so easily. If the log off is being increased, then 30 mins should be the max since the usual CCP trick is to nerf something or increase it so much that it has to be nerfed AGAIN by the next patch. Small increments instead of big **** ups.
Just a couple of ideas for people to tear to pieces. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:16:00 -
[1084] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:wouldnt take 15mins no, so after say disconnection from lagg it will take a good few minutes at least to reboot an relogg. Then will take some time to load grid aswell.By that time after this patch you could of been dropped 2-3 times, its for these eventuallitys im talking about. By that time before this patch, you could have been dropped 2-3 times.
The changes makes zero difference in this regard. None. Zilch. Nada. Not the slightest bit. This change kicks in after you've been logged off for more than 15 minutes with aggro, nothing else.
There are three scenarios at play here, so let's go through them before and after the patch:
1. You disconnect (willingly or not) without aggro. Before: after 1 minute, your ship disappears. After: after 1 minute, your ship disappears.
2. You disconnect (willingly or not) with aggro, and relog asap, within 15 minutes. Before: your ship remains on the field for 15 minutes, but you log in before it disappears. After: your ship remains on the field for at least 15 minutes, but you log in before it disappears.
3. You disconnect (willingly or not) with aggro, and do not relog asap. Before: your ship remains on the field for up to 15 minutes, and then disappears. After: your ship remains on the field for at least 15 minutes, and doesn't disappear until 15 minutes after it last got aggro:ed.
You are worried about cases 1 and 2 GÇö neither of which generates any difference whatsoever before and after the change. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Kahrnar
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:16:00 -
[1085] - Quote
Removing drones period from Supercarriers just made them a huge hunk of scrap metal...I guess the next thing to do would be to remove the ability to have ammo in your cargohold...just load guns and when ur done ur done. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:19:00 -
[1086] - Quote
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:Psymn wrote:Guys, your super caps are no longer solo pwn-wagons. If my baddon gets tackled by a dram theres nothing i can do about it either. Thats why i bring people who can.
I empathise with the folks complaining here that they will have to change their strategy. But any change that encourages inclusion of a wider range of ships in an engagement has to be a good change, right? How would you feel about the change if you were unable to dock the said baddon and change into usefull ship?
Or if said Abaddon didn't have a dronebay that could field light drones. Or if it couldn't use stargates. Etc. this is a signature |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:20:00 -
[1087] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch. And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die. Pure stupidness. If you are looking for solopwnmobile yes. If you are loking for balanced pvp enviroment with alot of variety, then its best way.
Is best way lol, your insaine, a bunch of fail in shield tanked blaster prophecys with a dictor are able to kill a super after this patch, an the super is unable to do anything about it. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Supers/titans wont be fielded solo, an they wont be fielded in a system for more time than it takes them to jump out again after this patch. Supers/titans will purely be used to counter drop a capital target or lesser number of capital targets, wich yet again defeats the purpose of this patch supposedly being able to balance out super/titan fleet fights. Will do completely the opposite.
|
Trinkets friend
Obstergo NEM3SIS.
212
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:21:00 -
[1088] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:
If Carriers are intended to be logistics ships, why are they called "carriers"? They have fighters, not just drones. Please reassess your assumptions.
I'd like to see fighters have their signature resolution bumped a little, so that fighters will be ineffective against cruisers. Rather than bumping them from 125m to 400m, a bump up to 200m should be enough: remember that fighters are also moving, which impacts on their chance to hit in the first place as opposed to Sentry drones for example, which have a resolution of 400m but are stationary.
The next step up from cruisers is battlecruisers, with sig radiuses between 240-280m (not including sig bloom from shield extender modules, shield extender rigs, T2 ammo etc). If you pack shield extenders onto a battlecruiser, expect to get smacked about by fighters. That's a consequence of a decision that you made.
If you're flying a carrier and want to get rid of those pesky HICs and EWAR cruisers, bring a support fleet.
-snip-
There's a lot of talk of nerfing fighters, eg, the above, which seems to state that carriers must use fighters versus BC's (read: drakes). I don't really care about people who fly drakes, cause they can DIAF for being lazy, but the argument "if you pack shield extenders on a BC expect to get smacked" is pretty lame. Carriers can use drones, and 10 ogre II's are pretty nasty to anything which moves slower than 800m/s.
I however, support carriers using fighters. Sudden Buggery lives in a wormhole, and carriers are one of the few capital ships you get to play with in w-space on a regular basis. Nerfing the sig resolution on fighters may have consequences for w-space dwellers who use them as ISK-generating machines (capital escalations or not) if you are unable to hit sleeper BS...or the T3/HAC gang which will inevitably try taking you down when you bork up your d-scan.
As for dreads in w-space, removing the drone bays will probably inconvenience the guys who own Moros' in low-end wormholes and use them for ratting. Luls, I say. Billion ISk wasted. For the guys in C5/C6's you would have support to web the BS down anyway so nerfing drones won't hurt them too much, and 5 minute siege timers will reduce the risk of being dropped significantly. So, all in all, a good move CCP.
But still, without fighters, carriers will suffer incredibly in w-space. What's the point of them, then? You need the DPS of fighters, you spent the time and ISk and took the risk (especially in low-end w-space where its a stranded asset) and having fighters removed would be a kick in the balls.
That said, I fully support the extendable 15 minute aggro timer. I've lost a couple of cap kills to chickenshiz riitards pulling a logoffski when pointed by a handful of BS/BC's. This way, you'll have to fight to the death, as it should be.
The skilful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man. Sun Tzu @trinketsfriend on twatter
|
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
546
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:25:00 -
[1089] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Why not just give the Carrier an skill boost that will lower the fighter sig per level. up to 200-300. That would keep the supercarrier fighters nerfed somewhat and would give the carrier a better stat. That way you can also decide just how much of a boost you'll be willing to give the carrier fighters.
PS: I just love the name of a "super dreadnought" it has a ring to it, I'd love to CCP design one (just not a sansha turdy one) - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Aldarean
Eclipse Innovations Fabricated Confabulations
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:26:00 -
[1090] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:Removing drones period from Supercarriers just made them a huge hunk of scrap metal...I guess the next thing to do would be to remove the ability to have ammo in your cargohold...just load guns and when ur done ur done.
No it didnt they just made them more in role with there design.
Your not talking about defensive capabilities here. You talking about Offensive capabilites.
A SC should have Defensive capabilities against Sub-cap. It shouldnt have offensive capailities.
Increasing local tanking ability could rebalance |
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:27:00 -
[1091] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:If you are looking for solopwnmobile yes. If you are loking for balanced pvp enviroment with alot of variety, then its best way.
Is best way lol, your insaine, a bunch of fail in shield tanked blaster prophecys with a dictor are able to kill a super after this patch, an the super is unable to do anything about it. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Supers/titans wont be fielded solo, an they wont be fielded in a system for more time than it takes them to jump out again after this patch. Supers/titans will purely be used to counter drop a capital target or lesser number of capital targets, wich yet again defeats the purpose of this patch supposedly being able to balance out super/titan fleet fights. Will do completely the opposite.
Umad? I know it hurts when you have to grind your isk for solopwmobile by your own and then after it turns to be "fleet ship", but deal with it. Its better for balance and pvp enviroment. But tbh supercaps deserved much bigger hit. |
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
73
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:27:00 -
[1092] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Have my babies. This is a proper two-way dialog between the players and CCP. I'm.. This is brilliant. If I go to fanfest you're not paying for a drink the entire ******* time, do you hear me? |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:30:00 -
[1093] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:If you are looking for solopwnmobile yes. If you are loking for balanced pvp enviroment with alot of variety, then its best way.
Is best way lol, your insaine, a bunch of fail in shield tanked blaster prophecys with a dictor are able to kill a super after this patch, an the super is unable to do anything about it. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Supers/titans wont be fielded solo, an they wont be fielded in a system for more time than it takes them to jump out again after this patch. Supers/titans will purely be used to counter drop a capital target or lesser number of capital targets, wich yet again defeats the purpose of this patch supposedly being able to balance out super/titan fleet fights. Will do completely the opposite. Umad? I know it hurts when you have to grind your isk for solopwmobile by your own and then after it turns to be "fleet ship", but deal with it. Its better for balance and pvp enviroment. But tbh supercaps deserved much bigger hit.
ROFL@U your a subcap only capable character, you have no intentions of having a balanced enviroment just as long as the peice of junk you fly wich will cost you 30mill will be able to kill a super worth in excess of 20bill. This my simple minded friend is biased utter rubbish.
|
Furb Killer
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:32:00 -
[1094] - Quote
NCDOT tears best tears (dont worry RaidenDOT, yours are second).
Quote:. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Let me fix this one for you:
Quote:. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you dont deserve to have a super/titan. This patch is carebearing it up, so nubs in there fail supers/titans cant down everything that moves.
Seriously it is hilarious that you complain in the same sentence that eve is carebearing it down, and that you need support for your supers. Only carebearing it down is when you get a solopwnmobile because you carebeared alot (or let a bot do it for you).
Quote:ROFL@U your a subcap only capable character, you have no intentions of having a balanced enviroment just as long as the peice of junk you fly wich will cost you 30mill will be able to kill a super worth in excess of 20bill. This my simple minded friend is biased utter rubbish.
If you are seriously afraid your supercap will be solod by a ship costing 30M, then it says more about how high you consider your own skill (pretty low) than the balance of the environment. Really if you let that happen (so you are solod by a dictor, which has been proven before is pretty much impossible) there is only one nub here. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:32:00 -
[1095] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Anile8er wrote:Otrovakruf wrote:There is one rule that everybody, except a few, seems to have forgotten! The most important rule of all!
If you can't afford to loose it, don't fly it!
and that goes for all ship classes and pilots. So stop complaining about you 80-120bil Titan or 20 something bil SC.
Your playing eve, Ships die, they are still gonna be hard to kill, but atleast we small guys have a chance to kill you now.
Good job CCP I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship. Oh no! you'll be forced to use the supercarrier to do what it was originally designed to do! the horror! the horror!
There was no "original intention", and if we're talking about the past, smaller entities with superior SP/ships (usually t2 hulls, nano-frigs and hacs spring to mind, also pirate-implanted solo bs) used to be able to fight bigger entities/blobs.
The current situation in EVE is that the blob almost always wins (lag and server issues could apply, but the general rule of thumb is numbers and/or supers: you win). These suggested changes by CCP will not change that scenario, in fact it will just reinforce it.
So if you want to argue that things should be "as intended" or they were "originally", we need to bring back a situation where SP and expensive hulls actually matters. Where MC and BoB's capital power allowed them to take most of nullsec even tho they fought larger blobs (ASCN, NC, etc). Where Burn Eden, PL, Triumviruate etc could terrorize big entities by superior tactics/skills/shiptypes.
EVE now is just a blob game with zero skill, zero return on investment, and zero incentitives to actually fight - and every incentitive to join the massive blob. It's everything this game wasn't, and the "dangerous" space, the skills/tactics element, the 'thinking out of the box' (to use shiptypes the ways they were NOT intended or assumed they would) has almost completely gone. These supercap changes, time dilation, etc, it's all just more blob incentitives. this is a signature |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:33:00 -
[1096] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:you have no intentions of having a balanced enviroment just as long as the peice of junk you fly wich will cost you 30mill will be able to kill a super worth in excess of 20bill. This my simple minded friend is biased utter rubbish. For one, no, that is not what he intends. For another, even if he did, it would not negate having a balanced environment.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Dray
Euphoria Released 0ccupational Hazzard
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:34:00 -
[1097] - Quote
Mar Drakar wrote:That logofski button... they took it away... :D
and then all was silent
This, a thousand times this.
What about gate jump logoffski?
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
241
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:34:00 -
[1098] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
Is best way lol, your insaine, a bunch of fail in shield tanked blaster prophecys with a dictor are able to kill a super after this patch, an the super is unable to do anything about it. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Supers/titans wont be fielded solo, an they wont be fielded in a system for more time than it takes them to jump out again after this patch. Supers/titans will purely be used to counter drop a capital target or lesser number of capital targets, wich yet again defeats the purpose of this patch supposedly being able to balance out super/titan fleet fights. Will do completely the opposite.
^^ (He mad, i'n't he?.../Me grins cheekily)
Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM 7! (Mittens, you may not want to admit it, but your day in the sun is over. Next!)
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:34:00 -
[1099] - Quote
Dray wrote:Mar Drakar wrote:That logofski button... they took it away... :D
and then all was silent This, a thousand times this. What about gate jump logoffski? If you can't get some aggro in before he logs, there's no difference (and, of course, when done right, gate logoffski won't let you do that). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Liranan
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
62
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:35:00 -
[1100] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:Liranan wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Thank you, it's good to see you guys listening to your players, shame it takes thousands of people leaving the game for CCP to take notice. I do think you guys shoot once again look at Selene's original MS/SC proposals. That was far more balanced than what we have today. It was selene(DEV) and the players that made sc the pawnmobiles they are today. I really think that nerfing the drone bay off supers is a good nerf, the figther nerf was uncalled for because it wouldn't affect scars only it would destroy carriers as a class.Whay i would like to see is to remove the ability of bombers to attack sov styructures making the dreads be the main bulk of the fleet sov in 0.0. And to people that are saying they get massacred by Scars and figthers guess what , warp out, kill figthers or just dont be dumb enougth to get caugth by a super fleet and die due to your stupidity.
You missed the entire Nozh affair? You missed the threadnoughts about how CCP had destroyed an idea everyone, bar a few devs, had wanted? Why don't you go back and read up on it all, before you start pointing fingers of blame? http://www.youtube.com/user/zeitgeistmovie?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/23/Lio3n66bwOo This ****'s got to go - Jacque Fresco |
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:35:00 -
[1101] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:If you are looking for solopwnmobile yes. If you are loking for balanced pvp enviroment with alot of variety, then its best way.
Is best way lol, your insaine, a bunch of fail in shield tanked blaster prophecys with a dictor are able to kill a super after this patch, an the super is unable to do anything about it. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Supers/titans wont be fielded solo, an they wont be fielded in a system for more time than it takes them to jump out again after this patch. Supers/titans will purely be used to counter drop a capital target or lesser number of capital targets, wich yet again defeats the purpose of this patch supposedly being able to balance out super/titan fleet fights. Will do completely the opposite. Umad? I know it hurts when you have to grind your isk for solopwmobile by your own and then after it turns to be "fleet ship", but deal with it. Its better for balance and pvp enviroment. But tbh supercaps deserved much bigger hit. ROFL@U your a subcap only capable character, you have no intentions of having a balanced enviroment just as long as the peice of junk you fly wich will cost you 30mill will be able to kill a super worth in excess of 20bill. This my simple minded friend is biased utter rubbish.
This is actually boosting tengu/legion character and despite that i want ganglinks working only on grid. Just for balance sake. Btw its you who is simple minded. You just fly "solopwnmobile" you dont want to lose and you dont care about balance and variety in pvp at all. |
Kahrnar
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:37:00 -
[1102] - Quote
Aldarean wrote:Kahrnar wrote:Removing drones period from Supercarriers just made them a huge hunk of scrap metal...I guess the next thing to do would be to remove the ability to have ammo in your cargohold...just load guns and when ur done ur done. No it didnt they just made them more in role with there design. Your not talking about defensive capabilities here. You talking about Offensive capabilites. A SC should have Defensive capabilities against Sub-cap. It shouldnt have offensive capailities. Increasing local tanking ability could rebalance
So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:38:00 -
[1103] - Quote
Liranan wrote:You missed the entire Nozh affair? You missed the threadnoughts about how CCP had destroyed an idea everyone, bar a few devs, had wanted? Why don't you go back and read up on it all, before you start pointing fingers of blame? For those who don't remember: Nozh was the guy who started messing around with reasonably acceptable numbers in every direction imaginable, and who, when it was pointed out to him that things wouldn't work the way he envisioned them, suggested using TPs on ewar-immune shipsGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:38:00 -
[1104] - Quote
Tippia wrote:For one, no, that is not what he intends. False. Its exactly what i want.
|
Ratnose Banker
Pink Sockers
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:38:00 -
[1105] - Quote
Make the siege module able to have a script fitted which makes it do less dps in siege but higher tracking. Would be great imo. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:40:00 -
[1106] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Tippia wrote:For one, no, that is not what he intends. False. Its exactly what i want. Kill a SC in a single Drake? Because that's what he claims that you wantGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
623
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:40:00 -
[1107] - Quote
Misanth wrote:EVE now is just a blob game with zero skill, zero return on investment, and zero incentitives to actually fight - and every incentitive to join the massive blob. It's everything this game wasn't, and the "dangerous" space, the skills/tactics element, the 'thinking out of the box' (to use shiptypes the ways they were NOT intended or assumed they would) has almost completely gone. These supercap changes, time dilation, etc, it's all just more blob incentitives. And what's the cause of this? The SOV system. Fix the SOV system into a much, much more granular system, and make it so it's much easier to take and lose a system, along with a vastly upgraded reason to actually take a system, even for a short while, and you'll see these large empires shrink and smaller entities being able to get a foothold in 0.0, at least for a while.
If it's done right, a large alliance will be able to keep a bigger empire on the basis of them being able to field f.ex 5x100 fleets, able to defend 5 systems at once, instead of today's system where you don't really have to defend any system for almost a week before you chuck all 500 people (or more) into the system, along with supers. |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
754
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:40:00 -
[1108] - Quote
CCP Tallest likes to mock us...
The fighter change solved so many issues in one go, that it was too good for CCP to put on TQ. I said it when I first saw it, and it turned out to be true...
Why CCP, why can't you give us the good stuff that you yourself suggest? Is this some kind of cruel game you play internally at CCP? 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Sarahs Sister
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:41:00 -
[1109] - Quote
These ideas are way to harsh on SupperC you have made them into a very specific ship buy taking away their versatility so you should make them dock-able and reduce the manufacturing cost otherwise the nerf out ways the cost and risk. Because you have a character stuck in a ship all the time waiting for the off chance they can go to battle, but more then likely wont happen and you cant even rat in them so might as well dock them up until a time they are needed.
My ideas are if you keep the proposed changes:
1. Make SuperC dock-able 2. Reduce the number of parts needed to make them 3. Increase the Hit Points on a Titan 4. Increase the damage of the DD weapon
My ideas if you decide to re-think this proposal:
1. Give SuperC all there drone back 2. Reduce there EHP (same as what you have now) 3. Make it so you cant hit anything apart from capitals with Fighters and FB 4. Reduce the amount of drone that can be deployed to 10 but still 20 for fighters
Sarah
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:41:00 -
[1110] - Quote
Ratnose Banker wrote:Make the siege module able to have a script fitted which makes it do less dps in siege but higher tracking. Would be great imo.
Yeah, especially battleship pilots would appreciate that.
|
|
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
623
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:41:00 -
[1111] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol So you didn't bring a support fleet? Oh dear, sucks to be you. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:42:00 -
[1112] - Quote
Leon Razor wrote:Well 16 hours and 42 pages later it's nice to see the community arguing (constructively?) over a FiS feature this time. I know something like this has been said at least once here, but I think they need to hear it again just in case they haven't gotten it yet. CCP:
- Read this entire thread, there are reasonable suggestions here from both sides
- Make some adjustments
- Make another blog about it
- Read another 40+ page thread
- Maybe repeat this process a few times
- Then post a final list of balance changes well before the patch day
- Be prepared to make adjustments before the next big expansion
If you are really serious about listening to your player base and regaining their trust, you are going to need lots of two way communication. I know you gather a lot of info before deciding on changes like these, but you need to continue that process up to and after release. Most people feel like balance changes are simple database value updates that are easy to do, so since it's relatively quick to implement them, spend the extra time talking and listening to us, and don't wait 18 months to react. Aside from the harsh vs effective (SC vs blob) arguments, a general issue people on both sides seem to have with these changes is that they are too flat, e.g.
- Overall HP -20% VS a variable HP nerf that considers the unique properties of each ship
- Removing all drones VS something like a smaller drone bay for non-fighters (like you did with the separate fuel cargo bays)
Very nice put, CCP's main fault the last five years has been in the communication department. Your suggestion would go a long way towards making this game alot better.
this is a signature |
Duchess Starbuckington
Starbuckington Manor
149
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:43:00 -
[1113] - Quote
Really liking these changes, but I do have to ask: what nich+¬ do you see fighters filling after this nerf exactly? Seems a bit heavy handed in this case.
Also please let the Veldnought keep the drones
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:43:00 -
[1114] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Tippia wrote:For one, no, that is not what he intends. False. Its exactly what i want. Kill a SC in a single Drake? Because that's what he claims that you wantGǪ
Solo supercarrier not being able to defend itself except remote ecm and neuts. |
Furb Killer
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:44:00 -
[1115] - Quote
Liranan wrote:This is the problem with the game, people who've never flown a ship whine so much that devs listen to them. Now, why don't you fly a dread a few times and watch those lovely guns miss a pos and then tell us your maths. You ever seen a Sieged Moros barely hit an iHub? No? Those guns barely track targets the size of a star, let alone a moving target But maths don't lie! I have a Moros, I have sieged it while still moving at zero from an ihub. I hit it fine, think I was even top damage dealer.
But really eve is math. Sure you need to properly apply it, but things like missing POS's due to tracking are things you can really easy put in the tracking formula (or let EFT do it for you), and you simply get the truth back. They hit for full damage, their tracking is sufficient. What are you saying then? The tracking formula is wrong? Eve = math, deal with it. |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:44:00 -
[1116] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Misanth wrote:EVE now is just a blob game with zero skill, zero return on investment, and zero incentitives to actually fight - and every incentitive to join the massive blob. It's everything this game wasn't, and the "dangerous" space, the skills/tactics element, the 'thinking out of the box' (to use shiptypes the ways they were NOT intended or assumed they would) has almost completely gone. These supercap changes, time dilation, etc, it's all just more blob incentitives. And what's the cause of this? The SOV system. Fix the SOV system into a much, much more granular system, and make it so it's much easier to take and lose a system, along with a vastly upgraded reason to actually take a system, even for a short while, and you'll see these large empires shrink and smaller entities being able to get a foothold in 0.0, at least for a while. If it's done right, a large alliance will be able to keep a bigger empire on the basis of them being able to field f.ex 5x100 fleets, able to defend 5 systems at once, instead of today's system where you don't really have to defend any system for almost a week before you chuck all 500 people (or more) into the system, along with supers.
Goons having no skills. They need 500+ to win fights. Basic knowledge, CSM = GOONS = WIN only way a goon wins. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:44:00 -
[1117] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Solo supercarrier not being able to defend itself except remote ecm and neuts. That's something rather different than what he suggests, thoughGǪ
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
623
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:45:00 -
[1118] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Misanth wrote:EVE now is just a blob game with zero skill, zero return on investment, and zero incentitives to actually fight - and every incentitive to join the massive blob. It's everything this game wasn't, and the "dangerous" space, the skills/tactics element, the 'thinking out of the box' (to use shiptypes the ways they were NOT intended or assumed they would) has almost completely gone. These supercap changes, time dilation, etc, it's all just more blob incentitives. And what's the cause of this? The SOV system. Fix the SOV system into a much, much more granular system, and make it so it's much easier to take and lose a system, along with a vastly upgraded reason to actually take a system, even for a short while, and you'll see these large empires shrink and smaller entities being able to get a foothold in 0.0, at least for a while. If it's done right, a large alliance will be able to keep a bigger empire on the basis of them being able to field f.ex 5x100 fleets, able to defend 5 systems at once, instead of today's system where you don't really have to defend any system for almost a week before you chuck all 500 people (or more) into the system, along with supers. Goons having no skills. They need 500+ to win fights. Basic knowledge, CSM = GOONS = WIN only way a goon wins.
Inappropriate comment removed. Spitfire |
Dray
Euphoria Released 0ccupational Hazzard
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:45:00 -
[1119] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dray wrote:Mar Drakar wrote:That logofski button... they took it away... :D
and then all was silent This, a thousand times this. What about gate jump logoffski? If you can't get some aggro in before he logs, there's no difference (and, of course, when done right, gate logoffski won't let you do that).
You make it sound like a viable tactic, which it shouldn't be, or did I read you wrong? either way it shouldn't be allowed.
|
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:45:00 -
[1120] - Quote
Why can't SCs just have a fighter AND a bomber bay, separately?
I get that you want SCs to be de'fangable, and thats why you reduced the drone bay. But this looks almost TOO easy to defang. Plus, do you know how much of a pita it would be to swap fighters for fighterbombers or vice versa if you decided to swap types before a battle?
You'd either need a pos, a freighter, or a whole bunch of industrial trips.
Maybe an increase in corp hangar or cargo capacity to help compensate (AKA you can carry spares in ship, but not in bay?)
I mean, the last thing that supers need is more pain in the ass for less power. |
|
Kahrnar
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:45:00 -
[1121] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Kahrnar wrote:So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol So you didn't bring a support fleet? Oh dear, sucks to be you.
So do you fly everywhere you go with a support fleet? Give me a break No offense at all makes it useless |
Naradius
DEATHFUNK
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:45:00 -
[1122] - Quote
I will wait to see, if removing drones from Dreads is a good idea...IMHO I feel that you need to improve the tracking bonus for dreads, for this idea to be a "balanced" idea. As I said - I'll wait and see.
Nerfing logoffski - hmmm, great idea in theory, but only in a perfect world. What happens if the server craps out, node dies, genuine internet connection loss? This would be fine, as long as GM's didn't fall back on the "The logs, they show nothing", canned response. I've had the server and node die on me too many times, to believe this idea is viable until CCP managed hardware/software is more reliable The reasons and issues as to why you haven't implemented a log off nerf up till now, are reasons and issues you haven't fully addressed.
Edit: Moros Turret Cap usage rate needs to be changed, if rate of fire bonus is increased. "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." - Douglas Adams |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:46:00 -
[1123] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Solo supercarrier not being able to defend itself except remote ecm and neuts. That's something rather different than what he suggests, thoughGǪ
Sorry then for misunderstanding. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
623
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:46:00 -
[1124] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Kahrnar wrote:So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol So you didn't bring a support fleet? Oh dear, sucks to be you. So do you fly everywhere you go with a support fleet? Give me a break No offense at all makes it useless Do you fly a scimitar around and expect to win everything? No? Could that possibly be because it's a ship with a specific role?
Well shucks, imagine that, so is the supercarrier and titan. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:47:00 -
[1125] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Shadowsword wrote:Anile8er wrote:I can afford to loose my Nyx... thats why i use it. It's more that CCP is making my Nyx useless other than killing caps, and more so useless to me because I am not in a giant blob alliance, and I cant change into another ship. You can still dps structures as fast as 15 players in battleships, same against other capitals, and can absorb as much damage as 100 battleships. If an enemy fleet of your size and composition choose to focus you first, your sacrifice win the fleet battle. What? Do you have any idea how fast super caps die in fleet fights? 20 SC focused on my Nyx and I'm down in just under 4 minutes, thats with my hardners on and overheated. 100 man BS gang can down me in about 2 minutes after they neut me completely of any cap and turn off my hardners. This is the reality, for all those who cry about supercaps having "MASSIVE" EHP and being indestructable. All this talk about supercaps have 100MIL EHP! Really? X-type buff tanks, T2 rigs, implants, not in gang, hardners on. Hel - 25 million EHP Wyvren - 32 million EHP Nyx - 36 million EHP Aeon - 56 million EHP Hardners off (it takes 50 BS each with a neut under 60 seconds to drain a supercap to 0 cap) Hel - 7 million EHP Wyvren - 9 million EHP Nyx - 15 million EHP Aeon - 23 million EHP Yeah 100 mil EHP super carriers with no weakness that just cant be killed by subcaps! right.....
..and in the 100mil EHP scenario, it's supers vs supers so they still die within minutes. this is a signature |
Furb Killer
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:47:00 -
[1126] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Kahrnar wrote:So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol So you didn't bring a support fleet? Oh dear, sucks to be you. So do you fly everywhere you go with a support fleet? Give me a break No offense at all makes it useless Well finally one of the whiners understands it. Yes you are supposed to go everywhere you go with a super with a support fleet. Just like you dont use a dread without support (well you can do it for a specific task, but if you run into some opponents you are ******). |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
379
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:48:00 -
[1127] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch. And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die. Pure stupidness.
No dude, it's quite good actually. A Supercarrier cost lots of billions, you're supposed to use it like an aircraft carrier. That means, you won't go solo, or else a single lone submarine will sink you in the first 20 nautic miles. Or, you could have gone with a support fleet.
But I agree on the fact that supercarrierblobs are the problem, not the supercarriers themselves.
A supercapfleet is a fleet you can't kite, you can't neut it enough (hardeners have 10s cycles, if neuting was really a common tactic vs supercapblobs, they would have capboosters juste to keep hardeners running), you can't speedtank it, you can't triage (logistics will get DDs, commandships aswell, same goes for expensive bhaalgorns and such) and absorb damage from it, you can't tackle it (Except with dictors and hictors, but they will get blown up in the first minute), you can't ECM or damp or web, you can't kill an endless stream of drones, and the lag generated from 40 supercarriers using 20 drones each (800 drones btw) keeps guns from cycling correctly and whatnot. That's why it's broken. The fact that no valid tactic is available to win or at least fight vs that kind of supercapital blob. |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:48:00 -
[1128] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Kahrnar wrote:So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol So you didn't bring a support fleet? Oh dear, sucks to be you. So do you fly everywhere you go with a support fleet? Give me a break No offense at all makes it useless
Holy jesus yes! It is that unbelievable? Do you really want to always fly supercarriers and titans and fight only other supercarriers and titans?
|
Kahrnar
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:49:00 -
[1129] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Kahrnar wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Kahrnar wrote:So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol So you didn't bring a support fleet? Oh dear, sucks to be you. So do you fly everywhere you go with a support fleet? Give me a break No offense at all makes it useless Do you fly a scimitar around and expect to win everything? No? Could that possibly be because it's a ship with a specific role? Well shucks, imagine that, so is the supercarrier and titan.
Ok well Carriers>SuperCarriers now...that makes perfect sense lol |
Furb Killer
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:50:00 -
[1130] - Quote
Quote: X-type buff tanks, T2 rigs, implants, not in gang, hardners on.
Oooooh I got an idea. Get into the freaking fleet......
|
|
Nox Virago
Invictus Australis Northern Coalition.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:51:00 -
[1131] - Quote
WarFireV wrote:Sakaali wrote:1) Without sentry drones supercarriers are unable to attack POS. Is this intentional then?. Then use dreads dumby :P
Genius comment <--- (sarcasm). Lemme just dock the ole Nyx in the station and swap out for a dread... |
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
623
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:52:00 -
[1132] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:Ok well Carriers>SuperCarriers now...that makes perfect sense lol I guess you're not quite comprehending the concept of "a specific role". |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:53:00 -
[1133] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote: Ok well Carriers>SuperCarriers now...that makes perfect sense lol
Yeah. Enjoy carriers popped every 30s by 10 moms. |
Liranan
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
62
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:54:00 -
[1134] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Liranan wrote:You missed the entire Nozh affair? You missed the threadnoughts about how CCP had destroyed an idea everyone, bar a few devs, had wanted? Why don't you go back and read up on it all, before you start pointing fingers of blame? For those who don't remember: Nozh was the guy who started messing around with reasonably acceptable numbers in every direction imaginable, and who, when it was pointed out to him that things wouldn't work the way he envisioned them, suggested using TPs on ewar-immune shipsGǪ
The ewar immune ships were sieged dreads. Nozh told us to target paint sieged dreads. Pages upon pages of people laughing at him led him to never poast again. Every single alliance in game laughed at Nozh, it was that ridiculous.
Furb Killer wrote:I have a Moros, I have sieged it while still moving at zero from an ihub. I hit it fine, think I was even top damage dealer.
But really eve is math. Sure you need to properly apply it, but things like missing POS's due to tracking are things you can really easy put in the tracking formula (or let EFT do it for you), and you simply get the truth back. They hit for full damage, their tracking is sufficient. What are you saying then? The tracking formula is wrong? Eve = math, deal with it.
Don't ever let go of maths, oh geat EFT warrior. While you're at it, telling yourself dreads do full damage to stationary targets, ignore those 'barely hit shots'.
Ignorance is bliss. http://www.youtube.com/user/zeitgeistmovie?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/23/Lio3n66bwOo This ****'s got to go - Jacque Fresco |
AspiB'elt
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:54:00 -
[1135] - Quote
Hi CCP,
The best way it's to remove completly the fighter to sc. Only fighterbomber.
If you have 20 nyx on the field without support. You have again 200 fighters on the field and with 200 fighters it's impossible to tackle with hid.
Don't forget that the supercarrier can still cap transfert and cap remote. If you have 20 nyx how many bhaalgorn do you need to cut the RR of 20 nyx. More then 100 ...
I have often see more then 20 nyx and the field but i have never see 10 bhaalgorn on the field ...
Remove completly the fighter from supercarrier and the subcap have some chance to kill some massive blob of super without support |
TheButcherPete
Titan Inc. Bloodbound.
96
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:55:00 -
[1136] - Quote
Giggles.
My moncole doubles as a cigarette lighter, a flashlight, a laser and x-ray goggles. If you haven't noticed yet, I'm in love with Punkturis. -á-á-á
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:55:00 -
[1137] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote: fighters are an anti bs drone.
OK, they may be now, but tell me why they SHOULD continue to be so? Quote:other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. Why heavy and sentry drones cannot be used by carriers against BS? heavys and sentrys do minimal damage against a bs. where as fighters will damage a bs.
Not at all, they can do 900+ dps, which is pretty good for a damage to a ship a class lower. This damage is almost TWICE the damage a bonused drone BS can do to another BS.
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:58:00 -
[1138] - Quote
Liranan wrote: Don't ever let go of maths, oh geat EFT warrior. While you're at it, telling yourself dreads do full damage to stationary targets, ignore those 'barely hit shots'.
Holy jesus this guy is clueless... go get some clue about tracking mechanics.
|
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
546
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:58:00 -
[1139] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:a ship with NO offence is useless...lol
What about the guardian then? Or any Cov-ops for that matter?
- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Furb Killer
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:58:00 -
[1140] - Quote
Liranan wrote: Don't ever let go of maths, oh geat EFT warrior. While you're at it, telling yourself dreads do full damage to stationary targets, ignore those 'barely hit shots'.
Ignorance is bliss.
Yes, while you ignore those wrecking hits. That some shots barely hit doesnt mean you do less than your max DPS. You also get them when you are not moving at all and shooting that POS or ihub.
But most importantly question remains: are you really telling me that eve is not simply based on math? Of course you have to properly apply it, you cannot say that a thorax has better dps and ehp than a cyna, so it will beat a cyna. But things like will my dread hit the POS or not are simply putting it in a well known tracking formula and observe the result.
EDIT: btw you do realise if you are not moving yourself and the POS generally also isnt very fast, tracking doesnt play a role, right? |
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
309
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:59:00 -
[1141] - Quote
i have a question for CCP to answer
as i like to build my own capital ships wth the new changes to capitals / supercapitals (ie loss of drone bays/hp reductions) will the build cost of capitals / supers be reduced? Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Krell Kroenen
Miners In Possession
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:00:00 -
[1142] - Quote
It seems to me that CCP intends for caps and super caps to be anti-capital ships and or structure grinders. Which is well and fine if that role was truly niche for them but as I see things now that isnGÇÖt the case. There seems to be no requirement to field caps as things stand now and in fact I can now see them as a liability in some cases.
For example if a 100 man subcap fleet fought a mix of say 70 subcaps with 30 caps would the mix fleet be at a disadvantage in light of these changes to caps? If the 30 caps are no threat to the sub caps faced against them, then that means the battle now depends mostly on the 70 subcaps which are outnumbered and hindered in mobility by being tied to the cap fleet they are defending
Correct me if I am wrong in that assumption but that is how it looks to me. I agree that caps should not be fielded without support . But other than seeing them having the ability to shave off time to reinforce a structure, I am not seeing the advantage of them. Especially if a pure subcap fleets can engage mixed cap fleets more efficiently and safely than having your own caps in to the mix if they are equal in numbers?
|
Ztrain
Viziam Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:02:00 -
[1143] - Quote
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:It will be interesting to see how these changes play out, and I look forward to many more balancing devblogs in the future.
Don't know don't care. After reading the cap ship nurf blog I have reacquired 8.7 gig of HD space for more useful purposes. I remember when Supers were fun, then they took away the end game. See you all in the new Star Wars.
Z |
DJB16
Phantom Squad Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:03:00 -
[1144] - Quote
i think the change in the super carrier bay size is abit wierd in my mind it only makes sense if ur reducing the number of deplyable fighters/bombers to 15 (with no drone links) otherwize
why spend 15+billion on a ship that can have all its dps destroy with no backups?
a dominix can carry 3 flights of ogres (granted it only goes around with 2 flights of heavys/sentrys but still its an extra full flight of drones it should scale up properly)
also this balancing doesnt address the issue with titans GUNS the GUNS can be REMOTELY BOOSTED via tracking links so they CAN hit moving battleships at less than 50km if it was at 150km i wouldnt care but at 50km thats way imbalanced
btw i can fly the moros and i can tell u that bonus change to ROF is just gonna bunk the thing more than it is already due to cap use! |
Sarahs Sister
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:04:00 -
[1145] - Quote
Oh and in addition to my other post to allow Supers to dock you could bring out a station upgrade that is required to dock supers. That can cost a lot of ISK and time/effort.
On a totally selfish point and aesthetic point of view, please increase the size of the Wyvern it is pathetically small compared to the other SuperC and the Dreads.
Sarah |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:06:00 -
[1146] - Quote
Krell Kroenen wrote: For example if a 100 man subcap fleet fought a mix of say 70 subcaps with 30 caps would the mix fleet be at a disadvantage in light of these changes to caps?
30 caps means alot of remote repair, so unless opposing fleet is able to alpha through their buffer, it is in big disadvantage.
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:06:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote: fighters are an anti bs drone.
OK, they may be now, but tell me why they SHOULD continue to be so? Quote:other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. Why heavy and sentry drones cannot be used by carriers against BS? heavys and sentrys do minimal damage against a bs. where as fighters will damage a bs. Not at all, they can do 900+ dps, which is pretty good for a damage to a ship a class lower. This damage is almost TWICE the damage a bonused drone BS can do to another BS.
a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs wardens is 450 dps, im tickling a bs fighters is 1250 dps im killing it at last CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
309
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:07:00 -
[1148] - Quote
Krell Kroenen wrote:It seems to me that CCP intends for caps and super caps to be anti-capital ships and or structure grinders. Which is well and fine if that role was truly niche for them but as I see things now that isnGÇÖt the case. There seems to be no requirement to field caps as things stand now and in fact I can now see them as a liability in some cases.
For example if a 100 man subcap fleet fought a mix of say 70 subcaps with 30 caps would the mix fleet be at a disadvantage in light of these changes to caps? If the 30 caps are no threat to the sub caps faced against them, then that means the battle now depends mostly on the 70 subcaps which are outnumbered and hindered in mobility by being tied to the cap fleet they are defending
Correct me if I am wrong in that assumption but that is how it looks to me. I agree that caps should not be fielded without support . But other than seeing them having the ability to shave off time to reinforce a structure, I am not seeing the advantage of them. Especially if a pure subcap fleets can engage mixed cap fleets more efficiently and safely than having your own caps in to the mix if they are equal in numbers?
u might have a valid point there. perhaps making the dps of sieged dreads increase more than they do at present while hitting structures might make it worth deploying dreads and supporting carriers but if dreads dont actually get a dps increase buff then the game will soon end up whelpcane/hellcat online.......as there would be no reason to fly anything else Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Furb Killer
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:07:00 -
[1149] - Quote
Ztrain wrote:Trebor Daehdoow wrote:It will be interesting to see how these changes play out, and I look forward to many more balancing devblogs in the future. Don't know don't care. After reading the cap ship nurf blog I have reacquired 8.7 gig of HD space for more useful purposes. I remember when Supers were fun, then they took away the end game. See you all in the new Star Wars. Z Rage quit because plebs can hurt your 'end game' ship best rage quit.
My subscription runs out in 12 hours, but that is because I simply cannot find fun anymore in eve (as in, how much time do you spend pew pew, and how much time grinding or using eve as a glorifed chat client with horrible fonts?). Not something as stupid as people being able to violate my space ship even though I have an older char. Hell that is the entire definition of what eve used to be about. Before all the vets became whiney little bitches. |
Dirala
Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:08:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Make a different Type of Drone Bay. Fighter Bay for example. That way its easier to balance Supercarriers and Carriers.
The Fighter Bay can only hold fighter Bomber, and fighter. Where the normal Drone Bay can hold the rest.
Than make a Drone Bay on a Supercarrier like 100m-¦ big, so a SC can at least defend itself against some lonely ships. But the small Drone Bay would make it impossible to put more than 5 Heavy Drones or Sentries in. |
|
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express Intrepid Crossing
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:09:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Okay I think I'm ready to reply.
Supercarrier changes:
Okay this nerf is a bit severe reducing them to a very specialized role. They may become like dreads of old. As such they need to be able to dock it's just unfair to make someone dedicate to sitting in one with this very limited role.
If I had a suggestion to improve I would add a small sub cap drone bay that can hold regular drones but just a very small amount. Maybe twice what a domi could carry.
Fighter changes:
Well I saw were some of this was being backed off of so that might be okay.
Dread changes.
Like the reduced siege timer. Worried the Moros will be overpowered compared to other dreads particularly the Nagflar. Though I read they are reviewing the matari caps.
Titan change.
I think the removal of the drone bay may be a bit to much.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:10:00 -
[1152] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote: a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs
Never type again.
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:13:00 -
[1153] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote: a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs
Never type again.
lol thats the number eft says. what should it be to kill a bs with a rep? CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
623
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:13:00 -
[1154] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:lol thats the number eft says. what should it be to kill a bs with a rep? BS fly with reps nowadays? |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
309
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:16:00 -
[1155] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote: Not at all, they can d
a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs wardens is 450 dps, im tickling a bs fighters is 1250 dps im killing it at last
worth noting:
Thanatos Info wrote: Gallente Carrier Skill Bonuses: 50% bonus to Capital Shield and Armor transfer range per level 5% bonus to deployed FightersGÇÖ damage per level 99% reduction in CPU need for Warfare Link modules Can fit Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration modules Can deploy 1 additional Fighter or Drone per level 200% bonus to Fighter control range
normal drones do not get any bonus applied to them and fighters only get a range bonus thus crappier dps if the fighter nerf goes ahead Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
50K khouri
Norse'Storm Battle Group Cascade Imminent
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:18:00 -
[1156] - Quote
Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:
CCP fixed the real problem - changes that will primarily affect ratters who improperly use their supers.
obvious hints on how to beat supercap "blobs".
-Tokino/Lords]
So you and I dare say a few of your fellow carebears are unhappy at the "Improper" use of SC's, who are you to decide how and when paying customers use the SC's.
and as far as Blobs go and the beating thereof who in their right mind would field an SC after these proposed changes take place. |
Krell Kroenen
Miners In Possession
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:18:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Krell Kroenen wrote: For example if a 100 man subcap fleet fought a mix of say 70 subcaps with 30 caps would the mix fleet be at a disadvantage in light of these changes to caps?
30 caps means alot of remote repair, so unless opposing fleet is able to alpha through their buffer, it is in big disadvantage.
If they where all carriers yes attached in a logi role to a subcap fleet but I was thinking of a fleet sent out to say bash a pos so it would be a bit more mixed in it's capital ship assignment. Hence why I didn't say pure carriers I said caps
And really if you are going against an alpha subcap fleet those logi carriers aren't going to do you much good. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:20:00 -
[1158] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:lol thats the number eft says. what should it be to kill a bs with a rep? BS fly with reps nowadays?
ive seena lot of really bad fits coming outtta goons recently so yeh its possible CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:21:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:
If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.
I dont disagree, however I dont deserve to loose a 26 bil isk ship because I could not deal with a solo random tackler by myself or small random nano gang with a dictor who never set out to kill a supercap. |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:24:00 -
[1160] - Quote
Furb Killer wrote:Kahrnar wrote:[quote=Lord Zim]
So do you fly everywhere you go with a support fleet? Give me a break No offense at all makes it useless Well finally one of the whiners understands it. Yes you are supposed to go everywhere you go with a super with a support fleet. Just like you dont use a dread without support (well you can do it for a specific task, but if you run into some opponents you are ******).
What is the reason for bringing out the supercarriers with the support fleet? Remind me pls. |
|
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
623
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:25:00 -
[1161] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:lol thats the number eft says. what should it be to kill a bs with a rep? BS fly with reps nowadays? ive seena lot of really bad fits coming outtta goons recently so yeh its possible I'm not the one implying that 650dps is insufficient to drop a BS because of "a rep".
Anile8er wrote:Shadowsword wrote:
If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.
I dont disagree, however I dont deserve to loose a 26 bil isk ship because I could not deal with a solo random tackler by myself or small random nano gang with a dictor who never set out to kill a supercap. Actually, yes, you do. You're doing something dumb by wielding a supercap solo, you deserve the risk of losing it because the other guy was better prepared than you were.
Bring a ******* support fleet. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:29:00 -
[1162] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Robert Lefcourt wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Kyjaro wrote:I can see 2 problems
- Carriers should remain deadly against sub-capitals, so give them a bonus to fighters to counter the penalty. I'm thinking about carriers ratting and the fact that carriers can be killed easily. They shouldn't have the penalty to fighters Or they could just avoid senselessly nerfing fighters in the first place... Oh, i see perfect sense in that. They want to prevent, that a mom can single-handedly take on fleets of every size and get away with it. This nerf will take care of the problem. To encounter a mixed fleet, you will need backup from now on. I think you overestimate the degree to which fighters (or normal drones) from supercaps play a pivotal role in fleet fights. Even if they were used extensively, fighters are not as problematic as people keep making them out to be. They can be killed. As I keep mentioning, if people bring the right ships-- smartboming BS, bombers, or antisupport BCs (speaking of fleet diversity, remember when BCs and HACs used to be fielded alongside BS?) will *all* make short work of a fighter cloud. Once the fighters or drones are cleared, the supercapitals become deadspace-fit killmails waiting to happen. They're not like titans, where the only way to remove the dps from the field is to remove the ship. If people just kept that mind when putting together a fleet, they'd probably find it a lot easier to kill supercarriers. E: Just to be clear, however, I do think that SCs need their normal drone bay sizes drastically reduced. Infinite waves of drones are no fun for anyone.
Already posted here twice, how I killed six Fighters for a Nyx while I was alone in a Nighthawk. Somehow I wish I had frapsed it, would've been awsome to post that as a counter-argument in this thread. It might be because I'm a super-pilot myself, but when you know how Fighters function you can easily kite them around and thus completely neglegt their damage output.
Since people are being stubborn and-/or stupid, I'll give a hint: they're slow and not very agile. If you have enough speed/maneuverability, especially combined with multiple on-grid bookmarks or objects to warp to, it's not even hard to "tank" 20 Fighters in a semi-decent BC. I reccon a BS would have alot more issues tho, unless a Machariel, you'd be too slow and not agile enough. But there's the rock/scissor/paper, and the TL;DR is that my solo BC-hull was tanking a Nyx' Fighters perfectly fine. Obviously I stayed out of neut/pointrange, I could not point him anyway so even less reason to do. this is a signature |
Silver Kid
Aurora Tech. Bloodbound.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:30:00 -
[1163] - Quote
With the speed this thread is moving I'll probably be wiped away under the endless posts but anyway.
Well my two cents are that leave Dreadnoughts their drone bay make it smaller if you must but thinking that a newbi ship with a point can hold a dread at bay is just silly, but then again I don't fly one.
Fly safe |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:32:00 -
[1164] - Quote
Funny all the people bitching in here about this patch being good are corps and alliances that have nothing to do with 0.0 or the ones that can't or won't field Capitals.
My older brother has a better toy than me so lets cry and threaten to quit the game unless you get rid of it.
Here is a wake up call. I've been in and out of 0.0 in the last couple years. You know what I said the first time I got DD'd or the first time our fleet got ****** up by a large amount of Capitals ? Damn I need one of those. You know what I didn't do ? Cry and complain because someone has a better ship than me. I realized from day 1 that there are always going to be people in this game with more than I have. That shouldn't be a reason qq and attempt to get CCP to take it away from them. It should be a reason for you to bust your ass so you can have one too.
Here is another thing. This game is risk vs reward. If your an alliance/pilot that risks more for the reward then of course your going to come out on top. Your talking about changing 0.0 and the mass majority of people agreeing with this patch sit in high sec or low-sec all day and get upset because someone has more than they do. Stop trying to change ships that **** you off because you either don't have one or because you sick of walking into traps because the guy running a complex in your system has a cyno on and isn't such an easy killmail anymore. |
Bloody Wench
236
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:32:00 -
[1165] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
From someone with less than 2 days left on fighters 5 I thank you! A LOT
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:33:00 -
[1166] - Quote
Fiberton wrote:Many of them enjoy League of Legends. Wreck this game np..Work for LOL BadBoyBubby wrote:Most of these changes...meh.
But reducing the drone bay on supercaps to 25 fighters/bombers max? That is seriously dumb. You've already taken out all the drones. You've nerfed fighters and fighter bombers again (how people forget so quickly) on sig radius, so they can't do much to sub caps anyway. So why reduce the drone bay capacity to the point where you can't even load a full flight of each type?? Seriously, WTF????
I'll repeat the question asked so often and never answered: DO CCP DEVS ACTUALLY PLAY EVE???
I like LoL too, it's free to play and the devs are actively communicating with players and/or balancing the game, it has instant access PvP, around the clock gaming and overall it's just a damn fine game.
EVE was alot better than LoL, especially back when five-man roaming in null was still viable, when players wanted to fight and wasn't afraid of dying/losing, and the devs used to communicate with us on the forums regulary.. but we're far from that nowadays. this is a signature |
Alex Stampede
Selectus Pravus Lupus Transmission Lost
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:35:00 -
[1167] - Quote
Rico Minali wrote: .... Can we have killmails for self destructed ships too please? ...... <-- this
and can we have a killmails of self destructed ships inside a camped pos ?
*lol*
:)
ty
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:36:00 -
[1168] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:You know what I didn't do ? Cry and complain because someone has a better ship than me. I realized from day 1 that there are always going to be people in this game with more than I have. Too bad. What you should have realised is that there is no GÇ£better shipGÇ¥ because of paper-scissors-rock balancing, and that the moment one ship is universally GÇ£betterGÇ¥ it is by very definition broken.
You learned the wrong lesson, and now you're having issues with the examGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:36:00 -
[1169] - Quote
Ztrain wrote: Don't know don't care. After reading the cap ship nurf blog I have reacquired 8.7 gig of HD space for more useful purposes.
I guess you could say that Ztrain has left Zstation
HEYOOOOOOOO ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Casey CIA
An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:36:00 -
[1170] - Quote
Bloody Wench wrote:
From someone with less than 2 days left on fighters 5 I thank you! A LOT
Hah, I am in the same boat.... I was like, damnit well that was pointless |
|
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:37:00 -
[1171] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Already posted here twice, how I killed six Fighters for a Nyx while I was alone in a Nighthawk. Somehow I wish I had frapsed it, would've been awsome to post that as a counter-argument in this thread. It might be because I'm a super-pilot myself, but when you know how Fighters function you can easily kite them around and thus completely neglegt their damage output.
Since people are being stubborn and-/or stupid, I'll give a hint: they're slow and not very agile. If you have enough speed/maneuverability, especially combined with multiple on-grid bookmarks or objects to warp to, it's not even hard to "tank" 20 Fighters in a semi-decent BC. I reccon a BS would have alot more issues tho, unless a Machariel, you'd be too slow and not agile enough. But there's the rock/scissor/paper, and the TL;DR is that my solo BC-hull was tanking a Nyx' Fighters perfectly fine. Obviously I stayed out of neut/pointrange, I could not point him anyway so even less reason to do.
I agree with you on this on but you are missing a very important factor. Your example is 1 vs 1 scenario GǪ I wild love to see how you are dogging 5 fighters with another 4.000 FB (200 SC) on grid GǪ Have you tried it?
What happens to a lone super after the nerf? GÇô Same thing that is happening now to a lone super: it dies. This changes dramatically when you scale the scenario GǪ
My 2 cents ... E |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:38:00 -
[1172] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote: a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs wardens is 450 dps, im tickling a bs fighters is 1250 dps im killing it at last
First, are you sure you calcs are alright, e.g. I get 950dps for 15 Ogre IIs, not 630 like you.
Second, how do you define "enough to kill a BS". I have surely killed BS with a ship doing less than 200dps before resists, so a statement "630 dps, not enough to kill a bs" is puzzling at best.
Third, do you think also that carriers are unable to defend themselves, for example, against frigates, because, "241 dps is not enough to kill a frigate"? (that, btw, is 15 Warrior IIs). |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:38:00 -
[1173] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Malcanis wrote:Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!! Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it. How is it bullshit ? Sorry that my 30+ billion isk ship that I had to wait like half a year to build and took me 4 years of training to get in can instantly destroy your 10 cent frigate. I mean seriously, what am I thinking its so unfair of me. Why would I ever assume that time and money could buy power in a game running on a capitalist economy ? To make me even more of a bad guy, why would I assume that my hard earned money and dedicated skill training would give me the right to fly ships untouchable by someone with less skills and dedication than me ? I'm so ashamed of myself I must say this is pure right on the dot for all super capital players. CCP you need to look at this post and understand frustrations by our community the super capital community. Bowing down to guys who fly battlecruisers and frigates and swarms and did not have the patience or the time and dedication to train for those super capitals in game. Thank you for wasting players time to train these ships and destroy as a whole a community that was over a years worth of training. CCP you fail!
The problem you're facing is that you both argue the wrong way. Arguing that money > all is not a way to balance a game. The proper way to address CCP/this issue would be to highlight how it's incredibly narrow-minded the way this game is developing now: it's all favouring blobs, and all game balance changes are reflecting on blobs. Nullsec and sov warfare has been the outspoken endgame since.. well as long as I remember actually, so it's not surprising CCP want to balance the game around that, and promote that gameplay. What is odd tho, is how they are making it increasingly less appealing to go to null, and how it will only be for blobs.
I.e., balancing ships around what fleetmates you are supposed to have = pigeonholing playerbase into a game/role they might not want to play. There's alot of people (me included) who live in null and don't care about sov warfare. I don't shoot structures, I don't want massive fleets, and I don't mind facing blobs - I took the deliberate choice to fight guerilla "man vs machine". That's fine. But when CCP is changing my ships to force me to join the blobs, they have suddenly changed the essence of EVE (the sandbox) into a game that tell us how to play. That's against the very nature of the core mechanics, the history, and the description of this game. That's what you should highlight, not the isk argument.
this is a signature |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:38:00 -
[1174] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Ztrain wrote: Don't know don't care. After reading the cap ship nurf blog I have reacquired 8.7 gig of HD space for more useful purposes.
I guess you could say that Ztrain has left Zstation HEYOOOOOOOO
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:41:00 -
[1175] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:You know what I didn't do ? Cry and complain because someone has a better ship than me. I realized from day 1 that there are always going to be people in this game with more than I have. Too bad. What you should have realised is that there is no Gǣbetter shipGǥ because of paper-scissors-rock balancing, and that the moment one ship is universally GǣbetterGǥ it is by very definition broken. You learned the wrong lesson, and now you're having issues with the examGǪ
They aren't universally better. There are many ships in the game that can kill them. Fleet comp is the all important here. I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight. So anyone here crying about Caps being OP obviously has never used them in combat.
They aren't invincible and if you aren't bringing enough to kill them or aren't bringing the right fleet comp(and I don't mean more supers than the other guy) then that is your problem. Not the problem of someone sitting in a Cap ship. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:43:00 -
[1176] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote: a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs wardens is 450 dps, im tickling a bs fighters is 1250 dps im killing it at last
First, are you sure you calcs are alright, e.g. I get 950dps for 15 Ogre IIs, not 630 like you. Second, how do you define "enough to kill a BS". I have surely killed BS with a ship doing less than 200dps before resists, so a statement "630 dps, not enough to kill a bs" is puzzling at best. Third, do you think also that carriers are unable to defend themselves, for example, against frigates, because, "241 dps is not enough to kill a frigate"? (that, btw, is 15 Warrior IIs).
i was just using skills no dcu, its rare yourll see carriers with them unless there ratting ofc CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:43:00 -
[1177] - Quote
Supercarriers were originally ships that were a modest increase over regular carriers and grotesquely priced as to be an end game ego ship. They were neat and something you pointed at "ooh look at that!" but not strategically important. Then they were improved dramatically and in doing so they became extremely popular, but also destabilizing. They evolved from being something that was a nice ego booster "Look at what we can make and field!" to something that was a critically important part of 0.0 warfare. Things reached a point where you simply could not compete on any appreciable level unless you fielded a large blob of these damn things and it is strangling the game. The rush to field supercaps fueled black market ISK dealing because people who used to show up and do things in dreads/carriers (battleships) no longer felt useful in the game and rushed to get a supercap by any means necessary.
This has been destructive to the game and the focus on supercaps being the end game content instead of one aspect of end game content had to be stopped. I believe these changes will make it so supercaps are still useful, but not the deciding factor in 0.0 combat. To be successful you must field a balanced fleet and if you can field a supercap fleet in addition to a balanced fleet you will be able to swing your super-dongs around just like you used to, but with a lot more caution.
And titans? They were garbage from the first iteration. They were a dumb idea, poorly implemented, and now they are still a dumb idea but slightly more killable. I would have loved to see some attention to titan gun tracking as well but this is a good first step towards bringing us back from a game where only the rich need apply.
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:44:00 -
[1178] - Quote
Casey CIA wrote:Bloody Wench wrote:
From someone with less than 2 days left on fighters 5 I thank you! A LOT
Hah, I am in the same boat.... I was like, damnit well that was pointless WHY WHY WHY do people think that fighters being able to hit cruisers is a good thing? The only reason this is still going to be acceptable is with the nerfed drone bay on supercarriers, otherwise supercarrier > everything larger than a frigate. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:45:00 -
[1179] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Kari Kari wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Malcanis wrote:Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!! Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it. How is it bullshit ? Sorry that my 30+ billion isk ship that I had to wait like half a year to build and took me 4 years of training to get in can instantly destroy your 10 cent frigate. I mean seriously, what am I thinking its so unfair of me. Why would I ever assume that time and money could buy power in a game running on a capitalist economy ? To make me even more of a bad guy, why would I assume that my hard earned money and dedicated skill training would give me the right to fly ships untouchable by someone with less skills and dedication than me ? I'm so ashamed of myself I must say this is pure right on the dot for all super capital players. CCP you need to look at this post and understand frustrations by our community the super capital community. Bowing down to guys who fly battlecruisers and frigates and swarms and did not have the patience or the time and dedication to train for those super capitals in game. Thank you for wasting players time to train these ships and destroy as a whole a community that was over a years worth of training. CCP you fail! The problem you're facing is that you both argue the wrong way. Arguing that money > all is not a way to balance a game. The proper way to address CCP/this issue would be to highlight how it's incredibly narrow-minded the way this game is developing now: it's all favouring blobs, and all game balance changes are reflecting on blobs. Nullsec and sov warfare has been the outspoken endgame since.. well as long as I remember actually, so it's not surprising CCP want to balance the game around that, and promote that gameplay. What is odd tho, is how they are making it increasingly less appealing to go to null, and how it will only be for blobs. I.e., balancing ships around what fleetmates you are supposed to have = pigeonholing playerbase into a game/role they might not want to play. There's alot of people (me included) who live in null and don't care about sov warfare. I don't shoot structures, I don't want massive fleets, and I don't mind facing blobs - I took the deliberate choice to fight guerilla "man vs machine". That's fine. But when CCP is changing my ships to force me to join the blobs, they have suddenly changed the essence of EVE (the sandbox) into a game that tell us how to play. That's against the very nature of the core mechanics, the history, and the description of this game. That's what you should highlight, not the isk argument.
While I agree with you, Isk is always a factor. This game has a Capitalist economy. Where there is Captialism, money is always a driving factor. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:45:00 -
[1180] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Stupid question : It is really that hard to adjust orbit ranges for fighters, so they can hit battleships "just fine" - lets say for 100% of dps with 2 target painters - but make them unable to seriously hurt sub bs ships?
Another question : Wouldnt be the easiest way to lower the performance gap between armor and shield caps simply making slave sets to not affect capitals, making bonus shield ehp from leadership or titan to take effect immediately and slightly lowering the cpu needs for cap shield transfers?
3rd question : Why are supercarriers capable of using ALL of their special bonuses in lowsec? Titans cant be build in lowsec - they cant fire dd in lowsec. No supercaps ca be build in wh space - they cant even enter. Supercarriers cant be build in lowsec - they can use ALL of their special abilities there... It would make perfect sense if they lost their point immunity in lowsec, especially if you take into account, how much harder is to keep mom tackled by focused point compared to bubble and how useless are hics in lowsec for anything else but pointing moms.
Do you want free isk with the subscription too? CCP already gave lazy players like you the HIC to tackle supers. We used to tackle them by bumping, nossing and neuting, you should learn the core mechanics of the game before you even beg for free killmails.
Since I'm all nice and posting helpful hinters today, I'll give you another: a) you can use multiple HIC that rotate their points, so they can be RR'd, b) you can keep at the edge of pointrange, pulse mwd and warp off/back.
It's so ridicilously easy to point supers today that anyone who fails to do so, does not deserve a kill. this is a signature |
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:46:00 -
[1181] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:[quote=Tippia] I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight.
Fun times. Six 12k big slowass ships being able to "bail" from 70 t2 cruisers, just because these fools didnt bring at least 15 hics with them on roam...
That i call balance.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:48:00 -
[1182] - Quote
Othran wrote:As you're removing logoffski can you go a little further and remove the ability to initiate self-destruct while aggressed please?
You need to do this otherwise the :goodfights: you anticipate will not happen. The target will simply self-destruct if he can't logoff. It happens far too often now, but it'll be happening a lot more with your changes.
Simple change - you cannot self-destruct while aggressed.
No. Self-destructing deprives the target of a killmail, which is a perfectly viable grieifng method. I'd selfdestruct a Rifter if I thought I was dying, just to get the tears from the other guy when he doesn't get his precioussss. If you think about it, you got the kill so you already won. He lost his isk. The minute you start caring more about the killmail than the actual kill, suddenly you let him beat you when he selfdestruction. Think again about this.. you.. let.. him.. win. If you stop care about the killmail, suddenly you're not losing out on anything.
There was a time where killmails meant nothing, today people are just way too killmail horny. If they fail to kill someone in time, they didn't deserve that killmail. And before you ask; I've lost several mothership km's due to players selfdestructing, and I'm perfectly fine with it. They did what they thought was best at that point, I still killed them. I did not lose anything, they did. this is a signature |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:50:00 -
[1183] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Casey CIA wrote:Bloody Wench wrote:
From someone with less than 2 days left on fighters 5 I thank you! A LOT
Hah, I am in the same boat.... I was like, damnit well that was pointless WHY WHY WHY do people think that fighters being able to hit cruisers is a good thing? The only reason this is still going to be acceptable is with the nerfed drone bay on supercarriers, otherwise supercarrier > everything larger than a frigate.
I agree that Fighters should not be able to hit cruisers. However, completely nerfing them so that they can't even hit battleships is a little overboard. Removing drone bays all together and nerfing fighters makes it impossible to even kill one. I have expectations that if I get attacked by a small gang of sub caps that I'll be able to defend myself in a Cap. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:50:00 -
[1184] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:They aren't universally better. There are many ships in the game that can kill them. Fleet comp is the all important here. I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight. GǪand you don't see the contradiction here?
Quote:While I agree with you, Isk is always a factor. This game has a Capitalist economy. Where there is Captialism, money is always a driving factor. It's not a factor in balance, which is the whole point here. You cannot claim balance because of price GÇö at best you can do the opposite (i.e. this p.o.s. isn't worth the price tag so fix the price to reflect its value). That is where the capitalist economy comes in: it does that part almost automaticallyGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Roosterton
Syndicalis Immortalis The Skeleton Crew
337
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:50:00 -
[1185] - Quote
Idea: Why not keep the Fighter change, but give carriers a tracking/sig resolution skill bonus so that they can bring fighter accuracy down to the level that they were pre-nerf? That way only supercarriers, who don't get the bonus, will be shafted, and will need to be used primarily for anti-cap support.
Sounds better than either a blanket nerf or a blanket non-nerf. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:50:00 -
[1186] - Quote
ThaWolf wrote:Maybe instead of nerving we should rather redo the Super-carrier as a whole, after reading this thread, i think they are not fitting in the game as they are, overpowered on one hand, mainly in larger groups, and close to useless if they get nerved that way, while the character is stuck in it.
So i came up with that:
New role, high end toy for all ppl who like to fly Caps, can do much but nothing Overpowered.
- Fighter Bombers will be pure Anti-Structure Weapons, bombing range 35km, anti Pos too, dmg should be like 2 Dreads
- Fighters stay like they are pre-nerv, the SCs should do Damage like 2 Carriers
- Drone bay gets nerved to 1 Bomber set 1 Fighter set and ~500m3 (yeah still normal Drones)
- SC cant use Remote repair mods, they should be only for Standard Carriers.
- ECM immunity stays
- remote ECM stays
- All SCs should be balanced to the defense Capabilities of a NYX (which i think is the most balanced EHP for SCs)
- balance production price of all SCs to the same amount
- SCs should be able to dock as a Compensation, and to make it possible that more ppl rely want to own them, so more can be killed
Agree with everything except the dock part. Supers are unique in the sense that they are a) e-war immune and b) can't dock. That's the benefit and tradeoff you get for flying one, something you accept by taking the seat, and something they should never change.
this is a signature |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:52:00 -
[1187] - Quote
Drop Dead Sexy wrote:as a sub cap pilot, lo sec roamer i second this nerf, thank you dev's, any chance on forbidding titans in low sec??? titan alfa kills are very annoying and must be looked at. super cap hot drops on a single ship becoming more and more popular taking away all chances of survival for solo warrior.
What kind of ****** pilot are you that can't get away from a solo super? You don't fit propulsion mod? this is a signature |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
96
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:52:00 -
[1188] - Quote
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 |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:53:00 -
[1189] - Quote
Misanth wrote:ThaWolf wrote:Maybe instead of nerving we should rather redo the Super-carrier as a whole, after reading this thread, i think they are not fitting in the game as they are, overpowered on one hand, mainly in larger groups, and close to useless if they get nerved that way, while the character is stuck in it.
So i came up with that:
New role, high end toy for all ppl who like to fly Caps, can do much but nothing Overpowered.
- Fighter Bombers will be pure Anti-Structure Weapons, bombing range 35km, anti Pos too, dmg should be like 2 Dreads
- Fighters stay like they are pre-nerv, the SCs should do Damage like 2 Carriers
- Drone bay gets nerved to 1 Bomber set 1 Fighter set and ~500m3 (yeah still normal Drones)
- SC cant use Remote repair mods, they should be only for Standard Carriers.
- ECM immunity stays
- remote ECM stays
- All SCs should be balanced to the defense Capabilities of a NYX (which i think is the most balanced EHP for SCs)
- balance production price of all SCs to the same amount
- SCs should be able to dock as a Compensation, and to make it possible that more ppl rely want to own them, so more can be killed Agree with everything except the dock part. Supers are unique in the sense that they are a) e-war immune and b) can't dock. That's the benefit and tradeoff you get for flying one, something you accept by taking the seat, and something they should never change.
fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere. |
Furb Killer
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:55:00 -
[1190] - Quote
Quote:They aren't universally better. There are many ships in the game that can kill them. Fleet comp is the all important here. I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight. Just going to point this out, but generally when talking balance it is not assumed that something is balanced because they have to bail without losses when outnumbered over 10 to 1... |
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:55:00 -
[1191] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:[quote=Tippia] I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight. Fun times. Six 12k big slowass ships being able to "bail" from 70 t2 cruisers, just because these fools didnt bring at least 15 hics with them on roam... That i call balance.
That is balance. One fleet didn't have enough HICs to hold the point. The HICs on field got nueted. It didn't happen because of a glitch or because something was broken.
You say this but its not different than not bringing enough tackle on sub cap vs sub cap engagement. Its not different except instead of throwing it on any old ship, you have to have specific ships. We're sorry if you find training skills to tedious. |
WhiteSleeve
IV Horsemen
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:57:00 -
[1192] - Quote
Stupid forum. had it all nice and neat. Guess now I'll have to put in the TL DR version.
All Capitals should be monsters of the BattleSpace. Taking away drones from Dreads is stupid. They can find room in the hulls for a couple of flights of light scout drones if NOTHING else. They should all have the Possibility to pop a tackler, maybe not with their main weaponry but that's what light and medium scout drones are for. Siege mode should make hitting pretty much Anything more likely for dreads. Even a chance to pop frigs, (Likely? maybe not; but possible yes). They can't move after all and can't be repped. So what's the REAL advantage to it. Maybe no 700% bonus to damage against BattleCruisers and smaller, tracking increase instead against them. Super Carriers. should be able to bring a full flight of Fighters and Fighter Bombers. Just enough room in the Fighter Bay for that. They should also be able to deploy Light/Medium scouts for the same reason as other Capitals. Not enough room in the Fighter bay for a full flight of all drone types though. You want to carry more/other drones you gotta drop either fighters of fighter bombers to make room. The CHANCE to pop the tackler. This premise of a cap being able to pop tackle is predicated upon the idea that it's just a frig or two or maybe even one or two hictors. They should have the CHANCE to get away before the tacklers gang arrives. Bit more tackle than that, or the tackle fleet's got more support then to bad so sad for the support-less super. Titans. Even Titans should have a CHANCE to pop a tackler (light\medium scout drones). And from those better at Maths I agree, Straight nerf to Super EHP's is not fair to Minmi. no I'm not a Minmi pilot either. Look closer at that Please Tallest before just a straight drop. Carriers should be feared by all. they SHOULD be able to deploy Light Scouts all the way up through Fighters, full flights of each. You'd still have to pick and choose so you can either carry spares or the flights. But that's what a carrier should be able to do. With Supers, make it so FB's can attack structures. You can then eliminate them being able to carry heavy/sentry drones. But make it so that a Dread's Guns do a better job of it. Perhaps FB's don't do full damage against structures compared to Capital Class ships. That seems like a good fix to me. Dreads feared by Structure owners and Caps for sure. They should make on down to BC's Very Nervous (small number of them say 3-5 without other support) with their guns. Carriers should make everybody worry a bit. They can't bring the pain to Caps like Super Carriers with their Fighter Bombers or Dreads with their 'Big Guns' or Titans with their DD's. But they can make even Frigs have a bad day. Titans Should make Structures and Caps Quake in their boots. What else is a DD for? Up to a flight of 5 Sentry drones for Dreads is not unreasonable. They're for Structure bashing after all. up to a flight of Medium Scout drones for Super Carriers and Titans is also not unreasonable to give them a CHANCE to get away before the tacklers gang can arrive. Heard an idea surrounding Jump Bridging of titans on a pod cast recently. Instead of bridging, the titans take everything in a certain radius with them. I think that that'd be a better idea for Carriers and Super Carriers. Think refinement of technology. Carriers can jump a few non jump capable ships With them somewhere (make taking ships with them a script or something) but can't jump as far. Super Carriers the same idea but more cause they are larger. Titans should be able to jump their full limit with ships, but should use a script of some type to make a bridge; decreasing the chance they're put in danger. And as far as Jump range goes, Dreads should be comparable to Carriers. Maybe not exactly as far, but since they're the closest in size, they should have similar jump ranges imo.
With that all said, I'm not totally negative on the items in the dev blog. I just think they need to be through through a little deeper is all.
Just the 2 isk of a non capital pilot on the subject.
Just finally read through enough of the idea of not nerfing fighters. thank Goodness for that! |
Subtarian
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:57:00 -
[1193] - Quote
I give a BIG THUMBS UP to all these changes. Thank you for not nerfing the fighters becasue it would've had a negative effect on carriers.
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.
CCP could you give us a general idea of how a basic fleet fight will look or stack in your minds. After being in one after another for so many years it will be interesting to see how you guys envision a typical fleet fight.
Once again we appreciate the re focust on the game at hand. As a player with 3 accounts running for 4 plus years , its nice to see you guys are intent on keeping me coming back for years more |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:58:00 -
[1194] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: 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
Your ideas are all terrible and neuter the ships to the point of extinction, raising the question of why somebody would pay that much for a ship that with your changes, does exactly nothing.
Keep your day job. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:59:00 -
[1195] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:That is balance. If you believe that, then guess what? The change will also be balanced. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 14:59:00 -
[1196] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Do you want free isk with the subscription too? CCP already gave lazy players like you the HIC to tackle supers. We used to tackle them by bumping, nossing and neuting, you should learn the core mechanics of the game before you even beg for free killmails. Since I'm all nice and posting helpful hinters today, I'll give you another: a) you can use multiple HIC that rotate their points, so they can be RR'd, b) you can keep at the edge of pointrange, pulse mwd and warp off/back. It's so ridicilously easy to point supers today that anyone who fails to do so, does not deserve a kill. Yes, its completely lazymode to be able to tackle supercarrier only with 1 type of ship, that is completely useless for anything else in lowsec. Its also ridiculously easy to point scs, because you are not under 20 fighters from each, 2x 30k+ neuts from each and remote ecm burst. Its also completely ok, that supercarriers - that can be built ONLY in 0.0 sovereignity space - can be used without any disadvantage in low sec space. Space, where you cannot built supercarrier.
Also how much supercarriers there were in game, when you used to tackle them with "bumps." Nice example of "always bet on stupid" pvp approach btw. And nice example of ccp providing good pvp balance. Making a ship, that basically cant be tackled withou pilot making mistake, mmm every fotmchaser goes wet...
|
Napoleon Bonapart
Draconis Holding Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:00:00 -
[1197] - Quote
I think the supercap nerf is long overdue however I don't think they will have the effects CCP is looking for
1) Hel - This thing really doesn't need anymore reduction of HP it's already crap. Leave Hel HP as is and reduce Aeon 20%, Nyx and Wyvern 15%
2) Titan tracking - Everyone hurfblurfing about nerfing titan tracking are not realizing that EVE will become Hurricane & Rifters Online. A nerf to tracking would guarantee that whoever brings the most bodies into the engagement will win. If you have the balls to drop supers on a fleet fight you shouldn't be punished by not being able to track subcaps. I agree the DD nerf is much needed but Titans are supposed to be game changers, if you nerf them down to where they are pointless and can't defend against sub caps then noone will ever deploy them unless they are 100% sure they will win engagement. 99% of the time they will spend logged off in a pos doing nothing but collecting dust.
3) Fighters/FB - I don't think removing drones is a good idea. Why not instead increase the bandwidth of Fighters/FB so they can deploy less. With the increase to sig radious a good bomber run will destory a supercarriers main weapon and they will be forced to either sit there and do nothing...or if able to jump back to safe pos and log off for another 3-4 months doing nothing.
I like that CCP is actually reading ideas in this thread and giving proper feedback, it just seems like with the current proposed changes EVE will move to whoever has the biggest subcap blob wins the game. |
Dirala
Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:00:00 -
[1198] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Anile8er wrote:Shadowsword wrote:
If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.
I dont disagree, however I dont deserve to loose a 26 bil isk ship because I could not deal with a solo random tackler by myself or small random nano gang with a dictor who never set out to kill a supercap. Actually, yes, you do. You're doing something dumb by wielding a supercap solo, you deserve the risk of losing it because the other guy was better prepared than you were. Bring a ******* support fleet.
Well, unlike Carriers and Dreads, you cant store a Supercap in a Station. So you are saying, you should only log in when there is a support fleet ready? He is talking about some random roaming fleet and such. I totally agree with the nerf, still the Supercarrier should have at least a little tooth against small ships. So that he is not completly helpless against a small gang of say 5 ships. |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:01:00 -
[1199] - Quote
Another issue here is some players use supercarriers for other than PVP at times. Before all the flaming and name calling, I ask you why shouldn't they be able to? Players use PVP ships to PVE in EVE all the time, CCP allows those ships to be cross functional.
And for the guy in the purely PVE faction battleship, a ship class designed for PVP but often used for PVE, he can just dock and change ships when he wants. What if CCP said Navy Ravens should only be able to kill Battleship class hulls in this game, we are disallowing the fitting of cruise lunchers and removing the drone bay.
I would love to see the uproar in this game if CCP changed every ship to be single tasked, single focused. For example, Hurricanes and Drakes will only be able to damage other BC, we are making their weapon systems 100% ineffective against smaller ships and removing the drone bays, so make sure you bring a frigate support fleet with your BC roam or you will get raped a small frigate gang. Same with battleships, if you are flying a battleship you have a 0% chance of hitting or doing any damage to a ship smaller than another battleship and you will have no drone bay. In fact unless you are in a ship with drone bonuses you will not have a drone bay. And the type of drone you can use in your drone ship will be based on your ship class/size, so Ishkur can use lights, Vexor, Ishtar, Myrmidon and Gila can only use mediums, and the Dominix can only use heavys and sentries.
That is the kind of inflexibilty CCP is presenting for supercaps. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:02:00 -
[1200] - Quote
Dirala wrote:Well, unlike Carriers and Dreads, you cant store a Supercap in a Station. So you are saying, you should only log in when there is a support fleet ready? Yes. Bring the right tool for the job. Without a support fleet, the SC is not the right tool.
Quote:I totally agree with the nerf, still the Supercarrier should have at least a little tooth against small ships. So that he is not completly helpless against a small gang of say 5 ships. Why not? If it encounters a small gang of, say, 5 ships, it will survive long enough for the support fleet to get there and wipe the floor with those ships. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2051
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:03:00 -
[1201] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
/emote breathes big sigh of relief.
Thanks for the love!
Missed an interview or debate? Check my CSM7 blog for details.
Many thanks to all of my friends and supporters for the kind words! |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2587
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:03:00 -
[1202] - Quote
Vile rat wrote: fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.
ehp bricks repping a station that dock up whenever they go into low armor and get free repairs |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:05:00 -
[1203] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Drop Dead Sexy wrote:as a sub cap pilot, lo sec roamer i second this nerf, thank you dev's, any chance on forbidding titans in low sec??? titan alfa kills are very annoying and must be looked at. super cap hot drops on a single ship becoming more and more popular taking away all chances of survival for solo warrior. What kind of ****** pilot are you that can't get away from a solo super? You don't fit propulsion mod?
You are clearly not aware of 1337 pvpers "new" tactics.
You engage in 1v1 in any other than kiting ship (i know, completely stupid idea right?), you get tackled, sc warps/jumps in, reps target, applies neuts and bunch of drones. After the gank just leaves. Without any real danger.
Gogo ewar immunity in lowsec.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:05:00 -
[1204] - Quote
Subtarian wrote:
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.
So you would be ok with carriers having their drone bays removed on this basis too then right?
I mean, I've seen people go
* Its a carrier, its got fighters, they should be useful for something
* Supers are fleet ships, they should need a fleet
So by those two logics, Carriers should also have their drone bays neutered to only carry fighters, if your carrier gets tackled by a lone frigate, you should have a fleet with you to beat it back right?
RIght?
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:06:00 -
[1205] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Why even penalize SCs use of fighters? You realize that a SC's fighter dps output is only equal to 2 carriers' worth, right? It's not exactly game-breaking, outlandish dps capabilities you're talking about. Because it still makes them too good against subcaps.
Only against bad subcap pilots who don't khow to a) pay attention to their surroundings, b) warp (on/offgrid) c) pulse mwd this is a signature |
Aldarean
Eclipse Innovations Fabricated Confabulations
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:07:00 -
[1206] - Quote
Kahrnar wrote:Aldarean wrote:Kahrnar wrote:Removing drones period from Supercarriers just made them a huge hunk of scrap metal...I guess the next thing to do would be to remove the ability to have ammo in your cargohold...just load guns and when ur done ur done. No it didnt they just made them more in role with there design. Your not talking about defensive capabilities here. You talking about Offensive capabilites. A SC should have Defensive capabilities against Sub-cap. It shouldnt have offensive capailities. Increasing local tanking ability could rebalance So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol
Every fight you go into, runs that risk.
Again taking back to RL situation. A Carrier, without proper support (solo) is defensless against smaller, more mobile ships. And eventually will be taken down.
Eve is supposed to Mirror Real Life (Eve is REAL), this change will do that.
Increasing resistance, lowering EHP, and having a bonus to local repper gives you a defensive capability.
Making them immune to Sub-Cap scrammers and HIC Bubbles, increase defensive capability.
Adding a Capital HIC Bubble of some form adds balance.
How many BS should it take to bring down a SC. Cost is not a balancing factor.
Look around RL situation, the make the argument for most people that are for this "re-balancing"
Super-Carriers and Titan will still be needed. But more Tactically orientated hopefully. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:07:00 -
[1207] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:They aren't universally better. There are many ships in the game that can kill them. Fleet comp is the all important here. I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight. GǪand you don't see the contradiction here?
What I see here is that instead of "balance" we're proposing to make a ship completely defenseless against that gang altogether. If the Supers get out of a fight that means you didn't have enough points. That isn't a Super cap pilots problem. I fail to see the imbalance here.
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:08:00 -
[1208] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Vile rat wrote: fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.
ehp bricks repping a station that dock up whenever they go into low armor and get free repairs
Simple, remove free repairs from sov stations. Or would that **** off the swarm?
Its kinda like when my roaming gang is in Fountain / Delve in a cyno jammed system and some Goon / TEST guy in a carrier undocks on station, aggresses, docks at half structure and comes out with full hitpoints. Pretty gay huh? |
FlameOfSurvival
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:09:00 -
[1209] - Quote
Why you also give -20% armor/shield/struc for Titans? They have nearly the same EHP like a SCAP but they are still crap load expensiv :)
The Drone Bay and DD nerf is already hard enough for Titans
|
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
499
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:10:00 -
[1210] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote:Lili Lu wrote:Lykouleon wrote:Just to clarify, is the Orca being considered a capital ship by the changes to the DD? Looks to me like they are referring to Rorqual and not Orca Correct. The Rorqual is a valid target, the Orca is not
Why would a Titan ever doomsday an Orca anyways? lol. Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:11:00 -
[1211] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Subtarian wrote:
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.
So you would be ok with carriers having their drone bays removed on this basis too then right? I mean, I've seen people go * Its a carrier, its got fighters, they should be useful for something * Supers are fleet ships, they should need a fleet So by those two logics, Carriers should also have their drone bays neutered to only carry fighters, if your carrier gets tackled by a lone frigate, you should have a fleet with you to beat it back right? RIght?
No he can just dock.... |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:12:00 -
[1212] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:
Why would a Titan ever doomsday an Orca anyways? lol.
Why wouldn't you?
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2587
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:12:00 -
[1213] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Weaselior wrote:Vile rat wrote: fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.
ehp bricks repping a station that dock up whenever they go into low armor and get free repairs Simple, remove free repairs from sov stations. Or would that **** off the swarm? Its kinda like when my roaming gang is in Fountain / Delve in a cyno jammed system and some Goon / TEST guy in a carrier undocks on station, aggresses, docks at half structure and comes out with full hitpoints. Pretty gay huh?
who cares about the money we'd just eat the cost
or, since we get the money from repairs since we own the station, we'd refund it |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:13:00 -
[1214] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Only against bad subcap pilots who don't khow to a) pay attention to their surroundings, b) warp (on/offgrid) c) pulse mwd No, against all subcap pilots, because unlike you, I don't assume that the SC pilot is an idiot and that he has instead brought a support fleet like he's supposed to.
You see, it's very simple: SCs are quite obviously meant to be wretched against subcaps. Not penalising the use of fighters make them not wretched. This means that they're too god against subcaps, and that is bad.
Velin Dhal wrote:What I see here is that instead of "balance" we're proposing to make a ship completely defenseless against that gang altogether. Yes. That is balance.
Quote:If the Supers get out of a fight that means you didn't have enough points. That isn't a Super cap pilots problem. I fail to see the imbalance here. If those supers are completely defenseless against that gang, it means they didn't have enough support. See? Same thing. Same balance. If you fail to spot it in one case, you cannot spot in the other either. If you want to call one imbalanced, then both are. Take your pick. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Napoleon Bonapart
Draconis Holding Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:14:00 -
[1215] - Quote
Also lol at the people saying a RL carrier is useless against smaller fleet....said carrier would just deploy jets and own smaller ships before they ever got in strike range of the carrier |
Pandi V
Plantains
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:14:00 -
[1216] - Quote
Cool changes, especially that logging out can no longer save your ship, something that should've never been possible in the first place
In regards to supercarriers
I think a lot of people are forgetting that Supercarriers and Titans are supposed to be alliance assets not player assets, which means that whether you can successfully field them or not, should be an indication of the strength of your alliance as a whole in terms of manpower, resources, leadership and organizational efficiency.
Example: Lets say Denmark suddenly decides it wants to be a great naval power and builds 5 brand new aircraft carriers but because of lack of funds and manpower it doesn't build any other ships to support them. In their first encounter with the Britsh fleet, which currently only has one aircraft carrier, they subsequently get their ass handed to them. Why? Because the smaller and much more numerous British vessels would just be able to sail right up to the aircraft carriers and pound them to bits, because there were no Danish ships to protect them.
Denmark was too small and weak a nation to properly field aircraft carriers, and were subsequently thrown back to highsec because they had no business playing with the big boys (Britain).
If a major alliance of 2000 or so pilots has so few active pilots available that it's unable to muster a fleet of 50-200 subcaps to support each Supercarrier, then they should not be able to effectively use those Supercarriers.
In fact if they can't even manage to scramble together a rescue fleet for a ratting-Supercarrier in need, then they deserve to not just lose that Supercarrier, but also all of their space as well! They should be getting their asses kicked and be thrown out of nullsec and not be able to come back until they get alliance leadership that's actually able to motivate them to log on.
All in all, this change will help to bring down a lot of the paper-tiger-alliances that have around 1500 pilots, but of which 95% are inactive or alts, and only a fraction of the remaining 5% actually show up to defend their space, and does so in Supercarriers and Titans, which makes defeating them impossible, despite that fact that there are no support fleets for them to count on.
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:14:00 -
[1217] - Quote
Aldarean wrote:Kahrnar wrote:Aldarean wrote:Kahrnar wrote:Removing drones period from Supercarriers just made them a huge hunk of scrap metal...I guess the next thing to do would be to remove the ability to have ammo in your cargohold...just load guns and when ur done ur done. No it didnt they just made them more in role with there design. Your not talking about defensive capabilities here. You talking about Offensive capabilites. A SC should have Defensive capabilities against Sub-cap. It shouldnt have offensive capailities. Increasing local tanking ability could rebalance So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol Every fight you go into, runs that risk. Again taking back to RL situation. A Carrier, without proper support (solo) is defensless against smaller, more mobile ships. And eventually will be taken down. Eve is supposed to Mirror Real Life (Eve is REAL), this change will do that. Increasing resistance, lowering EHP, and having a bonus to local repper gives you a defensive capability. Making them immune to Sub-Cap scrammers and HIC Bubbles, increase defensive capability. Adding a Capital HIC Bubble of some form adds balance. How many BS should it take to bring down a SC. Cost is not a balancing factor. Look around RL situation, the make the argument for most people that are for this "re-balancing" Super-Carriers and Titan will still be needed. But more Tactically orientated hopefully.
Your right but your also wrong. Carriers and Super Carriers in today's navies are defenseless again faster and more mobile ships. As a hull. However, they have large amount of planes and bombers that can be launched from said hull. All with the ability to fire at those faster and more mobile ships. Leaving them far from defenseless. This is correctly mirrored in EVE by the use of drones, Fighters and Fighter Bombers. The other thing correctly mirrored in eve from RL is that enough of anything can be devastating under the right circumstances. If your looking for an imbalance in eve by putting it in the light of RL navies, then I fail to see what your trying to show me.
|
steave435
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:17:00 -
[1218] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Misanth wrote:ThaWolf wrote:Maybe instead of nerving we should rather redo the Super-carrier as a whole, after reading this thread, i think they are not fitting in the game as they are, overpowered on one hand, mainly in larger groups, and close to useless if they get nerved that way, while the character is stuck in it.
So i came up with that:
New role, high end toy for all ppl who like to fly Caps, can do much but nothing Overpowered.
- Fighter Bombers will be pure Anti-Structure Weapons, bombing range 35km, anti Pos too, dmg should be like 2 Dreads
- Fighters stay like they are pre-nerv, the SCs should do Damage like 2 Carriers
- Drone bay gets nerved to 1 Bomber set 1 Fighter set and ~500m3 (yeah still normal Drones)
- SC cant use Remote repair mods, they should be only for Standard Carriers.
- ECM immunity stays
- remote ECM stays
- All SCs should be balanced to the defense Capabilities of a NYX (which i think is the most balanced EHP for SCs)
- balance production price of all SCs to the same amount
- SCs should be able to dock as a Compensation, and to make it possible that more ppl rely want to own them, so more can be killed Agree with everything except the dock part. Supers are unique in the sense that they are a) e-war immune and b) can't dock. That's the benefit and tradeoff you get for flying one, something you accept by taking the seat, and something they should never change. fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.
Unless you MASSIVELY nerf their EHP, I can: Docking games. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:17:00 -
[1219] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:Liranan wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Thank you, it's good to see you guys listening to your players, shame it takes thousands of people leaving the game for CCP to take notice. I do think you guys shoot once again look at Selene's original MS/SC proposals. That was far more balanced than what we have today. It was selene(DEV) and the players that made sc the pawnmobiles they are today. I really think that nerfing the drone bay off supers is a good nerf, the figther nerf was uncalled for because it wouldn't affect scars only it would destroy carriers as a class.Whay i would like to see is to remove the ability of bombers to attack sov styructures making the dreads be the main bulk of the fleet sov in 0.0. And to people that are saying they get massacred by Scars and figthers guess what , warp out, kill figthers or just dont be dumb enougth to get caugth by a super fleet and die due to your stupidity.
You do remember the changes that came tho?
First we had the FB introduction, which most loved but others were against. I was one of them. Seleene's argument was that it'd give the motherships a role as a damage dealer, and an incentitive to be on the combat field. There were people opposing it tho, I posted several times in those threads highlighting the stupid damage output they did. And I was testing it with one of my moms on SiSi daily.
Then we noticed how the combination of new DD and FB killed moms in seconds, in fact there was moms being volleyd by it, so we had the major HP buff. Combined with the really horrible capital reppers, this made it natural to max EHP, but the high damage from supers made this necessary too.
The longer jumprange came to complement the FB addition, to make these ships more viable to be fielded for combat, another incentitive.
Looking back, the EHP nerfs we'll get now will have to be reverted as soon as CCP realise what we did then - moms will be useless and all 'incentitives' to field them will be null and void when they die so damn easy. They need that hp. The main thing we see here is that the extra damage added was the culprit. You can also notice how that extra damage even more warrants the extended HP..
So, a reasonable way to counter the changes from then is to drasticly reduce the FB damage, perhaps even remove them altogether. Or keep them as pure anti-capital/structure weapons and leave Fighters for regular combat (make sense, and doesn't affect Carriers). The only way we could drop HP on moms without breaking them completely today, would be if the FB, DD and Titan gun damage would be reduced significantly. Else this HP is a necessity.
TL;DR the 'combat boat' and incentitives to make this ship a damage boat is the issue. I personally think that leaving it with Fighters only and a "bigger carrier" is the way to go. With the HP/Jumprange kept as is. Since CCP hates drones, another way to go is to make them all like the Revenant, less fighters, more damage per drone. Keep a limited sub-Fighter dronebay. Ta~da, suddenly you have the bigger swiss-army-knife-Carrier with the necessary HP boost, but without the stupid damage output. And CCP gets less drones, like they want! this is a signature |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:19:00 -
[1220] - Quote
Vile rat wrote: fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.
I actually said before the details were out in the public, that the way CCP can apologize supercarrier pilots for nerfing them too hard is to allow them to get docked.
That would be the only reason why they should be allowed to dock, CCP agreeing that the ship class is without use and is better to be mothballed in station than having supercarrier pilots go inactive. |
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:19:00 -
[1221] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:What I see here is that instead of "balance" we're proposing to make a ship completely defenseless against that gang altogether. Yes. That is balance.
Apparently balance is anything you personally want it to be. From your own words, leaving any ship that isn't a sub cap a piece of **** is balance. lol to that. |
Dirala
Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:21:00 -
[1222] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dirala wrote:Well, unlike Carriers and Dreads, you cant store a Supercap in a Station. So you are saying, you should only log in when there is a support fleet ready? Yes. Bring the right tool for the job. Without a support fleet, the SC is not the right tool.
Indeed, but "everyday life" in eve not only consists out of huge battles. Eventually you have to login your SC to do other stuff than hotdropping fleets with a big support Gang. Like moving the ship somewhere. Especially because you can't simply eject from the ship.
Tippia wrote:Dirala wrote:I totally agree with the nerf, still the Supercarrier should have at least a little tooth against small ships. So that he is not completly helpless against a small gang of say 5 ships. Why not? If it encounters a small gang of, say, 5 ships, it will survive long enough for the support fleet to get there and wipe the floor with those ships.
The support fleet has to get rid of the attacking 5 ships. Cause the SC can't do anything really. Thats what I'm saying. It's completly useless against smaller ships. I agree, that the super should not be able to take on a 20man fleet singlehanded, but with ..say 20 light Drones... its at least able to do something against a couple smaller ships.
When it comes to big Battles, thats all fine, cause the role of a SC is not to kill small ships. But 20 lights wont do you any good in a medium to big fight.
|
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:22:00 -
[1223] - Quote
WhiteSleeve wrote:Stupid forum. had it all nice and neat. Guess now I'll have to put in the TL DR version.
All Capitals should be monsters of the BattleSpace. Taking away ...
Not really, Dreadnoughts are more like this.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:22:00 -
[1224] - Quote
SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. |
Rhaegor Stormborn
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
218
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:22:00 -
[1225] - Quote
I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Inappropriate signature removed. CCP Spitfire |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:23:00 -
[1226] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Apparently balance is anything you personally want it to be No. In this case, I used your definition: bring the wrong thing and you're screwed GÇö balance.
What's so strange about that one ship being completely defenceless against that gang? It's outnumbered, it didn't bring the right stuff to deal with the situation, and it didn't have the situational awareness to gtfo while there was time. Being completely defenceless in that situation is entirely appropriate.
Grath Telkin wrote:That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game? Yes. The 18bn SC is the exact wrong tool for the job.
A 50M BC (fititngs included) can sleep through L4 missions and complete them with ease. A 300M Exhumer (fittings included) cannot. Why? Because the exhumer is the wrong tool for the job. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:24:00 -
[1227] - Quote
Dirala wrote:Tippia wrote:Dirala wrote:Well, unlike Carriers and Dreads, you cant store a Supercap in a Station. So you are saying, you should only log in when there is a support fleet ready? Yes. Bring the right tool for the job. Without a support fleet, the SC is not the right tool. Indeed, but "everyday life" in eve not only consists out of huge battles. Eventually you have to login your SC to do other stuff than hotdropping fleets with a big support Gang. Like moving the ship somewhere. Especially because you can't simply eject from the ship. Tippia wrote:Dirala wrote:I totally agree with the nerf, still the Supercarrier should have at least a little tooth against small ships. So that he is not completly helpless against a small gang of say 5 ships. Why not? If it encounters a small gang of, say, 5 ships, it will survive long enough for the support fleet to get there and wipe the floor with those ships. The support fleet has to get rid of the attacking 5 ships. Cause the SC can't do anything really. Thats what I'm saying. It's completly useless against smaller ships. I agree, that the super should not be able to take on a 20man fleet singlehanded, but with ..say 20 light Drones... its at least able to do something against a couple smaller ships. When it comes to big Battles, thats all fine, cause the role of a SC is not to kill small ships. But 20 lights wont do you any good in a medium to big fight.
For the support fleet to get there and save the SC depends on how close and what comp the other fleet has for support. Giving it absolutely no chance of getting out is moronic. |
FlameOfSurvival
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:25:00 -
[1228] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.
and a 60b Titan? ^^
supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;) |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:27:00 -
[1229] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Misanth wrote:Exactly this. The only reason CCP is removing the drone bays is same reasons titans/dreads are losing theirs: CCP hates drones and been trying to remove the drones from capitals since 2007. Each time players have been "quite upset" (to say the least). This time tho, CCP can disguise their drone-removal under the flag of 'capital revamp'.
The drone removals has nothing to do with actual gameplay, CCP just want less drones around. Probably for performance issues, but instead of being honest about it, they repeatedly keep trying to keep their reasons hidden and just blatantly try remove drones at every chance possible. I don't know that its due to a conspiracy theory-- if they wanted to reduce drone counts for performance reasons, the easiest thing to do would be to leave carriers / SCs with 5 drones each and give them a corresponding bonus to drone damage and hitpoints to make them functionally equal to ten or twenty drones with a fraction of the performance cost.
Not if the blobs are growing. 2k people now x5 = 10k drones. 4k people in future = 20k. The easier way for CCP to solve this long-term is to remove drones altogether.
I'm personally in favour of doing what you mention; reduce the amount of drones, increase their damage. It's what they did back when Drone Interfacing used to add +1 drone rather than +dmg. A good and welcome change. I would like to see this happen to all drones, including Fighters/FB's. The Revenant actually has a good core mechanic built in, in this regard. I just don't see CCP agree tho, why else would they keep removing drones? It makes no sense, they have the tools to make a sub-Fighter drone bay don't they? We have those fuelbays already. Removing them all just smells "we want no drones", since it's really not a gamebreaking issue and not a warranted nerf. Especially since the exact same thing happens to Dreads/Titans. this is a signature |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:27:00 -
[1230] - Quote
FlameOfSurvival wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. and a 60b Titan? ^^ supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;)
Yea, don't even get me started on the fact that the pinacle of my races starship engineering can't launch 5 warrior II's
|
|
Dirala
Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:29:00 -
[1231] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Dirala wrote:
The support fleet has to get rid of the attacking 5 ships. Cause the SC can't do anything really. Thats what I'm saying. It's completly useless against smaller ships. I agree, that the super should not be able to take on a 20man fleet singlehanded, but with ..say 20 light Drones... its at least able to do something against a couple smaller ships.
When it comes to big Battles, thats all fine, cause the role of a SC is not to kill small ships. But 20 lights wont do you any good in a medium to big fight.
For the support fleet to get there and save the SC depends on how close and what comp the other fleet has for support. Giving it absolutely no chance of getting out is moronic.
Thats what I'm saying |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:29:00 -
[1232] - Quote
Dirala wrote:Indeed, but "everyday life" in eve not only consists out of huge battles. No, but that is something you have to take up with whomever decided that they can't be docked or parked or stowed somewhere safe.
Quote:The support fleet has to get rid of the attacking 5 ships. Cause the SC can't do anything really. Thats what I'm saying. It's completly useless against smaller ships. I agree, that the super should not be able to take on a 20man fleet singlehanded, but with ..say 20 light Drones... its at least able to do something against a couple smaller ships. Nah. That's not its job, and it should simply stay away from those situations. See the Hulk vs. BC example above.Velin Dhal wrote:For the support fleet to get there and save the SC depends on how close and what comp the other fleet has for support. Giving it absolutely no chance of getting out is moronic. No. What is moronic is for the SC to stray so far away from its support that it can't provideGǪ wellGǪ support any more.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:30:00 -
[1233] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Apparently balance is anything you personally want it to be No. In this case, I used your definition: bring the wrong thing and you're screwed GÇö balance. What's so strange about that one ship being completely defenceless against that gang? It's outnumbered, it didn't bring the right stuff to deal with the situation, and it didn't have the situational awareness to gtfo while there was time. Being completely defenceless in that situation is entirely appropriate.
The fact that if you still bring an SC solo again a large fleet, your still going to lose the SC. The point is that you should still be able to fight back. Otherwise no one is going to fly them. Not to mention that you don't gtfo too well in a SC. Its not as if you can just warp to the gate or dock. If your waiting for your cyno, where the **** are you going ? Not to mention it takes forever to align and warp anywhere. |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:31:00 -
[1234] - Quote
FlameOfSurvival wrote:supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;)
Yeah, kill its point immunity or remote ecm burst in lowsec.
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:33:00 -
[1235] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Shadowsword wrote:
If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.
I dont disagree, however I dont deserve to loose a 26 bil isk ship because I could not deal with a solo random tackler by myself or small random nano gang with a dictor who never set out to kill a supercap.
If a solo random tackler or a small nano gang catch you, they still have to:
1/ Overpower your active tank.
2/ Chew out your millions upon millions of EHP. I suspect most of that gang would have run out of ammo long before you got to structure.
Whatever, it's going to take them time. Lots of it.
So the important question is, what are your alliance mates doing while you're tackled? If they do nothing, you lose it, and it's working as intended. If their batphone is more effective than your own, you lose it after some interesting fight, and again, it's working as intended. But it's not a small random nano gang that will have killed you, it will be a whole fleet. If your own batphone prevail, you live, and it's also working as intended. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:36:00 -
[1236] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Anile8er wrote:Shadowsword wrote:
If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.
I dont disagree, however I dont deserve to loose a 26 bil isk ship because I could not deal with a solo random tackler by myself or small random nano gang with a dictor who never set out to kill a supercap. If a solo random tackler or a small nano gang catch you, they still have to: 1/ Overpower your active tank. 2/ Chew out your millions upon millions of EHP. I suspect most of that gang would have run out of ammo long before you got to structure. Whatever, it's going to take them time. Lots of it. So the important question is, what are your alliance mates doing while you're tackled? If they do nothing, you lose it, and it's working as intended. If their batphone is more effective than your own, you lose it after some interesting fight, and again, it's working as intended. If your own batphone prevail, you live, and it's also working as intended.
Single small ships should not be able to solo kill a Super Carrier. It is unrealistic. |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:36:00 -
[1237] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.
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. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:37:00 -
[1238] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
Have you ever sat in a mothership and tried to fend off subcaps? Two HIC's that know what they do can't be removed by a single mothership pilot. I usually flew my motherships with 3 officer neuts and an ECM burst, with ecm drones, obviously full flight of Fighters/FB's etc.. theoreticly: 2-3 HIC's that rotate ongrid bm's/warps, and rotate keeping their points, all staying at well enough range from me to keep their point up but make my drones suffer from travel time.. they could technicly keep me there indefinately.
Assuming this is lowsec, I could probably hope to get max align, then hit ECM burst and warp off. This situation requires the HICs not to bump me ofc, which they probably won't with just 2-3 of them and bouncing the drones between them. But they could easily maintain my three neuts and disable my ecm drones. A single HIC that gets attacked by Fighters (even if neuted) will just warp off and warp back in. He'll even tank them for a decent while.
"clear floor" only happens when the HIC pilots set orbit on the mom, stay on field, with their focused script up (or bubble in null, so they can't warp themselves) and don't communicate with the other HIC pilots to make sure there's always at least one point up. Those pilots don't deserve a kill. this is a signature |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:38:00 -
[1239] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. 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.
You do realize that JFs and Freighters are industrial haulers right ? Not combat ships ?
|
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:38:00 -
[1240] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:It is unrealistic.
True, it wouldnt happen in real life. Oh wait...
|
|
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:38:00 -
[1241] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:1/ Overpower your active tank.
There is no such thing in a supercarrier due to broken cap self rep.
Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:39:00 -
[1242] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:
Single small ships should not be able to solo kill a Super Carrier. It is unrealistic.
No, retards should always die when they're being ********.
However, having a version of a carrier that can launch light drones, and a more advanced version of a carrier that CAN'T, even though it costs 20x the amount of the base version, is whats dumb.
iulixxi wrote:
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.
Carrier = Can launch standard drones
SUPERCarrier = Cant?
In the evolutionary scale of weapon design, while coming up with the bigger better version of something, they decided to scrap its small anti ship defenses?
And that seemed like a good idea?
I can only assume that the engineer in question would have since been shot for being so incredibly dumb that his breeding couldn't be tolerated for the sake of the human race.
When you make a super version of something you generally try to not make it worse than its standard counterpart. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:39:00 -
[1243] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:The point is that you should still be able to fight back. Why? That's not what they're meant for, so why?
Quote:Otherwise no one is going to fly them. Sure they will, as long as there are appropriate targets for them where the SCs shine. And guess what? There are! GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Bettoesai
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:40:00 -
[1244] - Quote
Napoleon Bonapart wrote:I think the supercap nerf is long overdue however I don't think they will have the effects CCP is looking for
1) Hel - This thing really doesn't need anymore reduction of HP it's already crap. Leave Hel HP as is and reduce Aeon 20%, Nyx and Wyvern 15%
2) Titan tracking - Everyone hurfblurfing about nerfing titan tracking are not realizing that EVE will become Hurricane & Rifters Online. A nerf to tracking would guarantee that whoever brings the most bodies into the engagement will win. If you have the balls to drop supers on a fleet fight you shouldn't be punished by not being able to track subcaps. I agree the DD nerf is much needed but Titans are supposed to be game changers, if you nerf them down to where they are pointless and can't defend against sub caps then noone will ever deploy them unless they are 100% sure they will win engagement. 99% of the time they will spend logged off in a pos doing nothing but collecting dust.
3) Fighters/FB - I don't think removing drones is a good idea. Why not instead increase the bandwidth of Fighters/FB so they can deploy less. With the increase to sig radious a good bomber run will destory a supercarriers main weapon and they will be forced to either sit there and do nothing...or if able to jump back to safe pos and log off for another 3-4 months doing nothing.
I like that CCP is actually reading ideas in this thread and giving proper feedback, it just seems like with the current proposed changes EVE will move to whoever has the biggest subcap blob wins the game.
Wow people are still thinking that they are raising the fighters sig rad? Its their resolution not their radius!
"Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
Vile rat |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:40:00 -
[1245] - Quote
Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship.
Pure Epic post here. CCP you better do this.
|
Klytior Am'jarhs
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:43:00 -
[1246] - Quote
Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship.
Why should you have something everybody else didn't get when other ships where balanced/nerfed. I think you have had an unfair advantage long enough. Training a account just to fly one ship in eve kinda proves the point that they are overpowered don't you think? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:43:00 -
[1247] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Pure Epic post here. CCP you better do this.
Yeah or he'll quit for... what is he up to now? the sixth time? The seventh?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
whoyoulookingat
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:43:00 -
[1248] - Quote
LoL at alot of the comments in this thread..
"MY CAPITAL can't DEFEND itself again non Capital ships"... Err, you know Capitals are supposed to be used with support yes?
If you're Dumb enough to use them without support, you deserve to lose them MMO anyone?
And if you can't think "Outside the box" and go with the "Norm" with fittings, then see above
And you must be really stupid if you thought CCP would leave the Capital Class unchanged.. Teach ya for going "FOTM"
I would go one step further and change it so (even with RSB's), Locking a Sub Class Capital in a Capital Hull would take over 20mins
Log timer change = good.
Drone changes = good
EHP reduction = time will tell.
and on a final note, the oldest saying in Eve:
DON'T FLY WHAT YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO LOSE |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:43:00 -
[1249] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Have you ever sat in a mothership and tried to fend off subcaps? Two HIC's that know what they do can't be removed by a single mothership pilot. I usually flew my motherships with 3 officer neuts and an ECM burst, with ecm drones, obviously full flight of Fighters/FB's etc.. theoreticly: 2-3 HIC's that rotate ongrid bm's/warps, and rotate keeping their points, all staying at well enough range from me to keep their point up but make my drones suffer from travel time.. they could technicly keep me there indefinately.
Assuming this is lowsec, I could probably hope to get max align, then hit ECM burst and warp off. This situation requires the HICs not to bump me ofc, which they probably won't with just 2-3 of them and bouncing the drones between them. But they could easily maintain my three neuts and disable my ecm drones. A single HIC that gets attacked by Fighters (even if neuted) will just warp off and warp back in. He'll even tank them for a decent while.
"clear floor" only happens when the HIC pilots set orbit on the mom, stay on field, with their focused script up (or bubble in null, so they can't warp themselves) and don't communicate with the other HIC pilots to make sure there's always at least one point up. Those pilots don't deserve a kill.
Agro from fighters, neuts, ecm burst, jump. Problem solved. None of the hics will keep lock without eccm and none i know of can tackle 2000 dps under neuts. Problem solved.
|
Di Mulle
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:43:00 -
[1250] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch. And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die. Pure stupidness.
You really do not need supercarrier to pwn, just use your forehead, it is really thick enough CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
|
Rhaegor Stormborn
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
218
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:44:00 -
[1251] - Quote
Klytior Am'jarhs wrote:Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Why should you have something everybody else didn't get when other ships where balanced/nerfed. I think you have had an unfair advantage long enough. Training a account just to fly one ship in eve kinda proves the point that they are overpowered don't you think?
Because with other ships, you dock, switch ships, and go on your merry way. There is no docking and switching ships with supers due to CCP's game design. L2read. Inappropriate signature removed. CCP Spitfire |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:44:00 -
[1252] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Kari Kari wrote:Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Pure Epic post here. CCP you better do this. Yeah or he'll quit for... what is he up to now? the sixth time? The seventh?
Last time it was unprobable snipers? Yeah, be always bring good laugh. |
Rhaegor Stormborn
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
218
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:45:00 -
[1253] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:[Yeah or he'll quit for... what is he up to now? the sixth time? The seventh?
Cry more noob. Inappropriate signature removed. CCP Spitfire |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:46:00 -
[1254] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:iulixxi wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. 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. You do realize that JFs and Freighters are industrial haulers right ? Not combat ships ?
nüè Exacly! The role of JFs and Freighters is industrial haulers GǪ well the role of the supers is to fight caps. |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:47:00 -
[1255] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Anile8er wrote:Shadowsword wrote:
If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.
I dont disagree, however I dont deserve to loose a 26 bil isk ship because I could not deal with a solo random tackler by myself or small random nano gang with a dictor who never set out to kill a supercap. If a solo random tackler or a small nano gang catch you, they still have to: 1/ Overpower your active tank. 2/ Chew out your millions upon millions of EHP. I suspect most of that gang would have run out of ammo long before you got to structure. Whatever, it's going to take them time. Lots of it. So the important question is, what are your alliance mates doing while you're tackled? If they do nothing, you lose it, and it's working as intended. If their batphone is more effective than your own, you lose it after some interesting fight, and again, it's working as intended. But it's not a small random nano gang that will have killed you, it will be a whole fleet. If your own batphone prevail, you live, and it's also working as intended.
Wow, I can tell you fly supercaps.
Lets start with my active tank... oh wait supercaps are max EHP buff with no local reps becasue, 1: you would have to fit CCC rigs to run local reps which would nerf your EHP tank which would, 2: cause you to melt in a fleet fight.
Now lets talk about my cap recharge on a supercap... when supercaps got buffed one buff that didn't happen was cap amount / recharge. So in my passive EHP tanked Nyx I generate 64.1 cap per second with a cap base of 84,375.
So back to the small roaming gang, with a single dictor and a cyno ship on the way. Now I cant kill the dictor and Im not in a massive blob alliance that can just form up a support fleet and use 0.0 POS jump becons to get to me quickly. So here I am tackled with some nano ships that arent doing much to me other than the Curse or Pilgrim who probably has me neuted down pretty well by now and here comes the cyno ship, cause no one has supercaps or dreads in EVE am I right? So now here I am tackled by a single dictor, neuted out, and dying to a few super caps and dreads. EDIT: oh and the small nano gang.
Pretty ******** if you ask me. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:47:00 -
[1256] - Quote
Klytior Am'jarhs wrote:Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Why should you have something everybody else didn't get when other ships where balanced/nerfed. I think you have had an unfair advantage long enough. Training a account just to fly one ship in eve kinda proves the point that they are overpowered don't you think?
No people train the accounts just to fly them because they are undockable and if own one your locked in it. Most people don't feel comfortable letting a Super Cap sit in a POS shield unattended where it can be bumped out. |
Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:48:00 -
[1257] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote: If you want to committ to a fight and survive, you will have to rely on your FC's, you will have to rely on your alliance, you will have to rely on your friend s for victory and safety. All they are doing is putting an end to solo super cap play.
...Except that solo supercaps were *never* the problem in the first place. This is the point of my argument-- they're talking about breaking one, nonproblematic form of gameplay in order to fix problems with another form of gameplay (supercap blobbing). I'm just saying SCs should be left with enough drones to perhaps make a difference in solo play, but without such a mass of drones that they remain problematic in big fights. Being able to field a total of ~60 normal drones is not going to make the tiniest difference in a fleet fight, but it might just make or break a solo engagement. That said, it's not like being able to field drones is a get-out-of-jail-free card for SCs. Even now, with an essentially infinite supply of small drones, its not like a solo SC is going to be able to fight its way out of a properly set trap. For actual, real-world examples of this, see the incidents where Dabigredboat dropped his Nyx on a gatecamp in Cobalt Edge (IRC brought a couple of dictors, tackled him on a gate, and killed his Nyx with a titan, a supercarrier, 1-2 dreads and a kitchen sink gang of subcaps), or Zungen losing a Nyx in Delve to Brick Squad (they brought a couple of dictors, he was held on the field and killed by a subcap gang). If a solo supercap can't escape a small hostile gang now, with infinite drones, I find it hard to believe that keeping a couple of flights of drones in the future will somehow render SCs broken solo pwnmobiles. What reducing SC drone bays to a reasonable size *will* do is prevent piles of SCs in a fleet fight fielding hundreds of Ogre IIs, wave after wave, and using them to obliterate all subcaps on the field. I think this current behavior is dumb, and that supercaps shouldn't be able to prevail over subcap fleets without their own subcap support in fleet fights. Taking all their drones is totally unnecessary though.
^^ AGREED
In my opinion changing logoff mechanics, reducing HP and also reducing the drone bay is more then enough. characters who fly supers should be able to protect themeselves from smaller ships.
The big problem, as stated above, is not solo ratting or ganking in supers. That capability has no need of beeing removed.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:49:00 -
[1258] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:No people train the accounts just to fly them because they are undockable and if own one your locked in it. Most people don't feel comfortable letting a Super Cap sit in a POS shield unattended where it can be bumped out. So ask CCP to implement proper parking spaces for SC, where you can stow the ships without needing that valet character. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Kheper Ra
Industrial Strength Killers
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:49:00 -
[1259] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:thank you CCP for just making me not really want to care about your game anymore
I like how certain groups in Eve got their "things" implemented
was a fun 6 years but if this is what needs to bring your players back .... keep trying... someday you might get it right
Can I have your stuff? |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:50:00 -
[1260] - Quote
Anile8er wrote: Wow, I can tell you fly supercaps.
Lets start with my active tank... oh wait supercaps are max EHP buff with no local reps becasue, 1: you would have to fit CCC rigs to run local reps which would nerf your EHP tank which would, 2: cause you to melt in a fleet fight.
Now lets talk about my cap recharge on a supercap... when supercaps got buffed one buff that didn't happen was cap amount / recharge. So in my passive EHP tanked Nyx I generate 64.1 cap per second with a cap base of 84,375.
So back to the small roaming gang, with a single dictor and a cyno ship on the way. Now I cant kill the dictor and Im not in a massive blob alliance that can just form up a support fleet and use 0.0 POS jump becons to get to me quickly. So here I am tackled with some nano ships that arent doing much to me other than the Curse or Pilgrim who probably has me neuted down pretty well by now and here comes the cyno ship, cause no one has supercaps or dreads in EVE am I right? So now here I am tackled by a single dictor, neuted out, and dying to a few super caps and dreads.
Pretty ******** if you ask me.
Why ffs you would warp/jump solo sc on small roaming gang? ...you desperately want your SOLOPWNMOBILE, dont you?
|
|
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:51:00 -
[1261] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.
"Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
754
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:53:00 -
[1262] - Quote
I've put in my hopes and dreams into this promised SC drone nerf, my HOPES and DREAMS and ****.
CCP better not go back on it, or I'll cancel the only account I still got left running!!! 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:53:00 -
[1263] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Anile8er wrote: Wow, I can tell you fly supercaps.
Lets start with my active tank... oh wait supercaps are max EHP buff with no local reps becasue, 1: you would have to fit CCC rigs to run local reps which would nerf your EHP tank which would, 2: cause you to melt in a fleet fight.
Now lets talk about my cap recharge on a supercap... when supercaps got buffed one buff that didn't happen was cap amount / recharge. So in my passive EHP tanked Nyx I generate 64.1 cap per second with a cap base of 84,375.
So back to the small roaming gang, with a single dictor and a cyno ship on the way. Now I cant kill the dictor and Im not in a massive blob alliance that can just form up a support fleet and use 0.0 POS jump becons to get to me quickly. So here I am tackled with some nano ships that arent doing much to me other than the Curse or Pilgrim who probably has me neuted down pretty well by now and here comes the cyno ship, cause no one has supercaps or dreads in EVE am I right? So now here I am tackled by a single dictor, neuted out, and dying to a few super caps and dreads.
Pretty ******** if you ask me.
Why ffs you would warp/jump solo sc on small roaming gang? ...you desperately want your SOLOPWNMOBILE, dont you?
Your still chatting absolute an utter nonscence. No1 is on about solopawnmobiles,adapting is all good an well, mostly super/titans are used with a subcap fleet anyway unless there fail. So maybe you have got your frieghter or Jump frieghter hotdropped 1 too many times, you being fail doesnt mean that the rest of eve an vets have to suffer for it.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:55:00 -
[1264] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:"Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!" Pff! They were evading the turbo lasers and had to be engaged ship-to-ship.
Sheesh! -1 Nerd Cred right there, sir!
Also, while we're on the topic: GÇ£Sir, we've lost our bridge deflector shield.GÇ¥ GÇ£Intensify the forward batteries. I don't want anything to get throughGǪIntensify forward firepower!GÇ¥ GÇ£Too late!GÇ£ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:55:00 -
[1265] - Quote
Some random thoughts...
A blanket EHP nerf across the board is a little silly. The raw HP levels are already out of balance between supercaps of different races. Reducing everyone by the same amount means we miss out on an opportunity to correct that.
Solution? Adjust HP levels as follows: Aeon -20% Nyx -10% Wyvern -15% Hel - No change
Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10%
Supercarriers fighter bays are a little anemic. These ships are tricky and time-consuming to refit, so carrying a single flight of their only damage tool seems like a recipe for disaster. Solution? Let them carry ~30 fighters/bombers. Alternatively, remove the in-built drone deployment bonus in Supercarriers but increase the number that can be deployed using Drone Control Units. This introduces a trade-off between raw damage and remote-rep ability, as well as an increased risk of losing all your bombers in one flight or deploying less but having spares available.
There isn't enough difference between Capitals and Super-Capitals. Carriers have a role as support and anti-subcap ships, as escorts for Supercarriers that are now unable to defend themselves with their own drones. After these changes Dreadnoughts will still be limited in use as they're still just as vulnerable to being one-shotted as before. If you have enough titans, there will be little reason to use Dreads. Titans also remain overpowered versus subcaps. With tracking links, remote sensor boosters and enough supercarriers behind them, beating a titan blob simply comes down to having more titans. Beyond a certain threshold subcap numbers still do not matter.
Solution? Three actually:
1) Doomsdays balanced on sig radius - A blanket 'no DD on subcaps' rule seems a little anti-sandbox for me. If I want to burn half my isotopes picking off Rifters, why can't I? Let's change Doomsday damage to scale on target sig radius. For example:
Supercap = full damage Dreadnought = ~1mil damage (with DD Op V) Battleship = ~50k damage Cruiser = 5k damage Frigate = 1k damage
It will no longer destroy ships outright (unless they're nearly dead or terribly fitted) and makes Dreads more cost-efficient at taking on Titan fleets, increasing their role. This is also great to help smaller groups fight larger ones using their insured dreads.
2) Jump 'Calibration' - Supercaps should have a delay in order to lock onto a player-activated cyno beacon. This time is based on the distance they are travelling, so while a 2ly jump might take five seconds, a jump to the full range could require 30 seconds to lock on. This has several effects. Firstly it means that supercaps planning a hotdrop need to be nearer the target, increasing the odds of them being spotted. It also increases the odds of the cyno and/or tackler being destroyed or jammed before support can arrive. Finally it gives regular capitals an increased role as 'rapid-response' capitals, able to move around faster than their larget counterparts.
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. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:55:00 -
[1266] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. "Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
No **** they launched tie fighters
WHERES MY TIE FIGHTERS VILE RAT, WHERE ARE THEY??!?!!!!?
|
George Holden
The Shadow Plague BLACK-MARK
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:57:00 -
[1267] - Quote
YOUR TEARS ARE DELICIOUS
Anyway, I've went over 30 pages of this mighty threadnaught and I gonna try to sum it up for future reference. Note the "quotes" are mostly an interpretation of mine.
- OMGOMG ME SUPER CAN'T SOLOPWN WHOLE SUBCAPFLEETS ANYMORE HALP!
This literally came up every second post. Supercarriers from what I've heard from CCP so far are not supposed to be able to defend themselves against subcaps period. You have to have a support fleet with you or else you die.
Signature Resolution not Radius change to 400m means basically a fighter works like a battleship-sized gun which unless it can keep up trackingwise (eg. 0m/s transversal = Fighter on your tail while you're burning away) it will have a hard time hitting anything smaller than a battleship and due to low tracking (Omnidirectional Trackinglinks anyone?) it might even have a hard time hitting battleships as well.
From my narrow point of view capitals and supercapitals are there to tear down structures and support the "grunts" of the fleet with their firepower. Think of them as artillery and airsupport in the military they're not there to do the infantrymens work they're there to take out fortified positions, take out enemy artillery and aircraft where possible and take out that rifle platoon pinning you down?
You don't put your M109s without any support on the frontline because charlie is gonna tear them apart.
Anyway I'm having tears of joy myself and I've already harvested buckets full of tears in this thread.
Legendary Thread |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:58:00 -
[1268] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. "Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
ccp aka goons pets do not know what Eve wants evidently, ccp knows what goons & friends want. make a server for noobs & goons so they can have fun lagging themselves out in systems thinking there Pro,hell an let us keep this server an actually have a ballz deep enviroment. DD on only capitals is fine. But alot of choices in this patch are down right stupid. Garantee if this rubbish goes ahead, the end of eve will be near. Absolute state of emergency. You are ******* vets in the arse an we pay your damn bills. Insaine
|
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:58:00 -
[1269] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them! |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:59:00 -
[1270] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Carrier = Can launch standard drones
SUPERCarrier = Cant?
So what you're saying is CCP should change the name back to 'mothership' so there's no confusion. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:00:00 -
[1271] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:
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.
This is actually a good idea, even if i don't like your view on the drone bay (40 is too many, you should be able to defang a super so the 25 is cool with me, i just think its stupidity on a grand scale not to at least give them 75m3 of regular drones, even the crappiest BS have that) |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:01:00 -
[1272] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:Some random thoughts...
A blanket EHP nerf across the board is a little silly. The raw HP levels are already out of balance between supercaps of different races. Reducing everyone by the same amount means we miss out on an opportunity to correct that.
Solution? Adjust HP levels as follows: Aeon -20% Nyx -10% Wyvern -15% Hel - No change
Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10%
Supercarriers fighter bays are a little anemic. These ships are tricky and time-consuming to refit, so carrying a single flight of their only damage tool seems like a recipe for disaster. Solution? Let them carry 30-40 fighters/bombers.
There isn't enough difference between Capitals and Super-Capitals. Carriers have a role as support and anti-subcap ships, as escorts for Supercarriers that are now unable to defend themselves with their own drones. After these changes Dreadnoughts will still be limited in use as they're still just as vulnerable to being one-shotted as before. If you have enough titans, there will be little reason to use Dreads. Titans also remain overpowered versus subcaps. With tracking links, remote sensor boosters and enough supercarriers behind them, beating a titan blob simply comes down to having more titans. Beyond a certain threshold subcap numbers still do not matter.
Solution? Three actually:
1) Doomsdays balanced on sig radius - A blanket 'no DD on subcaps' rule seems a little anti-sandbox for me. If I want to burn half my isotopes picking off Rifters, why can't I? Let's change Doomsday damage to scale on target sig radius. For example:
Dreadnought = ~1mil damage (with DD Op V) Battleship = ~50k damage Cruiser = 5k damage Frigate = 1k damage
It will no longer destroy ships outright (unless they're nearly dead or terribly fitted) and makes Dreads more cost-efficient at taking on Titan fleets, increasing their role. This is also great to help smaller groups fight larger ones using their insured dreads.
2) Jump 'Calibration' - Supercaps should a delay in order to lock onto a player-activated cyno beacon. This time is based on the distance they are travelling, so while a 2ly jump might take five seconds, a jump to the full range could require 30 seconds to lock on. This has several effects. Firstly it means that supercaps planning a hotdrop need to be nearer the target, increasing the odds of them being spotted. It also increases the odds of the cyno and/or tackler being destroyed or jammed before support can arrive. Finally it gives regular capitals an increased role as 'rapid-response' capitals, able to move around faster than their larget counterparts.
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.
At last a goon with something worth while to say.
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
309
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:01:00 -
[1273] - Quote
a possible solution to supers and lack of drones is to limit the super's max bandwidth for regular drones to 5
move the fighters and bombers into a fighter bay and then have a small 125m3 drone bay for normal drones. Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:01:00 -
[1274] - Quote
i really dont get it at this point, the avid hatred of capitals and super caps...do u hate them because u are too scared to fly one? or because they are just oh so expensive and u are scared to loose them? or are u just determined to limit yourself to sub caps? i mean if something is awesome it only makes sense to fly it. after devoting years and hundreds of dollars to perfect it, it really only seems fair to be reimbursed after its ruined. i never agreed to pay to play and train only to have my accomplishments destroyed after i had gotten it all.
i am really sorry you complainers do not have your own super caps to pwn with, but i have done plenty of pwning with out them, i am sorry you lot are too scared to give a thanatos a shot. its a pretty amazing ship. at least until the nerf it...some one said "defang" in reference to the "patch/nerf" heads chopped off would be better dreads will remain worthless, carriers will become less then worthless.
alot of FCs are currently cautious to deploy caps onto a battle field, as they are right now, risk to counter hot drops, titan bridges, what have you, with this nerf caps will be unable to fight sub caps. attacking FCs wont field caps at all, since they dont need them to remove a capital threat. and since they cannot be defended the defending FC wont bring them to the fight to begin with, moar arty abaddons...yay...this patch will render all caps worthless and they will not be seen on the field of battle pretty much ever.
all you people down with the black ops hot drops...i personally love to find that ratting carrier and light a covert cyno on his head...yay cap kill mail for me \o/ rawr....kiss that good by too. a thanatos and archon may be able to rat still with faction trgt painter, but the nid and the chimmy, being shield tankers are finished. the thannies tank will be greatly reduced any way because it looses so my cap recharge to fit the painters, either way, cap war far is good and dead. >wts fully fitted nyx :(<
after this patch, there will be a new method that is uber win, like gun tracking boosts to fighters or something fail like that, either way some other method will rise, some new uber way to "win eve" and all u whiny faggots will complain about it until CCP relents and nerfs that.
oh, my pod doesnt have enough resists, that needs to be upped i cant tank a rifter. please ccp fix pods. they should be able to defend against a frigate.
watch and mark my words, some new method that the people determined to win eve will discover and it will become the known way to fight in the nulsec.
but for the the 4 years i have personally wasted perfecting my capital skills its a shame. and for the wasted character sitting in my nyx that isnt worth the minerals i made it with. the billions of isk i have invested in carrier bpos to keep my alliance and fellow corp mates in the fight, i bet i wont be able to get half the isk i invested in them, i know i wont get the time spent researching them back.
CCP ur gutting alot of your older players, players with many accounts players with multi billion isk investments. some people will say good riddance to us and slam the door as we leave, u want to populate nulsec with more pilots, this is not the way. not with these proposed changes. your gonna break more then ur gonna fix, please dont do this like this.
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:01:00 -
[1275] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Anile8er wrote: Wow, I can tell you fly supercaps.
Lets start with my active tank... oh wait supercaps are max EHP buff with no local reps becasue, 1: you would have to fit CCC rigs to run local reps which would nerf your EHP tank which would, 2: cause you to melt in a fleet fight.
Now lets talk about my cap recharge on a supercap... when supercaps got buffed one buff that didn't happen was cap amount / recharge. So in my passive EHP tanked Nyx I generate 64.1 cap per second with a cap base of 84,375.
So back to the small roaming gang, with a single dictor and a cyno ship on the way. Now I cant kill the dictor and Im not in a massive blob alliance that can just form up a support fleet and use 0.0 POS jump becons to get to me quickly. So here I am tackled with some nano ships that arent doing much to me other than the Curse or Pilgrim who probably has me neuted down pretty well by now and here comes the cyno ship, cause no one has supercaps or dreads in EVE am I right? So now here I am tackled by a single dictor, neuted out, and dying to a few super caps and dreads.
Pretty ******** if you ask me.
Why ffs you would warp/jump solo sc on small roaming gang? ...you desperately want your SOLOPWNMOBILE, dont you?
Maybe Im moving my supercap and they warped to my cyno, maybe im ganking a carrier on a pos. A 20 billion isk ship should have some defense against a 1 or 2 tacklers or a small unperpared gang. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:01:00 -
[1276] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:No people train the accounts just to fly them because they are undockable and if own one your locked in it. Most people don't feel comfortable letting a Super Cap sit in a POS shield unattended where it can be bumped out. So ask CCP to implement proper parking spaces for SC, where you can stow the ships without needing that valet character.
Your are apparently all about fitting ships into the "roles" they were meant to have and leaving them unable to do anything else but still leaving every other non capital with enough versatility to preform many different roles. I fail to see exactly where this makes since. Being able to dock a ship that becomes severely nerfed is not the way to fix the problem. It just a way for non super cap pilots to attempt to get what they want by throwing super cap pilots a bone. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:02:00 -
[1277] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, its more like "Lets remove drone bays on BS so they need a support fleet to ward off interceptors"
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:04:00 -
[1278] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Misanth wrote:EVE now is just a blob game with zero skill, zero return on investment, and zero incentitives to actually fight - and every incentitive to join the massive blob. It's everything this game wasn't, and the "dangerous" space, the skills/tactics element, the 'thinking out of the box' (to use shiptypes the ways they were NOT intended or assumed they would) has almost completely gone. These supercap changes, time dilation, etc, it's all just more blob incentitives. And what's the cause of this? The SOV system. Fix the SOV system into a much, much more granular system, and make it so it's much easier to take and lose a system, along with a vastly upgraded reason to actually take a system, even for a short while, and you'll see these large empires shrink and smaller entities being able to get a foothold in 0.0, at least for a while. If it's done right, a large alliance will be able to keep a bigger empire on the basis of them being able to field f.ex 5x100 fleets, able to defend 5 systems at once, instead of today's system where you don't really have to defend any system for almost a week before you chuck all 500 people (or more) into the system, along with supers.
I agree that Sov is a part of the issue. Upgraded systems, jumpbridges, for example. It just means everyone is cluttered up in a single very-profitable system, while having every means to move really fast. Other issues include moongoo distribution, the easy logistics (that is definately helping supercap production). The stupendous income from moongoo and sanctum farming helps increase the supercap population as well.
The irony is, nullsec would be so much better for combat and living if people actually did not want to own the space. And if every incentitive to upgrade systems would be removed.
But this is the capital changes thread, you're right it affects, so could be nice to mention it, but it's not what we're talking about here. this is a signature |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:04:00 -
[1279] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Your still chatting absolute an utter nonscence. No1 is on about solopawnmobiles,adapting is all good an well, mostly super/titans are used with a subcap fleet anyway unless there fail. So maybe you have got your frieghter or Jump frieghter hotdropped 1 too many times, you being fail doesnt mean that the rest of eve an vets have to suffer for it.
You are wrong as usual, if there is subcap fleet fielded with friendly scs, then supercaps dont need to provide any defense vs subcaps by themselves. That you want to soloblob small roaming gangs with supercarrier, because you have no skills to fight them with subcaps or god forbid, form a fleet and have decent fight with them, its sad thing.
But i know, how dare they to dusturb you while carebearing! They must be crushed! Preferably with 0 chance of fighting back, because you paid 20bil ship for ship. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:05:00 -
[1280] - Quote
kralz wrote:i really dont get it at this point, the avid hatred of capitals and super caps...do u hate them because u are too scared to fly one? or because they are just oh so expensive and u are scared to loose them? or are u just determined to limit yourself to sub caps? i mean if something is awesome it only makes sense to fly it. after devoting years and hundreds of dollars to perfect it, it really only seems fair to be reimbursed after its ruined. i never agreed to pay to play and train only to have my accomplishments destroyed after i had gotten it all.
i am really sorry you complainers do not have your own super caps to pwn with, but i have done plenty of pwning with out them, i am sorry you lot are too scared to give a thanatos a shot. its a pretty amazing ship. at least until the nerf it...some one said "defang" in reference to the "patch/nerf" heads chopped off would be better dreads will remain worthless, carriers will become less then worthless.
alot of FCs are currently cautious to deploy caps onto a battle field, as they are right now, risk to counter hot drops, titan bridges, what have you, with this nerf caps will be unable to fight sub caps. attacking FCs wont field caps at all, since they dont need them to remove a capital threat. and since they cannot be defended the defending FC wont bring them to the fight to begin with, moar arty abaddons...yay...this patch will render all caps worthless and they will not be seen on the field of battle pretty much ever.
all you people down with the black ops hot drops...i personally love to find that ratting carrier and light a covert cyno on his head...yay cap kill mail for me \o/ rawr....kiss that good by too. a thanatos and archon may be able to rat still with faction trgt painter, but the nid and the chimmy, being shield tankers are finished. the thannies tank will be greatly reduced any way because it looses so my cap recharge to fit the painters, either way, cap war far is good and dead. >wts fully fitted nyx :(<
after this patch, there will be a new method that is uber win, like gun tracking boosts to fighters or something fail like that, either way some other method will rise, some new uber way to "win eve" and all u whiny faggots will complain about it until CCP relents and nerfs that.
oh, my pod doesnt have enough resists, that needs to be upped i cant tank a rifter. please ccp fix pods. they should be able to defend against a frigate.
watch and mark my words, some new method that the people determined to win eve will discover and it will become the known way to fight in the nulsec.
but for the the 4 years i have personally wasted perfecting my capital skills its a shame. and for the wasted character sitting in my nyx that isnt worth the minerals i made it with. the billions of isk i have invested in carrier bpos to keep my alliance and fellow corp mates in the fight, i bet i wont be able to get half the isk i invested in them, i know i wont get the time spent researching them back.
CCP ur gutting alot of your older players, players with many accounts players with multi billion isk investments. some people will say good riddance to us and slam the door as we leave, u want to populate nulsec with more pilots, this is not the way. not with these proposed changes. your gonna break more then ur gonna fix, please dont do this like this.
True true. CCP develop EVE but evidently they should not have the resposibilty of making major decisions such as these. Confidence in ccp is hanging by a thread im afraid. If this patch goes ahead you will have a hell of a time trying to save themselves from this horriffic mess
|
|
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
54
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:05:00 -
[1281] - Quote
Zomg Panties wrote:Good job CCP on making a 15 billion dollar ship worth 500 mill, because a 10 man gang can now shut down a mothership in less than 2 minutes
Lets say the SC is a Nyx with 35m EHP (X type tank, T2 trimarks, slave set, no gang bonus
35.000.000/120 (seconds) =291.666,67 DPS required. I am infact bad at EVE but for some reason this is an unlikely dps figure for a "10 man gang" I'd even go as far as saying that even a 100 man gang wont have this much dps. But if you want a realistic idea: 100 Hellcats at greatly glorified 800 dps per piece will need 437.5 Seconds to bring down an unbonused Nyx. Aeon and Wyvern will take a lot more damage than that and even for the Nyx this would take more than 7 minutes. Now if you managed to deploy your Nyx without any kind of support, or even other caps or supers, and you got caught by a gang that probably was reportet in intel for 15 minutes, I feel that all of us should be honoring comrade Darwin and you should let go and sacrifice your ship for that. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:05:00 -
[1282] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
My Maelstrom can kill the Rifter tackling me. Its called Tracking Enhancers and warrior IIs. |
Bettoesai
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:06:00 -
[1283] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. "Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
Tks for my new sig Vile!
"Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
Vile rat |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:07:00 -
[1284] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Your are apparently all about fitting ships into the "roles" they were meant to have and leaving them unable to do anything else but still leaving every other non capital with enough versatility to preform many different roles. Most of them have very clearly defined roles and suck if you try to stray to far outside them (except for the Domi).
Quote:I fail to see exactly where this makes since. Which part?
Quote:Being able to dock a ship that becomes severely nerfed is not the way to fix the problem. Sure it is. It means you can get your characters back and have them perform multiple roles instead of unbalancing the game by having the one ship they GÇ£have toGÇ¥ be in fill all the roles the players want to take on.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:07:00 -
[1285] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, the Mael can launch small drones. Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:07:00 -
[1286] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, its more like "Lets remove drone bays on BS so they need a support fleet to ward off interceptors"
Pls don't post never. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:07:00 -
[1287] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Kahrnar wrote:So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol So you didn't bring a support fleet? Oh dear, sucks to be you.
Support fleets won't kill those bombers in time. So yah it sucks to be him, he's sitting there in his expensive tomb, being completely relying on a blob of support ships, while not being able to do a thing.
Your argument would be correct if Fighters/FB's would return to the dronebay in less than 10sec if asked to, but guess what, usually they a) get stuck in POS shields, as you tend to fight around them b) gets stuck in lag, I had one fight in lowsec (!) where it took me 30min+ before my final one came back, etc.
The support fleet can't keep those instantly-dead FB's alive. They should and could keep tacklers off your supers tho, I think the fleet argument is a valid one. Completely removing dronebay makes the ship quite useless tho, there should be room for a limited regular dronebay at the very least. this is a signature |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:10:00 -
[1288] - Quote
kralz wrote:i really dont get it at this point, the avid hatred of capitals and super caps Have you tried reading?
It's because the obsolete a whole crapton of other ships and roles; because they encourage an N+1 kind of one-upmanship; and because they kill variety. None of your straw men are even close to being accurate, which tells me that you haven't even tried to GÇ£get itGÇ¥, at this point or any other.
Misanth wrote:Support fleets won't kill those bombers in time. So yah it sucks to be him, he's sitting there in his expensive tomb, being completely relying on a blob of support ships, while not being able to do a thing. Sure he can. Properly equipped, he can support that support fleet and make their job a whole lot easier. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:10:00 -
[1289] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, its more like "Lets remove drone bays on BS so they need a support fleet to ward off interceptors"
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. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
499
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:11:00 -
[1290] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
I think it's important to keep in mind that to most Supercap pilots, that choosing to use Fighters is like choosing to bring out a 14B ISK Carrier with a little more DPS... Economically, better to buy 14 Carriers and put them on the field in that case.
So, the Fighters are probably less of a concern in that case, thinking like an EVE player for Supercaps, but severely limits Carriers.
I will say I'm not crazy of the inability to shoot Sub-caps for Supercaps (it's not that I don't like it, it just FEELs weird and thematically difficult to justify).
Other than that, I guess it's a short term solution. Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
542
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:12:00 -
[1291] - Quote
CCP Tallest and others: I put an idea in F&I on the tracking issue
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=20231&find=unread
I am running for the CSM. Take a look at my ideas. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:13:00 -
[1292] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[quote=Velin Dhal]Your are apparently all about fitting ships into the "roles" they were meant to have and leaving them unable to do anything else but still leaving every other non capital with enough versatility to preform many different roles. Most of them have very clearly defined roles and suck if you try to stray to far outside them (except for the Domi).
That is so wrong is laughable. How about an example. Battleships fitting all Hardeners and plates/extenders and fitting all high slot with large smartbombs. Which works extremely well with enough BS using the same smart bombs and the same hardeners. I highly doubt that was what CCP expected when they made BS and smartbombs. So don't say that non caps suck outside of their originally designed intent. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:13:00 -
[1293] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, its more like "Lets remove drone bays on BS so they need a support fleet to ward off interceptors" Not only do Supercarriers not need to travel home alone through gates after a long fleet fight, but they have their own tools available to help break tackles in the form of neuts, smartbombs and ECM bursts. Sure they're not a 100% guarunteed method, but neither is carrying EC-300's in a Maelstrom.
Plus there is also the problem of where to draw the line. Five Warrior II's will not scare off any competent dictor pilot, he will just warp out and return before the bubble expires. Give the supercarrier the ability to fly twenty of those warriors and you suddenly have a scaling problem in fleet fights, with 1000 drones being assigned to one FC supercap to swat down tacklers as they all load replacements from their CHAs.
I don't think it's unfair to ask people to bring along an escort carrier or use a friendly starbase when moving around a 20bn+ ISK ship. Hell, chances are you have a cyno ship that can fit some kind of weapon. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:14:00 -
[1294] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Your still chatting absolute an utter nonscence. No1 is on about solopawnmobiles,adapting is all good an well, mostly super/titans are used with a subcap fleet anyway unless there fail. So maybe you have got your frieghter or Jump frieghter hotdropped 1 too many times, you being fail doesnt mean that the rest of eve an vets have to suffer for it.
You are wrong as usual, if there is subcap fleet fielded with friendly scs, then supercaps dont need to provide any defense vs subcaps by themselves. That you want to soloblob small roaming gangs with supercarrier, because you have no skills to fight them with subcaps or god forbid, form a fleet and have decent fight with them, its sad thing. But i know, how dare they to dusturb you while carebearing! They must be crushed! Preferably with 0 chance of fighting back, because you paid 20bil ship for ship.
your quite incredible, Supers/titans as I already state time an time again for just you mr special LOL are already fielded with a subcap fleet unless they are fail. The problem is not quality of subcap fleet supporting them at all. You obviously have no idea about what goes on in 0.0 or your a goon alt ofc bloody minded stubborn stupidity. A structured more elite subcap fleet looking after there supers/titans will be after this patch be no match for a humungo laggfesting blob of whelp canes etc. You fail to see the bigger picture an I have no intention of explaning to you obviousness anymore. Your a lost soul iv accepted that. Supers/titans will NOT be used for out an out fleet fights, there will NOT be a balanced super cap fight at all. Supers/titans will only be used to counter hotdrop a lesser number of capital targets and bridge, that is all they are going to be affective for after patch. So that in no way balances a super class fight at all as CCP are intending. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
784
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:14:00 -
[1295] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.
IF YOU CAN AFFORD TO BUY AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPERCARRIER!!!!!
THEN YOU CAN CERTAINLY AFFORD TO BUY SOME FRIENDS TO PROTECT YOU FROM A SABRE!!!
OMG WORKING TOGETHER AS A TEAM!!!! CCP IS FORCING US TO SOICALIZE AND WORK TOGETHER WHAHHH WAHHHH!!
Go pod youself sir. oh can i has your super cap? |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:14:00 -
[1296] - Quote
AspiB'elt wrote:Hi CCP,
The best way it's to remove completly the fighter to sc. Only fighterbomber.
If you have 20 nyx on the field without support. You have again 200 fighters on the field and with 200 fighters it's impossible to tackle with hid.
Don't forget that the supercarrier can still cap transfert and cap remote. If you have 20 nyx how many bhaalgorn do you need to cut the RR of 20 nyx. More then 100 ...
I have often see more then 20 nyx and the field but i have never see 10 bhaalgorn on the field ...
Remove completly the fighter from supercarrier and the subcap have some chance to kill some massive blob of super without support
If those Nyx' should bring support, so should you. Where's your smartbomging BS or SB's? Just takes a handful to completely kill off those drones. And why did your HIC not warp off when primaried? Where's the rotation of pointing? Your fleet were ****, so you lost, get over it. this is a signature |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:15:00 -
[1297] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, its more like "Lets remove drone bays on BS so they need a support fleet to ward off interceptors" 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.
So you wouldn't mind BS having their drone bays removed then?
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
Go pod youself sir. oh can i has your super cap?
No, my titan is just fine where it is thanks, though evidently I have a ship shattering beam that can kill 10's of thousands of crew members in a flash, and I have a cargo bay big enough to hold a fully assembled cruiser and frigate, but I can't launch 5 light drones.
I have a team of gnomish engineers currently looking at ways to punch a hole in the cargo bay door and storing drones in there. |
Centra Spike
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
103
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:15:00 -
[1298] - Quote
If doomsdays are going to be limited to firing only on capital class ships, they better work in low sec. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:16:00 -
[1299] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:That is so wrong is laughable. How about an example. Battleships fitting all Hardeners and plates/extenders and fitting all high slot with large smartbombs. Which works extremely well with enough BS using the same smart bombs and the same hardeners. I highly doubt that was what CCP expected when they made BS and smartbombs. So don't say that non caps suck outside of their originally designed intent. Except I didn't say GÇ£originally designed intentGÇ¥ GÇö I said outside of their role. None of what you just said demonstrated them being used outside their role.
So, do you have any examples of this? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:17:00 -
[1300] - Quote
Draahk Chimera wrote:While changes (nerfs) to the supercapital roster is indeed welcome I do remain of the opinion that the only way to breathe new life into 0.0 warfare is to nerf remote repping. Fleets with 20 or more logistics can be nothing but negative; they promote blobbing and the homogenization of fleets, and is an absolute killer of small-but-elite fleets (such as BURN EDEN). While blobbing is to some extent the product of human nature, in a game enviroment where you cannot break a single enemy without hitting it with 100+ ships blobbing goes from an annoyance to a necessity.
Remote repping needs to be nerfed now in order to facilitate a game where people are free to bring any (useful) ship and aren't forced to train for and use artillery ships. Also with less remote repairs small-but-elite fleets can once again use teamwork and good knowlege of the game to actually hurt or even kill off much larger blobs of inexperienced players.
^^ very good point.
|
|
trademeyourmoneys
billionaire boyz club
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:17:00 -
[1301] - Quote
Cant dock - makes fitting/fueling + changing corp a pain Have to pay for 2nd pvp account Considered end game Expensive (should be worth the isk) Time actually spent logged in a supercap is very low $/time played is low conversion Wasted skill points - If you plan to stay in supercaps having a char with gun skills maxed is kinda pointless, unless moving onto a titan of course but lets be honest with these changes i have no desire to.
considering this are these changes not too much? if one of these nerfs ie the ehp one went through i can understand but seeing as these changes make them more useless than when they got buffed, i cant see this being the way to push things forward?
These ships are the most expensive in game afterall and alot of people work their butt off to get them and you are making them practically useless.. i just dont understand ccp devs anymore |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:18:00 -
[1302] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, its more like "Lets remove drone bays on BS so they need a support fleet to ward off interceptors" Not only do Supercarriers not need to travel home alone through gates after a long fleet fight
Super Carriers do not jump through gates. At least know what your talking about before you start talking. I stopped reading after this because I assume you don't know anything about Supers. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:20:00 -
[1303] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Super Carriers do not jump through gates. At least know what your talking about before you start talking. I stopped reading after this because I assume you don't know anything about Supers. Maybe you should actually read what he wrote before you start assuming such things, especially if you try to correct him by saying the same thing he didGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:20:00 -
[1304] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:
By the same logic, let's buff tracking on maelstroms so they can shoot down the Rifter tackling them!
No, its more like "Lets remove drone bays on BS so they need a support fleet to ward off interceptors" Not only do Supercarriers not need to travel home alone through gates after a long fleet fight Super Carriers do not jump through gates. At least know what your talking about before you start talking. I stopped reading after this because I assume you don't know anything about Supers.
Double negatives are tricky business! |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:21:00 -
[1305] - Quote
trademeyourmoneys wrote:Cant dock - makes fitting/fueling + changing corp a pain Have to pay for 2nd pvp account Considered end game Expensive (should be worth the isk)
considering this are these changes not too much? if one of these nerfs ie the ehp one went through i can understand but seeing as these changes make them more useless than when they got buffed, i cant see this being the way to push things forward?
These ships are the most expensive in game afterall and alot of people work their butt off to get them and you are making them practically useless.. i just dont understand ccp devs anymore
CCP are evidently Goon pets that could be ofc a big reason for this monumental **** up. Failness breeds more fail.
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:21:00 -
[1306] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That is so wrong is laughable. How about an example. Battleships fitting all Hardeners and plates/extenders and fitting all high slot with large smartbombs. Which works extremely well with enough BS using the same smart bombs and the same hardeners. I highly doubt that was what CCP expected when they made BS and smartbombs. So don't say that non caps suck outside of their originally designed intent. Except I didn't say GÇ£originally designed intentGÇ¥ GÇö I said outside of their role. None of what you just said demonstrated them being used outside their role. So, do you have any examples of this?
Sure, the role of a battleship is to be used as primary or co-primary DPS in fleets while being supported by smaller ships. Yet they can still operate well solo against gangs of smaller ships and can form gangs of nothing but battleships to become extremely powerful as in the Smart bombing fleet i described before. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:23:00 -
[1307] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Tippia wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:I give up after this, you dont seem to either want to answer the question or you just dont understand. I understand. Do you understand what the change does? Quote:More often than not when you DC you not able to do jack for a certian amount of time, until you either relog or have to reboot PC and then relog. Does all of that take more than 15 minutes? If no, the change will make fuckall difference to you. wouldnt take 15mins no, so after say disconnection from lagg it will take a good few minutes at least to reboot an relogg. Then will take some time to load grid aswell.By that time after this patch you could of been dropped 2-3 times, its for these eventuallitys im talking about.
If your connection is that poor that you disconnect in every engagement 2-3 times, you probably should consider offline games. Flying a super cap is not in the cards for you.
An unintentional disconnect may suck, but it cannot ever be distinguished server-side from an intentional disconnect. It just can't be done. Get over it. CCP may make brain-blunders now and then, but intentionally putting in a mechanic that can and will be abused is the stuff of ignorance or incompetence.
If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:24:00 -
[1308] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote: Carrier = Can launch standard drones SUPERCarrier = Cant? When you make a super version of something you generally try to not make it worse than its standard counterpart.
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 |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
784
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:24:00 -
[1309] - Quote
What people fail to understand is there are more DRF members / allies on the CSM than goons. oh wait.. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:25:00 -
[1310] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Super Carriers do not jump through gates. At least know what your talking about before you start talking. I stopped reading after this because I assume you don't know anything about Supers. Maybe you should actually read what he wrote before you start assuming such things, especially if you try to correct him by saying the same thing he didGǪ
When the first sentence of a post is wrong about the most basic mechanic of how a ship works and with all the post here to read, why exactly am I going to waste time reading any further ? |
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:27:00 -
[1311] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:CCP are evidently Goon pets that could be ofc a big reason for this monumental **** up. Failness breeds more fail.
We get a cut of all subscriptions, true story. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Dirala
Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:27:00 -
[1312] - Quote
Pandi V wrote:
Example: Lets say Denmark suddenly decides it wants to be a great naval power and builds 5 brand new aircraft carriers but because of lack of funds and manpower it doesn't build any other ships to support them. In their first encounter with the Britsh fleet, which currently only has one aircraft carrier, they subsequently get their ass handed to them. Why? Because the smaller and much more numerous British vessels would just be able to sail right up to the aircraft carriers and pound them to bits, because there were no Danish ships to protect them.
Denmark was too small and weak a nation to properly field aircraft carriers, and were subsequently thrown back to highsec because they had no business playing with the big boys (Britain).
Strange comparism. But I'll just stick to it and argue the other way around. Basicly, what you are saying here. If they don't have a support fleet, (which might happen when you need to move the ship or for whatever other reason not beeing in a sceduled Op) a single rowing Boat should be able to hold those shiny new toys of Denmark down, until Downtime?
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:27:00 -
[1313] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:Grath Telkin wrote: Carrier = Can launch standard drones SUPERCarrier = Cant? When you make a super version of something you generally try to not make it worse than its standard counterpart.
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
How does any of what you said explain why they didn't chisel in a 25m3 drone bay on such a massive ship?
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:28:00 -
[1314] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:CCP are evidently Goon pets that could be ofc a big reason for this monumental **** up. Failness breeds more fail. We get a cut of all subscriptions, true story.
lol |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:28:00 -
[1315] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:Misanth wrote:Already posted here twice, how I killed six Fighters for a Nyx while I was alone in a Nighthawk. Somehow I wish I had frapsed it, would've been awsome to post that as a counter-argument in this thread. It might be because I'm a super-pilot myself, but when you know how Fighters function you can easily kite them around and thus completely neglegt their damage output.
Since people are being stubborn and-/or stupid, I'll give a hint: they're slow and not very agile. If you have enough speed/maneuverability, especially combined with multiple on-grid bookmarks or objects to warp to, it's not even hard to "tank" 20 Fighters in a semi-decent BC. I reccon a BS would have alot more issues tho, unless a Machariel, you'd be too slow and not agile enough. But there's the rock/scissor/paper, and the TL;DR is that my solo BC-hull was tanking a Nyx' Fighters perfectly fine. Obviously I stayed out of neut/pointrange, I could not point him anyway so even less reason to do. I agree with you on this on but you are missing a very important factor. Your example is 1 vs 1 scenario GǪ I wild love to see how you are dogging 5 fighters with another 4.000 FB (200 SC) on grid GǪ Have you tried it? What happens to a lone super after the nerf? GÇô Same thing that is happening now to a lone super: it dies. This changes dramatically when you scale the scenario GǪ My 2 cents ... E
Then you bring a few bombers, just a handful will easily do. Edit; Oh and I should add in that I'm not saying game should be balanced around 1v1. I'm just highlighting for stupid people who are whining their 40 subcaps die to a solo mothership (there's quite a few people whining about scenarious in here, and they want fighters nerfed based on that) is frankly - bad players. If one guy easily can dodge 20 fighters, and if two-three hics easily can rotate points to dodge ecm drones/fighters, ecm burst and neuts, then a proper subcap fleet need to get a clue rather than whining because they don't know how to play the game. this is a signature |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:29:00 -
[1316] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:
When the first sentence of a post is wrong about the most basic mechanic of how a ship works and with all the post here to read, why exactly am I going to waste time reading any further ?
:cripes:
IM A VERY BUSY PERSON I DON'T HAVE TIME TO COMPREHEND THE POSTS I READ ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:30:00 -
[1317] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Sure, the role of a battleship is to be used as primary or co-primary DPS in fleets while being supported by smaller ships. Yet they can still operate well solo against gangs of smaller ships and can form gangs of nothing but battleships to become extremely powerful as in the Smart bombing fleet i described before. GǪand guess what? While powerful in terms of the DPS they can put out, they suck for those other roles (tackling in particular) and aren't particularly successful as single-type-fleets.
Quote:When the first sentence of a post is wrong about the most basic mechanic of how a ship works and with all the post here to read, why exactly am I going to waste time reading any further ? I'll say it again: maybe you should actually read what he wrote before you start assuming such things, especially if you try to correct him by saying the same thing he didGǪ
Do you want to try again, or should I do the sentence analysis for you? You said the exact same thing he did, and then you proclaimed that based on what he said, he knows nothing about supercaps or basic mechanics. From this we can conclude that you don't know anything about supercaps or basic mechanics.
I must say, it's very brave of you to admit such things, but it kind of puts a damper on everything you've said so far in this threadGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:31:00 -
[1318] - Quote
Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:Malcanis wrote:[Yeah or he'll quit for... what is he up to now? the sixth time? The seventh?
Cry more noob.
You're producing all the tears I will ever need. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:31:00 -
[1319] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Super Carriers do not jump through gates. At least know what your talking about before you start talking. I stopped reading after this because I assume you don't know anything about Supers. Maybe you should actually read what he wrote before you start assuming such things, especially if you try to correct him by saying the same thing he didGǪ When the first sentence of a post is wrong about the most basic mechanic of how a ship works and with all the post here to read, why exactly am I going to waste time reading any further ?
Posting this again because it's hilarious.
Velin Dhal wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:Not only do Supercarriers not need to travel home alone through gates after a long fleet fight... Super Carriers do not jump through gates. At least know what your talking about before you start talking. I stopped reading after this because I assume you don't know anything about Supers.
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:31:00 -
[1320] - Quote
Many years ago, before many of the people whining about supercaps being to powerful started playing this game, CCP's CEO said EVE should be about choices. Clearly with the changes CCP is presenting for supercaps they are giving players a very limited array of choices: stay logged off, join a blob alliance so you can shoot only other cap ships and sov structures.
I think one idea that CCP should consider here is a choice option for supercarriers that doesn't take their teeth away against tacklers but forces them into a role.
Drone bay size. Scale it back to allow an SC pilot to fit a full flight of bombers OR fighters. Then give say 2000 m3 to 3000 m3 for smaller drones and let the player choose. This would diminish the giant alliance SC blob with endless sentries in bay, other than corp hangers i suppose. It would force SC pilots to pick a role, am I going to have bombers to kill a cap or fighters to down some faction BS with no support, but still allow them to have a small supply of ECM drones on a single HIC, warriors on a dictor, heavys / senties for a mission or sanctum. |
|
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:32:00 -
[1321] - Quote
well if CCP Tallest is not gonna nerf out regular carriers i wont die. or emo rage quit. still is hitting super carriers really hard, i dunno alot of people provided some really good solutions on this thread that dont make supers a relic of a beter time in eve....super caps online is gay. i will grant that, but frankly this isnt the type or world where u would wanna bring a knife to a gun fight, its the kind of world where u wanna bring a super carrier to a knife fight, its not my fault u cant afford you, cant fly one, havent been playing long enough to even think about sitting in one.
titans, i like how they are utterly missing the titan nerf...why dont u nerf them with their epic gun tracking? it doesnt make sense to be able to be friendly ewared but cannot be enemy ewared. but what ever, the goons have a bunch of titans at their disposal, just need to thin out the super carrier ranks since PL definitely has superiority there huh.
next target is the tengu, its a vicious little animal. heavy missiles at a ROF of 3.5 seconds is a bit much, and they fly so fast with max skills. more like assault missiles huh, but they dont matter so much i guess since goons already came up with the solotion for that. goon maels VS PL tengus, witha good Goon FC will alpha the tengus...fix supplied. goons wins, the tengu does not need the nerf hammer. glad we solved that one.
dreads, CCP they are broke as broke can get. u might as well give up on fixing them, come out with dust 514 then i can use my moros to pound the hell out of planets...its the only reason i bought it in the 1st place.
|
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:32:00 -
[1322] - Quote
The whoe "Balancing" could be solved by keeping the supers ability to launch regualr drones and buffing dreads in ehp,resists, cap and reducing the cap/cpu of capital turrets on dreads therefore returning dreads to viable capital killer letting the dreads get back into the game more effectively. Instead of screwing the sc pilots at the behest of the poor and envious. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:33:00 -
[1323] - Quote
Misanth wrote:iulixxi wrote:Misanth wrote:Already posted here twice, how I killed six Fighters for a Nyx while I was alone in a Nighthawk. Somehow I wish I had frapsed it, would've been awsome to post that as a counter-argument in this thread. It might be because I'm a super-pilot myself, but when you know how Fighters function you can easily kite them around and thus completely neglegt their damage output.
Since people are being stubborn and-/or stupid, I'll give a hint: they're slow and not very agile. If you have enough speed/maneuverability, especially combined with multiple on-grid bookmarks or objects to warp to, it's not even hard to "tank" 20 Fighters in a semi-decent BC. I reccon a BS would have alot more issues tho, unless a Machariel, you'd be too slow and not agile enough. But there's the rock/scissor/paper, and the TL;DR is that my solo BC-hull was tanking a Nyx' Fighters perfectly fine. Obviously I stayed out of neut/pointrange, I could not point him anyway so even less reason to do. I agree with you on this on but you are missing a very important factor. Your example is 1 vs 1 scenario GǪ I wild love to see how you are dogging 5 fighters with another 4.000 FB (200 SC) on grid GǪ Have you tried it? What happens to a lone super after the nerf? GÇô Same thing that is happening now to a lone super: it dies. This changes dramatically when you scale the scenario GǪ My 2 cents ... E Then you bright a few bombers, just a handful will easily do. Edit; Oh and I should add in that I'm not saying game should be balanced around 1v1. I'm just highlighting for stupid people who are whining their 40 subcaps die to a solo mothership (there's quite a few people whining about scenarious in here, and they want fighters nerfed based on that) is frankly - bad players. If one guy easily can dodge 20 fighters, and if two-three hics easily can rotate points to dodge ecm drones/fighters, ecm burst and neuts, then a proper subcap fleet need to get a clue rather than whining because they don't know how to play the game.
So the subcap guys should just "bright a few bombers" but it's too much to ask the supercap guys to do the same?
Should we infer that supercap pilots don't have any friends?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:33:00 -
[1324] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Then you bright a few bombers, just a handful will easily do. Edit; Oh and I should add in that I'm not saying game should be balanced around 1v1. I'm just highlighting for stupid people who are whining their 40 subcaps die to a solo mothership (there's quite a few people whining about scenarious in here, and they want fighters nerfed based on that) is frankly - bad players. If one guy easily can dodge 20 fighters, and if two-three hics easily can rotate points to dodge ecm drones/fighters, ecm burst and neuts, then a proper subcap fleet need to get a clue rather than whining because they don't know how to play the game.
Actualy you need about 34 bombs to kill a FB ... do your math
E
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:34:00 -
[1325] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Many years ago, before many of the people whining about supercaps being to powerful started playing this game, CCP's CEO said EVE should be about choices. Clearly with the changes CCP is presenting for supercaps they are giving players a very limited array of choices: stay logged off, join a blob alliance so you can shoot only other cap ships and sov structures.
Hypothetically they could also accept that they should risk losing their ships as well.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:34:00 -
[1326] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Supers/titans will NOT be used for out an out fleet fights, there will NOT be a balanced super cap fight at all. Supers/titans will only be used to counter hotdrop a lesser number of capital targets and bridge, that is all they are going to be affective for after patch. So that in no way balances a super class fight at all as CCP are intending.
Hard to understand for you, i know.
Even when droping on lower number of caps, they will have to consider bringing subcap support to take out any possible tacklers. Not just jump in, blob everything with various drones, jump out.
And that supercaps wont be used outside fleets, thats even better. No more 1337 soloing with nyx as backup or dding t3s and pirate bses with titan - and if **** hits the fan, just logoffski like a pro.
|
Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:35:00 -
[1327] - Quote
ThaWolf wrote:Maybe instead of nerving we should rather redo the Super-carrier as a whole, after reading this thread, i think they are not fitting in the game as they are, overpowered on one hand, mainly in larger groups, and close to useless if they get nerved that way, while the character is stuck in it.
So i came up with that:
New role, high end toy for all ppl who like to fly Caps, can do much but nothing Overpowered.
- Fighter Bombers will be pure Anti-Structure Weapons, bombing range 35km, anti Pos too, dmg should be like 2 Dreads
- Fighters stay like they are pre-nerv, the SCs should do Damage like 2 Carriers
- Drone bay gets nerved to 1 Bomber set 1 Fighter set and ~500m3 (yeah still normal Drones)
- SC cant use Remote repair mods, they should be only for Standard Carriers.
- ECM immunity stays
- remote ECM stays
- All SCs should be balanced to the defense Capabilities of a NYX (which i think is the most balanced EHP for SCs)
- balance production price of all SCs to the same amount
- SCs should be able to dock as a Compensation, and to make it possible that more ppl rely want to own them, so more can be killed
^^ ME LIKES!
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:35:00 -
[1328] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Supercarriers were originally ships that were a modest increase over regular carriers and grotesquely priced as to be an end game ego ship. They were neat and something you pointed at "ooh look at that!" but not strategically important. Then they were improved dramatically and in doing so they became extremely popular, but also destabilizing. They evolved from being something that was a nice ego booster "Look at what we can make and field!" to something that was a critically important part of 0.0 warfare. Things reached a point where you simply could not compete on any appreciable level unless you fielded a large blob of these damn things and it is strangling the game. The rush to field supercaps fueled black market ISK dealing because people who used to show up and do things in dreads/carriers (battleships) no longer felt useful in the game and rushed to get a supercap by any means necessary.
This has been destructive to the game and the focus on supercaps being the end game content instead of one aspect of end game content had to be stopped. I believe these changes will make it so supercaps are still useful, but not the deciding factor in 0.0 combat. To be successful you must field a balanced fleet and if you can field a supercap fleet in addition to a balanced fleet you will be able to swing your super-dongs around just like you used to, but with a lot more caution.
And titans? They were garbage from the first iteration. They were a dumb idea, poorly implemented, and now they are still a dumb idea but slightly more killable. I would have loved to see some attention to titan gun tracking as well but this is a good first step towards bringing us back from a game where only the rich need apply.
Remove the damage from motherships and titans and let them keep their fighters/logistic role. You won't see them shoot structures anymore, they won't be the anti-capital anymore, and you have virtually got everything you needed.
All you guys have to do is reduce their damage output. Not do alot of side-lulul that has nothing to do with anything. HP, dronebays, etc, that's all irrelevant. Doomsday and FB's is relevant. this is a signature |
Phoenus
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:35:00 -
[1329] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:iulixxi wrote:Grath Telkin wrote: Carrier = Can launch standard drones SUPERCarrier = Cant? When you make a super version of something you generally try to not make it worse than its standard counterpart.
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 How does any of what you said explain why they didn't chisel in a 25m3 drone bay on such a massive ship?
Nono Grath. They had a drone bay chiselled into such a massive ship. They just decided it was a really bad idea, and removed it.
CCP, in typical CCP fashion, release a dev blog a few days ago saying 'don't worry guys, we got this', and then release a new one proving that they have absolutely no idea what they are doing. :) :) |
Evil Celeste
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:36:00 -
[1330] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: Hypothetically they could also accept that they should risk losing their ships as well.
Havent you heard? They paid 20b for their ship and they pay for another account, so they deserve to be unstoppable.
|
|
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:37:00 -
[1331] - Quote
Actualy you need about 34 bombs to kill a FB ... do your math
E [/quote]
actually my friend, 6 well places well aimed bombs can take out a whole wing of FB and fighters, trust me, i have seen if from the stealth bomber chair and the nyx chair. it sucks to watch all 400 mil of my FB disappear |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:37:00 -
[1332] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:The whoe "Balancing" could be solved by keeping the supers ability to launch regualr drones and buffing dreads in ehp,resists, cap and reducing the cap/cpu of capital turrets on dreads therefore returning dreads to viable capital killer letting the dreads get back into the game more effectively. Instead of screwing the sc pilots at the behest of the poor and envious. Sorry to disappoint you brosef, but I own an Erebus, Leviathan and Aeon. I build several supercaps a month for people. I'm neither poor, nor envious and I still want that drone bay nerf.
Every ship should have a weakness, and right now Supercarriers with swiss-army drone formations backed by titans do not. They counter everything. |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:37:00 -
[1333] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote: How does any of what you said explain why they didn't chisel in a 25m3 drone bay on such a massive ship?
Think of it as a small fish analogy:
Support-fleet is the smallest fish The small fish (support-fleet) can be eaten by the bigger fish (carriers) The bigger fish (carriers) can be eaten by a even bigger fish (Supper carriers) Now GǪ the bigger fish canGÇÖt swallow the small fish because it will choke and kill the bigger fish
E
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:38:00 -
[1334] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:While I agree with you, Isk is always a factor. This game has a Capitalist economy. Where there is Captialism, money is always a driving factor.
Isk is a factor to the player, and should not affect game balance. Look at when CCP tried to state "Titans are so expensive, we'll just see 2-3 of them in the game".
The same applies to the people posting in this thread suggesting motherships should cost four times a much. Guess what, players will still farm that isk and still buy them and still use them. The issue both with Titans and Motherships is not that their cost, it's that they are too useful so people actually field them. They should've been kept as logistic boats and/or with a fun endgame twists. The mothership had it's 20 drones. The titan has the jumpportal. Neither was gamebreaking, even tho the portal is quite damn powerful. It should've stopped there. this is a signature |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:39:00 -
[1335] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Sure, the role of a battleship is to be used as primary or co-primary DPS in fleets while being supported by smaller ships. Yet they can still operate well solo against gangs of smaller ships and can form gangs of nothing but battleships to become extremely powerful as in the Smart bombing fleet i described before. GǪand guess what? While powerful in terms of the DPS they can put out, they suck for those other roles (tackling in particular) and aren't particularly successful as single-type-fleets. Quote:When the first sentence of a post is wrong about the most basic mechanic of how a ship works and with all the post here to read, why exactly am I going to waste time reading any further ? I'll say it again: maybe you should actually read what he wrote before you start assuming such things, especially if you try to correct him by saying the same thing he didGǪ Do you want to try again, or should I do the sentence analysis for you? You said the exact same thing he did, and then you proclaimed that based on what he said, he knows nothing about supercaps or basic mechanics. From this we can conclude that you don't know anything about supercaps or basic mechanics. I must say, it's very brave of you to admit such things, but it kind of puts a damper on everything you've said so far in this threadGǪ
Funny, I have 2 alts that fly Supers. How many do you have ? Not to mention that before you bash someone for apparently not understanding mechanics of this game you should look back at all your posts about how balance is destroying the usefulness of ships you probably can't fly in the first place. |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:40:00 -
[1336] - Quote
kralz wrote:actually my friend, 6 well places well aimed bombs can take out a whole wing of FB and fighters, trust me, i have seen if from the stealth bomber chair and the nyx chair. it sucks to watch all 400 mil of my FB disappear
In a controlled environment ... perhaps (even if I seriously doubt that) but try to do that with 2K FB on grid ...
E |
Lu Yuan
Weed Specialist's
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:41:00 -
[1337] - Quote
#373Posted: 2011.10.10 19:44 | Report Like 2 Lu Yuan wrote: Did you'z ever consider its not the supers or the capitals that need nerfed its all the rest of the ships ingame need a boost...,.. caus most r useless to some certain extent No, because that just leads to power inflation and even more balance issues.
The problem is that (super)caps are too good. The proper solution to that problem is to make them less good. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki
Well thats why they need to study each and all ships more to make sure they are living up to the job. there is already to many ships sitting on the shelf cause they have been nerfed and not used anymore shudnt do the same to supers
best things in this patch the log off mechanics the reduction in seige time
all the rest a farce.... |
Dr Djago
Kung Fu Roguer The Forbidden City
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:41:00 -
[1338] - Quote
I love the part with the logging off timer, get ready to see some massive record losses. |
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:45:00 -
[1339] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:kralz wrote:actually my friend, 6 well places well aimed bombs can take out a whole wing of FB and fighters, trust me, i have seen if from the stealth bomber chair and the nyx chair. it sucks to watch all 400 mil of my FB disappear In a controlled environment ... perhaps (even if I seriously doubt that) but try to do that with 2K FB on grid ... E
no i understand, a good warrior is one who controls his environment, thats the quiet calm stealth FC...me....and he sets all his pilots up on their warp in warp out points, he then counts it down, they al de-cloak, launch at the SAME target, at the same time..all go off at the same time all on target. u will kill the drones....I.E...all drones around a ihub...beautiful. shoot at the ihub, all the drones will take the hit. or many of them. stealth bombing is very very much about piloting skill.
|
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:47:00 -
[1340] - Quote
kralz wrote:no i understand, a good warrior is one who controls his environment, thats the quiet calm stealth FC...me....and he sets all his pilots up on their warp in warp out points, he then counts it down, they al de-cloak, launch at the SAME target, at the same time..all go off at the same time all on target. u will kill the drones....I.E...all drones around a ihub...beautiful. shoot at the ihub, all the drones will take the hit. or many of them. stealth bombing is very very much about piloting skill.
Out of curiosity what were those FB shooting since they were so groped that you netted such victory?
E
|
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:48:00 -
[1341] - Quote
Quote:Normally I don't say this, but damn, these tears are delicious.
You whiners realize that people flew moms even before they were buffed? People complained back then, but they still built them and put them into an alt, albeit motherships being useless crap.
Back then, there were two major reasons for supercap rebalance: 1. AOE doomsday was killing EVE 2. Titans were destroyed in under two minutes.
Both of these things did not relate to motherships at all. But CCP was nice and sort of introduced a new ship class, but completely overshot their goal and made motherships even matches for titans, despite them costing only a quarter of a titan.
The fact that EVE has 2-3k super pilots and even the poorest faggots fly them (I'd say 4 of 5 pilots could not easily replace their moms without alliance help) just shows how out of balance they are. It was obvious for over a year that they were due for a nerfbat, yet people still trained for them and are now crying that suddenly and totally surprising they're getting nerfed.
Tell you what. A mothership does not cost 20 bil, it costs 10 bil (k more like 12b after other costs). It is as strong as a ship with four times the material cost. It costs just 15 times more than a carrier, but does 8/10 times the DPS, has 20-30 times the tank. It costs 5 times more than a dread, but has 1.5 times the damage of a dread and 20-30 times the tank of one. Plus it has invulnerability to any forms of EW but neuts, it can defend against any ship there is in this game.
If you're crying about your shiny values being devalued, ask them for actually balancing that value and give moms 7 times the EHP of a carrier with 8k DPS to reflect their 15-fold price. Fitting 2 bil worth of rigs, 3b worth of low slots, a 2b implant set and paying 5b over build cost is your own damn problem. Mostly QFT from FHC, although the not docking **** is argued to be the justification for :derp: Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:50:00 -
[1342] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Funny, I have 2 alts that fly Supers. How many do you have ? Not to mention that before you bash someone for apparently not understanding mechanics of this game you should look back at all your posts about how balance is destroying the usefulness of ships you probably can't fly in the first place. I'm not bashing you GÇö I'm just going by what you said.
Have you read it yet? Do you need help understanding where you went wrong? Do you get why you said that you know nothing about supercaps and basic mechanics? It was probably not your intent, but it is what you saidGǪ
Maybe if you weren't so rash in assuming what people said rather than actually reading and understanding what is said, you wouldn't make these kinds of mistakes. But cheer up GÇö it's never too late to start. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Cpt Tunguska
Doomheim
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:50:00 -
[1343] - Quote
This whole thing will be a hidden titan buff. I mean hitpoints of all ships are reduced by 20%, Dreads and Carriers dont get any HP changes.....but the DD remains at 3 million dmg/shot. This means its a huuuge DD buff.
The side with the biggest titan blob will still obliterate any hostile opposition. They would DD the hell out of hostile caps and supers....their guns will decimate the hostile support. The consequence is: The underdog cant use capitals and supercaps, as long as a overwhelming DD party waits for him. Buissness as usual, this patch wont change anything. Even a supercarrier will pop quckly to a couple DDs. Alliances with huge titanblobs will benefit from this patch.
I see youre buffing Dreads to be useful again, and to be a counter to supers. But as I said. As long as a dread dies in one second via DD, they wont do any dmg. Keep in mind that very high numbers of titans ....like 30+....are pretty much eve standard.
So if you want to create an useful patch:
- reduce DD damage to something logical...like 1 million. - prohibit DD to be used vs. subs (done) - nerf Titan XL weaponry, so they cant hit BS and BC (without nerfing dreads) - nerf super HPs (already done) - nerf logout (done) - nerf logistic ships to get more dynamic subcap fights.
- make capitals to survive at least one DD with a good amount of remaining HP (look at point 1) - dont totally defang supercarriers they already got 20% hp reduction. - superarrier should at least be able to launch one full wing of bombers and fighters (fighter+bomber bay) - create a dronebay which can carry a logical amount of drones: like 1 wing of heavies/sentries and couple of lights)
- Preseve Gallente as "drone race! To prohibit drones @ moros and nyx would just be another obligatory gallente nerf, coming with ever y expansion, stop nerfing gallente ! - those dreads without drones are silly, ccp wtf do you even know your own game? - if you really intend to prohibit drones @ SCs and reduce their Bombers/Fighters, plz dont call them Supercarrier anymore, rename it in SBU-removal-tool. They wont be a carrier anymore, since they cant carry even basic stuff.
Supercarriers just with one wing of bombers and 10 fighters would be the laughing stock of eve, they couldnt even fight off a hostile destroyer, while titans remain largely unchecked.....this will just lead into titanblob online. Good job ccp. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:51:00 -
[1344] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Funny, I have 2 alts that fly Supers. How many do you have ? Not to mention that before you bash someone for apparently not understanding mechanics of this game you should look back at all your posts about how balance is destroying the usefulness of ships you probably can't fly in the first place. He's mostly bashing you for not understanding basic sentence structure. But if you haven't spotted it in the last 2 pages with three people pointing it out, I doubt you will now.
Please, tell us more about how many supercaps you own and how that helps with your English reading comprehension! |
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:52:00 -
[1345] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:kralz wrote:no i understand, a good warrior is one who controls his environment, thats the quiet calm stealth FC...me....and he sets all his pilots up on their warp in warp out points, he then counts it down, they al de-cloak, launch at the SAME target, at the same time..all go off at the same time all on target. u will kill the drones....I.E...all drones around a ihub...beautiful. shoot at the ihub, all the drones will take the hit. or many of them. stealth bombing is very very much about piloting skill. Out of curiosity what were those FB shooting since they were so groped that you netted such victory? E
yes many of them were as they were all on the ihub trying to blow it up. however little known fact is that the FB sig radius goes up HUGELY when a super pilot recalls them and the MWD turns on...
so my SB squad launched bombs, super cap pilots panic and recall fighters,MWD turns on, bombs travel 30km and detonate. in the path of the retreating FB wings and fire works take place. but 6 well placed bombs on the FB as the are shooting the target does very large damage to them. i am very sad when i see incomming bombs, thinking about all those damn letters i have to write to the families of my dead FB pilots. but i digress i do not call them back so as they donot increase their damage intake with MWD sig penatly. i have lost plenty of fighter bombers, fighters and drones to stealth bomber, the pilots in the SB just have to know what they are doing. |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:57:00 -
[1346] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Malcanis wrote: Hypothetically they could also accept that they should risk losing their ships as well.
Havent you heard? They paid 20b for their ship and they pay for another account, so they deserve to be unstoppable.
SC should not be able to destroy BS fleet but they should be able to defend themselves against a fast roaming gank, at least able to get out and safe before the burning cyno Recon can land on grid. They should not be (and are not) solopawnmobiles. This change is a little bit too much, the first introduction of SC was way overpowered though, we can all agree on that for sure. Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:57:00 -
[1347] - Quote
kralz wrote:yes many of them were as they were all on the ihub trying to blow it up. however little known fact is that the FB sig radius goes up HUGELY when a super pilot recalls them and the MWD turns on...
so my SB squad launched bombs, super cap pilots panic and recall fighters,MWD turns on, bombs travel 30km and detonate. in the path of the retreating FB wings and fire works take place. but 6 well placed bombs on the FB as the are shooting the target does very large damage to them. i am very sad when i see incomming bombs, thinking about all those damn letters i have to write to the families of my dead FB pilots. but i digress i do not call them back so as they donot increase their damage intake with MWD sig penatly. i have lost plenty of fighter bombers, fighters and drones to stealth bomber, the pilots in the SB just have to know what they are doing.
Nice story ... you must be indeed a great, quiet calm stealth FC since you could even control the moment the pilot recall his fighters |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:57:00 -
[1348] - Quote
Phoenus wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:iulixxi wrote:Grath Telkin wrote: Carrier = Can launch standard drones SUPERCarrier = Cant? When you make a super version of something you generally try to not make it worse than its standard counterpart.
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 How does any of what you said explain why they didn't chisel in a 25m3 drone bay on such a massive ship? Nono Grath. They had a drone bay chiselled into such a massive ship. They just decided it was a really bad idea, and removed it. CCP, in typical CCP fashion, release a dev blog a few days ago saying 'don't worry guys, we got this', and then release a new one proving that they have absolutely no idea what they are doing. :) :)
CCP officially suck ass. Plz Allow a seperate entity to make patch choices, you've proven to be a tradgedy, supposedly let an entity/parliment etc one wich has an unbiased influence & unbiased conceptions make choices from facts an figures an all aspects of eves player base. CCP cannot be trusted to know what there player base wants or this fail would not have happened. This would be a way to salvage this messed up situation make sure your loyal paying Vets dont disragard the game as being up **** creek
Please do not evade the profanity filter. Zymurgist |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:58:00 -
[1349] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Misanth wrote:ThaWolf wrote:Maybe instead of nerving we should rather redo the Super-carrier as a whole, after reading this thread, i think they are not fitting in the game as they are, overpowered on one hand, mainly in larger groups, and close to useless if they get nerved that way, while the character is stuck in it.
So i came up with that:
New role, high end toy for all ppl who like to fly Caps, can do much but nothing Overpowered.
- Fighter Bombers will be pure Anti-Structure Weapons, bombing range 35km, anti Pos too, dmg should be like 2 Dreads
- Fighters stay like they are pre-nerv, the SCs should do Damage like 2 Carriers
- Drone bay gets nerved to 1 Bomber set 1 Fighter set and ~500m3 (yeah still normal Drones)
- SC cant use Remote repair mods, they should be only for Standard Carriers.
- ECM immunity stays
- remote ECM stays
- All SCs should be balanced to the defense Capabilities of a NYX (which i think is the most balanced EHP for SCs)
- balance production price of all SCs to the same amount
- SCs should be able to dock as a Compensation, and to make it possible that more ppl rely want to own them, so more can be killed Agree with everything except the dock part. Supers are unique in the sense that they are a) e-war immune and b) can't dock. That's the benefit and tradeoff you get for flying one, something you accept by taking the seat, and something they should never change. fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.
If you let them dock, suddenly alot of people will feel "hey cool, now it doesn't matter anymore, I could just get one". In fact, if CCP let us dock them, I'd buy a couple more again after selling off some. Being forced to use parking alts and/or dedicated pilots, keep down the population of supers for one. It keeps more POS' fueled, which is good for the economy as a whole. It makes them easier to kill, which is another good argument for keeping them in space.
I'll give you this; even tho I'm a maxed out superpilot, carrier5, fb5, jumpskills etc, I'd be happy to see all supers gone from the game. Titans, moms, yes, but I'd like to see dreads and carriers gone too. However, they do exist, and as such, a super is not a cap and a cap is not a super. The supers are distinguished, expensive e-peen toys that has several tradeoffs when getting one. You're talking about giving pilots incentitives to fly them. I'm talking about deterrents. I.e. in my case, I accepted to that I would "lose" a pilot and dedicate an accounts training for each super I picked up. If person X feels that is "steep", then they shouldn't get a super.
this is a signature |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:01:00 -
[1350] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Misanth wrote:Do you want free isk with the subscription too? CCP already gave lazy players like you the HIC to tackle supers. We used to tackle them by bumping, nossing and neuting, you should learn the core mechanics of the game before you even beg for free killmails. Since I'm all nice and posting helpful hinters today, I'll give you another: a) you can use multiple HIC that rotate their points, so they can be RR'd, b) you can keep at the edge of pointrange, pulse mwd and warp off/back. It's so ridicilously easy to point supers today that anyone who fails to do so, does not deserve a kill. Yes, its completely lazymode to be able to tackle supercarrier only with 1 type of ship, that is completely useless for anything else in lowsec. Its also ridiculously easy to point scs, because you are not under 20 fighters from each, 2x 30k+ neuts from each and remote ecm burst. Its also completely ok, that supercarriers - that can be built ONLY in 0.0 sovereignity space - can be used without any disadvantage in low sec space. Space, where you cannot built supercarrier. Also how much supercarriers there were in game, when you used to tackle them with "bumps." Nice example of "always bet on stupid" pvp approach btw. And nice example of ccp providing good pvp balance. Making a ship, that basically cant be tackled withou pilot making mistake, mmm every fotmchaser goes wet...
You're a lousy player, just FYI.
I've been on both sides, both had my supers pointed by HICs/dics, as well as in some cases being one of few HIC's to point a super in lowsec. In one case I was one of two HIC's that kept a Nyx pointed for a couple of minutes before the rest of the fleet arrived. If you think it's that easy to fend off HIC's you should've taken the advice I posted above. this is a signature |
|
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:03:00 -
[1351] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:kralz wrote:yes many of them were as they were all on the ihub trying to blow it up. however little known fact is that the FB sig radius goes up HUGELY when a super pilot recalls them and the MWD turns on...
so my SB squad launched bombs, super cap pilots panic and recall fighters,MWD turns on, bombs travel 30km and detonate. in the path of the retreating FB wings and fire works take place. but 6 well placed bombs on the FB as the are shooting the target does very large damage to them. i am very sad when i see incomming bombs, thinking about all those damn letters i have to write to the families of my dead FB pilots. but i digress i do not call them back so as they donot increase their damage intake with MWD sig penatly. i have lost plenty of fighter bombers, fighters and drones to stealth bomber, the pilots in the SB just have to know what they are doing. Nice story ... you must be indeed a great, quiet calm stealth FC since you could even control the moment the pilot recall his fighters
do not troll me. do not mock me. cause and effect here is simple. a steal bomber wing can control when a super carrier panics and recalls his drones. simply by decloaking and launching his payload. no SC carrier pilot wants to watch all hi DPS go poof, and a great many of them dont know that by recalling them they are allowing them to take more damage then they may have. cause and effect. i have been extremely polite up to this point, lets keep it that way, 34 bombs would be very difficult to field against a super cap fleet since MORE then 6 bombs at a time and they will destroy themselves. |
Kalaratiri
Teraa Matar
120
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:04:00 -
[1352] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:[quote=Phoenus]
CCP officially suck ass. Plz Allow a seperate entity to make patch choices, you've proven to be a tradgedy, supposedly let an entity/parliment etc one wich has an unbiased influence & unbiased conceptions make choices from facts an figures an all aspects of eves player base. CCP cannot be trusted to know what there player base wants or this fail would not have happened. This would be a way to salvage this messed up situation make sure your loyal paying Vets dont disragard the game as being up s.h.i.t. creek
Ok, so, looking at your last 10 posts or so, the only thing you've made me think would be a good idea is for you to shut the hell up.. You're obviously hating on ccp and goons, and if you honestly think the game is that bad a shape you should probably find another one. I hear WoT is the 'bittervet refuge' at the moment. Less pointless rage, more leaving.
Please...? |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:04:00 -
[1353] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Another issue here is some players use supercarriers for other than PVP at times. Before all the flaming and name calling, I ask you why shouldn't they be able to? Players use PVP ships to PVE in EVE all the time, CCP allows those ships to be cross functional.
And for the guy in the purely PVE faction battleship, a ship class designed for PVP but often used for PVE, he can just dock and change ships when he wants. What if CCP said Navy Ravens should only be able to kill Battleship class hulls in this game, we are disallowing the fitting of cruise lunchers and removing the drone bay.
I would love to see the uproar in this game if CCP changed every ship to be single tasked, single focused. For example, Hurricanes and Drakes will only be able to damage other BC, we are making their weapon systems 100% ineffective against smaller ships and removing the drone bays, so make sure you bring a frigate support fleet with your BC roam or you will get raped a small frigate gang. Same with battleships, if you are flying a battleship you have a 0% chance of hitting or doing any damage to a ship smaller than another battleship and you will have no drone bay. In fact unless you are in a ship with drone bonuses you will not have a drone bay. And the type of drone you can use in your drone ship will be based on your ship class/size, so Ishkur can use lights, Vexor, Ishtar, Myrmidon and Gila can only use mediums, and the Dominix can only use heavys and sentries.
That is the kind of inflexibilty CCP is presenting for supercaps.
That's the very essence of what I try highlight that CCP is doing. I talk a bunch about how this game is becoming a blob game and mechanics behind it, but the real point I try illustrate is that supers are pigeonholed by CCP. This game was a sandbox game, CCP sell it as it a sandbox game, players used to shape the universe and we found alternative ways to use ships, not just 'as they were intended'. CCP is destroying that by pigeonholing everything into blob warfare, and supers are being forced into a blobfest fleetship. this is a signature |
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:04:00 -
[1354] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well?
Could not have said this better. Well put.
Typical CCP Balancing = "Grab your axes boys...we're goin' nerfin!"
This is seriously a sad thing. Trained my butt off for a LOOOOOONG time, spent billions of ISK, and now my Super Carrier will SIT in a POS doing NOTHING until there's a POS to shoot/rep ? At least before I could Rat to pass the time. Now, I can't even do that. You, CCP, should slow down a bit. Just the 3 ideas above definitely would have been enough to start.
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:08:00 -
[1355] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Misanth wrote:Drop Dead Sexy wrote:as a sub cap pilot, lo sec roamer i second this nerf, thank you dev's, any chance on forbidding titans in low sec??? titan alfa kills are very annoying and must be looked at. super cap hot drops on a single ship becoming more and more popular taking away all chances of survival for solo warrior. What kind of ****** pilot are you that can't get away from a solo super? You don't fit propulsion mod? You are clearly not aware of 1337 pvpers "new" tactics. You engage in 1v1 in any other than kiting ship (i know, completely stupid idea right?), you get tackled, sc warps/jumps in, reps target, applies neuts and bunch of drones. After the gank just leaves. Without any real danger. Gogo ewar immunity in lowsec.
Again you didn't read what I post.. but I'll be generous again: I said "get away from a solo super". If he was tackled, pointed and webbed by ship X, then the super is not the issue. The issue is that his ship XYZ is not killing ship ZYX. The super just adds in, and it's not a solo super. XYZ could've brought a cyno of his own for example, dropped HICs and a bunch of pals and killed the super.
Subcaps don't die to solo supers in lowsec, subcaps die to not properly fending off tacklers, or engaging in fights where they did not expect support to come in. That super could've been a carrier or a guardian + dmg ship and you'd see exactly the same outcome: XYZ died because he couldn't fend off a tackler. It has nothing to do with the super itself. this is a signature |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:09:00 -
[1356] - Quote
Kalaratiri wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:[quote=Phoenus]
CCP officially suck ass. Plz Allow a seperate entity to make patch choices, you've proven to be a tradgedy, supposedly let an entity/parliment etc one wich has an unbiased influence & unbiased conceptions make choices from facts an figures an all aspects of eves player base. CCP cannot be trusted to know what there player base wants or this fail would not have happened. This would be a way to salvage this messed up situation make sure your loyal paying Vets dont disragard the game as being up s.h.i.t. creek
Ok, so, looking at your last 10 posts or so, the only thing you've made me think would be a good idea is for you to shut the hell up.. You're obviously hating on ccp and goons, and if you honestly think the game is that bad a shape you should probably find another one. I hear WoT is the 'bittervet refuge' at the moment. Less pointless rage, more leaving. Please...?
lol if you have read them then you must of seen all the facts indicated, but still be ignoring them. Eve is a game iv sticked with thick an thin, but this is stupidity an not going to be silent about it. |
Dirk Tungsten
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:12:00 -
[1357] - Quote
Carabusu wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Could not have said this better. Well put. Typical CCP Balancing = "Grab your axes boys...we're goin' nerfin!" This is seriously a sad thing. Trained my butt off for a LOOOOOONG time, spent billions of ISK, and now my Super Carrier will SIT in a POS doing NOTHING until there's a POS to shoot/rep ? At least before I could Rat to pass the time. Now, I can't even do that. You, CCP, should slow down a bit. Just the 3 ideas above definitely would have been enough to start.
Dear Sir you wont even be able to shoot pos's anymore only modules. ohh CCP you naughty clowns, certianly know how to mess things up. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:14:00 -
[1358] - Quote
Kalaratiri wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:[quote=Phoenus]
CCP officially suck ass. Plz Allow a seperate entity to make patch choices, you've proven to be a tradgedy, supposedly let an entity/parliment etc one wich has an unbiased influence & unbiased conceptions make choices from facts an figures an all aspects of eves player base. CCP cannot be trusted to know what there player base wants or this fail would not have happened. This would be a way to salvage this messed up situation make sure your loyal paying Vets dont disragard the game as being up s.h.i.t. creek Ok, so, looking at your last 10 posts or so, the only thing you've made me think would be a good idea is for you to shut the hell up.. You're obviously hating on ccp and goons, and if you honestly think the game is that bad a shape you should probably find another one. I hear WoT is the 'bittervet refuge' at the moment. Less pointless rage, more leaving. Please...?
Are you kidding? I hope he never shuts up.
Not only are his tear-filled rantings music to our ears, but the fact he's incapable of expressing himself in anything other than incoherent flailing about CCP being owned by us makes anyone else opposed to supercap nerfs look stupid merely by association.
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Kalaratiri
Teraa Matar
120
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:15:00 -
[1359] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Kalaratiri wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:[quote=Phoenus]
CCP officially suck ass. Plz Allow a seperate entity to make patch choices, you've proven to be a tradgedy, supposedly let an entity/parliment etc one wich has an unbiased influence & unbiased conceptions make choices from facts an figures an all aspects of eves player base. CCP cannot be trusted to know what there player base wants or this fail would not have happened. This would be a way to salvage this messed up situation make sure your loyal paying Vets dont disragard the game as being up s.h.i.t. creek
Ok, so, looking at your last 10 posts or so, the only thing you've made me think would be a good idea is for you to shut the hell up.. You're obviously hating on ccp and goons, and if you honestly think the game is that bad a shape you should probably find another one. I hear WoT is the 'bittervet refuge' at the moment. Less pointless rage, more leaving. Please...? lol if you have read them then you must of seen all the facts indicated, but still be ignoring them. Eve is a game iv sticked with thick an thin, but this is stupidity an not going to be silent about it.
I didn't actually see any facts. 'lol ccp are goon pets'?
Only reason I've seen your posts is because I'm reading the whole thread |
Kalaratiri
Teraa Matar
120
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:17:00 -
[1360] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Are you kidding? I hope he never shuts up.
Not only are his tear-filled rantings music to our ears, but the fact he's incapable of expressing himself in anything other than incoherent flailing about CCP being owned by us makes anyone else opposed to supercap nerfs look stupid merely by association.
I am not actually allowed to like this more than once..
|
|
Vladimir Helios
Rayn Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:19:00 -
[1361] - Quote
Loving all of the tears of Super-cap pilots in this thread.
@CCP: Next update: buff Maelstroms. |
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
101
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:19:00 -
[1362] - Quote
(Declaration of interests: I have no super carrier, I don't like them, I want them all dead)
So, we have this super carrier problem in 0.0 and this nerf is going to address this issue. In general I agree with it and most of the changes are good and I think they will put an end to the current problem, BUT after I read 50 pages of discussion I have to agree with some minor points of the supers owners, that need to be addressed or basically these ships will be the new dreads and will not be used anymore (and we need them out there so we can have the chance to kill them all)...
Also there is the issue that these pilots invested money and time to get into these ships so at least give them a candy in exchange for the nerf, if you nerf my tengu I would also be mad...
- The candy
allow them to dock those ships
- Minor point 1
The role of these ships goes from "I'm a GOD in the field of battle" to "I can only kill caps and reinforce SOME structures", in one nerf. At least let them have the possibility to hit all structures, including POSes! By doing this, we sub cap pilots will not mind, since we do not like to hit poses, let the super pilots do it, and also while they are out killing a pos they became targets for us to drop and kill and a reason for a good fight to be had. :-)
- Minor point 2
Any carrier can deal with one solo ship, 1 at least. Super carriers should also be able to deal with 1, at least. not 2, just 1. Minimum drone set should be allowed. -> limit the drone bay size to 200m3 and bandwith so they can only carry and field a limited number drones, like 20 small, 10 medium or 5 heavys/sentries. That is it. minimum defense, nothing more, its fair even for a super to have a way to defend it self against 1 solo ship.
- Minor point 3
If you are going to nerf the ehp of these monsters, then its logical that you change the quantities of the respective BPOs to reflect the changes. A weeker ship should need less materials to be build, having in mind the nerf, the materials to build these monsters should also be nerfed in 20%.
--
Questions about the new agression session timers and logout.
- I'm ratting in a belt alone in a system with a carrier, someone enters in the system, I logout, we warps sees my carrier still aligning for the emergency warpout, shoots me or puts a point or opens a bubble, I'm agressed in any of these 3 scenarios? will I disapear in 1 or 15 minutes?
Allow us to change characters of the same account without the need to logout and put the password again. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:19:00 -
[1363] - Quote
Pandi V wrote:I think a lot of people are forgetting that Supercarriers and Titans are supposed to be alliance assets not player assets, which means that whether you can successfully field them or not, should be an indication of the strength of your alliance as a whole in terms of manpower, resources, leadership and organizational efficiency.
* There's no "supposed to be". They're assets of whoever has aquired them, in whatever way they did. * If alliances want to use their resources to show their strenght, reward their members, or simply has this as some kind of endgame goal, they're free to do so. * Guerilla warfare is often quite effective, both in EVE as well as RL. If say a 5man corp has a mothership and they're fighting a 100 man alliance who don't, the 5man obviously deserve what they have achived. Does it mean either side should be stronger? Or that the 5man corp are too small to own a super?
I've personally owned multiple supers, I have made the isk for them myself and not had any of them given to me. I've fielded them for my corp, for my alliance, but also for my own personal use. Why would I not? They were my asset, not my alliance asset, and not a fleet boat. Even tho I used it as, at times, it was also my personal ships. this is a signature |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:19:00 -
[1364] - Quote
Kalaratiri wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:
Are you kidding? I hope he never shuts up.
Not only are his tear-filled rantings music to our ears, but the fact he's incapable of expressing himself in anything other than incoherent flailing about CCP being owned by us makes anyone else opposed to supercap nerfs look stupid merely by association.
I am not actually allowed to like this more than once..
Careful, if you like or agree with anything a goon says it means you're a goon pet and we own you. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:22:00 -
[1365] - Quote
Ok, well much has been said about this. First off, I fly subcaps. Second off, I fly a HIC (Onyx actualy)
So your telling me now, that I can point a titan and all I need to do is orbit with an afterburner running? With titans not able to DD me AND not able to log off, I can simply wait for a fleet to form and light my cyno? Even to me, this is kind of bad considering a titan costs at least 70b and my ship costs 250m. When I was in the North, I remember MM lost more supers to them logging in and getting scanned down, then on the field of battle.
Cracking a DD costs: 25,000,000isk at 50,000 units of iso's x 500isk each. Why not change that to 200,000 units so it costs 100m per crack, make sure their cargo can carry lets say, 3-5 cracks? And yes, they should be able to hit subcaps. This way, I need to have a few friends in order to tackle them.
Supers. I've wanted a Wyvern for a long time, as I fly Caldari. However, I've noticed that I can ONLY old 20 F and 20FB. If I wanted to carry ANY other drones, I'd have to decide to drop a F or a FB. Already a hard choice, as I'd like to have a full bay of ECM drones. Now I guess I'll just get a carrier. I can do that with a carrier, 10 fighers, 10 ECM, 10x all other useful drones. If a Super is carrying fighers, then it will have 20 usable fighers. that's only 2x better then a carrier in DPS... Now those fighers, be they in a carrier OR a super are going to suck MORE?
A fit Chimera costs maybe 1b, whereas a fit Wyvern costs 17b?
We just went back in time, to the amazing days of MoM's. 1.5x the EHP of a carrier, 2x the damage and 17x the cost. At least you didnt cut the EHP that bad, but you still made these ships not worth being entombed in. If you want them to be used, cut their cost down to reflect the shitness that they are going to be.
I dont like blobs, but I believe you hit the Supers pinata with nerf bat a bit hard.
TL;DR Supers EHP cut: Good Supers not able to use other drones: Ok...people will deal with it. Supers not able to carry 20F 20FB: BAD Logoff timers: Ok (but people will just use DT to their advantage) Titans not being able to doomsday subcaps: BAD (lowsec, everywhere?) Titans EHP cut: Good |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:27:00 -
[1366] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:FlameOfSurvival wrote:supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;) Yeah, kill its point immunity or remote ecm burst in lowsec.
Said HIC also re-locks in less than a second, the mom needs to be fully aligned and not get bumped at all. If the attackers arn't idiots they bump, even when they have points. this is a signature |
yugi272
F---ing Nublets Pandorum Invictus
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:29:00 -
[1367] - Quote
So make a buff on carriers which would buff the fighters the way they are now prenerf. And just go with the changes on SC as you will now :P Or make it like a penalty like destroyers have, which would affect SC using fighters and bombers. |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:29:00 -
[1368] - Quote
Great blog, especially after the fighter nerf is taken out :)
Of course it's hard for the supercap pilots who invested a lot of time and/or money to get a pwnmobile and are now being reduced once more to just a part of a collective instead of masters of the universe. No one likes having his power taken away. But they have to suffer so that EVE can be fixed for the other 99% who don't fly supercaps. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:33:00 -
[1369] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Misanth wrote:Have you ever sat in a mothership and tried to fend off subcaps? Two HIC's that know what they do can't be removed by a single mothership pilot. I usually flew my motherships with 3 officer neuts and an ECM burst, with ecm drones, obviously full flight of Fighters/FB's etc.. theoreticly: 2-3 HIC's that rotate ongrid bm's/warps, and rotate keeping their points, all staying at well enough range from me to keep their point up but make my drones suffer from travel time.. they could technicly keep me there indefinately.
Assuming this is lowsec, I could probably hope to get max align, then hit ECM burst and warp off. This situation requires the HICs not to bump me ofc, which they probably won't with just 2-3 of them and bouncing the drones between them. But they could easily maintain my three neuts and disable my ecm drones. A single HIC that gets attacked by Fighters (even if neuted) will just warp off and warp back in. He'll even tank them for a decent while.
"clear floor" only happens when the HIC pilots set orbit on the mom, stay on field, with their focused script up (or bubble in null, so they can't warp themselves) and don't communicate with the other HIC pilots to make sure there's always at least one point up. Those pilots don't deserve a kill. Agro from fighters, neuts, ecm burst, jump. Problem solved. None of the hics will keep lock without eccm and none i know of can tackle 2000 dps under neuts. Problem solved.
* >70% cap. (hint; you were a) probably not at max cap when fight start, more likely you just cynoed in and are low, b) remote ECM burst suck ALOT of cap, stupendous amounts c) your own neuts, even tho quite low suckage yes) * Theoretical dps is not real dps, ****** HIC pilots you got there bro. * Injectors > neuts for a good portion of time. Look at 3 officer heavy cycle time, it just takes 2 HIC's to easily overcome it. This is the fourth time I teach you game mechanics, getting to the point where I should realise you're a successful troll. this is a signature |
Jaggins
Ixion Defence Systems Tactical Narcotics Team
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:34:00 -
[1370] - Quote
These changes sound pretty good as a start. I am most pleased by the change to logoffski.
I would like to add my voice to concerns about Dreads:
No drones is fine, thanks for shortening siege time.
Please look at tracking while in siege. I also feel a damage increase could really get interesting results in revitalizing a currently underused ship class. |
|
trademeyourmoneys
billionaire boyz club
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:35:00 -
[1371] - Quote
Floydd Heywood wrote:Great blog, especially after the fighter nerf is taken out :)
Of course it's hard for the supercap pilots who invested a lot of time and/or money to get a pwnmobile and are now being reduced once more to just a part of a collective instead of masters of the universe. No one likes having his power taken away. But they have to suffer so that EVE can be fixed for the other 99% who don't fly supercaps.
Everyone has access to supercaps, it really doesnt take long to train/make isk. I spent around 2 months making isk to get enough to get a super if i wanted one(this is personally just me,alliance didnt help at all) as eve has been around since 2003, If you are saying only 1% of eve can afford to fly a super, you are wrong.
A large amount of ccp customers live in high sec and will be uneffected by these changes. Saying 99% of eve wants supers nerfed is wrong, adapt or die. |
thebarry
SRS Industries SRS.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:43:00 -
[1372] - Quote
I like these changes a lot, but POS Gunning will also have to be rebalanced IMO.
The 5 minute timer on dreads will make it pretty much impossible for pos gunners to kill them. Previously we relied on the 10 minute siege timer to give us time to kill the dreads(about 2-3 minutes to empty its cap with 3 neuts, than another 4+ minutes to finish it off with the large guns). While it was very difficult even before, I believe now with a 5 minute siege timer it may literally be impossible for any pos, regardless of its configuration and number of gunners, to destroy a dread that's fitted a certain way(huge buffer) before it comes out of siege and gets repped up by triage carrier(s). |
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:47:00 -
[1373] - Quote
thebarry wrote:I like these changes a lot, but POS Gunning will also have to be rebalanced IMO.
The 5 minute timer on dreads will make it pretty much impossible for pos gunners to kill them. Previously we relied on the 10 minute siege timer to give us time to kill the dreads(about 2-3 minutes to empty its cap with 3 neuts, than another 4+ minutes to finish it off with the large guns). While it was very difficult even before, I believe now with a 5 minute siege timer it may literally be impossible for any pos, regardless of its configuration and number of gunners, to destroy a dread that's fitted a certain way(think perfect fleet booster, t2 trimarks, slaves) before it comes out of siege and gets repped up by triage carrier(s).
You literally just said EXACTLY why CCP needed to change the mechanic of the Dread and it's Siege timer. Dreads have long been useless due to the 10 minute Siege, and the fact that their tracking is pure shite* in Siege mode.
They are trying to bring them back to the field as a viable option. But fortunately for you, the dreads damage is still crapola on a stick. lol removal of 5 drones...whatever. They buff damage from 625% to 700% in Siege. Okay. Great. Still won't mean much.
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
miningtool
Event.Horizon Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:49:00 -
[1374] - Quote
supers caps with all the implants and x-types ehp is as follow (not including fleet boosts)
Aeon 55m ehp Hel 30m ehp Nyx 36m ehp Wyvern 43m ehp
now if you neut them out
Aeon 21m ehp Hel 7.7m ehp Nyx 15.3m ehp Wyvern 9.4m ehp
logged off but not nueted
Aeon 19m ehp Hel 23m ehp Nyx 16m ehp Wyvern 25m ehp
now if they are logged off and nueted their ehp is
Aeon 6.5m ehp Hel 4.5m ehp Nyx 6.3m ehp Wyvern 4.4m ehp
The only real changes that are necessary are the doomsday, super caps being limited to fighters/bombers and the log off mechanic.
ECM BURST IN LOW SEC NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT ITS BROKEN!!!!
Changing their drone bay to barely be better than a thanatos on a wyvern is just silly!
Eve is about figuring out how to counter what your enemy sends at you for instance supers are killed by nuets
Spoiler alert: the key to killing super caps is turning their hardeners off
a Wyvern with hardeners has 43m ehp a Wyvern without hardeners has 12m ehp
so lets say you field a 100 man fleet which anyone who is taking on super caps should be able to field and its a easy number. also your fielding hurricanes because they are cheap.
canes deal 500dps and nuet out 360gj every 12 seconds per ship
so in 36 seconds you turn the hardeners off on any super cap with this fleet
in another 240 seconds you would melt the Wyvern off the field with 50k dps killing 20b with 4b isk worth of ships
Now if the Wyvern had tried logging off it would only have 4m ehp because you lose skill bonuses and implants so it would only take 80 seconds to melt it off the field with a 100man cane fleet
Changes that need to happen
- hel rebalanced to be more inline with other supers a straight 20% to all won't really help
- the way armor bonuses are applied is drastically better than shield bonuses
- ECM Burst in low sec is so broken its not even funny.
- Something to make the levithan more on par with other titans fleet boosting wise. For instance the levi gives you 37.5 shields that you have to rep up before it takes effect and if you're dropping into a hostile fleet that is worthless while the erebus avatar and rags bonuses are immediately applied
- DREAD tracking carriers and supers should not be able to speed tank dreads
- logoff mechanic
- subcap doomsdays
- Supers fighters/bombers only
Those changes would cover everything and I would not have to let me super account go inactive because the ship is completely useless
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:50:00 -
[1375] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Misanth wrote:iulixxi wrote:Misanth wrote:Already posted here twice, how I killed six Fighters for a Nyx while I was alone in a Nighthawk. Somehow I wish I had frapsed it, would've been awsome to post that as a counter-argument in this thread. It might be because I'm a super-pilot myself, but when you know how Fighters function you can easily kite them around and thus completely neglegt their damage output.
Since people are being stubborn and-/or stupid, I'll give a hint: they're slow and not very agile. If you have enough speed/maneuverability, especially combined with multiple on-grid bookmarks or objects to warp to, it's not even hard to "tank" 20 Fighters in a semi-decent BC. I reccon a BS would have alot more issues tho, unless a Machariel, you'd be too slow and not agile enough. But there's the rock/scissor/paper, and the TL;DR is that my solo BC-hull was tanking a Nyx' Fighters perfectly fine. Obviously I stayed out of neut/pointrange, I could not point him anyway so even less reason to do. I agree with you on this on but you are missing a very important factor. Your example is 1 vs 1 scenario GǪ I wild love to see how you are dogging 5 fighters with another 4.000 FB (200 SC) on grid GǪ Have you tried it? What happens to a lone super after the nerf? GÇô Same thing that is happening now to a lone super: it dies. This changes dramatically when you scale the scenario GǪ My 2 cents ... E Then you bright a few bombers, just a handful will easily do. Edit; Oh and I should add in that I'm not saying game should be balanced around 1v1. I'm just highlighting for stupid people who are whining their 40 subcaps die to a solo mothership (there's quite a few people whining about scenarious in here, and they want fighters nerfed based on that) is frankly - bad players. If one guy easily can dodge 20 fighters, and if two-three hics easily can rotate points to dodge ecm drones/fighters, ecm burst and neuts, then a proper subcap fleet need to get a clue rather than whining because they don't know how to play the game. So the subcap guys should just "bright a few bombers" but it's too much to ask the supercap guys to do the same? Should we infer that supercap pilots don't have any friends?
Even you can't be that stupid. He's saying you can't counter 200 motherships. I say a handful of bombers takes care of all their damage. Obviously you'd need people to actually kill those motherships too, as well as those 200 motherships probably bringing their own support fleet to kill hostile HICs, dics, bombers, damage dealers, etc. That should not even have to be stated, heh.. there are actually players out there, who like him, think xyz motherships would be 'too powerful' because of fighters. Then he just didn't bring the counter. this is a signature |
Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:50:00 -
[1376] - Quote
Liranan wrote:[quote=CCP Tallest] I do think you guys shoot once again look at Selene's original MS/SC proposals. That was far more balanced than what we have today.
link? |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:51:00 -
[1377] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:Misanth wrote:Then you bright a few bombers, just a handful will easily do. Edit; Oh and I should add in that I'm not saying game should be balanced around 1v1. I'm just highlighting for stupid people who are whining their 40 subcaps die to a solo mothership (there's quite a few people whining about scenarious in here, and they want fighters nerfed based on that) is frankly - bad players. If one guy easily can dodge 20 fighters, and if two-three hics easily can rotate points to dodge ecm drones/fighters, ecm burst and neuts, then a proper subcap fleet need to get a clue rather than whining because they don't know how to play the game. Actualy you need about 34 bombs to kill a FB ... do your math E
I just re-read his post and saw he said my solo Nighthawk would be dropped by 200 moms using FB's. I assumed he meant Fighters, my bad. this is a signature |
Kalaratiri
Teraa Matar
120
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:54:00 -
[1378] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Kalaratiri wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:
Are you kidding? I hope he never shuts up.
Not only are his tear-filled rantings music to our ears, but the fact he's incapable of expressing himself in anything other than incoherent flailing about CCP being owned by us makes anyone else opposed to supercap nerfs look stupid merely by association.
I am not actually allowed to like this more than once.. Careful, if you like or agree with anything a goon says it means you're a goon pet and we own you.
Whoo!
Now, so not to derail this further, my opinion on this.
SC Hp nerf = good except for hel SC Drone bay = good, but should be able to hold more than 1 rack of fb/fighters Dreadnaughts = GOOD but let them keep at least some drones Titans = As above logoff timer = YES! |
Swearte Widfarend
Mortis Noir.
50
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:56:00 -
[1379] - Quote
I was originally going to post about how the Fighter nerf was a stupid idea, since that is the only real offensive platform of a carrier, but since Tallest isn't Stupidest, I can backtrack after my overnight digestion of this devblog.
Now on to my post.
Super Capitals Supercarriers and Titans should have a support fleet to do anything. Why? Because they are the biggest ships in the game, and the pilot in them can't swap ships very easily. The fact that Supercarriers can deploy fighters or fighter bombers makes them a step above the carrier - but all four races need balance as far as EHP, whether it's the ships themselves, or the implants the pilots use (or both - and I'd lean towards both).
Captials Carriers seem to be Ok, on their own, as is right now.
Dreadnaughts need love, in lots of ways. The siege timer/damage boost is a good start, but the tracking boost and help for the Hybrids on the Gallente Dread are still up in the air.
Fighters and Bombers I started looking at fighters (and bombers, below) and I'm trying to figure out what really makes them special compared to large drones. I think looking at fighters (as associated with their hosts, the carrier and supercarrier) is an important part of the rebalance for capital and supercapital ships. Fighters should be something between an assault frigate and a cruiser, and Bombers should be something like a steath bomber/cruiser (but with torpedo-style damage only). Suggested changes to Max Velocity/Signature Radius/Bandwidth Needed and defense Shield Capacity/Armor Hitpoints/Structure Hitpoints:
Fighters I based fighter mobility and signature on an MWD AF for each race, and defense on a basic tanked HAC. I would think damage would be akin to the Assault Frigate or a combat cruiser, including racial damage types.
Dragonfly 2,000/100/25 3,000/2,750/4,000 (original) 2,600/230/50 7,826/1,583/1,934 - 42,800 EHP w/resists (new)
Einherji 2,500/100/25 2,750/3,250/3,750 (original) 3,300/200/50 6,955/2,505/1,758 - 36,028 EHP w/resists (new)
Firbolg 2,250/100/25 2,500/3,000/4,500 (original) 2,700/220/50 1,450/8,970/3,955 - 42,939 EHP w/resists (new)
Templar 2,125/100/25 2,250/3,750/4,250 (original) 2,800/220/50 1,741/9,039/2,110 - 52,690 EHP w/resists (new)
Fighter Bombers I based mobility and signature on an AB Stealth Bomber for each race, and defense from a basic tanked Combat Recon. Damage should be akin to the output of a torpedo-only stealth bomber, including racial damage types.
Mantis 1400/125/25 6000/5500/8000 (original) 928/39/50 7,295/1,195/1,090 - 27,340 EHP w/resists
Tyrfing 1750/125/25 5500/6500/7500 (original) 1059/34/50 6,525/1,476/1,090 - 27,449 EHP w/resists
Cyclops 1575/125/25 5000/6000/9000 (original) 969/37/50 1,406/8,059/1,090 -30,280 EHP w/resists
Malleus 1485/125/25 4500/7500/8500 (original) 969/37/50 1,548/8,141/1,090 - 32,340 EHP w/resists
Yes, Fighter Bombers have a massively reduced signature, akin to a standard frigate. That might need to be boosted, but their tank and speed are also significantly lower. FIghters have a much greater signature, again akin to the MWD signature of the Assault Frigate.
Anyway, I know this is a pointless exercise. I do it because FIghters (and Bombers) are the backbone of the offense/defense of the carrier and super carrier, and should be evaluated as such. I haven't done damage profiles yet, because that is a lot more :effort: than tanking profiles... CCP is changing ship skill trees. How ship skills should be |
thebarry
SRS Industries SRS.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:56:00 -
[1380] - Quote
Carabusu wrote:thebarry wrote:I like these changes a lot, but POS Gunning will also have to be rebalanced IMO.
The 5 minute timer on dreads will make it pretty much impossible for pos gunners to kill them. Previously we relied on the 10 minute siege timer to give us time to kill the dreads(about 2-3 minutes to empty its cap with 3 neuts, than another 4+ minutes to finish it off with the large guns). While it was very difficult even before, I believe now with a 5 minute siege timer it may literally be impossible for any pos, regardless of its configuration and number of gunners, to destroy a dread that's fitted a certain way(think perfect fleet booster, t2 trimarks, slaves) before it comes out of siege and gets repped up by triage carrier(s). You literally just said EXACTLY why CCP needed to change the mechanic of the Dread and it's Siege timer. Dreads have long been useless due to the 10 minute Siege, and the fact that their tracking is pure shite* in Siege mode. They are trying to bring them back to the field as a viable option. But fortunately for you, the dreads damage is still crapola on a stick. lol removal of 5 drones...whatever. They buff damage from 625% to 700% in Siege. Okay. Great. Still won't mean much.
I shot sleepers with dread :) so on balance this is great for me and I approve, but at the same time, something should be done to keep pos gunning viable, as well...it shouldn't be a completely useless skill! |
|
Princess Cellestia
Friendship is Podding Test Alliance Please Ignore
107
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 17:56:00 -
[1381] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:Ok, well much has been said about this. First off, I fly subcaps. Second off, I fly a HIC (Onyx actualy)
So your telling me now, that I can point a titan and all I need to do is orbit with an afterburner running? With titans not able to DD me AND not able to log off, I can simply wait for a fleet to form and light my cyno? Even to me, this is kind of bad considering a titan costs at least 70b and my ship costs 250m. When I was in the North, I remember MM lost more supers to them logging in and getting scanned down, then on the field of battle.
Cracking a DD costs: 25,000,000isk at 50,000 units of iso's x 500isk each. Why not change that to 200,000 units so it costs 100m per crack, make sure their cargo can carry lets say, 3-5 cracks? And yes, they should be able to hit subcaps. This way, I need to have a few friends in order to tackle them.
Supers. I've wanted a Wyvern for a long time, as I fly Caldari. However, I've noticed that I can ONLY old 20 F and 20FB. If I wanted to carry ANY other drones, I'd have to decide to drop a F or a FB. Already a hard choice, as I'd like to have a full bay of ECM drones. Now I guess I'll just get a carrier. I can do that with a carrier, 10 fighers, 10 ECM, 10x all other useful drones. If a Super is carrying fighers, then it will have 20 usable fighers. that's only 2x better then a carrier in DPS... Now those fighers, be they in a carrier OR a super are going to suck MORE?
A fit Chimera costs maybe 1b, whereas a fit Wyvern costs 17b?
We just went back in time, to the amazing days of MoM's. 1.5x the EHP of a carrier, 2x the damage and 17x the cost. At least you didnt cut the EHP that bad, but you still made these ships not worth being entombed in. If you want them to be used, cut their cost down to reflect the shitness that they are going to be.
I dont like blobs, but I believe you hit the Supers pinata with nerf bat a bit hard.
TL;DR Supers EHP cut: Good Supers not able to use other drones: Ok...people will deal with it. Supers not able to carry 20F 20FB: BAD Logoff timers: Ok (but people will just use DT to their advantage) Titans not being able to doomsday subcaps: BAD (lowsec, everywhere?) Titans EHP cut: Good
If you fly a titan and you get tackled by some lone hictor that's just roaming around you deserve to lose said titan. You do not take out supers without support. That's just dumb. As for the not able to carry 20F AND 20FB, well you're going to have to decide what you plan on fighting against. Do you want to kill the Battleships in the support fleet, or do you want to wail on the dreads sieging your pos. You have to make a CHOICE.
Since CCP isn't going to kill fighters as they were previously, I only have 2 complaints. First, Dread tracking, dreads can't hit a damn thing so a damage buff won't matter at all, buff tracking so they can actually hit something besides a pos tower. Also what happened to the buff to SMA size on carriers, is that gone now? Was really looking forward to that. |
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:02:00 -
[1382] - Quote
thebarry wrote:Carabusu wrote:thebarry wrote:I like these changes a lot, but POS Gunning will also have to be rebalanced IMO.
The 5 minute timer on dreads will make it pretty much impossible for pos gunners to kill them. Previously we relied on the 10 minute siege timer to give us time to kill the dreads(about 2-3 minutes to empty its cap with 3 neuts, than another 4+ minutes to finish it off with the large guns). While it was very difficult even before, I believe now with a 5 minute siege timer it may literally be impossible for any pos, regardless of its configuration and number of gunners, to destroy a dread that's fitted a certain way(think perfect fleet booster, t2 trimarks, slaves) before it comes out of siege and gets repped up by triage carrier(s). You literally just said EXACTLY why CCP needed to change the mechanic of the Dread and it's Siege timer. Dreads have long been useless due to the 10 minute Siege, and the fact that their tracking is pure shite* in Siege mode. They are trying to bring them back to the field as a viable option. But fortunately for you, the dreads damage is still crapola on a stick. lol removal of 5 drones...whatever. They buff damage from 625% to 700% in Siege. Okay. Great. Still won't mean much. I shot sleepers with dread :) so on balance this is great for me and I approve, but at the same time, something should be done to keep pos gunning viable, as well...it shouldn't be a completely useless skill!
Well, as it pertains to POS gunnery and Dreads your point is 100% valid. However, as with everything the big picture is what is called into question here. POS Gunners will need to focus on logistical support and other DPS other than the dreads.
New changes require new tactics. Part of the fun of EvE for sure.
PS...I still am a sad panda about the loss of my ability to rat in E-Z mode in my Wyvern lol
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:02:00 -
[1383] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.
If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.
Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch. And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die. Pure stupidness.
Explain?
These two ship classes are the only ones for which this was not the case. Enough frigates, and any bs / bc / dread / ok-not-a-carrier-i-lied, can't do jack ****.
Supercarriers are not supposed to be solo-pwn-mobiles. Really.
|
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:04:00 -
[1384] - Quote
Princess Cellestia wrote:Damian Gene wrote:Ok, well much has been said about this. First off, I fly subcaps. Second off, I fly a HIC (Onyx actualy)
So your telling me now, that I can point a titan and all I need to do is orbit with an afterburner running? With titans not able to DD me AND not able to log off, I can simply wait for a fleet to form and light my cyno? Even to me, this is kind of bad considering a titan costs at least 70b and my ship costs 250m. When I was in the North, I remember MM lost more supers to them logging in and getting scanned down, then on the field of battle.
Cracking a DD costs: 25,000,000isk at 50,000 units of iso's x 500isk each. Why not change that to 200,000 units so it costs 100m per crack, make sure their cargo can carry lets say, 3-5 cracks? And yes, they should be able to hit subcaps. This way, I need to have a few friends in order to tackle them.
Supers. I've wanted a Wyvern for a long time, as I fly Caldari. However, I've noticed that I can ONLY old 20 F and 20FB. If I wanted to carry ANY other drones, I'd have to decide to drop a F or a FB. Already a hard choice, as I'd like to have a full bay of ECM drones. Now I guess I'll just get a carrier. I can do that with a carrier, 10 fighers, 10 ECM, 10x all other useful drones. If a Super is carrying fighers, then it will have 20 usable fighers. that's only 2x better then a carrier in DPS... Now those fighers, be they in a carrier OR a super are going to suck MORE?
A fit Chimera costs maybe 1b, whereas a fit Wyvern costs 17b?
We just went back in time, to the amazing days of MoM's. 1.5x the EHP of a carrier, 2x the damage and 17x the cost. At least you didnt cut the EHP that bad, but you still made these ships not worth being entombed in. If you want them to be used, cut their cost down to reflect the shitness that they are going to be.
I dont like blobs, but I believe you hit the Supers pinata with nerf bat a bit hard.
TL;DR Supers EHP cut: Good Supers not able to use other drones: Ok...people will deal with it. Supers not able to carry 20F 20FB: BAD Logoff timers: Ok (but people will just use DT to their advantage) Titans not being able to doomsday subcaps: BAD (lowsec, everywhere?) Titans EHP cut: Good If you fly a titan and you get tackled by some lone hictor that's just roaming around you deserve to lose said titan. You do not take out supers without support. That's just dumb. As for the not able to carry 20F AND 20FB, well you're going to have to decide what you plan on fighting against. Do you want to kill the Battleships in the support fleet, or do you want to wail on the dreads sieging your pos. You have to make a CHOICE. Since CCP isn't going to kill fighters as they were previously, I only have 2 complaints. First, Dread tracking, dreads can't hit a damn thing so a damage buff won't matter at all, buff tracking so they can actually hit something besides a pos tower. Also what happened to the buff to SMA size on carriers, is that gone now? Was really looking forward to that.
My point was not how a Titan was solo, but titans get bumped out of POS's a LOT. Titans stage, and while waiting to do something if someone bumps them out, then there hopelessly flying away at crazy speed. One HIC (which, is what i fly) can tackle them and wait for help. Titans / supers generally do not stage in the same location as subcap fleets, for many reasons, and it could take quite some time to get help there. Titans should be able to DD subcaps, just make it cost more to do so. Tell me why a titan is worth 70-90b after this nerf?
|
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:05:00 -
[1385] - Quote
Forlorn Wongraven wrote:So tl;dr of the devblog: maintaining and training supercarrier gets easier and cheaper (no drone skills except FB4/5), characters get cheaper on Bazaar - more supercap proliferation 25 mil skillpoints toons will be able to have everything needed at 5 longtime impact on supercarrier production: will get cheaper, probably soon only T2 fitted? you need more guys to cover your supercap fleet, so alliances will form bigger powerbloc if they want to get stuff done when sov mechanics gets changed supercarriers are useless again no ratting supercarriers/ carriers kills when roaming cause fighter changes small alliance with small blue list will have issues to do anything sov related, pretty sure that is what we all are looking forward dreadnoughts become viable again titans can still hit subcaps This is the only guy who gets it. The Devs and apparently 99% of the rest of the players are stupid. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:06:00 -
[1386] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Solo supercarrier not being able to defend itself except remote ecm and neuts. That's something rather different than what he suggests, thoughGǪ
He forgot webs and paints, they are always an option... (inb4 thats not an option because I want to **** subcap fleets without gimping my setup)
Also, remote ECM, neuts, and smartbombs go a long way towards keeping your silly solo SC alive...they always have.
EDIT: Derp, meant ECM, not ECCM |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:06:00 -
[1387] - Quote
Oh,
And I have friends that fly supers, do you have any idea how hard it is to swap out drones? Fighters are 4k each?
You cant dock, maybe you didnt know that, but Supers cant dock. Changing drones even in carriers in space sucks. |
Avon
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
136
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:10:00 -
[1388] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[I get that cost is not a balancing factor. That's all there is to get.
I have read you post this many times in this thread, but I don't understand the basis of your argument.
Are you saying that ships should not be better just because they are more expensive? A HAC is better than a cruiser - is that unfair?
It is harder to make and requires more resources, so it costs more - it also requires more skillpoints to fly.
Cost is very much a balancing factor. It is by no means the only factor, but as it reflects rather than dictates the dificulty in obtaining the ship it is sensible to factor it in.
If that wasn't the case there would be no reason to progress from your n00b ship - it would be unfair for someone with more isk than you to pwn you with a Rifter.
|
Destroyer Chappy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:12:00 -
[1389] - Quote
All capitals will soon have a DeathStar vent where a frigate can destroy them with a single shot - right?
Just want to keep rebalancing discussion interesting for people on both sides of the capital ownership line. |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:14:00 -
[1390] - Quote
trademeyourmoneys wrote:Floydd Heywood wrote:Great blog, especially after the fighter nerf is taken out :) Everyone has access to supercaps, it really doesnt take long to train/make isk. I spent around 2 months making isk to get enough to get a super if i wanted one
Well all the better, if supercaps are cheap and quick to skill, then nobody is harmed by their demise and they should best be taken out of this game completely
No single individual should be able to fill a role as powerful and versatile like what supers can do now. It leads to small alliances of all-vets no-rooks dominating space, which completely defeats the purpose of a persistent MMO where newer players should always be needed to swell the ranks of alliances to fill roles the old vets have outgrown but that are still vital for the alliance's success. If the supercap vets can do it all alone, the game dies. |
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
441
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:14:00 -
[1391] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:Questions about the new agression session timers and logout.
- I'm ratting in a belt alone in a system with a carrier, someone enters in the system, I logout, we warps sees my carrier still aligning for the emergency warpout, shoots me or puts a point or opens a bubble, I'm agressed in any of these 3 scenarios? will I disapear in 1 or 15 minutes?
You are logged off, not aggressed, so it's a minute. You'd have to be aggressed before you log to have the 15min (and then extention) timers. this is a signature |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:14:00 -
[1392] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote: fighters are an anti bs drone.
OK, they may be now, but tell me why they SHOULD continue to be so? Quote:other wise a carrier has no defence against a bs. Why heavy and sentry drones cannot be used by carriers against BS? heavys and sentrys do minimal damage against a bs. where as fighters will damage a bs. Not at all, they can do 900+ dps, which is pretty good for a damage to a ship a class lower. This damage is almost TWICE the damage a bonused drone BS can do to another BS.
Without, ya know, using any of the available highslots for guns / torps like you are intended to.
|
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:21:00 -
[1393] - Quote
kralz wrote:do not troll me. do not mock me. cause and effect here is simple. a steal bomber wing can control when a super carrier panics and recalls his drones. simply by decloaking and launching his payload. no SC carrier pilot wants to watch all hi DPS go poof, and a great many of them dont know that by recalling them they are allowing them to take more damage then they may have. cause and effect. i have been extremely polite up to this point, lets keep it that way, 34 bombs would be very difficult to field against a super cap fleet since MORE then 6 bombs at a time and they will destroy themselves.
do not troll me. do not mock me. - It was never my intention GÇô apologies if I gave you this impression.
What I tried (and failed) to do is point out the fact that while your scenario is theoretically possible giving a number of factors + a bit of luck it is highly improbable in an actual battle situation (lag being the biggest enemy here).
E |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:23:00 -
[1394] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote: a carrier with t2 ogre and maxed skills does 630 dps. not enough to kill a bs wardens is 450 dps, im tickling a bs fighters is 1250 dps im killing it at last
First, are you sure you calcs are alright, e.g. I get 950dps for 15 Ogre IIs, not 630 like you. Second, how do you define "enough to kill a BS". I have surely killed BS with a ship doing less than 200dps before resists, so a statement "630 dps, not enough to kill a bs" is puzzling at best. Third, do you think also that carriers are unable to defend themselves, for example, against frigates, because, "241 dps is not enough to kill a frigate"? (that, btw, is 15 Warrior IIs).
Never assume carriers will use the drone control units. They will, for the most part, find better uses for those slots that make them more likely to win these random carrier vs bs or carrier vs frig fights that you think happen all of the time. Hint, fit a neut or two, maybe a smartbomb, or, how about rr for your buddies in ships intended for those roles. Carrier is, like a SC, not actually intended to be, nor is it, a solo-pwn-mobile. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:28:00 -
[1395] - Quote
Avon wrote:I have read you post this many times in this thread, but I don't understand the basis of your argument.
Are you saying that ships should not be better just because they are more expensive? Yes.
But more importantly, I'm saying that there is a one-way relationship, and it's not in the direction people tend to want to use it. And this a rather important point to make: I'm not saying that cost and performance are completely unrelated, I'm just saying that you cannot balance performance with cost.
Instead, cost should (probably) be a result of performance. Better-performing ship GåÆ Higher cost. The beauty of this relationship is that a working market will make it happen automatically. Better performance will lead to higher popularity, which leads to higher demand, which drives prices up. So you don't even have to pick the base price all that well for the whole thing to work. Yes, in designing the ship, it is a good idea to ensure that if it outperforms some other ship, it also requires more expensive and/or exclusive parts, but that is only the beginning, and again: it is the performance that should determine the price, not the other way around, not even a little bit.
The problem is that this often leads to the fallacy (viz. affirming the consequent) that Higher cost GåÆ Better Performance. That is not the case. Higher cost does not lead to, explain, promise, justify or in any way promote better performance. It is not a factor in deciding the performance. At most, you can look at low cost and conclude that the performance isn't stellar, but that is still not a causal relationship GÇö the low cost does not cause low performance. Rather, the low cost is caused by a (relatively) worse ship. It is still not a factor GÇö it's just an indicator.
More importantly, cost is never an excuse for overpoweredness GÇö in fact, it rather proves that there is a balance issue that needs to be addressed, because the price wouldn't go as high if it weren't. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
thebarry
SRS Industries SRS.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:34:00 -
[1396] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Unforgiven Storm wrote:Questions about the new agression session timers and logout.
- I'm ratting in a belt alone in a system with a carrier, someone enters in the system, I logout, we warps sees my carrier still aligning for the emergency warpout, shoots me or puts a point or opens a bubble, I'm agressed in any of these 3 scenarios? will I disapear in 1 or 15 minutes? You are logged off, not aggressed, so it's a minute. You'd have to be aggressed before you log to have the 15min (and then extention) timers.
It's a 1 minute timer if there is no aggression, 2 minutes if there is pve aggression, and 15 minutes if there is pvp aggression. If you are in triage or siege mode you will not disappear until after the current siege/triage cycle has completed. Even though these are the timer 'rules', they are buggy and in our testing you are more likely to disappear at a different time than you are supposed to. Also, it is possible for you to gain a pvp timer AFTER you have logged off, thus ensuring your destruction. The mechanic is quite unreliable...I have personally witnessed an aeon die over 20 minutes after the pilot logged out. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:35:00 -
[1397] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:Some random thoughts...
A blanket EHP nerf across the board is a little silly. The raw HP levels are already out of balance between supercaps of different races. Reducing everyone by the same amount means we miss out on an opportunity to correct that.
Solution? Adjust HP levels as follows: Aeon -20% Nyx -10% Wyvern -15% Hel - No change
Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10%
Supercarriers fighter bays are a little anemic. These ships are tricky and time-consuming to refit, so carrying a single flight of their only damage tool seems like a recipe for disaster. Solution? Let them carry 30-40 fighters/bombers.
There isn't enough difference between Capitals and Super-Capitals. Carriers have a role as support and anti-subcap ships, as escorts for Supercarriers that are now unable to defend themselves with their own drones. After these changes Dreadnoughts will still be limited in use as they're still just as vulnerable to being one-shotted as before. If you have enough titans, there will be little reason to use Dreads. Titans also remain overpowered versus subcaps. With tracking links, remote sensor boosters and enough supercarriers behind them, beating a titan blob simply comes down to having more titans. Beyond a certain threshold subcap numbers still do not matter.
Solution? Three actually:
1) Doomsdays balanced on sig radius - A blanket 'no DD on subcaps' rule seems a little anti-sandbox for me. If I want to burn half my isotopes picking off Rifters, why can't I? Let's change Doomsday damage to scale on target sig radius. For example:
Dreadnought = ~1mil damage (with DD Op V) Battleship = ~50k damage Cruiser = 5k damage Frigate = 1k damage
It will no longer destroy ships outright (unless they're nearly dead or terribly fitted) and makes Dreads more cost-efficient at taking on Titan fleets, increasing their role. This is also great to help smaller groups fight larger ones using their insured dreads.
2) Jump 'Calibration' - Supercaps should a delay in order to lock onto a player-activated cyno beacon. This time is based on the distance they are travelling, so while a 2ly jump might take five seconds, a jump to the full range could require 30 seconds to lock on. This has several effects. Firstly it means that supercaps planning a hotdrop need to be nearer the target, increasing the odds of them being spotted. It also increases the odds of the cyno and/or tackler being destroyed or jammed before support can arrive. Finally it gives regular capitals an increased role as 'rapid-response' capitals, able to move around faster than their larget counterparts.
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.
At last a goon with something worth while to say.
I approve of this actually, a bit more balanced approach to balancing... and I like the idea of not being 1-shot by a titan in my moros. However, i would say a titan can do this new sig-related dd every 5 mins or so.
|
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
82
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:36:00 -
[1398] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Glad to see that player feedback is being taken into account.
A bit late now, but here's a chart showing probability of an orbiting Firbolg fighter to hit a stationary battleship and a battlecruiser at different signature resolutions. For the sake of simplicity, I assumed that a battleship will have a signature radius of 400m, and a battlecruiser will have a signature radius of 300m, and that a fighter would orbit at its optimal range (1500m) at the highest possible velocity (280m). I assume you have made similar charts, but this should help players understand the issue with changing fighter signature resolution to 400m. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:36:00 -
[1399] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Anile8er wrote: Wow, I can tell you fly supercaps.
Lets start with my active tank... oh wait supercaps are max EHP buff with no local reps becasue, 1: you would have to fit CCC rigs to run local reps which would nerf your EHP tank which would, 2: cause you to melt in a fleet fight.
Now lets talk about my cap recharge on a supercap... when supercaps got buffed one buff that didn't happen was cap amount / recharge. So in my passive EHP tanked Nyx I generate 64.1 cap per second with a cap base of 84,375.
So back to the small roaming gang, with a single dictor and a cyno ship on the way. Now I cant kill the dictor and Im not in a massive blob alliance that can just form up a support fleet and use 0.0 POS jump becons to get to me quickly. So here I am tackled with some nano ships that arent doing much to me other than the Curse or Pilgrim who probably has me neuted down pretty well by now and here comes the cyno ship, cause no one has supercaps or dreads in EVE am I right? So now here I am tackled by a single dictor, neuted out, and dying to a few super caps and dreads.
Pretty ******** if you ask me.
Why ffs you would warp/jump solo sc on small roaming gang? ...you desperately want your SOLOPWNMOBILE, dont you? Maybe Im moving my supercap and they warped to my cyno, maybe im ganking a carrier on a pos. A 20 billion isk ship should have some defense against a 1 or 2 tacklers or a small unperpared gang.
Have you tried a support fleet?
Also, why doesn't a dread have a defense against that, why is your super so ******* special. Also, why can't my 10 bil vindi kill that arazu that has me pointed 80k out?
Try harder. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:38:00 -
[1400] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. IF YOU CAN AFFORD TO BUY AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPERCARRIER!!!!! THEN YOU CAN CERTAINLY AFFORD TO BUY SOME FRIENDS TO PROTECT YOU FROM A SABRE!!! OMG WORKING TOGETHER AS A TEAM!!!! CCP IS FORCING US TO SOICALIZE AND WORK TOGETHER WHAHHH WAHHHH!! Go pod youself sir. oh can i has your super cap?
YOU MEAN I HAVE TO PLAY WITH TEAMMATES IN THIS MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAME?!?!?!?!?!?!???! |
|
Circumstantial Evidence
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:47:00 -
[1401] - Quote
kralz wrote:yes many of them were as they were all on the ihub trying to blow it up. however little known fact is that the FB sig radius goes up HUGELY when a super pilot recalls them and the MWD turns on... [...] i am very sad when i see incomming bombs, thinking about all those damn letters i have to write to the families of my dead FB pilots. Been there, have a screenshot. http://i56.tinypic.com/21nfvc3.jpg 2011.08.12.14.02.17
RA brought about 10 supercarriers (only) to destroy two SBU's, and lost a ton of FB's in doing so. When the second SBU went down, slower than the first, we saw more regular drones being used than fighters. (You can say "they were recalled due to damage and no longer deployed," if you like.)
Our side lost a couple bombers, to supercarriers remote sensor boosting each other, as we decloaked to drop bombs, hitting us with sentries. Oh well
Looking forward to the changes! |
DigitalCommunist
November Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 18:58:00 -
[1402] - Quote
First time posting on new forums; stopped halfway to take a rage poop. Didn't bother to copy my text like I usually do because new forums right? What can go wr--FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
5/10 troll 10/10 nostalgia
Aside from the logoff timer fix which should have been done six years ago, these changes are fundamentally flawed. They do nothing to make fleet warfare better, they only readjust capitals to fit the reality of how they are used and how widespread they have become. It's playing catchup to players rather than doing any real game design.
The biggest problem with capital ships is that they've always been based off ships. They share the same ship mechanics with minor differences and not the other way around. Every single time I see CCP do something to capitals (and this is the fourth major revision), it entrenches this sad little fact even more.
You could probably get away with doing Dreads correctly with only stat changes. Carriers need a few new mechanics to perform the role of ship resupply platforms in active combat much better than they do now. Jump drives need a serious overhaul as well, but Supercapitals on the other hand are beyond salvation in their current form and need to be redone from scratch.
You can argue for one set of changes over another when it comes to dreads and carriers, but for the most part everyone knows what they should be for and doesn't dispute that. Motherships/SC and Titans have no specific role that needs to be done, but most people agree on what they should be: big, powerful, scary, yadda yadda.
I don't know about you but I'm not very scared or impressed by a ship any rich carebear can get, adding to the pool of hundreds/thousands already out there.
In my opinion, Motherships/SC should be the ideal mobile support base for small to medium sized gangs (up to 30), and the ultimate wet dream for corporations who want to live in deep space without laying a very visible and vulnerable claim to it. Their primary role should be to have a secret and safe gathering point with basic facilities such as cloning and production. It's main defense would be stealth and the relative mobility that starbases do not have. Once discovered it needs to be defended just like any other asset.
Titans on the other hand are even simpler. If there is more than 3-6 in the hands of players at any given moment, something is fundamentally wrong with their implementation. This means that a Titan should be able to support an alliance fleet and essentially bring your sov / space with you much in the same way a real world supercarrier acts as a staging point for planes and bombers. It would cost a lot to upkeep in both manpower and resources, it would be very visible and impossible to hide, it would not be any more defenseless than a deathstar POS. It would be something you park in any system you want to control but don't and probably won't anytime soon (examples; YZ, NOL, BKG, AZN, etc).
|
Dynast
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:00:00 -
[1403] - Quote
Glad to see changes like these being made. The logout change is pure gold and long overdue. The hitpoint reduction is sensible. The rest, only time will tell, but they indicate an awareness of the problem on CCPs part which was not demonstrated in the past. |
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:06:00 -
[1404] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:Some random thoughts...
A blanket EHP nerf across the board is a little silly. The raw HP levels are already out of balance between supercaps of different races. Reducing everyone by the same amount means we miss out on an opportunity to correct that.
Solution? Adjust HP levels as follows: Aeon -20% Nyx -10% Wyvern -15% Hel - No change
Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10%
Supercarriers fighter bays are a little anemic. These ships are tricky and time-consuming to refit, so carrying a single flight of their only damage tool seems like a recipe for disaster. Solution? Let them carry 30-40 fighters/bombers.
There isn't enough difference between Capitals and Super-Capitals. Carriers have a role as support and anti-subcap ships, as escorts for Supercarriers that are now unable to defend themselves with their own drones. After these changes Dreadnoughts will still be limited in use as they're still just as vulnerable to being one-shotted as before. If you have enough titans, there will be little reason to use Dreads. Titans also remain overpowered versus subcaps. With tracking links, remote sensor boosters and enough supercarriers behind them, beating a titan blob simply comes down to having more titans. Beyond a certain threshold subcap numbers still do not matter.
Solution? Three actually:
1) Doomsdays balanced on sig radius - A blanket 'no DD on subcaps' rule seems a little anti-sandbox for me. If I want to burn half my isotopes picking off Rifters, why can't I? Let's change Doomsday damage to scale on target sig radius. For example:
Dreadnought = ~1mil damage (with DD Op V) Battleship = ~50k damage Cruiser = 5k damage Frigate = 1k damage
It will no longer destroy ships outright (unless they're nearly dead or terribly fitted) and makes Dreads more cost-efficient at taking on Titan fleets, increasing their role. This is also great to help smaller groups fight larger ones using their insured dreads.
2) Jump 'Calibration' - Supercaps should a delay in order to lock onto a player-activated cyno beacon. This time is based on the distance they are travelling, so while a 2ly jump might take five seconds, a jump to the full range could require 30 seconds to lock on. This has several effects. Firstly it means that supercaps planning a hotdrop need to be nearer the target, increasing the odds of them being spotted. It also increases the odds of the cyno and/or tackler being destroyed or jammed before support can arrive. Finally it gives regular capitals an increased role as 'rapid-response' capitals, able to move around faster than their larget counterparts.
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.
At last a goon with something worth while to say. I approve of this actually, a bit more balanced approach to balancing... and I like the idea of not being 1-shot by a titan in my moros. However, i would say a titan can do this new sig-related dd every 5 mins or so.
I am not looking at what alliance anyone is in. I care only about the validity and strength of the information being supplied and I must say, your post was VERY well thought out.
**** CCP TALLEST - I HOPE YOU READ THAT POST ****
He nailed it on the head. That is truly a balancing act, where as "NO MORE OF THIS and NO MORE OF THAT" is little more than using the ON/OFF button. Shame on you CCP for once again taking the easy way out.
More balance and work - Less Monacles and font changes.
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:14:00 -
[1405] - Quote
DigitalCommunist wrote:Supercapitals on the other hand are beyond salvation in their current form and need to be redone from scratch.
You can argue for one set of changes over another when it comes to dreads and carriers, but for the most part everyone knows what they should be for and doesn't dispute that. Motherships/SC and Titans have no specific role that needs to be done, but most people agree on what they should be: big, powerful, scary, yadda yadda.
I don't know about you but I'm not very scared or impressed by a ship any rich carebear can get, adding to the pool of hundreds/thousands already out there.
In my opinion, Motherships/SC should be the ideal mobile support base for small to medium sized gangs (up to 30), and the ultimate wet dream for corporations who want to live in deep space without laying a very visible and vulnerable claim to it. Their primary role should be to have a secret and safe gathering point with basic facilities such as cloning and production. It's main defense would be stealth and the relative mobility that starbases do not have. Once discovered it needs to be defended just like any other asset.
Titans on the other hand are even simpler. If there is more than 3-6 in the hands of players at any given moment, something is fundamentally wrong with their implementation. This means that a Titan should be able to support an alliance fleet and essentially bring your sov / space with you much in the same way a real world supercarrier acts as a staging point for planes and bombers. It would cost a lot to upkeep in both manpower and resources, it would be very visible and impossible to hide, it would not be any more defenseless than a deathstar POS. It would be something you park in any system you want to control but don't and probably won't anytime soon (examples; YZ, NOL, BKG, AZN, etc).
Long term, these may be welcome changes, but they would need extensive, detailed rewriting of entire swathes of the game. They are things which could be incorporated into the 0.0 Design Document Greyscale was recently touting, but even he said it may be 5 years before the bulk of those changes actually appear in game.
Meanwhile, here in the real world, its 2 months or so to go before the winter expansion, and CCP is still (even with resource re-allocation) split between WoD, Dust, Spaceships, and Incarna. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:16:00 -
[1406] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Tippia wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:2 Thanatoi: 2b isk
1 Nyx: 20b isk The realisation that cost is not a balancing factor: priceless. Thanks for misconstruing my argument. What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability? People are throwing down huge sums of money for supercaps because of their fighter-bomber capabilities, as well as their ewar immunity and large tanks, not because they're excellent at killing subcaps (thats what titans are for ATM, lolololol). The EHP nerf will take away a good chunk of their tank, and FB are already useless against subcaps, so I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability. If people dont care about their anti subcap capability, why are they whining so much about scs losing it? I don't think anyone is whining about taking away SCs ability to field infinite waves of drones. I think most people agree that it's dumb and pretty imbalanced. What they're whining about is *totally* removing their ability to fend off subcaps. There's no way that you can honestly argue that a supercarrier being able to field a couple of flights of normal drones (just like a Dominix can) is overpowered. By that logic, it is unfair and unbalanced to allow battleships to have drones. After all, battleship-sized turrets are designed to hit targets that are BC-sized and larger-- obviously allowing them to carry Warrior IIs makes them overpowered because it lets them kill frigates, which is not their "job" in a fleet fight. ...Except that fielding a few light drones *doesn't* make battleships overpowered frigate-death spewers. It gives them a *minimal* capacity to defend themselves against smaller ships that are not their primary targets. It's not unfair in the slightest. Without the ability to carry drones, BS gangs would easily find themselves perma-tackled (if not outright killed) by frigates. I think it stands to reason that Supercarriers should also be allowed some minimal ability to fend off smaller ships, even if that isn't their primary purpose.
^^ Well said. Its just stupid internet spaceship design not to incorporate this DEFENCE mechanizm!
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:19:00 -
[1407] - Quote
Floydd Heywood wrote:trademeyourmoneys wrote:Floydd Heywood wrote:Great blog, especially after the fighter nerf is taken out :) Everyone has access to supercaps, it really doesnt take long to train/make isk. I spent around 2 months making isk to get enough to get a super if i wanted one Well all the better, if supercaps are cheap and quick to skill, then nobody is harmed by their demise and they should best be taken out of this game completely No single individual should be able to fill a role as powerful and versatile like what supers can do now. It leads to small alliances of all-vets no-rooks dominating space, which completely defeats the purpose of a persistent MMO where newer players should always be needed to swell the ranks of alliances to fill roles the old vets have outgrown but that are still vital for the alliance's success. If the supercap vets can do it all alone, the game dies.
If Super Capitals are so easy to get into, then why doesn't everyone have the skills for them ? If they are so cheap, why doesn't everyone have enough isk to buy them ? You don't train up a character to fly a Super Capital in a few months. You may be able to sit in the ship in a far sorter amount of time but sitting in a ship and actually flying the ship well is completely different. I really don't understand when it became a bad thing to have high SP toons. Getting penalized for working hard in this game is a stupid idea.
It really isn't that hard to get enough isk to have one so long as you work for what you have. Though in the case of certain pilots, they can just buy a massive amount of PLEX and not have to step on your ship spinning style.
Your acting like Super Caps are ruining this game. They aren't. What is ruining this game are the incredible amount of people these days that are afraid of losing a ship. Then when they do, fill local with their **** talking.
I agree that Super Caps need some fine tuning, but the proposed nerf is destruction rather than tuning. These ships aren't killing the game. Just load up your in game map, set you filter to show system population, and stare at the giant mass of people care bearing in high sec. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:27:00 -
[1408] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Your acting like Super Caps are ruining this game. GǪand they are, since we've arrived at a situation where the answer is increasingly Gǣmore capsGǥ.
The mere fact that those who are clinging to their SCs right now all spout some form of GÇ£so get one yourselfGÇ¥ is the ultimate example of why they need to be fixed: because that should never be the answer GÇö the answer should always be to get something completely different that acts as a hard counter for the ship.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Kalaratiri
Teraa Matar
120
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:28:00 -
[1409] - Quote
DigitalCommunist wrote: In my opinion, Motherships/SC should be the ideal mobile support base for small to medium sized gangs (up to 30), and the ultimate wet dream for corporations who want to live in deep space without laying a very visible and vulnerable claim to it. Their primary role should be to have a secret and safe gathering point with basic facilities such as cloning and production. It's main defense would be stealth and the relative mobility that starbases do not have. Once discovered it needs to be defended just like any other asset.
Titans on the other hand are even simpler. If there is more than 3-6 in the hands of players at any given moment, something is fundamentally wrong with their implementation. This means that a Titan should be able to support an alliance fleet and essentially bring your sov / space with you much in the same way a real world supercarrier acts as a staging point for planes and bombers. It would cost a lot to upkeep in both manpower and resources, it would be very visible and impossible to hide, it would not be any more defenseless than a deathstar POS. It would be something you park in any system you want to control but don't and probably won't anytime soon (examples; YZ, NOL, BKG, AZN, etc).
This. Less pwnmobile, more mobile base please. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:30:00 -
[1410] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Your acting like Super Caps are ruining this game. GǪand they are, since we've arrived at a situation where the answer is increasingly GÇ£more capsGÇ¥. The mere fact that those who are clinging to their SCs right now all spout some form of GÇ£so get one yourselfGÇ¥ is the ultimate example of why they need to be fixed: because that should never be the answer GÇö the answer should always be to get something completely different that acts as a hard counter for the ship.
That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:34:00 -
[1411] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs.
This change addresses that GÇö not only are they moving to N+1 SCs being the wrong answer, but also changing the other side of it, where the SCs also have to bring the correct fleet. Of course, as we see here, this balance has SC owners up in arms because they don't want to bring the right tools. This means the change is 100% good. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
miningtool
Event.Horizon Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:36:00 -
[1412] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs.
no the fleet is a nuet fleet turning hardeners off nukes the ehp of all ships |
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:40:00 -
[1413] - Quote
Kalaratiri wrote:DigitalCommunist wrote: In my opinion, Motherships/SC should be the ideal mobile support base for small to medium sized gangs (up to 30), and the ultimate wet dream for corporations who want to live in deep space without laying a very visible and vulnerable claim to it. Their primary role should be to have a secret and safe gathering point with basic facilities such as cloning and production. It's main defense would be stealth and the relative mobility that starbases do not have. Once discovered it needs to be defended just like any other asset.
Titans on the other hand are even simpler. If there is more than 3-6 in the hands of players at any given moment, something is fundamentally wrong with their implementation. This means that a Titan should be able to support an alliance fleet and essentially bring your sov / space with you much in the same way a real world supercarrier acts as a staging point for planes and bombers. It would cost a lot to upkeep in both manpower and resources, it would be very visible and impossible to hide, it would not be any more defenseless than a deathstar POS. It would be something you park in any system you want to control but don't and probably won't anytime soon (examples; YZ, NOL, BKG, AZN, etc).
This. Less pwnmobile, more mobile base please.
while i dont ENTIRELY disagree. dont rorquals act as mobile bases? i mean thats what i use mine for...and of course compressing ore to make...more caps :)...so more people can have wtf pwn mobiles...but...i do not totally disagree with super carriers being taken down a notch or two. this thread has gotten to be so much about super carriers tho...to me..the 2 most effed up ships in ever are dreads and
dreads...totally overshadowed by the majestic titan...and it should be, but come on, my dread shouldnt have to go into some special mode to have access to ALL of is damage. and my dread shouldnt miss every shot, i should do to a abaddon what a titan can do to me. utterly disassemble it with extra large chunks of antimatter.
titans should honestly be the ships with tracking problems, it makes no sense for a titan to be able to shred battle ships when a dread, with the same type of guns cannot even hit them....even if a dread has to go into siege mode to have better tracking, i would be cool with that, i mean i am diverting all the power from my engines to local tank and....guns, ur saying more power to guns = not faster tracking? odd.
i think if u made super carriers unable to be remote rapped or remoted aided in any way it would go a LONG way to balancing them out. if the dread goes into seige to get its power, and immunity, why then do supers, which always have that immunity not have to seige? they could be considered to be in perma seige but with mobility, no RR nothing. would make for a scary jump in since i cannot receive cap transfers. would have to recharge all on my own, and running my local tank would put me well below jump capacitor levels. very vulnerable indeed... when i land on any field with my super the 1st time i do is look to my capacitor. (mashes nee cap button over and over again) so i can jump the the emergancy cyno and GTFO if need be as soon as possible.
just saying |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:40:00 -
[1414] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs.
Hardly. Super Capitals can be easily countered with nothing but T2 cruisers.
If people were really concerned with Capital warfare, they would boost Carriers and Dreds EHP to make then stand up better in Capital warfare.
Or
Do what they did years and years ago. When Battleships were the top boats in space and eventually everyone had one. So they introduced new ships. Carriers and Dreds. Here is a novel idea, introduce a new ship or rework the titan to be Super Cap killers. People will think twice if you increase the DD damage output so that it can one shot a SC. Then again I doubt most of the people hating on Supers here have the slightest care in the world for these possible solutions because if they can't kill it with a couple battleships, it must be OP. |
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:41:00 -
[1415] - Quote
Klytior Am'jarhs wrote:Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Why should you have something everybody else didn't get when other ships where balanced/nerfed. I think you have had an unfair advantage long enough. Training a account just to fly one ship in eve kinda proves the point that they are overpowered don't you think?
He put the training into it... had the isk to do it... duh ... come one now.
|
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:41:00 -
[1416] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Kari Kari wrote:Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Pure Epic post here. CCP you better do this. Yeah or he'll quit for... what is he up to now? the sixth time? The seventh?
Hey its a Boblet... posting in a grown persons thread.
|
SuperBeastie
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:42:00 -
[1417] - Quote
supers caps with all the implants and x-types ehp is as follow (not including fleet boosts)
Aeon 55m ehp Hel 30m ehp Nyx 36m ehp Wyvern 43m ehp
now if you neut them out
Aeon 21m ehp Hel 7.7m ehp Nyx 15.3m ehp Wyvern 9.4m ehp
logged off but not nueted
Aeon 19m ehp Hel 23m ehp Nyx 16m ehp Wyvern 25m ehp
now if they are logged off and nueted their ehp is
Aeon 6.5m ehp Hel 4.5m ehp Nyx 6.3m ehp Wyvern 4.4m ehp
The only real changes that are necessary are the doomsday, super caps being limited to fighters/bombers and the log off mechanic.
ECM BURST IN LOW SEC NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT ITS BROKEN!!!!
Changing their drone bay to barely be better than a thanatos on a wyvern is just silly!
Eve is about figuring out how to counter what your enemy sends at you for instance supers are killed by nuets
Spoiler alert: the key to killing super caps is turning their hardeners off
a Wyvern with hardeners has 43m ehp a Wyvern without hardeners has 12m ehp
so lets say you field a 100 man fleet which anyone who is taking on super caps should be able to field and its a easy number. also your fielding hurricanes because they are cheap.
canes deal 500dps and nuet out 360gj every 12 seconds per ship
so in 36 seconds you turn the hardeners off on any super cap with this fleet
in another 240 seconds you would melt the Wyvern off the field with 50k dps killing 20b with 4b isk worth of ships
Now if the Wyvern had tried logging off it would only have 4m ehp because you lose skill bonuses and implants so it would only take 80 seconds to melt it off the field with a 100man cane fleet
Changes that need to happen
- hel rebalanced to be more inline with other supers a straight 20% to all won't really help
- the way armor bonuses are applied is drastically better than shield bonuses
- ECM Burst in low sec is so broken its not even funny.
- Something to make the levithan more on par with other titans fleet boosting wise. For instance the levi gives you 37.5 shields that you have to rep up before it takes effect and if you're dropping into a hostile fleet that is worthless while the erebus avatar and rags bonuses are immediately applied
- DREAD tracking carriers and supers should not be able to speed tank dreads
- logoff mechanic
- subcap doomsdays
- Supers fighters/bombers only
Those changes would cover everything and I would not have to let me super account go inactive because the ship is completely useless |
Kheper Ra
Industrial Strength Killers
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:42:00 -
[1418] - Quote
Clolo wrote:Sarrgon wrote: Also what I think a lot are forgetting is the effect this will have on the mineral market. For how many of them are now going for caps and super caps, with a big reduction in the demand for caps of any kind, means a lot more minerals that will remain on the market and prices will crash. Needs to be some sort of balance in there to equal it out. Or Eve's economy will be worse then what it is now. Removing ore from the low end wormholes will help with this a little.
The logistics of getting ore out of a wormhole to the market on a consistent basis enough times by enough corporations to have an effect on the EVE economy is not based in fact. Without going into the mechanics of wormhole life, lets just say that corps don't move into wormholes for the ore. The revenue from sleeper sites and ladar sites super-cedes the revenue from the A.B.C ore probably by a factor of five to seven. Also in order to effectively get the ore out you would need a Rorq to grind the ore, (which would have to be built inside the wormhole) but the cost/benefit is probably not worth it just for moving the ore out. Most of the ore inside the wormhole is consumed for local use. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:42:00 -
[1419] - Quote
miningtool wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs. no the fleet is a nuet fleet turning hardeners off nukes the ehp of all ships
That works really well for 1-4 supercaps.
However there are now several thousand in game. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
R0ze
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:42:00 -
[1420] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Avon wrote:I have read you post this many times in this thread, but I don't understand the basis of your argument.
Are you saying that ships should not be better just because they are more expensive? Yes. Instead, cost should (probably) be a result of performance. Better-performing ship GåÆ Higher cost. The beauty of this relationship is that a working market will make it happen automatically. Better performance will lead to higher popularity, which leads to higher demand, which drives prices up. So you don't even have to pick the base price all that well for the whole thing to work. With that logic hurricanes and drakes (earlier) would need to cost more than a BS or even a carrier by now .. |
|
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:44:00 -
[1421] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. "Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
Another goon CSM getting what goons need to hit the IWIN botton...total fail... CCP you should limit 1 csm per alliance.
|
Argus Sorn
Star Frontiers Ignore This.
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:44:00 -
[1422] - Quote
Overall, I like the changes and think they are an improvement. However I think they are a bit contrived. I like changes to make "sense" within the game fiction, and so I wonder why supers are unable to field drones? I mean, maybe whatever system that is in place to provide EWAR immunity prevents drone communications... but you get the idea....
That being said I was acutally in favor of a bigger nerf. Give them 33% of the HP they do now, make them take 33% of the minerals, reduce the drone bonus to 1 per level (33% and same as the carrier). Decide what their role is really intended to be (because I am not sure we've decided this) and buff that role - drone bonus for combat, maybe logi bonuses or command bonuses, etc.. They still get all drones and bombers but get a smaller drone bay so you can't just fit everything you want in them
At the same time, make them dockable. The idea is to bring them more in line with a tier 3 carrier that is dockable.
Then, because super owners will be upset that you just cut the value of their ship to 1/3 of what it had been - give them all two free hulls.
I wonder how much this current proposal will fix things because the balance of power between standard capitals and super capitals may not really change - but it will definitely be a welcome change and good to see how it plays out but my own belief is that it needs more.
Argus |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:45:00 -
[1423] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:miningtool wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs. no the fleet is a nuet fleet turning hardeners off nukes the ehp of all ships That works really well for 1-4 supercaps. However there are now several thousand in game.
When was the last time someone dropped several thousand super caps on you ? |
cpu939
The Circle G00DFELLAS
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:45:00 -
[1424] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:No1 is argueing about that people should stay an fight an commit, im talking about as I will yet again repeat, how is it going to be fair and just that people who disconnect due to no fualt of there own should suffer the penalty? And I'm saying: it won't make any difference for them since they didn't disconnect on purpose and will therefore log right back in GÇö they wouldn't have stretched into that (potential) first renewal anyway.
and when you internet drops due to some problem at the providers end how are you to log back in. so far i have had 2 service drop outs this week 1st was over 12 hours 2nd was just over 3 hours |
Napoleon Bonapart
Draconis Holding Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:46:00 -
[1425] - Quote
I do have one other concern, may have already addressed but there are so many :words: here it's hard to see.
In regards to the logoff timer.....If servers crash while you are in combat does that clear your aggression and in turn you disappear or do you stay aggrod until you log back in? This can be potentially p bad if say the servers crash for several horus during a fleet fight and people can't be asked to stay at their computer screen for the several hours waiting to log back in. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:47:00 -
[1426] - Quote
No. Very really. It doesn't particularly matter that you can counter them with other things GÇö the best counter up until now has been N+1 SCs, because of their ability to go toe-to-toe with both the tanking and the damage output. This will no longer be the case.
Quote:Here is a novel idea, introduce a new ship or rework the titan to be Super Cap killers. It's not novel. It's the same deeply flawed GÇ£bigger is betterGÇ¥ kind of thinking that has brought us to the necessity of this change. It shouldn't be the titan GÇö it should be the Merlin. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Argus Sorn
Star Frontiers Ignore This.
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:48:00 -
[1427] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:miningtool wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs. no the fleet is a nuet fleet turning hardeners off nukes the ehp of all ships That works really well for 1-4 supercaps. However there are now several thousand in game.
My only concern Malcanis is that this isn't enough of a nerf to deal with the impact of the super-mega-blob.
I mean it's no easy fix - they are supposed to be REALLY GOOD SHIPS. The problem is there is no attrition of the ships, no upkeep, no maintenance, no regular loss of them - and so we have a ridiculous number of them. That's why I kinda like the idea of bringing them more in line with tier 3 carriers and providing some sort of reimbursement to current owners.
A |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:50:00 -
[1428] - Quote
Argus Sorn wrote:Overall, I like the changes and think they are an improvement. However I think they are a bit contrived. I like changes to make "sense" within the game fiction, and so I wonder why supers are unable to field drones? I mean, maybe whatever system that is in place to provide EWAR immunity prevents drone communications... but you get the idea....
That being said I was acutally in favor of a bigger nerf. Give them 33% of the HP they do now, make them take 33% of the minerals, reduce the drone bonus to 1 per level (33% and same as the carrier). Decide what their role is really intended to be (because I am not sure we've decided this) and buff that role - drone bonus for combat, maybe logi bonuses or command bonuses, etc.. They still get all drones and bombers but get a small drone bay so you can just fit everything you want in them
At the same time, make them dockable. The idea is to bring them more in line with a tier 3 carrier that is dockable.
Then, because super owners will be upset you just cut the value of their ship to 1/3 of what it had been - give them all two free hulls.
I wonder how much this will change because the balance of power between standard capitals and super capitals may not changing much with this change - but it will definitely be a welcome change and good to see how it plays out.
Argus
Honestly, I'm not worried about the price until the ship becomes useless. If the value of a super cap drops but 75%, it doesn't bother me much. So long as the ship can still operate in a variety of rolls. I am big in favor of your reduced drone bay idea. Or maybe a penalty to non-fighter/bomber damage to even things out a little. It would still keep them in the primary role as Capital killers but at the same time it would still be able to do other things. Not as great as it does them now but still. I think a lot of people could live with that. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:51:00 -
[1429] - Quote
Argus Sorn wrote:My only concern Malcanis is that this isn't enough of a nerf to deal with the impact of the super-mega-blob. Agreed, but baby steps: it might be enough of a psychological damper that the blobs get reduced. If not, a second round is called for. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:52:00 -
[1430] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Karim alRashid wrote: Not at all, they can do 900+ dps, which is pretty good for a damage to a ship a class lower. This damage is almost TWICE the damage a bonused drone BS can do to another BS.
Without, ya know, using any of the available highslots for guns / torps like you are intended to.
OK, I totally forgot Domi can fit guns ... and not blasters, of course, nobody's gonna wait your domi to crawl to blasters range.
So, not twice, but the same. Which is about right, using BS sized weapons against BS to do roughly the same damage that a BS with the same weapons can do to a BS.
|
|
Limas Nyx
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:53:00 -
[1431] - Quote
Cpt Tunguska wrote:This whole thing will be a hidden titan buff. I mean hitpoints of all ships are reduced by 20%, Dreads and Carriers dont get any HP changes.....but the DD remains at 3 million dmg/shot. This means its a huuuge DD buff.
The side with the biggest titan blob will still obliterate any hostile opposition. They would DD the hell out of hostile caps and supers....their guns will decimate the hostile support. The consequence is: The underdog cant use capitals and supercaps, as long as a overwhelming DD party waits for him. Buissness as usual, this patch wont change anything. Even a supercarrier will pop quckly to a couple DDs. Alliances with huge titanblobs will benefit from this patch.
I see youre buffing Dreads to be useful again, and to be a counter to supers. But as I said. As long as a dread dies in one second via DD, they wont do any dmg. Keep in mind that very high numbers of titans ....like 30+....are pretty much eve standard.
So if you want to create an useful patch:
- reduce DD damage to something logical...like 1 million. - prohibit DD to be used vs. subs (done) - nerf Titan XL weaponry, so they cant hit BS and BC (without nerfing dreads) - nerf super HPs (already done) - nerf logout (done) - nerf logistic ships to get more dynamic subcap fights.
- make capitals to survive at least one DD with a good amount of remaining HP (look at point 1) - dont totally defang supercarriers they already got 20% hp reduction. - superarrier should at least be able to launch one full wing of bombers and fighters (fighter+bomber bay) - create a dronebay which can carry a logical amount of drones: like 1 wing of heavies/sentries and couple of lights)
- Preseve Gallente as "drone race! To prohibit drones @ moros and nyx would just be another obligatory gallente nerf, coming with ever y expansion, stop nerfing gallente ! - those dreads without drones are silly, ccp wtf do you even know your own game? - if you really intend to prohibit drones @ SCs and reduce their Bombers/Fighters, plz dont call them Supercarrier anymore, rename it in SBU-removal-tool. They wont be a carrier anymore, since they cant carry even basic stuff.
Supercarriers just with one wing of bombers and 10 fighters would be the laughing stock of eve, they couldnt even fight off a hostile destroyer, while titans remain largely unchecked.....this will just lead into titanblob online. Good job ccp.
I also see the danger of Titanblob online. You cant nerf HPs and let the dmg amount of DDs unchecked. You need to balance DoomsDays along with the new game mechanics. Otherwise titanblobbers would greatly profit due to this new ruleset. |
Gevlin
EXPCS Corp SpaceMonkey's Alliance
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:53:00 -
[1432] - Quote
Executive Summary
Supercarriers
- (YES) Drone bay can only hold fighters and fighter bombers.
- (NO) Reduce Shield, Armor and Hull hitpoints on all Supercarriers by 20%.
- (YES) Reduce drone capacity.
Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers)
- (YES) Remote ECM Burst: Does not affect ships that are immune to electronic warfare (Supercarriers, Titans, Triaged Carriers and Sieged Dreads)
- (ADD) Not effected by Friendly EWAR, can not be Remote Repair -Like a Triage carrier but not immobile.
Fighters -á
- Increase signature resolution to 400
Fighter Bombers
- (ADD) Only Marginally more as effective vs Structures than fighters
Dreadnoughts
- (No) Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts.
- (YES)Siege Module I: Boost damage bonus from 625% to 700% to compensate for loss of drones.
- (No) Siege Module I: Duration time reduced to 5 minutes. Fuel cost -50%.
- (Yes) Moros: Remove drone bonus.
- (Yes) Moros: New bonus: 5% bonus to Capital Hybrid Turret rate of fire per level.
- (ADD)Remove the ability to command drones while in siege.
Titans
- (Yes) Remove drone bay from all titans.
- (No) Reduce Shield, Armor and Hull hitpoints by 20%.
- (No) Superweapon: Cannot shoot sub-capital ships. (people should try an off grid carrier full of replacement hic and Dics, command ships etc.)
- (ADD) Not effected by Friendly EWAR, can not be Remote Repair -Like a Triage carrier but not immobile.
Logoff timer
-á
-á(OH YES) After a player logs out, there is a check for player aggression every 15 minutes. If you have been aggressed, the timer extends for 15 minutes; if you have not been aggressed, you disappear as before. Note: this is only for player aggression and will not change what happens when you log off during fights against NPCs.
The Arguement For the Deadnaught, it is not a case it needs to be buffed, it needs a role. In the dominion change the dreadnaught was suppost to switch from only POS bashing to include Sov Structure Bashing. That role was replace by the the Super Carrier which did the job of 4 dreads and didn't have the disadvantage of staying put for 10 mins.
Is it not time to look at what roles these object were meant to Be (At least to my understanding) I agree with several people: CCP needs to focus most of eve's recources on FIS, but the development of WIS still needs to continue, just as a slower and more efficient pace. In eve I wish to be more than just a machine. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:53:00 -
[1433] - Quote
Tippia wrote:No. Very really. It doesn't particularly matter that you can counter them with other things GÇö the best counter up until now has been N+1 SCs, because of their ability to go toe-to-toe with both the tanking and the damage output. This will no longer be the case. Quote:Here is a novel idea, introduce a new ship or rework the titan to be Super Cap killers. It's not novel. It's the same deeply flawed GÇ£bigger is betterGÇ¥ kind of thinking that has brought us to the necessity of this change. It shouldn't be the titan GÇö it should be the Merlin.
Oh I think I see now. Since you can't drop one of your own, no one should. Understood. |
Gevlin
EXPCS Corp SpaceMonkey's Alliance
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:54:00 -
[1434] - Quote
Part 2
Carrier Ultimate support role for SUB cap Fleet, Abilities- ->Provide Fighter Support, ->Turn into a Logitics Bunker by going into Triage Mode, POS repair Ship Can't be Persuaded to stop rescue till it is done (Ewar has no effect on Triage) 2ndary ->Provide A mobile storage for replacement ships ->Mobile mechanic shop. ->Squad Boostings,
Dread ->Cannon specializing in Destroying Structures Abilities - ->Wreaking Ball vs structures or Immobile objects like Triage Carriers ->Can't be persuaded to stop its task till it is done (EWAR has no effect while in Siege) 2ndary None
Super Carrier Anit Capital Ship GÇô Designed to eliminate all capitals Abilities - Best DPS towards Capital Ships.
2ndary ->Provide A mobile storage for replacement ships ->Mobile mechanic shop. ->Squad Boosting,
Titan A God amongst Gods GÇô Be able to Bequeath Judgement amongst lesser folk. Even the Demi-gods of Capitals Quake in Fear -> Able sentence 1 ships per minute to death. ->And Provide Uncontrolled Wraith where desired. ->Lead Followers to victory do to its massive leadership and Awe (Fleet Bonuses)
Suggestions for changes I think need to happen Carriers... Nothing Really
Dreads .. More Targets, Remove the ability or reduce the capabilities of Supper Carriers vs Sov Structure (give them Shields or Anti Bomber defences) Drones be like a Carrier, remove their ability to use them when in siege/triage mode.
Super Carrier GÇô If it can't be effected by Ewar like a ships in Triage, then Why should accept the benefits not being in triage, I would day give it a boost to Self Reps and prevent it from accepting aid from other ships, Ie Repairs or Ewar Boosts, or Ewar Nerfs. Remove its ability to defend its self vs Sub Cap Fleet GÇô as that is its Achilles heel.... the swarm. Neutralizers and DPS from several ships.
Titan - Keep everything the same allow its dooms day to stay the same. If it can't be effected by Ewar like a ships in Triage, then Why should accept the benefits not being in triage, I would day give it a boost to Self Reps and prevent it from accepting aid from other ships, Ie Repairs or Ewar Boosts, or Ewar Nerfs. Remove its ability to defend its self vs Sub Cap Fleet GÇô as that is its Achilles heel.... the swarm. Neutralizers and DPS from several ships.
I love the idea for any ship to have a reset aggression timer upon aggression. A titan and super carrier should be something that when committed to the fight, it is committed. It should be something that takes awhile to kill or save via sub capital fleet. I like to envision the I Giant being taken down by a swarm... a slow painful death. As the fight continues the Swarm grow and grow as they look forward to claim a chunk of the kill mail. I agree with several people: CCP needs to focus most of eve's recources on FIS, but the development of WIS still needs to continue, just as a slower and more efficient pace. In eve I wish to be more than just a machine. |
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:55:00 -
[1435] - Quote
Argus Sorn wrote:Malcanis wrote:miningtool wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs. no the fleet is a nuet fleet turning hardeners off nukes the ehp of all ships That works really well for 1-4 supercaps. However there are now several thousand in game. My only concern Malcanis is that this isn't enough of a nerf to deal with the impact of the super-mega-blob. I mean it's no easy fix - they are supposed to be REALLY GOOD SHIPS. The problem is there is no attrition of the ships, no upkeep, no maintenance, no regular loss of them - and so we have a ridiculous number of them. That's why I kinda like the idea of bringing them more in line with tier 3 carriers and providing some sort of reimbursement to current owners. A
being a serious cap ship pilot, dread, orca, rorqual, freightre Jump freighter, super carrier....maybe one day titan....oh lets not forget...normal carrier...i would kill to get my hands on a t2 carrier, stealth carrier, or a super cap killing carrier with some sort of special device that effects super caps only i dunno. it could be crazy...i dont even know what a t3 carrier would do...i'd like to see a t3 BS before i see a t3 carrier.
could make a t3 super cap killing BS too. it would be fairly simple to make a super cap killing t3 BS...u could even make a ship that can lock onto ANY cynos in the region. who awesome would that be...use a super blobs own cyno to drop ur t3 bs in on, then he lights UR fleet a cyno and u counter drop/bridge ur fleet in...amazing thought... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:58:00 -
[1436] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Oh I think I see now. There you go again, not knowing anything about supercaps and basic mechanics.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:58:00 -
[1437] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Anile8er wrote:Many years ago, before many of the people whining about supercaps being to powerful started playing this game, CCP's CEO said EVE should be about choices. Clearly with the changes CCP is presenting for supercaps they are giving players a very limited array of choices: stay logged off, join a blob alliance so you can shoot only other cap ships and sov structures.
Hypothetically they could also accept that they should risk losing their ships as well.
Agreed, for all the reward they get (facefucking any capital for the most part), they should risk losing their ships if they are unwilling or unable to support them. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:00:00 -
[1438] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Vile rat wrote:Supercarriers were originally ships that were a modest increase over regular carriers and grotesquely priced as to be an end game ego ship. They were neat and something you pointed at "ooh look at that!" but not strategically important. Then they were improved dramatically and in doing so they became extremely popular, but also destabilizing. They evolved from being something that was a nice ego booster "Look at what we can make and field!" to something that was a critically important part of 0.0 warfare. Things reached a point where you simply could not compete on any appreciable level unless you fielded a large blob of these damn things and it is strangling the game. The rush to field supercaps fueled black market ISK dealing because people who used to show up and do things in dreads/carriers (battleships) no longer felt useful in the game and rushed to get a supercap by any means necessary.
This has been destructive to the game and the focus on supercaps being the end game content instead of one aspect of end game content had to be stopped. I believe these changes will make it so supercaps are still useful, but not the deciding factor in 0.0 combat. To be successful you must field a balanced fleet and if you can field a supercap fleet in addition to a balanced fleet you will be able to swing your super-dongs around just like you used to, but with a lot more caution.
And titans? They were garbage from the first iteration. They were a dumb idea, poorly implemented, and now they are still a dumb idea but slightly more killable. I would have loved to see some attention to titan gun tracking as well but this is a good first step towards bringing us back from a game where only the rich need apply. Remove the damage from motherships and titans and let them keep their fighters/logistic role. You won't see them shoot structures anymore, they won't be the anti-capital anymore, and you have virtually got everything you needed. All you guys have to do is reduce their damage output. Not do alot of side-lulul that has nothing to do with anything. HP, dronebays, etc, that's all irrelevant. Doomsday and FB's is relevant.
Doomsdays and FBs are not what lets them annihilate small gangs (or at least totally destabilize the fight so the gang has to gtfo and has no way of fighting back other than bringing a massive blob or more of their own scs)
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:03:00 -
[1439] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Oh I think I see now. There you go again, not knowing anything about supercaps and basic mechanics.
I know plenty about it. I also know that not a single one of your posts that I've seen, would have a benefit to anyone other than low SP toons. This has nothing to do about mechanics at this point as you have yet to state anything about mechanics other than the fact that your upset because of N+1 SC. So if you truly want to talk mechanics, then talk mechanics. Don't keep posting about your misguided opinion that the only logical way to counter super caps is with super caps. Its not. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:05:00 -
[1440] - Quote
Cpt Tunguska wrote:This whole thing will be a hidden titan buff. I mean hitpoints of all ships are reduced by 20%, Dreads and Carriers dont get any HP changes.....but the DD remains at 3 million dmg/shot. This means its a huuuge DD buff.
The side with the biggest titan blob will still obliterate any hostile opposition. They would DD the hell out of hostile caps and supers....their guns will decimate the hostile support. The consequence is: The underdog cant use capitals and supercaps, as long as a overwhelming DD party waits for him. Buissness as usual, this patch wont change anything. Even a supercarrier will pop quckly to a couple DDs. Alliances with huge titanblobs will benefit from this patch.
I see youre buffing Dreads to be useful again, and to be a counter to supers. But as I said. As long as a dread dies in one second via DD, they wont do any dmg. Keep in mind that very high numbers of titans ....like 30+....are pretty much eve standard.
So if you want to create an useful patch:
- reduce DD damage to something logical...like 1 million. - prohibit DD to be used vs. subs (done) - nerf Titan XL weaponry, so they cant hit BS and BC (without nerfing dreads) - nerf super HPs (already done) - nerf logout (done) - nerf logistic ships to get more dynamic subcap fights.
- make capitals to survive at least one DD with a good amount of remaining HP (look at point 1) - dont totally defang supercarriers they already got 20% hp reduction. - superarrier should at least be able to launch one full wing of bombers and fighters (fighter+bomber bay) - create a dronebay which can carry a logical amount of drones: like 1 wing of heavies/sentries and couple of lights)
- Preseve Gallente as "drone race! To prohibit drones @ moros and nyx would just be another obligatory gallente nerf, coming with ever y expansion, stop nerfing gallente ! - those dreads without drones are silly, ccp wtf do you even know your own game? - if you really intend to prohibit drones @ SCs and reduce their Bombers/Fighters, plz dont call them Supercarrier anymore, rename it in SBU-removal-tool. They wont be a carrier anymore, since they cant carry even basic stuff.
Supercarriers just with one wing of bombers and 10 fighters would be the laughing stock of eve, they couldnt even fight off a hostile destroyer, while titans remain largely unchecked.....this will just lead into titanblob online. Good job ccp.
DPS on SCs remains the same despite reduction in Titan EHP. Therefore Titan Nerf.
Your point? |
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:09:00 -
[1441] - Quote
Alice Katsuko wrote:
A bit late now, but here's a chart showing probability of an orbiting Firbolg fighter to hit a stationary battleship and a battlecruiser at different signature resolutions. For the sake of simplicity, I assumed that a battleship will have a signature radius of 400m, and a battlecruiser will have a signature radius of 300m, and that a fighter would orbit at its optimal range (1500m) at the highest possible velocity (280m). I assume you have made similar charts, but this should help players understand the issue with changing fighter signature resolution to 400m.
Fighters are not equal.
For all fighters, orbiting at their optimal, with sig resolution 400, against a target with signature radius 400, the chance to hit is:
Dragonfly - 69.81% Einherji - 1.85% Firbolg - 8.94% Templar - 68.37%
So, changing the signature resolution to 400 is mostly OK for Dragonfly and Templar, and not OK for Einherji and Firbolg.
Therefore:
1) change the fighters signature resolution to 400
2) increase Einherji tracking speed to 0.27 rad/s and optimal to 1500m
3) increase Firbolg tracking speed to 0.19 rad/s and optimal to 2000m |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:09:00 -
[1442] - Quote
Forlorn Wongraven wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Malcanis wrote: Hypothetically they could also accept that they should risk losing their ships as well.
Havent you heard? They paid 20b for their ship and they pay for another account, so they deserve to be unstoppable. SC should not be able to destroy BS fleet but they should be able to defend themselves against a fast roaming gank, at least able to get out and safe before the burning cyno Recon can land on grid. They should not be (and are not) solopawnmobiles. This change is a little bit too much, the first introduction of SC was way overpowered though, we can all agree on that for sure.
My 10 bil vindi (was actually 7 or 8) should be able to defend from a 10-man roaming frigate fleet that, sadly, can pop my drones and.
Why would I think I can go unsupported against superior numbers of ships built to tackle me and eat away at my hp till I run out of cap boosters?
I PAYED MORE !!!!1111!!!!11!!!!!
Also, same for my Moros, it should **** frigate fleets.
/saracasm
Stop feeling entitled to destroy / defeat large amounts of players at once with little risk because you paid a lot for a ship. |
R0ze
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:12:00 -
[1443] - Quote
Tippia wrote:It's not novel. It's the same deeply flawed GÇ£bigger is betterGÇ¥ kind of thinking that has brought us to the necessity of this change. It shouldn't be the titan GÇö it should be the Merlin. It has always worked for Eve though.. when it started there were just 3 ship classes.
.. to more recent events when Motherships were introduced and it became clear that they are too powerfull to be dealt in lowsec gatecampings wolla enter-the-stage Heavy Interdictor - a ship that counters quite the massive vessel instead of altering any other mechanics or attributes of existing spacecrafts.
Titans were made to deal with the massive blobs while the remote DD (on cyno) was retarted I think the AOE was fine till the point CCP didn't come up with a way to give any mechanics (besides the GTFO of grid ) to play arround something like quad-DD. And imo that was the point when all things started to get even worse..
Instead of coming up with an utility ship or even giving a role to the SuperCarrier (that way pushing them to battlefront (if you rememmber there was such CCP blogpost ( Capital battlefield http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=696 ) why to buff the EHP of supers) to make / force (instead of some lone gankings) those appear on grid for possible titan counters (like provide some sort of dictor / POS like bubble to fully or partially shield incomming DD damage).
Now we wil have Time dilation / once again questionable quality "super"ships / people-whining .. etc etc |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:12:00 -
[1444] - Quote
Carabusu wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Could not have said this better. Well put. Typical CCP Balancing = "Grab your axes boys...we're goin' nerfin!" This is seriously a sad thing. Trained my butt off for a LOOOOOONG time, spent billions of ISK, and now my Super Carrier will SIT in a POS doing NOTHING until there's a POS to shoot/rep ? At least before I could Rat to pass the time. Now, I can't even do that. You, CCP, should slow down a bit. Just the 3 ideas above definitely would have been enough to start.
derp, you can still carry 20 fighters.
Just not 20 fighters + 20 fighter bombers.
Next. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:13:00 -
[1445] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:I know plenty about it. GǪand yet you say that you don't, largely because you don't actually read what people write GÇö or, if you do, you don't think about what people write and assume that they say something other than was actually said.
Kind of like that straw man you just constructed.
Quote:I also know that not a single one of your posts that I've seen, would have a benefit to anyone other than low SP toons. So?
Quote:you have yet to state anything about mechanics other than the fact that your upset because of N+1 SC. Understandably, since the whole N+1 concept is pretty much the definition of imbalance.
Quote:Don't keep posting about your misguided opinion that the only logical way to counter super caps is with super caps. Ok, I'm going to ask you one more time, and after that, I'm going to get pretty mean to you.
Read. No, really, read. When you've done that, think. When you've done that, think. When you've done that, think.
GǪI say that three times, because you really need to think things over here.
Only after that, open your mouth/hit the keyboard.
If you had done the above, you would have noticed by now that I do not have the GÇ£misguided opinion that the only logical way to counter super caps is with super capsGÇ¥. That is yet another one of your straw men that comes out of you not reading, thinking about, and understanding what others write. It has already bit you hard by making you pronounce yourself as ignorant about supercaps GÇö you should really try to avoid a repeat of that.
The problem is not that there are other counters GÇö it's that N+1 is the best one, especially once we start to scale the confrontations. Being the cause of said scale only makes the whole thing worse, since that makes it self-generating. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:13:00 -
[1446] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:(Declaration of interests: I have no super carrier, I don't like them, I want them all dead)
So, we have this super carrier problem in 0.0 and this nerf is going to address this issue. In general I agree with it and most of the changes are good and I think they will put an end to the current problem, BUT after I read 50 pages of discussion I have to agree with some minor points of the supers owners, that need to be addressed or basically these ships will be the new dreads and will not be used anymore (and we need them out there so we can have the chance to kill them all)...
Also there is the issue that these pilots invested money and time to get into these ships so at least give them a candy in exchange for the nerf, if you nerf my tengu I would also be mad...
- The candy
allow them to dock those ships
- Minor point 1
The role of these ships goes from "I'm a GOD in the field of battle" to "I can only kill caps and reinforce SOME structures", in one nerf. At least let them have the possibility to hit all structures, including POSes! By doing this, we sub cap pilots will not mind, since we do not like to hit poses, let the super pilots do it, and also while they are out killing a pos they became targets for us to drop and kill and a reason for a good fight to be had. :-)
- Minor point 2
Any carrier can deal with one solo ship, 1 at least. Super carriers should also be able to deal with 1, at least. not 2, just 1. Minimum drone set should be allowed. -> limit the drone bay size to 200m3 and bandwith so they can only carry and field a limited number drones, like 20 small, 10 medium or 5 heavys/sentries. That is it. minimum defense, nothing more, its fair even for a super to have a way to defend it self against 1 solo ship.
- Minor point 3
If you are going to nerf the ehp of these monsters, then its logical that you change the quantities of the respective BPOs to reflect the changes. A weeker ship should need less materials to be build, having in mind the nerf, the materials to build these monsters should also be nerfed in 20%.
--
Questions about the new agression session timers and logout.
- I'm ratting in a belt alone in a system with a carrier, someone enters in the system, I logout, we warps sees my carrier still aligning for the emergency warpout, shoots me or puts a point or opens a bubble, I'm agressed in any of these 3 scenarios? will I disapear in 1 or 15 minutes?
SC docking games! nty |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:14:00 -
[1447] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Pandi V wrote:I think a lot of people are forgetting that Supercarriers and Titans are supposed to be alliance assets not player assets, which means that whether you can successfully field them or not, should be an indication of the strength of your alliance as a whole in terms of manpower, resources, leadership and organizational efficiency. * There's no "supposed to be". They're assets of whoever has aquired them, in whatever way they did. * If alliances want to use their resources to show their strenght, reward their members, or simply has this as some kind of endgame goal, they're free to do so. * Guerilla warfare is often quite effective, both in EVE as well as RL. If say a 5man corp has a mothership and they're fighting a 100 man alliance who don't, the 5man obviously deserve what they have achived. Does it mean either side should be stronger? Or that the 5man corp are too small to own a super? I've personally owned multiple supers, I have made the isk for them myself and not had any of them given to me. I've fielded them for my corp, for my alliance, but also for my own personal use. Why would I not? They were my asset, not my alliance asset, and not a fleet boat. Even tho I used it as, at times, it was also my personal ships.
Fit reps on the super, rep the other four members of your fleet as they clear tackle.
Next! |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:14:00 -
[1448] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:No. Very really. It doesn't particularly matter that you can counter them with other things GÇö the best counter up until now has been N+1 SCs, because of their ability to go toe-to-toe with both the tanking and the damage output. This will no longer be the case. Quote:Here is a novel idea, introduce a new ship or rework the titan to be Super Cap killers. It's not novel. It's the same deeply flawed GÇ£bigger is betterGÇ¥ kind of thinking that has brought us to the necessity of this change. It shouldn't be the titan GÇö it should be the Merlin. Oh I think I see now. Since you can't drop one of your own, no one should. Understood.
I started writing a very precise post with lots of math. It was all about what would happen should a fleet with 250 supercaps invavde a system (this has happened before). The post covered exactly how many sub-capitals it would take to beat their ewar-immune remote repping and counter them, while losing 75 ships to doomsdays every 10mins and attempting to replace their losses at a typical rate. As a bonus I planned to include a rough prediction of how long this would take on a time-dialated node (since a current node would not support this many ships in a stable manner).
But then I realised that you would just skim over it, misinterpret a few sentences then post about how you have more supercaps than everyone else and they're only jealous of you. So instead I wrote you this post:
neener neener ur ships is gettin' nerfed lawl |
SuperBeastie
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:15:00 -
[1449] - Quote
NERF DESTROYERS when i come at them with with equal numbers of frigates they eat me alive
NERF CRUISERS when i come at them with equal numbers of destroyers they eat me alive
NERF BATTLE CRUISERS when i come at them with equal numbers of cruisers they eat me alive
NERF BATTLESHIPS when i come at them with equal numbers of battle cruisers they eat me alive
NERF CARRIERS when i come at them with equal numbers of battleships they eat me alive
supers are killed by nuets
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZcA5g59Zsg&list=FLoWHRYGINTIWXgyJNU77P7A&index=1
A video of goons getting blobed by supers and killing two of them they probably would have killed them all if titans could not doomsday subcaps
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:16:00 -
[1450] - Quote
thebarry wrote:Carabusu wrote:thebarry wrote:I like these changes a lot, but POS Gunning will also have to be rebalanced IMO.
The 5 minute timer on dreads will make it pretty much impossible for pos gunners to kill them. Previously we relied on the 10 minute siege timer to give us time to kill the dreads(about 2-3 minutes to empty its cap with 3 neuts, than another 4+ minutes to finish it off with the large guns). While it was very difficult even before, I believe now with a 5 minute siege timer it may literally be impossible for any pos, regardless of its configuration and number of gunners, to destroy a dread that's fitted a certain way(think perfect fleet booster, t2 trimarks, slaves) before it comes out of siege and gets repped up by triage carrier(s). You literally just said EXACTLY why CCP needed to change the mechanic of the Dread and it's Siege timer. Dreads have long been useless due to the 10 minute Siege, and the fact that their tracking is pure shite* in Siege mode. They are trying to bring them back to the field as a viable option. But fortunately for you, the dreads damage is still crapola on a stick. lol removal of 5 drones...whatever. They buff damage from 625% to 700% in Siege. Okay. Great. Still won't mean much. I shot sleepers with dread :) so on balance this is great for me and I approve, but at the same time, something should be done to keep pos gunning viable, as well...it shouldn't be a completely useless skill!
Agreed. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:16:00 -
[1451] - Quote
R0ze wrote:It has always worked for Eve though.. when it started there were just 3 ship classes. Well, no. It hasn't really always worked GÇö it has just (almost) always been the way it has been applied. That's the whole problem, and the reason we are having this thread today.
That particular line of one-upmanship needs to end, because it doesn't work.
I suppose that's kind of what you then go on to say, but I just want to object to the notion that it GÇ£worksGÇ¥. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Argus Sorn
Star Frontiers Ignore This.
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:16:00 -
[1452] - Quote
Tippia wrote:No. Very really. It doesn't particularly matter that you can counter them with other things GÇö the best counter up until now has been N+1 SCs, because of their ability to go toe-to-toe with both the tanking and the damage output. This will no longer be the case. Quote:Here is a novel idea, introduce a new ship or rework the titan to be Super Cap killers. It's not novel. It's the same deeply flawed GÇ£bigger is betterGÇ¥ kind of thinking that has brought us to the necessity of this change. It shouldn't be the titan GÇö it should be the Merlin.
Maybe not the merlin, but perhaps a tier 3 or tier 2 cruiser or BC that functions as a "heavy bomber" and launches citadel torps.
Maybe the black ops battleship could fill this role if we don't want a new ship - but I thought I already heard something like that was being considered.
Argus |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:17:00 -
[1453] - Quote
Princess Cellestia wrote:Damian Gene wrote:Ok, well much has been said about this. First off, I fly subcaps. Second off, I fly a HIC (Onyx actualy)
So your telling me now, that I can point a titan and all I need to do is orbit with an afterburner running? With titans not able to DD me AND not able to log off, I can simply wait for a fleet to form and light my cyno? Even to me, this is kind of bad considering a titan costs at least 70b and my ship costs 250m. When I was in the North, I remember MM lost more supers to them logging in and getting scanned down, then on the field of battle.
Cracking a DD costs: 25,000,000isk at 50,000 units of iso's x 500isk each. Why not change that to 200,000 units so it costs 100m per crack, make sure their cargo can carry lets say, 3-5 cracks? And yes, they should be able to hit subcaps. This way, I need to have a few friends in order to tackle them.
Supers. I've wanted a Wyvern for a long time, as I fly Caldari. However, I've noticed that I can ONLY old 20 F and 20FB. If I wanted to carry ANY other drones, I'd have to decide to drop a F or a FB. Already a hard choice, as I'd like to have a full bay of ECM drones. Now I guess I'll just get a carrier. I can do that with a carrier, 10 fighers, 10 ECM, 10x all other useful drones. If a Super is carrying fighers, then it will have 20 usable fighers. that's only 2x better then a carrier in DPS... Now those fighers, be they in a carrier OR a super are going to suck MORE?
A fit Chimera costs maybe 1b, whereas a fit Wyvern costs 17b?
We just went back in time, to the amazing days of MoM's. 1.5x the EHP of a carrier, 2x the damage and 17x the cost. At least you didnt cut the EHP that bad, but you still made these ships not worth being entombed in. If you want them to be used, cut their cost down to reflect the shitness that they are going to be.
I dont like blobs, but I believe you hit the Supers pinata with nerf bat a bit hard.
TL;DR Supers EHP cut: Good Supers not able to use other drones: Ok...people will deal with it. Supers not able to carry 20F 20FB: BAD Logoff timers: Ok (but people will just use DT to their advantage) Titans not being able to doomsday subcaps: BAD (lowsec, everywhere?) Titans EHP cut: Good If you fly a titan and you get tackled by some lone hictor that's just roaming around you deserve to lose said titan. You do not take out supers without support. That's just dumb. As for the not able to carry 20F AND 20FB, well you're going to have to decide what you plan on fighting against. Do you want to kill the Battleships in the support fleet, or do you want to wail on the dreads sieging your pos. You have to make a CHOICE. Since CCP isn't going to kill fighters as they were previously, I only have 2 complaints. First, Dread tracking, dreads can't hit a damn thing so a damage buff won't matter at all, buff tracking so they can actually hit something besides a pos tower. Also what happened to the buff to SMA size on carriers, is that gone now? Was really looking forward to that.
I would love to see dread tracking buffed, but have you tried getting your target webbed and painted? |
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:18:00 -
[1454] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Your acting like Super Caps are ruining this game. GǪand they are, since we've arrived at a situation where the answer is increasingly GÇ£more capsGÇ¥. The mere fact that those who are clinging to their SCs right now all spout some form of GÇ£so get one yourselfGÇ¥ is the ultimate example of why they need to be fixed: because that should never be the answer GÇö the answer should always be to get something completely different that acts as a hard counter for the ship.
Once again more ship envy." I dont like that you have the capabilites that you do and im unwilling to train up for it myself so please CCP come and punish those who have traind for it"
CCP =SC nerf for the poor,low skilled, and envious |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:19:00 -
[1455] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:Princess Cellestia wrote:Damian Gene wrote:Ok, well much has been said about this. First off, I fly subcaps. Second off, I fly a HIC (Onyx actualy)
So your telling me now, that I can point a titan and all I need to do is orbit with an afterburner running? With titans not able to DD me AND not able to log off, I can simply wait for a fleet to form and light my cyno? Even to me, this is kind of bad considering a titan costs at least 70b and my ship costs 250m. When I was in the North, I remember MM lost more supers to them logging in and getting scanned down, then on the field of battle.
Cracking a DD costs: 25,000,000isk at 50,000 units of iso's x 500isk each. Why not change that to 200,000 units so it costs 100m per crack, make sure their cargo can carry lets say, 3-5 cracks? And yes, they should be able to hit subcaps. This way, I need to have a few friends in order to tackle them.
Supers. I've wanted a Wyvern for a long time, as I fly Caldari. However, I've noticed that I can ONLY old 20 F and 20FB. If I wanted to carry ANY other drones, I'd have to decide to drop a F or a FB. Already a hard choice, as I'd like to have a full bay of ECM drones. Now I guess I'll just get a carrier. I can do that with a carrier, 10 fighers, 10 ECM, 10x all other useful drones. If a Super is carrying fighers, then it will have 20 usable fighers. that's only 2x better then a carrier in DPS... Now those fighers, be they in a carrier OR a super are going to suck MORE?
A fit Chimera costs maybe 1b, whereas a fit Wyvern costs 17b?
We just went back in time, to the amazing days of MoM's. 1.5x the EHP of a carrier, 2x the damage and 17x the cost. At least you didnt cut the EHP that bad, but you still made these ships not worth being entombed in. If you want them to be used, cut their cost down to reflect the shitness that they are going to be.
I dont like blobs, but I believe you hit the Supers pinata with nerf bat a bit hard.
TL;DR Supers EHP cut: Good Supers not able to use other drones: Ok...people will deal with it. Supers not able to carry 20F 20FB: BAD Logoff timers: Ok (but people will just use DT to their advantage) Titans not being able to doomsday subcaps: BAD (lowsec, everywhere?) Titans EHP cut: Good If you fly a titan and you get tackled by some lone hictor that's just roaming around you deserve to lose said titan. You do not take out supers without support. That's just dumb. As for the not able to carry 20F AND 20FB, well you're going to have to decide what you plan on fighting against. Do you want to kill the Battleships in the support fleet, or do you want to wail on the dreads sieging your pos. You have to make a CHOICE. Since CCP isn't going to kill fighters as they were previously, I only have 2 complaints. First, Dread tracking, dreads can't hit a damn thing so a damage buff won't matter at all, buff tracking so they can actually hit something besides a pos tower. Also what happened to the buff to SMA size on carriers, is that gone now? Was really looking forward to that. My point was not how a Titan was solo, but titans get bumped out of POS's a LOT. Titans stage, and while waiting to do something if someone bumps them out, then there hopelessly flying away at crazy speed. One HIC (which, is what i fly) can tackle them and wait for help. Titans / supers generally do not stage in the same location as subcap fleets, for many reasons, and it could take quite some time to get help there. Titans should be able to DD subcaps, just make it cost more to do so. Tell me why a titan is worth 70-90b after this nerf?
Bridge, instakills normal caps, tracking link for loldead enemy non-cap fleet, decent dps against caps when you remember a dd is actually 5k dps alpha arty that always hits for full damage, massive bonus that ships like the erebus provide your fleet, etc. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:23:00 -
[1456] - Quote
Avon wrote:Tippia wrote:[I get that cost is not a balancing factor. That's all there is to get. I have read you post this many times in this thread, but I don't understand the basis of your argument. Are you saying that ships should not be better just because they are more expensive? A HAC is better than a cruiser - is that unfair? It is harder to make and requires more resources, so it costs more - it also requires more skillpoints to fly. Cost is very much a balancing factor. It is by no means the only factor, but as it reflects rather than dictates the dificulty in obtaining the ship it is sensible to factor it in. If that wasn't the case there would be no reason to progress from your n00b ship - it would be unfair for someone with more isk than you to pwn you with a Rifter.
If cost is the sole balancing factor, a 75 billion isk nightmare should totally **** a supercarrier or, say, 5 poorly fit ones / 3 well fit ones. or several thousand rifters. or an infinite number of velators.
It does not.
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
|
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:26:00 -
[1457] - Quote
I do not even know where to begin, and as a Hel pilot I have a pretty high resistance to tragedy.
Logout timer: this will increase the number of intentionally logged out supers (as counterintuitive as it is). An online supercapital can right now be held on the field by 3 things - dictor bubbles, hic point/bubble, anchored bubble. After this change, a drive-by shooting by an Ibis that gets off 2 shots (one for creating the timer, one for aggressing within that timer), means you have 30 minutes of infinitely-extendable aggression (remember the good old wreck-shooting). An aggressed supercapital should stay in space for 15 minutes (like now), and after that for as long as it is bubbled or hic-pointed. I'm not going to do the math if a tech 2 velator could actually kill a supercapital within 23 hours, but if it can't, then downtime is the ONLY thing saving the supercap. This in turn means a move back to a lot more aggression avoidance.
Supercarrier Dronetype change: Why not make Warrior IIs unfittable on battleships so the poor frigates do not get killed? I understand where the urge for this change comes from, but giving subcaps de facto immunity seems a bit much considered the only ships that can tackle them are destroyer/cruiser hulls. There is little shame losing a super to a well coordinated trap, but the absolutely only business a single planless dictor solo engaging a super has is dying - not being granted possibly infinite amounts of near-invulnerable time to figure out what to do next. 300m3 dronebay for 20 lights and 20 meds (or rep drones) should be considered. Yes there are battleships dying to solo frigates all the time - but they had the option to fit something that helps and did not do it.
Supercarrier Fighterbay Size: given how hard fighters and fighter-bombers are to field-resupply (short of jumping a cargo-rorqual into an ongoing battle lol), how near impossible they are to rep (locktime, indeterminate flightpath), and how easily they die, I see a lot of useless supers 10 minutes into any engagement they are accidentally deployed into in our future. Will they receive more HP / better resistances? Or will there be a supercarrier retcon to capital bombers with 600m ISK bombs that jump in, deploy and (hope to somehow) jump out?
Titan dronebay: Yes, those 375m3 were the one gamebreaking attribute they had. All is well now. Please move along, nothing to see here.
Siege module: since it doesn't really change anything but the time needed for pos-ops, good.
Dreadnought dronebay: I love this change, since with this I do not have to wait another year or two for the "hey look, my sentry drone bumped your dread 500km offgrid" bug to be fixed. The single tackling rifter is going to be annoying though.
SC/Titan HP nerf: if 20% of a Hel were the same as 20% of an Aeon, I could subscribe to this change, but even if the Hel stays as it is, the -20% Aeon would still have twice the EHP. Consequently, this just reads to me as "ALL MINMATAR - BEND OVER NOW." Analog for the Ragnarok.
Not in the blog but needed changes: Shield recharge: remove it from all capitals. Have capital shields behave like armor. Introduce +Capital Shield HP implant set (no drake/tengu love).
Hel bonus: either bring it inline with the other 3 supercarriers (offensive or defensive bonus), or fix its cap so it can actually use its bonus. +25% rep amount is ueless when you need twice the cap transfer amount of a nyx to not cap out (which gives you +100% rep and moar damage).
Dreadnought tracking: in theory, this would need a buff, but can be kept as is, since there will not be any big capital fights after this patch anyway.
Overall predictions for the proposed changes: - dreads will still only be used to reinforce towers (not finish), and with the 5min timers they will be harder to catch doing so. they will continue to not be used against anything that can't be one-cycled, since they remain extremely vulnerable to supers and have to, or supers will lose their last remaining role. Having nothing to fend off tacklers on their own does not help either.
- carriers basically same as above. main use emergency logistics and triage-pos-boost, although they may see the odd use for structure grinding if no fight is to be expected. Since they can still launch drones that can effectively fight fighterbombers, they may get fielded in 200+ quantities so they generate enough remote rep to neutralize and finish off any supers on the field.
- supers will largely vanish from the battlefield again, since having a support fleet changed from smart play to required necessity. This implies the total loss of your supers, if you do not have dominance of the subcap fight - at which point you do not really need to deploy supers anymore. Since this is true for both sides, noone will dare to make the first move (depending on their knowledge of game theory). Main use will be as a strategic deterrent against hostile dread/carrier deployments from within pos shields. Second most common usage will be parked on an inactive account. Highlight of the year might be a structure grind deployment if no hostile is logged in. |
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:27:00 -
[1458] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Oh I think I see now. There you go again, not knowing anything about supercaps and basic mechanics. I know plenty about it. I also know that not a single one of your posts that I've seen, would have a benefit to anyone other than low SP toons. This has nothing to do about mechanics at this point as you have yet to state anything about mechanics other than the fact that your upset because of N+1 SC. So if you truly want to talk mechanics, then talk mechanics. Don't keep posting about your misguided opinion that the only logical way to counter super caps is with super caps. Its not.
Exactly. This whole super cap nerf is about ship envy. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:29:00 -
[1459] - Quote
Nabuch Sattva wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:[quote=Tippia]
Thanks for misconstruing my argument.
What I'm saying is, there's no reason to ever promote the purchasing of supercarriers if what you're after is the ability to do DPS with fighters. Why would an alliance spend 20b on a Nyx when it could buy 8-10 Thanatoi instead and come out with 4-5x the offensive capability?
People are throwing down huge sums of money for supercaps because of their fighter-bomber capabilities, as well as their ewar immunity and large tanks, not because they're excellent at killing subcaps (thats what titans are for ATM, lolololol). The EHP nerf will take away a good chunk of their tank, and FB are already useless against subcaps, so I'm not sure why people are complaining so loudly about SCs needing reduced fighter capability. If people dont care about their anti subcap capability, why are they whining so much about scs losing it? I don't think anyone is whining about taking away SCs ability to field infinite waves of drones. I think most people agree that it's dumb and pretty imbalanced. What they're whining about is *totally* removing their ability to fend off subcaps. There's no way that you can honestly argue that a supercarrier being able to field a couple of flights of normal drones (just like a Dominix can) is overpowered. By that logic, it is unfair and unbalanced to allow battleships to have drones. After all, battleship-sized turrets are designed to hit targets that are BC-sized and larger-- obviously allowing them to carry Warrior IIs makes them overpowered because it lets them kill frigates, which is not their "job" in a fleet fight. ...Except that fielding a few light drones *doesn't* make battleships overpowered frigate-death spewers. It gives them a *minimal* capacity to defend themselves against smaller ships that are not their primary targets. It's not unfair in the slightest. Without the ability to carry drones, BS gangs would easily find themselves perma-tackled (if not outright killed) by frigates. I think it stands to reason that Supercarriers should also be allowed some minimal ability to fend off smaller ships, even if that isn't their primary purpose. ^^ Well said. Its just stupid internet spaceship design not to incorporate this DEFENCE mechanizm!
5 m3 seperate drone bay for most scs, 10 m3 for Nyx |
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:29:00 -
[1460] - Quote
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier. [/quote]
a super only does 10X the dps of a reg carrier when it uses its FB...which cannot hit anything sub cap really at all...so they dont count, and since it has double fighters to a carrier would assume it really only does 2x the damage of a carrier. |
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:33:00 -
[1461] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:I know plenty about it. GǪand yet you say that you don't, largely because you don't actually read what people write GÇö or, if you do, you don't think about what people write and assume that they say something other than was actually said. Kind of like that straw man you just constructed. Quote:I also know that not a single one of your posts that I've seen, would have a benefit to anyone other than low SP toons. So? Quote:you have yet to state anything about mechanics other than the fact that your upset because of N+1 SC. Understandably, since the whole N+1 concept is pretty much the definition of imbalance. Quote:Don't keep posting about your misguided opinion that the only logical way to counter super caps is with super caps. Ok, I'm going to ask you one more time, and after that, I'm going to get pretty mean to you. Read. No, really, read. When you've done that, think. When you've done that, think. When you've done that, think. GǪI say that three times, because you really need to think things over here. Only after that, open your mouth/hit the keyboard. If you had done the above, you would have noticed by now that I do not have the GÇ£misguided opinion that the only logical way to counter super caps is with super capsGÇ¥. That is yet another one of your straw men that comes out of you not reading, thinking about, and understanding what others write. It has already bit you hard by making you pronounce yourself as ignorant about supercaps GÇö you should really try to avoid a repeat of that. The problem is not that there are other counters GÇö it's that N+1 is the best one, especially once we start to scale the confrontations. Being the cause of said scale only makes the whole thing worse, since that makes it self-generating.
Your going to get pretty mean to me ? Oh boy. Someone on the internet is going to be mean to me.
Tell me this. IF this patch stays as is and launches this winter, how do you envision large scale 0.0 warfare ? |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
791
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:33:00 -
[1462] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Exactly. This whole super cap nerf is about ship envy.
Post with your supercarrier-capable main and then we can talk about ship envy. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:40:00 -
[1463] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:Exactly. This whole super cap nerf is about ship envy. Post with your supercarrier-capable main and then we can talk about ship envy.
Dont need to , thats why I have an alt.Posting under my alt does not take anyhting from what I have said. This is about the poor and lower skilled pilots unwilling to train up for a SC. Then crying loud enough to ccp to do something about it because they are way to scared to venture out to null without someone holding their hands or locking up the boogyman. |
Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:43:00 -
[1464] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.
^^AGREED
|
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:44:00 -
[1465] - Quote
awww i wanna be the boogie man...thats why i spent 4 years training for carriers and bought another account :( hey, whats the cyno? |
R0ze
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:46:00 -
[1466] - Quote
Tippia wrote:]The mere fact that those who are clinging to their SCs right now all spout some form of GÇ£so get one yourselfGÇ¥ is the ultimate example of why they need to be fixed: because that should never be the answer GÇö the answer should always be to get something completely different that acts as a hard counter for the ship.
Goddam .. few posts ago you said that price should be dictated by demand:
Tippia wrote:Better performance will lead to higher popularity, which leads to higher demand, which drives prices up. So you don't even have to pick the base price all that well for the whole thing to work.
Now you state when the ship has "better performance" one should go with - NO I am not getting that ship I should toally look into something else!
Don't get me wrong - I don't really care if any of the supers get nerfed (I blew my steam off back in 2009 ( http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/0911/Anti-Mothership-Nerf-Sig.jpg ) when CCP was thinking of changing that MS will be able to launch drones only if it has some squad-mates in fleet to assign those to) - but at least be consistent in your forum poasting .. |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
791
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:48:00 -
[1467] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Dont need to , thats why I have an alt.
Anything I want to say, I say with my main. What are you afraid of?
Aurora Egnald wrote:Posting under my alt does not take anyhting form what I have said.
Except it does. There's always the implication therein that you don't have the spine to say with your main what you can say without hesitation on your alt. It basically puts across that you're ashamed of your ideas and opinions being associated with your main.
Aurora Egnald wrote:This is about the poor and lower skilled pilots unwilling to train up for a SC. Then crying loud enough to ccp to do something about it because they are way to scared to venture out to null without someone holding ther hands or locking up the boogyman.
I have in excess of 80m skillpoints and have the prerequisites to fly the supercarriers of two races. With a little bit of instruction I'd likely be able to fly one competently in combat. I have absolutely no desire to because I have no desire to shackle my soul to a several-billion dollar flying rock that will, inevitably, without a shadow of a doubt, die. From what I've seen of 0.0 combat, it was a lot more fun before motherships became supercarriers. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
Machater
Regina's Wolves
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:51:00 -
[1468] - Quote
From a reality point of view, a ship the size of a carrier or titan should be able to fit the equipment inside it to control some drones.
Give supercarriers a dedicated Fighter/Fighter Bomber Bay and a dedicated Drone Bay. Drone bay should something like a Dominix.
This allows them to still use drones, but you have to pick and chose which drones you want to use.
Put a timer on removing putting drones into your drone bay, just like you have with jettisoning a can, this removes the issue with having a small drone bay but tons of drones in your supercarriers CHA to feed with.
================
Change the name from Supercarrier back to mothership as the name supercarrier will now be inappropriate for what these ships will do.
Give supercarriers a defensive weapon similar to that of a WWII aircraft carrier.
============
Yes there should be a counter to supercapitals that ISN'T more supercapitals. But it should be of comparable ISK value to the supercapital fleet.
Sadly the side with the most ISK in their fleet should win, unless one FC is much better than the other.
Create a T2 battlecruiser based on the tier 2 BC hulls(drake, hurricane etc) that is a Heavy Assault Bomber - specifically designed to engage capitals/supercapitals(NOT structures). |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:51:00 -
[1469] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Your acting like Super Caps are ruining this game. GǪand they are, since we've arrived at a situation where the answer is increasingly GÇ£more capsGÇ¥. The mere fact that those who are clinging to their SCs right now all spout some form of GÇ£so get one yourselfGÇ¥ is the ultimate example of why they need to be fixed: because that should never be the answer GÇö the answer should always be to get something completely different that acts as a hard counter for the ship. Once again more ship envy." I dont like that you have the capabilites that you do and im unwilling to train up for it myself so please CCP come and punish those who have traind for it" CCP =SC nerf for the poor,low skilled, and envious
It has nothing to do with willingness or ability to train / buy the ship. It has everything to do with the ship being truly an endgame ship that is massively more powerful than anything else and does not follow the law of diminishing returns in a game that (is intended to have) no end game. |
Zarian Uphius
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:51:00 -
[1470] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
I read this and was like \o/
Now please fix dread/titan tracking |
|
JitaPriceChecker2
State War Academy Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:54:00 -
[1471] - Quote
**** CCP is dealing with spaceships again , it is enough to be happy about. Even if changes will be bad you know they will be changed again next patch until they will be satisfactory.
Thats why we play , thats why we pay. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:54:00 -
[1472] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Oh I think I see now. There you go again, not knowing anything about supercaps and basic mechanics. I know plenty about it. I also know that not a single one of your posts that I've seen, would have a benefit to anyone other than low SP toons. This has nothing to do about mechanics at this point as you have yet to state anything about mechanics other than the fact that your upset because of N+1 SC. So if you truly want to talk mechanics, then talk mechanics. Don't keep posting about your misguided opinion that the only logical way to counter super caps is with super caps. Its not. Exactly. This whole super cap nerf is about ship envy.
Because I have not trained the fighter bombers skill, I am a noob low skilled player who will benefit by the removal of the SC abilities? |
FlameOfSurvival
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:55:00 -
[1473] - Quote
If you get tackled in a Titan you need a really good tactic now!
I prefer you start a ship from ur bay, eject from ur titan, board the ship and kill everything
p.s. this can be done as supercarrier pilot too |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:56:00 -
[1474] - Quote
kralz wrote:
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
a super only does 10X the dps of a reg carrier when it uses its FB...which cannot hit anything sub cap really at all...so they dont count, and since it has double fighters to a carrier would assume it really only does 2x the damage of a carrier.[/quote]
And it is ewar immune and can remote ECCM, don't forget that, also: 20x ehp. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:56:00 -
[1475] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:I do not even know where to begin, and as a Hel pilot I have a pretty high resistance to tragedy.
Logout timer: this will increase the number of intentionally logged out supers (as counterintuitive as it is). An online supercapital can right now be held on the field by 3 things - dictor bubbles, hic point/bubble, anchored bubble. After this change, a drive-by shooting by an Ibis that gets off 2 shots (one for creating the timer, one for aggressing within that timer), means you have 30 minutes of infinitely-extendable aggression (remember the good old wreck-shooting). An aggressed supercapital should stay in space for 15 minutes (like now), and after that for as long as it is bubbled or hic-pointed. I'm not going to do the math if a tech 2 velator could actually kill a supercapital within 23 hours, but if it can't, then downtime is the ONLY thing saving the supercap. This in turn means a move back to a lot more aggression avoidance.
Supercarrier Dronetype change: Why not make Warrior IIs unfittable on battleships so the poor frigates do not get killed? I understand where the urge for this change comes from, but giving subcaps de facto immunity seems a bit much considered the only ships that can tackle them are destroyer/cruiser hulls. There is little shame losing a super to a well coordinated trap, but the absolutely only business a single planless dictor solo engaging a super has is dying - not being granted possibly infinite amounts of near-invulnerable time to figure out what to do next. 300m3 dronebay for 20 lights and 20 meds (or rep drones) should be considered. Yes there are battleships dying to solo frigates all the time - but they had the option to fit something that helps and did not do it.
Supercarrier Fighterbay Size: given how hard fighters and fighter-bombers are to field-resupply (short of jumping a cargo-rorqual into an ongoing battle lol), how near impossible they are to rep (locktime, indeterminate flightpath), and how easily they die, I see a lot of useless supers 10 minutes into any engagement they are accidentally deployed into in our future. Will they receive more HP / better resistances? Or will there be a supercarrier retcon to capital bombers with 600m ISK bombs that jump in, deploy and (hope to somehow) jump out?
Titan dronebay: Yes, those 375m3 were the one gamebreaking attribute they had. All is well now. Please move along, nothing to see here.
Siege module: since it doesn't really change anything but the time needed for pos-ops, good.
Dreadnought dronebay: I love this change, since with this I do not have to wait another year or two for the "hey look, my sentry drone bumped your dread 500km offgrid" bug to be fixed. The single tackling rifter is going to be annoying though.
SC/Titan HP nerf: if 20% of a Hel were the same as 20% of an Aeon, I could subscribe to this change, but even if the Hel stays as it is, the -20% Aeon would still have twice the EHP. Consequently, this just reads to me as "ALL MINMATAR - BEND OVER NOW." Analog for the Ragnarok.
Not in the blog but needed changes: Shield recharge: remove it from all capitals. Have capital shields behave like armor. Introduce +Capital Shield HP implant set (no drake/tengu love).
Hel bonus: either bring it inline with the other 3 supercarriers (offensive or defensive bonus), or fix its cap so it can actually use its bonus. +25% rep amount is ueless when you need twice the cap transfer amount of a nyx to not cap out (which gives you +100% rep and moar damage).
Dreadnought tracking: in theory, this would need a buff, but can be kept as is, since there will not be any big capital fights after this patch anyway.
Overall predictions for the proposed changes: - dreads will still only be used to reinforce towers (not finish), and with the 5min timers they will be harder to catch doing so. they will continue to not be used against anything that can't be one-cycled, since they remain extremely vulnerable to supers and have to, or supers will lose their last remaining role. Having nothing to fend off tacklers on their own does not help either.
- carriers basically same as above. main use emergency logistics and triage-pos-boost, although they may see the odd use for structure grinding if no fight is to be expected. Since they can still launch drones that can effectively fight fighterbombers, they may get fielded in 200+ quantities so they generate enough remote rep to neutralize and finish off any supers on the field.
- supers will largely vanish from the battlefield again, since having a support fleet changed from smart play to required necessity. This implies the total loss of your supers, if you do not have dominance of the subcap fight - at which point you do not really need to deploy supers anymore. Since this is true for both sides, noone will dare to make the first move (depending on their knowledge of game theory). Main use will be as a strategic deterrent against hostile dread/carrier deployments from within pos shields. Second most common usage will be parked on an inactive account. Highlight of the year might be a structure grind deployment if no hostile is logged in.
Absolutely, perfectly spot on. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:58:00 -
[1476] - Quote
Oh, one more thing about the logout timer I forgot to rant about:
Fleet A has a good mix of subcaps, a few carrier and 5 supers. They engaged Fleet B of roughly even numbers and mixture and won in a lagfree fight due to better piloting. Shortly before jumping home and well within 15 minutes of the end of the fight, one of Fleet A's supercarriers crashes due to a power outage in the pilot's city. Fleet A immediately probes out their friend's super to form a protection around him, jumping in additional triage carriers.
One pilot of Fleet B reships into a sniper apoc with cloak, and a second pilot of Fleet B reships into a covert ops. Every 10 minutes the covert ops provides a warpin at 230-240km from the super to the apoc, which then shoots a single shot before warping off and cloaking again.
4 hours later, Fleet A has to leave because it is 2am local time. Fleet B has since switched the 2 active pilots keeping the super aggressed multiple times and eagerly await their friends in a different timezone to come online and hand the super over to them all the way into a timezone where Fleet A has no friends nearby.
Really? Eve 2012? |
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 20:59:00 -
[1477] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:kralz wrote:
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
a super only does 10X the dps of a reg carrier when it uses its FB...which cannot hit anything sub cap really at all...so they dont count, and since it has double fighters to a carrier would assume it really only does 2x the damage of a carrier.
And it is ewar immune and can remote ECCM, don't forget that, also: 20x ehp.[/quote]
GASP!? really? my god i should get one! which does the most DPS...checks ship stats.....omg! the NYX! (logs alt in, boards nyx, logs alt off, begins ratting and looking for a hot drop target)
i mean seriously with a ship THIS good...how can u hate?....oh right..sorry u dont own one? that SUCKS yo....really i feel for u. u want mine? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:01:00 -
[1478] - Quote
The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:04:00 -
[1479] - Quote
kralz wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:kralz wrote:
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
a super only does 10X the dps of a reg carrier when it uses its FB...which cannot hit anything sub cap really at all...so they dont count, and since it has double fighters to a carrier would assume it really only does 2x the damage of a carrier. And it is ewar immune and can remote ECCM, don't forget that, also: 20x ehp.
GASP!? really? my god i should get one! which does the most DPS...checks ship stats.....omg! the NYX! (logs alt in, boards nyx, logs alt off, begins ratting and looking for a hot drop target)
i mean seriously with a ship THIS good...how can u hate?....oh right..sorry u dont own one? that SUCKS yo....really i feel for u. u want mine?[/quote]
Can you deliver to w-space?
Seriously, not jelly.
fake edit: somewhat jelly of Erebus pilots, but meh. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:05:00 -
[1480] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:Dont need to , thats why I have an alt. Anything I want to say, I say with my main. What are you afraid of? Aurora Egnald wrote:Posting under my alt does not take anyhting form what I have said. Except it does. There's always the implication therein that you don't have the spine to say with your main what you can say without hesitation on your alt. It basically puts across that you're ashamed of your ideas and opinions being associated with your main. Aurora Egnald wrote:This is about the poor and lower skilled pilots unwilling to train up for a SC. Then crying loud enough to ccp to do something about it because they are way to scared to venture out to null without someone holding ther hands or locking up the boogyman. I have in excess of 80m skillpoints and have the prerequisites to fly the supercarriers of two races. With a little bit of instruction I'd likely be able to fly one competently in combat. I have absolutely no desire to because I have no desire to shackle my soul to a several-billion dollar flying rock that will, inevitably, without a shadow of a doubt, die. From what I've seen of 0.0 combat, it was a lot more fun before motherships became supercarriers.
With an EHP buff to normal Carriers and Dreds, along with the right bonus' while in seige for Dreds, it would be easier to counter Super Carriers. They still obviously wouldn't stand head to head, but at least alliances that dont own large amounts of Supers could still compete. As seems to be the biggest issue people are having.
Why remove entire drone bays from all caps ?
|
|
kralz
Valor Inc. Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:07:00 -
[1481] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:kralz wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:kralz wrote:
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
a super only does 10X the dps of a reg carrier when it uses its FB...which cannot hit anything sub cap really at all...so they dont count, and since it has double fighters to a carrier would assume it really only does 2x the damage of a carrier. And it is ewar immune and can remote ECCM, don't forget that, also: 20x ehp. GASP!? really? my god i should get one! which does the most DPS...checks ship stats.....omg! the NYX! (logs alt in, boards nyx, logs alt off, begins ratting and looking for a hot drop target) i mean seriously with a ship THIS good...how can u hate?....oh right..sorry u dont own one? that SUCKS yo....really i feel for u. u want mine?
Can you deliver to w-space?
Seriously, not jelly.
fake edit: somewhat jelly of Erebus pilots, but meh.[/quote]
i mean, if ur in WH space...why are u so worried about super caps? having spent a year in WH space myself..i just dont recall ever seeing a super carrier any where...saw some dreads and regular carrier...and they ruined my day for a while. but w/e...no supers..... |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:09:00 -
[1482] - Quote
There's plenty of players, myself included, who have both the skillpoints and the ISK to buy a supercap but chose not to because since at least a year ago it was obvious that the current state of play was unsustainable and they were going to be rebalanced.
Just because you babbies were so desperate to become ~elite pvp~ by GTCing yourself into an overpowered fotm spacedong (at hilariously marked up prices - 80b for a titan hull!), and didn't consider the likely long-term status of your investment, is no need to cry about it now. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:09:00 -
[1483] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Andreus Ixiris wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:Dont need to , thats why I have an alt. Anything I want to say, I say with my main. What are you afraid of? Aurora Egnald wrote:Posting under my alt does not take anyhting form what I have said. Except it does. There's always the implication therein that you don't have the spine to say with your main what you can say without hesitation on your alt. It basically puts across that you're ashamed of your ideas and opinions being associated with your main. Aurora Egnald wrote:This is about the poor and lower skilled pilots unwilling to train up for a SC. Then crying loud enough to ccp to do something about it because they are way to scared to venture out to null without someone holding ther hands or locking up the boogyman. I have in excess of 80m skillpoints and have the prerequisites to fly the supercarriers of two races. With a little bit of instruction I'd likely be able to fly one competently in combat. I have absolutely no desire to because I have no desire to shackle my soul to a several-billion dollar flying rock that will, inevitably, without a shadow of a doubt, die. From what I've seen of 0.0 combat, it was a lot more fun before motherships became supercarriers. With an EHP buff to normal Carriers and Dreds, along with the right bonus' while in seige for Dreds, it would be easier to counter Super Carriers. They still obviously wouldn't stand head to head, but at least alliances that dont own large amounts of Supers could still compete. As seems to be the biggest issue people are having. Why remove entire drone bays from all caps ?
Wait, they are removing the drone bays from carriers and capital industrial ships?
I would like to see a carrier / dread buff such that a carrier / dread with full low tank (mid for chimmy / phoenix / nid / nag) would be able to tank a DD.
Also, people should post with their mains. |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:11:00 -
[1484] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:"[..]mins cost is, indeed, in the vicinity of 10b[...]"You probably missed this part ... I know the production cost, direct me to a forum link where some one is selling a SC for 10b.
The production thread in Capswarm is where you can order them.. for the prices listed on that spreadsheet. It's might not be 10b but it's a lot closer to 10b than it is to 16b. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:11:00 -
[1485] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so.
You think they got the ISK to buy a supercap through their in-game actions.
heh ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:12:00 -
[1486] - Quote
kralz wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:kralz wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:kralz wrote:
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
a super only does 10X the dps of a reg carrier when it uses its FB...which cannot hit anything sub cap really at all...so they dont count, and since it has double fighters to a carrier would assume it really only does 2x the damage of a carrier. And it is ewar immune and can remote ECCM, don't forget that, also: 20x ehp. GASP!? really? my god i should get one! which does the most DPS...checks ship stats.....omg! the NYX! (logs alt in, boards nyx, logs alt off, begins ratting and looking for a hot drop target) i mean seriously with a ship THIS good...how can u hate?....oh right..sorry u dont own one? that SUCKS yo....really i feel for u. u want mine? Can you deliver to w-space? Seriously, not jelly. fake edit: somewhat jelly of Erebus pilots, but meh.
i mean, if ur in WH space...why are u so worried about super caps? having spent a year in WH space myself..i just dont recall ever seeing a super carrier any where...saw some dreads and regular carrier...and they ruined my day for a while. but w/e...no supers.....[/quote]
Part of the reason I ended up in w-space was because of the stagnant, blob friendly culture that came with the N+1 Super Capital Patch. To get me to reconsider 0.0 as a good location, certain anti-blob (poorly supported SC blob specifically) mechanics need to be in place.
As it is, I am ******* happy with the proposed Moros change. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:14:00 -
[1487] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:With an EHP buff to normal Carriers and Dreds, along with the right bonus' while in seige for Dreds, it would be easier to counter Super Carriers. They still obviously wouldn't stand head to head, but at least alliances that dont own large amounts of Supers could still compete. As seems to be the biggest issue people are having.
Why remove entire drone bays from all caps ?
Wait, they are removing the drone bays from carriers and capital industrial ships? I would like to see a carrier / dread buff such that a carrier / dread with full low tank (mid for chimmy / phoenix / nid / nag) would be able to tank a DD. Also, people should post with their mains.
Yeah sorry that was worded incorrectly on my part. Removing drone bays from supers and dreds. That should have been the way I phrased that. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:14:00 -
[1488] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. You think they got the ISK to buy a supercap through their in-game actions. heh
SCs are not that expensive at all. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:15:00 -
[1489] - Quote
why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. they woudl still be useful, they wont do omfg damage anymore and you wont screw them being able to kill a tackling frig. that would make more sence imo that what your doing now. dreads become useful again instantly, win win, just undo the last buff. give us back motherships CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:16:00 -
[1490] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Dont need to , thats why I have an alt.Posting under my alt does not take anyhting from what I have said.
Except your credibility.
It's mostly been people from the 'pet' (hate that term) and 'renter' alliances bitching, while the actual combat alliances have not only expected this for 6 months but are welcoming it.
Post with your main so that we can weigh up your opinion appropriately! |
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:17:00 -
[1491] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. they woudl still be useful, they wont do omfg damage anymore and you wont screw them being able to kill a tackling frig. that would make more senec imo that what your doing now. dreads become useful again instantly, win win, just undo the last buff. give us back motherships
Might make me but one if that happened. Only marginally better, still fun, and can triage.
I admit that being a SC pilot is about to get boring as ****.
Still, I would like that 5 minute timer on siege. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:18:00 -
[1492] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. they woudl still be useful, they wont do omfg damage anymore and you wont screw them being able to kill a tackling frig. that would make more sence imo that what your doing now. dreads become useful again instantly, win win, just undo the last buff. give us back motherships
Titans would have to lose the EHP bonus they got as well. To balance things out. Seem like a logical solution really. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:19:00 -
[1493] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. they woudl still be useful, they wont do omfg damage anymore and you wont screw them being able to kill a tackling frig. that would make more senec imo that what your doing now. dreads become useful again instantly, win win, just undo the last buff. give us back motherships Might make me but one if that happened. Only marginally better, still fun, and can triage. I admit that being a SC pilot is about to get boring as ****. Still, I would like that 5 minute timer on siege.
they could even buff teh old hp count by 20% say so they could survive 2 or 3 dd's. but there gonna make an awesom ship worthless, more worthless than it used to be. CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:20:00 -
[1494] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. they woudl still be useful, they wont do omfg damage anymore and you wont screw them being able to kill a tackling frig. that would make more senec imo that what your doing now. dreads become useful again instantly, win win, just undo the last buff. give us back motherships Might make me but one if that happened. Only marginally better, still fun, and can triage. I admit that being a SC pilot is about to get boring as ****. Still, I would like that 5 minute timer on siege. they could even buff teh old hp count by 20% say so they could survive 2 or 3 dd's. but there gonna make an awesom ship worthless, more worthless than it used to be.
Sorry, I was assuming the titans would be nerfed / dd removed, my bad. |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:21:00 -
[1495] - Quote
General: The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The solution: An aggressed supercapital should stay in space for 15 minutes (like now), and after that for as long as it is bubbled or hic-pointed. (credit goes to Mioelnir for the perfect fix)
Dreadnoughts: Dread siege changes are good, it brings them back into functional service. Dreads should track better. Removal of drones is fine because of other buffs.
Supercarriers: 20% EHP nerf to SCs is good, no nerf to Hel. Separation of F+FBs into a "Fighter Bay" of equal size to current Drone Bay. Nerf Drone Bay size significantly, but large enough to still field a reasonable number of regular drones. No nerf to fighters
Titans: No titan EHP nerf, make Ragnarok stronger. (If you must nerf, Rag should be balanced still) Titans should be able to doomsday subcaps, scale the damage if necessary. Fix leviathan shield bonuses so you don't start out damaged. Titans should keep their drone bays.
New ship class: They're trying to mold the supercarrier into something that none of the current pilots subscribed to. CCP is trying to nerf the Super Carrier into an Assault Carrier; they should just make a new ship class for this role. Make it cost around 3bil to build, have 5mil EHP, let it only use fighters/fighter-bombers. Let it field a maximum of 10 FBs on the field, capable of holding 20 F+FBs total. Vulnerable to ewar, no bonuses to remote rep, dockable. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:21:00 -
[1496] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. This would be amazing.
Supercarrier pilots would be queueing up to throw themselves off bridges. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:21:00 -
[1497] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. they woudl still be useful, they wont do omfg damage anymore and you wont screw them being able to kill a tackling frig. that would make more senec imo that what your doing now. dreads become useful again instantly, win win, just undo the last buff. give us back motherships Might make me but one if that happened. Only marginally better, still fun, and can triage. I admit that being a SC pilot is about to get boring as ****. Still, I would like that 5 minute timer on siege. they could even buff teh old hp count by 20% say so they could survive 2 or 3 dd's. but there gonna make an awesom ship worthless, more worthless than it used to be. Sorry, I was assuming the titans would be nerfed / dd removed, my bad.
would have to nerf the damage a dd did i guess to bring it back inline with the old hp counts of both titans and motherships CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:22:00 -
[1498] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:why dont you just revert the changes, so that super carriers become motherships again. give players teh fighter bomber skill points back and be done with it. This would be amazing. Supercarrier pilots would be queueing up to throw themselves off bridges.
probibly not as many as now id bet CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Alik Fall92
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:23:00 -
[1499] - Quote
"some nyx pilot, some alliance" wrote:22m in drones on my nyx pilot, refund that sp or i quit the game ^^ this tbh, dunno if it's been stated here yet already but
suddenly theres ALOT of wasted sp on a SC pilot,
congrats CCP on turning eve into "Goonswarm's Eve Online"
god this is more pathetic than the changes to sov |
zulrock
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:26:00 -
[1500] - Quote
The problem with dreads is that they have **** tracking in siege they need to get a tracking buff so they can track a supercarrier that's moving but also there is a range problem too the super carrier should loose the range bonus to fighters and maybe keep the drone bay size. That way to engage supers will have to come within dread firin range to be effective. |
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:28:00 -
[1501] - Quote
Alik Fall92 wrote:"some nyx pilot, some alliance" wrote:22m in drones on my nyx pilot, refund that sp or i quit the game ^^ this tbh, dunno if it's been stated here yet already but suddenly theres ALOT of wasted sp on a SC pilot, congrats CCP on turning eve into "Goonswarm's Eve Online" god this is more pathetic than the changes to sov
Welp, guess someone chased FotY... |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:29:00 -
[1502] - Quote
zulrock wrote:The problem with dreads is that they have **** tracking in siege they need to get a tracking buff so they can track a supercarrier that's moving but also there is a range problem too the super carrier should loose the range bonus to fighters and maybe keep the drone bay size. That way to engage supers will have to come within dread firin range to be effective.
Dreads can use long range guns and can hit at 250 km, proposed setup is acceptable. |
Alik Fall92
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:42:00 -
[1503] - Quote
yep, supers sure were flavor of the year, except erm
theyve been flavor of the half decade but yeah, sure i'm the idiot
edit: defiant? didnt you die 2yrs ago? gtfo... wheres the "dislike" button anyway? |
LegendaryFrog
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:43:00 -
[1504] - Quote
The theory behind the changes is good, though I agree with Shadoo in one of the first pages that this is actually going to just push more people into Titans since they will still represent the "Big expensive wtf pwn ship". Their turrets can still be remote tracking boosted to completely decimate subcaps, and their doomsday weapon will clean out capital ships.
I don't think the problem of supercapital proliferation is going to be solved with HP or DPS tweaks... their role needs to be reconsidered. If Titans are supposed to be seen as fleet flagships, there should be some sort of diminishing returns built into their role such that bringing increasingly more of them to a fight has less and less benefit. That way you can actually substantially increase the effectiveness of a Titan to make them desirable to have vs. their large expense... I believe they should still be able to help turn the tide of a battle... but fielding a fleet full of them won't be an "I win because I have more ISK" repeatable situation. |
Alik Fall92
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:44:00 -
[1505] - Quote
LegendaryFrog wrote:The theory behind the changes is good, though I agree with Shadoo in one of the first pages that this is actually going to just push more people into Titans since they will still represent the "Big expensive wtf pwn ship". Their turrets can still be remote tracking boosted to completely decimate subcaps, and their doomsday weapon will clean out capital ships.
I don't think the problem of supercapital proliferation is going to be solved with HP or DPS tweaks... their role needs to be reconsidered. If Titans are supposed to be seen as fleet flagships, there should be some sort of diminishing returns built into their role such that bringing increasingly more of them to a fight has less and less benefit. That way you can actually substantially increase the effectiveness of a Titan to make them desirable to have vs. their large expense... I believe they should still be able to help turn the tide of a battle... but fielding a fleet full of them won't be an "I win because I have more ISK" repeatable situation. goonie, stop talking
you already won eve no need to rub it in our faces
Mittiani for CCP President 2012Gäó |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:45:00 -
[1506] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:
New ship class: They're trying to mold the supercarrier into something that none of the current pilots subscribed to. CCP is trying to nerf the Super Carrier into an Assault Carrier; they should just make a new ship class for this role. Make it cost around 3bil to build, have 5mil EHP, let it only use fighters/fighter-bombers. Let it field a maximum of 10 FBs on the field, capable of holding 20 F+FBs total. Vulnerable to ewar, no bonuses to remote rep, dockable.
+1 |
Alik Fall92
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:46:00 -
[1507] - Quote
i also just realized that two step, the famous exploiter of wh and breaker of game mechanics is ALSO CSM...
dear god CCP what have you done to this game...
hell following that line of progression, unban kugu and invite him to CSM also!
ANTHONY K FOR CSM 2012 Gäó |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:46:00 -
[1508] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. While this statement might prove useful during an interview at the local tabloid, lets all get a few facts straight:
Strategic logouts happen. They happen with roaming gangs that get boxed in in some deadend constellation. They happen with wardeccers to suicide-tackle with a neutral char until the pilot with the war is logged in. They happen with supers to safe them - and while I may only have skimmed over most of the last 70 pages, I have not seen a single super pilot claim otherwise - it is currently in a lot of situations the most favorable option to the SC pilot.
Be that as it may - it is irrelevant. Protocols and game mechanics do not get tested by looking at the one intended usecase (super logging out while 50 hotiles are swarming it inside 15 bubbles gunz blazing) in which it is designed to work. They are tested by looking at ALL use cases. And the stranger the usecase, the more cornercases of different mechanics you get to overlap, the harder to look. Because how it fares in those cases is actually how good a mechanic is. And if the mechanics change is to ship logout/disconnect, examples of logout/disconnect scenarios should not come as a surprise. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:49:00 -
[1509] - Quote
Alik Fall92 wrote:yep, supers sure were flavor of the year, except erm theyve been flavor of the half decade but yeah, sure i'm the idiot edit: defiant? didnt you die 2yrs ago? gtfo... wheres the "dislike" button anyway?
?
Name was made during some internal alliance drama. Not the defiant you are thinking of (or defiant. even).
Also, there is no four letter acronym for anything other than month and year as far as my knowledge. Also, dominion was about two years, 10 months ago, which is closer to one year than five, with 1.1 being even more recent than that . |
Di Mulle
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:50:00 -
[1510] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.
AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER
BUT
AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.
That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?
To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity. IF YOU CAN AFFORD TO BUY AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPERCARRIER!!!!! THEN YOU CAN CERTAINLY AFFORD TO BUY SOME FRIENDS TO PROTECT YOU FROM A SABRE!!! OMG WORKING TOGETHER AS A TEAM!!!! CCP IS FORCING US TO SOICALIZE AND WORK TOGETHER WHAHHH WAHHHH!! Go pod youself sir. oh can i has your super cap?
You are right, no need to shout
The problem is, no one is going to pay for a friends guarding him while he rats. Why? thats another question already CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
|
Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
295
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:52:00 -
[1511] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Supercarriers were originally ships that were a modest increase over regular carriers and grotesquely priced as to be an end game ego ship. They were neat and something you pointed at "ooh look at that!" but not strategically important. Then they were improved dramatically and in doing so they became extremely popular, but also destabilizing. They evolved from being something that was a nice ego booster "Look at what we can make and field!" to something that was a critically important part of 0.0 warfare. Things reached a point where you simply could not compete on any appreciable level unless you fielded a large blob of these damn things and it is strangling the game. The rush to field supercaps fueled black market ISK dealing because people who used to show up and do things in dreads/carriers (battleships) no longer felt useful in the game and rushed to get a supercap by any means necessary.
This has been destructive to the game and the focus on supercaps being the end game content instead of one aspect of end game content had to be stopped. I believe these changes will make it so supercaps are still useful, but not the deciding factor in 0.0 combat. To be successful you must field a balanced fleet and if you can field a supercap fleet in addition to a balanced fleet you will be able to swing your super-dongs around just like you used to, but with a lot more caution.
And titans? They were garbage from the first iteration. They were a dumb idea, poorly implemented, and now they are still a dumb idea but slightly more killable. I would have loved to see some attention to titan gun tracking as well but this is a good first step towards bringing us back from a game where only the rich need apply.
Same can be said for standings and coalitions. You have groups that have 45000 members with individual allainces having close to 7000. The barrier for entry for a new group into 0.0 is too high. There is no way a new group can have any chance against a 7000 man alliance or its 45000 blues. Clearly coalitions and giant alliances are in need of a nerf. Its unfair and im sorry I know you spent years getting your group to this point but you are breaking the game. Were going to have to reduce your size and strength to level the playing field. No hard feelings its for the good of the game. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:53:00 -
[1512] - Quote
Alik Fall92 wrote:i also just realized that two step, the famous exploiter of wh and breaker of game mechanics is ALSO CSM...
dear god CCP what have you done to this game...
hell following that line of progression, unban kugu and invite him to CSM also!
ANTHONY K FOR CSM 2012 Gäó
http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/
Read, then come back. Or have a long chat with the AHARM people involved (as I did recently); it is not all as it seems (besides that, two step himself was not involved in any way, shape, or form).
two step for CSM(whatevernumberisnext) |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:55:00 -
[1513] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:Malcanis wrote:The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. While this statement might prove useful during an interview at the local tabloid, lets all get a few facts straight: Strategic logouts happen. They happen with roaming gangs that get boxed in in some deadend constellation. They happen with wardeccers to suicide-tackle with a neutral char until the pilot with the war is logged in. They happen with supers to safe them - and while I may only have skimmed over most of the last 70 pages, I have not seen a single super pilot claim otherwise - it is currently in a lot of situations the most favorable option to the SC pilot. Be that as it may - it is irrelevant. Protocols and game mechanics do not get tested by looking at the one intended usecase (super logging out while 50 hotiles are swarming it inside 15 bubbles gunz blazing) in which it is designed to work. They are tested by looking at ALL use cases. And the stranger the usecase, the more cornercases of different mechanics you get to overlap, the harder to look. Because how it fares in those cases is actually how good a mechanic is. And if the mechanics change is to ship logout/disconnect, examples of logout/disconnect scenarios should not come as a surprise.
It is rarely relevant if you are not in a super. Supers are the only thing that can survive for that length of time (not including certain dread and carrier fittings); if you are found during your 15 min logoff timer and are not in a supercap, you are ****** either way unless it is the difference between being found 14 mins in or 14 mins 30 secs in. |
Alik Fall92
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:57:00 -
[1514] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Alik Fall92 wrote:i also just realized that two step, the famous exploiter of wh and breaker of game mechanics is ALSO CSM...
dear god CCP what have you done to this game...
hell following that line of progression, unban kugu and invite him to CSM also!
ANTHONY K FOR CSM 2012 Gäó http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/Read, then come back. Or have a long chat with the AHARM people involved (as I did recently); it is not all as it seems (besides that, two step himself was not involved in any way, shape, or form). two step for CSM(whatevernumberisnext) dont care, he helped break the game by being part of an expoloiting party that resulted in imba that ccp couldnt fix, he should get no support from community and should instead be banned like other game breaking people have been in the past
(kugu for example)
two step is nothing but a supporter of all that is wrong about this game, and should be classed with people from eve's dark past, banned forever and playing hello kitty online to ease his pain
GG CCPswarm, GG |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:02:00 -
[1515] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Vile rat wrote:Supercarriers were originally ships that were a modest increase over regular carriers and grotesquely priced as to be an end game ego ship. They were neat and something you pointed at "ooh look at that!" but not strategically important. Then they were improved dramatically and in doing so they became extremely popular, but also destabilizing. They evolved from being something that was a nice ego booster "Look at what we can make and field!" to something that was a critically important part of 0.0 warfare. Things reached a point where you simply could not compete on any appreciable level unless you fielded a large blob of these damn things and it is strangling the game. The rush to field supercaps fueled black market ISK dealing because people who used to show up and do things in dreads/carriers (battleships) no longer felt useful in the game and rushed to get a supercap by any means necessary.
This has been destructive to the game and the focus on supercaps being the end game content instead of one aspect of end game content had to be stopped. I believe these changes will make it so supercaps are still useful, but not the deciding factor in 0.0 combat. To be successful you must field a balanced fleet and if you can field a supercap fleet in addition to a balanced fleet you will be able to swing your super-dongs around just like you used to, but with a lot more caution.
And titans? They were garbage from the first iteration. They were a dumb idea, poorly implemented, and now they are still a dumb idea but slightly more killable. I would have loved to see some attention to titan gun tracking as well but this is a good first step towards bringing us back from a game where only the rich need apply.
Same can be said for standings and coalitions. You have groups that have 45000 members with individual allainces having close to 7000. The barrier for entry for a new group into 0.0 is too high. There is no way a new group can have any chance against a 7000 man alliance or its 45000 blues. Clearly coalitions and giant alliances are in need of a nerf. Its unfair and im sorry I know you spent years getting your group to this point but you are breaking the game. Were going to have to reduce your size and strength to level the playing field. No hard feelings its for the good of the game.
This is true, and this actually works towards that goal. If you cannot get a super blob atm, you are screwed; if you have one, you blue up everyone else that has them (or a significant portion) so that you don't lose them easily. Now, they are harder to use effectively, which could either reduce their value so that people are willing to use them without the blob, or increase the blob, but with more subcapitals in the blobs. Given server issues, this could potentially make people more willing to divide such that they can field both supers and subs without telling some supers to stay home (atm, they just tell the normal caps and subs to stay home, gotta have the biggest best fleet available, and gotta keep the super pilots busy and happy, **** capital and sub capital pilots for the most part these days).
If you hear, "Nah bro, we need some subcaps to keep the supers alive; we don't want another ******* super atm because of lag" you will get pissed and go somewhere where super pilots are more appreciated / needed, preferably fighting the assholes that told you that you could not use your toys.
Or it could cause more massive blobs, not too sure. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:03:00 -
[1516] - Quote
Alik Fall92 wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Alik Fall92 wrote:i also just realized that two step, the famous exploiter of wh and breaker of game mechanics is ALSO CSM...
dear god CCP what have you done to this game...
hell following that line of progression, unban kugu and invite him to CSM also!
ANTHONY K FOR CSM 2012 Gäó http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/Read, then come back. Or have a long chat with the AHARM people involved (as I did recently); it is not all as it seems (besides that, two step himself was not involved in any way, shape, or form). two step for CSM(whatevernumberisnext) dont care, he helped break the game by being part of an expoloiting party that resulted in imba that ccp couldnt fix, he should get no support from community and should instead be banned like other game breaking people have been in the past (kugu for example) two step is nothing but a supporter of all that is wrong about this game, and should be classed with people from eve's dark past, banned forever and playing hello kitty online to ease his pain GG CCPswarm, GG
You seem pretty angry at CCP you should probably stop supporting them by subscribing to and playing their games.
You should also give me all your stuff. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:03:00 -
[1517] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:Dont need to , thats why I have an alt. Anything I want to say, I say with my main. What are you afraid of? Aurora Egnald wrote:Posting under my alt does not take anyhting form what I have said. Except it does. There's always the implication therein that you don't have the spine to say with your main what you can say without hesitation on your alt. It basically puts across that you're ashamed of your ideas and opinions being associated with your main. Aurora Egnald wrote:This is about the poor and lower skilled pilots unwilling to train up for a SC. Then crying loud enough to ccp to do something about it because they are way to scared to venture out to null without someone holding ther hands or locking up the boogyman. I have in excess of 80m skillpoints and have the prerequisites to fly the supercarriers of two races. With a little bit of instruction I'd likely be able to fly one competently in combat. I have absolutely no desire to because I have no desire to shackle my soul to a several-billion dollar flying rock that will, inevitably, without a shadow of a doubt, die. From what I've seen of 0.0 combat, it was a lot more fun before motherships became supercarriers.
wow so taking a little security with my sc flying main diminishes what ive said huh? Seems it hasnt and your attempts to call me out have failed. Its called security.But since you admittedly dont fly one you dont unserstand the security required of an sc pilot identity as well. Again i stand by my point earlier this whole nerf is aobut the lower skilled/poor/unwilling/envious pilots who would rather not try and reach the status of sc pilot either because it takes too long or is too expensive but they darn sure want to kill one alot easier. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:04:00 -
[1518] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Same can be said for standings and coalitions. You have groups that have 45000 members with individual allainces having close to 7000. The barrier for entry for a new group into 0.0 is too high. There is no way a new group can have any chance against a 7000 man alliance or its 45000 blues. Clearly coalitions and giant alliances are in need of a nerf. Its unfair and im sorry I know you spent years getting your group to this point but you are breaking the game. Were going to have to reduce your size and strength to level the playing field. No hard feelings its for the good of the game.
blues blues blues blue blue blue bloobloobloobloobloobloo ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:06:00 -
[1519] - Quote
Alik Fall92 wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Alik Fall92 wrote:i also just realized that two step, the famous exploiter of wh and breaker of game mechanics is ALSO CSM...
dear god CCP what have you done to this game...
hell following that line of progression, unban kugu and invite him to CSM also!
ANTHONY K FOR CSM 2012 Gäó http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/Read, then come back. Or have a long chat with the AHARM people involved (as I did recently); it is not all as it seems (besides that, two step himself was not involved in any way, shape, or form). two step for CSM(whatevernumberisnext) dont care, he helped break the game by being part of an expoloiting party that resulted in imba that ccp couldnt fix, he should get no support from community and should instead be banned like other game breaking people have been in the past (kugu for example) two step is nothing but a supporter of all that is wrong about this game, and should be classed with people from eve's dark past, banned forever and playing hello kitty online to ease his pain GG CCPswarm, GG
Have you actually talked with the about what happened and how the GM stuff went? You do realize the GMs they were talking to about "exploit-or-no" with worked for CCP, right?
W-space is what is right with the game, null is broken. I am proud to support two step and believe that AHARM is a great group of people who ended up in trouble because of a misunderstanding with GMs who changed their minds repeatedly.
Also, **** the rules on GM correspondence. |
Alik Fall92
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:08:00 -
[1520] - Quote
any other supporters of exploits?
anyone?
no? |
|
Mr'Capsule
Furians World
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:08:00 -
[1521] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:I do not even know where to begin, and as a Hel pilot I have a pretty high resistance to tragedy.
Logout timer: this will increase the number of intentionally logged out supers (as counterintuitive as it is). An online supercapital can right now be held on the field by 3 things - dictor bubbles, hic point/bubble, anchored bubble. After this change, a drive-by shooting by an Ibis that gets off 2 shots (one for creating the timer, one for aggressing within that timer), means you have 30 minutes of infinitely-extendable aggression (remember the good old wreck-shooting). An aggressed supercapital should stay in space for 15 minutes (like now), and after that for as long as it is bubbled or hic-pointed. I'm not going to do the math if a tech 2 velator could actually kill a supercapital within 23 hours, but if it can't, then downtime is the ONLY thing saving the supercap. This in turn means a move back to a lot more aggression avoidance.
Supercarrier Dronetype change: Why not make Warrior IIs unfittable on battleships so the poor frigates do not get killed? I understand where the urge for this change comes from, but giving subcaps de facto immunity seems a bit much considered the only ships that can tackle them are destroyer/cruiser hulls. There is little shame losing a super to a well coordinated trap, but the absolutely only business a single planless dictor solo engaging a super has is dying - not being granted possibly infinite amounts of near-invulnerable time to figure out what to do next. 300m3 dronebay for 20 lights and 20 meds (or rep drones) should be considered. Yes there are battleships dying to solo frigates all the time - but they had the option to fit something that helps and did not do it.
Supercarrier Fighterbay Size: given how hard fighters and fighter-bombers are to field-resupply (short of jumping a cargo-rorqual into an ongoing battle lol), how near impossible they are to rep (locktime, indeterminate flightpath), and how easily they die, I see a lot of useless supers 10 minutes into any engagement they are accidentally deployed into in our future. Will they receive more HP / better resistances? Or will there be a supercarrier retcon to capital bombers with 600m ISK bombs that jump in, deploy and (hope to somehow) jump out?
Titan dronebay: Yes, those 375m3 were the one gamebreaking attribute they had. All is well now. Please move along, nothing to see here.
Siege module: since it doesn't really change anything but the time needed for pos-ops, good.
Dreadnought dronebay: I love this change, since with this I do not have to wait another year or two for the "hey look, my sentry drone bumped your dread 500km offgrid" bug to be fixed. The single tackling rifter is going to be annoying though.
SC/Titan HP nerf: if 20% of a Hel were the same as 20% of an Aeon, I could subscribe to this change, but even if the Hel stays as it is, the -20% Aeon would still have twice the EHP. Consequently, this just reads to me as "ALL MINMATAR - BEND OVER NOW." Analog for the Ragnarok.
Not in the blog but needed changes: Shield recharge: remove it from all capitals. Have capital shields behave like armor. Introduce +Capital Shield HP implant set (no drake/tengu love).
Hel bonus: either bring it inline with the other 3 supercarriers (offensive or defensive bonus), or fix its cap so it can actually use its bonus. +25% rep amount is ueless when you need twice the cap transfer amount of a nyx to not cap out (which gives you +100% rep and moar damage).
Dreadnought tracking: in theory, this would need a buff, but can be kept as is, since there will not be any big capital fights after this patch anyway.
Overall predictions for the proposed changes: - dreads will still only be used to reinforce towers (not finish), and with the 5min timers they will be harder to catch doing so. they will continue to not be used against anything that can't be one-cycled, since they remain extremely vulnerable to supers and have to, or supers will lose their last remaining role. Having nothing to fend off tacklers on their own does not help either.
- carriers basically same as above. main use emergency logistics and triage-pos-boost, although they may see the odd use for structure grinding if no fight is to be expected. Since they can still launch drones that can effectively fight fighterbombers, they may get fielded in 200+ quantities so they generate enough remote rep to neutralize and finish off any supers on the field.
- supers will largely vanish from the battlefield again, since having a support fleet changed from smart play to required necessity. This implies the total loss of your supers, if you do not have dominance of the subcap fight - at which point you do not really need to deploy supers anymore. Since this is true for both sides, noone will dare to make the first move (depending on their knowledge of game theory). Main use will be as a strategic deterrent against hostile dread/carrier deployments from within pos shields. Second most common usage will be parked on an inactive account. Highlight of the year might be a structure grind deployment if no hostile is logged in. CCP have no idea about supercapital balance, listen to the guy above and the points made by a lot of others in this thread |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:09:00 -
[1522] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Andreus Ixiris wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:Dont need to , thats why I have an alt. Anything I want to say, I say with my main. What are you afraid of? Aurora Egnald wrote:Posting under my alt does not take anyhting form what I have said. Except it does. There's always the implication therein that you don't have the spine to say with your main what you can say without hesitation on your alt. It basically puts across that you're ashamed of your ideas and opinions being associated with your main. Aurora Egnald wrote:This is about the poor and lower skilled pilots unwilling to train up for a SC. Then crying loud enough to ccp to do something about it because they are way to scared to venture out to null without someone holding ther hands or locking up the boogyman. I have in excess of 80m skillpoints and have the prerequisites to fly the supercarriers of two races. With a little bit of instruction I'd likely be able to fly one competently in combat. I have absolutely no desire to because I have no desire to shackle my soul to a several-billion dollar flying rock that will, inevitably, without a shadow of a doubt, die. From what I've seen of 0.0 combat, it was a lot more fun before motherships became supercarriers. wow so taking a little security with my sc flying main diminishes what ive said huh? Seems it hasnt and your attempts to call me out have failed. Its called security.But since you admittedly dont fly one you dont unserstand the security required of an sc pilot identity as well. Again i stand by my point earlier this whole nerf is aobut the lower skilled/poor/unwilling/envious pilots who would rather not try and reach the status of sc pilot either because it takes too long or is too expensive but they darn sure want to kill one alot easier.
If it is a security issue and you are afraid of a SC pilot getting searched for by locators, you must not appear on any killmails (otherwise your name is already out there). If you do not appear on any killmails, then you do not actually know what you are saying, and are talking out of your ass. |
Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
295
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:10:00 -
[1523] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Same can be said for standings and coalitions. You have groups that have 45000 members with individual allainces having close to 7000. The barrier for entry for a new group into 0.0 is too high. There is no way a new group can have any chance against a 7000 man alliance or its 45000 blues. Clearly coalitions and giant alliances are in need of a nerf. Its unfair and im sorry I know you spent years getting your group to this point but you are breaking the game. Were going to have to reduce your size and strength to level the playing field. No hard feelings its for the good of the game. blues blues blues blue blue blue bloobloobloobloobloobloo
Comeon bro its for the good of the game. I mean Mittens/Vile's motivation to promote supers being nerfed had no selfish motivation it was for the good of the game right. They should be on board with this change also. Unless you think that a new group wanting to enter 0.0 can assemble a force to have a chance against a force such as yours. Lets keep riding this wave of fairness bro. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:13:00 -
[1524] - Quote
CCP have no idea about supercapital balance, listen to the guy above and the points made by a lot of others in this thread[/quote]
On the implant set, just make crystals boost repair rate on armor and shields, while slaves boost armor and shield HP. If you only introduce a new set for shield EHP, you just ****** over active repping subcaps and you have to introduce a new group to drop them. Also, a shield tanking group drops implants for armor ehp (and high level armor modules), wtf CCP (I am aware that the Sansha ships used to armor tank btw, but after the changes, they should have been made a second source of officer invuls and shield modules, not that they could not also drop armor mods). |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:13:00 -
[1525] - Quote
I don't know about you but its a wave of tears that I'm riding on. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:16:00 -
[1526] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Thank you very very much for considering what our opinions are. This means a lot to me, and I want you to know that I am thankful, as I'm sure lots of other people are as well.
Even if I do not agree with all of the changes, seeing that you guys are actually reading this Threadnought and are open to suggestions helps restore my confidence in CCP. |
Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
295
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:17:00 -
[1527] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:I don't know about you but its a wave of tears that I'm riding on.
It is good stuff although whats better is the tears to come. Winter O Winter I await thee. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
758
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:17:00 -
[1528] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:I don't know about you but its a wave of tears that I'm riding on.
Sadly, its losing momentum already... The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die. |
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:20:00 -
[1529] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Carabusu wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Could not have said this better. Well put. Typical CCP Balancing = "Grab your axes boys...we're goin' nerfin!" This is seriously a sad thing. Trained my butt off for a LOOOOOONG time, spent billions of ISK, and now my Super Carrier will SIT in a POS doing NOTHING until there's a POS to shoot/rep ? At least before I could Rat to pass the time. Now, I can't even do that. You, CCP, should slow down a bit. Just the 3 ideas above definitely would have been enough to start. derp, you can still carry 20 fighters. Just not 20 fighters + 20 fighter bombers. Next.
lol the point was that you had to choose 20 Fighters or 20 Bombers which sucks. For those of us that ACTUALLY fly Super Carriers, we know first hand just how much of a PITA (Pain In The A**) it is to change out drones, especially Fighters/Bombers just due to their size alone.
I guess that you missed that part...
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
758
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:25:00 -
[1530] - Quote
Like i said
People are crying because they bought apples which tasted like strawberries only for the reason that they tasted like strawberries. And now that they're being made to taste like ******* apples, tears are flowing.
I always said to everybody not to buy supercarriers for the reasons they wanted to, because they would get nerfed. Those people would call me crazy and say CCP doesn't fix anything.
Who is laughing now huh... The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die. |
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:28:00 -
[1531] - Quote
Carabusu wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Carabusu wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Could not have said this better. Well put. Typical CCP Balancing = "Grab your axes boys...we're goin' nerfin!" This is seriously a sad thing. Trained my butt off for a LOOOOOONG time, spent billions of ISK, and now my Super Carrier will SIT in a POS doing NOTHING until there's a POS to shoot/rep ? At least before I could Rat to pass the time. Now, I can't even do that. You, CCP, should slow down a bit. Just the 3 ideas above definitely would have been enough to start. derp, you can still carry 20 fighters. Just not 20 fighters + 20 fighter bombers. Next. lol the point was that you had to choose 20 Fighters or 20 Bombers which sucks. For those of us that ACTUALLY fly Super Carriers, we know first hand just how much of a PITA (Pain In The A**) it is to change out drones, especially Fighters/Bombers just due to their size alone. I guess that you missed that part...
I know, the point is that there is a choice, unlike what you said initially. Also, if you are ratting with fighters, have a pos in system and store the unused FBs there. |
Airu Naari
The Noxious
98
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:30:00 -
[1532] - Quote
I can't begin to say how happy this makes me. CCP is on to something good this time! And +1 @ Renan's post above. :D |
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:34:00 -
[1533] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Carabusu wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Carabusu wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Could not have said this better. Well put. Typical CCP Balancing = "Grab your axes boys...we're goin' nerfin!" This is seriously a sad thing. Trained my butt off for a LOOOOOONG time, spent billions of ISK, and now my Super Carrier will SIT in a POS doing NOTHING until there's a POS to shoot/rep ? At least before I could Rat to pass the time. Now, I can't even do that. You, CCP, should slow down a bit. Just the 3 ideas above definitely would have been enough to start. derp, you can still carry 20 fighters. Just not 20 fighters + 20 fighter bombers. Next. lol the point was that you had to choose 20 Fighters or 20 Bombers which sucks. For those of us that ACTUALLY fly Super Carriers, we know first hand just how much of a PITA (Pain In The A**) it is to change out drones, especially Fighters/Bombers just due to their size alone. I guess that you missed that part... I know, the point is that there is a choice, unlike what you said initially. Also, if you are ratting with fighters, have a pos in system and store the unused FBs there.
Well, the point about storage is moot as the change seems to be fairly certain at this point. Maybe I didn't type what I was thinking, but all I ever did was agree with the guy when he was talking about how lame it was that you had to choose between 20 fighters or 20 bombers.
Judging by the fact that you seem to have input and an opinion on every page that I've been reading since before page 70, I'm going to just save you the trouble and say "You're right I'm wrong..."
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:37:00 -
[1534] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:I do not even know where to begin, and as a Hel pilot I have a pretty high resistance to tragedy.
Logout timer: this will increase the number of intentionally logged out supers (as counterintuitive as it is). An online supercapital can right now be held on the field by 3 things - dictor bubbles, hic point/bubble, anchored bubble. After this change, a drive-by shooting by an Ibis that gets off 2 shots (one for creating the timer, one for aggressing within that timer), means you have 30 minutes of infinitely-extendable aggression (remember the good old wreck-shooting). An aggressed supercapital should stay in space for 15 minutes (like now), and after that for as long as it is bubbled or hic-pointed. I'm not going to do the math if a tech 2 velator could actually kill a supercapital within 23 hours, but if it can't, then downtime is the ONLY thing saving the supercap. This in turn means a move back to a lot more aggression avoidance.
Supercarrier Dronetype change: Why not make Warrior IIs unfittable on battleships so the poor frigates do not get killed? I understand where the urge for this change comes from, but giving subcaps de facto immunity seems a bit much considered the only ships that can tackle them are destroyer/cruiser hulls. There is little shame losing a super to a well coordinated trap, but the absolutely only business a single planless dictor solo engaging a super has is dying - not being granted possibly infinite amounts of near-invulnerable time to figure out what to do next. 300m3 dronebay for 20 lights and 20 meds (or rep drones) should be considered. Yes there are battleships dying to solo frigates all the time - but they had the option to fit something that helps and did not do it.
Supercarrier Fighterbay Size: given how hard fighters and fighter-bombers are to field-resupply (short of jumping a cargo-rorqual into an ongoing battle lol), how near impossible they are to rep (locktime, indeterminate flightpath), and how easily they die, I see a lot of useless supers 10 minutes into any engagement they are accidentally deployed into in our future. Will they receive more HP / better resistances? Or will there be a supercarrier retcon to capital bombers with 600m ISK bombs that jump in, deploy and (hope to somehow) jump out?
Titan dronebay: Yes, those 375m3 were the one gamebreaking attribute they had. All is well now. Please move along, nothing to see here.
Siege module: since it doesn't really change anything but the time needed for pos-ops, good.
Dreadnought dronebay: I love this change, since with this I do not have to wait another year or two for the "hey look, my sentry drone bumped your dread 500km offgrid" bug to be fixed. The single tackling rifter is going to be annoying though.
SC/Titan HP nerf: if 20% of a Hel were the same as 20% of an Aeon, I could subscribe to this change, but even if the Hel stays as it is, the -20% Aeon would still have twice the EHP. Consequently, this just reads to me as "ALL MINMATAR - BEND OVER NOW." Analog for the Ragnarok.
Not in the blog but needed changes: Shield recharge: remove it from all capitals. Have capital shields behave like armor. Introduce +Capital Shield HP implant set (no drake/tengu love).
Hel bonus: either bring it inline with the other 3 supercarriers (offensive or defensive bonus), or fix its cap so it can actually use its bonus. +25% rep amount is ueless when you need twice the cap transfer amount of a nyx to not cap out (which gives you +100% rep and moar damage).
Dreadnought tracking: in theory, this would need a buff, but can be kept as is, since there will not be any big capital fights after this patch anyway.
Overall predictions for the proposed changes: - dreads will still only be used to reinforce towers (not finish), and with the 5min timers they will be harder to catch doing so. they will continue to not be used against anything that can't be one-cycled, since they remain extremely vulnerable to supers and have to, or supers will lose their last remaining role. Having nothing to fend off tacklers on their own does not help either.
- carriers basically same as above. main use emergency logistics and triage-pos-boost, although they may see the odd use for structure grinding if no fight is to be expected. Since they can still launch drones that can effectively fight fighterbombers, they may get fielded in 200+ quantities so they generate enough remote rep to neutralize and finish off any supers on the field.
- supers will largely vanish from the battlefield again, since having a support fleet changed from smart play to required necessity. This implies the total loss of your supers, if you do not have dominance of the subcap fight - at which point you do not really need to deploy supers anymore. Since this is true for both sides, noone will dare to make the first move (depending on their knowledge of game theory). Main use will be as a strategic deterrent against hostile dread/carrier deployments from within pos shields. Second most common usage will be parked on an inactive account. Highlight of the year might be a structure grind deployment if no hostile is logged in.
^ This
This is very good content, well thought out, and I like this.
You should run for CSM :)
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:37:00 -
[1535] - Quote
Carabusu wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Carabusu wrote:[quote=Demon Azrakel][quote=Carabusu]
lol the point was that you had to choose 20 Fighters or 20 Bombers which sucks. For those of us that ACTUALLY fly Super Carriers, we know first hand just how much of a PITA (Pain In The A**) it is to change out drones, especially Fighters/Bombers just due to their size alone.
I guess that you missed that part... I know, the point is that there is a choice, unlike what you said initially. Also, if you are ratting with fighters, have a pos in system and store the unused FBs there. Well, the point about storage is moot as the change seems to be fairly certain at this point. Maybe I didn't type what I was thinking, but all I ever did was agree with the guy when he was talking about how lame it was that you had to choose between 20 fighters or 20 bombers. Judging by the fact that you seem to have input and an opinion on every page that I've been reading since before page 70, I'm going to just save you the trouble and say "You're right I'm wrong..."
It is all in motion, and they may have gone a little bit far either way.
|
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
407
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:37:00 -
[1536] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:Like i said
People are crying because they bought apples which tasted like strawberries only for the reason that they tasted like strawberries. And now that they're being made to taste like ******* apples, tears are flowing.
I always said to everybody not to buy supercarriers for the reasons they wanted to, because they would get nerfed. Those people would call me crazy and say CCP doesn't fix anything.
Who is laughing now huh...
+2
|
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:39:00 -
[1537] - Quote
When one skims this thread page per page to find CSM/DEV posts, one notices that it's mostly the same 10 guys posting over and over for the last couple dozens pages. Go out and catch some fresh air, fellows :D |
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:40:00 -
[1538] - Quote
Carabusu wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Carabusu wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:[quote=Carabusu]
lol the point was that you had to choose 20 Fighters or 20 Bombers which sucks. For those of us that ACTUALLY fly Super Carriers, we know first hand just how much of a PITA (Pain In The A**) it is to change out drones, especially Fighters/Bombers just due to their size alone.
I guess that you missed that part... I know, the point is that there is a choice, unlike what you said initially. Also, if you are ratting with fighters, have a pos in system and store the unused FBs there. Well, the point about storage is moot as the change seems to be fairly certain at this point. Maybe I didn't type what I was thinking, but all I ever did was agree with the guy when he was talking about how lame it was that you had to choose between 20 fighters or 20 bombers. Judging by the fact that you seem to have input and an opinion on every page that I've been reading since before page 70, I'm going to just save you the trouble and say "You're right I'm wrong..." It is all in motion, and they may have gone a little bit far either way.
Yeah for sure. I think at this point, everything that can be said, has been said and the best thing is to sit back and await the changes to hit SISI. Otherwise everything is just theorycraft and speculation.
For now, we know what CCP has on it's mind (or lack thereof for that matter), and the best thing the community can do is actually put some real thought into whats coming. Forego the mindless banter and personal opinion, and think big picture about what benefits the ENTIRE community. This includes everyone from the brand new account that is 2 hours old, to the seasoned 8 year old vet....
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
WarFireV
The Maverick Navy Against ALL Authorities
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:42:00 -
[1539] - Quote
Floydd Heywood wrote:When one skims this thread page per page to find CSM/DEV posts, one notices that it's mostly the same 10 guys posting over and over for the last couple dozens pages. Go out and catch some fresh air, fellows :D
No, they must stay and make there point heard to everyone! Everyone must know what a horrible/awesome expansion this is going to be!
Also it's pretty entertaining to watch. |
Zomg Panties
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:42:00 -
[1540] - Quote
Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:If you are looking for solopwnmobile yes. If you are loking for balanced pvp enviroment with alot of variety, then its best way.
Is best way lol, your insaine, a bunch of fail in shield tanked blaster prophecys with a dictor are able to kill a super after this patch, an the super is unable to do anything about it. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Supers/titans wont be fielded solo, an they wont be fielded in a system for more time than it takes them to jump out again after this patch. Supers/titans will purely be used to counter drop a capital target or lesser number of capital targets, wich yet again defeats the purpose of this patch supposedly being able to balance out super/titan fleet fights. Will do completely the opposite. Umad? I know it hurts when you have to grind your isk for solopwmobile by your own and then after it turns to be "fleet ship", but deal with it. Its better for balance and pvp enviroment. But tbh supercaps deserved much bigger hit.
please stop trolling you must be a 5 mill skill point character, nothing you say makes sense, nobody with any common sense who is actually good at nullsec pvp would say any of the things you say - it's so easy to kill a super carrier that I laugh at your level of fail
go troll the carebear online forums noob |
|
SuperBeastie
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:42:00 -
[1541] - Quote
Why cant ships that are the size of a mach dock make the super carrier models bigger!!!! |
Dunn Idaho
Core Impulse FEARLESS.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:43:00 -
[1542] - Quote
Personally I would like to see a some further changes to the dreads and the siege mod. Instead of the active rep bonus it has now, it would be better if it increased its resistance when in siege so they could tank a DD or two. Since hitting siege is like going into reinforced mode. (kinda like em POS's)
The active tank bonus was prolly fine back in the day when there was less caps around, and caps where rare in general. Nowadays its all about the blobs and the EHP in large battles, and the siege module should reflect that and the "modern" eve warfare.
And yeah, give us atleast 20/20 on the fighterbombers/fighters if we cant have any other drones.
|
Carabusu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:43:00 -
[1543] - Quote
Floydd Heywood wrote:When one skims this thread page per page to find CSM/DEV posts, one notices that it's mostly the same 10 guys posting over and over for the last couple dozens pages. Go out and catch some fresh air, fellows :D
hehe, well, a lot of us have a vested interest in this man. Whether it's because of the sheer amount of training that went into the SC/Titan, or the ISK, or any combination in between, it's somewhat important. Sure, it's just internet spaceships at the end of the day, but anyone that has EARNED the ISK to sit in a Super will tell you it's important to them. That's not even touching on the point at hand which is those that have been fighting against the SC/Titan super blobs. They have their own vested interest in forward motion.
It's all good conversation. Gotta let it all ride.
_______________________________________ Fly Well, Kill Many The Busu |
Neterti Axexut
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 22:51:00 -
[1544] - Quote
SCs needed to be rebalanced. They were overpowered. But now, for all the reasons in this thread, SCs are reduced to specific purpose T2 Carriers. Many people here have already offered great suggestions, so I wonGÇÖt beat a dead horse.
Titans got it worse TBH. The biggest, baddest ship in the game just became more of a mobile JB then it was before. Yes: The gunboat titans can still hit a BS, but will have a hard time killing anything else. And the DD, even after the HP nerf of SCs, is not sufficient to do meaningful damage against a SC. (Yes GÇô I know it was not intended for a solo SC / Titan brawl)
An idea that should work would be to allow DDs to fire at anything (like before) but apply some sig radius effect on the target ship. The DD would do full damage against a titan or SC, less against a dread or carrier, less still on a BS and so on. (I would suggest some script to allow an AOE DD that applies damage with even greater sig-radius related damage reducing effect, but not in the mood to dodge all the items thrown at me ATM)
And the Leviathan has specifically gotten it the worst of all: Very limited ability to hit any moving target with the Citadels (worse than the gunboat titans) and no ability to increase that chance like the other titans can through tracking enhancing mods.
Finally, the HP nerf makes it all the more important to either 1) fix the way the shield bonuses are applied so we donGÇÖt jump in at 75% shields, and / or 2) give us some Capital-class Shield equivalent to the slave set. This would help the unfortunate shield tanking SCs and titans and get us up to par with the armor tankers.
(Yes - I fly an Aeon and a Levi) |
InnerDrive
Shiva Initiative Mercenaries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:08:00 -
[1545] - Quote
The tracking on dreads seriously needs to be looked at , currently a dread has huge issues hitting a titan of supercarrier moving at full speed , especialy if those have a MWD fitted. |
Korvin
Shadow Kingdom Best Alliance
346
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:10:00 -
[1546] - Quote
I'm sorry to ask, but what is the system of these changes? What is the goal? Can you define the role of capital ships?
I remember there was a role of Dreadnoughts as a mobile structure to fight another static structures called POSes. Subcap fleet was needed to defend them in siege.
TBH, instead of making dread siege 5 min - you should make other capitals effective only in siege/triage. instead of removing normal drones from carriers, you should change them the way, when they could release their fighters only in triage.
Motherships and Titans are still capitals, so they should operate in full power only in siege, or they will be overpowered or useless at all.
__________________________________ Member of CSM 4&5, your CSM 7 candidate. |
fenistil
1st. Legion
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:13:00 -
[1547] - Quote
WHAT ABOUT HYBRID REBALANCE?
What good does Moros do with 25% extra ROF if it can only hit capitals and structures in 20km Radius? What is the radius of large towers? 30km? So a Moros will already operate in Falloff at 0 on the shields and might not even reach the guns on the other side say 60-70km from it?
HYBRID SUCKS ATM, PLEASE GIVE IT SOME LOVE!!
And yes I am getting very very annoyed by this, give us a hint on hybrid rebalance and nothing seems to be happening with it! EVE is of 3 races right now not 4! |
Mad Moxie
NerdHerd En Garde
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:16:00 -
[1548] - Quote
InnerDrive wrote:The tracking on dreads seriously needs to be looked at , currently a dread has huge issues hitting a titan of supercarrier moving at full speed , especialy if those have a MWD fitted.
Are you a complete ****** ? why would you ever fit a mwd to a titan/sc ??? and another thing is the sig rad bonus of using the mwd would make it easyer to hit |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:21:00 -
[1549] - Quote
fenistil wrote:WHAT ABOUT HYBRID REBALANCE?What good does Moros do with 25% extra ROF if it can only hit capitals and structures in 20km Radius? What is the radius of large towers? 30km? So a Moros will already operate in Falloff at 0 on the shields and might not even reach the guns on the other side say 60-70km from it? HYBRID SUCKS ATM, PLEASE GIVE IT SOME LOVE!! And yes I am getting very very annoyed by this, give us a hint on hybrid rebalance and nothing seems to be happening with it! EVE is of 3 races right now not 4!
CCP/goons doesnt care about hybrid. This is all about killing off supers A real highsec carebear. |
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:30:00 -
[1550] - Quote
[quote=Demon AzrakelIf it is a security issue and you are afraid of a SC pilot getting searched for by locators, you must not appear on any killmails (otherwise your name is already out there). If you do not appear on any killmails, then you do not actually know what you are saying, and are talking out of your ass.[/quote]
Again I said earlier buff the dreads leave the supercarriers alone. Too bad you dont like me posting through an alt.. I still stand by what I posted earlier. This whole sc "balancing" benefits the lower skilled players at the expense of the people who have invested in sc's, both the builders and pilots of them. |
|
InnerDrive
Shiva Initiative Mercenaries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:31:00 -
[1551] - Quote
Mad Moxie wrote:InnerDrive wrote:The tracking on dreads seriously needs to be looked at , currently a dread has huge issues hitting a titan of supercarrier moving at full speed , especialy if those have a MWD fitted. Are you a complete ****** ? why would you ever fit a mwd to a titan/sc ??? and another thing is the sig rad bonus of using the mwd would make it easyer to hit
Someone needs to play the game some more and than come back and post here. 2 reasons why titans/supercarriers fit mwds. 1. to get out of range of a hostile capital fleet faster. 2. to move faster than dreads can track.
A nyx for example moves at 137ms with a mwd and at 88ms without one. (notice you cant web supercarriers or titans either) |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:36:00 -
[1552] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:
So, we have this super carrier problem in 0.0 and this nerf is going to address this issue. In general I agree with it and most of the changes are good and I think they will put an end to the current problem
So what exactly is the problem? That Goonswarm and TEST can't send legions of low SP battlecruiser pilots accross 0.0 and disrupt all sov and take what they want?
|
Sinc
x13 Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:38:00 -
[1553] - Quote
So basically all the guys who rmt the isk away they earned in the "north" now got ccp to nerf everyone else who actually used the isk on better ships...
It yet again show eve is more meta-gaming then ingame ... just get the devs to change the game, so you dont have to work for it ingame. .:Sinc:. |
Officer Nyota Uhura
213
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:43:00 -
[1554] - Quote
Elisha Starkiller wrote:having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start...
This, honestly. |
Mr Sado
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:46:00 -
[1555] - Quote
I thought the fighter nerf was the right direction, cuz supers have important role in sov taking and fighting other large ships.... let the standard carriers and subcaps keep their important roles as pvp ships.
Mr Sado
Blackwater USA Inc. Against All Authorities
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:50:00 -
[1556] - Quote
Korvin wrote: I'm sorry to ask, but what is the system of these changes? What is the goal? Can you define the role of capital ships?
That is the problem here, what are the ships supposed to do?
Dreads - Cheap (relatively) damage, at close range, and un-mitigatable damage at long range Carriers - Heavy remote repair support - light anti subcap support. Supercarriers - Heavy Anti Capital ship Titan - Break up RR blobs and provide additional damage and support for the fleet.
The question is, should these be their roles, and do they currently perform these roles well? |
Mr Sado
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:58:00 -
[1557] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
A change to fighter bombers for sure though right? Mr Sado
Blackwater USA Inc. Against All Authorities
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:58:00 -
[1558] - Quote
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Elisha Starkiller wrote:having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start... This, honestly.
Why "This honestly"?
Okay so let me get the quote straight, you were part of a small gang that got hot dropped by bigger ships and it wasn't fun. Okay so assuming you have been part of other small gangs, lets say 10 or less people, you have probably camped some gates, baited someone into aggression, set up drag bubbles. Okay so with this small gang of lets just say 8 ships you have probably killed the "lone battleship" traveling, the hauler that jumped in, the hulk in a belt, the guy looking for a solo fight on a station who you baited into aggression and then jumped 8 ships on top of. Was it fun for those players who got "ganked" by your small gang? Should your small gang ships be nerfed cause they overpowered a weaker force?
So you fly around and happily "gank" people in you small gang but when it comes time for someone to **** in your Cheerios you want to cry that stuff needs nerfed. How many people have you and your small gang killed in which the fight was clearly not fair? Like your 5 BS two logi and a falcon just completely wipe someone, with no chance. That's just fine with you, but when you get wiped you want to cry "overpowered" and "nerf it" and "that wasn't fair, this is bullshit". Welcome to what should be the sandbox in EVE. |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
791
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:59:00 -
[1559] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:wow so taking a little security with my sc flying main diminishes what ive said huh? Seems it hasnt and your attempts to call me out have failed. Its called security.But since you admittedly dont fly one you dont unserstand the security required of an sc pilot identity as well.
It doesn't change the fact that any opinion you can't stand behind with your main is an opinion that has no real support behind it. Just because you don't support a supercap nerf doesn't neccessarily mean you're a supercap pilot. Are you seriously egotistical enough to think that of the thousands of people who've posted in this thread, they're going to scrape every name and run a locator agent just to see if they're in space in a nullsec system? No-one in this thread even knew your main was a supercarrier pilot until you told us.
Nice job on that. Callout successfully made.
Aurora Egnald wrote:Again i stand by my point earlier this whole nerf is aobut the lower skilled/poor/unwilling/envious pilots who would rather not try and reach the status of sc pilot either because it takes too long or is too expensive but they darn sure want to kill one alot easier.
I'm a high-skilled player who thinks being a supercap pilot would be boring, and I think supercaps are imbalanced in their current state. Sucks for you that however much you whine, this nerf will be made and there's not much you can do about it. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
Mr Sado
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:01:00 -
[1560] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Korvin wrote: I'm sorry to ask, but what is the system of these changes? What is the goal? Can you define the role of capital ships?
That is the problem here, what are the ships supposed to do? Dreads - Cheap (relatively) damage, at close range, and un-mitigatable damage at long range Carriers - Heavy remote repair support - light anti subcap support. Supercarriers - Heavy Anti Capital ship Titan - Break up RR blobs and provide additional damage and support for the fleet. The question is, should these be their roles, and do they currently perform these roles well?
I think thats a great summary.... but yea add Sov Flipping to Supercarrier role.... cuz thats what it should be...
Our bomber fleet got welped by a supercapital fleet (that had no sub cap support), Fighters should not be able to scratch frigates.... and I hope that is a change that can still happen. Also... getting instantly locked by a supercarrier....
Wouldn't it make sense that if a ship is immune to e-war, that it not be able to use e-war or remote sensor boosting? Just seems like common sense to fix that.
Mr Sado
Blackwater USA Inc. Against All Authorities
|
|
Avon
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
136
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:07:00 -
[1561] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Avon wrote:I have read you post this many times in this thread, but I don't understand the basis of your argument.
Are you saying that ships should not be better just because they are more expensive? Yes. But more importantly, I'm saying that there is a one-way relationship, and it's not in the direction people tend to want to use it. And this a rather important point to make: I'm not saying that cost and performance are completely unrelated, I'm just saying that you cannot balance performance with cost. Instead, cost should (probably) be a result of performance. Better-performing ship GåÆ Higher cost. The beauty of this relationship is that a working market will make it happen automatically. Better performance will lead to higher popularity, which leads to higher demand, which drives prices up. So you don't even have to pick the base price all that well for the whole thing to work. Yes, in designing the ship, it is a good idea to ensure that if it outperforms some other ship, it also requires more expensive and/or exclusive parts, but that is only the beginning, and again: it is the performance that should determine the price, not the other way around, not even a little bit. The problem is that this often leads to the fallacy (viz. affirming the consequent) that Higher cost GåÆ Better Performance. That is not the case. Higher cost does not lead to, explain, promise, justify or in any way promote better performance. It is not a factor in deciding the performance. At most, you can look at low cost and conclude that the performance isn't stellar, but that is still not a causal relationship GÇö the low cost does not cause low performance. Rather, the low cost is caused by a (relatively) worse ship. It is still not a factor GÇö it's just an indicator. More importantly, cost is never an excuse for overpoweredness GÇö in fact, it rather proves that there is a balance issue that needs to be addressed, because the price wouldn't go as high if it weren't.
That's a long but terrible argument.
If a ship actually costs more to produce then it *should* have some advantage, otherwise why bother?
We aren't talking about a game where everything has the same base cost and the only factor dictating price is demand. The cost of a ship (rather than the price) really does need to be considered as an element of balance. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:10:00 -
[1562] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Elisha Starkiller wrote:having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start... This, honestly. Why "This honestly"? Okay so let me get the quote straight, you were part of a small gang that got hot dropped by bigger ships and it wasn't fun. Okay so assuming you have been part of other small gangs, lets say 10 or less people, you have probably camped some gates, baited someone into aggression, set up drag bubbles. Okay so with this small gang of lets just say 8 ships you have probably killed the "lone battleship" traveling, the hauler that jumped in, the hulk in a belt, the guy looking for a solo fight on a station who you baited into aggression and then jumped 8 ships on top of. Was it fun for those players who got "ganked" by your small gang? Should your small gang ships be nerfed cause they overpowered a weaker force? So you fly around and happily "gank" people in you small gang but when it comes time for someone to **** in your Cheerios you want to cry that stuff needs nerfed. How many people have you and your small gang killed in which the fight was clearly not fair? Like your 5 BS two logi and a falcon just completely wipe someone, with no chance. That's just fine with you, but when you get wiped you want to cry "overpowered" and "nerf it" and "that wasn't fair, this is bullshit". Welcome to what should be the sandbox in EVE. The problem is that to a supercarrier, a 30 man fleet is still a "weaker force" in fact, the Aeon can drop in on a fleet, blow stuff up and log off with no danger because you need to be able to do > 55,000 DPS to kill it before it mystically disappears, that means that even if we counter your supercarrier with 6 of our own WE STILL DONT KILL YOU
If you want to deploy your "tier 6 gear" with no consequences and no fear of losing anything WOW is =======================> This way |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:13:00 -
[1563] - Quote
fenistil wrote:WHAT ABOUT HYBRID REBALANCE?What good does Moros do with 25% extra ROF if it can only hit capitals and structures in 20km Radius? What is the radius of large towers? 30km? So a Moros will already operate in Falloff at 0 on the shields and might not even reach the guns on the other side say 60-70km from it? HYBRID SUCKS ATM, PLEASE GIVE IT SOME LOVE!! And yes I am getting very very annoyed by this, give us a hint on hybrid rebalance and nothing seems to be happening with it! EVE is of 3 races right now not 4!
I am all for a hybrid buff, but if you think the blaster Moros can only hit at 20km, you are an idiot (Source: Moros Pilot who has hit targets at 120km + with blasters).
I have shot a lot of pos, and I still tend to do highest damage to large towers in a blaster moros (Blasters are rather useful in w-space, just sayin).
FYI, blaster moros can use uranium at 30 km or so without any optimal scripts, try using plutonium and 2x optimal scripts for lolawesome dps on poses.
There are two sizes of hybrids that work properly: small and XL. The XL work because when turrets were nerfed in Dominion, the blasters were not and the optimal was actually increased to make them more effective at shooting poses.
Honestly, I am jizzing in my pod thinking about what these changes will do to my Moros.
But, sure, argue that they will not be OP, I could use even more than the 1.47x multiplier these notes say I get.
On a different note, my Triage pilot is rather worried by this turn of events... |
Dunn Idaho
Core Impulse FEARLESS.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:13:00 -
[1564] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Elisha Starkiller wrote:having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start... This, honestly. Why "This honestly"? Okay so let me get the quote straight, you were part of a small gang that got hot dropped by bigger ships and it wasn't fun. Okay so assuming you have been part of other small gangs, lets say 10 or less people, you have probably camped some gates, baited someone into aggression, set up drag bubbles. Okay so with this small gang of lets just say 8 ships you have probably killed the "lone battleship" traveling, the hauler that jumped in, the hulk in a belt, the guy looking for a solo fight on a station who you baited into aggression and then jumped 8 ships on top of. Was it fun for those players who got "ganked" by your small gang? Should your small gang ships be nerfed cause they overpowered a weaker force? So you fly around and happily "gank" people in you small gang but when it comes time for someone to **** in your Cheerios you want to cry that stuff needs nerfed. How many people have you and your small gang killed in which the fight was clearly not fair? Like your 5 BS two logi and a falcon just completely wipe someone, with no chance. That's just fine with you, but when you get wiped you want to cry "overpowered" and "nerf it" and "that wasn't fair, this is bullshit". Welcome to what should be the sandbox in EVE.
Reminds me of Derelik ;)
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:14:00 -
[1565] - Quote
Avon wrote:If a ship actually costs more to produce then it *should* have some advantage, otherwise why bother?
We aren't talking about a game where everything has the same base cost and the only factor dictating price is demand. The cost of a ship (rather than the price) really does need to be considered as an element of balance.
Thats not right . . . in fact nobody would make a game like that or everyone would only just rush to the biggest and baddest ship which is what is happening now.
In StarCraft, marines (a tier 1 unit) are still viable against Voidrays (a tier 4 unit) in fact, marines are what you want to use against voidrays.
This isnt WoW where everyone rushes to level 85 because 85 is arbitrarily better than 84
In this game More expensive != More Powerful |
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:16:00 -
[1566] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:wow so taking a little security with my sc flying main diminishes what ive said huh? Seems it hasnt and your attempts to call me out have failed. Its called security.But since you admittedly dont fly one you dont unserstand the security required of an sc pilot identity as well. It doesn't change the fact that any opinion you can't stand behind with your main is an opinion that has no real support behind it. Just because you don't support a supercap nerf doesn't neccessarily mean you're a supercap pilot. Are you seriously egotistical enough to think that of the thousands of people who've posted in this thread, they're going to scrape every name and run a locator agent just to see if they're in space in a nullsec system? No-one in this thread even knew your main was a supercarrier pilot until you told us. Nice job on that. Callout successfully made. Aurora Egnald wrote:Again i stand by my point earlier this whole nerf is aobut the lower skilled/poor/unwilling/envious pilots who would rather not try and reach the status of sc pilot either because it takes too long or is too expensive but they darn sure want to kill one alot easier. I'm a high-skilled player who thinks being a supercap pilot would be boring, and I think supercaps are imbalanced in their current state. Sucks for you that however much you whine, this nerf will be made and there's not much you can do about it.
well touche on that one I thought it was obvious by the way I was defending sc's. Still already parts of the nerf have been scaled back(Fighter tracking) according to the devs and hopefully they will listen to reason on removing drones from sc's as well .Limiting an sc's ability to deploy regular drones is akin to making a domi only able to fly heavy drones. One poster said it quite well about the 900 mil carrier being able to defend itself form smaller ships while the 18 bil mothership cant. me thinks the devs went overboard with the full intention of scaling it back just to say see we didnt totally screw the sc pilots.Wink Wink |
FearOwns
GR3Y N0MADS
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:16:00 -
[1567] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Anile8er wrote:Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Elisha Starkiller wrote:having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start... This, honestly. Why "This honestly"? Okay so let me get the quote straight, you were part of a small gang that got hot dropped by bigger ships and it wasn't fun. Okay so assuming you have been part of other small gangs, lets say 10 or less people, you have probably camped some gates, baited someone into aggression, set up drag bubbles. Okay so with this small gang of lets just say 8 ships you have probably killed the "lone battleship" traveling, the hauler that jumped in, the hulk in a belt, the guy looking for a solo fight on a station who you baited into aggression and then jumped 8 ships on top of. Was it fun for those players who got "ganked" by your small gang? Should your small gang ships be nerfed cause they overpowered a weaker force? So you fly around and happily "gank" people in you small gang but when it comes time for someone to **** in your Cheerios you want to cry that stuff needs nerfed. How many people have you and your small gang killed in which the fight was clearly not fair? Like your 5 BS two logi and a falcon just completely wipe someone, with no chance. That's just fine with you, but when you get wiped you want to cry "overpowered" and "nerf it" and "that wasn't fair, this is bullshit". Welcome to what should be the sandbox in EVE. The problem is that to a supercarrier, a 30 man fleet is still a "weaker force" in fact, the Aeon can drop in on a fleet, blow stuff up and log off with no danger because you need to be able to do > 55,000 DPS to kill it before it mystically disappears, that means that even if we counter your supercarrier with 6 of our own WE STILL DONT KILL YOU If you want to deploy your "tier 6 gear" with no consequences and no fear of losing anything WOW is =======================> This way
I agree with the proposed log off mechanic change, if I drop my aeon there should always be a chance its my last.
With this change, are you telling me you and 29 of your friends could not kill a lone supercarrier before downtime rolls around? If this is a problem, then your obviously playing the game wrong to begin with.
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:19:00 -
[1568] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Anile8er wrote:Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Elisha Starkiller wrote:having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start... This, honestly. Why "This honestly"? Okay so let me get the quote straight, you were part of a small gang that got hot dropped by bigger ships and it wasn't fun. Okay so assuming you have been part of other small gangs, lets say 10 or less people, you have probably camped some gates, baited someone into aggression, set up drag bubbles. Okay so with this small gang of lets just say 8 ships you have probably killed the "lone battleship" traveling, the hauler that jumped in, the hulk in a belt, the guy looking for a solo fight on a station who you baited into aggression and then jumped 8 ships on top of. Was it fun for those players who got "ganked" by your small gang? Should your small gang ships be nerfed cause they overpowered a weaker force? So you fly around and happily "gank" people in you small gang but when it comes time for someone to **** in your Cheerios you want to cry that stuff needs nerfed. How many people have you and your small gang killed in which the fight was clearly not fair? Like your 5 BS two logi and a falcon just completely wipe someone, with no chance. That's just fine with you, but when you get wiped you want to cry "overpowered" and "nerf it" and "that wasn't fair, this is bullshit". Welcome to what should be the sandbox in EVE. The problem is that to a supercarrier, a 30 man fleet is still a "weaker force" in fact, the Aeon can drop in on a fleet, blow stuff up and log off with no danger because you need to be able to do > 55,000 DPS to kill it before it mystically disappears, that means that even if we counter your supercarrier with 6 of our own WE STILL DONT KILL YOU If you want to deploy your "tier 6 gear" with no consequences and no fear of losing anything WOW is =======================> This way
Wow really? How would a single Aeon or any supercap for that matter hold down a 30 man gang? Wouldn't the players of the 30 man gang be pretty stupid for not warping off if there was just that much ganking coming down from that Aeon? Aeons and all supercaps have 30-40 mid slots for warp disruptors and sensor boosters and webs. And I would not drop my Nyx on a 30 man BS gang because there is a pretty good chance that I would die in under 15 minutes. Oh wait I forgot supercaps have MILLIONS of capacitor points don't they.... Right, like I said I would probably get neuted out and killed in under 15 minutes. |
Sir Rup
x13 Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:19:00 -
[1569] - Quote
The problem as i see it is the fact that with this nerf Eny given alliance is gonna Win by numbers .. if you jump in a pretty standard fleet of 200 battleships or battelcruisers with logi ect and say 40 supers ... you lose the subcap fight to a bigger alliance you basicly just lost all 40 supers .. all they have to do is bubble them (supers can't hit them) and then proceed to agress every super now and then .. that gives them Hours and hours to kill all of them .... i dont see enyone winning on this nerf but the alliances that refuces to spend isk on supers . wich wierd enough is the same people complaining that they are too powerfull .. |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:21:00 -
[1570] - Quote
Dunn Idaho wrote:Anile8er wrote:Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Elisha Starkiller wrote:having been part of a small gang that has had supers dropped on it... no fun and with no consequence to them as if we called in intel they would just log off.. NOT ANY MORE!!! hahahaahhahahahaahha
now super pilots will need to really think before diving into a fight and thats what it needed, everyone knows that this will not be final, never is with ccp but it is a good start... This, honestly. Why "This honestly"? Okay so let me get the quote straight, you were part of a small gang that got hot dropped by bigger ships and it wasn't fun. Okay so assuming you have been part of other small gangs, lets say 10 or less people, you have probably camped some gates, baited someone into aggression, set up drag bubbles. Okay so with this small gang of lets just say 8 ships you have probably killed the "lone battleship" traveling, the hauler that jumped in, the hulk in a belt, the guy looking for a solo fight on a station who you baited into aggression and then jumped 8 ships on top of. Was it fun for those players who got "ganked" by your small gang? Should your small gang ships be nerfed cause they overpowered a weaker force? So you fly around and happily "gank" people in you small gang but when it comes time for someone to **** in your Cheerios you want to cry that stuff needs nerfed. How many people have you and your small gang killed in which the fight was clearly not fair? Like your 5 BS two logi and a falcon just completely wipe someone, with no chance. That's just fine with you, but when you get wiped you want to cry "overpowered" and "nerf it" and "that wasn't fair, this is bullshit". Welcome to what should be the sandbox in EVE. Reminds me of Derelik ;)
They hot dropped us with carriers first, they just picked the wrong gang to drop carriers on. =)
I'm sure they are whinning on here too Dunn.
"Oh supercarriers need nerfed, we hot dropped a 4 man BS gang with 3 carriers, and it went south when they counter dropped us with 4 Super carriers." |
|
Balor Haliquin
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:24:00 -
[1571] - Quote
So at the risk of this not being read by any developer. I would like to point out a major flaw in the current balancing of super capital ships in eve. Super carriers are still to powerful. Having fought 300 man super capital fleets and understanding how they work the super carrier was always the more threatening then the titan. Simply because it has more effective DPS, had a better ECM system, and often had the same EHP as the titan for 16th the cost.
Looking at the cost end of the spectrum we see that a super carrier takes about 1billion isk in skills, about 4 months in training time to become effective and then another 17 billion isk for the hull and fittings. Contrast that with a titan that costs about 7 billion isk in skills and around a year to train for so that your can do more then just sit in it. You can understand why super carriers are out numbering titans by nearly 20 to 1. Simply put even with the nerfs and the super carriers inability to engage sub caps effectively, they are still going to be a better anti capital ships because they still have nerly the same EHP and can remote rep each other.
With the current glut of super carriers, you will not see dread fleets because the super carrier fleet is simply going to wipe the floor with the dread fleet. Anything not supported by super carriers becomes an easy target for super carriers and carriers. The simple fact is that the super carrier has too big of a performance envelope.
Looking at the current and proposed EHP stats you can see that the super carrier is equal to the titans EHP. While only requiring a quarter of the resources and a thrid of the time to train for. If we were to put that in sub capital terms we would be looking at a T1 cruiser that has the same EHP and firepower as a battleship, but with none of the draw backs of cost and training time. Either the DPS or the EHP, or both. Honestly i like the idea of a super carrier that has huge firepower but is not a solid rock of hit points. Remember that super carrier can remote repair each other and more often then not when you have 100 of them on field you simply can not break the remote repair tank on them even if you have 100 of your own super carriers hitting them.
If we take the reduced hit points of the titan (about 42 million EHP)and super carrier(about 41 million ehp) assuming both are dead space fit and slave implants. And we compare that to how many carrier it takes to build each (about 62 for a titan and 16 for a super carrier). We then take the Titans EHP and divide it by the number of carriers it takes and we get 677,419 EHP. we then multiply that by the number of carriers it takes to make a super carrier and we get 10,838,709 EHP. That is about where the super carrier should be sitting.
But because of the efficiencies of construction, i think a number of about 14,500,000 EHP is much more suitable. That means the super carrier is far more vulnerable to titans and dreads alike and there is an actual risk to flying them. This will also prevent the glut of super carriers from ensuring that nothing changes in eve. Because at the end of the day we will still need titans and dreads to hit sov structures. And if the fist counter is drop 100 super carriers on it and rep it up to save it, then we will see not shift in the current way eve is running in null sec.
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:25:00 -
[1572] - Quote
Sir Rup wrote:The problem as i see it is the fact that with this nerf Eny given alliance is gonna Win by numbers .. if you jump in a pretty standard fleet of 200 battleships or battelcruisers with logi ect and say 40 supers ... you lose the subcap fight to a bigger alliance you basicly just lost all 40 supers .. all they have to do is bubble them (supers can't hit them) and then proceed to agress every super now and then .. that gives them Hours and hours to kill all of them .... i dont see enyone winning on this nerf but the alliances that refuces to spend isk on supers . wich wierd enough is the same people complaining that they are too powerfull ..
Because winning because you could outblob the enemy with supers that had little to no risk involved was a much better situation? |
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:26:00 -
[1573] - Quote
Sigras wrote:
In this game More expensive != More Powerful
According to you?
So... stuff should cost more, with no benefit? Why don't we take money out in general, and then make the server into SiSi?
I've never understood this cost does not justify balance argument. Cost reduces the efficiency of certain ships, reduces their proliferation, etc. |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:28:00 -
[1574] - Quote
Anile8er wrote: Wow really? How would a single Aeon or any supercap for that matter hold down a 30 man gang? Wouldn't the players of the 30 man gang be pretty stupid for not warping off if there was just that much ganking coming down from that Aeon? Aeons and all supercaps have 30-40 mid slots for warp disruptors and sensor boosters and webs. And I would not drop my Nyx on a 30 man BS gang because there is a pretty good chance that I would die in under 15 minutes. Oh wait I forgot supercaps have MILLIONS of capacitor points don't they.... Right, like I said I would probably get neuted out and killed in under 15 minutes.
Should listen to this guy. The threat of randomly being hotdropped is very real. I stalked him and dropped two alliances worth of capitals on his head. He escaped at low armor in his nyx. But he was extremely likely to die. Under the new changes he wouldn't have stood a chance without ECM drones.
|
Don Dark
x13 Raiden.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:30:00 -
[1575] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Sir Rup wrote:The problem as i see it is the fact that with this nerf Eny given alliance is gonna Win by numbers .. if you jump in a pretty standard fleet of 200 battleships or battelcruisers with logi ect and say 40 supers ... you lose the subcap fight to a bigger alliance you basicly just lost all 40 supers .. all they have to do is bubble them (supers can't hit them) and then proceed to agress every super now and then .. that gives them Hours and hours to kill all of them .... i dont see enyone winning on this nerf but the alliances that refuces to spend isk on supers . wich wierd enough is the same people complaining that they are too powerfull .. Because winning because you could outblob the enemy with supers that had little to no risk involved was a much better situation?
the thing is .. Alliances like goonswarm has Alot of tech too .. and alot of pilots able to fly these ships .. they simply has choosen not to fly them .. So i ask .. Why all the complaining .had people actually bought supers like so many others maybe there would be more super fights too .. = more super Deaths .. and that would solve the issue were having of too many supers being in the game at one time |
AlexKay
Sigillum Militum Xpisti Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:31:00 -
[1576] - Quote
Cap builders in my corp would like to know if you will be taking out the Capital Drone Bay requirements from the Dread blueprint bill of materials. One would think that would be a yes with the loss of the drone bay but better to ask the question now then complain about it latter. |
Lord Helghast
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
53
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:32:00 -
[1577] - Quote
Wait somethings missing from here, what happened to the blackops buff, and destroyers buff...
and for that matter, what happened to expanding the size of the carrier's ship maint bay to make them more corp tools and less personal u-hauls |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:33:00 -
[1578] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:Anile8er wrote: Wow really? How would a single Aeon or any supercap for that matter hold down a 30 man gang? Wouldn't the players of the 30 man gang be pretty stupid for not warping off if there was just that much ganking coming down from that Aeon? Aeons and all supercaps have 30-40 mid slots for warp disruptors and sensor boosters and webs. And I would not drop my Nyx on a 30 man BS gang because there is a pretty good chance that I would die in under 15 minutes. Oh wait I forgot supercaps have MILLIONS of capacitor points don't they.... Right, like I said I would probably get neuted out and killed in under 15 minutes.
Should listen to this guy. The threat of randomly being hotdropped is very real. I stalked him and dropped two alliances worth of capitals on his head. He escaped at low armor in his nyx. But he was extremely likely to die. Under the new changes he wouldn't have stood a chance without ECM drones.
Still dont know how I was sat unclocked in that safe... lol |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
701
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:34:00 -
[1579] - Quote
Well i think CCP are on the right track for SCs. Remember this is the first attempt to re-ballance them, so more may happen down the track.
Taking away the ability of smaller drones from them may seem like a bad mistake. It WILL farm out that role to normal carriers and support ships. Net effect? Less SCs on the field, as alliance members now move to close the gaps in the fleet, or they just hope for the best and be at further risk.
I think a decent move by CCP after this happens, would be to reduce the cost of a SC, cut BP requirements by up to 1/2. Net effect? More SCs for smaller alliances, easier to carve a niche out for themselves The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:35:00 -
[1580] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Wow really? How would a single Aeon or any supercap for that matter hold down a 30 man gang? Wouldn't the players of the 30 man gang be pretty stupid for not warping off if there was just that much ganking coming down from that Aeon? Aeons and all supercaps have 30-40 mid slots for warp disruptors and sensor boosters and webs. And I would not drop my Nyx on a 30 man BS gang because there is a pretty good chance that I would die in under 15 minutes. Oh wait I forgot supercaps have MILLIONS of capacitor points don't they.... Right, like I said I would probably get neuted out and killed in under 15 minutes. For the Aeon to be broken it doesnt need to kill all of the ships just one or two with NO fear of dieing . . .
The best part of this is that your own argument is your gallows because you'd be completely safe jumping into a 30 man battleship gang because when you got into trouble you'd just warp off and cloak because they cant warp scramble you.
Also i sincerely doubt a 30 man gang could kill you, maybe if they were all at 0 with 1200 DPS Armageddons and they all instantly got on you, they'd do 32 million damage to you; even with your hardeners off, Aeons still have > 27 million EHP so unless they were able to INSTANTLY cap you out you'd still probably get away, and thats against a 30 man battleship fleet that you were stupid enough to cyno into the middle of with no support!
This patch brings back the fear of dieing
FearOwns wrote:I agree with the proposed log off mechanic change, if I drop my aeon there should always be a chance its my last.
With this change, are you telling me you and 29 of your friends could not kill a lone supercarrier before downtime rolls around? If this is a problem, then your obviously playing the game wrong to begin with.
honestly, id love the logoff mechanic and id rather give the supercaps back their 20% EHP and do a minor nerf to fighters (say 200m signature resolution) so they couldnt hit logistics ships and would do reduced damage to regular cruisers |
|
Relnala
Event.Horizon Flatline.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:37:00 -
[1581] - Quote
Balor Haliquin wrote:So at the risk of this not being read by any developer. I would like to point out a major flaw in the current balancing of super capital ships in eve. Super carriers are still to powerful. Having fought 300 man super capital fleets and understanding how they work the super carrier was always the more threatening then the titan. Simply because it has more effective DPS, had a better ECM system, and often had the same EHP as the titan for 16th the cost.
Looking at the cost end of the spectrum we see that a super carrier takes about 1billion isk in skills, about 4 months in training time to become effective and then another 17 billion isk for the hull and fittings. Contrast that with a titan that costs about 7 billion isk in skills and around a year to train for so that your can do more then just sit in it. You can understand why super carriers are out numbering titans by nearly 20 to 1. Simply put even with the nerfs and the super carriers inability to engage sub caps effectively, they are still going to be a better anti capital ships because they still have nerly the same EHP and can remote rep each other.
With the current glut of super carriers, you will not see dread fleets because the super carrier fleet is simply going to wipe the floor with the dread fleet. Anything not supported by super carriers becomes an easy target for super carriers and carriers. The simple fact is that the super carrier has too big of a performance envelope.
Looking at the current and proposed EHP stats you can see that the super carrier is equal to the titans EHP. While only requiring a quarter of the resources and a thrid of the time to train for. If we were to put that in sub capital terms we would be looking at a T1 cruiser that has the same EHP and firepower as a battleship, but with none of the draw backs of cost and training time. Either the DPS or the EHP, or both. Honestly i like the idea of a super carrier that has huge firepower but is not a solid rock of hit points. Remember that super carrier can remote repair each other and more often then not when you have 100 of them on field you simply can not break the remote repair tank on them even if you have 100 of your own super carriers hitting them.
If we take the reduced hit points of the titan (about 42 million EHP)and super carrier(about 41 million ehp) assuming both are dead space fit and slave implants. And we compare that to how many carrier it takes to build each (about 62 for a titan and 16 for a super carrier). We then take the Titans EHP and divide it by the number of carriers it takes and we get 677,419 EHP. we then multiply that by the number of carriers it takes to make a super carrier and we get 10,838,709 EHP. That is about where the super carrier should be sitting.
But because of the efficiencies of construction, i think a number of about 14,500,000 EHP is much more suitable. That means the super carrier is far more vulnerable to titans and dreads alike and there is an actual risk to flying them. This will also prevent the glut of super carriers from ensuring that nothing changes in eve. Because at the end of the day we will still need titans and dreads to hit sov structures. And if the fist counter is drop 100 super carriers on it and rep it up to save it, then we will see not shift in the current way eve is running in null sec.
go fit an archon like you fit a supercarrier. It has about 10mil EHP with gang bonii.
So by your logic, the Aeon should have 200mil EHP. |
WiredMerchant
NerdHerd En Garde
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:37:00 -
[1582] - Quote
I have a great idea,
If you don't live in Null Sec...get out of this forum, its not your problem.
If you live in Low Sec... you are all about being overpowered and jumping one innocent (albait dumb) carebear stumbling through your space and you are using your supers to attack and then log off. So basically the people crying about YOUR actions have caused this knee jerk reaction.
If you live in High Sec : I heard Ice Mining is profitable these days...
Love : Wired <3 |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:41:00 -
[1583] - Quote
Don Dark wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Sir Rup wrote:The problem as i see it is the fact that with this nerf Eny given alliance is gonna Win by numbers .. if you jump in a pretty standard fleet of 200 battleships or battelcruisers with logi ect and say 40 supers ... you lose the subcap fight to a bigger alliance you basicly just lost all 40 supers .. all they have to do is bubble them (supers can't hit them) and then proceed to agress every super now and then .. that gives them Hours and hours to kill all of them .... i dont see enyone winning on this nerf but the alliances that refuces to spend isk on supers . wich wierd enough is the same people complaining that they are too powerfull .. Because winning because you could outblob the enemy with supers that had little to no risk involved was a much better situation? the thing is .. Alliances like goonswarm has Alot of tech too .. and alot of pilots able to fly these ships .. they simply has choosen not to fly them .. So i ask .. Why all the complaining .had people actually bought supers like so many others maybe there would be more super fights too .. = more super Deaths .. and that would solve the issue were having of too many supers being in the game at one time
The bottom line is Goonswarm and TEST do not want to spend their money on fielding and replacing supercaps in a slugfest war. So they, the leadership, have pushed hard on CCP to nerf supercaps vs subcaps and not really do anything for dreads except some timer change and some dps and call it a fix even though they can and will still insta pop to fighter bombers and Doomsdays.
So bets on that come patch day Goons launch a campaign spearheaded by Hurricanes, Drakes and Arty Maelstroms into a major sov holders space. Then they can use their supercaps which will be very effective still at killing sov structures to do so. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:42:00 -
[1584] - Quote
WiredMerchant wrote:I have a great idea,
If you don't live in Null Sec...get out of this forum, its not your problem.
If you live in Low Sec... you are all about being overpowered and jumping one innocent (albait dumb) carebear stumbling through your space and you are using your supers to attack and then log off. So basically the people crying about YOUR actions have caused this knee jerk reaction.
If you live in High Sec : I heard Ice Mining is profitable these days...
Love : Wired <3
Because you can't use dreads in w-space, c/d? |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:46:00 -
[1585] - Quote
Sigras wrote:
The best part of this is that your own argument is your gallows because you'd be completely safe jumping into a 30 man battleship gang because when you got into trouble you'd just warp off and cloak because they cant warp scramble you.
Maybe your 30 man gang should field some support ships like Hics, dictors and logi cruisers.
And yeah a 30 man BS gang would kill my 15mil EHP neuted out nyx in under 15 minutes. Do the math. i've got just over 9 minutes.
Edit: I forgot that when you cyno in you have full cap... right? hmmm more like 30 something percent. And the lock time on my Nyx for those battleships must be in the what? 3 second range? be really hard for them all to get on me at once, what with those kinds of lock times. And lets say 20 of your BS have a single neut, your knocking back 16,000 of my cap every 24 seconds. Start doing the math on say 30 BS with 2 neuts each...
Educate yourself before you post on a subject. Please. |
Mik kyo
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:55:00 -
[1586] - Quote
InnerDrive wrote:Someone needs to play the game some more and than come back and post here. 2 reasons why titans/supercarriers fit mwds. 1. to get out of range of a hostile capital fleet faster. 2. to move faster than dreads can track.
HAHAHAhhahaa
Someone needs to play the game some more and than come back and post here.
Neither of those are in fact why they fit mwds, they are fit to enable a fast warp/fast pos reapp after jumpin.
Goddamn MM your terrible. |
Ramman K'arojic
Deep Black Industries Yulai Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:57:00 -
[1587] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Can you amend your Dev Blog to stop disinformation.
|
R0ze
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 00:57:00 -
[1588] - Quote
Mr Sado wrote:Our bomber fleet got welped by a supercapital fleet (that had no sub cap support), Fighters should not be able to scratch frigates.... and I hope that is a change that can still happen. Shocking turn of events - how can you explain dieing in a frigate size ship (not to mention having the superior option of covert ops cloak) to a spacecraft which takes like a minute to lock you? |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:00:00 -
[1589] - Quote
Mik kyo wrote:InnerDrive wrote:Someone needs to play the game some more and than come back and post here. 2 reasons why titans/supercarriers fit mwds. 1. to get out of range of a hostile capital fleet faster. 2. to move faster than dreads can track. HAHAHAhhahaa Someone needs to play the game some more and than come back and post here. Neither of those are in fact why they fit mwds, they are fit to enable a fast warp/fast pos reapp after jumpin. Goddamn MM your terrible.
It is true I fit a MWD on my Nyx so I can speed tank dreads with my 61371 M sig radius roaring along at 121 m/s, 142 m/s overheated mind you.
zoom zoom zoom
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:01:00 -
[1590] - Quote
R0ze wrote:Mr Sado wrote:Our bomber fleet got welped by a supercapital fleet (that had no sub cap support), Fighters should not be able to scratch frigates.... and I hope that is a change that can still happen. Shocking turn of events - how can you explain dieing in a frigate size ship (not to mention having the superior option of covert ops cloak) to a spacecraft which takes like a minute to lock you?
Bad decisions should equate to nerfing good pilots, per CCP |
|
Don Dark
x13 Raiden.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:02:00 -
[1591] - Quote
this one goes out to ccp .. you have completly misunderstood dreads .. thier dps Wasent an issue .. neither was thier siege timers . thier problem is the tracking .. if a supercarrir orbits it speedtanks it .. wich means the dread is Purely for poses and stations .. wich was why everone just stop using them and found other ships to use .. you have then went ahead and boosted the dmg abit ..and shortend the siege time .. wich isent gonna mean a thing to people using 20 so dreads enyway .. its still gonna take 10 minuts to kill a pos .. only change here is we now have to press the siege mod twice or leave it running .. Keyword here is tracking .. we wanted the dread to be able to Counter some of the supers/capitals so it actually had a use that dident bore people to death |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:03:00 -
[1592] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Don Dark wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Sir Rup wrote:The problem as i see it is the fact that with this nerf Eny given alliance is gonna Win by numbers .. if you jump in a pretty standard fleet of 200 battleships or battelcruisers with logi ect and say 40 supers ... you lose the subcap fight to a bigger alliance you basicly just lost all 40 supers .. all they have to do is bubble them (supers can't hit them) and then proceed to agress every super now and then .. that gives them Hours and hours to kill all of them .... i dont see enyone winning on this nerf but the alliances that refuces to spend isk on supers . wich wierd enough is the same people complaining that they are too powerfull .. Because winning because you could outblob the enemy with supers that had little to no risk involved was a much better situation? the thing is .. Alliances like goonswarm has Alot of tech too .. and alot of pilots able to fly these ships .. they simply has choosen not to fly them .. So i ask .. Why all the complaining .had people actually bought supers like so many others maybe there would be more super fights too .. = more super Deaths .. and that would solve the issue were having of too many supers being in the game at one time The bottom line is Goonswarm and TEST do not want to spend their money on fielding and replacing supercaps in a slugfest war. So they, the leadership, have pushed hard on CCP to nerf supercaps vs subcaps and not really do anything for dreads except some timer change and some dps and call it a fix even though they can and will still insta pop to fighter bombers and Doomsdays. So bets on that come patch day Goons launch a campaign spearheaded by Hurricanes, Drakes and Arty Maelstroms into a major sov holders space. Then they can use their supercaps which will be very effective still at killing sov structures to do so.
I'm right there with you bud. That is exactly what I see happening. That has probably been the plan since they first starting fighting for this "patch". |
Roosterton
Syndicalis Immortalis The Skeleton Crew
337
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:03:00 -
[1593] - Quote
While CCP is definitely on the right track with these nerfs, I can't help but get the feeling that this is only going to result in yet more things being overpowered, underpowered, or outright never used. Maybe said ships will be different, but the result will stay the same.
Instead of each capital having a mishmash of possible uses, each class should have its own role which it excels at, but should be little more than passable at any other role.
Let's look at what we currently have:
Carriers: Deals the lowest DPS of any cap class, but can reliably apply that DPS to anything larger than a cruiser using fighter drones. Also have bonuses to remote repping to keep other ships alive. TL;DR: Specialized in repping. DPS is a secondary role, but is still effective in many situations.
Dreadnaughts: Deals moderately high DPS, but only when in siege mode, where it sacrifices all mobility and can't be RR'ed, and sucks at hitting subcaps. TL;DR: Specialized against capitals and above.
Supercarriers: Deals insane DPS, nearing that of a titan, and has great EHP. Can field both fighters and fighter bombers to deal DPS to virtually any target larger than a cruiser. Can also fit RR. Only drawback compared to a normal carrier is failure to fit triage modules. TL;DR: Specialized against everything. -_-
Titan: Can jump bridge fleets across vast distances, and doomsday to quickly take out any non-super cap carriers or dreads. Also deals respectable DPS with XL turrets/launchers against capitals and battleships. TL;DR: Specialized against caps; viable against BS.
The way I see it, Dreadnaughts are the only well balanced of the four so far, as they have a specialized role and are crappy at anything else due to crippled mobility and vulnerability. In my opinion, all caps should be like that; they excel at a VERY SPECIFIC role, and if they get engaged by something not included in that role, then they'd better have a support fleet backing them up.
With this in mind, I propose the following:
Carriers: These should be the only caps capable of being effective against subcaps. To do this, revert back to the change to fighter sig to be ~400, but give carriers a X% tracking bonus per carrier skill level. This means that a supercarrier with fighters will do crappy DPS unless it's supported by target painters, while carriers are capable of dishing out some of their DPS without needing subcap support. However, compared to other classes, their fighter DPS will be crappy against other capitals. TL;DR: Will be effective against subcaps.
Dreadnaughts: Keep them more or less the way they are; (Well, the way they are going to be, with the 5 min siege cycle time.) Siege modules should allow for minimal movement, and to be RR'ed, so that they aren't *completely* outdone by supercarriers. TL;DR: Will be effective against caps.
Supercarrier: With fighter sig resolution pushed up to 400m, they will have to either forgo fighters or forgo fighter bombers if they want to be effective whatsoever against sub-BS, which cripples their effectiveness against caps. They will still be effective cap and supercap killers, but simply have extremely limited viability against a well-organized subcap fleet. TL;DR: Will be effective against caps.
Titan: These should be supercapital killers. Give them terrible XL turret tracking - to accomplish this, make XL weapons have higher sig res and lower tracking, but give dreads a tracking/sig resolution bonus per level. Additionally, make their doomsday stronger, but make it strictly sig radius based, so that it is no longer capable of one-shotting capitals, but will do more effective damage against supercapitals. TL;DR: Will be effective against supercaps.
TL;DR Changes:
Fighter sig res to 400m. Carriers (NOT supercarriers) gain a +X% fighter tracking bonus per skill level. XL Weapons have higher sig resolution and worse tracking. Dreadnaugts gain a +X% XL turret/launcher tracking/sig resolution bonus per skill level. Doomsday devices do more damage, but are now sig radius based. Dreads can now move a bit and be RR'ed while in siege mode.
This is by no means a final list, but I feel that it's reasonable, and better than blanket buffs/nerfs. Now, I shall prepare to be flamed into oblivion. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:04:00 -
[1594] - Quote
R0ze wrote:[quote=Mr Sado]Our bomber fleet got welped by a supercapital fleet (that had no sub cap support), Fighters should not be able to scratch frigates.... and I hope that is a change that can still happen.
Sounds to me like you need a new FC. Not a nerf. |
FearOwns
GR3Y N0MADS
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:06:00 -
[1595] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:R0ze wrote:[quote=Mr Sado]Our bomber fleet got welped by a supercapital fleet (that had no sub cap support), Fighters should not be able to scratch frigates.... and I hope that is a change that can still happen. Sounds to me like you need a new FC. Not a nerf.
+1 |
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:30:00 -
[1596] - Quote
Leviathan can't even track subcaps. If it cant use drones or doomsday, it cant even win vs a battleship. How is that balanced? |
The Offerer
Republic University Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:30:00 -
[1597] - Quote
Quote:Logging off should not be a viable tactic
Only if you can guarantee that fleets will no longer be stuck because of infamous black screen. Fingers crossed for the time dilation feature, I guess. |
Pestilent Industries
Pestilent Industries Amalgamated
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:33:00 -
[1598] - Quote
Mr Sado wrote:[Our bomber fleet got welped by a supercapital fleet (that had no sub cap support), Fighters should not be able to scratch frigates....
Wow, you, your alliance, and your FC are all terrible and should biomass your characters. |
Legras
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:46:00 -
[1599] - Quote
I don't agree with the Fighter Nerf...
Not everyone uses Fighters for pvp usage... Many use them to Ratt...
The use of fighters will become usless then for running pritty much any type of Plex.
I could understand maybe a partial increase of maybe 200 or 250 but 400 is just outrageous.
why not change the base to say 150 and then put a modification on Supers to boost it to the 400. Or make a slightly weaker version of the fighter for cariears (say scale back the damage 5 to 15 percent and lower their hitpoints by the same ) and the current versions that you change only available to Supercaps. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:46:00 -
[1600] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
Is it fair then that carriers use same (dirt-cheap) rigs as battleships? Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:47:00 -
[1601] - Quote
So, took a look at what happens when you run tracking mods and links on a titan.
Erebus Meta 2 Blasters (24+26 km AM, 78+26 Iron, assuming tracking is not quite that important at range, 2x optimal gives 102+42, and this is the shortest range titan) meta 14 TE 2x meta 14 TCs (Tracking Scripts) 5x incoming Faction TLs from a max skilled onieros Ogdin's Eye Tracking, Blasters: 0.02549 Tracking, Blasters, 2x Optimal (Iron is 102+42): 0.02525 DPS(Short-Long, T1 Ammo, no Damage Mods, no overheat, no implants): 5654-2356 (Therm/Kin)
Obviously I have run into the wall as far as tracking goes, the penalties have really kicked in.
Repeated for Avatar Meta 2 Pulses (28+17 with MF, 88+17 with Radio, 2x optimal (previous numbers were tracking speed) 116+28 with 2x optimal) (Same as Erebus otherwise) Tracking, Giga Pulses: 0.01908 Tracking, Giga Pulses, 2x Optimal Scripts: 0.0189 DPS(Short-Long, T1 Ammo, no Damage Mods, no overheat, no implants): 4673-1947 (EM/Therm)
Again, this is pretty much the upper limit as the loss of 2x tracking comps had little to no effect on tracking
Ragnarok: (same ****) (20+33 with EMP, 65+33 with carbonized lead, (previous were tracking speed) 85+54 with 2x optimal) Tracking, 6x2500: 0.02403 Tracking, 6x2500, 2x Optimal Scripts: 0.0238 DPS(Short-Long, T1 Ammo, no Damage Mods, no overheat, no implants): 5629-2345 (Variable Damage Types)
Megathron, 425s: 0.01654 (Hype: 0.01203)
Megathron, Neutrons: 0.07442 (Hype: 0.05412)
Geddon, Mega Pulse: 0.04219
Geddon, Mega Beam: 0.01914
Tempest, 1400s: 0.01125
Tempest 800 Repeating: 0.054
Not too sure what to make of this, other than, yes, titans can hit stuff rather decently. I probably would accept slightly lower tracking for a better optimal (have the oneiros switch a script or two).
Food for thought on that issue.
Given that Erebus and Avatar are the most used, you can see why the Erebus gets (and deserves a lot of flack for this)
Boosh, beat the forum, it tried to eat my post, but I copied it beforehand \o/ |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:48:00 -
[1602] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Is it fair then that carriers use same (dirt-cheap) rigs as battleships?
No, it is also not fair that they get the same ******* expensive rigs as SCs. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:49:00 -
[1603] - Quote
Legras wrote:I don't agree with the Fighter Nerf...
Not everyone uses Fighters for pvp usage... Many use them to Ratt...
The use of fighters will become usless then for running pritty much any type of Plex.
I could understand maybe a partial increase of maybe 200 or 250 but 400 is just outrageous.
why not change the base to say 150 and then put a modification on Supers to boost it to the 400. Or make a slightly weaker version of the fighter for cariears (say scale back the damage 5 to 15 percent and lower their hitpoints by the same ) and the current versions that you change only available to Supercaps.
They retracted that one, just have not edited the dev blog. Post one by (Guard I think) links to it.
EDIT: Link here |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:51:00 -
[1604] - Quote
Death2all Supercaps wrote:Leviathan can't even track subcaps. If it cant use drones or doomsday, it cant even win vs a battleship. How is that balanced?
The Phoenix and Leviathan really need to be looked at, the Phoenix also is the shittiest of the dreads for shooting battleships (it works under certain circumstances for the other dreads, not so much for the Phoenix), followed by the Naglfar, if only because it has some capital missiles.
To be fair, none of the others can really hit a BS orbiting at 500...regardless of its speed or sig |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:52:00 -
[1605] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Is it fair then that carriers use same (dirt-cheap) rigs as battleships? No, it is also not fair that they get the same ******* expensive rigs as SCs. They are of the same class and share same capital mods, so I don't see how this particular thing is unfair. Both carriers and supercarriers are to use XL rigs which in turn should actually cost something. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
J'J'J'Jita
Ch'Ch'Ch'Chia Corp
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 01:57:00 -
[1606] - Quote
Will pilots with the Fighter Bombers or (racial) Titan skills trained be reimbursed their skillpoints in normal drones, since those skills are now totally useless for supercapital pilots?
My Erebus pilot would like those drone skillpoints back. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
784
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:00:00 -
[1607] - Quote
J'J'J'Jita wrote:Will pilots with the Fighter Bombers or (racial) Titan skills trained be reimbursed their skillpoints in normal drones, since those skills are now totally useless for supercapital pilots?
My Erebus pilot would like those drone skillpoints back.
You will need those drone skills when your erebus gets popped and you are forced back into a regular battleship. |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:01:00 -
[1608] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote:Anile8er wrote: Wow really? How would a single Aeon or any supercap for that matter hold down a 30 man gang? Wouldn't the players of the 30 man gang be pretty stupid for not warping off if there was just that much ganking coming down from that Aeon? Aeons and all supercaps have 30-40 mid slots for warp disruptors and sensor boosters and webs. And I would not drop my Nyx on a 30 man BS gang because there is a pretty good chance that I would die in under 15 minutes. Oh wait I forgot supercaps have MILLIONS of capacitor points don't they.... Right, like I said I would probably get neuted out and killed in under 15 minutes.
Should listen to this guy. The threat of randomly being hotdropped is very real. I stalked him and dropped two alliances worth of capitals on his head. He escaped at low armor in his nyx. But he was extremely likely to die. Under the new changes he wouldn't have stood a chance without ECM drones. Still dont know how I was sat unclocked in that safe... lol You weren't uncloaked. That was a lie because I wanted you to feel safe and I was hoping to catch you again the next day. I scanned you down when you landed, then you cloaked a few seconds later. I warped to your position and just got lucky decloaking you (you were 5km away or so). I was much faster with my probes than you suspected :) |
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:03:00 -
[1609] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Is it fair then that carriers use same (dirt-cheap) rigs as battleships? No, it is also not fair that they get the same ******* expensive rigs as SCs. They are of the same class and share same capital mods, so I don't see how this particular thing is unfair. Both carriers and supercarriers are to use XL rigs which in turn should actually cost something.
A Levi shouldnt have to rep its tank because of fleet bonuses |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:05:00 -
[1610] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Is it fair then that carriers use same (dirt-cheap) rigs as battleships? No, it is also not fair that they get the same ******* expensive rigs as SCs. They are of the same class and share same capital mods, so I don't see how this particular thing is unfair. Both carriers and supercarriers are to use XL rigs which in turn should actually cost something.
You have any idea what T2 trimarks would cost SC pilots? Recently looked at buying a t2 rep aug for one of my carriers, not a good idea (900 mil).
TBH, the rigs are proportional to the size of the ship, I have seen machs bigger than carriers (pretty damn close to a SC I might add). SCs should require something like 10x what a carrier requires and 100x what a BS requires. Also, my carriers cannot fit remote ECM burst, but they do fit Heavy Neuts. The larger factor is that the price is similar to many battleships, and should remain so until there are actually faction carriers.
Actually, if they fixed it such that all rigs were of equal demand this would not be nearly the same problem. As it stands, armor t2 rigs are too expensive to fit on anything below a super that is not just a toy. Having said that, the t1 prices for carriers are meh, even at 5x-15x the current price (what would happen I assume after x-large are implemented and start sucking up a large portion of the components, 100 mil for a CCC1 is not exactly a problem for me) or so. The biggest problem would be rigs costing more than half the value of the ship for some people. T2 CCCs would also be an issue for me. |
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:07:00 -
[1611] - Quote
Death2all Supercaps wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Is it fair then that carriers use same (dirt-cheap) rigs as battleships? No, it is also not fair that they get the same ******* expensive rigs as SCs. They are of the same class and share same capital mods, so I don't see how this particular thing is unfair. Both carriers and supercarriers are to use XL rigs which in turn should actually cost something. A Levi shouldnt have to rep its tank because of fleet bonuses
Actually it should, but only after slave implants give shield bonus as well as armor. Ideally, unrepped it has less EHP than an avatar, but repped it has an equivalent (hell, significant) amount more. Sound fair, giving it the opportunity to perform better than the avatar if you put a little effort in (and much better if you really rep it up)? |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:08:00 -
[1612] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:Anile8er wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote:Anile8er wrote: Wow really? How would a single Aeon or any supercap for that matter hold down a 30 man gang? Wouldn't the players of the 30 man gang be pretty stupid for not warping off if there was just that much ganking coming down from that Aeon? Aeons and all supercaps have 30-40 mid slots for warp disruptors and sensor boosters and webs. And I would not drop my Nyx on a 30 man BS gang because there is a pretty good chance that I would die in under 15 minutes. Oh wait I forgot supercaps have MILLIONS of capacitor points don't they.... Right, like I said I would probably get neuted out and killed in under 15 minutes.
Should listen to this guy. The threat of randomly being hotdropped is very real. I stalked him and dropped two alliances worth of capitals on his head. He escaped at low armor in his nyx. But he was extremely likely to die. Under the new changes he wouldn't have stood a chance without ECM drones. Still dont know how I was sat unclocked in that safe... lol You weren't uncloaked. That was a lie because I wanted you to feel safe and I was hoping to catch you again the next day. I scanned you down when you landed, then you cloaked a few seconds later. I warped to your position and just got lucky decloaking you (you were 5km away or so). I was much faster with my probes than you suspected :)
Well played sir. lol |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:09:00 -
[1613] - Quote
J'J'J'Jita wrote:Will pilots with the Fighter Bombers or (racial) Titan skills trained be reimbursed their skillpoints in normal drones, since those skills are now totally useless for supercapital pilots?
My Erebus pilot would like those drone skillpoints back.
Use a holding character and fly dominixes whenever you are not in your titan?
Use a CSMA? Realize that you really dont have any other skills to train anyway in your titan? |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:10:00 -
[1614] - Quote
Anile8er wrote: The bottom line is Goonswarm and TEST do not want to spend their money on fielding and replacing supercaps in a slugfest war.
Psst, your secret source of intel on 'Goonswarm and TEST' supercap capabilities has been lying to you. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:14:00 -
[1615] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Anile8er wrote: The bottom line is Goonswarm and TEST do not want to spend their money on fielding and replacing supercaps in a slugfest war.
Psst, your secret source of intel on 'Goonswarm and TEST' supercap capabilities has been lying to you.
Oxymoron? |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:23:00 -
[1616] - Quote
I hope for the sake of balance and fairplay that all battleships lose their drone bays with this patch as well.
After all, ships should have support, all ships, no matter the size, and its unfair that a heavy neut and a flight of light drones makes ships like the Mega and Geddon immune to tacklers.
This type of heresy cannot stand, and it screams in the face of Lady Justice. No more solo ships in EVE period, everything should be supported in some way shape or form, so completely removing the ability of a larger ship class to damage a smaller ship class is obviously the only way forward. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:43:00 -
[1617] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:I hope for the sake of balance and fairplay that all battleships lose their drone bays with this patch as well.
After all, ships should have support, all ships, no matter the size, and its unfair that a heavy neut and a flight of light drones makes ships like the Mega and Geddon immune to tacklers.
This type of heresy cannot stand, and it screams in the face of Lady Justice. No more solo ships in EVE period, everything should be supported in some way shape or form, so completely removing the ability of a larger ship class to damage a smaller ship class is obviously the only way forward.
Confirming SCs cannot hit Carriers or Dreads. Or use Fighters and hit battleships. They also lack the slots to fit multiple webs and target painters so their fighters hit cruisers...
"But those are stupid fits" I hear you say. "Nay," I respond. "Those are fit to fight those classes of ships." Just choose what you are going after beforehand. One does not fit rails and webs on a battleship very often, and, when one does, one should expect the cruisers on top of them to pop those few drones rather quickly.
EDIT: you do realize that titans can still hit stuff and receive tracking links to help them with that, right? |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 02:56:00 -
[1618] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:
EDIT: you do realize that titans can still hit stuff and receive tracking links to help them with that, right?
What i realize is that if a ship the size of a dread, mothership, or titan can't find space for a drone bay, then theres absolutely no way anything smaller should have the space.
|
LegendaryFrog
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 03:04:00 -
[1619] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:
EDIT: you do realize that titans can still hit stuff and receive tracking links to help them with that, right?
What i realize is that if a ship the size of a dread, mothership, or titan can't find space for a drone bay, then theres absolutely no way anything smaller should have the space.
You see, EvE developers should endorse realism over game balance in a game about immortal pilots and their spaceships because... |
Balor Haliquin
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 03:24:00 -
[1620] - Quote
Relnala wrote:Balor Haliquin wrote:So at the risk of this not being read by any developer. I would like to point out a major flaw in the current balancing of super capital ships in eve. Super carriers are still to powerful. Having fought 300 man super capital fleets and understanding how they work the super carrier was always the more threatening then the titan. Simply because it has more effective DPS, had a better ECM system, and often had the same EHP as the titan for 16th the cost.
Looking at the cost end of the spectrum we see that a super carrier takes about 1billion isk in skills, about 4 months in training time to become effective and then another 17 billion isk for the hull and fittings. Contrast that with a titan that costs about 7 billion isk in skills and around a year to train for so that your can do more then just sit in it. You can understand why super carriers are out numbering titans by nearly 20 to 1. Simply put even with the nerfs and the super carriers inability to engage sub caps effectively, they are still going to be a better anti capital ships because they still have nerly the same EHP and can remote rep each other.
With the current glut of super carriers, you will not see dread fleets because the super carrier fleet is simply going to wipe the floor with the dread fleet. Anything not supported by super carriers becomes an easy target for super carriers and carriers. The simple fact is that the super carrier has too big of a performance envelope.
Looking at the current and proposed EHP stats you can see that the super carrier is equal to the titans EHP. While only requiring a quarter of the resources and a thrid of the time to train for. If we were to put that in sub capital terms we would be looking at a T1 cruiser that has the same EHP and firepower as a battleship, but with none of the draw backs of cost and training time. Either the DPS or the EHP, or both. Honestly i like the idea of a super carrier that has huge firepower but is not a solid rock of hit points. Remember that super carrier can remote repair each other and more often then not when you have 100 of them on field you simply can not break the remote repair tank on them even if you have 100 of your own super carriers hitting them.
If we take the reduced hit points of the titan (about 42 million EHP)and super carrier(about 41 million ehp) assuming both are dead space fit and slave implants. And we compare that to how many carrier it takes to build each (about 62 for a titan and 16 for a super carrier). We then take the Titans EHP and divide it by the number of carriers it takes and we get 677,419 EHP. we then multiply that by the number of carriers it takes to make a super carrier and we get 10,838,709 EHP. That is about where the super carrier should be sitting.
But because of the efficiencies of construction, i think a number of about 14,500,000 EHP is much more suitable. That means the super carrier is far more vulnerable to titans and dreads alike and there is an actual risk to flying them. This will also prevent the glut of super carriers from ensuring that nothing changes in eve. Because at the end of the day we will still need titans and dreads to hit sov structures. And if the fist counter is drop 100 super carriers on it and rep it up to save it, then we will see not shift in the current way eve is running in null sec.
go fit an archon like you fit a super carrier. It has about 10mil EHP with gang bonii. So by your logic, the Aeon should have 200mil EHP.
No, by my logic they should have about 15mil EHP like i stated. As a point of interest an archon can get to 6 million EHP with a deadspace fit wit slaves. The point I am trying to make is that even with 20% less EHP the super carrier still has far to many hit points for far to cheep a hull. |
|
CaldeteisX
Aurora Polaris The Babylon Consortium
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 03:38:00 -
[1621] - Quote
Cronyx Ravage wrote:Can someone explain why, exactly, it makes sense for fighters to have a hard time shooting subcaps? Theyre *fighters*, right? With a pilot inside. It would be like a Viper Mk.2 having a hard time shooting something the size of Colonial One, as far as cruisers go, a heavy raider to relate to frigates, or a frakin Basestar to relate to battleships. Making them only effective against capitals is like saying Vipers are only effective against Hiveships, Resurection hubs, or colony ships. Or a more real world example, F-16s are only effective against.... What? Something the size of an Independence Day city destroyer? (there is no real world exame for this size difference)
This!, it should be a nerf applied to fighters being launched from Supercarriers if fighters really need a nerfing, as you want carriers to be able to handle subcaps but make their offence system for this less effective? - no logic there at all. |
HTP2K
Black Core Federation Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 03:40:00 -
[1622] - Quote
Firstly the question that needs to be asked is Does CCP actually Take note of there forums and the questions & concerns the member base has?? Or are there plans for the Capital Rebalancing set in stone and once again CCP ignores its members and does its own thing? This Whole Capital ship rebalancing/NERF has come about due to people complaining that it is too hard to kill a super capital. Yes I agree BUT surely that is the whole point of the ship classes. As described in the ingame descriptionsGǪ. Wyvern GÇÿthe Wyvern is likely to stand as a symbol of Caldari greatness for untold years to comeGÇÖ Nyx GÇÿthe Nyx itself is emblematic of the GallenteansGÇÖ love for progress; packed to the ergonomic brim with the latest in cutting-edge advancementsGÇÖ These are just a few of the in game descriptions given to such vessels, & then u have titans which give an even more awe impressing description which just screams the best of EVE has to offer.
First Off, Super Capitals are too hard to kill so what do u do about it without further a do u strip 20% of shields armour & hull. Surely there are better options available to do. I mean a Super-capital is classed as being the size of stations hence the inability to dock, yet a station has different sub sections that can be attacked ie the medical centre/reprocessing factory etc. Why not do something similar with Super capitals & give them targetable sub systems ie Jump Drives which can be shot to prevent escape, & targetable drone Command Centres which if damaged will cause the vessel not to be able to deploy & control fighters/bombers, weapon systems which if incapacitated will inhibit the vessel from operating weapons. With this in mind split the Sheild/Armor/Hull points up among the sub systems thus making a particular feature more vulnerable but as a whole not NERFGÇÖing the overall HP. This would give the attacker the easier chance of rendering a super out of the fight for the purpose it was deployed for but not taking away from the sheer vastness of the vessel
Another option would be to address the modules able to fit on a such a class of vessel. At present most Super capitals and Titans are faction/Officer fit which is really what makes then so immense in battle. Ie an Invulnerability field fitted on a BC or BS uses between 30 and 45 TF of CPU and 1 MW of power grid. Now fitting the same module on a Super capital has the safe affect at the same cost, so why not look at either reducing the effect they have because an Invulnerability field has to cover a shield 50x its size or looking at the requirements for itGÇÖs use. Ie the TF and MW are increased. Or even look at creating a Super Capital Class of modules which does a more retrospective effect on a vessel ie a Capital Invulnerability field with its own unique values, or a capital energised adaptive membrane which can only be fitted to capital class, which then will do away with fitting officer items as they are obsolete in terms of the output effects it has. (ie like fitting a X-large Shield booster on a capital as apposed to a Capital Shield Booster)
Next u addressed that super-carriers are too versatile, but your plan is to nerf them to a point where a standard carrier outways some of the benefits of the GÇÿnewGÇÖ super layout. Why not look at do what has already been suggested and increase the Drone bandwidth of fighter bombers so that the amount they can deploy is reduced which in terms of DPS is reduced & also lag due to millions of fighter bombers being deployed.
The Next Item you have highlighted to NERF is the Titan Superweapon. This should not happen. The DD is described as being GÇÿTHEGÇÖ SUPER WEAPON. By not being able to fire on 90% of the ships in eve will make this weapon obsolete. At the end of the day I can be sat still in a shuttlecraft and someone pointing a large gun at me that has me locked up should be able to fire and obliterate me. How u should look at this would be having the titan to have a 5% or 10% Field of fire with a DD, meaning it can lock anything but to fire at it the titan has to point itGÇÖs super sized killing machine at it. This in itself can be a challenge as titans can be so easily bumbed. Also the effect of the weapon should also be a Point to Point AOE weapon ie if a titan is firing at said target 50Km ahead of it, then while the Doomsday is in a brief operation, anything that passes in that line of sight from Titan to target should take some of the damage thus spreading the overall damage output of the weapon along everything within itGÇÖs path to the target, thus reducing the damage caused to the actual target. After all it is meant to be a focused weapon of destruction.
Next. Dreads will have a reduction in Siege mode & ever so slight increase to Damage output does not constitute as a good enough fix to bring them back in line, Especially if u plan on killing the Drone bay on these vessels. Maybe u should think of adding another 2 weapon mounts and the ability to fit 2 more guns/batteries
With regards to the Increase of the Sig resolution to fighters to 400 why I ask?? A fighter is meant to be a small versatile attack craft no bigger than a frigate so why give it the same attributes of battleships.
The Aggression Log Off Timer is the One Attribute in that whole long list u have created seems a fair & feasible option.
As I said in the beginning does CCP developers actually read the forums taking into account the voices of the member base that pays itGÇÖs way, or do all these posts that people have taken the time to make fall on deaf ears. Another question CCPGǪ. If u proposed plans are in place and nothing can be done to make you see sense, then I Sincerely hope u rebalance the production process for all the said capital class vessels reducing the build cost ie 20% off the Shield emitters, armour plates & construction parts for titans & super-carriers, also remove the requirement of drone bay parts for titans & Dreads
|
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 03:54:00 -
[1623] - Quote
DigitalCommunist wrote:First time posting on new forums; stopped halfway to take a rage poop. Didn't bother to copy my text like I usually do because new forums right? What can go wr--FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
In my opinion, Motherships/SC should be the ideal mobile support base for small to medium sized gangs (up to 30), and the ultimate wet dream for corporations who want to live in deep space without laying a very visible and vulnerable claim to it. Their primary role should be to have a secret and safe gathering point with basic facilities such as cloning and production. It's main defense would be stealth and the relative mobility that starbases do not have. Once discovered it needs to be defended just like any other asset.
Titans on the other hand are even simpler. If there is more than 3-6 in the hands of players at any given moment, something is fundamentally wrong with their implementation. This means that a Titan should be able to support an alliance fleet and essentially bring your sov / space with you much in the same way a real world supercarrier acts as a staging point for planes and bombers. It would cost a lot to upkeep in both manpower and resources, it would be very visible and impossible to hide, it would not be any more defenseless than a deathstar POS. It would be something you park in any system you want to control but don't and probably won't anytime soon (examples; YZ, NOL, BKG, AZN, etc).
Changes like this would give the ship role instead of just being "pwn mobiles", but they would also require lots of creativity from CCP which I haven't recently seen outside their awesome videos.
Because these would require major changes in game mechanics I doubt that something like this can be seen. The ships in this kinds of roles would actually be alliance ( or corp) assets, piloting them should be also be possible on alliance level instead of individual pilot.
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 04:18:00 -
[1624] - Quote
LegendaryFrog wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:
EDIT: you do realize that titans can still hit stuff and receive tracking links to help them with that, right?
What i realize is that if a ship the size of a dread, mothership, or titan can't find space for a drone bay, then theres absolutely no way anything smaller should have the space. You see, EvE developers should endorse realism over game balance in a game about immortal pilots and their spaceships because... Its about game balance. Super Capitals, while they do need to be reworked a bit, are being taken from one extreme to the other here.
As someone a ways back mentions, just send Super Carriers back to what they were when they were just Motherships. Lose the Fighter Bombers and Nerf the Titan's EHP. Removing drone bays on ships that require drones to survive once their support fleet dies off, seems a bit extreme. |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 04:19:00 -
[1625] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:[quote=Avon
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
The supercapital ships are different to other ships in one very important part; you cannot leave the ship and change to a new ship.
The only structure you can leave a supercarrier or a titan with even minimal secuirity is capital ship maintenance bay. This requires a control tower that can be killed and sovereignty and infrastructure upgrade.
What this suggested nerf is doing, is removing lot of gameplay options from these said ships. In past, it has been possible that you have used the ship ingame for few hours a week (most of it is spent waiting something to happen inside a pos).
In future, the use would be even less. Games are supposed to be fun, but I totally fail to see where is the fun with the suggested supercarriers.
Since every ship has a role and purpose, please describe why would you want to own one of these new supercarriers?
Or do you think its good idea to make another ship class as succesfull as electronic attack frigates? |
Ciryath Al'Darion
FinFleet Raiden.
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 04:24:00 -
[1626] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:[quote=Velin Dhal][quote=Tippia] was all about what would happen should a fleet with 250 supercaps invavde a system (this has happened before). The post went covered exactly how many sub-capitals it would take to beat their ewar-immune remote repping and counter them, while losing 75 ships to doomsdays every 10mins and attempting to replace their losses at a typical rate. As a bonus I planned to include a rough prediction of how long this would take on a time-dialated node (since a current node would not support this many ships in a stable manner).
I think fleet of 250 supercaps has happened as often as local count has gone over 3000.
|
J'J'J'Jita
Ch'Ch'Ch'Chia Corp
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 04:31:00 -
[1627] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:J'J'J'Jita wrote:Will pilots with the Fighter Bombers or (racial) Titan skills trained be reimbursed their skillpoints in normal drones, since those skills are now totally useless for supercapital pilots?
My Erebus pilot would like those drone skillpoints back. You will need those drone skills when your erebus gets popped and you are forced back into a regular battleship.
If I lose the Erebus I will just get another one. Like most titan pilots I'm rich personally and in a rich alliance.
CSMA / holding alt are not options because the titan needs to be able to log in at any time on very short notice for alliance ops. Retrieving and swapping out the titan would take too much time.
The fact is, drone skills are now totally useless for titan pilots and those skill points should be reimbursed. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:05:00 -
[1628] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Sigras wrote:The best part of this is that your own argument is your gallows because you'd be completely safe jumping into a 30 man battleship gang because when you got into trouble you'd just warp off and cloak because they cant warp scramble you. Maybe your 30 man gang should field some support ships like Hics, dictors and logi cruisers. You were the one to propose the battleship scenario, dont blame me for your fail analogies
Anile8er wrote: I forgot that when you cyno in you have full cap... right? hmmm more like 30 something percent. And the lock time on my Nyx for those battleships must be in the what? 3 second range? be really hard for them all to get on me at once, what with those kinds of lock times. And lets say 20 of your BS have a single neut, your knocking back 16,000 of my cap every 24 seconds. Start doing the math on say 30 BS with 2 neuts each...
Ill do the math when you show me a fit for an armageddon that does 1200 DPS and has two neuts . . .
The closest you can come is the tempest with about 1000 DPS and again lets remember that you are the one that was stupid enough to cyno your nyx on top of 30 tempests, which ofc is something that even you would never do . . .
The problem was that supercarrier hotdrops were never in danger, because against anything that can fight back, you'd cower systems away completely safe in your POS, and when you do decide to hotdrop, its against a small fleet that you KNOW cant kill you in 15 minutes . . . now logging off is not a tactic, and honestly it never should have been it should always have been an exploit.
Anile8er wrote:Educate yourself before you post on a subject. Please. Please take your own advice. |
Ubee Rubiks
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:06:00 -
[1629] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
I have been playing this game a long time and this is the first time I have ever seen a reply like this, maybe CCP is true about being open and developing eve right! |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:13:00 -
[1630] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Anile8er wrote:Sigras wrote:The best part of this is that your own argument is your gallows because you'd be completely safe jumping into a 30 man battleship gang because when you got into trouble you'd just warp off and cloak because they cant warp scramble you. Maybe your 30 man gang should field some support ships like Hics, dictors and logi cruisers. You were the one to propose the battleship scenario, dont blame me for your fail analogies Anile8er wrote: I forgot that when you cyno in you have full cap... right? hmmm more like 30 something percent. And the lock time on my Nyx for those battleships must be in the what? 3 second range? be really hard for them all to get on me at once, what with those kinds of lock times. And lets say 20 of your BS have a single neut, your knocking back 16,000 of my cap every 24 seconds. Start doing the math on say 30 BS with 2 neuts each... Ill do the math when you show me a fit for an armageddon that does 1200 DPS and has two neuts . . . The closest you can come is the tempest with about 1000 DPS and again lets remember that you are the one that was stupid enough to cyno your nyx on top of 30 tempests, which ofc is something that even you would never do . . . The problem was that supercarrier hotdrops were never in danger, because against anything that can fight back, you'd cower systems away completely safe in your POS, and when you do decide to hotdrop, its against a small fleet that you KNOW cant kill you in 15 minutes . . . now logging off is not a tactic, and honestly it never should have been it should always have been an exploit. Anile8er wrote:Educate yourself before you post on a subject. Please. Please take your own advice.
My math was based on BS doing an average of 850 DPS....
so 16000 cap every 24 seconds, thats 20 neuts... total for the fleet. |
|
non judgement
Without Fear Flying Burning Ships Alliance
748
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:13:00 -
[1631] - Quote
First time posting in a threadnaught.
I'd just like to say that it's amazing how much thought is going into this stuff without being able to see who it will affect the game. I haven't used a SC but I imagine these changes will change fleet composition a bit. I think they will help fleet battles. But I don't mind waiting until the changes hit the server before saying they were good changes. I was going to say Sisi but the main server is the best test to see how the changes work. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:13:00 -
[1632] - Quote
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:The supercapital ships are different to other ships in one very important part; you cannot leave the ship and change to a new ship.
The only structure you can leave a supercarrier or a titan with even minimal secuirity is capital ship maintenance bay. This requires a control tower that can be killed and sovereignty and infrastructure upgrade.
but you can leave them, and in fact IIRC the CSMA doesnt even require CPU so you can still get your ship(s) out even if the tower is reinforced, this makes the fact that the tower can be killed insignificant, and honestly, if you cant afford the 1 mil a day for the sov upgrade, why are you even flying a supercap?
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:What this suggested nerf is doing, is removing lot of gameplay options from these said ships. In past, it has been possible that you have used the ship ingame for few hours a week (most of it is spent waiting something to happen inside a pos).
In future, the use would be even less. Games are supposed to be fun, but I totally fail to see where is the fun with the suggested supercarriers.
Since every ship has a role and purpose, please describe why would you want to own one of these new supercarriers?
Or do you think its good idea to make another ship class as succesfull as electronic attack frigates? which is why they provided you with a POS module so you can leave your ship behind and fly a different one.
Also the role of the supercarrier should be to counter other cap ships; im personally of the belief that they need to get their 20% EHP back but even without it, theyre still extremely viable counters to dreadnaughts and able to blow through sov units. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:18:00 -
[1633] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:My math was based on BS doing an average of 850 DPS....
so 16000 cap every 24 seconds, thats 20 neuts... total for the fleet. The particular numbers are insignificant to the fact that you still had 100% of the initiative . . . if it is something that has any chance of killing you, you dont engage.
Well now everything has a chance to kill you, so you have to be far more strategic about how you deploy them . . . you may even have to resort to using them for the purpose they were intended . . . the horror! the horror! |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:24:00 -
[1634] - Quote
J'J'J'Jita wrote:If I lose the Erebus I will just get another one. Like most titan pilots I'm rich personally and in a rich alliance.
CSMA / holding alt are not options because the titan needs to be able to log in at any time on very short notice for alliance ops. Retrieving and swapping out the titan would take too much time.
The fact is, drone skills are now totally useless for titan pilots and those skill points should be reimbursed. The fact that your alliance is press-ganging you into never leaving your titan is your problem, not a problem of the system. your character is free to leave the titan in the CSMA any time as far as the game is concerned, what you decide to do with your character is your business and should not result in retroactive changes for all of New Eden. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:25:00 -
[1635] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:
My math was based on BS doing an average of 850 DPS....
so 16000 cap every 24 seconds, thats 20 neuts... total for the fleet.
You are aware that supercaps are generally found in groups, and that they can remote cap and remote repair each other, right?
Theory crafting is something you can twist to support whatever you want, but we need to deal with reality here... |
Endeavour Starfleet
685
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:47:00 -
[1636] - Quote
I 100 percent agree with the logoff timer change. If someone is being attacked being able to wait it out and vanish is not fair in the least.
But I do not agree with things like the EHP decrease. Pre TiDi lag and logoffski were causing the ability for entire cap fleets to vanish. Those issues will be gone after Winter 2011. The EHP nerf isnt needed.
How about this CCP. Keep the EHP nerf on "Hot Standby" Ready to deploy by a patch if and ONLY if the other changes are not resulting in how cap and subcap combat ought to be.
That sounds fair to me does everyone agree? |
Celery Man
Talocan Mining And Industrial Talocan United
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:52:00 -
[1637] - Quote
Aase Nord wrote:Thank you CCP/goons/allies/alts. Game is F.U.B.A.R
Its time for me to find an other game to spend my money on .
Bye
If this breaks the game for you, then gtfo :) we wont miss you. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:04:00 -
[1638] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. You think they got the ISK to buy a supercap through their in-game actions. heh
Thatsthejoke.jpg Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:08:00 -
[1639] - Quote
Celery Man wrote:
If this breaks the game for you, then gtfo :) we wont miss you.
Actually since we're already missing 20% of eve's subscriber base due to the retardation of incarna, I wouldn't so sure that ever super cap pilot quiting wouldn't be noticed at this point.
They'd be big babies to quit, but just the same, saying they wouldn't be noticed is extremely short sighted considering the current server population levels.
|
Bugcheck
Israeli Gold Miners Union
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:10:00 -
[1640] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Apologize if this was been suggested already but I didnt read the whole thread. Instead of nerfing the fighter, go along with nerfing the SC drone capabilities. What if you change FBs to have the same bandwidth as fighters, and change the drone deployment mechanics to validate you're in an SC to deploy FBs only (would allow carriers to move FBs just not deploy them). Change carrier skill bonus of drone deployment to be +2 per level for SCs instead of +3 drones. Buff FB DPS and HP 33% to compensate (also increase mineral build cost equally). Also reduce SC bandwidth and capacity further to balance with current plan. SCs then can only deploy 15 FBs with overall effect of fighter not touched but also only 15 fighters instead of 20. Makes sense that an SC could do more damage to subcaps w/ fighters than a carrier.
This would also help with war-on-lag etc since less drones on field overall. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:12:00 -
[1641] - Quote
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:[quote=Avon
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
The supercapital ships are different to other ships in one very important part; you cannot leave the ship and change to a new ship.
Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?
Right?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:13:00 -
[1642] - Quote
R0ze wrote:Goddam .. few posts ago you said that price should be dictated by demand [GǪ] Now you state when the ship has "better performance" one should go with - NO I am not getting that ship I should toally look into something else! No, I'm stating even if a ship has better performance, it must still die horribly when faced with its counter.
Quote:at least be consistent in your forum poasting .. Seeing as how one did not contradict the other, I am. What you just quoted had nothing to do with price, but with counters.
InnerDrive wrote:A nyx for example moves at 137ms with a mwd and at 88ms without one. (notice you cant web supercarriers or titans either) Ok. So it moves ~50% faster with an MWD. It is also 4-500% bigger. This means that it is now 200GÇô250% easier to tack, and Dread pilot will be very happy for this.
So no, fitting an MWD to a titan to move faster than a Dread can track is a particularly bad idea because it doesn't work GÇö it makes the titan easier to track.
Avon wrote:That's a long but terrible argument.
If a ship actually costs more to produce then it *should* have some advantage, otherwise why bother? You're still thinking the wrong way around. If a ship has some advantage, it should to cost more. That is all. However, it does not follow from this that something that costs more has some advantage.
Velin Dhal wrote:Tell me this. IF this patch stays as is and launches this winter, how do you envision large scale 0.0 warfare ? Same as now, except that one ship class cannot do it all any more. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:19:00 -
[1643] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?
Right?
If you are dumb enough to bring your over priced pirtate implants an 6% concord implants out of the hull that keeps them safe, then you go right ahead.
I couldn't even guess at the value anymore of a super clone, they probably add 8ish billion to the hull cost.
Tippia wrote:Same as now, except that one ship class cannot do it all any more.
Supercarrier can't shoot towers, so theres one thing they can't do right now, they also suck in support fleet fights, but ima let people like you, who don't own or fly one, go ahead and tell the rest of us what they can do.
Whoever started the myth that supercarriers ruin fleet fights is a god, because supers literally do NOTHING in fleet fights until other caps hit the ground, unless you count the 10 seconds of dps that sentry drones apply as the targets motor out of drone control range. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:25:00 -
[1644] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Malcanis wrote:Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?
Right? If you are dumb enough to bring your over priced pirtate implants an 6% concord implants out of the hull that keeps them safe, then you go right ahead. Because obviously there is no way to keep implants safe in this gameGǪ
Quote:Supercarrier can't shoot towers, so theres one thing they can't do right now, they also suck in support fleet fights, but ima let people like you, who don't own or fly one, go ahead and tell the rest of us what they can do. Ah, so you're saying that, in fact, nothing will actually change with this fix. Well then, all this whinging is really about nothing. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:27:00 -
[1645] - Quote
LegendaryFrog wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:
EDIT: you do realize that titans can still hit stuff and receive tracking links to help them with that, right?
What i realize is that if a ship the size of a dread, mothership, or titan can't find space for a drone bay, then theres absolutely no way anything smaller should have the space. You see, EvE developers should endorse realism over game balance in a game about immortal pilots and their spaceships because...
Because it is impossible to make a ship larger than the smallest aircraft carrier that can't launch planes? |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:30:00 -
[1646] - Quote
Balor Haliquin wrote:Relnala wrote:Balor Haliquin wrote:So at the risk of this not being read by any developer. I would like to point out a major flaw in the current balancing of super capital ships in eve. Super carriers are still to powerful. Having fought 300 man super capital fleets and understanding how they work the super carrier was always the more threatening then the titan. Simply because it has more effective DPS, had a better ECM system, and often had the same EHP as the titan for 16th the cost.
Looking at the cost end of the spectrum we see that a super carrier takes about 1billion isk in skills, about 4 months in training time to become effective and then another 17 billion isk for the hull and fittings. Contrast that with a titan that costs about 7 billion isk in skills and around a year to train for so that your can do more then just sit in it. You can understand why super carriers are out numbering titans by nearly 20 to 1. Simply put even with the nerfs and the super carriers inability to engage sub caps effectively, they are still going to be a better anti capital ships because they still have nerly the same EHP and can remote rep each other.
With the current glut of super carriers, you will not see dread fleets because the super carrier fleet is simply going to wipe the floor with the dread fleet. Anything not supported by super carriers becomes an easy target for super carriers and carriers. The simple fact is that the super carrier has too big of a performance envelope.
Looking at the current and proposed EHP stats you can see that the super carrier is equal to the titans EHP. While only requiring a quarter of the resources and a thrid of the time to train for. If we were to put that in sub capital terms we would be looking at a T1 cruiser that has the same EHP and firepower as a battleship, but with none of the draw backs of cost and training time. Either the DPS or the EHP, or both. Honestly i like the idea of a super carrier that has huge firepower but is not a solid rock of hit points. Remember that super carrier can remote repair each other and more often then not when you have 100 of them on field you simply can not break the remote repair tank on them even if you have 100 of your own super carriers hitting them.
If we take the reduced hit points of the titan (about 42 million EHP)and super carrier(about 41 million ehp) assuming both are dead space fit and slave implants. And we compare that to how many carrier it takes to build each (about 62 for a titan and 16 for a super carrier). We then take the Titans EHP and divide it by the number of carriers it takes and we get 677,419 EHP. we then multiply that by the number of carriers it takes to make a super carrier and we get 10,838,709 EHP. That is about where the super carrier should be sitting.
But because of the efficiencies of construction, i think a number of about 14,500,000 EHP is much more suitable. That means the super carrier is far more vulnerable to titans and dreads alike and there is an actual risk to flying them. This will also prevent the glut of super carriers from ensuring that nothing changes in eve. Because at the end of the day we will still need titans and dreads to hit sov structures. And if the fist counter is drop 100 super carriers on it and rep it up to save it, then we will see not shift in the current way eve is running in null sec.
go fit an archon like you fit a super carrier. It has about 10mil EHP with gang bonii. So by your logic, the Aeon should have 200mil EHP. No, by my logic they should have about 15mil EHP like i stated. As a point of interest an archon can get to 6 million EHP with a deadspace fit wit slaves. The point I am trying to make is that even with 20% less EHP the super carrier still has far to many hit points for far to cheep a hull.
It is silly to compare fitting the two with the same modules. Try modules and implants in proportion to the hull price. A 10 bil carrier vs a 20 bil sc is a far different story than a 1.5 bil carrier and a 20 bil sc. Or should the dramiel and daredevil, hell, every ship in the game, be balanced based on meta 14/13 fits? |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:32:00 -
[1647] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ah, so you're saying that, in fact, nothing will actually change with this fix. Well then, all this whinging is really about nothing. No he is not.Please do us all a favor and learn to read.
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:33:00 -
[1648] - Quote
J'J'J'Jita wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote:J'J'J'Jita wrote:Will pilots with the Fighter Bombers or (racial) Titan skills trained be reimbursed their skillpoints in normal drones, since those skills are now totally useless for supercapital pilots?
My Erebus pilot would like those drone skillpoints back. You will need those drone skills when your erebus gets popped and you are forced back into a regular battleship. If I lose the Erebus I will just get another one. Like most titan pilots I'm rich personally and in a rich alliance. CSMA / holding alt are not options because the titan needs to be able to log in at any time on very short notice for alliance ops. Retrieving and swapping out the titan would take too much time. The fact is, drone skills are now totally useless for titan pilots and those skill points should be reimbursed.
So if CCP nerfs any ship and you do not plan to fly it again, they should immediately give you the SP? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:36:00 -
[1649] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:No he is not.Please do us all a favor and learn to read. I am. He's claiming that they currently aren't of much use against support fleets. The biggest change here is that they will no longer be of much use against support fleets. Plus +ºa changeGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:36:00 -
[1650] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Anile8er wrote:
My math was based on BS doing an average of 850 DPS....
so 16000 cap every 24 seconds, thats 20 neuts... total for the fleet.
You are aware that supercaps are generally found in groups, and that they can remote cap and remote repair each other, right? Theory crafting is something you can twist to support whatever you want, but we need to deal with reality here...
At least in this example, he was talking about solo dropping the group of 30. |
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:38:00 -
[1651] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Celery Man wrote:
If this breaks the game for you, then gtfo :) we wont miss you.
Actually since we're already missing 20% of eve's subscriber base due to the retardation of incarna, I wouldn't so sure that ever super cap pilot quiting wouldn't be noticed at this point. They'd be big babies to quit, but just the same, saying they wouldn't be noticed is extremely short sighted considering the current server population levels.
I won't be surprised if this brings people back and delays other people unsubbing because they suddenly have a bit more faith in CCP. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:39:00 -
[1652] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:[quote=Avon
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
The supercapital ships are different to other ships in one very important part; you cannot leave the ship and change to a new ship. Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main? Right?
That was my plan if I ever got one...
|
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:41:00 -
[1653] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mioelnir wrote:No he is not.Please do us all a favor and learn to read. I am. He's claiming that they currently aren't of much use against support fleets. The biggest change here is that they will no longer be of much use against support fleets. Plus +ºa changeGǪ Yes, and you then go ahead and claim that because one aspect does not change, no aspect changes. And that is wrong. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:42:00 -
[1654] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Malcanis wrote:
Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?
Right?
If you are dumb enough to bring your over priced pirtate implants an 6% concord implants out of the hull that keeps them safe, then you go right ahead.
Ever hear of jump clones?
Titan/SC ---> Holding alt, dock up, jc to new clone one system over, lose less isk when you die?
:effort: |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:44:00 -
[1655] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:Tippia wrote:Mioelnir wrote:No he is not.Please do us all a favor and learn to read. I am. He's claiming that they currently aren't of much use against support fleets. The biggest change here is that they will no longer be of much use against support fleets. Plus +ºa changeGǪ Yes, and you then go ahead and claim that because one aspect does not change, no aspect changes. And that is wrong.
Other than the timer, the changes make the SCs less effective against support fleets. The only other large change as far as I can tell is that they have less extra FBs to back themselves up. Either that, or they had an effect against support fleets, in which case there was a problem, but there wasn't, i need sleep, but that seems to be a logical loop i am stuck in... |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:45:00 -
[1656] - Quote
J'J'J'Jita wrote:Will pilots with the Fighter Bombers or (racial) Titan skills trained be reimbursed their skillpoints in normal drones, since those skills are now totally useless for supercapital pilots?
My Erebus pilot would like those drone skillpoints back.
I want also the Drone Skills for my Levi titan back ...
so the T2 Heavys / Sentrys are not longer needed ... sou you can delete all the trained drone skills and give the SPs back !!! to train this Drones cost a lot of time ... and this time is wasted with this fuc**** patch
or better , let me dock so i can refine the titan |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:46:00 -
[1657] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:Yes, and you then go ahead and claim that because one aspect does not change, no aspect changes. And that is wrong. So what other aspects change, do you think? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
URDEAD2ME
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:59:00 -
[1658] - Quote
hope they fix the tracking on dreads too not fun seeing a sc speed tank your guns :( |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:01:00 -
[1659] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mioelnir wrote:Yes, and you then go ahead and claim that because one aspect does not change, no aspect changes. And that is wrong. So what other aspects change, do you think?
Nothing changed, there is a thread with the title capital balance, but nothing is actually changing.
Supers still deploy fighters because people didn't want to face the possibility of not being able to run Sanctums with carriers, they had the fighter nerf 'undone', so now, you'll have herds of supers launching their 5-10 fighters with rack loads of webs and painters.
On top of this, the ECM burst ill no longer burst their own reps off, so a proficient group of supers will be bursting every few seconds to keep sub caps having to constantly relock the target while their reps, and the reps of triage carriers remain in tact.
Dropping this in the middle of a battleship fleet spells the end of the battleship fleet, no other help needed but dictors to hold everything in the area.
Thats whats most dumb about this whole series of changes, the carebears inability to let go of ratting in carriers has taken the teeth out of the nerf entirely, and left you with nerfs that just don't make sense from a basic design point of view (drone ships that can't launch normal drones).
As is in its current incarnation this is a super cap BUFF simply due to the ECM changes alone, and it came at a cost of a few hit points that everybody knew they needed to lose anyway....well, except the Hel, in CCPs infinite wisdom they have made it so that a pimp fit archon can achieve nearly the same hit points as a 20 billion isk 'end game' ship.
The problem as it sits right now, is too many people who have only watched supers in all their forms from the outside are attempting to talk like they actually know how the work, when in fact you are mostly clueless.
The day after this nerf, everything will be the same, only you'll be left trying to explain why you want things nerfed even more because you still have the same problems on your hands, because you do not understand the problems to begin with.
|
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:15:00 -
[1660] - Quote
So I am going to re-iterate what I said about 40 pages back.
Drone Bay. Completely taking away the use of normal drones is too stiff of a nerf. Splitting the bay into two parts, one that is for Fighters and Fighter Bombers only, and the other for normal drones. Say 1250m3 (50 large drones) for a Nyx, 1000m3 (40 large) for a Wyvern, 875m3 (35 large) for an Aeon and 750m3 (30 large) for a Hel. This would mean that during a fight, supers would run out of drones much faster. If there were a few stealth bombers paying attention during that fight and bombing the drones whenever they were concentrated on something. You would quickly declaw the super fleet and leaving them hanging and looking for a way out as now they are just a big structure to shoot at.
EHP nerf. This is by far not needed, supers do not have the uber EHP that so many noobs have been toteing around. The EHP of supers is 56mil EHP at most and thats on an Aeon. The most prevalent super, the Nyx, has only 36mil EHP at the most, and not everyone has there supers fitted like that. With the paragraph about, a declawed super is just basically a slowly moving structure to grind through. If you must put an EHP nerf on them, which it seems like you have a hard on for that CCP, a 5-10% reduction would suffice.
Dreads. Needs more work....A lot more work. For one, they need there drones back, there bays are only the size of a battleship anyways, its not like there massive DPS. A 20% increase in EHP would be a good start for buffing them. The siege cycle is another good thing, but dreads need more then just that, like removing the tracking nerf....completely. Maybe a 50% reduction to RR when in siege? This coupled with a buff to HP could save them from titans and FB's with those buffs it would be a good start in getting dreads to be anti super and titan.
Nerfs are needed in games but IN MODERATION and you (CCP) have had a tendency to swing the proverbial GÇ£nerf batGÇ¥ a little too hard. When swinging that nerf bat keep in mind when nerfing something that take years of training and billions of isk to build, that going too far will make you lose players. Bowing to the weak minded WoW players will make you lose players who have been with you for years and years, people who have supported you for that long. Heed the warning........ |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:16:00 -
[1661] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Nothing changed, there is a thread with the title capital balance, but nothing is actually changing. Quite. Which is why one has to ask: what is all the whinging about?
Quote:The problem as it sits right now, is too many people who have only watched supers in all their forms from the outside are attempting to talk like they actually know how the work, when in fact you are mostly clueless. The really worrying bit is how many people who have (supposedly) watched supers from the inside are also mostly clueless, as your examples show. My suspicion is that it stems from largely the same factor: they have never actually seen their own ships in the situations where they're causing problems.
Quote:The day after this nerf, everything will be the same, only you'll be left trying to explain why you want things nerfed even more because you still have the same problems on your hands, because you do not understand the problems to begin with. The retraction of the fighter change was a prime example of this, since on closer inspection, the problem is actually quite different from the one that was initially presented. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:23:00 -
[1662] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Nothing changed, there is a thread with the title capital balance, but nothing is actually changing. Quite. Which is why one has to ask: what is all the whinging about?
Because an artificial limitation is being imposed on 3 ship types (dreads, supercarriers, titans) that now require them to have support because they can't launch a single 5 drone flight of light drones in their own defense, yet no other ship type needs fall under this hoakey limitation being put into place.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:32:00 -
[1663] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:If you are dumb enough to bring your over priced pirtate implants an 6% concord implants out of the hull that keeps them safe, then you go right ahead.
ITT: a Titan is a 'safe place' to keep valuables. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:33:00 -
[1664] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Because an artificial limitation is being imposed on 3 ship types (dreads, supercarriers, titans) that now require them to have support because they can't launch a single 5 drone flight of light drones in their own defense, yet no other ship type needs fall under this hoakey limitation being put into place. 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.
Yes, there are still things that need to be addressed, most notably the effect of having them in large numbers, but you knowGǪ baby steps. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:36:00 -
[1665] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Because an artificial limitation is being imposed on 3 ship types (dreads, supercarriers, titans) that now require them to have support because they can't launch a single 5 drone flight of light drones in their own defense, yet no other ship type needs fall under this hoakey limitation being put into place. 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. .
So why is every other offensive capital ship being forced into the "Fleet Ship" profile except the carrier?
Shouldn't we remove its regular drones as well and require it to be fielded with support?
After all if you're changing the role of offensive capitals, change them all, don't leave one in its broken state.
They are broken right, thats why we're changing them? |
Jennifer Celeste
The Dark Horses.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:42:00 -
[1666] - Quote
im very late to this thread...but good god, what a boatload of awesome! The tears in this thread are what I've waited for since they super-buffed Moms and Titans...
Excuse me while I go slosh around in the olympic sized swimming pool full of tears |
Meldgaard
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:44:00 -
[1667] - Quote
Shade Millith wrote:Just Another Toon wrote:You are stupid, best changes CCP have done and now your back tracking cos of a little forum pressure.. Carriers are logistics ships not offensive ships. Want to defend a carrier bring your sub cap fleet!
Now im angry Carriers do not need a nerf. He is backing down from an accidental nerfing of a ship type that didn't need it.
Then give carriers are tracking buff to fighters, that way we still can get the SC balanced. |
Jennifer Celeste
The Dark Horses.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 07:47:00 -
[1668] - Quote
Meldgaard wrote:Then give carriers are tracking buff to fighters, that way we still can still farm sanctums in our carriers.
FYP |
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
103
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:02:00 -
[1669] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Tippia wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Because an artificial limitation is being imposed on 3 ship types (dreads, supercarriers, titans) that now require them to have support because they can't launch a single 5 drone flight of light drones in their own defense, yet no other ship type needs fall under this hoakey limitation being put into place. 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. . So why is every other offensive capital ship being forced into the "Fleet Ship" profile except the carrier? Shouldn't we remove its regular drones as well and require it to be fielded with support? After all if you're changing the role of offensive capitals, change them all, don't leave one in its broken state. They are broken right, thats why we're changing them? 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. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:09:00 -
[1670] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:[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.
They have pretty overwhelming reps, so they CAN defend, as much as any dread can, against supers and titans.
They can also defend/defeat sub caps in large enough numbers in the same way.
And yea, why CAN'T dreads, supers, and titans keep a small drone bay, 50m3 or so, I cannot fathom the whole "NO DRONES NOT NOW NOT EVER". Every Gallente ship, from the noob ship up uses drones, but for some reason the 3 biggest baddest had them left out?
Thats the only flaw in the nerfs, is omitting a small drone bay from each ship type, and keeping the carrier inline with the rest of the 'fleet' ships.
|
|
Karles
UK Corp RAZOR Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:13:00 -
[1671] - Quote
Aase Nord wrote:Thank you CCP/goons/allies/alts. Game is F.U.B.A.R
Its time for me to find an other game to spend my money on .
Bye
Please don't leave... What will become nullsec pvp without you around? |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:20:00 -
[1672] - Quote
! changes need too, against supcapital blob. Increase their build time to 2x or 3x times longer. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:24:00 -
[1673] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:I never understood some ****** players why happy, when CCP changes to wrong direction something. Check weapon icons, 0.0 changes what need changes again because bad ideas.
Clap your hands buddies when capital nerf coming. :DDD
1. Supercarriers changes: The first problem is their too big damage output, but CCP nerfing their HP ??? 2. Unuseable Dreads still unuseable. Who want bring dreads to fight, when 300-400 supercarrier blobs moving to kill them ?
3. Fighter nerf, made carriers unusable against sub-cap fleets, but CCP say, bring carriers against subfleets. LOL We knew it always, they don't like drones and this is why they want to remove from caps. They got their chance to remove drones and say to player base, bring more man to fights instead of the drones, but everyone know that, if somebody bring more man he will bring more lag. We know supcarriers problems is their damage output and they useable with blob without support, but CCP why need nerfing fighters ??? They want to nerfing carriers too with fighter changes ???
4. Titan nerf: Old supercarriers changes made titans unusable, titan pilots using them just for titanbridges, because too dangerous using them against supercap blobs. But ccp idea more nerfing titans. LOL 3-4 supercarriers more useable than a single titan with same value. Who wanna use titans when too weak against SC hordes ? Grab HD or dictor and catch a titan without danger, because drone removing. LOL CCP read your backstories and chronicles from titans.
We know, need changes and rebalance but be smart and use brain and logic.
Supcarriers need damage nerf too for adding to chance to dread fleets. Fighter changes will make carrier nerf not just for supcarrier. (Remove fighters from supers and not need fighter nerf, but CCP your idea will succes, because supers will need support.) Need titan boost against supercarrier hordes and need scriptable DD.
|
Aequitas Veritas
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:25:00 -
[1674] - Quote
As Miolnir and many others have pointed out theres plenty of other ways to change how the Supers can be changed, best would be a total remake of them to something different than combatships, but that will take time and some rebalancing before is in dire need. Dread buff and logoutchanges are spot on, though I'd keep the dronebay on dreads as well. No ship should be completely useless vs all smaller ships.
All the fuzz about the supercarriers drones are quite ********. It's not an issue in most fights as can be demonstrated in this video which shows how helpless supercarriers are against a welpfleet even with support:
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZcA5g59Zsg&list=FLoWHRYGINTIWXgyJNU77P7A&index=1[/url]
Though since drones can be a issue in the smallest of fights in lowsec and so on Id still change them some.
Fighters Increase their sig resolution to at least 200 to make them less useful against cruisers and destroyers etc, possibly more, as well as increase orbit of the closest orbiting ones. Might want to bring this up to 300 or so.
SuperCarriers Their biggest problem is their insane damage dealt to capitals using fighterbombers, this makes carriers and dreads completely useless when faceing supercarriers. Their second problem is the ease of which they project power. Thirdly their ability to create remote rr chains and thus operate without carriers and forth their damageoutput vs subcaps, mostly in smallscale fighting. Changes: Give supercarriers a rolebonus with 100% damage to fighter and fighterbombers, reduce their skillbonus to +1 drone pr level as with carriers and theyll work just as the Revenant does. At the same time reduce the damage of fighterbombers to 50% of what it is today. This reduces lag created by drones. It reduce the gankeffect that supercarriers today have over other capitals and prevents them being used. It reduces the amout of normal drones to 10 which makes them less efficient in destroying gangwarfare and lastly it reduce their damage output vs POSes by 50% making dreads useful. Remove rigslots and balance their HP around 30M EHP fully fitted without bonuses so the supers don't mess with the rigmarket for battleships. Remove their bonus to Remote Reps so they can't spidertank alone and would need carrier support. Get Slaveallike implants for Shieldships in some way. Reduce the jumprange to limit their powerprojection and increase the jumpfuelcost to make their use more of an effort. Possibly give them XL rigslots which can be used to modify the supers to a more logistical role with increased hangar and shipbay as well as jumprange. In short: Max 10 launched fighters, fighterbombers and drones. Same DPS as today with fighters but 50% reduction of fighterbombers and with drones. No RR. Reduced EHP so theire around 30M EHP. Increased cost of using and less power projection. Less efficient vs subcaps due to fighter sig res increase and 50% less drones launched.
Titan changes Keep their EHP and increase the EHP of the Ragnarok. Remove rigslots. Reduce jumprange and increase jumpfuel to limit power projection through Titan bridges and the Titan itself. I'd even want the bridge to be removed alltogether as bridgedropping is preventing ppl from fighting cus theres no way for ppl to know if theres reinforcements coming within the blink of an eye to the opposing gang. DoomsDay might be fine with a Capital only version, but might be better to just or also increase its fuelcost to not only prevent DDing cheaper targets, but also limit how many times a Titan can DD in a fleetfight through its fuelbay, making each DD more valuable. Keep the dronebay.
Summary This will let the supers still have a role and a defence without being completely dependent on winning the subcap fights in fleetbattles. Through limiting the amount of drones launched it reduce their efficiency in affecting smaller gangs and with no RR ability on the supers themselves one might think twice about dropping a few supers on a smaller gang. Power projection through jumping and bridgeing is reduced which will increase smallgangs survivability and increased jumpfuelamount will make it costly to move a fleet of supercaps around.
This is a tweak to them and not a complete castration. If it fails to give the effect you want nothing prevents you from making further changes in the future.
Though at some point something must be done about the DD, it needs to be changed to some kind of effect rather than a weapon or just removed or Titan proliferation will just continue to increase and we're back to square one. |
Infinion
Awesome Corp
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:31:00 -
[1675] - Quote
did anyone actually use damage drones while their dread was in siege besides the moros? I used webbing drones |
Grymn Loche
hirr Against ALL Authorities
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:38:00 -
[1676] - Quote
why use a sledge hammer to fix a couple of small cracks in your best bone china tea set "people who winge should be killed"
direct quote: M Gandhi 1947 |
Le Cardinal
Spricer Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:44:00 -
[1677] - Quote
Great, forum ate my post TWICE
90% of the replys here are ********.
A 20B endgame ship shouldnt be able to hold at least a few drones to fend off a dictor? lol. How somone could say thats a sane thing to do is beyond comprehension.
Lets go further:
Remove drones and offensive capabilty of interdictors and HICs: "Destroyer-class/Cruiser-class vessels, designed to pull other vessels out of warp."
Remove drones from majority of BS: "They have after all a designated role as well. Dont like it? bring support"
Remove all offensive capability of Cap-Industrial SHips and Mining barges: "Dont like it? bring support. Its industrial ships.
Remove mining abilities of Cap-industrial ships. They are supposed to be industrial platforms, not solominers ".
Remove ability to fit EW modules on ships not designed for it: Dont like it? Bring proper support.
I could go on and on and its not anymore ******** than most of the arguments that people in this thread spews out.
There are ships designated for most roles in the game, so if you wanna pull the role-card then make it happen to all classes. I would like to see the reactions then from the people in this thread who support the current nerf.
No matter how you twist and turn it, you do in fact sometimes end up in situations where you are alone and without support, either from logging at a safespot or pos or whatever. Its inevitable. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:48:00 -
[1678] - Quote
Got my post eaten too, this is irritating.
Got Eaten, Didn't Read version: 36M EHP on a supercap is already too much when compared to the Hp per isk ratio on other ships and the opportunity cost of taking one down. If you don't understand what the opportunity cost is, go check wikipedia. |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:55:00 -
[1679] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mioelnir wrote:Yes, and you then go ahead and claim that because one aspect does not change, no aspect changes. And that is wrong. So what other aspects change, do you think? The path of your reasoning is wrong, regardless of what else changes. But I'm in a mood to feed you, so here we go:
Close to all options small groups of capitals have. Yet we all pretty much agree that small capital counts are not a problem once the logout mechanic is changed so that a properly tackled and engaged capital does not disappear. There are plenty of options to counter small capital fleets.
It also makes dreads even more suicidal than they are now, a shipclass generally considered so overpowered, you can often buy them for below mineral value. Yet carriers remain swiss army knives. And battleships do not require frigate escorts.
All the while, in large packs, very very little will change. By model size alone, a group of titans is so vast that you will never be able to keep every one of them from successfully tracking you in a battleship by hitting orbit on one. That is simply how tracking works. Their overwehelming DPS against the shipclasses that are supposed to fight them remains, meaning those will not get fielded against sthem.
Dreads remain immobile dps platforms that can not adapt to a fight in any way preserving them as a relic from a time when eve pvp tactics were two fleets set up at 200km from each other shooting it out. The limitations the siege module needs to impose on them so POS remain a threat guarantee a turkey shoot once supers enter the field.
Supercarrier dps against caps and structures remains high because sov structure HP is balanced against it and remote ecm burst became more powerful at the cost of their double-battleship dps against subcaps inside 60km. Their massive EHP bulk with remote rep is unaffected or strengthened, depending on engagement range.
Carrier miraculously stay the same. And while their remote rep can be jammed, it is also a lot easier to field 250 of them, bringing us back to Branch-defense by Insurgency times with 250 carriers except there is no AEO DDD to clean the fighters. The moment supers enter the field, they continue to die like flies in a flamethrower.
Shield capitals still need setup time and effort to gain full combat strength, keeping them inferior to armor capitals which do not require such support.
What changes is that those capitals that already can be killed, will now be trivial. What changes is the certainty of the cap pilot that if he gets stranded during deployment, he has no defensive options left and by that account might not deploy his cap at all. What changes is the introduction of combat shiptypes that are not allowed to defend themselves against ships that are specifically designed to engage them (HICs). What changes is that you do not actually need to fight supercarriers, but get their killmails gifted to you by killing their support.
@Infinion: yes.
@Shadowsword: no it is not. |
Lord Wickham
Green Eagle Research Punch Drunk Lemmings
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:58:00 -
[1680] - Quote
when they say fighter singature radius has been increased to 400, is this both fighters and fighter bombers or what?
is a carrier now useless to rat in aswell? and what about wormhole carriers? |
|
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 08:59:00 -
[1681] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:I want also the Drone Skills for my Levi titan back ...
so the T2 Heavys / Sentrys are not longer needed ... sou you can delete all the trained drone skills and give the SPs back !!! to train this Drones cost a lot of time ... and this time is wasted with this fuc**** patch
or better , let me dock so i can refine the titan
I also want my money back from Monday night dinner because you know ... it is in the toilet now ...
E |
Monster Dude
hirr Against ALL Authorities
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 09:07:00 -
[1682] - Quote
down in this post: - preconditions for SC nerf are wrong - nerfing SC's wrong in general - it all in favor of botting
To me all past changes do is "driving SC's out of game. Making them less and less useful." And that that removing of drones is a peak of nonsense. It has no EVE world logic at all.
My assumption: Perhaps CCP devs listening some once opinions when making this. But I'm afraid that those people are either not honest to EVE community or just very high in leadership position that they do get SC by clap a hands (most likely both).
Closer to the point: What is SC for ordinary player who has built on his own?. Not to mention that it takes whole character to get stuck in SC. It is ship that can give value in nice capital PVP for him, his corp, his alliance. Meanwhile if there is no PVP need SC pilot could make some ISK in his VERY expensive ship. (which expose him in danger getting tackled and killed)
What for SC's after this nerf? For rich, well rich alliances that can afford lose them a lot if "something goes wrong"? That change is in favor of those rich alliances just to make their separation from others even higher. Hm... who might want that? Cause if you want to be cost efficient - you start using drednoughts due to their insurance... And what SC will do?
Long ago SC's were already nerfed for worse ratting abilities. Why? I didn't see anything bad in ratting SC... Nothing is wrong in that. Freaking expensive ship does ratting and getting used. If it is getting used it will be tackled at some point and die. But now instead of manual ratting in e.g. SC half of eve does botting. After nerf 3/4 will do botting? Well, compare you doing manually ratting in SC and some one botting with drake(s). What is better for real EVE players?
Preconditions for nerf:
1) Supercapitals are too hard to kill. 2) Supercarriers are far too versatile. 3) The Titan superweapon is too powerful. 4) Dreadnoughts are not good enough. 5) Remote ECM Bursts should not work on ships immune to ewar. 6) Sub-capitals are useless in fleet fights.
1) too hard to kill? really? I wouldn't say so as I seen many of those pops very quick being attacked sub-caps. 2) too versatile? really? a ship that can't really kill hictor on his own... that takes ages to lock cruser size or frig.... and if you need to swap fighters to drones it takes too long and time is everything. 3) titans - perhaps this is right precondition. So this step is for making gap between rich alliances and poor once smaller. When doing opposite with SC's... 4) dreds - absolutely correct 5) ECM - no comments that perhaps right 6) really? good to know... Now I know that all my fights before and titans/super kills were useless
As I see things: - There is nothing wrong with SC's atm, absolutely nothing. They are just good. Nerfing them is a bonus for botting communities and bonus to very rich alliances (which are often the same). - May be it is not bad idea to nefr a bit titans dooms day, but I'd draw border on BS size. BS and above can shot, cruser and below can't. - YES, dreads needs boost. This one it self will bring needed balance.
As a short summary. Why would player like to have/build an SC? (for him or for providing some abilities for his corp as individual) Why would corp like to equip members with SC's? (if business wise dreds are safer, insurance, etc...) This nerf will increase amount of botters -> ppl getting not fair advantage on those who stays in rules -> they will afford to use this nerfed SC's, as they can replace them in 2 weeks botting -> not good changes. |
Ath'daru
Phantom Squad Nulli Secunda
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 09:10:00 -
[1683] - Quote
People are disliking these changes, not because it will impact them in PvP, but because it will screw up their ISK farming.
I can't fly capitals yet, let alone a super carrier, but I'd be pissed too if I used to make several billion ISK a day soloing ****, and someone took that away from me :) |
Victoria Cheeks
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 09:30:00 -
[1684] - Quote
I'm in love with the log off timer change.
Future logs are showing a dramatic increase in selfdestructing ships. Especially capitals...
Perhaps it would be a good idea to allow killmails to be generated even though someone selfdestructs?
Just my 2p. |
Victoria Cheeks
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 09:32:00 -
[1685] - Quote
Ath'daru wrote:People are disliking these changes, not because it will impact them in PvP, but because it will screw up their ISK farming.
I can't fly capitals yet, let alone a super carrier, but I'd be pissed too if I used to make several billion ISK a day soloing ****, and someone took that away from me :)
If you can afford supers, do you really think they had an isk problem to start with? |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 09:35:00 -
[1686] - Quote
Le Cardinal wrote:A 20B endgame ship shouldnt be able to hold at least a few drones to fend off a dictor? lol. How somone could say thats a sane thing to do is beyond comprehension.
Lets go further:
Remove drones and offensive capabilty of interdictors and HICs: "Destroyer-class/Cruiser-class vessels, designed to pull other vessels out of warp." What are you talking about? The only HIC or Dictor with any kind of drone bay is the 5m-¡3 on the Eris, able to carry a single light drone. They do have a token offensive capability inherited from the Tech 1 version of their hull, but generally this isn't a threat to anything more than a pod or hauler, which is one of the targets they're intended to hunt solo. They can't however kill capital ships solo, they need support for that. Inversely, Supercarriers can still kill capital and super-capital sized targets using their offensive capability, which is exactly what they're designed to hunt. They now need support to kill sub-caps, which is how it should be.
Le Cardinal wrote:Remove drones from majority of BS: "They have after all a designated role as well. Dont like it? bring support" BS often have to travel through gates to get home. They lack ewar-immunity and as such it's pretty fair for them to be able to fight off the weakest tacklers. Even with the drone bay they still have very, very little chance against an Interdictor or HIC, if you want to compare them to supercaps. Supercaps always take the direct route home. The very nature of capital travel means that another friendly entitiy will always be involved in their movement, either an armed starbase with a beacon or a cynoship. You can use anything you like as that cynoship to protect the supercap.
Le Cardinal wrote:Remove all offensive capability of Cap-Industrial SHips and Mining barges: "Dont like it? bring support. Its industrial ships. Barges and cap industrial ships do not have ewar-immunity, ranged ECM bursts, or the ability to run large neuts/smartbombs without compromising their fit. This point is moot however as they're clearly not intended to be run without a support fleet already. Your argument is circular and redundant.
Le Cardinal wrote:Remove mining abilities of Cap-industrial ships. They are supposed to be industrial platforms, not solominers ". The ability to run 5 mining drones is clearly game-breaking. Please provide less ridiculous examples.
Le Cardinal wrote:Remove ability to fit EW modules on ships not designed for it: Dont like it? Bring proper support. Using ECM on an unbonused ship is about as effective as using Fighters against a sub-capital. The option is there in both cases and scales quite well.
The key point that most people whining about drone bays seem to be missing is that a token dronebay will never, ever protect a supercap from a competent dictor pilot. No amount of drones is going to be popping that bubble placed outside of smartbomb range. This results in an issue of scale: A lone supercap will need many drones to defend itself against tacklers - 5 mediums just won't cut it against a dictor pilot who drops a bubble, warps out and back in then cloaks before it's time for the next bubble. Unless the supercap has enough drones to nuke it in a few seconds, that dictor will hold him forever. So what happens if we give it enough drones to do that? Sure a lone supercap becomes able to shake off a lone tackler. But then we get 10, 20, 50+ supercarriers in fleets who are suddently also able to shake off 10, 20 50+ dictors. Not accounting for scale is how we got into this mess in the first place.
Supercaps are the deathstars of EVE. They bring all the extreme firepower, but you should still need escorts to keep the X-Wing from the exhaust port.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 09:36:00 -
[1687] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:So why is every other offensive capital ship being forced into the "Fleet Ship" profile except the carrier? Because they don't need to in order to fit their role.
Quote:After all if you're changing the role of offensive capitals, change them all, don't leave one in its broken state. You're assuming here that carriers are brokenGǪ You are also assuming that the roles are being changed GÇö they're not. They're being refined, clarified, and more strictly enforced.
Le Cardinal wrote:A 20B endgame ship I have bad news for you: cost is irrelevant, and there is no endgame. By all means, ask them to reduce the build price and/or stop equipping them as expensively if they're no longer worth it, but price is not an argument for performance.
Quote:No matter how you twist and turn it, you do in fact sometimes end up in situations where you are alone and without support, either from logging at a safespot or pos or whatever. Its inevitable. GǪand in those scenarios, you are rightfully very very exposed and you should try your hardest to avoid them. This makes them no different from all other ships. So why is that a problem? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 09:37:00 -
[1688] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:Close to all options small groups of capitals have. GǪunless they bring the right support, which is, if anything, a good change.
Quote:All the while, in large packs, very very little will change. So, really, if anything, more significant changes are actually needed. All you're doing here is demonstrating that what I said was correct.
Quote:Carrier miraculously stay the same. And while their remote rep can be jammed, it is also a lot easier to field 250 of them How does that happen?
Monster Dude wrote:1) too hard to kill? really? I wouldn't say so as I seen many of those pops very quick being attacked sub-caps. And what were the scenarios for these kills pray tell? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Brambridge
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:06:00 -
[1689] - Quote
In conclusion, this is my 2 gerbles! Great changes but i think its a bit to much too soon.
Supercarriers (You need to change the name again... After this nerf there is nothing Super about there carrier function)
Drone bay can only hold fighters and fighter bombers. - But abit more that 20-25 ... this is the Primary offencive weapon! Reduce Shield, Armor and Hull hitpoints on all Supercarriers by 20%. - I dont think this is nessesary (Ref: Logoff time fix is good enough)
Reduce drone capacity. Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool Remote ECM Burst: Does not affect ships that are immune to electronic warfare (Supercarriers, Titans, Triaged Carriers and Sieged Dreads)
Fighters
Increase signature resolution to 400 (This should be Subject to the Ship Class i.e. Supercarriers)
Dreadnoughts
Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts. ... Sounds good
Titans.... Great changes
Logoff timer This will do alot of good ...both in the short term and long!
Great changes CCP! |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:22:00 -
[1690] - Quote
Brambridge wrote: Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool
That would be like a battleship pilot asking to have turrets that can turn into blasters or railguns without having to refit. Forcing the player to choose is a good thing. |
|
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:25:00 -
[1691] - Quote
My favorite part of this thread (and damn, there are so many good parts) is the posts from people saying that supercaps are the 'end game' and should be overpowered.
Sorry, there's no 'end game' in a sandbox game.
My 'end game' is currently 'build 1T worth of supercaps' and when I hit that mark, I'll probably change it to 2T or 5T. If you've bought into the 'supercaps are like raid gear' mindset you've been sold a bunch of snake oil by your alliance leadership.
My advice is to firesale your ship for whatever you can get for it (Here is a handy guide: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArVlisPcgSHddGFZRGtwZ3YyT3dSUDB2YmJvQ053a2c&hl=en_US) and then join an alliance that camps Jita 4-4 until your epeen grows back. |
Le Cardinal
Spricer Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:41:00 -
[1692] - Quote
@ Cynonet Two: You focus too much on the dronebay. A lot of people pull the role-card, and if that is to be a principle counting for Supercaps then it ought to count for other ships as well.
And as for ewar immunity and advantages like that? Christ, a Supercarrier cost 20B. Ofcourse it should have advantages compared to its rivals.
Its the principle behind it that is flawed. Its ok that SuperCarriers get nerfed cause "Now they get their designated role", while other ships dont need to get nerfed cause they are not immune to Ewar and have to jump through gates? If you dont like jumping through gates bring support. You know, black ops or a titan. And if you think its unfair that barges cant mine solo i nullsec then bring support.
And no, cost isnt irrelevant. Or at least it shouldnt be. And every sane SC will try to avoid situations where they are alone. And the fact remains that solo SC's are as killable now as they will be postpatch, except postpatch SC's wont have any defencemechanisms that work on anything less than a capitalship.
Ninjaedit. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:46:00 -
[1693] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Brambridge wrote: Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool
That would be like a battleship pilot asking to have turrets that can turn into blasters or railguns without having to refit. Forcing the player to choose is a good thing.
No no no you see if you spend a lot of money on a ship, you shouldn't have to do things like fitting the right tools for the job, or anything else which requires a functioning brain. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Monster Dude
hirr Against ALL Authorities
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:51:00 -
[1694] - Quote
Victoria Cheeks wrote:Ath'daru wrote:People are disliking these changes, not because it will impact them in PvP, but because it will screw up their ISK farming.
I can't fly capitals yet, let alone a super carrier, but I'd be pissed too if I used to make several billion ISK a day soloing ****, and someone took that away from me :) If you can afford supers, do you really think they had an isk problem to start with?
If you got your SC by claping hands and say - "give me SC" then of course not. If you got your SC by buying it on ISK made by boting - then of course not If you build your SC by doing everything for it - hauling, building parts, making isks on your own etc... all by yourself then YES you will have a problem. And this is why I'm saying that coming nerf will just favor very rich communities and make poor once weaker.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:52:00 -
[1695] - Quote
Le Cardinal wrote:And as for ewar immunity and advantages like that? Christ, a Supercarrier cost 20B. Ofcourse it should have advantages compared to its rivals. Again, no. It does not follow.
It's the other way around: an SC has advantages, so of course it should cost 10B. If its cost is out of proportion to the advantage, don't buy it, or ask them to reduce the baseline cost so it can find its true equilibrium.
Quote:And no, cost isnt irrelevant. Or at least it shouldnt be. Yes it is, and yes it should, because as history has shown, price is no object if it buys an advantage. All of EVE is built around that very concept, and proves is every day. People will pay insane sums for marginal improvements, but here we have a case where they get a far more than marginal improvement for a rather small increase in relative cost. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 10:58:00 -
[1696] - Quote
Monster Dude wrote: If you got your SC by claping hands and say - "give me SC" then of course not. If you got your SC by buying it on ISK made by boting - then of course not If you build your SC by doing everything for it - hauling, building parts, making isks on your own etc... all by yourself then YES you will have a problem. And this is why I'm saying that coming nerf will just favor very rich communities and make poor once weaker.
When you can make a few billion a week running 0.0 plexes, reaction farms, or doing mysterious things in wormholes, making something more expensive just adds a few extra days or weeks to the grinding period. |
loser mclame fatty
Catelo Productions LLC
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 11:06:00 -
[1697] - Quote
almost everyone in this thread is the kid who takes his ball and does home when he gets dunked on i hope you're all proud of yourselves |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:08:00 -
[1698] - Quote
chnage them back to motherships, remove fighter bombers. make them a tier 2 carrier liek they used to be
moms and titans have the old hp counts. titan dd's need to be nerf'd a bit more.
introduce attack carrier fighter bombers only, hp same as the new supercarrier plan.
allow all but titans to dock
motherships and attack carrier build costs 5 and 10bil respectivly..
/me goes back to smoking blunts
these ******* forums keep eating posts. ccp fix them ffs
edit, dont even have to do a new model for attack carriers, just paint moms black and add that lovely camo crap to the attack carrier CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:12:00 -
[1699] - Quote
ROFL@this patch |
Endeavour Starfleet
685
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:17:00 -
[1700] - Quote
That is far too harsh. CCP has shown FAR more interest in what we have had to say in this topic than features of the past like captains quarters.
So can we keep to actually discussing ways to make this change in best way to keep balance to the game instead of throwing crap everywhere? |
|
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:20:00 -
[1701] - Quote
Best thing CCP can do to save them selves and save some dignity & respect for themselves is to rework the winter patch. As it currently is its an insulting bunch of biased fail.
Need to rework the rework and come back again when you have something in all aspects positive and going forward for Super capitals and subcapitals alike. Some of the changes in the patch are so blindly being made that yet again people wonder if CCP actually takes time out of developing to actually play eve an know what the hell goes on in EVE, from the look of this patch I would be right in saying that.
As has been said before, instead of refining down supers and titans CCP gets an axe and hacks away at them blindly leaving them as a mass hunk of scrap. Almost as though ccp are cracking a Joke to P1ss people off. The way the patch currently stands at,ccp are dooming the game we all love to its end. They will both lose themselves an absolute shed load of money from this fail patch & lose a hell of alot of players (mostly vets) who take this as the last straw. If it goes ahead expect significant drop in players attending EVE that much is obvious. |
Sarahs Sister
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:21:00 -
[1702] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Brambridge wrote: Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool
That would be like a battleship pilot asking to have turrets that can turn into blasters or railguns without having to refit. Forcing the player to choose is a good thing.
Okay I agree with you if you allow SC to dock so that they can refit for the situation, becasue I am guessing you have no idea the hassle in swapping firghters to FBs. So yes they should be able to carry 20-25 of both FB and Fighters, I think in two differnet bays so that people can bring LOADS of fighters or FB and can only bring one set plus a few spare for ones that die.
Sarah |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:22:00 -
[1703] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:Best thing CCP can do to save them selves and save some dignity & respect for themselves is to rework the winter patch. As it currently is its an insulting bunch of biased fail.
Need to rework the rework and come back again when you have something in all aspects positive and going forward for Super capitals and subcapitals alike. Some of the changes in the patch are so blindly being made that yet again people wonder if CCP actually takes time out of developing to actually play eve an know what the hell goes on in EVE, from the look of this patch I would be right in saying that.
As has been said before, instead of refining supers and titans CCP gets an axe and hacks away at them blindly leaving them as a mass hunk of scrap. Almost as though ccp are cracking a Joke to P1ss people off. The way the patch currently stands at,ccp are dooming the game we all love to its end. They will both lose themselves an absolute shed load of money from this fail patch & lose a hell of alot of players (mostly vets) who take this as the last straw. If it goes ahead expect significant drop in players attending EVE that much is obvious.
Look at this bitter babby crying over his soon-to-be-nerfed Inappropriate language removed. Spitfire. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:24:00 -
[1704] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Phunnestyle wrote:Best thing CCP can do to save them selves and save some dignity & respect for themselves is to rework the winter patch. As it currently is its an insulting bunch of biased fail.
Need to rework the rework and come back again when you have something in all aspects positive and going forward for Super capitals and subcapitals alike. Some of the changes in the patch are so blindly being made that yet again people wonder if CCP actually takes time out of developing to actually play eve an know what the hell goes on in EVE, from the look of this patch I would be right in saying that.
As has been said before, instead of refining down supers and titans CCP gets an axe and hacks away at them blindly leaving them as a mass hunk of scrap. Almost as though ccp are cracking a Joke to P1ss people off. The way the patch currently stands at,ccp are dooming the game we all love to its end. They will both lose themselves an absolute shed load of money from this fail patch & lose a hell of alot of players (mostly vets) who take this as the last straw. If it goes ahead expect significant drop in players attending EVE that much is obvious. Look at this bitter babby crying over his soon-to-be-nerfed spacedick.
LOL I dont even have a super or titan,I am looking at this from both angles, appreciating what this nerf should be and what it is, that is 2 completely different stories,about time you got off your perch an did so aswell instead of being a child an trying to fail troll. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:33:00 -
[1705] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:I am looking at this from both angles, appreciating what this nerf should be and what it is, that is 2 completely different stories So you agree, then, that the suggestions are not enough and that more is needed?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:36:00 -
[1706] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Phunnestyle wrote:I am looking at this from both angles, appreciating what this nerf should be and what it is, that is 2 completely different stories So you agree, then, that the suggestions are not enough and that more is needed?
LOL fail troll an to be frank fail comment. |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1078
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:43:00 -
[1707] - Quote
This has been a very good discussion so far, with many interesting points.
Off-topic posts removed.
Please continue to stay civil and on-topic, thank you! CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:43:00 -
[1708] - Quote
Ciar Meara wrote:[quote=CCP Tallest]In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
This gives me some hope that CCP will save the game we love an save them selves from some* of the hurrendious patch notes they released. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:49:00 -
[1709] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:LOL fail troll an to be frank fail comment. I take that as a GÇ£yesGÇ¥.
What has been suggested so far somewhat takes care of the issue with subcaps (aside from reneging on the fighter change, when it would be perfectly fine if they balanced the fighters themselves a bit better), but not the issue of super blobs. Granted, that's a hard nut to crack, but doing so would probably allow the same methodology to be applied to subcaps and solve some of the blobbing issues there as well.
At any rate, that last part is still missing, so more is indeed needed.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Lady PimpStar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:53:00 -
[1710] - Quote
The changes to fighters make every wormhole carrier useless for PVE.
Are the fighter changes only effective to Super Caps or effect all capital ships?
As of now we can just barely rep our fighters in time lossing maybe 2 to 5 a site. |
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
754
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:57:00 -
[1711] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:This gives me some hope that CCP will save the game we love an save them selves from some* of the hurrendious patch notes they released. Only way they can save themselves is by putting all the items in the devblog on TQ.
Tears of those who feel themselves privileged is the only thing driving EVE at this moment. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
|
CCP Spitfire
C C P C C P Alliance
1376
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 12:57:00 -
[1712] - Quote
Lady PimpStar wrote:The changes to fighters make every wormhole carrier useless for PVE.
Are the fighter changes only effective to Super Caps or effect all capital ships?
As of now we can just barely rep our fighters in time lossing maybe 2 to 5 a site.
If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution, it has been decided not to go ahead with them. Please have a look at this post for more information.
CCP Spitfire | Russian Community Coordinator @ccp_spitfire |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:01:00 -
[1713] - Quote
CCP Spitfire wrote:If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution, it has been decided not to go ahead with them. Please have a look at this post for more information. GǪand I'll reiterate that it's a pity that you're doing that. The suggestion works if you address the problems with some of the fighters, most notably the effects of having too tight orbits.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
758
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:02:00 -
[1714] - Quote
Sig radius != Sig resolution
However, spitfire, i think you guys got it all wrong again. Don't scrap the change, just don't use 400m as the value. 170m would be a good value. The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die. |
pearcy15504
House Aratus Fatal Ascension
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:04:00 -
[1715] - Quote
will CCP remove the Capital Drone Bay from the list of required parts for Titans and Dreads if the remove them from game. it will also help to lower the prices a little. |
Endeavour Starfleet
685
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:05:00 -
[1716] - Quote
CCP Spitfire wrote:Lady PimpStar wrote:The changes to fighters make every wormhole carrier useless for PVE.
Are the fighter changes only effective to Super Caps or effect all capital ships?
As of now we can just barely rep our fighters in time lossing maybe 2 to 5 a site. If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution, it has been decided not to go ahead with them. Please have a look at this post for more information.
I just want to thank you and the other members of the dev team for taking the time to hear our concerns and ideas about these proposed changes and actually acting on them. If we as the community can take the time to think and discuss REAL ways of fixing these issues instead of trolling or causing problems. I am sure we can all find viable solutions that will be the most benefit to all the players.
I hope you will continue to hear our ideas on other issues as well. I and others for instance have proposed fixes for things such as AFK cloaking that I hope will be considered instead of a massive nerf bat.
When we take the time to discuss and provide ideas that work there will be less time having to reverse damage done by massive swings of the nerf bat to fix issues. We can ALL make EVE better! |
Lady PimpStar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:05:00 -
[1717] - Quote
CCP Spitfire wrote:Lady PimpStar wrote:The changes to fighters make every wormhole carrier useless for PVE.
Are the fighter changes only effective to Super Caps or effect all capital ships?
As of now we can just barely rep our fighters in time lossing maybe 2 to 5 a site. If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution, it has been decided not to go ahead with them. Please have a look at this post for more information.
Thank you,
Will it be possible to test a few carrier configurations in wormhole PVE after changes are on Sisi?
I bet there is no chance you could seed sleepers in 0.0 with a station. |
Endeavour Starfleet
685
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:07:00 -
[1718] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:Sig radius != Sig resolution
However, spitfire, i think you guys got it all wrong again. Don't scrap the change, just don't use 400m as the value. 170m would be a good value.
Considering all the other big changes needed. Any change to the fighters might just do more harm than good right now.
Perhaps fighter changes can happen sometime in 2012 where there is more time to fix issues individually. |
zero2espect
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:08:00 -
[1719] - Quote
So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game. |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
791
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:14:00 -
[1720] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
CCP Tallest, although you are shorter than me, I respect you as a man of principle and integrity. This new concern for customer feedback CCP is showing is a good sign. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:17:00 -
[1721] - Quote
Sarahs Sister wrote:Okay I agree with you if you allow SC to dock so that they can refit for the situation, becasue I am guessing you have no idea the hassle in swapping firghters to FBs.
I wouldn't mind making SC able to dock because I don't like the concept of prison ships, and can't be arsed to skill an alt to park one. That's the main reason why I never tried to get one. I also wouldn't mind the possibility of repreocessing a SC to get components and reprocess them, or use them to build carriers.
However, the idea of something like a supercarrier playing docking games makes me angry, and allowing SC to dock would make campagin logistics significantly easier. It would be like making X carrier trips in a single travel. I think force projection should be harder, on the contrary. |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:25:00 -
[1722] - Quote
I hope ccp implements 2 diferent in drone bays in supers carriers 1 for 25 figthers 1 for 25 bombers that would make sense. |
Emmerik
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:25:00 -
[1723] - Quote
Shield Capitals in General need some love. as in Cap dependance, Recharge after bonus, Implants
Else; all the other Nerfs sound very good... Keep up the good work |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:28:00 -
[1724] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:I hope ccp implements 2 diferent in drone bays in supers carriers 1 for 25 figthers 1 for 25 bombers that would make sense.
Heaven forbid you might have to actually make a decision about what to carry in your dronebay. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
296
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:28:00 -
[1725] - Quote
CCP Spitfire wrote:If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution... So the core concept of the balancing which is presumably making the SC's less of Jack'O'All is being scrapped entirely again? .. you seriously need to find out just what the hell you want.
Do what you were planning with fighters and add a drone tracking bonus (5%/lvl or so) to Carriers.
Solves the SC issue, solves the Carrier issue for the two carriers in Eve that are still using fighters that is) and makes Carriers more than giant batteries for supers and RR monkeys for plate Baddons (sentries w. tracking bonus .. yum!) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:30:00 -
[1726] - Quote
pearcy15504 wrote:will CCP remove the Capital Drone Bay from the list of required parts for Titans and Dreads if the remove them from game. it will also help to lower the prices a little.
That's only reasonable. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
ANGAL 2000
FinFleet Raiden.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:32:00 -
[1727] - Quote
This is a simple proposal for the upcoming changes to super carriers with over estmated 3000 thousand pilots sitting in super carrier post nurf many of them will not see the light of day many will be move to a unused toon to hold it.
With limited options for super carrier after the nurf many of us saved and trained for a long time to get in one and for them to be more or less unused post nurf it make no sense to punish people who has played a game for years to get the one ship they wanted.
Super carrier are not just given out to people .
Those of us that have them have work hard to get them.
out of the changes many of us would like to see a change to allow them to be built again and used and its a simple change to let them dock and be used as the next level of carrier and logistic ship.
proposed change with the nurf super carriers are able to dock (NOT TITANS) super carriers drone bay able to fit 20 fighters and 20 fighter bombers |
Temmu Guerra
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
40
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:34:00 -
[1728] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game.
Listen to this guy
|
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:35:00 -
[1729] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Pesadel0 wrote:I hope ccp implements 2 diferent in drone bays in supers carriers 1 for 25 figthers 1 for 25 bombers that would make sense. Heaven forbid you might have to actually make a decision about what to carry in your dronebay.
Being able to transport 1 set of each isnt that game breaking... I mean bombers are worthless against anything that moves and figthers being destroyed super is dead duck.
|
CyberRaver
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:36:00 -
[1730] - Quote
The supercap proliferation needs to be fixed regardless
When supercaps fill the field and deply drones the nodes CANNOT handle it 67+ super caps makes it impossible to do anything in that system
They have far too many bonuses and not enough weakneses, these changes fix that
Sorry Raiden and so but your "i win" mobiles are being taken away
Cry more
|
|
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:38:00 -
[1731] - Quote
CyberRaver wrote:The supercap proliferation needs to be fixed regardless
When supercaps fill the field and deply drones the nodes CANNOT handle it 67+ super caps makes it impossible to do anything in that system
They have far too many bonuses and not enough weakneses, these changes fix that
Sorry Raiden and so but your "i win" mobiles are being taken away
Cry more
What stops them from bringing just carriers with fighters?With their alt accounts and more? |
ANGAL 2000
FinFleet Raiden.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:40:00 -
[1732] - Quote
when the nurf comes in their will be a some other ship being cried about.
what will be next of the chopping block. |
GRIEV3R
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:40:00 -
[1733] - Quote
Alright, I'm gonna voice an opinion that's been growing on me for a long time now. I know it's going to be unpopular, and I also know it's not going to sway anything, but, dammit, it'll make me feel better.
It seems to me like the root of this whole change is the idea that supers provide an unfair advantage.
But Eve is not about being fair. Eve has always been more like real life: in other words, completely unfair, merciless, and brutal.
I didn't spend 6 years training skills and $3000 worth of plex to fly a ship that's "fair." If players who didn't invest the time and isk to rival me are mad about my advantage.... **** 'em. If I drop 17 billion isk into a single ship, I should not be afraid of your disorganized little drake blob + 1 hictor.
|
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:40:00 -
[1734] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
*LISTEN TO THIS GUY* PROPS FOR WISDOM Alot of what your saying I agree with, especially like the Idea of Supers being only 0.0 capable and not being able to use remote reps/transfers, would introduce supers more so into a dynamic fleet with more carrier/logistics. Supers in this way would be pure platforms for dps/servivabilty but have to rely on carriers/logistics for support rather than being able to spider tank each other. makes alot of sence inplace of some of the aweful changes that have been mentioned in the patch notes. |
Lady PimpStar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:43:00 -
[1735] - Quote
Oh, about the people that where talking about camping with Titans and fear of cyno with x# of more Titans and backup.
Has there ever been a module proposed to scramble a Cyno on grid so incoming hostals apear off grid on jump in.. That way countering a direct hot drop and the incoming fleet will have to reform and do a warp to.. Just throwing ideas out. |
CyberRaver
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:47:00 -
[1736] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:CyberRaver wrote:The supercap proliferation needs to be fixed regardless
When supercaps fill the field and deply drones the nodes CANNOT handle it 67+ super caps makes it impossible to do anything in that system
They have far too many bonuses and not enough weakneses, these changes fix that
Sorry Raiden and so but your "i win" mobiles are being taken away
Cry more
What stops them from bringing just carriers with fighters?With their alt accounts and more?
That can be addressed with further balancing, Supercaps should not be as prolific as they are currently, they needed a single role, not to be the swiss army knife of eve
You dont see aircraft carriers going solo versus whole armies, they have a whole plethora of support, which in turns gives sub cap pilots something to actually do in fleet fights, SC's broke the sandbox, making it that you HAD to have one to play in the sand, now they are more limited in use everyone can enjoy the sandbox again
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
214
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:51:00 -
[1737] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:CCP Spitfire wrote:If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution... So the core concept of the balancing which is presumably making the SC's less of Jack'O'All is being scrapped entirely again? .. you seriously need to find out just what the hell you want.
If you're not going ahead with the fighter sig resolution change, then to stop supercarriers casually wiping the floor with subcapitals you'll need to prevent supercarriers from deploying fighters and restrict them to fighter-bombers only. |
GiveMeATry
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:58:00 -
[1738] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote:CCP Spitfire wrote:If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution... So the core concept of the balancing which is presumably making the SC's less of Jack'O'All is being scrapped entirely again? .. you seriously need to find out just what the hell you want. If you're not going ahead with the fighter sig resolution change, then to stop supercarriers casually wiping the floor with subcapitals you'll need to prevent supercarriers from deploying fighters and restrict them to fighter-bombers only.
I think everyone agrees that the counter to this is to shoot the "limited" supply of fighters they will have |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:59:00 -
[1739] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:What stops them from bringing just carriers with fighters?With their alt accounts and more?
:cripes:
Encouraging diversity in fleet composition (rather than 'just bring more supercaps') is pretty much the whole point of this rebalance. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:59:00 -
[1740] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote:CCP Spitfire wrote:If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution... So the core concept of the balancing which is presumably making the SC's less of Jack'O'All is being scrapped entirely again? .. you seriously need to find out just what the hell you want. If you're not going ahead with the fighter sig resolution change, then to stop supercarriers casually wiping the floor with subcapitals you'll need to prevent supercarriers from deploying fighters and restrict them to fighter-bombers only.
It takes fighters a longo time to reach targets so there is rarely focusedd fire between the supers on subcaps,this is more than enough of a natural resistance. If they had only bombers whats to stop eventuallitys such as being bumped outta a POS an having no chance of getting away from a single dictor and petty numbered gang. Cant have a subcap fleet on standby 24/7 People go to work aswell as EVE you know. |
|
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:02:00 -
[1741] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game.
Yep. Listen to this guy. |
Janus Corbec
Project Stealth Squad Avaricious Cartel
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:02:00 -
[1742] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game.
CCP plz listen to him. Very good ideas imho. |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:05:00 -
[1743] - Quote
CyberRaver wrote:Pesadel0 wrote:CyberRaver wrote:The supercap proliferation needs to be fixed regardless
When supercaps fill the field and deply drones the nodes CANNOT handle it 67+ super caps makes it impossible to do anything in that system
They have far too many bonuses and not enough weakneses, these changes fix that
Sorry Raiden and so but your "i win" mobiles are being taken away
Cry more
What stops them from bringing just carriers with fighters?With their alt accounts and more? That can be addressed with further balancing, Supercaps should not be as prolific as they are currently, they needed a single role, not to be the swiss army knife of eve You dont see aircraft carriers going solo versus whole armies, they have a whole plethora of support, which in turns gives sub cap pilots something to actually do in fleet fights, SC's broke the sandbox, making it that you HAD to have one to play in the sand, now they are more limited in use everyone can enjoy the sandbox again
Well i dont really like real life comparisons because they are based in crap, and after this changes, supers wont really have a role per say , cap killers? well let me introduce you the titan.And frankly there was always a bigger fish in the pond , now it is supers then it will be **** , nerfing to oblivion a ship class wont make things "fair" people will blob you and me still with the best option be it supers, carriers, **** or eve BS and people will still moan that we need more nerfs .
The nerfs CCP doing for me are in the rigth direction even iff they were implemented tomorrow, but i would like a them to keep an eye to make adjustments , people will sell the moms and buy titans and go in a heavy suport fleet with carriers and ****, then what are people going to do? |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:06:00 -
[1744] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:[quote=zero2espect]So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
CCP look^ Way current patch is its totally fail an unbalanced, scrap alot of whats in that patch,an pick up some of these conceptions. Love it how Goons out of self gain, not EVE community gain are desperately trying to believe in there own heads that this patch is balancing it out ROFL |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:09:00 -
[1745] - Quote
GRIEV3R wrote: But Eve is not about being fair. Eve has always been more like real life: in other words, completely unfair, merciless, and brutal.
I didn't spend 6 years training skills and $3000 worth of plex to fly a ship that's "fair."
So, you feel these changes are *gasp* unfair to you?
Works as intended then, according to your own words, let me remind you:
GRIEV3R wrote:But Eve is not about being fair
GRIEV3R wrote:Eve is not ...fair
GRIEV3R wrote:not ... fair
Whaaaaaaaa ..... QQ |
Mr Management
Anger Management
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:17:00 -
[1746] - Quote
Sorry for being thick .. but I'm confused.
So whats happening to the fighters ?
Staying the same for both Carriers and Supers or for carriers only ? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:19:00 -
[1747] - Quote
Mr Management wrote:So whats happening to the fighters ? Right now? Nothing. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:22:00 -
[1748] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Pesadel0 wrote:I hope ccp implements 2 diferent in drone bays in supers carriers 1 for 25 figthers 1 for 25 bombers that would make sense. Heaven forbid you might have to actually make a decision about what to carry in your dronebay. It isn't about having to make a choice.
First: Go to Sisi, grab 2 carrier chars. Load the first carrier's drone bay completely full with tyrfing and the other comletely full with malleus. Put at least 1 capital mod and/or some extra fuel into the carriers corphangar. Now undock both, warp to a safe, and swap the bombers between them, so that the first has the malleus and the second the tyrfing. Stopclock the time the carriers can be engaged in space without any weapons available to them.
Then repeat this task inside a pos forcefield. Do not use a corphangar array, since the staging pos is from a different corp in your alliance and you do not have access to it. Then simulate the corphangar removal proposed in here and do the same again, this time only using one carrier's internal corphangar.
Now simulate a campaign with a forward staging system without station, 2 cyno jumps away from your hangar. Bring 100k m3 of fighters/fighterbombers to the staging system in combat ships fit to that travel through a warzone. Ponder about doing this for more than one supercarrier.
After that, please come back and compare it again to switching rails with blasters on a docked Megathron (don't think that was actually you, but I do not want to make 2 posts about it).
The point that nags with most super pilots about this is not the having to make a choice part, but that inspace fitting mechanics were never designed for switching a million m3 (10 supercarriers) of drones between ops. You simply can't just jettison a few thousand rounds of ammo and everyone is happy again.
This is like 20 pages ago when tons of people argued about mwd supers speed tanking dreads when every player that ever had a super cringed and cried, because there were people discussing the changes needed to be made for their ships and plain obviously had no frackin idea what they are talking about, with the only super they have ever seen up close probably the levi empyrean age put into highsec. |
Avisary Rotsuda
Doomheim
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:24:00 -
[1749] - Quote
Hey, had a thought about Titan DDs. What about 3 seperate tiers that are each more powerful, as in T1 would be the DD mentioned in the blog, T2 would be the current, shoot everything DD. And T3 could be the overpowered Smartbomb Just a thought. |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:26:00 -
[1750] - Quote
Avisary Rotsuda wrote:Hey, had a thought about Titan DDs. What about 3 seperate tiers that are each more powerful, as in T1 would be the DD mentioned in the blog, T2 would be the current, shoot everything DD. And T3 could be the overpowered Smartbomb Just a thought. Would replace one near-impossible to balance weapon system with 3 near-impossible to balance weapon systems. How is that improving the overall situation? |
|
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
979
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:27:00 -
[1751] - Quote
I'll just take a moment to remind everyone here that Carriers are NOT DIRECT COMBAT SHIPS
Carriers are vulnerable, weak, slow and provide SUPPORT via Theater C&C and fighter/bomber groups. Carriers should NEVER be usable as frontline assets.
ok, so its eve, but carriers should still be nothing more than a moving landing strip.
triage... ok I can see the use for that and I'm willing to look the other way, but this whole concept of hard as nails super tank boat totally flys in the face of the traditional role of a carrier and is just plain silly.
If I cant pop it with a wing of SB's fitted with torps then its totally wrong.
repeat, a carrier is a large slow box full of expensive airplanes, fuel and ordinance. its a goddamn floating bomb
How can you lot over at CCP justify them sitting on the front lines going head to head with ships whose traditional role was killing carriers with little or no effort?
Frankly you guys should eliminate them from the game altogether until you come up with a reasonable role for them to fill and then revamp them to fit it properly The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
Avisary Rotsuda
Doomheim
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:28:00 -
[1752] - Quote
Hey, I was just throwing the idea out. |
Metal Dude
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:28:00 -
[1753] - Quote
Are you people really believe that CCP will listen to anyone other than the goons that make the most noise and have the CCP in their back pocket? Do you actually believe that they will learn from their mistakes and not rush with the nerfs without listening to their paying customers that has spent thousands of dollars on this ****** game over the last nine years and instead make changes to please the goons? Do you believe that the letter form the head moron in CCP about learning from their mistakes is for real? Do you believe that they will address the real problem with EVE, which is the blob, NAPing and the numbers game instead of skill to PVP? If you do, than you are just as dumb as the retards at CCP. I for one learned long, long ago that these monkeys could not balance a game , appreciate their customers, and research and test the features of the game if their lives depended on it. I'm down to one account from the six I had when the game was fun and the way things are going, soon that might be not worth the money either.
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
241
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:29:00 -
[1754] - Quote
Karles wrote:Aase Nord wrote:Thank you CCP/goons/allies/alts. Game is F.U.B.A.R
Its time for me to find an other game to spend my money on .
Bye Please don't leave... What will become nullsec pvp without you around?
There's PvP in nullsec?
Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM 7! (Mittens, you may not want to admit it, but your day in the sun is over. Next!)
|
1Of9
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:31:00 -
[1755] - Quote
Metal Dude wrote:Are you people really believe that CCP will listen to anyone other than the goons that make the most noise and have the CCP in their back pocket? Do you actually believe that they will learn from their mistakes and not rush with the nerfs without listening to their paying customers that has spent thousands of dollars on this ****** game over the last nine years and instead make changes to please the goons? Do you believe that the letter form the head moron in CCP about learning from their mistakes is for real? Do you believe that they will address the real problem with EVE, which is the blob, NAPing and the numbers game instead of skill to PVP? If you do, than you are just as dumb as the retards at CCP. I for one learned long, long ago that these monkeys could not balance a game , appreciate their customers, and research and test the features of the game if their lives depended on it. I'm down to one account from the six I had when the game was fun and the way things are going, soon that might be not worth the money either.
+1+1+1+1+1+1
i mean, hell ya, word for word my words exactly
|
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
241
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:34:00 -
[1756] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Your still chatting absolute an utter nonscence. No1 is on about solopawnmobiles,adapting is all good an well, mostly super/titans are used with a subcap fleet anyway unless there fail. So maybe you have got your frieghter or Jump frieghter hotdropped 1 too many times, you being fail doesnt mean that the rest of eve an vets have to suffer for it.
You are wrong as usual, if there is subcap fleet fielded with friendly scs, then supercaps dont need to provide any defense vs subcaps by themselves. That you want to soloblob small roaming gangs with supercarrier, because you have no skills to fight them with subcaps or god forbid, form a fleet and have decent fight with them, its sad thing. But i know, how dare they to dusturb you while carebearing! They must be crushed! Preferably with 0 chance of fighting back, because you paid 20bil ship for ship. your quite incredible, Supers/titans as I already state time an time again for just you mr special LOL are already fielded with a subcap fleet unless they are fail. The problem is not quality of subcap fleet supporting them at all. You obviously have no idea about what goes on in 0.0 or your a goon alt ofc bloody minded stubborn stupidity. A structured more elite subcap fleet looking after there supers/titans will be after this patch be no match for a humungo laggfesting blob of whelp canes etc. You fail to see the bigger picture an I have no intention of explaning to you obviousness anymore. Your a lost soul iv accepted that. Supers/titans will NOT be used for out an out fleet fights, there will NOT be a balanced super cap fight at all. Supers/titans will only be used to counter hotdrop a lesser number of capital targets and bridge, that is all they are going to be affective for after patch. So that in no way balances a super class fight at all as CCP are intending.
I'm sorry, but could you repeat that in something approximating English?
Actually, on second thought, don't. Just contract your stuffs to me, and then biomass.
Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM 7! (Mittens, you may not want to admit it, but your day in the sun is over. Next!)
|
1Of9
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:35:00 -
[1757] - Quote
In all seriousness, i careless about the changes, buff, nerf.. screw it.
What i DO care about, is how strongly biased this game is towards goons.
It's amazing how goons fart and ccp rushes to smell it in, and how ccp "proudly" shows they favoritism towards goons.
for all i care, ccp could be 100% made of goons and love them to death, but in no occasion should show favoritism as they currently do.
That's what i care about.
And if ur a goon reading this, specially the mitanus dude, *snip*
Edit: Profanity removed, CCP Phantom. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:36:00 -
[1758] - Quote
Metal Dude wrote:Are you people really believe that CCP will listen to anyone other than the goons that make the most noise and have the CCP in their back pocket? Want to buy a tinfoil hat? Cheap and in bulk?
Quote:Do you actually believe that they will learn from their mistakes and not rush with the nerfs without listening to their paying customers Fun fact: they are. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
fanaka
Cygnus Project Desman Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:39:00 -
[1759] - Quote
I too have wasted my life on a computer game. Bunch of sperging maggots get a ******* grip |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:45:00 -
[1760] - Quote
1Of9 wrote:In all seriousness, i careless about the changes, buff, nerf.. screw it.
What i DO care about, is how strongly biased this game is towards goons.
It's amazing how goons fart and ccp rushes to smell it in, and how ccp "proudly" shows they favoritism towards goons.
for all i care, ccp could be 100% made of goons and love them to death, but in no occasion should show favoritism as they currently do.
That's what i care about.
And if ur a goon reading this, specially the mitanus dude *snip*
While I'm not Mittani, I have to assume I'm bundled in this statement and rest assured, I am ******* myself multiple times as I type this note. Please excuse any typos.
The supercap adjustments haven't come from Goons. We were a part of the conversation with CCP where we gave our concerns, DRF gave their concerns, a MM guy and a Razor guy gave their concerns, a brick squad guy gave his concerns, Two PL guys gave theirs! And a handful of others including a worm hole guy and a guy who specializes in lowsec warfare and really good Belgian beer. Also a generic Irish guy but for the purpose of this post we'll pretend he doesn't exist.
We all gave input and our own opinions and while CCP listened, they developed their own plan and implemented it. Some I like, some I don't like. Overall I'm happy with the changes but to try and insinuate that they are showing favoritism towards us just because a few of us tend to be very vocal on the subject, is just dumb. Don't be dumb. |
|
Roosterton
Syndicalis Immortalis The Skeleton Crew
337
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:46:00 -
[1761] - Quote
Metal Dude wrote:Are you people really believe that CCP will listen to anyone other than the goons that make the most noise and have the CCP in their back pocket? Do you actually believe that they will learn from their mistakes and not rush with the nerfs without listening to their paying customers that has spent thousands of dollars on this ****** game over the last nine years and instead make changes to please the goons? Do you believe that the letter form the head moron in CCP about learning from their mistakes is for real? Do you believe that they will address the real problem with EVE, which is the blob, NAPing and the numbers game instead of skill to PVP? If you do, than you are just as dumb as the retards at CCP. I for one learned long, long ago that these monkeys could not balance a game , appreciate their customers, and research and test the features of the game if their lives depended on it. I'm down to one account from the six I had when the game was fun and the way things are going, soon that might be not worth the money either.
Tears like this make me want to join goons. |
1Of9
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:51:00 -
[1762] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:1Of9 wrote:In all seriousness, i careless about the changes, buff, nerf.. screw it.
What i DO care about, is how strongly biased this game is towards goons.
It's amazing how goons fart and ccp rushes to smell it in, and how ccp "proudly" shows they favoritism towards goons.
for all i care, ccp could be 100% made of goons and love them to death, but in no occasion should show favoritism as they currently do.
That's what i care about.
And if ur a goon reading this, specially the mitanus dude *snip* While I'm not Mittani, I have to assume I'm bundled in this statement and rest assured, I am ******* myself multiple times as I type this note. Please excuse any typos. The supercap adjustments haven't come from Goons. We were a part of the conversation with CCP where we gave our concerns, DRF gave their concerns, a MM guy and a Razor guy gave their concerns, a brick squad guy gave his concerns, Two PL guys gave theirs! And a handful of others including a worm hole guy and a guy who specializes in lowsec warfare and really good Belgian beer. Also a generic Irish guy but for the purpose of this post we'll pretend he doesn't exist. We all gave input and our own opinions and while CCP listened, they developed their own plan and implemented it. Some I like, some I don't like. Overall I'm happy with the changes but to try and insinuate that they are showing favoritism towards us just because a few of us tend to be very vocal on the subject, is just dumb. Don't be dumb.
dude .. you can send sand to whoever eyes you want, i know that this has been pushed by goons since ever, also, your trustworthiness is bellow zero, so, ya, your words, waste of database space they are. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:53:00 -
[1763] - Quote
1Of9 wrote:Vile rat wrote:1Of9 wrote:In all seriousness, i careless about the changes, buff, nerf.. screw it.
What i DO care about, is how strongly biased this game is towards goons.
It's amazing how goons fart and ccp rushes to smell it in, and how ccp "proudly" shows they favoritism towards goons.
for all i care, ccp could be 100% made of goons and love them to death, but in no occasion should show favoritism as they currently do.
That's what i care about.
And if ur a goon reading this, specially the mitanus dude *snip* While I'm not Mittani, I have to assume I'm bundled in this statement and rest assured, I am ******* myself multiple times as I type this note. Please excuse any typos. The supercap adjustments haven't come from Goons. We were a part of the conversation with CCP where we gave our concerns, DRF gave their concerns, a MM guy and a Razor guy gave their concerns, a brick squad guy gave his concerns, Two PL guys gave theirs! And a handful of others including a worm hole guy and a guy who specializes in lowsec warfare and really good Belgian beer. Also a generic Irish guy but for the purpose of this post we'll pretend he doesn't exist. We all gave input and our own opinions and while CCP listened, they developed their own plan and implemented it. Some I like, some I don't like. Overall I'm happy with the changes but to try and insinuate that they are showing favoritism towards us just because a few of us tend to be very vocal on the subject, is just dumb. Don't be dumb. dude .. you can send sand to whoever eyes you want, i know that this has been pushed by goons since ever, also, your trustworthiness is bellow zero, so, ya, your words, waste of database space they are.
Oh if you're going to the forums shouting that ccp are in our pocket and do what we want then I'm not going to really try and stop you because that'd own.
It's not true, but it would sure own. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:53:00 -
[1764] - Quote
Metal Dude wrote:Are you people really believe that CCP will listen to anyone other than the goons that make the most noise and have the CCP in their back pocket? Do you actually believe that they will learn from their mistakes and not rush with the nerfs without listening to their paying customers that has spent thousands of dollars on this ****** game over the last nine years and instead make changes to please the goons? Do you believe that the letter form the head moron in CCP about learning from their mistakes is for real? Do you believe that they will address the real problem with EVE, which is the blob, NAPing and the numbers game instead of skill to PVP? If you do, than you are just as dumb as the retards at CCP. I for one learned long, long ago that these monkeys could not balance a game , appreciate their customers, and research and test the features of the game if their lives depended on it. I'm down to one account from the six I had when the game was fun and the way things are going, soon that might be not worth the money either.
My, that's one angry guy here.
Bitter that Bob's era of supremacy stopped overnight when CCP nerfed the AoE doomsdays? Blaming the Goons for that one, too, because they were part of the GSF?
If you really feel that way, then quit Eve right away and forget about it, or you'll get yourself an ulcer. |
Avisary Rotsuda
Doomheim
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 14:54:00 -
[1765] - Quote
1Of9 wrote:Vile rat wrote:1Of9 wrote:In all seriousness, i careless about the changes, buff, nerf.. screw it.
What i DO care about, is how strongly biased this game is towards goons.
It's amazing how goons fart and ccp rushes to smell it in, and how ccp "proudly" shows they favoritism towards goons.
for all i care, ccp could be 100% made of goons and love them to death, but in no occasion should show favoritism as they currently do.
That's what i care about.
And if ur a goon reading this, specially the mitanus dude *snip* While I'm not Mittani, I have to assume I'm bundled in this statement and rest assured, I am ******* myself multiple times as I type this note. Please excuse any typos. The supercap adjustments haven't come from Goons. We were a part of the conversation with CCP where we gave our concerns, DRF gave their concerns, a MM guy and a Razor guy gave their concerns, a brick squad guy gave his concerns, Two PL guys gave theirs! And a handful of others including a worm hole guy and a guy who specializes in lowsec warfare and really good Belgian beer. Also a generic Irish guy but for the purpose of this post we'll pretend he doesn't exist. We all gave input and our own opinions and while CCP listened, they developed their own plan and implemented it. Some I like, some I don't like. Overall I'm happy with the changes but to try and insinuate that they are showing favoritism towards us just because a few of us tend to be very vocal on the subject, is just dumb. Don't be dumb. dude .. you can send sand to whoever eyes you want, i know that this has been pushed by goons since ever, also, your trustworthiness is bellow zero, so, ya, your words, waste of database space they are.
Thats harsh. |
Mr Management
Anger Management
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:00:00 -
[1766] - Quote
We all know that the Goons cried foul because they can't take over the alliance that built supers while they didn't.
Its also funny that they complain about Bots but when you sit in their mining systems their hulks log in every hour on the hour, spot a neuts in local and log off .............. 24 x 7.
The CSM is broken when you have players who soul purpose of their alliance is break the game for everyone else.
Too much insider information ....................
|
Maria Kitiare
Norse'Storm Battle Group Cascade Imminent
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:07:00 -
[1767] - Quote
I would like to know if CCP, with this patch, is trying to ruin the "end game" of EVE Online..
I am a fairly new player. I follow the skill curve.. FIrst i go for frigates, then cruisers, then BC's and finally BS's... Now i would go for a carrier and then a Super...
But with this patch, there would be no reason for me to skill for a super of a titan. I could simply stay with my BS's or a carrier.
So, my question to CCP would be.. IS it your attention to remove the supers and titans from the game? Cause with these changes, no new player would waste the time and isk to get one. I know i would not.. and when i watch the market these days, i see that people who already have supers is selling them off rather cheap already.
Also, even as a new player, I see why goons would love this patch, due to their huge player-base. Smaller corp's are the ones getting butt-****** by CCP since they will no longer be able to fight off the zerkswarm of sub-caps.
I really hope CCP would scratch these stupid nerfs and start balancing instead of ruining. Would be awesome since I would like to enjoy this game for quite some years ahead as well :)
AlsoGǪ I want a reason to actually skill for the big shipsGǪ Give me my reason back CCP. |
Temmu Guerra
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
40
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:09:00 -
[1768] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game.
Listen to this guy and making sure ccp see's this
|
Smuggo Smuggins
Idol Corp
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:10:00 -
[1769] - Quote
This is probably the best thread on the whole Internet right now. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:14:00 -
[1770] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote:I would like to know if CCP, with this patch, is trying to ruin the "end game" of EVE Online..
I am a fairly new player. I follow the skill curve.. FIrst i go for frigates, then cruisers, then BC's and finally BS's... Now i would go for a carrier and then a Super...
There is no "end game" for EVE. Sorry that you got lied to. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:15:00 -
[1771] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote: I am a fairly new player. I follow the skill curve.. FIrst i go for frigates, then cruisers, then BC's and finally BS's... Now i would go for a carrier and then a Super...
AlsoGǪ I want a reason to actually skill for the big shipsGǪ Give me my reason back CCP.
You see, this is your misconception that the point of the game is to obtain gear.
Don't look for items to acquire, look for things to do.
|
serine twilight
Hobgoblin Marketeers
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:19:00 -
[1772] - Quote
Supercarriers
Drone bay can only hold fighters and fighter bombers. Reduce Shield, Armor and Hull hitpoints on all Supercarriers by 20%. Reduce drone capacity. Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Remote ECM Burst: Does not affect ships that are immune to electronic warfare (Supercarriers, Titans, Triaged Carriers and Sieged Dreads)
A ship with immunity to EWAR should not have the ability to use ECM, also the sig res change on fighters affects carriers as well, and the same problem remains, super carriers can jump out when they get into a bad spot, so what if there fighters can't hit regular ships? they only need to ECM & kill the hics/dics with fighters/ support and they are gone. best solution would be to get rid of Projected ECM period, as ECM makes those ships way to comfy to fly.
Dreadnoughts
Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts. Siege Module I: Boost damage bonus from 625% to 700% to compensate for loss of drones. Siege Module I: Duration time reduced to 5 minutes. Fuel cost -50%. Moros: Remove drone bonus. Moros: New bonus: 5% bonus to Capital Hybrid Turret rate of fire per level.
Regardless of the siege mod and the damage change Dreads have been nerfed, and will continue to collect dust as they can no longer handle small ships...
The best solution to fixing the problem with carriers and dreads collecting dust would be to give ALL combat Capitals IMMUNITY to EWAR, or remove immunity from all combat capitals.
I prefer all cap ships have immunity, everyone would start bringing there caps out to play again, people would take risks more often. = more money for CCP, and more fun for everyone else. |
Mahoniausnrw
Twinstar Universal Services Ewoks
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:23:00 -
[1773] - Quote
Blindfold our fighter pilots and bind them one arm on the back to make us teethless, Take away our CQC by cutting the drone bays and make us defenceless, Cut away 1/5 of our liveblood to make the pain end sooner,
At least give us damn XXXXXX start and landing animations for our fighters .... Origin achieved this with WingCommander ( 1 ) over 20 years ago , shame. |
Mr Management
Anger Management
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:26:00 -
[1774] - Quote
Quote:The best solution to fixing the problem with carriers and dreads collecting dust would be to give ALL combat Capitals IMMUNITY to EWAR, or remove immunity from all combat capitals.
I prefer all cap ships have immunity, everyone would start bringing there caps out to play again, people would take risks more often. = more money for CCP, and more fun for everyone else.
I like that idea ................
I don't mind losing a carrier or dread to a Dic / Hic but having a Interceptor going around and around without me doing anything about it sucks |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
127
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:30:00 -
[1775] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Doesn't that simply undermine the whole concept of not allowing Super Carriers to wipe the floor with Sub Cap fleets? Would it not be better to give Carriers a compensatory bonus that offsets the penalty Fighters? That would allow you to have your cake and eat it, so to speak. |
Mr Management
Anger Management
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:40:00 -
[1776] - Quote
Quote:Doesn't that simply undermine the whole concept of not allowing Super Carriers to wipe the floor with Sub Cap fleets? Would it not be better to give Carriers a compensatory bonus that offsets the penalty Fighters? That would allow you to have your cake and eat it, so to speak.
He He .... stop making it easy for CCP ...... we like seeing them stumble around in the dark |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1276
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:51:00 -
[1777] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Give this man a Bells.
If Carrier based fighters retain their existing attributes after this patch goes live, then I will reluctantly endorse the rest of the proposed cap changes.
But at the very least, Carriers and Dreads need to be a buffer between supers and subs, not be a sub-cap dependable double adapter. To this end, they should be able to hold their own ground against both classes in PvP situations.
Anti sub-capital weapons should be introduced for dreads. Remove the stupid close range gun variants, give us close range anti blob guns designed to pick on packs of rifters. Long range guns for anti cap warfare and POS bashing, close range weapons for anti-sub-capital pew pew. Fail in doing this, and watch dreads continue to get mothballed.
Carriers fielding Fighters need to be able to eat a smaller amount of sub-caps alive, be they rifters or battleships or even T3s. But with any numbers game, if you bring enough friends in sub-caps to the party, they (caps) should get ganked with room for dessert.
Dare I say this would-have-been uber nerf opened up allot of debate and prospects for t2 Carriers and Dreads, more geared towards PvP and damage vs sub-caps and supers alike. |
SXYGeeK
Tera Incognita Rolling Thunder.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 15:52:00 -
[1778] - Quote
L1m9n1663r wrote:- When a ship can not be sensor boosted or tracking disrupted, it should not be possible to remote sensor boost or tracking link. It makes no sense at all.
If you make cap size rigs, that should solve the issue with EHP without touching the numbers. Make shield extender rigs and Armor extender rigs take 200 rig-power-thingies, so you then lose 1 rig slot if buffer tanking. Make cap rigs only T1, that means tanked damage type HP * 1,15^2 instead of HP * 1,2^3. This will help for the HP's.
(Give the Hel some love first)
Destroy all T1 rigs in titans / supercaps (LOL-T1 rigs) Make all T2 rigs the T1 cap size. Any rigs that exeed the rig-power, eject rig in slot 3 to cargo bay. --
Make a rig that takes 150 rig power that will allow you to field 250 m3 of HEAVY drones. That is, sentries, heavy armor/shield bots, heavy EW drones. This will again cost you 15% of your 'tanked' HP buffer. That means your SC will have 70% less shield if you want to field 20 regular drones.
-- Throw the Super pilots a bone... Make Supercaps and Titans dockable at stations with a SUPER CAP UPGRADE mod. This mod should cost 100 billion isk, and it should be impossible to board a super-cap if the station fitting services are offline. Undocking super caps should do so with 0 CAP and all high slots offline. Gives people a reason to own some space.
--
Remove 1 gun / turret from each Titan. Remove DD.
Make a titan sitting at a CUSTOM OFFICE, tapping into its coordinate flux power generator able to start a 5 min 2 way bridge to another titan within 3-5 AU, at another CUSTOM OFFICE. (able to run freighters through)
Give Amarr titans a 50km radius energy neutralizing field that triggers every 30 seconds while in 'enforcer mode' (as in, stuck there for 75 seconds) neuting like a medium neut, not stackable with other amarr titans.
Give Minmatar titans a 50km web-field. (not stackable with other minmatar titans) while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Caldari titans a 25 km cloaking field, that will cloak any ship moving slower than 30 m/s and not targetting anyone. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Gallente titans a 40 km radius warp disruption field (same as large T2 bubble) with a scramble strength of 1. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Make Gallente and Minmatar able to trade eachothers Enforcement mods by use of a 200 power rig. (and Amarr / Caldari)
There are some really cool idea's here. giving Titans a better support role, reducing the benefit of titan blob.
I especially like the idea of giving super caps a choice between drone versatility and tank. Choice is good ? |
Varrakk
Burning Napalm
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:09:00 -
[1779] - Quote
Super Carriers; Give them a separate Drone Bay, which allows them to deploy up to 10 of regular Drones (Unaffected by DCU) or 20 Fighter/Fighter Bombers. Not a combination of these.
Dreadnaughts; Should still have their Drone Bay, but lose control of Drones when Siege Mode is activated. (Much like the Carrier Triage) |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1225
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:16:00 -
[1780] - Quote
Lan Caden wrote:Cry cry.. "Your guns can hit my hurricane!"
"They better hit 1,800 of your hurricanes before I explode."
1 Titan = 90,000,000,000 ISK 1 Hurricane = 50,000,000 ISK
1 Titan = 1,800 Hurricanes
Because, as we all know, a BS can kill 60 - 100 frigates before it dies in a straight up fight. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
|
Maria Kitiare
Norse'Storm Battle Group Cascade Imminent
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:17:00 -
[1781] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:There is no "end game" for EVE. Sorry that you got lied to.
Karim alRashid wrote:You see, this is your misconception that the point of the game is to obtain gear.
Don't look for items to acquire, look for things to do. I am well aware that eve doesn't have an end game, and that eve is not all about having the best ships etc. But.. Eve does have a chain of skills.. Ie. you need frigate before you can move on to cruisers etc.
So.. If CCP doesn't want you to follow these "skill-trees", they have programed this game very badly.
If you follow the skill tree, you will at some point, have perfected what you need to jump into a super-cap - and if what you say is true, that eve is not, at all, about having the best ships, then why have different ships at all? If EVE is not about skilling up, getting better ships, getting better mods for your ship, then why even bother making t2 mods? Either, the CCP wants you to get better "gear" over time, or they are worse programmers than my old kindergarden class. (adding t2 code, models, etc by a mistake, thats a new one :))
I believe that CCP wants you to get more skillpoints and with those, get access to better mods, ships etc. Now, by nerfing the best ships in the game, to a point where they aint worth skilling for, they also remove that part of the skill-tree..
So why, would they bother make these ships, code the code, make the models.. But them in the "end" of the skill tree wich they have also made.. Just to nerf them so they wouldnt be worth using at all..
That must be either a brainfart from CCP, or evidence that CCP is listening too much to certain players who does not have a super-cap fleet.. Just sayin... |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1549
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:19:00 -
[1782] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote:I would like to know if CCP, with this patch, is trying to ruin the "end game" of EVE Online..
I am a fairly new player. I follow the skill curve.. FIrst i go for frigates, then cruisers, then BC's and finally BS's... Now i would go for a carrier and then a Super...
But with this patch, there would be no reason for me to skill for a super of a titan. I could simply stay with my BS's or a carrier.
So, my question to CCP would be.. IS it your attention to remove the supers and titans from the game? Cause with these changes, no new player would waste the time and isk to get one. I know i would not.. and when i watch the market these days, i see that people who already have supers is selling them off rather cheap already.
Also, even as a new player, I see why goons would love this patch, due to their huge player-base. Smaller corp's are the ones getting butt-****** by CCP since they will no longer be able to fight off the zerkswarm of sub-caps.
I really hope CCP would scratch these stupid nerfs and start balancing instead of ruining. Would be awesome since I would like to enjoy this game for quite some years ahead as well :)
AlsoGǪ I want a reason to actually skill for the big shipsGǪ Give me my reason back CCP.
You are doing it wrong. Bigger is not better. Bigger is in fact usually worse. Vote Two step for CSM7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1276
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:24:00 -
[1783] - Quote
Two step wrote:
You are doing it wrong. Bigger is not better. Bigger is in fact usually worse.
Your doing it wrong. Smaller is not better. Smaller is in fact usually cheaper and usually allot worse.
This is eve, where time = the best investment ever (que the RMT rage stuff about rl richness should not translate into i win mechanics)
If Time = awesome (best investment ever), then money = awesome since money = time.
If size costs money, then the bigger a ship, the more money and the more time is required.
Thus, the moar size, the moar awesome.
Now run back to your wormhole blob where size does not matter. |
Maria Kitiare
Norse'Storm Battle Group Cascade Imminent
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:25:00 -
[1784] - Quote
Two step wrote:You are doing it wrong. Bigger is not better. Bigger is in fact usually worse.
But why have ships in this game.. and in the end of the skill tree, if they are utterly useless. It doesnt make sence, that the worst ships, are the expensive and late-game (SP wise) ones..
If CCP wanted a game where evolvement in SP and income didnt affect the PVP outcome, they would have made a counter strike in space.. However.. They did not.. They made a game, with SP's and a skill tree system.. Why make that, if you don't want to use it? |
Aequitas Veritas
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:26:00 -
[1785] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game.
Bump again! |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:27:00 -
[1786] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote:I am well aware that eve doesn't have an end game, and that eve is not all about having the best ships etc. But.. Eve does have a chain of skills.. Ie. you need frigate before you can move on to cruisers etc.
So.. If CCP doesn't want you to follow these "skill-trees", they have programed this game very badly.
If you follow the skill tree, you will at some point, have perfected what you need to jump into a super-cap - and if what you say is true, that eve is not, at all, about having the best ships, then why have different ships at all? If EVE is not about skilling up, getting better ships, getting better mods for your ship, then why even bother making t2 mods? Either, the CCP wants you to get better "gear" over time, or they are worse programmers than my old kindergarden class. (adding t2 code, models, etc by a mistake, thats a new one :))
I believe that CCP wants you to get more skillpoints and with those, get access to better mods, ships etc. Now, by nerfing the best ships in the game, to a point where they aint worth skilling for, they also remove that part of the skill-tree..
So why, would they bother make these ships, code the code, make the models.. But them in the "end" of the skill tree wich they have also made.. Just to nerf them so they wouldnt be worth using at all..
That must be either a brainfart from CCP, or evidence that CCP is listening too much to certain players who does not have a super-cap fleet.. Just sayin...
And by your logic what exactly were you expecting to get after you finish training for those "unnerfed" super caps? You do realise that at one point you will have all skills for that much wanted super @ 5. What is next? In your opinion?
EDIT for clarification: NOW your ideal in EVE is to fly a super. Ok, my question is simple: what is your next step? (after you have all skills @5 for that super) I got the AFTER it wonGÇÖt worth train for that super GǪ but assuming the patch will never happen GǪ what is your next step? |
Lykouleon
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
450
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:28:00 -
[1787] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote:If EVE is not about skilling up, getting better ships, getting better mods for your ship...
EVE isn't WoW, we don't need to keep developing our characters towards a "skill tree" of any sorts.
I fly almost all cruiser-sized ships, but I have the skills to fly capital ships across the board. Why? Because cruisers are a hell of a lot more fun to fly.
If you're treating this game like there are set-in-stone "skill trees" and "bigger is better," I suggest uninstalling and going back to a game where such structure is necessary for you to comprehend fun...because you're doing yourself a major disservice by not comprehending EVE. Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER SO I CAN HIT THEM WITH MY SWORD
WIdot Director of Quality Control and Ironically Signing My Title to Posts To Make People ~mad~ |
Swearte Widfarend
Mortis Noir.
50
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:36:00 -
[1788] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Mioelnir wrote:Malcanis wrote:The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. While this statement might prove useful during an interview at the local tabloid, lets all get a few facts straight: Strategic logouts happen. They happen with roaming gangs that get boxed in in some deadend constellation. They happen with wardeccers to suicide-tackle with a neutral char until the pilot with the war is logged in. They happen with supers to safe them - and while I may only have skimmed over most of the last 70 pages, I have not seen a single super pilot claim otherwise - it is currently in a lot of situations the most favorable option to the SC pilot. Be that as it may - it is irrelevant. Protocols and game mechanics do not get tested by looking at the one intended usecase (super logging out while 50 hotiles are swarming it inside 15 bubbles gunz blazing) in which it is designed to work. They are tested by looking at ALL use cases. And the stranger the usecase, the more cornercases of different mechanics you get to overlap, the harder to look. Because how it fares in those cases is actually how good a mechanic is. And if the mechanics change is to ship logout/disconnect, examples of logout/disconnect scenarios should not come as a surprise. It is rarely relevant if you are not in a super. Supers are the only thing that can survive for that length of time (not including certain dread and carrier fittings); if you are found during your 15 min logoff timer and are not in a supercap, you are ****** either way unless it is the difference between being found 14 mins in or 14 mins 30 secs in.
let me fix your post for you:
"If you run away successfully from PvP because you are losing, and you are found within the 15 min aggression timer, you are ****** either way."
If you have an "accidental disconnect" during combat in your super, I feel for you, I really do. And if you can present to CCP the huge number of supercapital pilots who have such bad internet connectivity that they often disconnect (and not only during combat), I'm sure they would re-evaluate the logoff timer change, just as they re-evaluated the fighter change. But if you are whining because you can't CTRL-Q to save your super when you get into a losing situation, I can only say one thing. Duh - this is EVE - and you shouldn't fly what you can't afford to lose. CCP is changing ship skill trees. How ship skills should be |
Maria Kitiare
Norse'Storm Battle Group Cascade Imminent
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:38:00 -
[1789] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:And by your logic what exactly were you expecting to get after you finish training for those "unnerfed" super caps? You do realise that at one point you will have all skills for that much wanted super @ 5. What is next? In your opinion? That depends on how EVE evolves.. I do not say that when you fly a Titan, you don't need anything els.. I am saying that the skill tree, made by CCP, indicates that Caps is the next step after sub-caps..
CCP will keep adding content to the game.. In a former blog we read about new T2 mods, new ewar drones. all these things is stuff you would like to skill after. But that doesn't change, that the skill system, made by the CCP, with pre requirements for new skills, shows us that ex. carriers is a step higher the chain, than battleships.
You would still have to skill for whatever you like to fly, but again.. why would CCP even add cap's to this game, AND put their skillbooks after battleships, if they intend to make these changes?
Either CCP had a change of hearts and want this game to be something els, than we signed up for back in the days.. Or CCP really listens too much to the wrong people. imho :)
Lykouleon - To give you an answer :) - CCP made the skill tree.. Its there, its no secret.. I don't say you need to follow it to have fun. believing i said so is your mistake. the skill tree is there, right in front of your eyes when you look the the pre requirements page for your next skillbook. I didn't invent that page.. CCP made it. So.. When i am saying that the skill tree says, that cap's comes after sub-cap's, then it is because CCP made it that way. I just observe it and write it here. If that means that CCP should quit EVE and start playing WOW, i wouldn't know.. But i hope not :) |
Naradius
DEATHFUNK
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:47:00 -
[1790] - Quote
Usurpine wrote:CCP you do it the wrong way.
If you have 3 kids, one has 4 chocolades, one has 6 and one has 7 chocolades and you need to rebalance this situation its a good way to give everyone 10 chocolades (upgrade to 10). Everybody will have same amount of chocolates and everyone will be very happy.
Instead you give the first one 1 extra chocolades, take 1 from the second and 2 of the third kid, which results in a balance but propably making one kid a little more happy but the others think you badly suck and call you that this is action is a fail.
You're dumb...obviously you also want three very obese kids. "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." - Douglas Adams |
|
Officer Nyota Uhura
213
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:47:00 -
[1791] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote:Oh and just for the records: If you lose a Supercap to "a single hic" or a very, very small gang that means: you werent able to get some friends to come along for whatever you're doing and you werent able to figure out why this funny fitting you got from this wiki has neutralizer on it and you are unable to use a decent fit and you dont know a single person who could help you organise some backup and you were stupid enough to get your SC in a combat situation under this circumstances; then holy ******* **** you deserve whats comming to you.
Every ship in EVE has a role, every fleettype has a counter, the only ships that didnt fit into this were supercaps. Welcome back to (space)earth.
Sirs:
Why did I have to read this thread all the way to page 32 to hear the voice of reason? |
Avon
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
136
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:56:00 -
[1792] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Avon wrote:That's a long but terrible argument.
If a ship actually costs more to produce then it *should* have some advantage, otherwise why bother? You're still thinking the wrong way around. If a ship has some advantage, it should to cost more. That is all. However, it does not follow from this that something that costs more has some advantage.
It isn't me that is thinking the wrong way around.
A Zealot will always cost more than an Omen because an Omen is one of the build requirements of the Zealot. For that reason, a Zealot should always have some advantage over an Omen.
A Supercap is expensive because it requires a ****-ton of stuff to make it. If you want cost to reflect effectiveness then the build requirements need to automagically reduce when a ship becomes less desireable.
Now, as that isn't going to happen, you have to accept that cost *is* a factor for balance. In your world it is the effectiveness of ships that dictates the cost, for the rest of us we have to follow the build requirements.
I'm not saying that a ship should be better just because you paid a lot for it, I'm saying that because you *have* to pay more for it there should be some advantage.
You know what, this whole thread is starting to remind me of the "OMG too many battleships" threads of '03. |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:05:00 -
[1793] - Quote
Avon wrote:[quote=Tippia] A Zealot will always cost more than an Omen because an Omen is one of the build requirements of the Zealot. For that reason, a Zealot should always have some advantage over an Omen. An Omen has a smaller signature than a Zealot and has a drone bay, making it better in some (rare) situations.
It's funny how many people pretend that Supercaps are now completely useless, when in fact they have just become a little less useful. From reading this thread you'd think that all super pilots will have their ships replaced with Velators.
It reminds me of how many people whined when the mothership->supercarrier changes were announced. Quite a lot of people were absolutely sure that their precious motherships were going to be total crap. Well, it turned out that they in fact had gained a major buff. I hope this nerf now is actually a nerf *g* |
Veranius
Sigillum Militum Xpisti Fatal Ascension
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:07:00 -
[1794] - Quote
I can't be asked to read all 90 pages to see whether or not this has been mentioned yet, but I was just wondering that since Dreads and Titans are having their drones bays taken away and SCs are having them reduced, will Dreads and Titans have Capital Drone Bays removed from their bill of materials and will SCs have Capital Drone Bays the number of Capital Drone Bays reduced? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:10:00 -
[1795] - Quote
Avon wrote:It isn't me that is thinking the wrong way around.
A Zealot will always cost more than an Omen because an Omen is one of the build requirements of the Zealot. For that reason, a Zealot should always have some advantage over an Omen. No. A Zealot has certain advantages over an Omen, and should probably therefore have a price that is above that of the Omen. One of the easiest way to ensure this is to have the Omen be a part of the materials to produce one.
It is not the price that determines its advantage GÇö it the advantage that determines the price.
Quote:A Supercap is expensive because it requires a ****-ton of stuff to make it. The reason it requires a shitton of stuff to make it is because it provides advantages. They do not gain a bunch of advantages just because they sit at a particular price point.
Again: advantage determines the price, not the other way around.
Quote:If you want cost to reflect effectiveness then the build requirements need to automagically reduce when a ship becomes less desireable. GǪand guess what? That has happened previously when it became clear that the market felt the advantage bough wasn't worth the price. So that is probably the route you should take.
Quote:Now, as that isn't going to happen Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't aware of your prophetic abilities. Tell me: should I invest in nitrogen or helium isotopes?
Build requirements have been altered before. It will surely happen againGǪ if it turns out that it's needed. So far, there is nothing to suggest that it is apart from a solid wall of rather unreasoned whinging. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Dank Man
FinFleet Raiden.
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:14:00 -
[1796] - Quote
Do we get skillpoints reimbursed for our titan parking alts? and our Scarrier alts that no longer need about 14 mil in drone skills? |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:18:00 -
[1797] - Quote
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Akara Ito wrote:
Every ship in EVE has a role, every fleettype has a counter, the only ships that didnt fit into this were supercaps. Welcome back to (space)earth.
Sirs: Why did I have to read this thread all the way to page 32 to hear the voice of reason?
Every ship in this game does have a role and every ship in this game fill that role. Including the Super Capitals. Super Capitals were made to take down other Capitals in battle. They do that very well already. What your failing to realize is that every sub Capital in this game fill their roles as well and still have the versatility to take out that annoying frig tackling it. That is why almost every sub Capital in this game has drone bays. Yet here here we are trying to throw Super Capitals and Dreds into their specific role and say "Thats all they get to do". I realized a long time ago that this thread is really not about fitting them into their specific roles. Like I said, they already do that role well. Its about people who are looking for an easier way of beating the larger alliances that own more of them. Its about the morons who get baited into hot drops by PL and -A-.
If you don't have the Super Capitals to take on the larger alliances in this game, then maybe you shouldn't try. If you don't have the numbers because 3/4 of your 2000 man alliance is either perm afk or ignores intel channels in favor or ratting and plexing, then maybe you need to look at your own alliance as the problem. Not Super Capitals. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1225
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:22:00 -
[1798] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote:I would like to know if CCP, with this patch, is trying to ruin the "end game" of EVE Online..
I am a fairly new player. I follow the skill curve.. FIrst i go for frigates, then cruisers, then BC's and finally BS's... Now i would go for a carrier and then a Super...
But with this patch, there would be no reason for me to skill for a super of a titan. I could simply stay with my BS's or a carrier.
So, my question to CCP would be.. IS it your attention to remove the supers and titans from the game? Cause with these changes, no new player would waste the time and isk to get one. I know i would not.. and when i watch the market these days, i see that people who already have supers is selling them off rather cheap already.
Also, even as a new player, I see why goons would love this patch, due to their huge player-base. Smaller corp's are the ones getting butt-****** by CCP since they will no longer be able to fight off the zerkswarm of sub-caps.
I really hope CCP would scratch these stupid nerfs and start balancing instead of ruining. Would be awesome since I would like to enjoy this game for quite some years ahead as well :)
AlsoGǪ I want a reason to actually skill for the big shipsGǪ Give me my reason back CCP.
There is no "End Game" in EVE.
Also, Supercaps as a general rule are not purchased by individuals to pursue their personal goals. Supercaps are usually and Alliance asset used to further alliance objectives. Of course there are exceptions here and there, but the point still stands.
After this patch you will train for a Supercap because your alliance needs you to make the sacrifice in time and character freedom, no longer to gain an "I Win button" usable in most any situation. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:23:00 -
[1799] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote:iulixxi wrote:And by your logic what exactly were you expecting to get after you finish training for those "unnerfed" super caps? You do realise that at one point you will have all skills for that much wanted super @ 5. What is next? In your opinion? That depends on how EVE evolves.. I do not say that when you fly a Titan, you don't need anything els.. I am saying that the skill tree, made by CCP, indicates that Caps is the next step after sub-caps.. CCP will keep adding content to the game.. In a former blog we read about new T2 mods, new ewar drones. all these things is stuff you would like to skill after. But that doesn't change, that the skill system, made by the CCP, with pre requirements for new skills, shows us that ex. carriers is a step higher the chain, than battleships. You would still have to skill for whatever you like to fly, but again.. why would CCP even add cap's to this game, AND put their skillbooks after battleships, if they intend to make these changes? Either CCP had a change of hearts and want this game to be something els, than we signed up for back in the days.. Or CCP really listens too much to the wrong people. imho :) Lykouleon - To give you an answer :) - CCP made the skill tree.. Its there, its no secret.. I don't say you need to follow it to have fun. believing i said so is your mistake. the skill tree is there, right in front of your eyes when you look the the pre requirements page for your next skillbook. I didn't invent that page.. CCP made it. So.. When i am saying that the skill tree says, that cap's comes after sub-cap's, then it is because CCP made it that way. I just observe it and write it here. If that means that CCP should quit EVE and start playing WOW, i wouldn't know.. But i hope not :)
EVE does not have a skill tree that you progress 'upwards' in a linear fashion. You do not choose to train for a Battleship because it is next on the list.
In EVE you choose what ship you want to fly, or what mods you want to use. Then you train the pre-requisites. If you choose to go for ever larger hulls and so end up in a super capital, thats your call. If you choose instead to master every frigate and cruiser in the game then that is equally valid.
The game does not force you to train towards a super capital unless the game balance is skewed towards them as being the most effective ship class. This character could board one with ease, it never will because I prefer to fly Scimitars and Sabres. Flying a super is not the logical end point of the game, it is merely one option.
The issue is not the skill training philosophy 'pushing' players into supers, it is the flexibilty to apply the raw power of that class that pushes so many towards them in order to feel 'competitive'. It is right to reduce that flexibility, no other class can do so much so well. http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:27:00 -
[1800] - Quote
Aequitas Veritas wrote:zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game. Bump again!
Seconded!
The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
|
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:28:00 -
[1801] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Shadowsword wrote:Brambridge wrote: Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern: 125000 (25 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool Hel and Nyx: 150000 (30 total Fighters + Fighter Bombers) Needs to be both ..50 would be cool
That would be like a battleship pilot asking to have turrets that can turn into blasters or railguns without having to refit. Forcing the player to choose is a good thing. No no no you see if you spend a lot of money on a ship, you shouldn't have to do things like fitting the right tools for the job, or anything else which requires a functioning brain.
Yeah, cause all super capitals can dock and change fitting (it just 100k m3) in station. That is just a silly arguement.
Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
KB Eretic
Iris Covenant The Gorgon Empire
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:28:00 -
[1802] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
Why? If you will give bonus to carriers as "-14% Fighter's Weapon signature resolution per level", then carriers with a carrierskill level 5 that will be actually a small boost.
Now: Fighters from Carriers: 125 Fighters from Supercarriers: 125
Will become: Fighters from Carriers: 344/288/232/176/120 Fighters from Supercarriers: 400
PS: Sorry for my English.
fixed |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:31:00 -
[1803] - Quote
Ugleb wrote:Maria Kitiare wrote:iulixxi wrote:And by your logic what exactly were you expecting to get after you finish training for those "unnerfed" super caps? You do realise that at one point you will have all skills for that much wanted super @ 5. What is next? In your opinion? That depends on how EVE evolves.. I do not say that when you fly a Titan, you don't need anything els.. I am saying that the skill tree, made by CCP, indicates that Caps is the next step after sub-caps.. CCP will keep adding content to the game.. In a former blog we read about new T2 mods, new ewar drones. all these things is stuff you would like to skill after. But that doesn't change, that the skill system, made by the CCP, with pre requirements for new skills, shows us that ex. carriers is a step higher the chain, than battleships. You would still have to skill for whatever you like to fly, but again.. why would CCP even add cap's to this game, AND put their skillbooks after battleships, if they intend to make these changes? Either CCP had a change of hearts and want this game to be something els, than we signed up for back in the days.. Or CCP really listens too much to the wrong people. imho :) Lykouleon - To give you an answer :) - CCP made the skill tree.. Its there, its no secret.. I don't say you need to follow it to have fun. believing i said so is your mistake. the skill tree is there, right in front of your eyes when you look the the pre requirements page for your next skillbook. I didn't invent that page.. CCP made it. So.. When i am saying that the skill tree says, that cap's comes after sub-cap's, then it is because CCP made it that way. I just observe it and write it here. If that means that CCP should quit EVE and start playing WOW, i wouldn't know.. But i hope not :) EVE does not have a skill tree that you progress 'upwards' in a linear fashion. You do not choose to train for a Battleship because it is next on the list. In EVE you choose what ship you want to fly, or what mods you want to use. Then you train the pre-requisites. If you choose to go for ever larger hulls and so end up in a super capital, thats your call. If you choose instead to master every frigate and cruiser in the game then that is equally valid. The game does not force you to train towards a super capital unless the game balance is skewed towards them as being the most effective ship class. This character could board one with ease, it never will because I prefer to fly Scimitars and Sabres. Flying a super is not the logical end point of the game, it is merely one option. The issue is not the skill training philosophy 'pushing' players into supers, it is the flexibilty to apply the raw power of that class that pushes so many towards them in order to feel 'competitive'. It is right to reduce that flexibility, no other class can do so much so well.
Very well written and while I do agree to a point, I don't think we should be removing all flexibility from them. There are other ways of solving this issue than CCP has proposed. A smaller drone bay and a penalty to normal combat drone damage or a limit of 5 combat drones in space, while keeping fighter and bombers untouched I think would work well enough. The EHP nerf is a good idea but only on a ship by ship basis because lets face it, the Hel is already ****** enough. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:38:00 -
[1804] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote:iulixxi wrote:And by your logic what exactly were you expecting to get after you finish training for those "unnerfed" super caps? You do realise that at one point you will have all skills for that much wanted super @ 5. What is next? In your opinion? That depends on how EVE evolves.. I do not say that when you fly a Titan, you don't need anything els.. I am saying that the skill tree, made by CCP, indicates that Caps is the next step after sub-caps.. CCP will keep adding content to the game.. In a former blog we read about new T2 mods, new ewar drones. all these things is stuff you would like to skill after. But that doesn't change, that the skill system, made by the CCP, with pre requirements for new skills, shows us that ex. carriers is a step higher the chain, than battleships. You would still have to skill for whatever you like to fly, but again.. why would CCP even add cap's to this game, AND put their skillbooks after battleships, if they intend to make these changes? Either CCP had a change of hearts and want this game to be something els, than we signed up for back in the days.. Or CCP really listens too much to the wrong people. imho :)
Eve does have a vast skill tree. Pruning one branch back a bit doesn't kill the "end game" of Eve, if there is such a thing. It merely brings the tree back into balance and harmony rather than letting one get too big and actually become the end of the tree itself.
In less metaphorical terms, Cap ships are a tool for a purpose. They are not intended to be the ultimate swiss-army knife solution suitable to all purposes that every linear-thinking player should desire. They are one of many options. Other options include black ops, hacs, recons, command ships, T3 ships and more. All of them have similar if not heavier subcap requirements than do capital ships.
Don't focus on the biggest ship just because it's there and then insist it should be the best ship. It should be the best ship for it's purpose, but it won't be the only best ship there is.
If one ship was better than all the rest in all cases, why would anyone fly the others? If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
Andy Landen
Exploring Eagles
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:38:00 -
[1805] - Quote
Great changes overall, BUT the drone changes are all wrong.
Supers will still be able to burn through structures and caps like there is no tomorrow. Fighter bombers (FB) will see no change to their a) numbers deployed at a time, b) dps, and c) EHP. The super will still dominate sov wars, cap battles, and even battles against BS with large numbers of fighters on BS, while the carrier remains vastly inferior toward supers. Large FB EHP makes attacking them very difficult .. recall, deploy, recall, etc..
Plus, carriers are hit equally hard as the supers with the fighter nerf.
We need fighters to remain as is, and the super bonus per carrier skill to fighters to be reduced instead. I propose the bonus be 2 additional drones per level, and the fighters remain as is. I also suggest the same 20% reduction in FB EHP as for the titans, supers, etc. I like all the other changes, as they seem to make quite a bit of sense. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:47:00 -
[1806] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Maria Kitiare wrote:iulixxi wrote:And by your logic what exactly were you expecting to get after you finish training for those "unnerfed" super caps? You do realise that at one point you will have all skills for that much wanted super @ 5. What is next? In your opinion? That depends on how EVE evolves.. I do not say that when you fly a Titan, you don't need anything els.. I am saying that the skill tree, made by CCP, indicates that Caps is the next step after sub-caps.. CCP will keep adding content to the game.. In a former blog we read about new T2 mods, new ewar drones. all these things is stuff you would like to skill after. But that doesn't change, that the skill system, made by the CCP, with pre requirements for new skills, shows us that ex. carriers is a step higher the chain, than battleships. You would still have to skill for whatever you like to fly, but again.. why would CCP even add cap's to this game, AND put their skillbooks after battleships, if they intend to make these changes? Either CCP had a change of hearts and want this game to be something els, than we signed up for back in the days.. Or CCP really listens too much to the wrong people. imho :) Eve does have a vast skill tree. Pruning one branch back a bit doesn't kill the "end game" of Eve, if there is such a thing. It merely brings the tree back into balance and harmony rather than letting one get too big and actually become the end of the tree itself. In less metaphorical terms, Cap ships are a tool for a purpose. They are not intended to be the ultimate swiss-army knife solution suitable to all purposes that every linear-thinking player should desire. They are one of many options. Other options include black ops, hacs, recons, command ships, T3 ships and more. All of them have similar if not heavier subcap requirements than do capital ships. Don't focus on the biggest ship just because it's there and then insist it should be the best ship. It should be the best ship for it's purpose, but it won't be the only best ship there is. If one ship was better than all the rest in all cases, why would anyone fly the others?
Link me one ship that has more requirements than getting into a Super Capital in both actual skills that have to be trained and training time required. Black ops would be the closest because of the high navigation skills and BS 5 but I don't even think that beat out the training time to fly a Super. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:53:00 -
[1807] - Quote
Andy Landen wrote:Great changes overall, BUT the drone changes are all wrong.
Supers will still be able to burn through structures and caps like there is no tomorrow. Fighter bombers (FB) will see no change to their a) numbers deployed at a time, b) dps, and c) EHP. The super will still dominate sov wars, cap battles, and even battles against BS with large numbers of fighters on BS, while the carrier remains vastly inferior toward supers. Large FB EHP makes attacking them very difficult .. recall, deploy, recall, etc..
Plus, carriers are hit equally hard as the supers with the fighter nerf.
We need fighters to remain as is, and the super bonus per carrier skill to fighters to be reduced instead. I propose the bonus be 2 additional drones per level, and the fighters remain as is. I also suggest the same 20% reduction in FB EHP as for the titans, supers, etc. I like all the other changes, as they seem to make quite a bit of sense.
If Capitals can no longer hit anything below a BS, then people aren't going to bring BS. They are going to bring T2 Cruiser/BC/Command fleets with loads of Logi for support. They're going to bring fleets of the things that are effectively immune to the most powerful ships on the field. Not something they can shoot.
After this happens a few time, It will end up that no Capitals cyno into a battlefield because its just too dangerous and expensive to risk them, as they don't have the versatility to ever defend themselves. |
K0ttDiledundee
Salty Nut Attack Squirrels
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:59:00 -
[1808] - Quote
so im assuming with the reduction to the drone bay the material requirement for these ships will be less. and therefore more affordable? sooooo those of us who have fronted the massive bill to pay for these now less useful ships will be reimbursed for the robbery of some of the materials we have already paid for? |
Cornette
Solar Revenue Service F0RCEFUL ENTRY
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:05:00 -
[1809] - Quote
Aurora Egnald wrote:Tippia wrote:Aurora Egnald wrote:What we have going on here is GǪbalancing. It's a good thing for everyone involved. So why we are it why dont we just empty everyones isk and then evenly divide it between the players.. Since your such a great fan of balancing!!!!!!
I agree with this...
Because I'm poor atm
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:08:00 -
[1810] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Doesn't that simply undermine the whole concept of not allowing Super Carriers to wipe the floor with Sub Cap fleets? Would it not be better to give Carriers a compensatory bonus that offsets the penalty Fighters? That would allow you to have your cake and eat it, so to speak.
Not really. Fighters aren't a huge problem tbh. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Mr Management
Anger Management
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:20:00 -
[1811] - Quote
Quote:Now: Fighters from Carriers: 125 Fighters from Supercarriers: 125
Will become: Fighters from Carriers: 344/288/232/176/120 Fighters from Supercarriers: 400
Why allow a carrier to defend itself against sub capital ships and not a dread or a Super ?????
Just proves that CCP really haven't got a clue tbh |
Temmu Guerra
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
40
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:24:00 -
[1812] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships.
Hope CCP is watching the number of people that keep posting this tidbit.
|
Koraeth
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:25:00 -
[1813] - Quote
K0ttDiledundee wrote:so im assuming with the reduction to the drone bay the material requirement for these ships will be less. and therefore more affordable? sooooo those of us who have fronted the massive bill to pay for these now less useful ships will be reimbursed for the robbery of some of the materials we have already paid for?
Makes sense to me, as long as it's never been used.
See, if you used those resources then you weren't robbed. |
Indeterminacy
THORN Syndicate Initiative Mercenaries
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:28:00 -
[1814] - Quote
Just needed to make sure I got in on this threadnaught. |
ry ry
Doctrine. FEARLESS.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:32:00 -
[1815] - Quote
Koraeth wrote:K0ttDiledundee wrote:so im assuming with the reduction to the drone bay the material requirement for these ships will be less. and therefore more affordable? sooooo those of us who have fronted the massive bill to pay for these now less useful ships will be reimbursed for the robbery of some of the materials we have already paid for? Makes sense to me, as long as it's never been used. See, if you used those resources then you weren't robbed. It really doesn't matter if he was robbed or not. He's already commit suicide irl over it. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:55:00 -
[1816] - Quote
Le Cardinal wrote:A 20B endgame ship shouldnt be able to hold at least a few drones to fend off a dictor? lol. How somone could say thats a sane thing to do is beyond comprehension.
please let me reiterate, this is not WoW, end game does not mean end all and be all. In WoW level 85 is just arbitrarily better than level 84. Just because a ship is bigger doesnt mean that it is better
Le Cardinal wrote:There are ships designated for most roles in the game, so if you wanna pull the role-card then make it happen to all classes. I would like to see the reactions then from the people in this thread who support the current nerf.
What you fail to realize is that ships can have multiple roles and engage multiple ship types but the biggest ships cant because you cant escalate up from them. There is nothing bigger to bring to counter them, so they have to have a weakness to something smaller than them otherwise everyone would just bring those ships because they are uncounterable which btw is what happened.
Le Cardinal wrote:No matter how you twist and turn it, you do in fact sometimes end up in situations where you are alone and without support, either from logging at a safespot or pos or whatever. Its inevitable. and it would be YOUR fault for letting that happen in hostile space. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:56:00 -
[1817] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:War Kitten wrote:
Eve does have a vast skill tree. Pruning one branch back a bit doesn't kill the "end game" of Eve, if there is such a thing. It merely brings the tree back into balance and harmony rather than letting one get too big and actually become the end of the tree itself.
In less metaphorical terms, Cap ships are a tool for a purpose. They are not intended to be the ultimate swiss-army knife solution suitable to all purposes that every linear-thinking player should desire. They are one of many options. Other options include black ops, hacs, recons, command ships, T3 ships and more. All of them have similar if not heavier subcap requirements than do capital ships.
Don't focus on the biggest ship just because it's there and then insist it should be the best ship. It should be the best ship for it's purpose, but it won't be the only best ship there is.
If one ship was better than all the rest in all cases, why would anyone fly the others?
Link me one ship that has more requirements than getting into a Super Capital in both actual skills that have to be trained and training time required. Black ops would be the closest because of the high navigation skills and BS 5 but I don't even think that beat out the training time to fly a Super. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.
I didn't say super capitals, I said caps. I also didn't say training in general, I said subcap requirements.
Either way, you're nitpicking and missing the point entirely. Capital ships are a goal, not THE goal, and aiming for that particular goal misses quite a large amount of the variety available in the sub-cap ship realm.
If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
Trainwreck McGee
Ghost Ship Inc.
234
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:58:00 -
[1818] - Quote
TBH i am just happy about log off timer changes. Good job CCP CCP Trainwreck - Weekend Custodial Engineer / CCP Necrogoats foot stool |
Arcin Hamir
Sigillum Militum Xpisti Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:10:00 -
[1819] - Quote
While containing many good points I do suspect that this proposed change goes a bit too far. Perhaps some residual drone capacity for dreads, titans and supers could be retained rather than a complete lose of this capability. |
Gesina Kouvo
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:10:00 -
[1820] - Quote
Mr Management wrote:Why allow a carrier to defend itself against sub capital ships and not a dread or a Super ?????
Just proves that CCP really haven't got a clue tbh
Yea, why not allow a freighter, or a jump freighter, or a hauler to defend itself from any type of aggressor GÇô capitals and sub-capitals alike. Totally agree with you on this one.
Let's see: a supper-carrier is the ultimate weapon in sov warfare, pve, can counter caps, can counter supers, has no counter in large numbers - except of course - a larger number, it has EW immunity, it can haul almost like a freighter (ship maintainance, corporate hangar), it can even mine GǪ why not giving it the ability to deploy interdictor bubbles too so it can fill the role of pretty much every ship in-game.
My 2p
|
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:15:00 -
[1821] - Quote
Gesina Kouvo wrote:Mr Management wrote:Why allow a carrier to defend itself against sub capital ships and not a dread or a Super ?????
Just proves that CCP really haven't got a clue tbh Yea, why not allow a freighter, or a jump freighter, or a hauler to defend itself from any type of aggressor GÇô capitals and sub-capitals alike. Totally agree with you on this one. Let's see: a supper-carrier is the ultimate weapon in sov warfare, pve, can counter caps, can counter supers, has no counter in large numbers - except of course - a larger number, it has EW immunity, it can haul almost like a freighter (ship maintainance, corporate hangar), it can even mine GǪ why not giving it the ability to deploy interdictor bubbles too so it can fill the role of pretty much every ship in-game. My 2p
oh can i get a drone bay and some low slots on my nomad. that would be sexy CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:20:00 -
[1822] - Quote
Arcin Hamir wrote:While containing many good points I do suspect that this proposed change goes a bit too far. Perhaps some residual drone capacity for dreads, titans and supers could be retained rather than a complete lose of this capability. Far??
This is a mere beginning. Otherwise it makes no sense. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1225
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:21:00 -
[1823] - Quote
Mr Management wrote:Quote:Now: Fighters from Carriers: 125 Fighters from Supercarriers: 125
Will become: Fighters from Carriers: 344/288/232/176/120 Fighters from Supercarriers: 400 Why allow a carrier to defend itself against sub capital ships and not a dread or a Super ????? Just proves that CCP really haven't got a clue tbh
Because Cap/Supercap fleet defense vs sub caps is considered to be part of a carriers role, alongside logistics duties. Titans can be effective in this role as well if tracking boosted, but hopefully that capability will be removed.
Dreads and Supers have an anti capship/anti structure role (Titans also have a fleet deployment role).
I don't think CCP are the ones lacking a clue in this instance. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Draconus Lofwyr
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:24:00 -
[1824] - Quote
As a long time capital pilot and near future super pilot, i propose a alternative change to the supercarrier class.
* 99% reduction in CPU need for Warfare Link modules No change, (but a bonus to gang links might add command and control role back to supers )
* Can fit Projected Electronic Counter Measures no change ( other than proposed super immunity fix )
* Can deploy 3 additional Fighters, Fighter Bombers or Drones per level Change this to "Can deploy 3 additional Fighters, Fighter Bombers Only" (standard drones are limited to pilot skill. do not reduce drone bay, but split it into a fighter bay and a drone bay, as well as changing aggression rules for each drone type. Fighterbombers can only aggress supers and structures Fighters can only aggress Battleships and above. all other drones are not limited on engagement
This will allow a lone tackled super to have a potential chance to free himself, but no more than any sub capital would have, after it has spent an eternity locking said target.
* Immune to all forms of Electronic Warfare Documentation change only, change this to "Immune to most forms of Electronic Warfare" after all, a bubble is a form of e-warfare, so is an infinite point script (this can also fit on the Titan)
if Fighter bay is reduced to just above one flight of fighters/FB, then allow docking, the only remaining argument so far has been docking games being an issue, there's a counter to that, don't let them get near a station to dock. don't like docking games, don't fight near a station till you have eliminated the repairing ability of said station.
I also have one other request that is technically a minor nerf, but well requested. Can we make the ship model for supercarriers reflect the SUPER? make the supercarriers appear in space in size half way between a carrier and a titan? its pathetic that a Machariel is represented as larger than a Nyx, but it can dock with no problem!!!! |
Rodent Jr
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:26:00 -
[1825] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:Some random thoughts...
A blanket EHP nerf across the board is a little silly. The raw HP levels are already out of balance between supercaps of different races. Reducing everyone by the same amount means we miss out on an opportunity to correct that.
Solution? Adjust HP levels as follows: Aeon -20% Nyx -10% Wyvern -15% Hel - No change
Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10%
Supercarriers fighter bays are a little anemic. These ships are tricky and time-consuming to refit, so carrying a single flight of their only damage tool seems like a recipe for disaster. Solution? Let them carry ~30 fighters/bombers. Alternatively, remove the in-built drone deployment bonus in Supercarriers but increase the number that can be deployed using Drone Control Units. This introduces a trade-off between raw damage and remote-rep ability, as well as an increased risk of losing all your bombers in one flight or deploying less but having spares available.
There isn't enough difference between Capitals and Super-Capitals. Carriers have a role as support and anti-subcap ships, as escorts for Supercarriers that are now unable to defend themselves with their own drones. After these changes Dreadnoughts will still be limited in use as they're still just as vulnerable to being one-shotted as before. If you have enough titans, there will be little reason to use Dreads. Titans also remain overpowered versus subcaps. With tracking links, remote sensor boosters and enough supercarriers behind them, beating a titan blob simply comes down to having more titans. Beyond a certain threshold subcap numbers still do not matter.
Solution? Three actually:
1) Doomsdays balanced on sig radius - A blanket 'no DD on subcaps' rule seems a little anti-sandbox for me. If I want to burn half my isotopes picking off Rifters, why can't I? Let's change Doomsday damage to scale on target sig radius. For example:
Supercap = full damage Dreadnought = ~1mil damage (with DD Op V) Battleship = ~50k damage Cruiser = 5k damage Frigate = 1k damage
It will no longer destroy ships outright (unless they're nearly dead or terribly fitted) and makes Dreads more cost-efficient at taking on Titan fleets, increasing their role. This is also great to help smaller groups fight larger ones using their insured dreads.
2) Jump 'Calibration' - Supercaps should have a delay in order to lock onto a player-activated cyno beacon. This time is based on the distance they are travelling, so while a 2ly jump might take five seconds, a jump to the full range could require 30 seconds to lock on. This has several effects. Firstly it means that supercaps planning a hotdrop need to be nearer the target, increasing the odds of them being spotted. It also increases the odds of the cyno and/or tackler being destroyed or jammed before support can arrive. Finally it gives regular capitals an increased role as 'rapid-response' capitals, able to move around faster than their larget counterparts.
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.
Bumping dis post from page 64 |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:31:00 -
[1826] - Quote
K0ttDiledundee wrote:so im assuming with the reduction to the drone bay the material requirement for these ships will be less. and therefore more affordable? sooooo those of us who have fronted the massive bill to pay for these now less useful ships will be reimbursed for the robbery of some of the materials we have already paid for?
The value of your investment may go down as well as up.
Shoulda read the small print. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:31:00 -
[1827] - Quote
Some people have been quoting this guy up and down. He has a few good ideas but I am gonna pick him apart on a few of them.
zero2espect wrote: My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
This is actually a good idea, putting a nerf to supers that is tied to low sec, but none when in null. I like +1 for this one.
zero2espect wrote:
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
-1. NO. Limiting the number of drones deployed just makes supers into glorified battleships with bonuses. The ability to deploy more then 5 drones is something that draws people to carriers in the first place. Limiting them would fix lag, but only temporarily, and with time dilation on its way this is a mute issue now. Having drone models unchecked on your settings would also fix any PLAYER lag you may get from having hundreds of drones on the field. Split the bay into two parts, one that is for (25) Fighters and (25) Fighter Bombers only, and the other for normal drones. Say 1250m3 (50 large drones) for a Nyx, 1000m3 (40 large) for a Wyvern, 875m3 (35 large) for an Aeon and 750m3 (30 large) for a Hel. This would mean that during a fight, supers would run out of drones much faster. If there were a few stealth bombers paying attention during that fight and bombing the drones. Fewer back up drones, means a declawed super, and that makes a dead super.
zero2espect wrote:
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
-1. Leave the bridge alone, its fine as is. Limit it if you must but in low sec only. I do agree that supers need to have limits for being in low sec, after all it still is empire. Titans are mobile jump bridges for people too poor to live in null and do not have a jump bridge network.
zero2espect wrote: I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
You sir about the smartest sub cap pilot I have seen yet. Wrong on a few things but better then most.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:35:00 -
[1828] - Quote
Indeterminacy wrote:Just needed to make sure I got in on this threadnaught.
Welcome aboard!
I'm hoping we reach the same size as the old nano-nerf feedback thread (we're already on course for similar amounts of raging, entitlement complexes, self-delusion, account cancellation threats, and general incoherent flailing)
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Trader 99
The Black Hornets
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:39:00 -
[1829] - Quote
i think being dreads cant move in siege i would let them keep their dronebays personally, but not let the supers or titans use regular drones because i think they should be easy to tackle if alone with no support.Just because titans and supers cost quite a bit they shouldnt make it so its easy to deal with the only ships that can hold them.This should be one of there achilles heels. |
Gesina Kouvo
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:44:00 -
[1830] - Quote
@CynoNet Two some ideas are good some of them will actually change nothing in today's scenario. Let me explain myself:
Quote:Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10%
Ragnarok has the best tracking out there, you can actually track a frigate, an increase in HP will make it by far the best of all titans.
Quote:Alternatively, remove the in-built drone deployment bonus in Supercarriers but increase the number that can be deployed using Drone Control Units. This introduces a trade-off between raw damage and remote-rep ability, as well as an increased risk of losing all your bombers in one flight or deploying less but having spares available.
And this will change the actual blobing-with-supers scenario how exactly? You will simply jump 200 SC (like you do now GÇô objective) (with 5 x DCU fitted) and 50 triage carriers for remote-rep and NOTHING will move on grid, kill everything GåÆ go home.
It's funny to read that some guys are bringing the GǣblobGǥ card out front when now they are the ones that blob GǪ with supers GǪ :) |
|
Vaako Horizon
Casual Slackers Daily Operations
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:48:00 -
[1831] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
This is a balance issue.. While I am happy for those that like this I dont much like how CCP ignores confirmed bugs in favor of balance... :P As I am a high sec carebear these things dont affect me but since incarna there has been a bug which affect all players using them ( havent hard any user say otherwise )... DRONES!! ( no focus fire+idle ) Would it not be better to fix an actuall bug that affect "everyone" before looking towards balance issues? |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:50:00 -
[1832] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Le Cardinal wrote:A 20B endgame ship shouldnt be able to hold at least a few drones to fend off a dictor? lol. How somone could say thats a sane thing to do is beyond comprehension. please let me reiterate, this is not WoW, end game does not mean end all and be all. In WoW level 85 is just arbitrarily better than level 84. Just because a ship is bigger doesnt mean that it is better Le Cardinal wrote:There are ships designated for most roles in the game, so if you wanna pull the role-card then make it happen to all classes. I would like to see the reactions then from the people in this thread who support the current nerf. What you fail to realize is that ships can have multiple roles and engage multiple ship types but the biggest ships cant because you cant escalate up from them. There is nothing bigger to bring to counter them, so they have to have a weakness to something smaller than them otherwise everyone would just bring those ships because they are uncounterable which btw is what happened. Le Cardinal wrote:No matter how you twist and turn it, you do in fact sometimes end up in situations where you are alone and without support, either from logging at a safespot or pos or whatever. Its inevitable. and it would be YOUR fault for letting that happen in hostile space.
I find all this coming from an alliance that myself and ~8 guys came to within a few days of wiping off the sov map entirely pretty amusing. I guess what he fails to realize is that supers should be utterly defenseless. That way us super pilots can spend more time in EVE doing what you guys do, like hiding in poses refusing to fight, then using exploits to escape from our poses after hostiles rapecage and reinforce them.
Hahaha, incredible. The guys who have to use password resets to fling their jumpfreighters out of rapecaged, soon-to-die POSes because they wouldn't fight 8 people are lecturing us on why supers need to be easier to kill.
Go **** yourselves, Imperial Legion. You're terrible renter scum whose nullsec existence is entirely at the whim of others. Your input in this discussion means next to nothing. |
Kern Walzky
x13 Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:51:00 -
[1833] - Quote
CCP. i think this nerf aproach is the wrong way. i have played since 2004 and spent alot of RL money and spent alot of time.
Not only the ship will become nerfed, but the BPO's, and all investments to produce theese ships/BPO's will become worthless. So with a swith stroke from you CCP all my investment is ruined... im stuck in this sadness.
Why not make a dread a bit better to be a cheap competitor to the supers. Instead of making supers worthless.. a ship used only to kill caps and boooring structures. and you need a alt to hold it. subscribtion needed here.
its not tears. but a sad day when Eve becomes booring with no benefit to have isk and skills.
Supercarriers will become the next dread. almost never used... again BS and hacs will become the iwin... with no consideration for skills and isk and the current owners of the supercarriers & titans... |
Solinuas
Beyond Evil and Good
86
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:51:00 -
[1834] - Quote
You know a Sc fix seems pretty simple, just dissallow locking (or possibly only allow 5 drones?) on anything smaller than a bs (exept dictors and hics maybe) and have that with the other changes, and for the love of ****, fighters themselves are fine, if you play it right they cant hit anything smaller than a BS at all |
onefineday
Wings of Omen Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:53:00 -
[1835] - Quote
I think your re balancing is useless and thats why
Reasons:
You say super caps are two strong because they carry drones and they blob, the thing witch will happen the you will limit them to fighter and bomber drones they gonna blob even more.
i know its way harder for you to change amount of armor and shield they have and it would straight away make them easier to kill another thing make dps from bombers smeller whats a point of a carier if he cant even defend him self from one single dictor ? thats a reason they gonna blob even more because they wont be able to defend them self alone so they gonna do everything to make sure they don't die so the same thing ho have more super caps wins :) no logic to your desitions, titan dd is to strong its its lol luck titan uses dd he cant move 5mins he is target if you luck to the history goonswarm not so long ago nearly killed two titans in trash hurri hang because they used dd and cud not move :) cut armore shield ammaunth dps they do but don't cut drones because its juts sorry for expression stupid, can you Emogene moros without drones sorry but its galente ship it has to have drones its all point yes i agry dreads are two weak but maby you sud increase they dps cut armore and shield on titans and supercaps reduce they dps little bit and it will be all good :) it would be relay strange if one dictor would be able to kill super cap because he cant use small drones to kill it away :) don't be lazy to program more because its only reason i can see you choosing this way for super cap nerf, you destroying a game witch i love! |
Gesina Kouvo
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:57:00 -
[1836] - Quote
Can some one with ridiculous amounts of spare time can count the posts against super-cap nerf from certain alliances? I am just curious ...
Love the tears BTW. If I were CCP I wold go even further ... allow supers to deploy ONLY RACIAL fighters / fighter bombers ... like titans ... plus of course all the proposed changes. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1225
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:07:00 -
[1837] - Quote
Trader 99 wrote:i think being dreads cant move in siege i would let them keep their dronebays personally, but not let the supers or titans use regular drones because i think they should be easy to tackle if alone with no support.Just because titans and supers cost quite a bit they shouldnt make it so its easy to deal with the only ships that can hold them.This should be one of there achilles heels.
I guess I'm the only one that (should a Dreds roll be deemed a bit too limited, and some anti support fleet capability be desired) instead of keeping the drone bays instead allow them the rest of their high slots (8) that they can only mount smaller guns/missile launchers/etc in.
I admit to having a vision of Dreads bristiling with guns of all different sizes. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
zero2espect
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:09:00 -
[1838] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=176360#post176360 ^^ original post
thanks for all the props guys.
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1225
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:20:00 -
[1839] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=176360#post176360 ^^ original post
thanks for all the props guys.
There are a lot of good points in your post that could work, CCP's plan (with a few tweaks) can work as well however. There are a lot of subtle effects from either plan that could make or break the whole line of thought. Testing will tell in CCP's case.
I will agree that they need to be careful, particularly of following too closely the expressed desires of the community. Yes, feedback is valuable, however the reason Super Caps are in the shape they are today is because they listened too closely to the community wish list. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
penifSMASH
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
51
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:24:00 -
[1840] - Quote
hi can you fix titan bridge bug
the titan bridge bug is when a titan bridge goes up, a player then session changes, and said player is unable to go through said portal
thanks |
|
Sahjahn
Nex Exercitus Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:27:00 -
[1841] - Quote
Rodent Jr wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:Some random thoughts...
A blanket EHP nerf across the board is a little silly. The raw HP levels are already out of balance between supercaps of different races. Reducing everyone by the same amount means we miss out on an opportunity to correct that.
Solution? Adjust HP levels as follows: Aeon -20% Nyx -10% Wyvern -15% Hel - No change
Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10%
Supercarriers fighter bays are a little anemic. These ships are tricky and time-consuming to refit, so carrying a single flight of their only damage tool seems like a recipe for disaster. Solution? Let them carry ~30 fighters/bombers. Alternatively, remove the in-built drone deployment bonus in Supercarriers but increase the number that can be deployed using Drone Control Units. This introduces a trade-off between raw damage and remote-rep ability, as well as an increased risk of losing all your bombers in one flight or deploying less but having spares available.
There isn't enough difference between Capitals and Super-Capitals. Carriers have a role as support and anti-subcap ships, as escorts for Supercarriers that are now unable to defend themselves with their own drones. After these changes Dreadnoughts will still be limited in use as they're still just as vulnerable to being one-shotted as before. If you have enough titans, there will be little reason to use Dreads. Titans also remain overpowered versus subcaps. With tracking links, remote sensor boosters and enough supercarriers behind them, beating a titan blob simply comes down to having more titans. Beyond a certain threshold subcap numbers still do not matter.
Solution? Three actually:
1) Doomsdays balanced on sig radius - A blanket 'no DD on subcaps' rule seems a little anti-sandbox for me. If I want to burn half my isotopes picking off Rifters, why can't I? Let's change Doomsday damage to scale on target sig radius. For example:
Supercap = full damage Dreadnought = ~1mil damage (with DD Op V) Battleship = ~50k damage Cruiser = 5k damage Frigate = 1k damage
It will no longer destroy ships outright (unless they're nearly dead or terribly fitted) and makes Dreads more cost-efficient at taking on Titan fleets, increasing their role. This is also great to help smaller groups fight larger ones using their insured dreads.
2) Jump 'Calibration' - Supercaps should have a delay in order to lock onto a player-activated cyno beacon. This time is based on the distance they are travelling, so while a 2ly jump might take five seconds, a jump to the full range could require 30 seconds to lock on. This has several effects. Firstly it means that supercaps planning a hotdrop need to be nearer the target, increasing the odds of them being spotted. It also increases the odds of the cyno and/or tackler being destroyed or jammed before support can arrive. Finally it gives regular capitals an increased role as 'rapid-response' capitals, able to move around faster than their larget counterparts.
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. Bumping dis post from page 64
Quoting a Goon, good god. None the less quoting cos some ideas in here are good, the only one i really don't like is the jump calibration one, but meh.
|
Neurotica
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:38:00 -
[1842] - Quote
Blobbing wont stop, this will just bring about more BC blobbing with the introduction of more carriers being backup.
It's way to drastic, we already had the dreadnoughts / super carriers / titans around for such a time that these sort of changes shouldn't be happening with just a hammer and blindfold.
I wont deny that supers need balancing and it's all about who has more.
A nice apology, then to back it up withan amateur alpha stage style balance.
Monkeys and typewriters do not write Shakespeare. And the certainly can't build bridges. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:49:00 -
[1843] - Quote
Neurotica wrote:
Monkeys and typewriters do not write Shakespeare. And the certainly can't build bridges.
You ever give a monkey a typewriter to be sure?
|
Melivein
Ore Exploration Team
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:54:00 -
[1844] - Quote
ABOUT TIME ... Not enough, but will do for now. Better then nothing. (that was over due for over 5 years) |
Kerri Desdemonia
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:54:00 -
[1845] - Quote
Temmu Guerra wrote:zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread
(lots of text)
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships. Hope CCP is watching the number of people that keep posting this tidbit.
Quoting this post multiple times doesn't make it come true. It just makes it annoying! |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:58:00 -
[1846] - Quote
Maria Kitiare wrote: I am saying that the skill tree, made by CCP, indicates that Caps is the next step after sub-caps..
No. Just no.
Caps are not next step after sub-caps. Sub-caps are the step before caps.
Think for a second how these statements mean different things.
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:01:00 -
[1847] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Neurotica wrote:
Monkeys and typewriters do not write Shakespeare. And the certainly can't build bridges.
You ever give a monkey a typewriter to be sure?
Don't you think these very forums prove it ? |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:07:00 -
[1848] - Quote
Gesina Kouvo wrote:@CynoNet Two some ideas are good some of them will actually change nothing in today's scenario. Let me explain myself: Quote:Avatar, Erebus, Leviathan - No change Ragnarok +10% Ragnarok has the best tracking out there, you can actually track a frigate, an increase in HP will make it by far the best of all titans. Actually capital blasters have the best tracking of all capital guns, but I'll humour you here:
A quick EFT shows that if you take: a standard MWD flycatcher, moving at 2,480m/s with 570m sig a Ragnarok with 3 officer tracking mods and Drop boosters and feed it with a Scimitar with 4 tracking links at max skills
The Flycatcher will take a maximum of 320-360dps at a range of 80-120km. Below 70km damage drops to under 50dps. If I remove the tracking links, the Flycatcher needs to drop its transversal below 40% of max speed to be hit by the same rate of DPS. If the pilot is smart and fits an Afterburner instead, he cannot be hit below 250m/s transversal.
tl;dr - a Rag can hit very bad dictor pilots at the other end of the field if they stack every possible tracking bonus available. I didn't bother doing frigates because they're even smaller.
Gesina Kouvo wrote:Quote:Alternatively, remove the in-built drone deployment bonus in Supercarriers but increase the number that can be deployed using Drone Control Units. This introduces a trade-off between raw damage and remote-rep ability, as well as an increased risk of losing all your bombers in one flight or deploying less but having spares available. And this will change the actual blobing-with-supers scenario how exactly? You will simply jump 200 SC (like you do now GÇô objective) (with 5 x DCU fitted) and 50 triage carriers for remote-rep and NOTHING will move on grid, kill everything GåÆ go home. It's funny to read that some guys are bringing the GÇ£blobGÇ¥ card out front when now they are the ones that blob GǪ with supers GǪ :)
Carriers become the weak link in that fleet. Triage-focused carriers typically compromise their tank for cap stability. There are several options to easily take them out, including coordinated Doomsdays, your own supercap DPS, and even typical subcap fleets can alpha them.
Also if the drone bay size is balanced around giving spare bombers to pilots who do not fit DCUs, but denying them to those that do we get another effect. A DCU-heavy supercarrier fleet throwing all of its bombers in the same general direction becomes much easier to be defanged by enemy AoE weapons and finds that it suddenly can't replace its full DPS. |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:16:00 -
[1849] - Quote
I really don't see a reason why EHP needs to be cut back if CCP is changing the log off timer mechanic. You could up a supercaps EHP to 100 million or more and if it can't go anywhere it doesn't really matter does it? The shield tanked supercaps are in need of some EHP increases to be very honest. Also another point to make, with the scale of large engagements in today's EVE and the log of timer change an EHP increase for all supercaps would not be unreasonable. The reality as it is, is supercaps die pretty quick in most large scale fights and a medium sized gang can drain a supercaps capacitor to 0 in 1 to 2 minutes. If you honestly don't believe that got to youtube.com and search EVE super capital kills and educate yourself or just go to EVE Fitting Tool and see the numbers for yourself.
Drone bays on supercarriers need to be scaled back, I agree with that and I am a Nyx pilot. However what CCP is presenting I don't agree with. Supercarriers still need to have some flexibility in dealing with subcapital ships, particularly tacklers like dictors and HICs. I like the Idea of giving supercarriers and carriers 2 drone bays, 1 coded for fighters or bombers and 1 coded for regular drones, this was an idea CCP had a few years ago but they had some coding issues and gave up. I believe a drone bay for supercarriers large enough to fit 20 fighters AND 20 bombers plus a small drone bay 1000 m3 or 2000 m3 for smaller drones would be awesome. I think 1000 m3 is a bit on the "to limiting" side but it is acceptable. I could also agree with giving supercarriers a drone bay large enough to fit only 25 bombers OR 25 fighters along with a 2000 to 3000 M3 smaller drone bay, to give supercarriers some flexibility with heavy drones. Carrier drone bays should be similar, say enough to fit 15 fighters and a smaller drone bay, say 3000 M3 to 5000 M3. This would allow carrier to be much more versatile with drones in comparison to supercarriers.
Dreads need an enhancement to their ability to tank while in siege. I believe a resistance bonus when the siege cycle is active would be in line. This could be geared to give them the EHP to absorb a single titan doomsday, last a bit longer to vast amounts of fighter bombers, and more importantly tank 2 to 3 supercarriers. So yes I am purposing that dreads should be able to achieve a 25k to 35k DPS tank in siege depending on their fitting. However this would not make them indestructible to subcapital gangs because energy neutralizing. And before the posts start about "You can do that with a dread now if you fit x-type, officer and take pills", that is unreasonable to ask of a ship worth 1.5 billion isk. I believe dreads should have a small drone bay, say 50 M3. The siege timer change and the increased DPS is needed and fair.
Titans need a small drone bay, enough to be able to store ECM drones and light drones. There is no reason to not allow this.
|
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:25:00 -
[1850] - Quote
welp its been 50 pages since ccp Tallest's last post
i like how the thread is named capital ship rebalancing but NO actual rebalancing between the capital ship races was actually done or even mentioned.
caldari and minmatar are and have been inferior for years. Armor superiority in tank and implants as well.
I had hoped to see CCP Tallest respond more.
a nerf across the board doesnt fix the problem.
But I guess the priority is to make sure we have pretty clothes and living rooms to look at when we only wanted to watch our ship spin anyways. |
|
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:28:00 -
[1851] - Quote
Death2all Supercaps wrote:welp its been 50 pages since ccp Tallest's last post
i like how the thread is named capital ship rebalancing but NO actual rebalancing between the capital ship races was actually done or even mentioned.
caldari and minmatar are and have been inferior for years. Armor superiority in tank and implants as well.
Welcome to PVP, may I take you number?
Its been a hard fact for many years that armor tanked races such as gallente and amarr have been better in PvP then the other two. Shield is better for PvE and works for PvP in SOME cases. All of this you should of learned from the first few days of joining a PvP alliance. |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:29:00 -
[1852] - Quote
Death2all Supercaps wrote:welp its been 50 pages since ccp Tallest's last post
i like how the thread is named capital ship rebalancing but NO actual rebalancing between the capital ship races was actually done or even mentioned.
caldari and minmatar are and have been inferior for years. Armor superiority in tank and implants as well.
I had hoped to see CCP Tallest respond more.
a nerf across the board doesnt fix the problem.
But I guess the priority is to make sure we have pretty clothes and living rooms to look at when we only wanted to watch our ship spin anyways.
Silence isn't a bad thing, traditionally in regards to CCP this means things are being reconsidered while more information is being gathered.
I agree with you regarding shield supercaps, they need a boost to EHP, however CCP would need to nerf the passive recharge of shield supercaps aswell. While the recharge doesn't make a difference in a blob, where the EHP would, it does make a difference in a smaller gank situation.
The other problem for shield supercapitals is the lack of deadspace invulnerability fields. With only faction (a slight resistance increase over T2) and officer (equivalent to deadspace but much more rare) available players generally fit faction based on the prices of officer. |
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:36:00 -
[1853] - Quote
John Hand wrote:Death2all Supercaps wrote:welp its been 50 pages since ccp Tallest's last post
i like how the thread is named capital ship rebalancing but NO actual rebalancing between the capital ship races was actually done or even mentioned.
caldari and minmatar are and have been inferior for years. Armor superiority in tank and implants as well.
Welcome to PVP, may I take you number? Its been a hard fact for many years that armor tanked races such as gallente and amarr have been better in PvP then the other two. Shield is better for PvE and works for PvP in SOME cases. All of this you should of learned from the first few days of joining a PvP alliance.
this is a capital thread. i was talking caps.
|
Galyrion
Alcatraz Inc. Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:52:00 -
[1854] - Quote
The reasoning that a shiptype should be better because it takes allot of time to train for and is expensive to build is plain stupid. All shiptypes should fill a role but none should be able to do fill all. Right now supers are filling all roles and that is the reason why we see supercarriers and titan only fleets, there are absolutely no reason to bring anything else.
These changes makes supers have a specific role, anti capital and structure weapons and they will do it damn well also. If they are not worth fielding in a regular subcapital fight doesnt matter as its role is not to slaughter subcapitals with a click of a button. These changes makes for more diverse fleets and more interesting fights. |
Dr Cedric
Orbital Industry and Research.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:57:00 -
[1855] - Quote
I'll see if I can recap without this thing eating the post...again....
Regarding SuperCarrier Drone bays; It was mentioned just above that there needs to be a separate drone bay and Fighter bay (including separate Drone bandwidth and Fighter (Bomber) bandwidth...call it communications relays). I fully agree. I can't say how big a fighter bay should be, and how many waves of bombers/fighters a SC needs, I can say that any "carrier" needs to be able to field drones. A drone bay the size of a Dominix is not too much to ask for these ship types, and I'm sure others would say even that is too small. At the same time, we want to make sure we don't see a hornet's nest explode every time a small ship approaches a supercarrier. DRONE bandwidth should be limited to 125 mbit/s for a supercarrier, but let them have a damage bonus to drones (every race's Super carrier...they're all carriers!...maybe make it a racial bonus?). The DPS equivalent of 10 Heavy drones on a tackling Hictor will give the SC some leeway in not being pinned down by a single player for 23 hours. At the same time, it makes sure that the drone bay is not the "damage dealer" for that supercarrier. Fighter (Bombers) will retain their role in anti capital DPS, there will still be viable PvE options for (Super)carriers. Titans and Dreads need their drone bays as well and for the same reasons.
Regarding other changes; Disallowing SuperCarriers and Titans in Low-sec space is a stellar idea. This immediately removes the threat of a "hot drop" for those who are not associated with a large corp/alliance and don't have access to their own capital armadas. Low sec will be more open to those who choose to play there.
Creating a "spooling" mechanism for Cyno fields is another wonderful idea. Having several different cynos (a regular one for capitals, a new one specifically for supercapitals, the black ops one for blops gangs) each with a specific "spooling" rate (the faster the spool, the sooner ships can jump through and the larger the ship that can jump at a time) allows for more interesting fleet choices. This also opens up a reason to fit a cyno gen on a recon ship, change that bonus to "X% faster cyno spool per level."
Players are looking for a game where they are free to make choices, free to engage or disengage (depending on the situation ) and where the arbitrary limitations of systems MAKE SENSE and contribute to the decision making process in a meaningful way. Hacking away at SuperCapitals EHP (without a good reason) makes no sense and doesn't add meaning with the current context of the game and the other changes proposed (no logofski FTW). Hacking a dronebay off of a very expensive (ISK and skillwise) ship (without a good reason) makes no sense and doesn't add meaning.
I hope this finds receptive eyes and that the Dev's continue their (apparent) interest in what the community is hoping for and talking about.
Ced |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:58:00 -
[1856] - Quote
Galyrion wrote:The reasoning that a shiptype should be better because it takes allot of time to train for and is expensive to build is plain stupid. All shiptypes should fill a role but none should be able to do fill all. Right now supers are filling all roles and that is the reason why we see supercarriers and titan only fleets, there are absolutely no reason to bring anything else.
These changes makes supers have a specific role, anti capital and structure weapons and they will do it damn well also. If they are not worth fielding in a regular subcapital fight doesnt matter as its role is not to slaughter subcapitals with a click of a button. These changes makes for more diverse fleets and more interesting fights.
So Hurricanes and other battlecruisers should be changed too? Lets see they are great at killing smaller ships, other BC, sig/speed tanking BS, sig/speed tanking fighters, killing capital ships, killing supercapital ships, ratting, killing structures and killing POS's. That seems like it pretty much just covered every role in EVE.
Edit: Oh and they can be effective armor tankers or shield tankers. Two more roles they can cover. |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Initiative Mercenaries
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:58:00 -
[1857] - Quote
Just going to restate it since it hasnt been said recently
Currently the most broken part of the game is Titan's being used to take out sub-capital fleets with their guns - not thier DD.
The current tactic is - go in with subcap fleet to bait out hostile subcap fleet, get them engaged / bubbled then drop in titans and support supercarriers, in most cases these support supercarriers do not even drop drones, they are boxed alts that bounce cap / rep and remote sensor boost and tracking enhance the titans. The Titans DD the FCs, Command Ships, and Logi. The titans then use their guns to kill the remaining fleet, and will usually alpha strike their target anyway, even if the logi was alive.
With the proposed changes the supercarriers will still support the titans in the same way, the titans will not be able to DD the support but they will be able to buffed and use their guns on sub-capitals.
Look at it this way - Dreads, Supercarriers, and Titans are the only DPS capitals.
Currently the Dread is much lower HP, Must siege to signifigant dps, and is otherwise useless(out of siege dps is less than a battleship and cannot hit subcaps worth anything). (siege stops movement, reduces to 2 locked targets, makes immune to ewar, disallows rr / cap / remote anythingbuff, reduces tracking)
The dreadnaught is the only one of the above 3 that has to siege to DPS, and its already disadvantaged in hitpoints. I believe they all need to siege to to dps. This will reduce the ability for supercarrier blobs to RR dps. they already have enough hp if they cant last 5 minutes they deserve to die. I believe fleet positioning is a valid mechanic in any fight, and capitals unable to move in siege is a bit boring, so allow capitals to move on the field while in siege. I believe the drones on capitals will not be an issue if they cannot launch them while in siege, this will maintain the ability for recreational supercarriers ratting to be caught and killed.
1) Only allow fighterbombers in a siege mode on supercarriers 2) Change Titan damage bonuses to where they were before dominion, enable siege modules on titans 3) allow movement in siege, but still disallow warping 4) balance capital weapons so movement is not an issue with sieged ships 5) leave drone bays on supercapitals, titans, and dreads, disallow launching of drones in siege on all vessels. 6) maintain proposed DD nerf or remove DD completely. DD's have been subject of broken mechanics since they were introduced, stop beating around the bush and just axe the damned thing.
-GeeBee |
RuriHoshino
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 22:07:00 -
[1858] - Quote
I am the troll of my userbase :words: are my body, and butthurt is my blood I have created over a thousand threads
Unknown to logic Nor known to our own GMs
Have withstood pain to create many n00b tears Yet these users will never know our Fearlessness
So as I pray, Unlimited CCP Devblogs
Kudos to the folk who are proposing solutions instead of crying that their shiny ships are being nerfed. Without a supercap fleet of my own I can't judge these changes except to say that it was getting boring just reading about all-super fleets being dropped on small gangs and owning sov warfare. That being said this thread has been such a fantastic bounty of tears, I don't know if any one person could have the constitution to harvest them all. If you think supers are the "endgame" of EVE then you need to seriously consider whether or not this is even the right game for you to be playing. |
Galyrion
Alcatraz Inc. Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 22:16:00 -
[1859] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Galyrion wrote:The reasoning that a shiptype should be better because it takes allot of time to train for and is expensive to build is plain stupid. All shiptypes should fill a role but none should be able to do fill all. Right now supers are filling all roles and that is the reason why we see supercarriers and titan only fleets, there are absolutely no reason to bring anything else.
These changes makes supers have a specific role, anti capital and structure weapons and they will do it damn well also. If they are not worth fielding in a regular subcapital fight doesnt matter as its role is not to slaughter subcapitals with a click of a button. These changes makes for more diverse fleets and more interesting fights. So Hurricanes and other battlecruisers should be changed too? Lets see they are great at killing smaller ships, other BC, sig/speed tanking BS, sig/speed tanking fighters, killing capital ships, killing supercapital ships, ratting, killing structures and killing POS's. That seems like it pretty much just covered every role in EVE. Edit: Oh and they can be effective armor tankers or shield tankers. Two more roles they can cover.
The big difference is that the hurricane (since u mentioned it) needs to make sacrifices to do any of those things. If u want to have a big tank u need to sacrifice offensive abilities/speed/range. If u want to form a fleet of only hurricanes (standard shieldbuffer, ac fit for example) u are weak against a number of fleetscomps (bombers, abaddons, drakes to name a few). The supers will never have to make those sacrifices and have no weakness at current state.
Edit: Also id like to see u kill a POS with your armor and shieldtanked hurricane with 1,5k ms speed, tia |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:12:00 -
[1860] - Quote
Galyrion wrote:
The big difference is that the hurricane (since u mentioned it) needs to make sacrifices to do any of those things. If u want to have a big tank u need to sacrifice offensive abilities/speed/range. If u want to form a fleet of only hurricanes (standard shieldbuffer, ac fit for example) u are weak against a number of fleetscomps (bombers, abaddons, drakes to name a few). The supers will never have to make those sacrifices and have no weakness at current state.
Right, supers arent vulnerable to being cap'd out, bumped, having all their drones bombed or being probed in a few seconds and de-cloaked in a "safe spot" because the can't dock. Right?
Galyrion wrote: Edit: Also id like to see u kill a POS with your armor and shieldtanked hurricane with 1,5k ms speed, tia
I would like to see my Nyx kill an online pos with 20 sentries before downtime hits.
|
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:15:00 -
[1861] - Quote
I have a question for the the community, CCP, the Goon/TEST leadership, and Goon/TEST CSM's. I'm looking for a serious answer here in spite of the implied troll in my last line. So here goes:
Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare AND 20 billion isk worth of supercarrier be useful at killing only capitals and sov structures and only so when in larger numbers far surpassing 20 billion isk worth of ships on field AND they must be accompanied by yet another group of ships solely tasked with supporting them? |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
309
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:16:00 -
[1862] - Quote
dear ccp, please reconsider the drone bay on dreads.
a fair option would be to limit the use of drones on dreads so that they cannot be used while the dread is in siege. you already have the code and it works on carriers that cannot use drones/fighters while in triage. the same could be applied to dreads.
this gives dreads a small degree of defense vs tackle frigs/ light dictors when not in siege, but when its in siege it aint going anywhere so drones wont be much use anyways.
even a reduced drone bay so it can only field 5x medium drones would be a fair compromise Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Dunn Idaho
Core Impulse FEARLESS.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:25:00 -
[1863] - Quote
Dreads needs an EHP bost while in siege.
And there should be some seperate treads on the varius classes we discussion here as well. Now its just a big mix of SCs here, titans there, and some dreads over there discussion.
Just cut the bomber DPS in half, so they do less dps than dreads, 4k with Bombers, (5k on the nyx). and bost the buffer on dreads, and we're getting closer to balance. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:29:00 -
[1864] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare
They're not.
I mean its kind of flattering that you assume we're such awesome theorycrafters that we came up with a doctrine which literally owns the crap out of every other shiptype in the game before anyone else did, but welpfleet is by no means a one-size-fits-all doctrine. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:32:00 -
[1865] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Anile8er wrote:Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare They're not. Stop posting goon A real highsec carebear. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:32:00 -
[1866] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Anile8er wrote:Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare They're not. Stop posting goon
no u ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:35:00 -
[1867] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Anile8er wrote:Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare They're not.
Really?
1.4 k/ms per ship
2 medium neuts per ship
drone bay capable of dealing with smaller ship
awesome tracking
awesome ability to dictate range
much better rate of fire than any other BC/BS
20 billion isk worth of hurricanes generates about 240,000 DPS (that far surpasses the DPS a supercarrier or a titan can apply, and only to a capital ship mind you.)
|
Pyro Tsu
Sarum Industries Viking Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:40:00 -
[1868] - Quote
Yet another change that does not affect players living in HighSec. Only a minority is living in Nullsec and WHs! Do care more about the majority please! |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:42:00 -
[1869] - Quote
Tell you what. I will support the supercapital nerf if CCP provided all Dreads, Carriers, Supercarriers and Titans the following:
A rapid fire 1000 dps point defense system capable of hitting out to around 20 km.
Edit: this is pretty much a troll. However it would be the reality of a Specific Roles for ships based gameplay. Modern day super aircraft carriers have point defense systems that are well capable of defending them against smaller ships and fast moving aircraft while their primary role is to launch fighters and fighter bombers to provide air superiority and heavily damage enemy ships or positions. |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:44:00 -
[1870] - Quote
Pyro Tsu wrote:Yet another change that does not affect players living in HighSec. Only a minority is living in Nullsec and WHs! Do care more about the majority please! CCPgoons are not interested in little things.... like fixing hybrids. They want to "fix" supers so goons can take over 0.0 with their hurricanes A real highsec carebear. |
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:45:00 -
[1871] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote:
They want to "fix" supers so goons can take over 0.0 with their hurricanes
This
Edit: the quote I was actually looking for |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Initiative Mercenaries
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 23:48:00 -
[1872] - Quote
Pyro Tsu wrote:Yet another change that does not affect players living in HighSec. Only a minority is living in Nullsec and WHs! Do care more about the majority please!
Do what more with highsec, they buffed missionsand added incurions recently, theres plenty of isk printing carebearing there for you to do practically risk free.
btw a good portion of your majority are alts of 0.0 players or bots, if you get bored with highsec go somewhere else and find something interesting to do, that is how the majority of us in 0.0 got to be here in the first place.
-GeeBee |
L'ouris
Have Naught Subsidiaries
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 00:09:00 -
[1873] - Quote
After reading all friggin 94 pages:
Am I correct in that the fleet fights won't change for Null?
Grath seemed to do a good summary here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=175334#post175334
Grath Telkin wrote:Tippia wrote:Mioelnir wrote:Yes, and you then go ahead and claim that because one aspect does not change, no aspect changes. And that is wrong. So what other aspects change, do you think? Nothing changed, there is a thread with the title capital balance, but nothing is actually changing. Supers still deploy fighters because people didn't want to face the possibility of not being able to run Sanctums with carriers, they had the fighter nerf 'undone', so now, you'll have herds of supers launching their 5-10 fighters with rack loads of webs and painters. On top of this, the ECM burst ill no longer burst their own reps off, so a proficient group of supers will be bursting every few seconds to keep sub caps having to constantly relock the target while their reps, and the reps of triage carriers remain in tact. Dropping this in the middle of a battleship fleet spells the end of the battleship fleet, no other help needed but dictors to hold everything in the area. ...
I can't seem to identify how the patch changes the current N+1 counter to super fleets with the ECM immunity of the supers and the titan tracking.
I usually only fly frigs though so any clarification would be appreciated.
What about these changes encourages a more diverse fleet fight? |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals Late Night Alliance
142
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 00:31:00 -
[1874] - Quote
So many SCs being sold lol. http://fw-frontline.blogspot.com/ |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
784
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 00:35:00 -
[1875] - Quote
new feedback
1. Please let dreads keep their drone bay - but have the siege module make it so dreads cannot use drones while in siege mode - similar to carriers triage mode.
2. Hel is getting hit the worst and will have the lowest EHP of all the mom's please leave their hp alone and maybe look into changing the bonus from logi to something like drone rof.
3. Drone bay sizes should be able to take a full compliment of fighters and fighter bombers. 25 f / 25 FB. This will leave some versatility to moms to either assign fighters to sub caps to help them out or have a full wing of bombers for capital / sov fights.
3.a. To appease the super cap whiners that have no friends to back them up in a fleet fight. MAKE 2 drone bays. One for fighters and fighter bombers, And another one for regular drones. large enough to accomodate, 25 light, 25 medium, 25 heavy, 25 sentry, and 25 ewar. Now to the whiney super cap pilots --- THIS IS MEETING THE ISSUE HALF WAY, It gives you reasonable defense against subs but its not op where you can constantly throw drones out.
4. AS an added bonus to help supers carriers and others, MAYBE offer a bonus to smartbomb range or neut range.
5. Look into dread / titan tracking of turrets,
6. You should explain more in depth about hybrid changes to quell the fear about the changes it is going to receive, you already broke its poor little legs.
7. If regular carriers are going to be support ships to the supers, make sure they get some good bonuses to help defend against sub caps, 7a - small hp buff 7b - better tracking for all drones 7c - speed bonus drones ETC
8. A note to the community - THESE ARE PLANNED CHANGES AND ARE NOT YET IN STONE! Get on the test server and try it out and offer constructive help not whining and rage quitting.
9. To most of you bitter vets - We were all around before super caps existed, we were all around fighting for sov long before tons and tons of moms were fielded. MAKE UP TACTICS, Send in the subs first to distract their subs then send in the dreads and supers to take out their capitals.
|
Galyrion
Alcatraz Inc. Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 00:46:00 -
[1876] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Anile8er wrote:Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare They're not. Really? 1.4 k/ms per ship 2 medium neuts per ship drone bay capable of dealing with smaller ship awesome tracking awesome ability to dictate range much better rate of fire than any other BC/BS 20 billion isk worth of hurricanes generates about 240,000 DPS (that far surpasses the DPS a supercarrier or a titan can apply, and only to a capital ship mind you.)
U keep refering to "isk worth of" as if that is a way to messure balance, and as I stated before its plainly ******** to think that way. Following your logic noobships needs to be nerfed cos what can counter xammount of isk worth of noobships?
|
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises RED.Legion
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 00:48:00 -
[1877] - Quote
Also they will see many unsubs. I too will watch this company cascade. Terrible it has to happen to EVE. I have played MMOs for about 15 years. This is the classic hair on fire we are losing subs let us make drastic changes to try to get subs. I watched many MMOs do this very same thing. Top corp execs put out mails. " We are refocusing guys stay please " . They all died because of it. CCP your community is growing tired. Constant war creates burnout, burnout creates unsubs. No war creates unsubs. Making everyone buy extra accounts to play the end game is going to hurt you more and more. Unsub = 3+ unsubs or so average. Good luck. I will be observing. Being this is write a Novel month you are giving me great material.
Silence iKillYouu wrote:So many SCs being sold lol.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Mr Management
Anger Management
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:07:00 -
[1878] - Quote
Quote:Because Cap/Supercap fleet defense vs sub caps is considered to be part of a carriers role
And where was this decided ...... apart from in your imagination.
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.
It is a totally a one sided biast argument to expect a Supercarrier to sit in space until downtime / destroyed / rescued without the ability to defend itself from a single Interdictor.
Either give Dreads / Supers the ability to field a small amount of drones or give them a point defence system. Giving them nothing is both stupid and short sighted., |
MrEcloth
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:18:00 -
[1879] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game.
This Is the kind of thinking that'll get stuff done right
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:23:00 -
[1880] - Quote
Mr Management wrote: 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.
Easy there pilgrim, you're coming dangerously close to pointing out facts.
Here let me help you:
Quote:Sensing the need for a more moderately-priced version of the Nyx, Federation Navy authorities commissioned the design of the Thanatos
Thats the direct quote.
If the Thanatos can launch regular drones, the Nyx should be able to, since its built off that design.
Simple solution to me is to take regular drones from the carriers as well, wouldn't bother me a bit, and it would mean that ALL capital ships need support, not just some 3 of the 4.
Carriers shouldn't be held up as some special case because people like to run Sanctums in them, if you really, REALLY want to make cap fleets require a support fleet, as the argument is currently being made, then take away regular drones from carriers too.
Otherwise its just some arbitrary nerf CCP is imposing hoping Mittani doesn't tell all his little Goons to go play some other game.
|
|
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:27:00 -
[1881] - Quote
Final nerf will be
DEATH 2 ALL SUPERCAPS! |
Mongo Edwards
Grey Templars Ushra'Khan
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:36:00 -
[1882] - Quote
My .02 isk:
I personally feel that CCP messed up big when they took SC's and turned them into DPS platforms. They should have been a natural progression for a carrier/logi pilot i.e. a super logistics boat (I'm thinking in the vicinity of being able to fit 6-8 bonused capital remote reps). Also, the difference between a carrier and super carrier skill wise does not justify the abilities they have (carrier 3 to sit in one - really?).
While I like most of the proposed changes even I (who hate SC's with a passion) feel a token - seperate - drone bay of about 250-500 m3 is reasonable. I would also like to propose that if you insist on keeping SC's as DPS platforms then you make them siege to use their fighter bombers (and with this they lose the ability to be move, use normal drones, be RR'd, or to RR others). They shouldn't be allowed to siege in low sec.
Titans: I feel they need there tracking nerfed - they shouldn't be popping BS with their guns when a dread has trouble tracking a moon.
Dreads: I don't think this boost goes far enough. They need a better role, killing structures is fine and all but when they siege they are extremely suseptable to being neuted out and killed since they can't active tank with no cap. Really if a fight is expected it is better just to bring BS and carriers since the BS are useful against more ships than the sieged, tracking nerfed, dread. The Phoenix needs some love because not only is it a shield tanker in an armor tanking world but it uses Citadel launchers which are just plain bad.
Disclaimer: I live in low sec and have never been involved in a sov fight. However, SC's are becoming more of a problem for low sec with the recent upheaval in null. |
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises RED.Legion
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:40:00 -
[1883] - Quote
You want to solve super carrier problems in EVE ? You want to solve your unsub problem? Make super carriers only cost 1/2 and 1/2 time to build or something like that. You have any idea what that would do ? When you have lemons you make lemonade. You do not ignore your lemons , cut them in half, try to suppress them or throw lemons out the window. More supers more risk. More supers more alt toons more holding toons. More war. MORE LOSSS. Cheaper supers mean easier for smaller groups to get them. Levels the playing field. Just deposit x isk into super pilots pocket for adjustment. It will all get blown up anyway.
You can never stop weapon proliferation We are not playing Yatzy.
I am not sure if you are listening but you have already lost the war against supers. Make them abundant and you are a winner.
Political Science Class Dismissed. <-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises RED.Legion
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:44:00 -
[1884] - Quote
You my friend deserve isk donations. Super logistics boat is another fantastic idea.
Mongo Edwards wrote:My .02 isk:
I personally feel that CCP messed up big when they took SC's and turned them into DPS platforms. They should have been a natural progression for a carrier/logi pilot i.e. a super logistics boat (I'm thinking in the vicinity of being able to fit 6-8 bonused capital remote reps). Also, the difference between a carrier and super carrier skill wise does not justify the abilities they have (carrier 3 to sit in one - really?).
While I like most of the proposed changes even I (who hate SC's with a passion) feel a token - seperate - drone bay of about 250-500 m3 is reasonable. I would also like to propose that if you insist on keeping SC's as DPS platforms then you make them siege to use their fighter bombers (and with this they lose the ability to be move, use normal drones, be RR'd, or to RR others). They shouldn't be allowed to siege in low sec.
Titans: I feel they need there tracking nerfed - they shouldn't be popping BS with their guns when a dread has trouble tracking a moon.
Dreads: I don't think this boost goes far enough. They need a better role, killing structures is fine and all but when they siege they are extremely suseptable to being neuted out and killed since they can't active tank with no cap. Really if a fight is expected it is better just to bring BS and carriers since the BS are useful against more ships than the sieged, tracking nerfed, dread. The Phoenix needs some love because not only is it a shield tanker in an armor tanking world but it uses Citadel launchers which are just plain bad.
Disclaimer: I live in low sec and have never been involved in a sov fight. However, SC's are becoming more of a problem for low sec with the recent upheaval in null.
<-áI believe he is right > Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
|
Havak Kouvo
State War Academy Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:58:00 -
[1885] - Quote
This is an oppurtunity to really balance capitals.
The fighter sig radius doesn't need to be the size of a battleship.
Minmatar carriers and supercaps need a balance in terms of damage and/or EHP. If they are going to have significantly less EHP compared to other races, they should be dealing a heal of a lot of DPS.
Shield bonuses need to be applied just like armor.
All supercarriers should be able to AT LEAST hold 20 fighters + 20 fb, especially with the nerf. That could be part of the balance of Minmatar supercarriers, large drone bays than other supercarriers.
|
Morar Santee
64
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:59:00 -
[1886] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:new feedback 1. Please let dreads keep their drone bay - but have the siege module make it so dreads cannot use drones while in siege mode - similar to carriers triage mode. 2. Hel is getting hit the worst and will have the lowest EHP of all the mom's please leave their hp alone and maybe look into changing the bonus from logi to something like drone rof. 3. Drone bay sizes should be able to take a full compliment of fighters and fighter bombers. 25 f / 25 FB. This will leave some versatility to moms to either assign fighters to sub caps to help them out or have a full wing of bombers for capital / sov fights. 3.a. To appease the super cap whiners that have no friends to back them up in a fleet fight. MAKE 2 drone bays. One for fighters and fighter bombers, And another one for regular drones. large enough to accomodate, 25 light, 25 medium, 25 heavy, 25 sentry, and 25 ewar. Now to the whiney super cap pilots --- THIS IS MEETING THE ISSUE HALF WAY, It gives you reasonable defense against subs but its not op where you can constantly throw drones out. 4. AS an added bonus to help supers carriers and others, MAYBE offer a bonus to smartbomb range or neut range.5. Look into dread / titan tracking of turrets, 6. You should explain more in depth about hybrid changes to quell the fear about the changes it is going to receive, you already broke its poor little legs. 7. If regular carriers are going to be support ships to the supers, make sure they get some good bonuses to help defend against sub caps, 7a - small hp buff 7b - better tracking for all drones7c - speed bonus drones ETC8. A note to the community - THESE ARE PLANNED CHANGES AND ARE NOT YET IN STONE! Get on the test server and try it out and offer constructive help not whining and rage quitting. 9. To most of you bitter vets - We were all around before super caps existed, we were all around fighting for sov long before tons and tons of moms were fielded. MAKE UP TACTICS, Send in the subs first to distract their subs then send in the dreads and supers to take out their capitals.
Best set of suggestions I've seen in this thread. Would be actual balancing rather than an unsophisticated nerf. |
Zhentar
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 02:37:00 -
[1887] - Quote
The only thing I have to add is that I think you should provide the option for current SC pilots to remap any drone skills they have. Supercarriers have been able to use all the dronetypes since they were motherships, and some of us have trained characters exclusively for that purpose. Cutting all those out now, and not allowing people to dock those ships to use those skills, means you should give us the opportunity to remap them into something useful. |
Lord Helghast
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
53
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 02:37:00 -
[1888] - Quote
For the love of god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIX DREADS and MINMATAR CAPS at the same time
HEL is getting NERFED even worse? And it already sucks vs the other supers?
Nidhoggur is effectively always primaried and yet has worst EHP, mediocre bonuses, what does it have for all that training??? few m/s extra i think? lol How about making it more nimble, jump with less cap, faster base speed, something for the love of god
Naglfar... Seriously how has this not been fixed, moros is getting even better, yet Naglfar one of the longest dreads to train for is still medicore at best? Split CAPITAL weapon systems, and now no drones.... oh for the love of god fix this
Also weren't carriers supposed to become more corp logistics, you know with a larger more useful ship maint bay???
Why the hell are dreads jump range not getting fixed, match dreads with carriers, so that together as a TEAM they can move and be an affective group weapon for attacking, and supers will fall into there defensive local roles...
Also why are dreads not getting a boost to tracking even a tiny boost so to hit supers "speed tanking" you dont need a full rack of tracking mods!
|
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 02:52:00 -
[1889] - Quote
Lord Helghast wrote: FIX DREADS and MINMATAR CAPS at the same time
HEL is getting NERFED even worse? And it already sucks vs the other supers?
They've already said that Minmatar caps are getting a look at as well.
I get that this is a long thread, but could people at least read the dev posts before rushing in to splash your 'insights' everywhere. |
Duncan Dickson
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 02:56:00 -
[1890] - Quote
If a Capital is built around DPS (Dread, SC, Titan) it should NOT be able to apply that DPS to subcaps. If you want to get away from a lone dictor holding your for 23 hours then get friends.
I am really eager to see how this all shapes up and I hope CCP doesn't back off too much until these changes at least get some time to settle in. |
|
XPistolX
Muppet Factory 0ccupational Hazzard
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 02:57:00 -
[1891] - Quote
Ok... Let's pretend for a sec that those measures aren't a fancy way to say "We would like to remove SC's from EVE", much like that clever way to say that lag is now a feature (TiDi)
IF that idea that supercaps should be a weapon to figth only caps, the "balancing" should include an buff to carriers and dreads HP. The reason is that is too easy to kill them with subcaps. Hell, its even easy to alpha carriers wih a not so big number of ships... a number that can be taken as small in a regular sov/moon battle.
If killing caps with subcaps do not become a job that involves an amount of neuting, jamming AND dps rather than just arties, why the hell would anyone bring them?
Do you ever heard anyone at CCP saying that to create another ship you need to find a role? If dealing with caps its easier than should be today, making them harder to kill adjusts the role that a supercarrier should trully fit in the future. |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 02:59:00 -
[1892] - Quote
L'ouris wrote:What about these changes encourages a more diverse fleet fight? Encourage? Nothing encouraging about it.
These changes do basically three things: - kitchen sink roamings that accidentally stumble upon a ratting supercap have a better chance of killing it - force subcapital deployment alongside supers by making subcaps as immune to supers as possible without using the word immune - they fiddle with a few fleet-fight performance knobs to see what happens, reminiscent of the equipment tests run in chernobyl in 1986
Now if we look at it, what is actually the problem with supers? They are designed to be cap killers. And they are undeniably good at it. So good in fact, that fielding caps against them currently is ritual suicide. But that is not the fault of supers - that would be like blaming a vagabond for being fast. So, now that we have ruled out engaging them with regular caps, lets look at subcaps. Titans take a special place here since their doomsday can take out key infrastructure ships like fleet commands in a very reliable way. The other thing at least for turret titans is basic tracking mechanics which guarantees them to at least have some effect if the fc sets them up correctly.
Going on to supercarriers, what about them? Their dps? No. Since the last round of fighterbomber changes a fighterbomber hits an abaddon for 8 to 15 damage per volley. That's not even enough to make your twitchy finger broadcast for reps - it adds up if you look at 250 scs, yes (75k), but you just got hit by a 30 million HP damage volley, there are bound to be scratches (0.25% effective damage!). Their best bet is somewhere in the fighters / sentries / heavies ballpark in which they deal a little above twice as much dps as fleet battleship inside 60km control range. So the subcapital damage output of 250 supercarriers is 550 battleships worth, hardly something the cluster has never seen before.
If you've ever engaged 550 battleships, you know there is simply no tanking that inside their engagement zone. There is not. Accept it. Embrace it. But (assuming even numbers which already means you failed in setting up an unfair fight) you get a steady decline of incoming dps as ships explode. With the EHP of supercaps, their dps decline over time is always shallower than any subcap forces'. The EHP in turn they received because they used to fold in 20 seconds to anything looking at them the wrong way and because they are actually needed in cap fights which are a lot more static than subcap fights once they are on.
All of this combined results in the "supers are the only counter to supers" mantra. So, what is CCP hoping to achieve with these changes? The -20% HP change makes the dps reduction steeper, without having them implode against 20 battleships like they used to. With the drone changes I assume they hope that supercarrier pilots will go for 10/10 or 15/15 splits between bombers and regular fighters. This reduces the damage output of them against both capital and subcapital targets and removing the titan's headshot aimbot. So, less dps output and steeper over time dps reduction. Will this give subcapital fleets a better chance? Yes. Will the odds-improval be enough to stop the whining or fix eve? No. Will turning these screws even more fix eve? No, it will just break supers again. With their destructible dps without the endless-waves feature that saved the Dominix through the ages they will already be borderline.
The real core problem is not that supers are designed as cap killers. Giving subcaps better odds is all fine, but subcaps are not the designed weightclass in which to engage in. The problem is that no other capital is actually designed to fight capitals - short story short, fix broken dreads. Siege weapons were fine in the days of RMR and served their purpose while sov was linked to POS. Newsflash, that's history. POS are engaged to annoy your enemy, force fights and flush a few isks into your wallet. They are an opportunity target now, not a tightly regulated core game mechanic.
So, dreads redux: - remove the 2 target limit that was imposed on dreads because of station hugging moros pilots. supers take care of that problem all over new eden reliably and fast - remove the remote rep restriction - soften the tracking penalty in siege considerably - switch the local rep boost in siege to +120/140/160/180/200% hull, armor and shield hp depending on dread level - no warping / docking while in siege, but movement does not have to be restricted - siege timer at 5 minutes is probably still a good idea
What do we achieve with this? We get an actual supportable, fully insured and comparatively easy to get into damage backbone for regular capital fleets that is not just breakfast any more. You will not come out of engaging a 250 supercapital fleet with a 175/75 dread/carrier fleet (again, failure to set up an unfair fight) scott free and you imho never should - but a considerable amount of supers will die, your losses will be easier to replace (isk, build time and build capcity wise) and you actually have - depending on actual fleet compositions and tactics - maybe even a shot at holding the field / forcing the retreat (wiping 250 supers with even numbers should for the time being be unrealistic I think). But this could actually generate nice combined forces fights.
As Titan proliferation increases, the doomsday will probably have to be looked at again. Then again, engaging 250 titans feels like it should hurt by sound alone, yet how much remains the question.
PS: by the way, what is it with all that 'no remote rep' nonsense. Are you all imprisoned in motsu or a 2005 timebubble? active tank stockholm syndrome?
PPS: and fix capital shield reload mechanics by making it like armor Not even a sandbox needs passive (super)capital shield tanks |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 03:09:00 -
[1893] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote: what is actually the problem with supers? They are designed to be everything killers. And they are undeniably good at it.
FTFY. |
L'ouris
Have Naught Subsidiaries
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 03:11:00 -
[1894] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:L'ouris wrote:What about these changes encourages a more diverse fleet fight? Encourage? Nothing encouraging about it.... ... If you've ever engaged 550 battleships, you know there is simply no tanking that inside their engagement zone. There is not. Accept it. Embrace it. But (assuming even numbers which already means you failed in setting up an unfair fight) you get a steady decline of incoming dps as ships explode. With the EHP of supercaps, their dps decline over time is always shallower than any subcap forces'. The EHP in turn they received because they used to fold in 20 seconds to anything looking at them the wrong way and because they are actually needed in cap fights which are a lot more static than subcap fights once they are on. ...
These engagments are exactly what I experienced. During the push on Geminate we had a few battles with you and the DRF forces where the Super fleet was able to remote ECM our BS fleet so no DPS was even being applied in the engagment zone. All this while the Titans were DD'ng command ships, FC's, alt FC's, alts of FC's, blapping the battleships with the turrets etc untinterrupted.
Hopefully the Timedilation will help somewhat, but if you look back over the scenario quoted in my post, it seems awful familiar.
I was wondering if any of these changes will really have an impact on the capability of the Super Fleets to decimate the sub cap fleets without the need for anything else but a cyno and some HICS / DICS?
EDIT: I don't really mind whatever is decided, as i'm a long way off from any cap ship involvment outside of support roles. I'm more curious if there will be any support roles in the large fleet battles moving forward. The changes seem to nerf the small Super Fleet but doesn't seem to change the 0.0 SOV warefare tactical possibilites much from my perspective. Was hoping someone with a better grasp would correct me.
EDIT 2:
Why wouldn't a dramatic increase in the cap neuts of Void bombs be on the table for this? Bomber Wings would be able to neut out cap fleets if coordinated enough? Or are void bombs already viable in enough numbers? Any experienced bomber pilots / FC's who could enlighten me? Or are the bombs still untrustworthy still in the large fleet fights? |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 03:39:00 -
[1895] - Quote
Lord Helghast wrote:For the love of god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIX DREADS and MINMATAR CAPS at the same time
HEL is getting NERFED even worse? And it already sucks vs the other supers?
Nidhoggur is effectively always primaried and yet has worst EHP, mediocre bonuses, what does it have for all that training??? few m/s extra i think? lol How about making it more nimble, jump with less cap, faster base speed, something for the love of god
Naglfar... Seriously how has this not been fixed, moros is getting even better, yet Naglfar one of the longest dreads to train for is still medicore at best? Split CAPITAL weapon systems, and now no drones.... oh for the love of god fix this
Also weren't carriers supposed to become more corp logistics, you know with a larger more useful ship maint bay???
Why the hell are dreads jump range not getting fixed, match dreads with carriers, so that together as a TEAM they can move and be an affective group weapon for attacking, and supers will fall into there defensive local roles...
Also why are dreads not getting a boost to tracking even a tiny boost so to hit supers "speed tanking" you dont need a full rack of tracking mods!
Erm, you do realize that the Moros had its drone bay (the largest), along with the awesome bonus removed, right? You do realize that the Moros guns use cap, unlike all of the guns on the Naglfar, right? You do realize that the Moros just lost a ton of its cap stability with a ROF bonus instead of a DPS bonus? You do realize that the Nag can choose a shield tank or armor tank (the shield tank being better in the short term if I recall)? You do realize that you are saying that the short range gunboat for dreads that also uses capacitor should be out -dpsed by a (slightly and only in some cases) longer ranged ship that still fires its guns when it is capped out? This is the same terrible argument that makes the Brutix **** next to the Hurricane. You can fit a hurricane to outdps a brutix and outperform it in every other way (shield gank). Much like the Nag vs the Moros, you don't in general (close range fit), but that does not mean that the Hurricane or Naglfar is a poor ship or underpowered atm. Once again, the argument I hear is that "I trained a couple more skills, I should perform better in every way", which, as it happens, is the entire argument in this thread, though less about the Naglfar and more about supers.
Antimatter range is still pretty ****** on capitals FYI.
Hel and nid still need to be looked at, I don't think anyone disagrees there (EDIT: well, I know a pilot in AHARM that really loves the nid, but it is the last carrier I would train).
Question though, how would you make the Hel different than a Wyvern and be balanced properly. Most people look only at HP, but it would be a Wyvern clone if most suggestions were taken. Suggestion: room for 45 fighters / fighter bombers. As parts of the Hel have rusted away, the Minmitar have found that it still, inexplicably, runs fine. These missing sections are now used to store drones and are not even built on the new ones. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 03:47:00 -
[1896] - Quote
L'ouris wrote:Mioelnir wrote:L'ouris wrote:What about these changes encourages a more diverse fleet fight? Encourage? Nothing encouraging about it.... ... If you've ever engaged 550 battleships, you know there is simply no tanking that inside their engagement zone. There is not. Accept it. Embrace it. But (assuming even numbers which already means you failed in setting up an unfair fight) you get a steady decline of incoming dps as ships explode. With the EHP of supercaps, their dps decline over time is always shallower than any subcap forces'. The EHP in turn they received because they used to fold in 20 seconds to anything looking at them the wrong way and because they are actually needed in cap fights which are a lot more static than subcap fights once they are on. ... These engagments are exactly what I experienced. During the push on Geminate we had a few battles with you and the DRF forces where the Super fleet was able to remote ECM our BS fleet so no DPS was even being applied in the engagment zone. All this while the Titans were DD'ng command ships, FC's, alt FC's, alts of FC's, blapping the battleships with the turrets etc untinterrupted. Hopefully the Timedilation will help somewhat, but if you look back over the scenario quoted in my post, it seems awful familiar. I was wondering if any of these changes will really have an impact on the capability of the Super Fleets to decimate the sub cap fleets without the need for anything else but a cyno and some HICS / DICS? EDIT: I don't really mind whatever is decided, as i'm a long way off from any cap ship involvment outside of support roles. I'm more curious if there will be any support roles in the large fleet battles moving forward. The changes seem to nerf the small Super Fleet but doesn't seem to change the 0.0 SOV warefare tactical possibilites much from my perspective. Was hoping someone with a better grasp would correct me. EDIT 2: Why wouldn't a dramatic increase in the cap neuts of Void bombs be on the table for this? Bomber Wings would be able to neut out cap fleets if coordinated enough? Or are void bombs already viable in enough numbers? Any experienced bomber pilots / FC's who could enlighten me? Or are the bombs still untrustworthy still in the large fleet fights?
Void bombs really do need to be buffed to neut 1000 cap or 2000 cap (maybe based on sig radius or something, 5000 tops?), currently any ship that they cause problems for can easily get out of range. (If I recall, it neuts 250 cap atm, could be wrong though...) |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 03:48:00 -
[1897] - Quote
L'ouris wrote:I was wondering if any of these changes will really have an impact on the capability of the Super Fleets to decimate the sub cap fleets without the need for anything else but a cyno and some HICS / DICS?
From a pure isolated dps / ehp point of view, it will get slightly better since supers die faster and at least supercarriers are easier to strip of their dps which could give rise to some new tactics. But since remote ecm bursts are actually getting fixed in these sense that they do not affect the ships that they should not (supers), it will likely get worse in the scenario you experienced.
Remote ECM bursts are old-style anti-blob weapons based largely on the same design principle that the old AOE doomsday was, with the same scale problems. I doubt they were being looked at from a more than 5 per fleet angle during design similar to the 10 titans in all of new eden doomsday scenario. They are also AOE which traditionally is a kick into the nuts of the sol nodes.
If a fleet has enough supercarriers to truely spam them, your only engagement option are ew immune ships - supers, dreads, triaged carriers. Which basically leaves supers. Time dilation could help in that locktime is more reliable and you actually get to apply some dps, but only until more ecm bursts are deployed again.
About the void bombs. You can launch 10 of them before they start blowing each other up, and that hits for combined 18000 cap or roughly 20-25% of a supercarrriers cap. Even assuming time dilation allows them to actually trigger on target I doubt you will be able to dry up cap chains with them, the setup time between runs is just too high. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 04:55:00 -
[1898] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:L'ouris wrote:What about these changes encourages a more diverse fleet fight? Encourage? Nothing encouraging about it. These changes do basically three things: - kitchen sink roamings that accidentally stumble upon a ratting supercap have a better chance of killing it - force subcapital deployment alongside supers by making subcaps as immune to supers as possible without using the word immune - they fiddle with a few fleet-fight performance knobs to see what happens, reminiscent of the equipment tests run in chernobyl in 1986 Now if we look at it, what is actually the problem with supers? They are designed to be cap killers. And they are undeniably good at it. So good in fact, that fielding caps against them currently is ritual suicide. But that is not the fault of supers - that would be like blaming a vagabond for being fast. So, now that we have ruled out engaging them with regular caps, lets look at subcaps. Titans take a special place here since their doomsday can take out key infrastructure ships like fleet commands in a very reliable way. The other thing at least for turret titans is basic tracking mechanics which guarantees them to at least have some effect if the fc sets them up correctly. Going on to supercarriers, what about them? Their dps? No. Since the last round of fighterbomber changes a fighterbomber hits an abaddon for 8 to 15 damage per volley. That's not even enough to make your twitchy finger broadcast for reps - it adds up if you look at 250 scs, yes (75k), but you just got hit by a 30 million HP damage volley, there are bound to be scratches (0.25% effective damage!). Their best bet is somewhere in the fighters / sentries / heavies ballpark in which they deal a little above twice as much dps as fleet battleship inside 60km control range. So the subcapital damage output of 250 supercarriers is 550 battleships worth, hardly something the cluster has never seen before. If you've ever engaged 550 battleships, you know there is simply no tanking that inside their engagement zone. There is not. Accept it. Embrace it. But (assuming even numbers which already means you failed in setting up an unfair fight) you get a steady decline of incoming dps as ships explode. With the EHP of supercaps, their dps decline over time is always shallower than any subcap forces'. The EHP in turn they received because they used to fold in 20 seconds to anything looking at them the wrong way and because they are actually needed in cap fights which are a lot more static than subcap fights once they are on. All of this combined results in the "supers are the only counter to supers" mantra. So, what is CCP hoping to achieve with these changes? The -20% HP change makes the dps reduction steeper, without having them implode against 20 battleships like they used to. With the drone changes I assume they hope that supercarrier pilots will go for 10/10 or 15/15 splits between bombers and regular fighters. This reduces the damage output of them against both capital and subcapital targets and removing the titan's headshot aimbot. So, less dps output and steeper over time dps reduction. Will this give subcapital fleets a better chance? Yes. Will the odds-improval be enough to stop the whining or fix eve? No. Will turning these screws even more fix eve? No, it will just break supers again. With their destructible dps without the endless-waves feature that saved the Dominix through the ages they will already be borderline. The real core problem is not that supers are designed as cap killers. Giving subcaps better odds is all fine, but subcaps are not the designed weightclass in which to engage in. The problem is that no other capital is actually designed to fight capitals - short story short, fix broken dreads. Siege weapons were fine in the days of RMR and served their purpose while sov was linked to POS. Newsflash, that's history. POS are engaged to annoy your enemy, force fights and flush a few isks into your wallet. They are an opportunity target now, not a tightly regulated core game mechanic. So, dreads redux: - remove the 2 target limit that was imposed on dreads because of station hugging moros pilots. supers take care of that problem all over new eden reliably and fast - remove the remote rep restriction - soften the tracking penalty in siege considerably - switch the local rep boost in siege to +120/140/160/180/200% hull, armor and shield hp depending on dread level - no warping / docking while in siege, but movement does not have to be restricted - siege timer at 5 minutes is probably still a good idea What do we achieve with this? We get an actual supportable, fully insured and comparatively easy to get into damage backbone for regular capital fleets that is not just breakfast any more. You will not come out of engaging a 250 supercapital fleet with a 175/75 dread/carrier fleet (again, failure to set up an unfair fight) scott free and you imho never should - but a considerable amount of supers will die, your losses will be easier to replace (isk, build time and build capcity wise) and you actually have - depending on actual fleet compositions and tactics - maybe even a shot at holding the field / forcing the retreat (wiping 250 supers with even numbers should for the time being be unrealistic I think). But this could actually generate nice combined forces fights. As Titan proliferation increases, the doomsday will probably have to be looked at again. Then again, engaging 250 titans feels like it should hurt by sound alone, yet how much remains the question. PS: by the way, what is it with all that 'no remote rep' nonsense. Are you all imprisoned in motsu or a 2005 timebubble? active tank stockholm syndrome? PPS: and fix capital shield reload mechanics by making it like armor Not even a sandbox needs passive (super)capital shield tanks
Quoting a good Evoke post. |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 05:47:00 -
[1899] - Quote
Thought I'd highlight some of the multi-used / quoted.
Draconus Lofwyr with:
Quote:* Can deploy 3 additional Fighters, Fighter Bombers or Drones per level Change this to "Can deploy 3 additional Fighters, Fighter Bombers Only" (standard drones are limited to pilot skill. do not reduce drone bay, but split it into a fighter bay and a drone bay, as well as changing aggression rules for each drone type. Fighterbombers can only aggress supers and structures Fighters can only aggress Battleships and above,[and all size rats]. all other drones are not limited on engagement This will allow a lone tackled super to have a potential chance to free himself, but no more than any sub capital would have, after it has spent an eternity locking said target.
John Hand with:
Quote:Split the bay into two parts, one that is for (25) Fighters and (25) Fighter Bombers only, and the other for normal drones. Say 1250m3 (50 large drones) for a Nyx, 1000m3 (40 large) for a Wyvern, 875m3 (35 large) for an Aeon and 750m3 (30 large) for a Hel. This would mean that during a fight, supers would run out of drones much faster. If there were a few stealth bombers paying attention during that fight and bombing the drones. Fewer back up drones, means a declawed super, and that makes a dead super.
CynoNet Two with:
Quote:[The idea to *dynamically* adjust EHP of the supers. Build costs should perhaps be reflected as well.]
zero2espect with:
Quote:Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Many people: Supers should not be able to recive remote tracking links.
Many people: A rookie ship should not be able to maintain a logofskiee timer forever. Perhaps change the timer to 30mins considering the EHP change. Big fleets that attempt to use this should suffer far more losses.
Me:Quote: Doomsday should be able to hit any ship, however bring the cost from 50,000 ISO's to 200,000 ISOs. This would limit the amount of cracks per titan by requiring them to refuel more often, including during fleet fights. It would also cost more, and be considered less.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 06:09:00 -
[1900] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:
Many people: A rookie ship should not be able to maintain a logofskiee timer forever.
What does it matter if it does? Even unpiloted, a supercap has enough natural shield recharge to permatank a rookie ship.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
transcom caldari
Crimson Empire. Nulli Secunda
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 06:19:00 -
[1901] - Quote
Making that many changes to supercarriers is kind of outrageous and way more of a hit from the nerf bat than I think SCs need.
Simply changing the logoff mechanics as you have proposed, and a modest decrease in HP (maybe 10% as opposed to the proposed 20%) would be more than enough to level the playing field in my opinion.
The ships we're talking about are SUPERcarriers, after all; they are big and expensive boats and should be able to take down lower classes with ease. CCP Tallest mentions how the log-off mechanics don't make much sense... well, neither does building an aircraft carrier without any defenses.
The proposed nerf to the fighter bay, coupled with the other changes would really make the SC rather pointless. A 20 billion isk dread ... lovely.
|
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 06:33:00 -
[1902] - Quote
I saw someone post something about the void bomb. This is by far a good idea, and it needs a big buff. Currently the void bomb is kinda stupid and not all that good. If it were changed to remove 50% of current cap level this bomb alone would become quite useful against supers and anything else. 3 or 4 SB's hitting a super fleet with those bombs would just about cap them out, and if they were doing any repping....well there will be no more cap. Meaning a few neauting ships could now keep supers caps drained, couple that with the drone bay nerf that I posted a few pages back (and has been quoted) and right there is your fix. Just those two changes to supers would fix everything, not only to SC's but to Titans as well (void would wreak havoc on there guns and DD's). No EHP nerf, there fine as is with these changes, add in a buff to dreads EHP and allow RR while sieged (maybe reduced by -50%?) and there is you cap ship re-balance. No changing there 3 drones per crap or anything of that magnitude, supers just really needed a small tweak and dreads another small tweak and bingo you have a working game again. Anything outside of these changes here would be too much and would NOT address the issue that super caps pose. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
444
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:09:00 -
[1903] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Quote:Sensing the need for a more moderately-priced version of the Nyx, Federation Navy authorities commissioned the design of the Thanatos Thats the direct quote. If the Thanatos can launch regular drones, the Nyx should be able to, since its built off that design.
Here's another quote you may like from 2 years ago:
Aurora Ominae wrote:Emits a gigantic antimatter field over a wide area, capable of obliterating everything in its path. Note: you will be unable to jump for 10 minutes after activating the doomsday device. Man it's almost as if CCP adjust the background details to match the game, rather than the other way around!
Tore Vest wrote:Pyro Tsu wrote:Yet another change that does not affect players living in HighSec. Only a minority is living in Nullsec and WHs! Do care more about the majority please! CCPgoons are not interested in little things.... like fixing hybrids. They want to "fix" supers so goons can take over 0.0 with their hurricanes
Excuse me sir but that is completely untrue.
We want CCP to fix hybrids and supercaps so we can take over 0.0 with our Thoraxes. |
David Magnus
108
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:14:00 -
[1904] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:L'ouris wrote:What about these changes encourages a more diverse fleet fight? Encourage? Nothing encouraging about it. These changes do basically three things: - kitchen sink roamings that accidentally stumble upon a ratting supercap have a better chance of killing it - force subcapital deployment alongside supers by making subcaps as immune to supers as possible without using the word immune - they fiddle with a few fleet-fight performance knobs to see what happens, reminiscent of the equipment tests run in chernobyl in 1986 .... Stuff about Dreads ....
A great way to balance capitals without destroying any of their current capabilities.
http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/winterupdate http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/supercaps http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/pandemiclegion |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:15:00 -
[1905] - Quote
L1m9n1663r wrote:- When a ship can not be sensor boosted or tracking disrupted, it should not be possible to remote sensor boost or tracking link. It makes no sense at all.
If you make cap size rigs, that should solve the issue with EHP without touching the numbers. Make shield extender rigs and Armor extender rigs take 200 rig-power-thingies, so you then lose 1 rig slot if buffer tanking. Make cap rigs only T1, that means tanked damage type HP * 1,15^2 instead of HP * 1,2^3. This will help for the HP's.
(Give the Hel some love first)
Destroy all T1 rigs in titans / supercaps (LOL-T1 rigs) Make all T2 rigs the T1 cap size. Any rigs that exeed the rig-power, eject rig in slot 3 to cargo bay. --
Make a rig that takes 150 rig power that will allow you to field 250 m3 of HEAVY drones. That is, sentries, heavy armor/shield bots, heavy EW drones. This will again cost you 15% of your 'tanked' HP buffer. That means your SC will have 70% less shield if you want to field 20 regular drones.
-- Throw the Super pilots a bone... Make Supercaps and Titans dockable at stations with a SUPER CAP UPGRADE mod. This mod should cost 100 billion isk, and it should be impossible to board a super-cap if the station fitting services are offline. Undocking super caps should do so with 0 CAP and all high slots offline. Gives people a reason to own some space.
--
Remove 1 gun / turret from each Titan. Remove DD.
Make a titan sitting at a CUSTOM OFFICE, tapping into its coordinate flux power generator able to start a 5 min 2 way bridge to another titan within 3-5 AU, at another CUSTOM OFFICE. (able to run freighters through)
Give Amarr titans a 50km radius energy neutralizing field that triggers every 30 seconds while in 'enforcer mode' (as in, stuck there for 75 seconds) neuting like a medium neut, not stackable with other amarr titans.
Give Minmatar titans a 50km web-field. (not stackable with other minmatar titans) while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Caldari titans a 25 km cloaking field, that will cloak any ship moving slower than 30 m/s and not targetting anyone. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Gallente titans a 40 km radius warp disruption field (same as large T2 bubble) with a scramble strength of 1. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Make Gallente and Minmatar able to trade eachothers Enforcement mods by use of a 200 power rig. (and Amarr / Caldari)
This has some really, really great ideas in it. I'd love to see that. |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:22:00 -
[1906] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Damian Gene wrote:
Many people: A rookie ship should not be able to maintain a logofskiee timer forever.
What does it matter if it does? Even unpiloted, a supercap has enough natural shield recharge to permatank a rookie ship.
Lets use a covert ops for a case example.
You are in a super, I am in a buzzard. I happen to know that your safe is close to planet 4 and you are cloaked (I saw you on directional while you were in warp, and narrowed the band down etc.) I cloak up and wait. I have my probes out, and off grid of you, but tuned into, say 1AU. With good skills, the moment you log, i can move the probes over to Planet 4, and scan. Then I warp to you from my SS close to Planet 4. I can get to you in far less then the 1 min before your ship goes away. I then hit you with one gun, or a nuet. Now all i have to do, is love tap you every 10 mins to insure that you do not despawn. I now wait until my corp members come home from work, my alliance form's up, everyone takes a leak, goes out for a smoke, checks Reddit, etc. Then they come in, and we kill your ship. Or, you bump outside the POS shields, same thing, I just wait until you are outside of gun range of the POS, and give you a poke every 10mins. Hell, I could even cloak up for 9 of those 10mins (or 14 of the 15mins if i for some reason wanted to risk it)
It doesnt matter that I can not tackle you, but it does prevent you logging, and staying right where you are for as long as I'd like you to. Until downtime. People will soon meta downtime a WHOLE lot more then they already do. Huge fleet fights timed perfectly where the target goes into reinforced, or dies moments before DT.
There are a lot of reasons why this is bad, and a lot of ways it can still be fixed. A 30min timer vs a 15 min timer would work for instance. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:26:00 -
[1907] - Quote
Ok is it just me or do alot of this changes suck for no good reason?
1.) Carriers have not been a problem for some time now why screw them over now? There much softer targets then SC.
2,) Dreads need to be able to hit other moving cap ships when in seige So slow down other cap ships alittle and inc seaige tracking alittle.
3.) Change Moros bonus to 5%dmg inc or add in a 5% cap reduction per level to Capital guns. Though it is not going to matter much as SC will still burn them down just as fast and I have no problem with that as its cap on cap action but if they fix the SC speed tanking the dreads then at least they can now go down fighting.
4.) Logoff timer this is the best change here great job.
5.) Carrier and SC new Drone bays should be renamed Fighter bay and both giving new Fighter bandwiths. Then add in a Navy dominix sized drone bay and bandwith for normal drones. I dont think that would be to overpowering for sub cap ships. This lets the logistice Carriers and SC's to field repair drones and yes other drones as well but in limited numbers i.e. at the limit of 125 bandwith.
Thoughs are just my own ideals and my hold no water.
|
Chanina
ASGARD HEAVY INDUSTRIES The Citadel of Asgard
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:56:00 -
[1908] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:Malcanis wrote:Damian Gene wrote:
Many people: A rookie ship should not be able to maintain a logofskiee timer forever.
What does it matter if it does? Even unpiloted, a supercap has enough natural shield recharge to permatank a rookie ship. Lets use a covert ops for a case example. You are in a super, I am in a buzzard. I happen to know that your safe is close to planet 4 and you are cloaked (I saw you on directional while you were in warp, and narrowed the band down etc.) I cloak up and wait. I have my probes out, and off grid of you, but tuned into, say 1AU. With good skills, the moment you log, i can move the probes over to Planet 4, and scan. Then I warp to you from my SS close to Planet 4. I can get to you in far less then the 1 min before your ship goes away. I then hit you with one gun, or a nuet. Now all i have to do, is love tap you every 10 mins to insure that you do not despawn. I now wait until my corp members come home from work, my alliance form's up, everyone takes a leak, goes out for a smoke, checks Reddit, etc. Then they come in, and we kill your ship. Or, you bump outside the POS shields, same thing, I just wait until you are outside of gun range of the POS, and give you a poke every 10mins. Hell, I could even cloak up for 9 of those 10mins (or 14 of the 15mins if i for some reason wanted to risk it) It doesnt matter that I can not tackle you, but it does prevent you logging, and staying right where you are for as long as I'd like you to. Until downtime. People will soon meta downtime a WHOLE lot more then they already do. Huge fleet fights timed perfectly where the target goes into reinforced, or dies moments before DT. There are a lot of reasons why this is bad, and a lot of ways it can still be fixed. A 30min timer vs a 15 min timer would work for instance.
You should realy take a look at post number 14. Don't worry i will qout the answer for you:
Quote:"If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression."
So no matter if you use your frig/cov ops to attack or not, if he don't have an agression counter running he will log off after 1 minute. if you get him to agression he needs to get rid of that timer. Only if he logs off with that counter active you can prevent is logoffski.
At least thats how i understand it.
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:59:00 -
[1909] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Ok is it just me or do alot of this changes suck for no good reason?
1.) Carriers have not been a problem for some time now why screw them over now? There much softer targets then SC.
Not been a problem because they were overshadowed by the bigger super-carrier problem.
The "Capships Online" slogan appeared well before super-cap buff in 2009, you should remember carrier blobs and fighter swarms of 2007-2008.
Fighters should be changed so that when fit for DPS, carriers can apply about 50-60% of their theoretical fighter DPS output to a stationary battleship (a class lower) and 100% to a moving (super)cap.
Neither changing their signature resolution to 400 nor leaving them as is is a balanced solution for all fighters.
Perhaps any changes can be postponed, but carriers should be watched very carefully in the following 3-4 months, lest they become the new battleships (again). |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:59:00 -
[1910] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:Malcanis wrote:Damian Gene wrote:
Many people: A rookie ship should not be able to maintain a logofskiee timer forever.
What does it matter if it does? Even unpiloted, a supercap has enough natural shield recharge to permatank a rookie ship. Lets use a covert ops for a case example. You are in a super, I am in a buzzard. I happen to know that your safe is close to planet 4 and you are cloaked (I saw you on directional while you were in warp, and narrowed the band down etc.) I cloak up and wait. I have my probes out, and off grid of you, but tuned into, say 1AU. With good skills, the moment you log, i can move the probes over to Planet 4, and scan. Then I warp to you from my SS close to Planet 4. I can get to you in far less then the 1 min before your ship goes away. I then hit you with one gun, or a nuet. Now all i have to do, is love tap you every 10 mins to insure that you do not despawn. I now wait until my corp members come home from work, my alliance form's up, everyone takes a leak, goes out for a smoke, checks Reddit, etc. Then they come in, and we kill your ship. Or, you bump outside the POS shields, same thing, I just wait until you are outside of gun range of the POS, and give you a poke every 10mins. Hell, I could even cloak up for 9 of those 10mins (or 14 of the 15mins if i for some reason wanted to risk it) It doesnt matter that I can not tackle you, but it does prevent you logging, and staying right where you are for as long as I'd like you to. Until downtime. People will soon meta downtime a WHOLE lot more then they already do. Huge fleet fights timed perfectly where the target goes into reinforced, or dies moments before DT. There are a lot of reasons why this is bad, and a lot of ways it can still be fixed. A 30min timer vs a 15 min timer would work for instance.
The trouble is that you seem to think the scenario you describe is a "problem", where as I think it sounds like excellent gameplay. If you, the brave and skillfull covops pilot have managed to determine that I, the lazy and foolish titan pilot, keep using the same safespot to log off in while there's a hostile in local (instead of using a different safe each time or just using a safe POS) then you absolutely deserve a chance to kill my Titan and I absolutely deserve to risk losing it.
15 minutes is easily enough for a smallish gang to kill off any other logged off ship except a supercapital. Your argument seems to be ontological: what is, should be. Supercaps are able to evade destruction by logoffski, therefore they should be able to evade destruction The whole reason for the change is to ensure that any ship who logs off with aggro to an active pilot won't disappear until that pilot has killed it or has given up trying to do so, and that's exactly how it should be. Why should supercaps get any special treatment here?
Leaving aside the implicit assumption that lone covops pilots can spawn an arbitrary number of friends at need, wheras Titan pilots are :foreveralone:, your worry about downtimes is overblown. Fleet battles are determined by pilot availability, which is determined by timezeone. I suppose Australian//NZ supercap pilots will derive some theoretical advantage from this, but that's matched by the real disadvantage of having 20-40 minutes chopped out of their play time every day. I am relaxed about this. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:02:00 -
[1911] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Damian Gene wrote: You are in a super, I am in a buzzard... [a scenario follows]
The trouble is that you seem to think the scenario you describe is a "problem", where as I think it sounds like excellent gameplay.
QFFT |
Le Cardinal
Spricer Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:10:00 -
[1912] - Quote
So much talk about the Hel. Fix ALL the shieldsupers. EFT warriors here keep comparing Shieldtankers and armortankers and it looks pretty even on paper, but when shieldtankers jump into a battle they loose a very large portion of their shield. Now someone choke up a good argument for why that is fair. The amount of armortanked supercaps compared to shieldtankers alone is a very good example of this.
This has been adressed by people for years and never been properly fixed. |
LordSergey
Kant Coup
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:12:00 -
[1913] - Quote
Well... I think CCP trying to reach to only one goal by balancing supercarriers... its reduce the profits!! not for pvp just one thing players cant using supercarriers for hunting with sentry drone /You talking that supercarriers hard to kill its rediculous of course small gangs 5-6 people cant if they not using supercapitals but big gangs on capital ship and supercap ship make it easy they don,t need 15 minutes /What the 15 minutes logoff?? Supecapitals ships almost all using in alliance war when you talk about pvp and what you want to say that during this massive war player want to go log off ??No!!! Say the truth CCP want reduce the profits from hunters! not for pvp! |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:14:00 -
[1914] - Quote
LordSergey wrote: Say the truth CCP want reduce the profits from hunters!
Of course, read the last QEN, it's more than hinted there.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:15:00 -
[1915] - Quote
LordSergey wrote:Well... I think CCP trying to reach to only one goal by balancing supercarriers... its reduce the profits!!
Yes, the soaring subscriber numbers and skyrocketing PCU due to the dynamic and diverse strategic situation in sov 0.0 certainly do seem to argue that CCP shouldn't fix what aint broke. Good observation there, sir.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
LordSergey
Kant Coup
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:20:00 -
[1916] - Quote
I think is coming one day when EVE online will be game only for CCP not for players if they won't listen the players! |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:27:00 -
[1917] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:The real core problem is not that supers are designed as cap killers. Giving subcaps better odds is all fine, but subcaps are not the designed weightclass in which to engage in. The problem is that no other capital is actually designed to fight capitals - short story short, fix broken dreads. Siege weapons were fine in the days of RMR and served their purpose while sov was linked to POS. Newsflash, that's history. POS are engaged to annoy your enemy, force fights and flush a few isks into your wallet. They are an opportunity target now, not a tightly regulated core game mechanic. So, dreads redux: - remove the 2 target limit that was imposed on dreads because of station hugging moros pilots. supers take care of that problem all over new eden reliably and fast - remove the remote rep restriction - soften the tracking penalty in siege considerably - switch the local rep boost in siege to +120/140/160/180/200% hull, armor and shield hp depending on dread level - no warping / docking while in siege, but movement does not have to be restricted - siege timer at 5 minutes is probably still a good idea What do we achieve with this? We get an actual supportable, fully insured and comparatively easy to get into damage backbone for regular capital fleets that is not just breakfast any more. You will not come out of engaging a 250 supercapital fleet with a 175/75 dread/carrier fleet (again, failure to set up an unfair fight) scott free and you imho never should - but a considerable amount of supers will die, your losses will be easier to replace (isk, build time and build capcity wise) and you actually have - depending on actual fleet compositions and tactics - maybe even a shot at holding the field / forcing the retreat (wiping 250 supers with even numbers should for the time being be unrealistic I think). But this could actually generate nice combined forces fights. As Titan proliferation increases, the doomsday will probably have to be looked at again. Then again, engaging 250 titans feels like it should hurt by sound alone, yet how much remains the question. PS: by the way, what is it with all that 'no remote rep' nonsense. Are you all imprisoned in motsu or a 2005 timebubble? active tank stockholm syndrome? PPS: and fix capital shield reload mechanics by making it like armor Not even a sandbox needs passive (super)capital shield tanks
I support this. Just as supers are capital killers, dreadnoughts should be able to make them pay cash for it if they get enough number. If four or five dreads focus one supercarrier, that should result in one or two surviving dreds and a dead SC. But that would require quite a bit of reworking cap dps and EHP. |
Chanina
ASGARD HEAVY INDUSTRIES The Citadel of Asgard
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:43:00 -
[1918] - Quote
Obviously this is a topic where most people have an opinion to. Always funny are those guys telling "I think/feel that GǪ and GǪ! And since I'm a player I'm the majority and the majority says this is GǪ " Don't pretend to speak for more then your self. Thanks.
Concerning the Patch: Generally it is a move in the right directions. Changes are needed and some will come.
Dreadnaughts: This things should be mighty warships with state of the arte engineering in them. How is that conform with "no Drones at all"? Those are damn huge ships with a crew of some hundred peoples in it and they can't effort the space for a dronebay? Sorry that's no good idea. Specially for gallente ships drones are some kind of racial mark. If you wanted to degrade them to some shine "hit and run" gunslingers with the only purpose of structure grinding you made it right. ElseGǪ well guess there are better solutions.
Titan: Same as dreads concerning drones. That just don't match up with the background stories of eve and besides: if the enemy jumps in 20 or 30 titans, your least concern are the sentry drones they are dropping. The Impact on server might be something but there is no difference in that if you drop those 5 Sentries with a cap or supercap or just field some dominix BS. For that price of a titan you can sent in a lot of them if you really love the drones .
Carrier: The fighter nerf will most likely hit those who are ratting with carrier (and earn honest ingame money) pretty hard. Fighting with T2 heavy drones? Not really an option cause they are way to slow and you will loose a lot of them each wave. Sentries? Might work but you can't align or reposition your self even with the incredible speed of an carrier.
Super Carrier: This ships have a serious dps and thats what they are used and designed for. Making them unable to field other drones might help to reduce there variety of use cases but it is still quit unlogic. Reducing there bonus of +X drones control to only work with fighter and fighter bombers would still allow to use other drones but not those feared hords of hobgoblin II ;-) Further more: your Fighters and FBs are manned Strike crafts. Surely you can get some more pilots on deck in such a huge ship. Other drones are operated by the ships computer and still limited in capability.
Suggestion for a return to Motherships: S-Carriers should be able to bring in a lot of BS to the field. Like 20 or 30 in there SMAs. So pilots loosing there ship can easily reship in battle. If one gets potted in the battle he should be able to respawn "inside" the SC to choose a ship he want to launch with. That only works as long as the assign SC has ships left in it's bay.
Fighters and Fighter bombers: The prime target for Fighters are BS or at least should be. Because for larger targets FBs should be the weapon of choice. The DPS of FBs might be reduced to get that balanced but hopefully the endless HP bashing of sov structures will soon find an end.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:45:00 -
[1919] - Quote
LordSergey wrote:I think is coming one day when EVE online will be game only for CCP not for players if they won't listen the players!
You mean that if CCP won't listen to the interests of ~2500 supercap owners instead of the ~347,500 players who don't, they'll go out of business?
Interesting analysis. I look forward to reading the full article in the Wall Street Journal. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:48:00 -
[1920] - Quote
LordSergey wrote:I think is coming one day when EVE online will be game only for CCP not for players if they won't listen the players!
Think is coming one day when EVE online will feel it in their rl wallet if they won't listen the players !!
A real highsec carebear. |
|
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:49:00 -
[1921] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote: Lets use a covert ops for a case example.
You are in a super, I am in a buzzard. I happen to know that your safe is close to planet 4 and you are cloaked (I saw you on directional while you were in warp, and narrowed the band down etc.) I cloak up and wait. I have my probes out, and off grid of you, but tuned into, say 1AU. With good skills, the moment you log, i can move the probes over to Planet 4, and scan. Then I warp to you from my SS close to Planet 4. I can get to you in far less then the 1 min before your ship goes away. I then hit you with one gun, or a nuet. Now all i have to do, is love tap you every 10 mins to insure that you do not despawn. I now wait until my corp members come home from work, my alliance form's up, everyone takes a leak, goes out for a smoke, checks Reddit, etc. Then they come in, and we kill your ship. Or, you bump outside the POS shields, same thing, I just wait until you are outside of gun range of the POS, and give you a poke every 10mins. Hell, I could even cloak up for 9 of those 10mins (or 14 of the 15mins if i for some reason wanted to risk it)
It doesnt matter that I can not tackle you, but it does prevent you logging, and staying right where you are for as long as I'd like you to. Until downtime. People will soon meta downtime a WHOLE lot more then they already do. Huge fleet fights timed perfectly where the target goes into reinforced, or dies moments before DT.
There are a lot of reasons why this is bad, and a lot of ways it can still be fixed. A 30min timer vs a 15 min timer would work for instance.
No, it doesnGÇÖt work like that mate 99% of the cases a super pilot has an alt and once it logs out the super it will keep his alt within range till super disappears.
I think a visible aggression timer would be more recommended on the proposed aggression timer changes. - this will prevent exploiting as well as giving a sense of security for the super pilot. If it logs out during a fight he knows he is fecked, if he logs out on a friendly pos without aggression then he is safe.
E
EDIT: I think you and a lot of people misunderstood the message in the dev blog (perhaps it requires some adjustments for clarity). I believe what CCP was trying to say is that if you log with aggression your timer will reset 15 mins from the last shot but if you log without aggression the timer will be unaffected GÇô you will disappear in 2 mins. Aggression after log out (assuming you are not aggressed) again will not affect the timer. CCP is trying to prevent exploiting the log-off mechanics not to get your ship killed by another exploit 5 hours after you went to bed. Basically if you aggress AFTER super logs off itGÇÖs a bit to late GǪ he will disappear in 2 minutes any way, you should have move faster GǪ |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 09:18:00 -
[1922] - Quote
It was clear enough the first time. If people are unable to read or comprehend and write up enormously elaborate whines based on their failure to read a dev blog, it's not CCP's fault. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 09:24:00 -
[1923] - Quote
Mongo Edwards wrote:My .02 isk:
I personally feel that CCP messed up big when they took SC's and turned them into DPS platforms. They should have been a natural progression for a carrier/logi pilot i.e. a super logistics boat (I'm thinking in the vicinity of being able to fit 6-8 bonused capital remote reps). Also, the difference between a carrier and super carrier skill wise does not justify the abilities they have (carrier 3 to sit in one - really?).
While I like most of the proposed changes even I (who hate SC's with a passion) feel a token - seperate - drone bay of about 250-500 m3 is reasonable. I would also like to propose that if you insist on keeping SC's as DPS platforms then you make them siege to use their fighter bombers (and with this they lose the ability to be move, use normal drones, be RR'd, or to RR others). They shouldn't be allowed to siege in low sec.
Titans: I feel they need there tracking nerfed - they shouldn't be popping BS with their guns when a dread has trouble tracking a moon.
Dreads: I don't think this boost goes far enough. They need a better role, killing structures is fine and all but when they siege they are extremely suseptable to being neuted out and killed since they can't active tank with no cap. Really if a fight is expected it is better just to bring BS and carriers since the BS are useful against more ships than the sieged, tracking nerfed, dread. The Phoenix needs some love because not only is it a shield tanker in an armor tanking world but it uses Citadel launchers which are just plain bad.
Disclaimer: I live in low sec and have never been involved in a sov fight. However, SC's are becoming more of a problem for low sec with the recent upheaval in null.
I basically agree with this. I think there is a role for titans and supercarriers in this game, it's just not as direct damage platforms. They should be big ass logistics hubs that bring a unique feature to the battle instead of just 'bigger' and 'more of'.
CCP did not make a wise gameplay mechanics decision when they made the ships the way they are and they did the playerbase no favors by making them so powerful that they eventually had to be reduced. Now people are crying about their big toy that they worked hard to get being reduced in power and while they have a really valid point, they shouldn't have been put in a position where they felt they had to get this overpowered garbage to even have a chance at competing.
|
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 09:27:00 -
[1924] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Mongo Edwards wrote:My .02 isk:
I personally feel that CCP messed up big when they took SC's and turned them into DPS platforms. They should have been a natural progression for a carrier/logi pilot i.e. a super logistics boat (I'm thinking in the vicinity of being able to fit 6-8 bonused capital remote reps). Also, the difference between a carrier and super carrier skill wise does not justify the abilities they have (carrier 3 to sit in one - really?).
While I like most of the proposed changes even I (who hate SC's with a passion) feel a token - seperate - drone bay of about 250-500 m3 is reasonable. I would also like to propose that if you insist on keeping SC's as DPS platforms then you make them siege to use their fighter bombers (and with this they lose the ability to be move, use normal drones, be RR'd, or to RR others). They shouldn't be allowed to siege in low sec.
Titans: I feel they need there tracking nerfed - they shouldn't be popping BS with their guns when a dread has trouble tracking a moon.
Dreads: I don't think this boost goes far enough. They need a better role, killing structures is fine and all but when they siege they are extremely suseptable to being neuted out and killed since they can't active tank with no cap. Really if a fight is expected it is better just to bring BS and carriers since the BS are useful against more ships than the sieged, tracking nerfed, dread. The Phoenix needs some love because not only is it a shield tanker in an armor tanking world but it uses Citadel launchers which are just plain bad.
Disclaimer: I live in low sec and have never been involved in a sov fight. However, SC's are becoming more of a problem for low sec with the recent upheaval in null. I basically agree with this. I think there is a role for titans and supercarriers in this game, it's just not as direct damage platforms. They should be big ass logistics hubs that bring a unique feature to the battle instead of just 'bigger' and 'more of'. CCP did not make a wise gameplay mechanics decision when they made the ships the way they are and they did the playerbase no favors by making them so powerful that they eventually had to be reduced. Now people are crying about their big toy that they worked hard to get being reduced in power and while they have a really valid point, they shouldn't have been put in a position where they felt they had to get this overpowered garbage to even have a chance at competing.
I vote for only one CSM pr aliance A real highsec carebear. |
Mr Management
Anger Management
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 09:54:00 -
[1925] - Quote
Quote:I vote for only one CSM pr aliance
Agreed, also ban Devs from playing the game ......... they haven't got a clue anyway.
No more insider information and hot-lines .......................
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
754
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:09:00 -
[1926] - Quote
Mr Management wrote:Quote:I vote for only one CSM pr aliance Agreed, also ban Devs from playing the game ......... they haven't got a clue anyway. No more insider information and hot-lines ....................... As long as they provide the tears, I don't give a **** what devs do in-game. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:16:00 -
[1927] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:I have a question for the the community, CCP, the Goon/TEST leadership, and Goon/TEST CSM's. I'm looking for a serious answer here in spite of the implied troll in my last line. So here goes:
Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare AND 20 billion isk worth of supercarrier be useful at killing only capitals and sov structures and only so when in larger numbers far surpassing 20 billion isk worth of ships on field AND they must be accompanied by yet another group of ships solely tasked with supporting them?
because 20 billion isk in hurricans is over 250 people 250 people x 15 dollars a month = CCP making it rain.
20 billion isk in a supercarrier is 1 person 1 person RMTing isk with his bots that go unpunished = 0 $ for CCP
What would you do if you were ccp?
Edit: still waiting for CCP Tallest to comment more. been 60 pages bro |
Xue Slick
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:24:00 -
[1928] - Quote
Death2all Supercaps wrote:Anile8er wrote:I have a question for the the community, CCP, the Goon/TEST leadership, and Goon/TEST CSM's. I'm looking for a serious answer here in spite of the implied troll in my last line. So here goes:
Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare AND 20 billion isk worth of supercarrier be useful at killing only capitals and sov structures and only so when in larger numbers far surpassing 20 billion isk worth of ships on field AND they must be accompanied by yet another group of ships solely tasked with supporting them? because 20 billion isk in hurricans is over 250 people 250 people x 15 dollars a month = CCP making it rain. 20 billion isk in a supercarrier is 1 person 1 person RMTing isk with his bots that go unpunished = 0 $ for CCP What would you do if you were ccp? Edit: still waiting for CCP Tallest to comment more. been 60 pages bro
I approve... |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:30:00 -
[1929] - Quote
Most of the proposed changes sound reasonable but I think CCP are doing too many small alterations in one hit so they wont be able to figure out exactly which change is doing what.
The underlying philosophy of the game has always been that ships can hit their own class and everything bigger with full force, They hit one class down with most of their damage2 classes down they can tickle a little and everything else they have no chance. That's before tracking altering mods.
The issue of Titans owning BS fleets can be solved with a new class of guns for Super class hulls, The ship damage bonus would need to be altered to keep the DPS similar but slightly higher V other suppers, slightly less than current on regular caps and at or about 1000 DPS against BS. The DD only working on caps is a good thing and should remain.
Suppers loosing their Drone bays is OK but painful. BUT they should still be able to field a full flight of bombers and fighters. with possibly a few spares in the drone specialist ones.
Fighters, fine increase their sig resolution to 400 to stop them hitting small targets but they also need either a tracking and or optimal range buff to make them still effective against moving BS.
As we all know people will now try to de fang SC/Carriers with stealth bombers. this needs to be made slightly harder to do. Fighters need their orbiting range increased a lot. it should be more than 7.5K so 6 bombers cant take all the fighters from a hundred carriers in one pass. The solutions are either slightly nerf bombers so that a single wave can't kill fighters/bombers. They should do in the region of 60-70% armour damage so a second wave kills them OR increase fighter orbits so that only a portion of the sphere get killed when orbiting a target.
Now as for Dreads, I've already said all ships should be able to hit the class bellow to some extent. If a new class or super gun is introduced this makes it possible to increase the tracking of dread guns. Out of siege they should have the DPS of 1.5 to 2 BS and be able to hit BS ok but not well, in siege they should be unable to hit BS but get their big DPS increase.
And not sure if a fix has been mentioned but the ROF boost to the Moros is going to kill it's cap. This needs addressed. |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:31:00 -
[1930] - Quote
Death2all Supercaps wrote:Anile8er wrote:I have a question for the the community, CCP, the Goon/TEST leadership, and Goon/TEST CSM's. I'm looking for a serious answer here in spite of the implied troll in my last line. So here goes:
Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare AND 20 billion isk worth of supercarrier be useful at killing only capitals and sov structures and only so when in larger numbers far surpassing 20 billion isk worth of ships on field AND they must be accompanied by yet another group of ships solely tasked with supporting them? because 20 billion isk in hurricans is over 250 people 250 people x 15 dollars a month = CCP making it rain. 20 billion isk in a supercarrier is 1 person 1 person RMTing isk with his bots that go unpunished = 0 $ for CCP What would you do if you were ccp? Edit: still waiting for CCP Tallest to comment more. been 60 pages bro
Republic fleet laying the hurt in supercap nerf , hey bro why don-¦t you tell your CEO to make a super cap plan .
edit. and tallest doesn't need to reply , he just needs to read the thread and make the best out off it. |
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:36:00 -
[1931] - Quote
i still think you woudl be better off just rolling back the cap changes that came in with dom, remove fighter bombers until you can be botherd to introduce an attack carrier.
these new plans do not address the current issues properly. come on ccp, if you cant be bothered to do a proper job dont bother at all CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
bitter kiss
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:41:00 -
[1932] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Update:
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary.
...
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
THIS! Its actually a hidden nerf to carriers so its harder for caps to rat in 0.0 ! bullshit! |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 10:46:00 -
[1933] - Quote
bitter kiss wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary.
...
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
THIS! Its actually a hidden nerf to carriers so its harder for caps to rat in 0.0 ! bullshit!
Guess what figthers arent getting the nerf , and carriers arent meant to rat. |
Jazzmyn
The Ghost Division
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 11:22:00 -
[1934] - Quote
TIME TO GET REAL WITH CAPITAL BALANCING !
To me it seems pretty unrealistic that huge capital ship would be designed in a way that is has no countermeasures against small or medium size ships whatsoeverGǪ I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels. However, I do realize this is a spaceship game that needs to be balanced to work. Therefore I only suggest following small changes that would make the game feel more real;
1)make dreads able to shoot slow moving (>100m/s) battleship sized targets with their capital turrets, even if they donGÇÖt make full damage they should be able to cause some trouble to a slow moving BS. --> Improve dread primary guns tracking.
2)remove dronebays from dreads and titans as planned (having such small drone bays in huge vessels is very unrealistic anyway)
3)add GÇ£not so powerfullGÇ¥ secondary guns to dreads and titans; add couple extra slots for medium sized, short range (1-25km) weapons so these huge ships would pose a threat atleast to a single small / medium sized subcapital ship that is trying to tackle them. Also it wouldnt hurt if firing these "self defence guns" would look like anti-aircraft fire . Fight ! Fight ! Never surrender, never surrender ! |
iulixxi
EVE-RO Fidelas Constans
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 11:39:00 -
[1935] - Quote
Jazzmyn wrote:I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels.
Bad example buddy (Bismarck was a battleship not a Carrier - or super carrier for that matter, it was a faction BS ) ... you do realise that he was always in fleet with a HAC (Prinz Eugen) just to be heavily damaged by a Carrier (HMS Ark Royal) later the final blow was made by BS'es ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck
Jazzmyn wrote:Therefore I only suggest following small changes that would make the game feel more real;
[sarcasm] You are playing of internet SPACESHIPS and you want to make it realistic? In real life you donGÇÖt have spaceships (except of course a decommissioned SHUTTLE - lol) GǪ nothing can travel faster than the speed of light (donGÇÖt care about that newspaper headline that the Italians found some particles GÇô proof or STFU), wormholes existence hasnGÇÖt been proven yet and the stargates are still under construction GǪ [/sarcasm]
Hope you don't take it personally ... bored @ work...
E |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 11:48:00 -
[1936] - Quote
Jazzmyn wrote:TIME TO GET REAL WITH CAPITAL BALANCING ! To me it seems pretty unrealistic that huge capital ship would be designed in a way that is has no countermeasures against small or medium size ships whatsoeverGǪ I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels. However, I do realize this is a spaceship game that needs to be balanced to work. Therefore I only suggest following small changes that would make the game feel more real; 1)make dreads able to shoot slow moving (>100m/s) battleship sized targets with their capital turrets, even if they donGÇÖt make full damage they should be able to cause some trouble to a slow moving BS. --> Improve dread primary guns tracking. 2)remove dronebays from dreads and titans as planned (having such small drone bays in huge vessels is very unrealistic anyway) 3)add GÇ£not so powerfullGÇ¥ secondary guns to dreads and titans; add couple extra slots for medium sized, short range (1-25km) weapons so these huge ships would pose a threat atleast to a single small / medium sized subcapital ship that is trying to tackle them. Also it wouldnt hurt if firing these "self defence guns" would look like anti-aircraft fire .
I'am all for taking out drone bays from supers IF carriers got them out and BS also. |
Kblackjack54
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 11:57:00 -
[1937] - Quote
Do not Nerf Supers CCP, leave them exactly as they are except for the log off and self destruct thingy, for this apply R/L rules, just because your getting attacked in your R/L shiny carrier does not mean you can just disappear, nor does it mean you can blow yourself up or destroy your ship to such an extent that the attackers have nothing to shoot at.
In R/L yes you can disable your ship, scuttle it, but your attackers can still shoot and destroy it as long as they can see it, if you commit to battle then you must accept the fact that you stand a good chance of loosing your ship and that chance must be real.
How to pose a threat to super carriers, currently not possible, not in a meaningful way enough to place the doubt of outcome in the mind of the pilot.
A far simpler way to solve the problem would be to make Dreads a meaningful threat to supers, alter there design in such a way as to make them useful as fleet ships rather than just stationary siege platforms, to do this add a rack of point defense weapons with which to protect themselves from other GÇÿsmallerGÇÖ ships and drones/fighters, increase there main gun tracking abilities with the use of rigs or mods.
Add to this increased Cap and Armor and you have in numbers a real threat to SupersGǪGǪGǪGǪ. Hmmm !
Note to self: are you not talking about tactics, correct fleet composition and the understanding of the capabilities of the ships you fly here rather than changes to ship mechanics.
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 12:06:00 -
[1938] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:Jazzmyn wrote:TIME TO GET REAL WITH CAPITAL BALANCING ! To me it seems pretty unrealistic that huge capital ship would be designed in a way that is has no countermeasures against small or medium size ships whatsoeverGǪ I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels. However, I do realize this is a spaceship game that needs to be balanced to work. Therefore I only suggest following small changes that would make the game feel more real; 1)make dreads able to shoot slow moving (>100m/s) battleship sized targets with their capital turrets, even if they donGÇÖt make full damage they should be able to cause some trouble to a slow moving BS. --> Improve dread primary guns tracking. 2)remove dronebays from dreads and titans as planned (having such small drone bays in huge vessels is very unrealistic anyway) 3)add GÇ£not so powerfullGÇ¥ secondary guns to dreads and titans; add couple extra slots for medium sized, short range (1-25km) weapons so these huge ships would pose a threat atleast to a single small / medium sized subcapital ship that is trying to tackle them. Also it wouldnt hurt if firing these "self defence guns" would look like anti-aircraft fire . I'am all for taking out drone bays from supers IF carriers got them out and BS also.
to make it fair, remove drones altogether from eve. after all that woudl be fair CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
754
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 12:10:00 -
[1939] - Quote
Jazzmyn wrote:To me it seems pretty unrealistic that huge capital ship would be designed in a way that is has no countermeasures against small or medium size ships whatsoeverGǪ I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels. However, I do realize this is a spaceship game that needs to be balanced to work. Therefore I only suggest following small changes that would make the game feel more real; What does a lone carrier (with fighters in the air) do against a dozen stealth missiles capable of cruising a couple of meters above the waves, with networking capability for synchronized strike, electronic counter-measures and designed to evade modern point-defense systems... Launched from a pair of stealth missile boats?
And that ignores hypersonic missiles... 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 12:15:00 -
[1940] - Quote
Forum ate my post TWICE. This is downright ridiculous to have a modern forum do this that often.
TL, DR version: Dreads should be more than space captapults, only good at killing structures. They should do somewhere about 2500 dps unsieged, with the siege bonus lowered to 100%, and tracking on all XL weapons halved. And no drones. Because they currently fail at fighting moving caps, and that's a role that should be accessible short of having a supercap. |
|
Herr Nerdstrom
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 12:47:00 -
[1941] - Quote
I think CCP is overnerfing with this patch. Yes, people do rat in their carriers, many people enjoy it, and lots of carriers are destroyed for doing it. Nerfing fighters so carriers can't be used to rat any longer doesn't make any sense...doing so makes carriers single role ships, and also hurts W-Space capital ship escalations.
I agree with the EHP hit, and applaud the logoffski fix. However, I disagree with reducing drone bay size on supers (taking the "super" away from "supercarrier"), and also disagree with disallowing use of anything but fighters and fighter bombers. I understand that supers are meant to be fielded in fleets, but they should also have basic means to defend themselves (ECM drones), and reducing drone bay size is just ridiculous.
CCP has just made an enormously expensive ship class less useful, more dangerous to field, and at the same time reduced their use on the battlefield. If the intent is for more of these ships to be used on the battlefield, then reduce their cost and make it worth fielding them. As it stands now, many alliances are afraid to field supers, and these changes will only further that cowardice. The only things this nerf will do is reduce the number of supercarriers on the field, and, as we are already seeing, cause many supercarrier pilots to sell their ships.
|
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 12:52:00 -
[1942] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Forum ate my post TWICE. This is downright ridiculous to have a modern forum do this that often.
The need for Ctrl+A && Ctrl+C is strong in this forum.
|
Lunce
PWNED Factor The Seventh Day
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 12:57:00 -
[1943] - Quote
These changes do basically three things: - kitchen sink roamings that accidentally stumble upon a ratting supercap have a better chance of killing it - force subcapital deployment alongside supers by making subcaps as immune to supers as possible without using the word immune - they fiddle with a few fleet-fight performance knobs to see what happens, reminiscent of the equipment tests run in chernobyl in 1986
Now if we look at it, what is actually the problem with supers? They are designed to be cap killers. And they are undeniably good at it. So good in fact, that fielding caps against them currently is ritual suicide. But that is not the fault of supers - that would be like blaming a vagabond for being fast. So, now that we have ruled out engaging them with regular caps, lets look at subcaps. Titans take a special place here since their doomsday can take out key infrastructure ships like fleet commands in a very reliable way. The other thing at least for turret titans is basic tracking mechanics which guarantees them to at least have some effect if the fc sets them up correctly.
Going on to supercarriers, what about them? Their dps? No. Since the last round of fighterbomber changes a fighterbomber hits an abaddon for 8 to 15 damage per volley. That's not even enough to make your twitchy finger broadcast for reps - it adds up if you look at 250 scs, yes (75k), but you just got hit by a 30 million HP damage volley, there are bound to be scratches (0.25% effective damage!). Their best bet is somewhere in the fighters / sentries / heavies ballpark in which they deal a little above twice as much dps as fleet battleship inside 60km control range. So the subcapital damage output of 250 supercarriers is 550 battleships worth, hardly something the cluster has never seen before.
If you've ever engaged 550 battleships, you know there is simply no tanking that inside their engagement zone. There is not. Accept it. Embrace it. But (assuming even numbers which already means you failed in setting up an unfair fight) you get a steady decline of incoming dps as ships explode. With the EHP of supercaps, their dps decline over time is always shallower than any subcap forces'. The EHP in turn they received because they used to fold in 20 seconds to anything looking at them the wrong way and because they are actually needed in cap fights which are a lot more static than subcap fights once they are on.
All of this combined results in the "supers are the only counter to supers" mantra. So, what is CCP hoping to achieve with these changes? The -20% HP change makes the dps reduction steeper, without having them implode against 20 battleships like they used to. With the drone changes I assume they hope that supercarrier pilots will go for 10/10 or 15/15 splits between bombers and regular fighters. This reduces the damage output of them against both capital and subcapital targets and removing the titan's headshot aimbot. So, less dps output and steeper over time dps reduction. Will this give subcapital fleets a better chance? Yes. Will the odds-improval be enough to stop the whining or fix eve? No. Will turning these screws even more fix eve? No, it will just break supers again. With their destructible dps without the endless-waves feature that saved the Dominix through the ages they will already be borderline.
The real core problem is not that supers are designed as cap killers. Giving subcaps better odds is all fine, but subcaps are not the designed weightclass in which to engage in. The problem is that no other capital is actually designed to fight capitals - short story short, fix broken dreads. Siege weapons were fine in the days of RMR and served their purpose while sov was linked to POS. Newsflash, that's history. POS are engaged to annoy your enemy, force fights and flush a few isks into your wallet. They are an opportunity target now, not a tightly regulated core game mechanic.
So, dreads redux: - remove the 2 target limit that was imposed on dreads because of station hugging moros pilots. supers take care of that problem all over new eden reliably and fast - remove the remote rep restriction - soften the tracking penalty in siege considerably - switch the local rep boost in siege to +120/140/160/180/200% hull, armor and shield hp depending on dread level - no warping / docking while in siege, but movement does not have to be restricted - siege timer at 5 minutes is probably still a good idea
What do we achieve with this? We get an actual supportable, fully insured and comparatively easy to get into damage backbone for regular capital fleets that is not just breakfast any more. You will not come out of engaging a 250 supercapital fleet with a 175/75 dread/carrier fleet (again, failure to set up an unfair fight) scott free and you imho never should - but a considerable amount of supers will die, your losses will be easier to replace (isk, build time and build capcity wise) and you actually have - depending on actual fleet compositions and tactics - maybe even a shot at holding the field / forcing the retreat (wiping 250 supers with even numbers should for the time being be unrealistic I think). But this could actually generate nice combined forces fights.
As Titan proliferation increases, the doomsday will probably have to be looked at again. Then again, engaging 250 titans feels like it should hurt by sound alone, yet how much remains the question.
PS: by the way, what is it with all that 'no remote rep' nonsense. Are you all imprisoned in motsu or a 2005 timebubble? active tank stockholm syndrome?
PPS: and fix capital shield reload mechanics by making it like armor Not even a sandbox needs passive (super)capital shield tanks[/quote]
Excellent summary of the current situation and an amazingly simple solution to the problem.
|
Lunce
PWNED Factor The Seventh Day
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 12:59:00 -
[1944] - Quote
Ooops, sorry for missing the quotes. |
L'ouris
Have Naught Subsidiaries
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 13:07:00 -
[1945] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:L'ouris wrote:I was wondering if any of these changes will really have an impact on the capability of the Super Fleets to decimate the sub cap fleets without the need for anything else but a cyno and some HICS / DICS? From a pure isolated dps / ehp point of view, it will get slightly better since supers die faster and at least supercarriers are easier to strip of their dps which could give rise to some new tactics. But since remote ecm bursts are actually getting fixed in these sense that they do not affect the ships that they should not (supers), it will likely get worse in the scenario you experienced. Remote ECM bursts are old-style anti-blob weapons based largely on the same design principle that the old AOE doomsday was, with the same scale problems. I doubt they were being looked at from a more than 5 per fleet angle during design similar to the 10 titans in all of new eden doomsday scenario. They are also AOE which traditionally is a kick into the nuts of the sol nodes. If a fleet has enough supercarriers to truely spam them, your only engagement option are ew immune ships - supers, dreads, triaged carriers. Which basically leaves supers. Time dilation could help in that locktime is more reliable and you actually get to apply some dps, but only until more ecm bursts are deployed again. About the void bombs. You can launch 10 of them before they start blowing each other up, and that hits for combined 18000 cap or roughly 20-25% of a supercarrriers cap. Even assuming time dilation allows them to actually trigger on target I doubt you will be able to dry up cap chains with them, the setup time between runs is just too high.
Thanks for being candid. I was really hoping I was wrong though :(
It appears that the more things change, the more they stay the same. With any luck we will get a change at somepoint that lets us attempt an assault on a super fleet w/o just needing more supers. |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 13:20:00 -
[1946] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:Jazzmyn wrote:I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels. Bad example buddy (Bismarck was a battleship not a Carrier - or super carrier for that matter, it was a faction BS ) ... you do realise that he was always in fleet with a HAC (Prinz Eugen) just to be heavily damaged by a Carrier (HMS Ark Royal) later the final blow was made by BS'es ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck
Good point. There are actually no RL counterparts for Supercaps. The biggest ships on this planet are carriers, afaik.
Anyway, arguments based on real-life weaponry serve no purpose. In RL, there is no hard counter to every weapon that exists, and there is no balance. In fact, everyone tries hard to IMbalance the 'game' in their favor. Nations don't want balance, they want to have the best weapons against which there is no counter. Reality is a bad game designer.
And there is no counter to nuclear weapons, except more nuclear weapons. You could say that nukes are the RL supercaps
Of course this is why RL wars wouldn't be fun even if they were a game. Games shouldn't be based on that. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 13:30:00 -
[1947] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:I have a question for the the community, CCP, the Goon/TEST leadership, and Goon/TEST CSM's. I'm looking for a serious answer here in spite of the implied troll in my last line. So here goes:
Why should 20 billion isk worth of Hurricanes be the most versatile forces capable of dealing with support, BS fleets, capital fleets, supercapital fleets and sov warfare AND 20 billion isk worth of supercarrier be useful at killing only capitals and sov structures and only so when in larger numbers far surpassing 20 billion isk worth of ships on field AND they must be accompanied by yet another group of ships solely tasked with supporting them?
That's an easy question to answer.
20 billion isk spent on 2 or more ships should easily always be more flexible than 20 billion isk spent on one ship.
20 billion isk on hurricanes? Hell you have enough isk there to include hurricanes suited for every type of anomoly possible, mining, salvaging and even remote rep hurricanes if you felt like it.
If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 13:37:00 -
[1948] - Quote
Also, money should substitute manpower only to a degree. It's ok that a very expensive ship replaces 5 or 10 people in lesser ships. But no ship should be the equivalent of 100+ people in lesser ships.
You should be able to beat superior numbers by having better tactics and a larger brain, not by spending just a lot more money. |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 13:39:00 -
[1949] - Quote
L'ouris wrote:Thanks for being candid. I was really hoping I was wrong though :(
It appears that the more things change, the more they stay the same. With any luck we will get a change at somepoint that lets us attempt an assault on a super fleet w/o just needing more supers. The one degree of freedom I currently see is that with the ECM burst fix, sieged dreads will keep their locks against Remote ECM spam. And supers are not that good at dictating range...
So one could arguably engage a super fleet with dreads with a steadier dps output than now. You will hemorraghe dreads like a stuck pig while doing it, but if you are willing to go for a suicide dread op, the option will be there. The question will be if someone is willing to try it.
Edit: clarification: with the currently proposed devblog dreads, not the redux dreads from page 95ish |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 13:48:00 -
[1950] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:L'ouris wrote:What about these changes encourages a more diverse fleet fight? Encourage? Nothing encouraging about it. These changes do basically three things: - kitchen sink roamings that accidentally stumble upon a ratting supercap have a better chance of killing it - force subcapital deployment alongside supers by making subcaps as immune to supers as possible without using the word immune - they fiddle with a few fleet-fight performance knobs to see what happens, reminiscent of the equipment tests run in chernobyl in 1986 Now if we look at it, what is actually the problem with supers? They are designed to be cap killers. And they are undeniably good at it. So good in fact, that fielding caps against them currently is ritual suicide. But that is not the fault of supers - that would be like blaming a vagabond for being fast. So, now that we have ruled out engaging them with regular caps, lets look at subcaps. Titans take a special place here since their doomsday can take out key infrastructure ships like fleet commands in a very reliable way. The other thing at least for turret titans is basic tracking mechanics which guarantees them to at least have some effect if the fc sets them up correctly. Going on to supercarriers, what about them? Their dps? No. Since the last round of fighterbomber changes a fighterbomber hits an abaddon for 8 to 15 damage per volley. That's not even enough to make your twitchy finger broadcast for reps - it adds up if you look at 250 scs, yes (75k), but you just got hit by a 30 million HP damage volley, there are bound to be scratches (0.25% effective damage!). Their best bet is somewhere in the fighters / sentries / heavies ballpark in which they deal a little above twice as much dps as fleet battleship inside 60km control range. So the subcapital damage output of 250 supercarriers is 550 battleships worth, hardly something the cluster has never seen before. If you've ever engaged 550 battleships, you know there is simply no tanking that inside their engagement zone. There is not. Accept it. Embrace it. But (assuming even numbers which already means you failed in setting up an unfair fight) you get a steady decline of incoming dps as ships explode. With the EHP of supercaps, their dps decline over time is always shallower than any subcap forces'. The EHP in turn they received because they used to fold in 20 seconds to anything looking at them the wrong way and because they are actually needed in cap fights which are a lot more static than subcap fights once they are on. All of this combined results in the "supers are the only counter to supers" mantra. So, what is CCP hoping to achieve with these changes? The -20% HP change makes the dps reduction steeper, without having them implode against 20 battleships like they used to. With the drone changes I assume they hope that supercarrier pilots will go for 10/10 or 15/15 splits between bombers and regular fighters. This reduces the damage output of them against both capital and subcapital targets and removing the titan's headshot aimbot. So, less dps output and steeper over time dps reduction. Will this give subcapital fleets a better chance? Yes. Will the odds-improval be enough to stop the whining or fix eve? No. Will turning these screws even more fix eve? No, it will just break supers again. With their destructible dps without the endless-waves feature that saved the Dominix through the ages they will already be borderline. The real core problem is not that supers are designed as cap killers. Giving subcaps better odds is all fine, but subcaps are not the designed weightclass in which to engage in. The problem is that no other capital is actually designed to fight capitals - short story short, fix broken dreads. Siege weapons were fine in the days of RMR and served their purpose while sov was linked to POS. Newsflash, that's history. POS are engaged to annoy your enemy, force fights and flush a few isks into your wallet. They are an opportunity target now, not a tightly regulated core game mechanic. So, dreads redux: - remove the 2 target limit that was imposed on dreads because of station hugging moros pilots. supers take care of that problem all over new eden reliably and fast - remove the remote rep restriction - soften the tracking penalty in siege considerably - switch the local rep boost in siege to +120/140/160/180/200% hull, armor and shield hp depending on dread level - no warping / docking while in siege, but movement does not have to be restricted - siege timer at 5 minutes is probably still a good idea What do we achieve with this? We get an actual supportable, fully insured and comparatively easy to get into damage backbone for regular capital fleets that is not just breakfast any more. You will not come out of engaging a 250 supercapital fleet with a 175/75 dread/carrier fleet (again, failure to set up an unfair fight) scott free and you imho never should - but a considerable amount of supers will die, your losses will be easier to replace (isk, build time and build capcity wise) and you actually have - depending on actual fleet compositions and tactics - maybe even a shot at holding the field / forcing the retreat (wiping 250 supers with even numbers should for the time being be unrealistic I think). But this could actually generate nice combined forces fights. As Titan proliferation increases, the doomsday will probably have to be looked at again. Then again, engaging 250 titans feels like it should hurt by sound alone, yet how much remains the question. PS: by the way, what is it with all that 'no remote rep' nonsense. Are you all imprisoned in motsu or a 2005 timebubble? active tank stockholm syndrome? PPS: and fix capital shield reload mechanics by making it like armor Not even a sandbox needs passive (super)capital shield tanks
Lots of good analysis and suggestions here. If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:05:00 -
[1951] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Ok is it just me or do alot of this changes suck for no good reason? 1.) Carriers have not been a problem for some time now why screw them over now? There much softer targets then SC. 2,) Dreads need to be able to hit other moving cap ships when in seige So slow down other cap ships alittle and inc seaige tracking alittle. 3.) Change Moros bonus to 5%dmg inc or add in a 5% cap reduction per level to Capital guns. Though it is not going to matter much as SC will still burn them down just as fast and I have no problem with that as its cap on cap action but if they fix the SC speed tanking the dreads then at least they can now go down fighting. 4.) Logoff timer this is the best change here great job. 5.) Carrier and SC new Drone bays should be renamed Fighter bay and both giving new Fighter bandwiths. Then add in a Navy dominix sized drone bay and bandwith for normal drones. I dont think that would be to overpowering for sub cap ships. This lets the logistice Carriers and SC's to field repair drones and yes other drones as well but in limited numbers i.e. at the limit of 125 bandwith. Thoughs are just my own ideals and my hold no water.
Honestly, as a Moros pilot, the current changes are fine. I am fine with losing some cap stability to gain the DPS a blaster dread should have (This is a 33% dps increase if I understand correctly). Tracking increases or vastly changing the sig of a SC and Titan would be welcome.
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:06:00 -
[1952] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:
Not been a problem because they were overshadowed by the bigger super-carrier problem.
The "Capships Online" slogan appeared well before super-cap buff in 2009, you should remember carrier blobs and fighter swarms of 2007-2008.
Fighters should be changed so that when fit for DPS, carriers can apply about 50-60% of their theoretical fighter DPS output to a stationary battleship (a class lower) and 100% to a moving (super)cap.
Neither changing their signature resolution to 400 nor leaving them as is is a balanced solution for all fighters.
Perhaps any changes can be postponed, but carriers should be watched very carefully in the following 3-4 months, lest they become the new battleships (again).
Fighters need to be fixed anyway so the short range ones can track a stationary target while orbiting... certain ones cannot. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:09:00 -
[1953] - Quote
Le Cardinal wrote:So much talk about the Hel. Fix ALL the shieldsupers. EFT warriors here keep comparing Shieldtankers and armortankers and it looks pretty even on paper, but when shieldtankers jump into a battle they loose a very large portion of their shield. Now someone choke up a good argument for why that is fair. The amount of armortanked supercaps compared to shieldtankers alone is a very good example of this.
This has been adressed by people for years and never been properly fixed.
Earlier I suggested that Slave implants buff all HP (Structure, Armor and Shield), while Crystal implants buff all active Tanks (Structure, Armor, and Shield). Given the way fleet bonuses are applied, I have also suggested that a Wyvern with the new slaves will have less EHP on jump in than an aeon, but significantly more if you want to rep it up. Hel fix: 45 fbs/fighters in drone bay (and EHP buff, but not so that its ehp competes with anything other than the Nyx). |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:11:00 -
[1954] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Ok is it just me or do alot of this changes suck for no good reason? 1.) Carriers have not been a problem for some time now why screw them over now? There much softer targets then SC. 2,) Dreads need to be able to hit other moving cap ships when in seige So slow down other cap ships alittle and inc seaige tracking alittle. 3.) Change Moros bonus to 5%dmg inc or add in a 5% cap reduction per level to Capital guns. Though it is not going to matter much as SC will still burn them down just as fast and I have no problem with that as its cap on cap action but if they fix the SC speed tanking the dreads then at least they can now go down fighting. 4.) Logoff timer this is the best change here great job. 5.) Carrier and SC new Drone bays should be renamed Fighter bay and both giving new Fighter bandwiths. Then add in a Navy dominix sized drone bay and bandwith for normal drones. I dont think that would be to overpowering for sub cap ships. This lets the logistice Carriers and SC's to field repair drones and yes other drones as well but in limited numbers i.e. at the limit of 125 bandwith. Thoughs are just my own ideals and my hold no water. Honestly, as a Moros pilot, the current changes are fine. I am fine with losing some cap stability to gain the DPS a blaster dread should have (This is a 33% dps increase if I understand correctly). Tracking increases or vastly changing the sig of a SC and Titan would be welcome.
yeh but the max 50km yourll be able to hit currently, still leaves a blaster moros worthless in all but 1 maybe 2 situations. it cant even hit a large pos properly at 28km CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:14:00 -
[1955] - Quote
Death2all Supercaps wrote:
because 20 billion isk in hurricans is over 250 people 250 people x 15 dollars a month = CCP making it rain.
20 billion isk in a supercarrier is 1 person 1 person RMTing isk with his bots that go unpunished = 0 $ for CCP
What would you do if you were ccp?
Edit: still waiting for CCP Tallest to comment more. been 60 pages bro
Meh, the real argument is diminishing returns. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:15:00 -
[1956] - Quote
Jazzmyn wrote:TIME TO GET REAL WITH CAPITAL BALANCING !
...
1)make dreads able to shoot slow moving (>100m/s) battleship sized targets with their capital turrets, even if they donGÇÖt make full damage they should be able to cause some trouble to a slow moving BS. --> Improve dread primary guns tracking.
...
Get a friend to web the BS for you if you really want to shoot the bs with the guns. Have fun with locking time...
Tracking SCs and Titans is the real issue in question |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:20:00 -
[1957] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:
That's an easy question to answer.
20 billion isk spent on 2 or more ships should easily always be more flexible than 20 billion isk spent on one ship.
20 billion isk on hurricanes? Hell you have enough isk there to include hurricanes suited for every type of anomoly possible, mining, salvaging and even remote rep hurricanes if you felt like it.
Canes are OP in comparison to all other BCs, but I agree with the basic sentiment (diminishing returns). |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:24:00 -
[1958] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:
yeh but the max 50km yourll be able to hit currently, still leaves a blaster moros worthless in all but 1 maybe 2 situations. it cant even hit a large pos properly at 28km
Fit 2x Optimal Scripts, use plutonium ammo.
<---Has shot many, many POS with a Blaster Moros (I have also hit targets while in siege at 120 km in the same ship, hits at 130 were really pushing it though). Also, the rail Moros will actually be a decent choice next a Rev now, though like the Nyx vs Aeon situation, the Rev will still have the EHP advantage over the Moros.
I just want to see a boost to capital self reps (50% would not be OP tbh, its not like a rev can tank a rev at this point in time...)
EDIT: FYI, I use the blaster Moros in w-space, which should also be considered when balancing given that, after all, it is one of the few places where dreads are actually used now... |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:29:00 -
[1959] - Quote
For you, dear Sir, I offer a 101 in forum posting which comes absolutely free:
Rule #1: Don't answer to yourself. If two of your posts stand next to each other in a thread, you're doing it wrong Rule #2: Don't quote entire posts
If you combined these two basic rules, you end up with a single post that actually contains more than one line of new content. Awesome! |
L'ouris
Have Naught Subsidiaries
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:33:00 -
[1960] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote: ... The one degree of freedom I currently see is that with the ECM burst fix, sieged dreads will keep their locks against Remote ECM spam. And supers are not that good at dictating range...
So one could arguably engage a super fleet with dreads with a steadier dps output than now. You will hemorraghe dreads like a stuck pig while doing it, but if you are willing to go for a suicide dread op, the option will be there. The question will be if someone is willing to try it.
Edit: clarification: with the currently proposed devblog dreads, not the redux dreads from page 95ish
It would be better from my perspective for this patch to fix our existing tools to deal with super fleets ( Void bomb buff, Dread buff )
and then just appease the masses with an actual rebalance of the supers ( shield implant sets, shield mechanics, minnie caps ) etc.
The problem with the Super fleets in my experience was simply a lack of acceptable tools to deal with them.
We need more degrees of freedom.
With more options at our disposal, FC's might demonstrate that the ships are not 'that' overpowered.
Thoughts?
|
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:35:00 -
[1961] - Quote
Floydd Heywood wrote:For you, dear Sir, I offer a 101 in forum posting which comes absolutely free:
Rule #1: Don't answer to yourself. If two of your posts stand next to each other in a thread, you're doing it wrong Rule #2: Don't quote entire posts
If you combined these two basic rules, you end up with a single post that actually contains more than one line of new content. Awesome!
CCP has made it easier to hit quote and then post with the removal of the timer. Furthermore, every time i spend the time to do that, I have a good chance of the forums ganking my post. Also, every time I try to remove and organize quotes, I **** it up. Dont worry, in a couple days I will probably stop posting again. I will try to go back and get rid of middle quotes, but expect me to screw up there...
^^Excuses for laziness
@ poster below me Fighters are not being nerfed, see first post. Now if only the short range ones would be fixed... |
Sader Rykane
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
177
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:46:00 -
[1962] - Quote
The fighter Nerf might be a bit much especially with the removal of the drone bay. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:52:00 -
[1963] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:
yeh but the max 50km yourll be able to hit currently, still leaves a blaster moros worthless in all but 1 maybe 2 situations. it cant even hit a large pos properly at 28km
Fit 2x Optimal Scripts, use plutonium ammo. <---Has shot many, many POS with a Blaster Moros (I have also hit targets while in siege at 120 km in the same ship, hits at 130 were really pushing it though). Also, the rail Moros will actually be a decent choice next a Rev now, though like the Nyx vs Aeon situation, the Rev will still have the EHP advantage over the Moros. I just want to see a boost to capital self reps (50% would not be OP tbh, its not like a rev can tank a rev at this point in time...) EDIT: FYI, I use the blaster Moros in w-space, which should also be considered when balancing given that, after all, it is one of the few places where dreads are actually used now...
i take it your mid are sebo's and tracking comps then?
2 tracking comps, range scrips and iron. optimal is 78 +31. rail moros is the choice 90% of teh time outside a wormhole. and tbh the changes will not get me back in what effectivly is a kiting ship now CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Bilaz
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:56:00 -
[1964] - Quote
I dont think that 20% ehp loss would change fact that supercaps are so hard to kill now. The way i see it - nyx having ehp of 8-10 dreads is more or less fine but if you count in comandship bonuses, erebus, slave set - you get 15-20 dread equevalent in ehp. Which you can rep with any number of triage carriers. And most of supercap potential to enlarge its hp lies in rigs - here you get 45-60% more to your already wast main tanking buffer. Come to think about it - having bs sized module give same % of armor to a battleship and titan - feels quite wrong. So i think instead of just cutting base hp of supercaps it may be better to cut down their potential to become 3-5 times wider in terms of ehp - one way is to look at hp buffer rigs, but it may be also a good idea to see that supercaps while being immune to e-war - be also "immune" to gang bonuses and pirate imp. sets. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:18:00 -
[1965] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:
i take it your mid are sebo's and tracking comps then?
2 tracking comps, range scrips and iron. optimal is 78 +31. rail moros is the choice 90% of teh time outside a wormhole. and tbh the changes will not get me back in what effectivly is a kiting ship now
(That dread is actually all meta 2 / faction fit)
The following are comparisons of T2 fit Dreads (Moros and Revelation):
All 5s, 3x damage mods for long ranged guns (no tracking mods in atm, using t1 ammo, though it is actually economical to use faction on rev) now:
Moros - 3483 at 60+30, 1451 at 192+30 +Potential 600 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 450 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs New Moros (1.47x) - 5120 at 50+30, 2132 at 192+30
Moros (Blasters) - 6866 at 19+19, 3123 at 60+19 +Potential 600 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 450 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs Moros New (Blasters) (1.47x) - 10,093 at 19+19, 4590 at 60+19
Rev (Beam) - 3743 at 50+40, 1560 at 160+40 +Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs New Rev (Beam) (1.1x) - 4117 at 50+40, 1716 at 160+40
Rev (Pulse) - 6222 DPS at 23+13, 2592 at 75+13 +Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs New Rev (Pulse) (1.1x) - 6844 at 23+13, 2851 at 75+13
Tracking Comparison (Sieged): Rail - 0.0012 Blaster - 0.00338 Beam - 0.0014 Pulse - 0.00253
Capacitor comparison: ATM, the blasters use much more cap, and will use any more, the changes to long range weapons, however, put the rails using almost the same cap as the rev's guns use.
Armor EHP comparison(3x trimark Is, 2x EANM IIs, 1x DCU II) Moros - 2,049,789 Revelation - 2,058,336
I would say that the rail Moros is clearly superior to the beam Revelation
Moros Base Cap - +57.5 3 Rails 3 Damage Mods - -77.5 3 Blasters 3 Damage Mods - -92.3 New: 3 Rails 3 Damage Mods - -103.3 3 Blasters 3 Damage Mods - -123.1
Revelation Base Cap - +57.5 3 Beams 3 Damage Mods - -105 3 Pulses 3 Damage Mods - -62.7
Range Modifiers: 1x T2 TC w/ Optimal: (1.15x)+(1.3x) 2x T2 TC w/ Optimal: (1.30x)+(1.64x)
I am liking the look of the rail, regardless of potential cap issues. (Getting good at avoiding ganked posts \o/, copy-pasta ftw)
Aside from a long range fight with short ranged guns, it seems to me that the Moros is going to be a winner. Not complaining, mind you, I just don't like everyone complaining about the Moros being nerfed until CCP gives it some insane bonus, then screws it over in a year when it is OP. ALL dreads need a EHP buff and a larger damage buff. At the same time, all capital armor mods need to be buffed to keep up with the Moros changes (1.5x multiplier for the current notes), especially considering that active tanking mods on capitals are already pretty ******.
Edit:
Sader Rykane wrote:The fighter Nerf might be a bit much especially with the removal of the drone bay.
They retracted that change, just have yet to edit the blog. |
Judge Renovatio
Texas Roughnecks
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:28:00 -
[1966] - Quote
I never reply to posts but need to insert my 1-+ Cents!
Nerf on Supercaps - Some balance would be nice, but these ships are expensive and should be hard to kill. Loggoffski - GOOD Change
Nerfing fighters on regular carriers - SUCKS.
From reading this thread. I tend to wonder if Obama has taken over the reigns at CCP and has proclaimed;
Dear Long Time Dedicated Players. You have worked hard, you have been dedicated and built your fortune and your following. And for this we are eternally grateful. But it is time we take away from you so the suffering poor masses that don't want to work hard have more.
The only real change I see any of this making is the return of the sub-cap blob and the biggest blob wins.
And now for the stupid question portion of my post.
"Is there a mechanism in place to impeach the entire CSM?"
|
RebelGeneral
Orion's Fist RED.Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:33:00 -
[1967] - Quote
Leave fighters alone, Carriers are fine in this game and anything done to make fighters do less damage is going to break the game more. Fighter bombers should have there signature radius increased to make them do less damage against sub-caps. Stop breaking things please. Leave carriers alone, by reducing fighters damage to sub-caps your going to limit what the already limited carrier is used for. Might as well just strip its drone bay and make it purely a logistics ships for hauling ships. Because by nerfing fighters this is what your creating. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:34:00 -
[1968] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:
i take it your mid are sebo's and tracking comps then?
2 tracking comps, range scrips and iron. optimal is 78 +31. rail moros is the choice 90% of teh time outside a wormhole. and tbh the changes will not get me back in what effectivly is a kiting ship now
(That dread is actually all meta 2 / faction fit) All 5s, 3x damage mods for long ranged guns (no tracking mods in atm, using t1 ammo, though it is actually economical to use faction on rev) now: Moros - 3483 at 60+30, 1451 at 192+30 +Potential 600 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 450 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs New Moros (1.47x) - 5120 at 50+30, 2132 at 192+30 Rev (Beam) - 3743 at 50+40, 1560 at 160+40 +Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs New Rev (Beam) (1.1x) - 4117 at 50+40, 1716 at 160+40 Rev (Pulse) - 6222 DPS at 23+13, 2592 at 75+13 +Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs New Rev (Pulse) (1.1x) - 6844 at 23+13, 2851 at 75+13 Range Modifiers: 1x T2 TC w/ Optimal: (1.15x)+(1.3x) 2x T2 TC w/ Optimal: (1.30x)+(1.64x) I am liking the look of the rail, regardless of potential cap issues. (Getting good at avoiding ganked posts \o/, copy-pasta ftw) Edit: Sader Rykane wrote:The fighter Nerf might be a bit much especially with the removal of the drone bay. They retracted that change, just have yet to edit the blog.
so basicly, your using a dread fit, that yourll never see in a none wh dread fleet? as these ships are effectivly paper thin and cant hit small targets( bs and lower and now cant even kill a solo frig) and fitting blasters, that yourll never see in a none wh dread fleet.
you are right, only place now and after this change where a dread can be used liek it used to be is in a wh. but balancing them using expensive none fleet mods isnt my idea of balance. its liek compairing a t2 fit proteus with a full deadspace tengu
CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:38:00 -
[1969] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:
so basicly, your using a dread fit, that yourll never see in a none wh dread fleet? as these ships are effectivly paper thin and cant hit small targets( bs and lower and now cant even kill a solo frig) and fitting blasters, that yourll never see in a none wh dread fleet.
you are right, only place now and after this change where a dread can be used liek it used to be is in a wh. but balancing them using expensive none fleet mods isnt my idea of balance. its liek compairing a t2 fit proteus with a full deadspace tengu
Edited a lot of stuff in (capacitor comparison). The dread comment was just one on how I could hit at those ranges in w-space, while all other comments regarded a t2 fit dread. I will edit that post again to make it more clear.
RebelGeneral wrote:Leave fighters alone, Carriers are fine in this game and anything done to make fighters do less damage is going to break the game more. Fighter bombers should have there signature radius increased to make them do less damage against sub-caps. Stop breaking things please. Leave carriers alone, by reducing fighters damage to sub-caps your going to limit what the already limited carrier is used for. Might as well just strip its drone bay and make it purely a logistics ships for hauling ships. Because by nerfing fighters this is what your creating.
They decided against the change on page 46 or something (they linked the post in the OP)
EDIT: can't seem to do quotes right... EDIT: this fix it? |
quIinn
Angry Falcons
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:38:00 -
[1970] - Quote
ok ccp most of the changers are kool but why nerf normal fighters there's not a problem with carrier's / fighters fighter bombers are the problem please for the love of god dont change fighters why brake somthing thats already ok as it is. LEAVE FIGHTER'S ALONE u must think to urselves right well fix this this nd this and brake this whilst were at it wtf ccp so please think about it they dont need nurfing supers needed the nurf nd dreads needed the boost carriers are fine i hope i get the point accross thanks |
|
BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
126
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:41:00 -
[1971] - Quote
quIinn wrote:ok ccp most of the changers are kool but why nerf normal fighters there's not a problem with carrier's / fighters fighter bombers are the problem please for the love of god dont change fighters why brake somthing thats already ok as it is. LEAVE FIGHTER'S ALONE u must think to urselves right well fix this this nd this and brake this whilst were at it wtf ccp so please think about it they dont need nurfing supers needed the nurf nd dreads needed the boost carriers are fine i hope i get the point accross thanks
Fighter change got retracted, I'm too lazy to look up the post, and CCP is too lazy to edit their blog, but no more fighter change. |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:43:00 -
[1972] - Quote
Still not too late to change their mind about fighters. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:49:00 -
[1973] - Quote
as someone with maxed skilled moros/nyx/erebus pilots. these changes are just so far from balanced its not funny. some mom pilots now will just move to titans, some will go to carriers, soem will actiually stay in moms. but no one is gonna use dreads anymore than now.
its liek ccp got all the people taht dont play eve in there office, put them in a room and said, you got to say 1 thing each and we will use that to balance capitals.
there is a lot of whine about this and that, but cut through all that, there is no balance, its a bunch of rash changes by people that have never flown these ships, will never fly them and basicly dont play eve.
if you go through all 100 pages or what ever, you can pick out good ideas, better ideas than ccp from at least 1 person from eack of the alliances in game. ideas that would make more sence and be balanced. anyhow, last post cba with this anymore, ill wait for the patch notes
CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Nova Soldier
ROMANIA Renegades ROMANIAN-LEGION
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 16:33:00 -
[1974] - Quote
I hope CCP realizes that this winter patch is critical for the future of eve. A lot of ppl are already bored of eve because right now null sec eve is ~80% controled by 2 large coalitions. While the rest try to survive on crappy moons in an eve controlled by supers. If CCP fails with this winter patch, then i do not see a bright future no matter how many ''walking in stations'' improvements they get in eve.
PS: Make Dreads usefull again. A dread is a ship is used by everyone in eve while the supers are reserved for the few.
PPS : http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=4015923 this is what we want back. |
Oscasre
Anger Management
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 16:42:00 -
[1975] - Quote
Quote:Fighter change got retracted, I'm too lazy to look up the post, and CCP is too lazy to edit their blog, but no more fighter change.
Fighters changes got changed for what ?
Carriers and not Supers
Carriers and Supers ?
CCP Please clear up the confusion ...... in one statment you said the changes to the fighters for carriers is wrong but haven't cleared up anything ?
|
Oscasre
Anger Management
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 16:44:00 -
[1976] - Quote
One side blobbing the other ... nice move |
Nova Soldier
ROMANIA Renegades ROMANIAN-LEGION
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 16:50:00 -
[1977] - Quote
Don't look at the blob, look at the dread fleets fighting each outher. |
Avon
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
136
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 16:57:00 -
[1978] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:Now, as that isn't going to happen Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't aware of your prophetic abilities. Tell me: should I invest in nitrogen or helium isotopes? Build requirements have been altered before. It will surely happen againGǪ if it turns out that it's needed. So far, there is nothing to suggest that it is apart from a solid wall of rather unreasoned whinging. Quote:Now, as that isn't going to happen Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't aware of your prophetic abilities. Tell me: should I invest in nitrogen or helium isotopes? Build requirements have been altered before. It will surely happen againGǪ
I didn't say that build requirement never change, I said they don't change "automagically". If you are claiming that they do, or will, then you can deem me a false prophet - until then, stop being an idiot.
You actually managed to pretty much shoot down your own argument by the way.
Supercaps should have an advantage because they cost more due to their build requirement, which is set because of the advantage they should have.
Now, stop with your silly circular logic and accept that cost is a factor of balance, because, as you correctly pointed out, cost is a factor of build requirements which are decided by CCP to reflect how much "better" a ship should be. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 17:10:00 -
[1979] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:new feedback 1. Please let dreads keep their drone bay - but have the siege module make it so dreads cannot use drones while in siege mode - similar to carriers triage mode. 2. Hel is getting hit the worst and will have the lowest EHP of all the mom's please leave their hp alone and maybe look into changing the bonus from logi to something like drone rof. 3. Drone bay sizes should be able to take a full compliment of fighters and fighter bombers. 25 f / 25 FB. This will leave some versatility to moms to either assign fighters to sub caps to help them out or have a full wing of bombers for capital / sov fights. 3.a. To appease the super cap whiners that have no friends to back them up in a fleet fight. MAKE 2 drone bays. One for fighters and fighter bombers, And another one for regular drones. large enough to accomodate, 25 light, 25 medium, 25 heavy, 25 sentry, and 25 ewar. Now to the whiney super cap pilots --- THIS IS MEETING THE ISSUE HALF WAY, It gives you reasonable defense against subs but its not op where you can constantly throw drones out. 4. AS an added bonus to help supers carriers and others, MAYBE offer a bonus to smartbomb range or neut range. 5. Look into dread / titan tracking of turrets, 6. You should explain more in depth about hybrid changes to quell the fear about the changes it is going to receive, you already broke its poor little legs. 7. If regular carriers are going to be support ships to the supers, make sure they get some good bonuses to help defend against sub caps, 7a - small hp buff 7b - better tracking for all drones 7c - speed bonus drones ETC 8. A note to the community - THESE ARE PLANNED CHANGES AND ARE NOT YET IN STONE! Get on the test server and try it out and offer constructive help not whining and rage quitting. 9. To most of you bitter vets - We were all around before super caps existed, we were all around fighting for sov long before tons and tons of moms were fielded. MAKE UP TACTICS, Send in the subs first to distract their subs then send in the dreads and supers to take out their capitals.
1. thats actually an interesting idea 2. they said they would look at the Hel independently 3. the problem was that, in theory you can blow up the F-Bombers to mitigate the damage, but when you can keep putting them out, and keep putting them out and keep putting them out its not the same. 4. im not really seeing the help there 5. yep, titans need less dreadnaughts need more 6. CCP never does anything fast 7. Carriers are support ships period their bonuses to help defend against subcaps is a good support fleet 8. Amen 9. how quickly people forget that. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
784
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 17:51:00 -
[1980] - Quote
To defend my point 3, The idea is if the average mom pilot has carrier 5, then 20 drones is all they can field w/o using the drone control units. This allows the mom pilot to field 20 of each while having 5 extra for back up.
Most people can agree that getting your drones shot down by rats or smartbombed is annoying as hell.
Now I like to ask the thoughts of the 2 drone bays.
A fighter bay and a drone bay as i also stated in point 3. If you have two seperate bays this will really limit how many drones moms can put out and allow them to assist in pos take downs with sentries, and help defense against sub caps.
This will retain some versatility of moms but not make them op. Instead of cutting the balls off nerf it will just be more of a kick in the balls. |
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 18:03:00 -
[1981] - Quote
Oscasre wrote:Quote:Fighter change got retracted, I'm too lazy to look up the post, and CCP is too lazy to edit their blog, but no more fighter change. Fighters changes got changed for what ? Carriers and not Supers Carriers and Supers ? CCP Please clear up the confusion ...... in one statment you said the changes to the fighters for carriers is wrong but haven't cleared up anything ?
Go back to page one of this thread and read that post. It has a link to the post where CCP Tallest was persuaded to redact the fighter sig resolution change by reasonable arguments in this thread.
As it stands, everything is all just being discussed and to be decided for all we know. Changes aren't even on test yet, so don't get your panties in a wad just yet. If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 18:15:00 -
[1982] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:To defend my point 3, The idea is if the average mom pilot has carrier 5, then 20 drones is all they can field w/o using the drone control units. This allows the mom pilot to field 20 of each while having 5 extra for back up.
Most people can agree that getting your drones shot down by rats or smartbombed is annoying as hell.
Now I like to ask the thoughts of the 2 drone bays.
A fighter bay and a drone bay as i also stated in point 3. If you have two seperate bays this will really limit how many drones moms can put out and allow them to assist in pos take downs with sentries, and help defense against sub caps.
This will retain some versatility of moms but not make them op. Instead of cutting the balls off nerf it will just be more of a kick in the balls.
Yup. Splitting the drone bay to limit the number of normal drones gives supers the ability to still fight on like before. However it limits the number of drones instead of having 10k drones in there bay they will have, at most, 200 or so normal drones. Thats only 10 relaunches of drones for a level 5 SC. A few stealth bombers can wipe that out in no time flat. As a SC pilot myself, I am for this idea, as I also like to fly SB's (gotta love those little ships). SB's being a small counter to supers (tiney frig vs epic size) is a really good idea, after all a gang of SB's could feasibly take down a single SC thats alone. Torps do some amazing DPS, add that with a bomb or two to wipe out the drones and that super is prepped and ready for the slaughter house. |
Yaay
Thunder Mercenary Army Stainwagon.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 18:27:00 -
[1983] - Quote
You need to still address carrier and SC remote repairing out of triage. IMO, link the range bonus to triage only. This addresses Super Carrier blobs repairing each other effectively and reduces spider tanking carrier effects a bit. Make remote repair blobs less effective b/c honestly, spider tanking and remote repairing on all levels is out of control and needs some more balance.
Take what you want from that and also fix Logistics. |
Yaay
Thunder Mercenary Army Stainwagon.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 18:29:00 -
[1984] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:new feedback 1. Please let dreads keep their drone bay - but have the siege module make it so dreads cannot use drones while in siege mode - similar to carriers triage mode. 2. Hel is getting hit the worst and will have the lowest EHP of all the mom's please leave their hp alone and maybe look into changing the bonus from logi to something like drone rof. 3. Drone bay sizes should be able to take a full compliment of fighters and fighter bombers. 25 f / 25 FB. This will leave some versatility to moms to either assign fighters to sub caps to help them out or have a full wing of bombers for capital / sov fights. 3.a. To appease the super cap whiners that have no friends to back them up in a fleet fight. MAKE 2 drone bays. One for fighters and fighter bombers, And another one for regular drones. large enough to accomodate, 25 light, 25 medium, 25 heavy, 25 sentry, and 25 ewar. Now to the whiney super cap pilots --- THIS IS MEETING THE ISSUE HALF WAY, It gives you reasonable defense against subs but its not op where you can constantly throw drones out. 4. AS an added bonus to help supers carriers and others, MAYBE offer a bonus to smartbomb range or neut range. 5. Look into dread / titan tracking of turrets, 6. You should explain more in depth about hybrid changes to quell the fear about the changes it is going to receive, you already broke its poor little legs. 7. If regular carriers are going to be support ships to the supers, make sure they get some good bonuses to help defend against sub caps, 7a - small hp buff 7b - better tracking for all drones 7c - speed bonus drones ETC 8. A note to the community - THESE ARE PLANNED CHANGES AND ARE NOT YET IN STONE! Get on the test server and try it out and offer constructive help not whining and rage quitting. 9. To most of you bitter vets - We were all around before super caps existed, we were all around fighting for sov long before tons and tons of moms were fielded. MAKE UP TACTICS, Send in the subs first to distract their subs then send in the dreads and supers to take out their capitals.
Every bit of that is ****.. all your doing is changing why their overpowered rather than reducing their effectiveness. |
Ratnose Banker
Pink Sockers
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 18:39:00 -
[1985] - Quote
lolol nerf logis because we can't get more than 4 in fleet and they only have logistics trained to 3 :DDDD |
GaiusAlexander
Abacus House
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 18:42:00 -
[1986] - Quote
Cronyx Ravage wrote:Can someone explain why, exactly, it makes sense for fighters to have a hard time shooting subcaps? Theyre *fighters*, right? With a pilot inside. It would be like a Viper Mk.2 having a hard time shooting something the size of Colonial One, as far as cruisers go, a heavy raider to relate to frigates, or a frakin Basestar to relate to battleships. Making them only effective against capitals is like saying Vipers are only effective against Hiveships, Resurection hubs, or colony ships. Or a more real world example, F-16s are only effective against.... What? Something the size of an Independence Day city destroyer? (there is no real world exame for this size difference)
Yeah, I miss BSG as well... |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 19:07:00 -
[1987] - Quote
The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise. |
Dank Man
FinFleet Raiden.
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 19:32:00 -
[1988] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Tell you what. I will support the supercapital nerf if CCP provided all Dreads, Carriers, Supercarriers and Titans the following:
A rapid fire 1000 dps point defense system capable of hitting out to around 20 km.
Edit: this is pretty much a troll. However it would be the reality of a Specific Roles for ships based gameplay. Modern day super aircraft carriers have point defense systems that are well capable of defending them against smaller ships and fast moving aircraft while their primary role is to launch fighters and fighter bombers to provide air superiority and heavily damage enemy ships or positions.
Watching Big Bigger Biggest (c) on NGC last night and im pretty sure suppercarriers developed since midway have realized that with such precious cargo (ie the most expensive heaviest drones in the game FBs) you need some way to protect against threats of all kinds including point defense as a last resort. Granted your first line of defense is a fleet around you to support you which should always exist in some manner, but this will be fixed by the nerf to loggoff timers as has already been stated. No reason to nerf anything, you want super populations to go down, they will with the changes to logoff timers, change one thing, give it time and see what happens. While your at it i guess you could even out shield SCs/ and minmatars capitals but dont nerf the most powerful ships in the game just because a dedicated group of players banded together to wipe out the biggest zerg/blob ever seen in this game. I know mittins wants you to reduce the lag so he can pile hundreds more of his pets into systems in order to establish the classic goon iWin button approach, but when the biggest fleets ever seen band together to move across the map, united across multiple timezones, then it should not be viewed as a reason to reduce the ships effectiveness. Evolution would show that balancing should require upgrades to technology (like dreads or carriers or more t2/t3 BS) to combat the growing threat of things like the supercap fleets that seem to run things for a few months. They do take YEARS to train for and cost hundreds of dollars, no loggoffski is already enough for people to say f*** it and cash out, be done with the game, and move on. Dont screw over your most loyal dedicated fans/players just to appease a small outcry of noobs who QQ that they cant face the biggest ships ever created. It has been seen that small subcap fleets can easily pick off unprotected supers if bumped (by a spy) or whatnot and with no loggoffski this will happen even more. I mean seriously i dont want to give you all the counters but if someone wanted to invest in a fleet of 100 hics/dics 50 logis 50 t3s and some recons for nueting, add some bombers in their as well, and SC fleets would melt and be unable to escape for hours my point is if the fleet is too big and can DD your hics/dics (which they seem to also be changing) then bring more, its and extra 50-150 m per ship (as much as a fully fit BS) and you will likely get on some SC kills, seems worth it. R&K do it all the time with a few t3s and nueting bhallghorns.
gg wall of text TL:DR game evolves not regresses, ships should be evolved to counter (t3 bs? t2 carrier/dread? new type of capitals?) that which seems unbeatable (massive SC fleets) and with the Loggoff change SCs will be dying much more often already, no other nerf needed (except small re-balancing obviously) |
Mirei Jun
Right to Rule IMPERIAL LEGI0N
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 20:09:00 -
[1989] - Quote
There has been a lot of talk in here one way or the other. I am not hung up on one exact change, rather an overall thought process about the role of caps in Eve.
- Capital class ships should be weak against BCs and below.
- They should require sub-capital support fleets
- Fighters should not be a valid defense tool against cruisers and below
The reason capitals dominate warfare is because they can kill every class ship in the game single-handed. This has got to end before sub-caps will ever play a viable role in large scale fleet engagements.
MJ
|
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 20:59:00 -
[1990] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise.
This is a great point The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
|
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:05:00 -
[1991] - Quote
CCP Spitfire wrote:Lady PimpStar wrote:The changes to fighters make every wormhole carrier useless for PVE.
Are the fighter changes only effective to Super Caps or effect all capital ships?
As of now we can just barely rep our fighters in time lossing maybe 2 to 5 a site. If you mean the changes to the fighters' signature resolution, it has been decided not to go ahead with them. Please have a look at this post for more information.
someone needs to update the first post with a link to all important/interesting CCP/Dev posts in this gigantic threadnaught. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:06:00 -
[1992] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote:The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise. This is a great point
Yeah no the opposite, because the person you're replying to doesn't understand the change. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
791
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:10:00 -
[1993] - Quote
Posting a link to Jester's blog, which sums up the problems with this nerf better than anyone else in the thread so far:
http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2011/10/winter-is-coming.html Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
vikari
Serenity Engineering and Transport Company Fatal Ascension
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:11:00 -
[1994] - Quote
CCP could you enlighten us on if you plan to adjust the BPO requirements for dreads and titans to reflect their lack of drone bays? Last time I logged into the test server the BPOs were still requiring Capital Drone Bays in the build requirements. |
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:17:00 -
[1995] - Quote
Mirei Jun wrote: There has been a lot of talk in here one way or the other. I am not hung up on one exact change, rather an overall thought process about the role of caps in Eve.
- Capital class ships should be weak against BCs and below.
- They should require sub-capital support fleets
- Fighters should not be a valid defense tool against cruisers and below
The reason capitals dominate warfare is because they can kill every class ship in the game single-handed. This has got to end before sub-caps will ever play a viable role in large scale fleet engagements.
MJ
Captials are really find as they are....afterall there big ships that take IRL time and lots of Ingame isk (and even more time) to buy and fit. Supers are even bigger and take even more time to work on and get, and by themselves there pritty strong and in fleets, even stronger. The real issue in the game isn't the ship itself, the real issue is the players. Something that CCP nor the game can EVER fix. Player interaction, the ability to make coalitions of alliances, and to band together to fight something....all of that is in OUR hands not CCP's. Supers are really fine as is, people are having issues with them because a lot of people got together and crushed an enemy. You watch, those people will soon fight one another and in a few months or so the map will change again. This is EvE were talking about, where nothing stays the same for very long, so what if a group of people own over 90% of 0.0. It won't be like that forever, people will want to fight again and you will get a civil war, or the spais will do there job and cause one. In which then you get massive fighting all across 0.0 again and the map shifts. All of this is PLAYER controlled, no amount of nerfs or changes will change that factor of the game, if supers become useless then people will change to something else (provided theres a game left).
So back to the topic at hand. Supers should NOT be overly weak to any one group. I have said it before in previous posts, fast small agile ships WORK against them. If the drone bays get changed to what has been suggested by myself and others then you have your "counter".
Really the only true ship that should be made to counter supers are Dreads. They are the one ship that is ALREADY in the game, abit nerfed to hell and back. Rebuff them and you have a ship that can slug it out with the best of them. Replace your battleship fleets with dreadnought fleets and supers will go running for the hills.
EDIT: 100 pages....FTW! |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:19:00 -
[1996] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:xxxak wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote:The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise. This is a great point Yeah no the opposite, because the person you're replying to doesn't understand the change. I understand all the changes very well. Stating otherwise will not change that. You're confusing me with someone else in one of my corps who misspoke. I, however, am very well nuanced with all the rules of aggression and logging mechanics. Ad hominem replies aside, please give good reasons why the changes I've suggested are bad/unfair. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:28:00 -
[1997] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote: The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise.
Actually, you can still kill supers w/o super point or bubble, see neuts + bumps. Does not happen often, but it is doable. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
784
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:35:00 -
[1998] - Quote
@ the morsus mihi person a few pages back.
Calm down, read it carefully. My compromises on the motherhips are reasonable. If you split up the drone bays for carriers and motherships to where you have a drone bay and a fighter bay. YOU LIMIT what they are capable of. Limiting the sizes limit the effectiveness. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 22:14:00 -
[1999] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:@ the morsus mihi person a few pages back.
Calm down, read it carefully. My compromises on the motherhips are reasonable. If you split up the drone bays for carriers and motherships to where you have a drone bay and a fighter bay. YOU LIMIT what they are capable of. Limiting the sizes limit the effectiveness.
Carriers are not broken atm, SCs are. Carriers in w-space are taking a huge hit because of the changes to dreads (Moros in particular). |
Aequitas Veritas
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 22:16:00 -
[2000] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:@ the morsus mihi person a few pages back.
Calm down, read it carefully. My compromises on the motherhips are reasonable. If you split up the drone bays for carriers and motherships to where you have a drone bay and a fighter bay. YOU LIMIT what they are capable of. Limiting the sizes limit the effectiveness. Ill just briefly repeat what i suggested for the supers earlier, should be near what Obsidian is thinking as well - Decrease fighterbombers dps by approximately 50% to be inline with dreads - 1 Drone pr level, for max total of 10 drones / fighters / fighterbombers: less drones vs subcaps, less sentries vs poses. Reduces lag - Add a 100% role bonus to fighterbombers and possibly also fighters - Let them have at least one full set of both fighters and fighterbombers - Reduce jumprange and increase jumpcost to reduce their power projections - Remove Cap Remote rep so they wont be "safe" on their own
I dont think its possible to just create a seperate dronebay, cus the supers will just bring different drones in the corp hangars and refill the dronebay as needed. Power projection is also much much more troublesome than their damage, so CCP really needs to look into that, even if thats hurting the way we fight in PL. Hotdrops must be harder and distances in EVE must be further apart.
If it was up to me id go ahead witih the fighterchanges just so ppl stop ratting in their carriers and supers. the economy is whats most problematic with this game... ISK comes by way too easy
Motherships were being used waaaay back and they only did twice the dps of a carrier. They were still being used because or ew immunity, rr ability, and the fact that nothing could keep it to the field beside bumping. But at that time they were balanced with having like twice the EHP of a carrier. Then came the dictors and hictors and they stopped being used cus they were to fragile and now we have this. As long as these ships can put out 10k dps, dreads wont be used for anything but ninja reinforcements. Motherships / SCS must be brough back to what they were before where their damage wasnt so abnormally high. If you remove their RR ability, leave their dps at dread level, if you dont remove the RR ability then make fighterbombers do twice the damage of normal fighters, lower the size of the fighters and fighterbombers so they are easier to switch out and bring replacements for campaigns (given that you nerf the bay so you can only hold one full flight plus a few spares).
The same goes for the doomsday, it needs to be switched out to something else: neut, web, ecm, point bomb of some sort, or dreads wont be used much at all... |
|
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 22:18:00 -
[2001] - Quote
Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
There isnt anything wrong with the new logoff mechanics if you die because you logged off with aggression and didnt relog to deal with the aggression you deserve to die if someone finds you.Only bad thing with this is if your internet goes down that would be frustrating,but i wouldnt fly a super unless i could afford to lose it. |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 22:21:00 -
[2002] - Quote
vikari wrote:CCP could you enlighten us on if you plan to adjust the BPO requirements for dreads and titans to reflect their lack of drone bays? Last time I logged into the test server the BPOs were still requiring Capital Drone Bays in the build requirements.
I don't know why people keep asking this question - CCP removed the clone vat bay reqs from SC's when they were changed, so it's just as reasonable that they'll remove drone bays from dreads and titans. |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 22:42:00 -
[2003] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote: The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise.
Actually, you can still kill supers w/o super point or bubble, see neuts + bumps. Does not happen often, but it is doable.
Yes you CAN, but it rarely happens. I'd still argue it's not unreasonable to assume that if you can't kill or catch(point) a super in 15-30 mins after it's logged out, then it was going to have lived anyways. If you can point the super, then it's gg and the kill is yours no matter how long you have to hold it. The point is that the compromise is much closer to the intended rule than the current proposed changes by CCP.
|
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 22:49:00 -
[2004] - Quote
Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
A 20bil isk ship should be able to deal with any situation, even if its to a limited degree. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:29:00 -
[2005] - Quote
iulixxi wrote:Jazzmyn wrote:I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels. Bad example buddy (Bismarck was a battleship not a Carrier - or super carrier for that matter, it was a faction BS ) ... you do realise that he was always in fleet with a HAC (Prinz Eugen) just to be heavily damaged by a Carrier (HMS Ark Royal) later the final blow was made by BS'es ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck
Even better, the Bismark was completely unable to track and shoot down any of the Swordfish launched from HMS Ark Royal which torpedoed her rudder and sealed her fate.
Goodness me, a large, powerful, expensive ship being unable to engage smaller attackers and hence becoming vulnerable to them! Just like supercaps in the forthcoming rebalance! ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
784
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:31:00 -
[2006] - Quote
Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
There isnt anything wrong with the new logoff mechanics if you die because you logged off with aggression and didnt relog to deal with the aggression you deserve to die if someone finds you.Only bad thing with this is if your internet goes down that would be frustrating,but i wouldnt fly a super unless i could afford to lose it.
it meeting halfway.
IT's a very limited swiss army knife. Sure it would have all the tools but only 2 of the blades are metal, the rest are plastic.
25 light / medium / heavy / sentry / ewar drones. IF that seems to be too extreme limit it to a full fighter bay of 25 of fighters and FB and have a seperate drone bay that's 1250m-¦ for regular drones. That seems like a lot of drone bay but a full flight of 25 heavies is 625m-¦.
Anyway, Im trying to work for a well balanced compromise here. Sure they will be versatile but not as much as they are now. As for the comment of a swiss army knife, yes it would be a swiss army knife still, except it would have 2 blades and the screwdriver, wine opener, scissors would all be made of plastic. |
Norto Azermoth
SregginWaffe
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 23:59:00 -
[2007] - Quote
Good old CCP... always overdoing things, even nerfs... They just grabbed that nerf bat.. started hitting... and realised shoving it up the supercapitals ass was more effective to cripple it.
|
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
407
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 02:10:00 -
[2008] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote:The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise. This is a great point
No. It is not a great point. It's ridiculous. In this scenario you have a guy in a supercap and was disconnected for FOUR HOURS. So you get logged while attacking in a 20 billion isk ship and you can't get logged back in for four hours?? That's not realistic at all. Even if there was a real reasion server side for him to DC, and assuming the GMs didn't reimburse the loss, he still would have been able to log back in within that time frame. The odds of this happening at all are very slim. The odds of a supercap pilot not being able to log back in for four hours are astronomical. This situation could only affect a tiny micro-fraction of people... say one a year... and you want to accommodate that one person and alter the entire mechanic for that? That's just stupid.
John Hand wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
A 20bil isk ship should be able to deal with any situation, even if its to a limited degree.
Yah... well maybe they aren't worth 20 billion. You're working the market backwards, my man... an EvE pilot can only deal with other EvE pilots. I blew up a faction fit Navy Raven on my own faction warfare team one time because I am a d-bag and he was only a month old and had a faction fit navy raven. He should have been able to deal with that... but he couldn't. Those are the most tasty tears in the world. Remember: there's always two sides to a conflict. One side has tears, the other great satisfaction.
Speaking of tears... this threadnaught is full of them. I've enjoyed them immensely... but the only people speaking here now are sitting in supercaps as I type. The rest of us are amused and excited about CCP finally making 0.0 the wild west again and we're pumped. (The "we" I speak of has mostly stopped following this thread... I'm here mostly for market considerations but I had to interject because I think those that aren't following this thread anymore should have some representation)
|
steveking
Rainbows in the Darkness
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 04:09:00 -
[2009] - Quote
come on people,its just a game!! |
Aase Nord
Vikinghall
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 05:21:00 -
[2010] - Quote
CCP is doing it now. Hitting older players with multiple accounts rigth in their gutts. I guess many are going to just let their super pilots die in their ships , use isk they needed to run their supers on plex for their alts.
|
|
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express Intrepid Crossing
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 06:32:00 -
[2011] - Quote
I again reiterate, with the changes on the Supercarriers, they need to be able to dock. Without the ability to rat or engage in anything other than anti capital/anti structure warfare which is such a limited role you need to allow them to dock so that the player can use the character in other ways, otherwise they'll just let those accounts lapse while not on campaign, costing CCP money. |
Nathanial Victor
Pelennor Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 06:33:00 -
[2012] - Quote
What? CCP finally fixing stuff? People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?
Excellent.
They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.
These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP. |
Aase Nord
Vikinghall
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 06:37:00 -
[2013] - Quote
Nathanial Victor wrote:What? CCP finally fixing stuff? People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?
Excellent.
They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.
These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP.
You sound like a goon.......
|
Nathanial Victor
Pelennor Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 07:16:00 -
[2014] - Quote
Aase Nord wrote:Nathanial Victor wrote:What? CCP finally fixing stuff? People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?
Excellent.
They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.
These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP. You sound like a goon.......
a goon?
You sound like an idiot.
Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha.
And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why? |
Aase Nord
Vikinghall
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 07:30:00 -
[2015] - Quote
Nathanial Victor wrote:Aase Nord wrote:Nathanial Victor wrote:What? CCP finally fixing stuff? People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?
Excellent.
They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.
These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP. You sound like a goon....... a goon? You sound like an idiot. Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha. And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why?
oops. Im sorry. I can see you got hurt there.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 07:35:00 -
[2016] - Quote
Nathanial Victor wrote:Aase Nord wrote:Nathanial Victor wrote:What? CCP finally fixing stuff? People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?
Excellent.
They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.
These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP. You sound like a goon....... a goon? You sound like an idiot. Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha. And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why?
People who bot themselves into supercaps are Very Important Internet People, and CCP should bend over and pander to them at every opportunity or they will cry.
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Ender Sai
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 08:29:00 -
[2017] - Quote
Supercaps are just horrible.
They need a buff and a nerf;
Nerf: they should not be all and end all of 0.0 warfare.
Buff: pilots should be able to own one without them hogging a toon. (ie, dock them, hide them in a secure subspace pocket/ wormhole/ kestrel cargo hold exiting jita 4-4/ whatever).
Additionally, if you think supercaps are the Eve end game you're playing eve wrong. I'm also judging the way you play eve. I'm also entitled to my opinion. It's also unfortunate that I'm sharing it. My grammar is also horrible. Mostly I don't care about supercaps but I'm glad that they're getting the nerfbat.
TL;DR: - |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 08:32:00 -
[2018] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Nathanial Victor wrote:Aase Nord wrote:Nathanial Victor wrote:What? CCP finally fixing stuff? People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?
Excellent.
They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.
These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP. You sound like a goon....... a goon? You sound like an idiot. Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha. And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why? People who bot themselves into supercaps are Very Important Internet People, and CCP should bend over and pander to them at every opportunity or they will cry.
A large alliance alliance member accusing others of botting , O.o.
With the changes scars will be able to kill BS ,yes they wil, but if the BS gang isnt a tard and doenst kill their fighters they deserve to die. |
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 08:33:00 -
[2019] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
There isnt anything wrong with the new logoff mechanics if you die because you logged off with aggression and didnt relog to deal with the aggression you deserve to die if someone finds you.Only bad thing with this is if your internet goes down that would be frustrating,but i wouldnt fly a super unless i could afford to lose it. it meeting halfway. IT's a very limited swiss army knife. Sure it would have all the tools but only 2 of the blades are metal, the rest are plastic. 25 light / medium / heavy / sentry / ewar drones. IF that seems to be too extreme limit it to a full fighter bay of 25 of fighters and FB and have a seperate drone bay that's 1250m-¦ for regular drones. That seems like a lot of drone bay but a full flight of 25 heavies is 625m-¦. Anyway, Im trying to work for a well balanced compromise here. Sure they will be versatile but not as much as they are now. As for the comment of a swiss army knife, yes it would be a swiss army knife still, except it would have 2 blades and the screwdriver, wine opener, scissors would all be made of plastic.
Obsidian cap killers shouldnt have the option to get away in a 1v1 situation from anything that can hold them.A titan is loosing that ability and the same should apply to a super.Just because something is expensive that doesnt mean it should be able to deal with anything that is a threat to it.If people use supers and titans they should need a support fleet to keep them safe from ships that can hold them. |
Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
295
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 08:50:00 -
[2020] - Quote
will trade my supers in for old school nano's |
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 09:12:00 -
[2021] - Quote
Dreads without siege mode are utterly useless, and will be even more after this change.
A complete revision is needed. Dreads are supposed to be the line combat ships, those you put forward to absorb fire away from your support/command capitals as well as dish out signifiant damage on their own, but they are made into space trebuchets!
They are DREADNOUGHTS. I didn't train for them so I could park myself around a POS, go in siege, press F1 and go read a book. I trained for them because I wanted to be part of cap battles like I do in subcap battles with a battleship.
Give them back their role, CCP, unnerf their normal mode. Make them do 2500 dps in normal and 5000 dps in siege mode, and nerf XL guns base tracking and sig res so that normal-mode won't hit any battleship, and siege mode will hit only unmoving things. That nerf would also deal with the titan tracking issue. |
Sangard
Firebrands
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 09:41:00 -
[2022] - Quote
fighters are cruiser size and they should be able to hit sub-caps. Otherwiese they are just useless.
Issue with fighters are there EHP. Bring them in line with an unfitted T1 cruiser. Create room for new/other tactics against super caps and do not nerf them that way, because Its a boring and uninspired way of balancing.
If supers are only good for sov shooting, which is boring anyway, it's not worth the money for most players. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 10:07:00 -
[2023] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:iulixxi wrote:Jazzmyn wrote:I mean, in real life for example GÇ£BismarckGÇ¥ didnGÇÖt have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels. Bad example buddy (Bismarck was a battleship not a Carrier - or super carrier for that matter, it was a faction BS ) ... you do realise that he was always in fleet with a HAC (Prinz Eugen) just to be heavily damaged by a Carrier (HMS Ark Royal) later the final blow was made by BS'es ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck Even better, the Bismark was completely unable to track and shoot down any of the Swordfish launched from HMS Ark Royal which torpedoed her rudder and sealed her fate. Goodness me, a large, powerful, expensive ship being unable to engage smaller attackers and hence becoming vulnerable to them! Just like supercaps in the forthcoming rebalance!
Then again, this could be put down to the skill and or luck of the swordfish pilots, as Bismark was equipped with anti-aircraft weapons. It's almost as if the provision of limited defenses against smaller attackers wasn't enough to escape the consequences of a concerted attack! Sort of like how any competent dictor pilot should be able to avoid being blown up by a Supercarrier...
You see, EVE online is literally the battle of the Atlantic because...
Sangard wrote: Issue with fighters are there EHP. Bring them in line with an unfitted T1 cruiser.
Fighter EHP is fine. The other day, a hostile carrier sitting on a station deployed fighters to shoot an anchorable bubble of mine 100km off the undock. I proceeded to kill three of his fighters in my battleship before he could recall them, while my mate in a cruiser picked off another. If a measly two ships can take out 40% of a carrier's offensive capabilities in the time it takes him to recall his fighters, I doubt fighters "need an ehp nerf."
Don't punish carrier pilots for peoples' general lack of competence. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 11:15:00 -
[2024] - Quote
Mecinia Lua wrote:I again reiterate, with the changes on the Supercarriers, they need to be able to dock. Without the ability to rat or engage in anything other than anti capital/anti structure warfare which is such a limited role you need to allow them to dock so that the player can use the character in other ways, otherwise they'll just let those accounts lapse while not on campaign, costing CCP money.
I'd like them being able to dock, under two conditions:
- Aggro timer to allow docking extended to 30-45 minutes for supercarriers, to avoid docking games.
- A nerf to their carrrying capacity. 1 SC trip is equivalent to 3 carriers trips. Campaign logistics is already too easy, it favor power blocks. |
Monster Dude
hirr Against ALL Authorities
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 11:32:00 -
[2025] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Monster Dude wrote: If you got your SC by claping hands and say - "give me SC" then of course not. If you got your SC by buying it on ISK made by boting - then of course not If you build your SC by doing everything for it - hauling, building parts, making isks on your own etc... all by yourself then YES you will have a problem. And this is why I'm saying that coming nerf will just favor very rich communities and make poor once weaker.
When you can make a few billion a week running 0.0 plexes, reaction farms, or doing mysterious things in wormholes, making something more expensive just adds a few extra days or weeks to the grinding period.
Awesome. Never made "few" billion a week.... Are you sure you are not confusing it with botting? Reactions and such is corp size things, on top of that not too many reactions can give such good profit. If you do wormholes you do not play the game at all.
I might be wrong here but "normal" active players life is split. Devote some time for making isk, devote some time for wasting them (PVP :))) ). An yes staying in this pattern there are few ways. Belts, Anoms (before nerfing those), Plexes, corp size things (I exclude for now). And here we come back to SC nerf. You can't use your SC for gaining isk. It is now changing that way that lose it even easier then before, but at same time abilities of the ship are reduced which turns out to a patch that gives benefit to very rich communities, making gap between of them and poorer once bigger. Let me guess who wants that... |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 12:44:00 -
[2026] - Quote
Monster Dude wrote: If you do wormholes you do not play the game at all.
Why is that?
The stupidity of that remark aside, one could have a wh alt for PvE and still play the k-space 0.0 part of the game. And in wh I could easily pull in several billion a week all on my own, using two accounts in cheap ships. That is, if I could be bothered wasting my time like that. Not being or wanting to be a supercap pilot, I don't need more than maybe 500m a month, so I do sleeper sites only once a month. When I do it, I do it in one long op, pulling in a billion ISK in 5-6 hours of work. |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 12:48:00 -
[2027] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
[/quote]
Listen to the guy. P.S. who ever thought of the idea of only allowing 25 mixed fighters & Fighter bombers should go an run into the same lamp post as gave them that stupid idea. Needs to have the extra drone bonus taken away so Supers have a natural drone number of 10 upto 15 & have enough room for 10fighters & 10 Fight bombers & 5spare either fighters/fighter bombers, giving a bonus to damage per level to make up for the loss of numbers,and give a slight boost to HP to fighters/FBs so they can't be cream crackers fast & have a little more survivabilty to make up for the loss of numbers. This option will reduce lagg also, so a win win situation. Or could go for enough room for 20 fighters & 20 fighter bombers and space for 5 spare fighters/fighter bombers. Prefer first option, but these are viable. What you sugessted CCP isn't and is LOLness of fail. |
angal 2003
Capital Maintenance
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 13:07:00 -
[2028] - Quote
Monster Dude wrote:Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Monster Dude wrote: If you got your SC by claping hands and say - "give me SC" then of course not. If you got your SC by buying it on ISK made by boting - then of course not If you build your SC by doing everything for it - hauling, building parts, making isks on your own etc... all by yourself then YES you will have a problem. And this is why I'm saying that coming nerf will just favor very rich communities and make poor once weaker.
When you can make a few billion a week running 0.0 plexes, reaction farms, or doing mysterious things in wormholes, making something more expensive just adds a few extra days or weeks to the grinding period. Awesome. Never made "few" billion a week.... Are you sure you are not confusing it with botting? Reactions and such is corp size things, on top of that not too many reactions can give such good profit. If you do wormholes you do not play the game at all. I might be wrong here but "normal" active players life is split. Devote some time for making isk, devote some time for wasting them (PVP :))) ). An yes staying in this pattern there are few ways. Belts, Anoms (before nerfing those), Plexes, corp size things (I exclude for now). And here we come back to SC nerf. You can't use your SC for gaining isk. It is now changing that way that lose it even easier then before, but at same time abilities of the ship are reduced which turns out to a patch that gives benefit to very rich communities, making gap between of them and poorer once bigger.Let me guess who wants that...
sounds like you need to try empire incursions you can make over a bil a day off them with limited risk. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 13:19:00 -
[2029] - Quote
Monster Dude wrote:
Awesome. Never made "few" billion a week.... Are you sure you are not confusing it with botting? Reactions and such is corp size things, on top of that not too many reactions can give such good profit. If you do wormholes you do not play the game at all.
Wormholes are a great addition to the game.
Seriously though, WH is how EVE should be. No local, no perfect intel, no perfect map so you can camp all of your entrances forever, limited fleet and ship sizes (no supers \o/); it's great.
There is actual risk, as you can never be completely sure you are not being scouted right now... LOOK OUT, a covops is getting warpins on you and your shinies RIGHT NOW. |
Floydd Heywood
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 13:33:00 -
[2030] - Quote
Yep, WH is the real thing for everyone who doesn't think that pvp gets better the larger the armies are and the less impact the individual pilot has. It has only one major drawback: Too few people, too few targets. The reason for this is that most 0.0 people, who should by rights like this environment, are too lazy and/or dumb to learn and understand the complexities of w-space with its constant need for scouting, scanning and intel gathering. I seriously wish for more smart people inhabiting more wormholes, so there is more pvp to be had. Because you know, when there is a real gang fight in w-space it's much better than normal 0.0 warfare. Only this is quite rare, most of the time it's just ganking ratters because that's all there is to find. |
|
Monster Dude
hirr Against ALL Authorities
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 13:34:00 -
[2031] - Quote
We are well driving off topic with this wormhole things. I'd like to stay focused on the topic. But in short yeah you may farm wormholes if u like PvE... But you can't do both Wormholes and daily PVP unless u doing it with different characters, which is ugly solution if you think about it.... Imagine you would be a person in that world. |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Initiative Mercenaries
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 15:40:00 -
[2032] - Quote
Yet again - there is entirely too much crying and trolling about the proposed nerf and not enough constructive criticism.
- Please Address the ability for titans to kill subcapitals with their guns
- Please Address why Dreads have to siege to do DPS and SC's and Titans do not. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 15:57:00 -
[2033] - Quote
Im supercarrier pilot and after patch im leave eve online because you learn skills a long time then spend 20b to buy and what now? NOTHING I think if you have drone bay the player must decide what type of drones you want to have in it not CCP or somebody else !! And what with fighers after patch supercarriers cant do anything to l cruisers especially heavydictors and theoretically cruisers gangs can destroy SC if it alone ?so why i spend 20billions ISK ?? THANK you CCP to destroy my interest to play eve online . |
Archetype 66
Pleasure and Pain Ares Protectiva
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 16:33:00 -
[2034] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:Im supercarrier pilot and after patch im leave eve online because you learn skills a long time then spend 20b to buy and what now? NOTHING I think if you have drone bay the player must decide what type of drones you want to have in it not CCP or somebody else !! And what with fighers after patch supercarriers cant do anything to l cruisers especially heavydictors and theoretically cruisers gangs can destroy SC if it alone ?so why i spend 20billions ISK ?? THANK you CCP to destroy my interest to play eve online .
I'm betting you're not an SC pilot...not even close to be.
|
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 16:49:00 -
[2035] - Quote
Archetype 66 wrote:The Dealmaker wrote:Im supercarrier pilot and after patch im leave eve online because you learn skills a long time then spend 20b to buy and what now? NOTHING I think if you have drone bay the player must decide what type of drones you want to have in it not CCP or somebody else !! And what with fighers after patch supercarriers cant do anything to l cruisers especially heavydictors and theoretically cruisers gangs can destroy SC if it alone ?so why i spend 20billions ISK ?? THANK you CCP to destroy my interest to play eve online . I'm betting you're not an SC pilot...not even close to be.
and Im betting too if you have 1 alt is your problem guy this topic about nerf and not about personal skills |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:19:00 -
[2036] - Quote
Monster Dude wrote:We are well driving off topic with this wormhole things. I'd like to stay focused on the topic. But in short yeah you may farm wormholes if u like PvE... But you can't do both Wormholes and daily PVP unless u doing it with different characters, which is ugly solution if you think about it.... Imagine you would be a person in that world.
I would talk to ADHC, AHARM, Aquila, my own alliance (less now than before in terms of fighting from home), and a ton of others. Often though, PvP is not happening at the same time, but you collapse the wormhole, look for PvP, if none available and if you are not bored enough to bash a pos, then you do PvE. To attack a specific target, you are right (unless, say, you bring your PvE ships with you and laugh at the enemy when they do not have the balls/blob to attack you running PvE in their home).
More on Topic:
The Dealmaker wrote:Im supercarrier pilot and after patch im leave eve online because you learn skills a long time then spend 20b to buy and what now? NOTHING I think if you have drone bay the player must decide what type of drones you want to have in it not CCP or somebody else !! And what with fighers after patch supercarriers cant do anything to l cruisers especially heavydictors and theoretically cruisers gangs can destroy SC if it alone ?so why i spend 20billions ISK ?? THANK you CCP to destroy my interest to play eve online .
You are not supposed to do anything about cruisers, remember?
EDIT: to clarify and bold the problem with your thought process: they should be able to if somehow you cannot get backup and proper support in time. You are not an anti-cruiser-fleet pilot, you are an anti-capital / anti-sov-structure pilot.
Why spend 20 billion? To **** capitals and only be vulnerable if they can get hictors/dictors on you.
Anyways, cya. o/ |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:24:00 -
[2037] - Quote
All that i hear is crying from super capital pilots goes something like this: O no you are taking away my bot i can no longer RMT "or" O no i can no longer warp to the gate DD and warp of "or" i no longer have I WIN button my alliance is going to fail now...
Shows how stupid and arrogant most super capital pilots are. They think just cuss they payed 20billion and had to train 3 months more for stupid Fighters 5 and Jump Cal 5 that they deserve a dominant ship that can either fly solo or in fleet. Wrong..
Super Carriers: Used for killing capitals and other super capitals - Meant to be used as a fleet support .. "read" supporting sub capital fleets. Meaning it doesn't do **** solo.
Titan: Used for 1 shooting the most crucial target on field and than providing DPS to counter opposing capitals and super capitals not wrecking sub capital ships that is just plain stupid. And to be used as a BOOSTER BONUS and LOGISTICAL PLATFORM. They were meant to be 1 peer fleet not 100. They cant and shouldn't be able to have any offensive capability against sub-capital ships they need fleet support all the time.
If you think that because you spent 3 months more training for 2 extra skills and spend 20B for the ship should give you a ship that can kill anything solo your ******* stupid and ******** and its you who is ruining this game for others not CCP.
ALSO WE WERE TOLD LONG AGO THAT SUPER CAPITALS WILL BE NERFED AND BALANCED ALL THE WAY BACK WHEN THEY NERFED TITANS DOOMSDAY FROM AOE TO FOCUS.
CCP SAID WE ARE LOOKING HOW TO FURTHER BALANCE SUPER CAPITALS AND IN 2 YEARS THEY HAVE BEEN OVER ABUSED AND NEERING THEM IS BALANCING THEM
YOU ALL KNEW THAT THEY WILL BE NERFED AND NERFED HARD.. YOU PURCHASED ONE KNOWING THIS. DONT CRY ABOUT IT NOW.
You should have thought about this when you and 150 of your super capital buddies were 2 chicken **** to fight a 10 man BS fleet in a equal size in sub capitals so you hot dropped them whit a supercapital blob.
Also:
- Titans guns tracking needs to be nerfed so they match Dread's guns in sige mode so they cant hit subcapitals
- Dreads guns should have enough tracking to hit supercapitals in sige mode
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:39:00 -
[2038] - Quote
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die.
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat will can not selfdestruck
LET SUPER CARRIERs DOCK |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:44:00 -
[2039] - Quote
personally believe that supercaps (MS's and titans) should always be immune to being bonused with positive ewar (remote tracking enhancers etc..) but keep their gun tracking as they are.
if titan pilots want to sacrifice cap regen for tracking increases to hit subcaps then fair enough. but they shouldnt be able to rely on subcaps to boost their tracking.
basically change the remote bonusing from other ships to non-aggressive (aka make titans have to rely on carrier or subcap remote cap transfers) if they want to fit full aggro midslots (tracking computers etc)
|
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:44:00 -
[2040] - Quote
GeeBee wrote:Yet again - there is entirely too much crying and trolling about the proposed nerf and not enough constructive criticism.
- Please Address the ability for titans to kill subcapitals with their guns
- Please Address why Dreads have to siege to do DPS and SC's and Titans do not.
Dreads having to siege and titans and supers not seems that they want them to not to have to commit to a fight.Titans are immobile for a very short time if they use the DD but its so short that seems nothing major at all.
|
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:46:00 -
[2041] - Quote
FHM wrote: Titan: Used for 1 shooting the most crucial target on field and than providing DPS to counter opposing capitals and super capitals not wrecking sub capital ships that is just plain stupid. And to be used as a BOOSTER BONUS and LOGISTICAL PLATFORM. They were meant to be 1 peer fleet not 100. They cant and shouldn't be able to have any offensive capability against sub-capital ships they need fleet support all the time.[/b]
[/list]
so lets get this one out their ccp made the titan class to be a massive dic k is space their words. their are not meant to be practical. remove the dd from hitting sub caps works and remove remote links will fix them to a degree. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1276
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:49:00 -
[2042] - Quote
When can caps and supers target PI networks!
WHEN! |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:49:00 -
[2043] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die.
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat will can not selfdestruck
LET SUPER CARRIERs DOCK
That is the single most stupid "St00pid" argument you can make. The nerfs they are considering are great and fix all the issues smaller alliances and alliances that cannot field 100 super capitals have. For Super Carriers to be able to use other than Fighters and Fighter Bombers is plain stupid because it does not fix the BLOB warfare.
SUPER CAPITALS SHOULD HAVE NO OFFENSIVE CAPABILITY AGAINST SUB-CAPITAL SHIPS PERIOD
Now they will serve their true role Super Carrier will be the anti-structure and anti-capital and anti-supercapital ship, Titan will be the main fleet command ship and fleet logistic ship.
Now a small alliance can make a push in to say Raiden. space and they have to meet them whit a subcapital fleet having super capital support only for bonuses and not as a offensive power against their sub capitals.
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:49:00 -
[2044] - Quote
Quote: Dreads having to siege and titans and supers not seems that they want them to not to have to commit to a fight.Titans are immobile for a very short time if they use the DD but its so short that seems nothing major at all.
titans can't move for 30 seconds after firing the DD but they cannot jump for 10 minutes or cloak.
also to the cap for titans i will say Ragnarok. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:50:00 -
[2045] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:FHM wrote: Titan: Used for 1 shooting the most crucial target on field and than providing DPS to counter opposing capitals and super capitals not wrecking sub capital ships that is just plain stupid. And to be used as a BOOSTER BONUS and LOGISTICAL PLATFORM. They were meant to be 1 peer fleet not 100. They cant and shouldn't be able to have any offensive capability against sub-capital ships they need fleet support all the time.[/b]
[/list]
so lets get this one out their ccp made the titan class to be a massive dic k is space their words. their are not meant to be practical. remove the dd from hitting sub caps works and remove remote links will fix them to a degree.
Exactly |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:51:00 -
[2046] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:When can caps and supers target PI networks!
WHEN! Iam guessing ... when DUST is out ^^ |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 17:55:00 -
[2047] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:
Dreads having to siege and titans and supers not seems that they want them to not to have to commit to a fight.Titans are immobile for a very short time if they use the DD but its so short that seems nothing major at all.
[/quote]
titans can't move for 30 seconds after firing the DD but they cannot jump for 10 minutes or cloak.
also to the cap for titans i will say Ragnarok.[/quote]
You are wining the field enemy has Dreads and Titans on field titans DD and start to run you just pin them down whit HICTORS easy as 1,2,3... Dreads are slow and not immune to warp scramble the frigates and stealth bombers will finish them..
It makes no sense for them to have Triage or Sige module... |
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:04:00 -
[2048] - Quote
Titans not moving for 30 seconds,no jumping or cloaking for 10 minutes isnt anything major for a titan pilot that jumps into a system and DD a lone carrier then warps around for a bit before jumps back out.This hasnt happen to me by the way i know someone that does it. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:08:00 -
[2049] - Quote
Goose Sokarad wrote:Titans not moving for 30 seconds,no jumping or cloaking for 10 minutes isnt anything major for a titan pilot that jumps into a system and DD a lone carrier then warps around for a bit before jumps back out.This hasnt happen to me by the way i know someone that does it. we all know someone that it happened too but the point being that titans have their set backs
to the idiot rambling about the suggestions i made carry on |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:14:00 -
[2050] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Titans not moving for 30 seconds,no jumping or cloaking for 10 minutes isnt anything major for a titan pilot that jumps into a system and DD a lone carrier then warps around for a bit before jumps back out.This hasnt happen to me by the way i know someone that does it. we all know someone that it happened too but the point being that titans have their set backs to the idiot rambling about the suggestions i made carry on
You suggestion makes not sense 500m3 is just enough for 20 Ogers T2... and we are back to Super Capitals being dominant on the field let your super carrier buddy unleash 20 Ogers against your max possible fited BS they will eat it like its nothing..
Making them pick between Fighters and Fighter Bombers is great. Either pick Fighters to use against bigger sub capital ships say large signature BS and structures or Fighter Bombers against Super Capitals and Capitals. |
|
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:15:00 -
[2051] - Quote
I dont consider the titan drawbacks that major is all im saying.Titans and supers will still be used as solo pwn mobiles but if easier to tackle is all good. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:17:00 -
[2052] - Quote
Goose Sokarad wrote:Titans not moving for 30 seconds,no jumping or cloaking for 10 minutes isnt anything major for a titan pilot that jumps into a system and DD a lone carrier then warps around for a bit before jumps back out.This hasnt happen to me by the way i know someone that does it.
Good luck on that. Nano Titan cant align and warp fast enough for a probe'er to catch him let alone a standard fit. It takes me 9s to scan down a titan at a safe to be able to warp to him. A titan that would after this patch do something like that is pretty much dead moments after. |
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:20:00 -
[2053] - Quote
We will see FHM. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:21:00 -
[2054] - Quote
FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Titans not moving for 30 seconds,no jumping or cloaking for 10 minutes isnt anything major for a titan pilot that jumps into a system and DD a lone carrier then warps around for a bit before jumps back out.This hasnt happen to me by the way i know someone that does it. we all know someone that it happened too but the point being that titans have their set backs to the idiot rambling about the suggestions i made carry on You suggestion makes not sense 500m3 is just enough for 20 Ogers T2... and we are back to Super Capitals being dominant on the field let your super carrier buddy unleash 20 Ogers against your max possible fited BS they will eat it like its nothing.. Making them pick between Fighters and Fighter Bombers is great. Either pick Fighters to use against bigger sub capital ships say large signature BS and structures or Fighter Bombers against Super Capitals and Capitals.
to think you have not trained smartbombs yet its a quick fix for them drones you think you have a issues with. May i suggest you sit down and take a load off ,call someone you may need to interact with more then a computer from time to time.
limiting a drone bay always the ship to Survive a attack from a lone hic or dic it makes sense to give them something if you plan on taking so much away from them.
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:22:00 -
[2055] - Quote
Goose Sokarad wrote:I dont consider the titan drawbacks that major is all im saying.Titans and supers will still be used as solo pwn mobiles but if easier to tackle is all good.
How exactly will they be used as a solo pwn mobile. Titan can no longer DD a subcapital to insta pop it, its guns wont 1 hit 1 kill a subcapital least hasnt happened to be always had a chance to warp off.
And super carriers will only be able to gank 1 BS and whit Fighters being nerfed as well that wont go as fast as it happens now.
These ships shouldn't do anything SOLO... and there for should not have any ability to defend them selves against subcapital ships.
Also to people that cry they will leave after this. Go ahead no one is stopping you. You represent 1% of EvE Online population i think that the 99% wont care if you stay or leave nor will CCP.
You knew what you were committing to when you trained for them and purchased them. And you knew that they are gonna get NERFED bad really bad to a point where they will finally serve their true role. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:22:00 -
[2056] - Quote
Deleted - Double post - Bug |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:27:00 -
[2057] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Titans not moving for 30 seconds,no jumping or cloaking for 10 minutes isnt anything major for a titan pilot that jumps into a system and DD a lone carrier then warps around for a bit before jumps back out.This hasnt happen to me by the way i know someone that does it. we all know someone that it happened too but the point being that titans have their set backs to the idiot rambling about the suggestions i made carry on You suggestion makes not sense 500m3 is just enough for 20 Ogers T2... and we are back to Super Capitals being dominant on the field let your super carrier buddy unleash 20 Ogers against your max possible fited BS they will eat it like its nothing.. Making them pick between Fighters and Fighter Bombers is great. Either pick Fighters to use against bigger sub capital ships say large signature BS and structures or Fighter Bombers against Super Capitals and Capitals. to think you have not trained smartbombs yet its a quick fix for them drones you think you have a issues with. May i suggest you sit down and take a load off ,call someone you may need to interact with more then a computer from time to time. limiting a drone bay always the ship to Survive a attack from a lone hic or dic it makes sense to give them something if you plan on taking so much away from them.
You are so st00ping..you are not seeing the point.
These ships have their roles and they do no include being sub-capital ship killers. They rely of being defended by subcapitals AT ALL TIME. If you are caught by a Hictor it means you were trying to do stupid SOLO s h i t.. in a ship that is not meant for that so you deserve to DIE.
Super Capitals should have no defense against sub capital ships absolute no defense. Does not make sense. When they take all that away from them they will simply make them what they are meant to be.
A FLEET SUPPORT SHIP and ANTI CAPITAL SHIP and NOTHING MORE.
Also SMARTBOMBS are not the proper solution since these benemoths could easily repair their drones or just hold 1000s of them in corp hangar arrays when you kill the fielded ones they just move new ones in drone bay and launch them.. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:28:00 -
[2058] - Quote
FHM wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:I dont consider the titan drawbacks that major is all im saying.Titans and supers will still be used as solo pwn mobiles but if easier to tackle is all good. How exactly will they be used as a solo pwn mobile. Titan can no longer DD a subcapital to insta pop it, its guns wont 1 hit 1 kill a subcapital least hasnt happened to be always had a chance to warp off. And super carriers will only be able to gank 1 BS and whit Fighters being nerfed as well that wont go as fast as it happens now. These ships shouldn't do anything SOLO... and there for should not have any ability to defend them selves against subcapital ships. Also to people that cry they will leave after this. Go ahead no one is stopping you. You represent 1% of EvE Online population i think that the 99% wont care if you stay or leave nor will CCP.
You knew what you were committing to when you trained for them and purchased them. And you knew that they are gonna get NERFED bad really bad to a point where they will finally serve their true role.
chill
when you have time take a look at this guy he is a legend xMartok you know something nothing is going to change for him after this, but you have a point you need a support team in place for xMartok its a cyno in and a cyno out all caps need them. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:31:00 -
[2059] - Quote
Also SMARTBOMBS are not the proper solution since these benemoths could easily repair their drones or just hold 1000s of them in corp hangar arrays when you kill the fielded ones they just move new ones in drone bay and launch them.. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:35:00 -
[2060] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:FHM wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:I dont consider the titan drawbacks that major is all im saying.Titans and supers will still be used as solo pwn mobiles but if easier to tackle is all good. How exactly will they be used as a solo pwn mobile. Titan can no longer DD a subcapital to insta pop it, its guns wont 1 hit 1 kill a subcapital least hasnt happened to be always had a chance to warp off. And super carriers will only be able to gank 1 BS and whit Fighters being nerfed as well that wont go as fast as it happens now. These ships shouldn't do anything SOLO... and there for should not have any ability to defend them selves against subcapital ships. Also to people that cry they will leave after this. Go ahead no one is stopping you. You represent 1% of EvE Online population i think that the 99% wont care if you stay or leave nor will CCP.
You knew what you were committing to when you trained for them and purchased them. And you knew that they are gonna get NERFED bad really bad to a point where they will finally serve their true role. chill when you have time take a look at this guy he is a legend xMartok you know something nothing is going to change for him after this, but you have a point you need a support team in place for xMartok its a cyno in and a cyno out all caps need them.
He's not alone that does that, he can do that now just wait until nerfs come in when that ship wont be able to hit sub capitals. GL to him then. |
|
Sol Oman
Ship Trading Company United Pod Service
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:36:00 -
[2061] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:zero2espect wrote:
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
+1
read this, CCP!!
|
Jade Greenfire
KISIN Enterprises
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:38:00 -
[2062] - Quote
The problem with Supers & Titans is they were introduced into the game without ever being properly balanced, and now that CCP is trying to do something, it will not please those that say the nerfs are too hard and it wont please those that say they have not gone far enough. Personally, I dont see how these changes are going to do anything, when it still means that due to the numbers of them now in the game, that neither Corps or Alliances, outside of the 2 major bloc's can stand against 100+ Supers or 50+ Titans. Escpecially when you consider that there is no changes to a titans ability to track sub caps with their guns, to use tracking computers or target painters. I think that unless CCP addresses the following: *Alliance Mechanics, *Sov Mechanics * Rolls back the disasterously badly thought out 0.0 anom nerf & * Low Sec within the the upcomming expansion, then its still a case of too lttle, too late. Yes its nice they will be bring out new Assault ships, but lets face it, that should have happened 2 years ago, rather than killing us with useless eye candy. I get the clear impression again that CCP is not listening to the player base yet again & will implement changes that will do nothing to help stop the flat lining of EvE. In fact it may actual speed up its flat lining, given what new games are comming out & how little reason there is to get people back to EvE or for people to want to continue to play EvE. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:39:00 -
[2063] - Quote
thread is going off track just a bit. lets start it up with this suggestion
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
if the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET SUPER CARRIERS DOCK |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:42:00 -
[2064] - Quote
Sol Oman wrote:Phunnestyle wrote:zero2espect wrote:
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
+1 read this, CCP!!
Everything you proposed solves nothing.. They are useless changes that would make no difference at all. Only solution is to make SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS..
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:44:00 -
[2065] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:thread is going off track just a bit. lets start it up with this suggestion
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
if the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET SUPER CARRIERS DOCK
Again s00pid argument. Also letting them dock makes no sense. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:47:00 -
[2066] - Quote
If the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET SUPER CARRIERS DOCK |
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:48:00 -
[2067] - Quote
I was wrong to say solo pwn mobiles FHM was thinking something else. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:54:00 -
[2068] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:If the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET SUPER CARRIERS DOCK
Thank god you arent a dev this would be one ****** game. They are BALANCING these ships to a point that is needed.
Should Super Carriers be allowed to dock here is the way to do it proper. Since this is giving them a unbelivable advantage the process should be the following.
Only 4 SC's can dock to a station and they dock in a way they are visible outside of station but not targetable. If station is put in to a reinforced mode the ship can no longer be undocked and after stations shield reinforcement is down you can destroy the docked super carrier.
Only way to make it fare if allowing them to dock.
And again we are back to point where stupid people think just cuss they trained 3 months more just in one direction and paid 20bil for a ship they deserve a ultimate solo and fleet ship that cannot be killed and can kill anything there is.
Stupid idots... |
Sol Oman
Ship Trading Company United Pod Service
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:57:00 -
[2069] - Quote
FHM wrote: Everything you proposed solves nothing.. They are useless changes that would make no difference at all. Only solution is to make SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS..
Solution for what? to make SC completely useless?? Strong the hate in you is... |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 18:58:00 -
[2070] - Quote
this thread has a large mix of ideas from many stand points i hope ccp have read most of this mammoth thread and come up with some new ideas on the subject of capital rebalance.
all the changes are subject to change which is i hope noted by all. |
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:07:00 -
[2071] - Quote
with the nano titans its still possible to fit out anyone of them to warp in under 10 seconds their a trick to it. also both shield supers are able to have full tanks (shield tanks tho) and a nano fits in a system like x-7 its more then possible to warp from ss to ss without being probed out with max skills.
|
XPistolX
Muppet Factory 0ccupational Hazzard
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:08:00 -
[2072] - Quote
FHM wrote: Stupid idots...
u mad bro?
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:12:00 -
[2073] - Quote
Sol Oman wrote:FHM wrote: Everything you proposed solves nothing.. They are useless changes that would make no difference at all. Only solution is to make SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS..
Solution for what? to make SC completely useless?? Strong the hate in you is...
Yes exactly that SUPER CAPITALS need to be USELESS against SUB CAPITALS. You souldn't be able to kill a sub capital ship whit a super capital.
If you want to kill a subcapital ship whit a supercapital ship have subcapital support to do it for you. Its how it's so-pose to be. Any other changes short of making SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS are stupid and senseless since it gives SUPER CAPITALS more roles then what they are meant to be.
If that is balanced to you then i propose the following changes as well:
- BS Buff: 10000m3 cargohold, 500m3 drone bay, 20 weapons slots, 500ms base speed, 100k base EHP - BC Buff: 500m3 cargo, 250m3 drone bay, immunity to fighters, 500km web and scram range, 1km base speed - HIC Buff: Immunity against EWAR, Immunity against fighters, 500k base EMP, 4 EXTRA LARGE TURRET slots - Logie Buff: Immunity to neuting, 1000km repair range, Infinite cap and cpu, 900% boost in repair and cap transfer amount
Things like that probably make sense to you. Also i want my machariel to be buffed: - 10km base speed - 5mil EHP - All resists above 90% as base - 500m3 drone bay - 1.9 tracking - Immunity to ewar
It did cost me 8bil to pimp fit so it should be the dominant thing on field on its level i should be able to go against 20 T1 BS and kill them all.
THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING CHANGES LIKE TAHT |
XPistolX
Muppet Factory 0ccupational Hazzard
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:15:00 -
[2074] - Quote
OMG shut up dude... |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:18:00 -
[2075] - Quote
FHM wrote:Sol Oman wrote:FHM wrote: Everything you proposed solves nothing.. They are useless changes that would make no difference at all. Only solution is to make SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS..
Solution for what? to make SC completely useless?? Strong the hate in you is... Yes exactly that SUPER CAPITALS need to be USELESS against SUB CAPITALS. You souldn't be able to kill a sub capital ship whit a super capital. If you want to kill a subcapital ship whit a supercapital ship have subcapital support to do it for you. Its how it's so-pose to be. Any other changes short of making SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS are stupid and senseless since it gives SUPER CAPITALS more roles then what they are meant to be. If that is balanced to you then i propose the following changes as well: - BS Buff: 10000m3 cargohold, 500m3 drone bay, 20 weapons slots, 500ms base speed, 100k base EHP - BC Buff: 500m3 cargo, 250m3 drone bay, immunity to fighters, 500km web and scram range, 1km base speed - HIC Buff: Immunity against EWAR, Immunity against fighters, 500k base EMP, 4 EXTRA LARGE TURRET slots - Logie Buff: Immunity to neuting, 1000km repair range, Infinite cap and cpu, 900% boost in repair and cap transfer amount Things like that probably make sense to you. Also i want my machariel to be buffed: - 10km base speed - 5mil EHP - All resists above 90% as base - 500m3 drone bay - 1.9 tracking - Immunity to ewar It did cost me 8bil to pimp fit so it should be the dominant thing on field on its level i should be able to go against 20 T1 BS and kill them all. THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING CHANGES LIKE TAHT
was it made in a pos and can you only make this pimp mach in a pos with sov upgrades in system and do your mighty ship take 1 to 2 months to build if it is yes then lets give it the ability |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:23:00 -
[2076] - Quote
XPistolX wrote:FHM wrote: Stupid idots...
u mad bro?
Not really as i am personally in market for an Aeon my self. But these ships need to serve their true roles and not be a solution to every fight. They should be totally useless against sub capitals. That's why i have a corporation and an alliance for me to help them and for them to help me. Mutual defense they keep other sub capitals off me while i grind the enemy super capitals we all fight on our level makes no sense that 100 of us in a 1000 man alliance put 100 supers on the field and kill 1000 sub capitals ships in few min and we are done.
That is exactly what is happening now. I want fights that include all my corp and alliance mates. I want fleet fights where i try to get enemy triage carriers to brake while my sub capital buddies keep me safe from any hictors or sub capital threats.
I have no interest in ratting in my super carrier. I am in subcapital making isk for it before i jump in to it i will make sure its fitted properly whit END FIT on it and that i have a slave clone whit at a clone upgraded to at least 30% more than i need.
Once in the ship i am bound to it and the help of my corpmates. I have no intention to rat in it since i am bound to this fully properly fitted ship i already have all that i need.
From the day i first **** in to an Aeon till the day i loose it i want to be fighting whit it not ratting or making stupid videos. I want to be rdy at any time should my alliance roaming gang find a carrier or two doing sanctums or sleeping on the station undock i want to be rdy to jump to them help them and leave the field knowing i had them to defend me.
This would also reduce the number of re tar ded, stupid and arrogant super capital pliots in corporations. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:27:00 -
[2077] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:FHM wrote:Sol Oman wrote:FHM wrote: Everything you proposed solves nothing.. They are useless changes that would make no difference at all. Only solution is to make SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS..
Solution for what? to make SC completely useless?? Strong the hate in you is... Yes exactly that SUPER CAPITALS need to be USELESS against SUB CAPITALS. You souldn't be able to kill a sub capital ship whit a super capital. If you want to kill a subcapital ship whit a supercapital ship have subcapital support to do it for you. Its how it's so-pose to be. Any other changes short of making SUPER CAPITALS useless against SUB CAPITALS are stupid and senseless since it gives SUPER CAPITALS more roles then what they are meant to be. If that is balanced to you then i propose the following changes as well: - BS Buff: 10000m3 cargohold, 500m3 drone bay, 20 weapons slots, 500ms base speed, 100k base EHP - BC Buff: 500m3 cargo, 250m3 drone bay, immunity to fighters, 500km web and scram range, 1km base speed - HIC Buff: Immunity against EWAR, Immunity against fighters, 500k base EMP, 4 EXTRA LARGE TURRET slots - Logie Buff: Immunity to neuting, 1000km repair range, Infinite cap and cpu, 900% boost in repair and cap transfer amount Things like that probably make sense to you. Also i want my machariel to be buffed: - 10km base speed - 5mil EHP - All resists above 90% as base - 500m3 drone bay - 1.9 tracking - Immunity to ewar It did cost me 8bil to pimp fit so it should be the dominant thing on field on its level i should be able to go against 20 T1 BS and kill them all. THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING CHANGES LIKE TAHT was it made in a pos and can you only make this pimp mach in a pos with sov upgrades in system and do your mighty ship take 1 to 2 months to build if it is yes then lets give it the ability
Was build in a pos in sov space and was bashed multiple times and was needed to be defended it took time to build and spent 8bil to fit. Yes it deserves those buffs. I payed 8 bil for it my enemy payed 150mil for their geddons i want to kill them all 1v20. After all i did pay 8bil for it.
Just cuss you invested time in it and few more ISK than others should not give you a full on advantage against everything there is.
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:31:00 -
[2078] - Quote
kill 1000 sub capitals ships in few min if this was the case then test and goons will be a non factor in sov holding 0.0.
you are having a wet dreaming if you think this is possible with 100 super caps in few minutes |
vurdosek
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:35:00 -
[2079] - Quote
wow i haven't seen a dumber statement then saying because you spent time and more money in a ship it shouldn't be useful against other ships. sorry to use an analogy from another game, but im going to have too. since there are is no standard raiding in this game or normal ways of leveling up, spending time and isk in this game is relatively the same as raiding and leveling to upgrade your character. balancing an overpowered ship is one thing, outright making it useless is a moron move. if a supercap couldn't destroy a subcap what's the point of having them in a fleet? to shoot at structures in a system? it should take alot of subcaps to kill a supercap, the problem is finding the right balance of numbers needed to do so. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:35:00 -
[2080] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:kill 1000 sub capitals ships in few min if this was the case then test and goons will be a non factor in sov holding 0.0.
you are having a wet dreaming if you think this is possible with 100 super caps in few minutes
few min can mean 3 ore more... so 3 or 50 or 500.. anyways. If you bring 100 super carriers to a field against 1000 subcapitals whats gonna happen is 900 of subcapital ships will have their game client crash it will take you only few min to mop up the rest of them... Super capitals wont have their client crash meaning they will be there dealing full on DPS on empty ships.
If you find this fun you are stupid.
Good luck.. |
|
XXeerroo
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:41:00 -
[2081] - Quote
titans tracking will still be ******** high + ecm-burst on moms -> lol not much change on large scale -.- |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:41:00 -
[2082] - Quote
vurdosek wrote:wow i haven't seen a dumber statement then saying because you spent time and more money in a ship it shouldn't be useful against other ships. sorry to use an analogy from another game, but im going to have too. since there are is no standard raiding in this game or normal ways of leveling up, spending time and isk in this game is relatively the same as raiding and leveling to upgrade your character. balancing on overpowered ship is one thing, outright making it useless is a ****** move. if a supercap couldn't destroy a subcap what's the point of having them in a fleet? to shoot a structures in a system? it should take alot of subcaps to kill a supercap, the problem is finding the right balance of numbers needed to do so.
Again you forget these ships are 1st meant to be extra rare. Second they serve their role as killing enemy carriers that may be used as DPS ships or Triage Logistic carriers and in the end killing opponents super capital ships that may appear on field to assist their own sub capital fleet.
If you want to let super capitals have offensive ability against subcapital ships then they need to do reduced damage to them, they need to take 5min to lock these ships.
Also this is not WoW where everything is unbalanced. These ships need to be balanced and need their own role and that is not killing sub capital ships.
Titans were created to move big fleets from A to B the fact they have a DD and guns is just a small bonus to help and take out the most crucial capital ship opponent fielded.
Super Carriers were created to support friendly Titans while being there to help sub capital ship kill a Titan not help a sub capital fleet kill another sub capital fleet. Thats just plain stupid. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:43:00 -
[2083] - Quote
XXeerroo wrote:titans tracking will still be ******** high + ecm-burst on moms -> lol not much change on large scale -.-
Think they are gonna make it so you cannot boost them from external ships if youll want tracking you will have to sacrifice cap or tank. |
Peregrine
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:44:00 -
[2084] - Quote
My Suggestions:
1) 22.5m in drone skills + another 20M in SC specific skills to not be able to use drones on my MS? If you take drones away from SC's then give back drone skills if the player wants to have them returned. Done through the petition process.
2) To get some real feedback from players who are experienced in the use of SC's open a thread that only Titan and SC pilots can post in. Verified through API. All that is happening in this thread is little testies and goons bleating against SC's because the chief goon Mitiani has told them too.
3) SC's and Titans were brought into the game because BS and carriers were too powerfull. Every time you bring a new ship class in the same thing happens. Noobs whine and complain that it isn't fair etc etc etc. Visa vis the intrduction of the HIC. Well if titans and SC's are too powerfull then bring in something designed to kill them. A death Star if you will. Price it at like 250B to build. Make it so 10 people have to be skilled and online to use it. And give it a death star type weapon. Every 10m it can pop a SC or a titan etc etc. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:48:00 -
[2085] - Quote
thread is going off track again. lets start it up with my suggestions.
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET advanced carriers DOCK
FHM take a pill see a shrink have a **** do something but stop posting such fail ideas on normal eve citizens |
vurdosek
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:51:00 -
[2086] - Quote
FHM wrote:vurdosek wrote:wow i haven't seen a dumber statement then saying because you spent time and more money in a ship it shouldn't be useful against other ships. sorry to use an analogy from another game, but im going to have too. since there are is no standard raiding in this game or normal ways of leveling up, spending time and isk in this game is relatively the same as raiding and leveling to upgrade your character. balancing on overpowered ship is one thing, outright making it useless is a ****** move. if a supercap couldn't destroy a subcap what's the point of having them in a fleet? to shoot a structures in a system? it should take alot of subcaps to kill a supercap, the problem is finding the right balance of numbers needed to do so. Again you forget these ships are 1st meant to be extra rare. Second they serve their role as killing enemy carriers that may be used as DPS ships or Triage Logistic carriers and in the end killing opponents super capital ships that may appear on field to assist their own sub capital fleet. If you want to let super capitals have offensive ability against subcapital ships then they need to do reduced damage to them, they need to take 5min to lock these ships. Also this is not WoW where everything is unbalanced. These ships need to be balanced and need their own role and that is not killing sub capital ships. Titans were created to move big fleets from A to B the fact they have a DD and guns is just a small bonus to help and take out the most crucial capital ship opponent fielded.
Super Carriers were created to support friendly Titans while being there to help sub capital ship kill a Titan not help a sub capital fleet kill another sub capital fleet. Thats just plain stupid.
so supercarriers were made to protect a super awesome cyno generating ship that has no purpose in this game other than to jump fleets large distances. so why not just get rid of both of them and make a subcap that jumps fleets large distances so you don't have the imbalances of overpowered ships? and give all people that trained for those titan/supercarrier skills their sp back. i just solved the problem ur welcome. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:53:00 -
[2087] - Quote
Peregrine wrote:My Suggestions:
1) 22.5m in drone skills + another 20M in SC specific skills to not be able to use drones on my MS? If you take drones away from SC's then give back drone skills if the player wants to have them returned. Done through the petition process.
2) To get some real feedback from players who are experienced in the use of SC's open a thread that only Titan and SC pilots can post in. Verified through API. All that is happening in this thread is little testies and goons bleating against SC's because the chief goon Mitiani has told them too.
3) SC's and Titans were brought into the game because BS and carriers were too powerfull. Every time you bring a new ship class in the same thing happens. Noobs whine and complain that it isn't fair etc etc etc. Visa vis the intrduction of the HIC. Well if titans and SC's are too powerfull then bring in something designed to kill them. A death Star if you will. Price it at like 250B to build. Make it so 10 people have to be skilled and online to use it. And give it a death star type weapon. Every 10m it can pop a SC or a titan etc etc.
1) FFS No. You know that everything is subject to change you knew this prior to training for that ship and buying it. Those skills still apply to people in carriers so you are loosing nothing. So all the people that spent months training for fully T2 Hybrid gunnery to have all Gunnnery skills on lvl 5 and then noticed that Hybrid turrets suck should have their skills reimbursed as well ?
2) **** no makes no sense. If anything they should make a thread where subcapital pilots decided the proper balance for super capital ships. All of you are only crying that your I WIN button is going away and that your alliances are going to fail now since they have **** experience in fielding subcapital ships. Your cry is really pathetic.
3) Thats the most stupid thing to say. BS and carriers were overpowered because of the market to income ratio back then. And Titans and Super carriers were not made to counter BS...
Your arguments are plain stupid. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 19:57:00 -
[2088] - Quote
ask ccp why titans where added to the game their is fenfest vid from when they where shown and added about their main use in eve to be a flying epeen for us all to enjoy.
FHM YOU MAD BRO |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:00:00 -
[2089] - Quote
vurdosek wrote:FHM wrote:vurdosek wrote:wow i haven't seen a dumber statement then saying because you spent time and more money in a ship it shouldn't be useful against other ships. sorry to use an analogy from another game, but im going to have too. since there are is no standard raiding in this game or normal ways of leveling up, spending time and isk in this game is relatively the same as raiding and leveling to upgrade your character. balancing on overpowered ship is one thing, outright making it useless is a ****** move. if a supercap couldn't destroy a subcap what's the point of having them in a fleet? to shoot a structures in a system? it should take alot of subcaps to kill a supercap, the problem is finding the right balance of numbers needed to do so. Again you forget these ships are 1st meant to be extra rare. Second they serve their role as killing enemy carriers that may be used as DPS ships or Triage Logistic carriers and in the end killing opponents super capital ships that may appear on field to assist their own sub capital fleet. If you want to let super capitals have offensive ability against subcapital ships then they need to do reduced damage to them, they need to take 5min to lock these ships. Also this is not WoW where everything is unbalanced. These ships need to be balanced and need their own role and that is not killing sub capital ships. Titans were created to move big fleets from A to B the fact they have a DD and guns is just a small bonus to help and take out the most crucial capital ship opponent fielded.
Super Carriers were created to support friendly Titans while being there to help sub capital ship kill a Titan not help a sub capital fleet kill another sub capital fleet. Thats just plain stupid. so supercarriers were made to protect a super awesome cyno generating ship that has no purpose in this game other than to jump fleets large distances. so why not just get rid of both of them and make a subcap that jumps fleets large distances so you don't have the imbalances of overpowered ships? and give all people that trained for those titan/supercarrier skills their sp back. i just solved the problem ur welcome.
Again stupid argument from a person who now sees that SC is a stupid investment on a "personal" level. Titan is meant to be the "ultimate fleet command ship" and supper carrier the "ultimate fleet support ship" as stated these were their roles:
Quote:Titans were created to move big fleets from A to B the fact they have a DD and guns is just a small bonus to help and take out the most crucial capital ship opponent fielded.
Super Carriers were created to support friendly Titans while being there to help sub capital ship kill a Titan not help a sub capital fleet kill another sub capital fleet. Thats just plain stupid.
No meant to be subcapital killers. Titan was created because we needed a command ship that can move our fleet when we need to go 50 jumps away. Super Carrier is there to defend us against carriers and defend our Titan or help our sub capital fleet kill another Titan or Super Capital ship.
END OF STORY... Super Capitals need to be useless against Sub Capitals
Now even more when most alliances can reimburse a super capital loss the same day or when they can say well if SC's get nerfed bad we will just put all our pliots in Titans. We need to cut the number of Super Capitals badly to a point where they are still something really amazing to have and bee seen. And to a point where killing one is humiliating for entire alliance that lost it not just an everyday event that has no effect at all. |
Peregrine
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:01:00 -
[2090] - Quote
FHM wrote:Peregrine wrote:My Suggestions:
1) 22.5m in drone skills + another 20M in SC specific skills to not be able to use drones on my MS? If you take drones away from SC's then give back drone skills if the player wants to have them returned. Done through the petition process.
2) To get some real feedback from players who are experienced in the use of SC's open a thread that only Titan and SC pilots can post in. Verified through API. All that is happening in this thread is little testies and goons bleating against SC's because the chief goon Mitiani has told them too.
3) SC's and Titans were brought into the game because BS and carriers were too powerfull. Every time you bring a new ship class in the same thing happens. Noobs whine and complain that it isn't fair etc etc etc. Visa vis the intrduction of the HIC. Well if titans and SC's are too powerfull then bring in something designed to kill them. A death Star if you will. Price it at like 250B to build. Make it so 10 people have to be skilled and online to use it. And give it a death star type weapon. Every 10m it can pop a SC or a titan etc etc. 1) FFS No. You know that everything is subject to change you knew this prior to training for that ship and buying it. Those skills still apply to people in carriers so you are loosing nothing. So all the people that spent months training for fully T2 Hybrid gunnery to have all Gunnnery skills on lvl 5 and then noticed that Hybrid turrets suck should have their skills reimbursed as well ? 2) **** no makes no sense. If anything they should make a thread where subcapital pilots decided the proper balance for super capital ships. All of you are only crying that your I WIN button is going away and that your alliances are going to fail now since they have **** experience in fielding subcapital ships. Your cry is really pathetic. 3) Thats the most stupid thing to say. BS and carriers were overpowered because of the market to income ratio back then. And Titans and Super carriers were not made to counter BS... Your arguments are plain stupid.
1) No, I did not know before I spent years triaining skills that they would suddenly be obsolete on the ship I trained them to be usefull on. perrhaps you knew that this was coming but I for one have never had the advantage of clarivoyance. Also if they were to remove Hybrids from the game then you should be able to have your hybrid sp's returned. In essence they are removing drones from my game.
2) This is not a routine ship nerf. The expressions of people like you are not required. You know less then sweet f-all, so there should be a thread that filters the garbage you spew from what could be constructive disscussion.
3) And in fact yes titans were made because BS and other ships were too powerfull. That was the origin of the AOE weapon. But guess what.... Goons had that nerfed because they couldn't beat it. Now goons are having all SC's and titans nerfed because, sticking to a common theme, they cannot beat it.
As for my arguements being stupid. meh your opinion is worthless to me. But I admit that stupid agruements are your speciality.
BTW I agree with mmost of the proposed nerfs. I have issues with dreads not getting enough of a buff. and the DD' being totally removed. It should have a downsliding scale of effectiveness depending on the target. But I am dead against the removal of the drone bays. BTW logoffski timer nerf is great. :) |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:02:00 -
[2091] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:ask ccp why titans where added to the game their is fenfest vid from when they where shown and added about their main use in eve to be a flying epeen for us all to enjoy.
FHM YOU MAD BRO
Exactly a non cost effective big D I C K. ...useless for anything other than moving an alliance fleet from A to B. Thats why they were so-pose to be rare.
I really dont care they stated their final decision on nerfs because voice of 99% of game population is stronger than 1%. In the end i gain nothing either way. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:04:00 -
[2092] - Quote
well ..For SC we must talk in two aspects PVP and PVE . in PVE SC bought people who can earn money who rent a systems ratting and want to feel safely especially with cynosural jammer why not? Citizen players is also big community and they spent their time to earn for buy SC and after this SC will be useless. PVP players also different somebody will buy for solo pvp another for alliances. i disagree that SC will unable to destroy subcups . |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:13:00 -
[2093] - Quote
Peregrine wrote:FHM wrote:Peregrine wrote:My Suggestions:
1) 22.5m in drone skills + another 20M in SC specific skills to not be able to use drones on my MS? If you take drones away from SC's then give back drone skills if the player wants to have them returned. Done through the petition process.
2) To get some real feedback from players who are experienced in the use of SC's open a thread that only Titan and SC pilots can post in. Verified through API. All that is happening in this thread is little testies and goons bleating against SC's because the chief goon Mitiani has told them too.
3) SC's and Titans were brought into the game because BS and carriers were too powerfull. Every time you bring a new ship class in the same thing happens. Noobs whine and complain that it isn't fair etc etc etc. Visa vis the intrduction of the HIC. Well if titans and SC's are too powerfull then bring in something designed to kill them. A death Star if you will. Price it at like 250B to build. Make it so 10 people have to be skilled and online to use it. And give it a death star type weapon. Every 10m it can pop a SC or a titan etc etc. 1) FFS No. You know that everything is subject to change you knew this prior to training for that ship and buying it. Those skills still apply to people in carriers so you are loosing nothing. So all the people that spent months training for fully T2 Hybrid gunnery to have all Gunnnery skills on lvl 5 and then noticed that Hybrid turrets suck should have their skills reimbursed as well ? 2) **** no makes no sense. If anything they should make a thread where subcapital pilots decided the proper balance for super capital ships. All of you are only crying that your I WIN button is going away and that your alliances are going to fail now since they have **** experience in fielding subcapital ships. Your cry is really pathetic. 3) Thats the most stupid thing to say. BS and carriers were overpowered because of the market to income ratio back then. And Titans and Super carriers were not made to counter BS... Your arguments are plain stupid. 1) No, I did not know before I spent years triaining skills that they would suddenly be obsolete on the ship I trained them to be usefull on. perrhaps you knew that this was coming but I for one have never had the advantage of clarivoyance. Also if they were to remove Hybrids from the game then you should be able to have your hybrid sp's returned. In essence they are removing drones from my game. 2) This is not a routine ship nerf. The expressions of people like you are not required. You know less then sweet f-all, so there should be a thread that filters the garbage you spew from what could be constructive disscussion. 3) And in fact yes titans were made because BS and other ships were too powerfull. That was the origin of the AOE weapon. But guess what.... Goons had that nerfed because they couldn't beat it. Now goons are having all SC's and titans nerfed because, sticking to a common theme, they cannot beat it. As for my arguements being stupid. meh your opinion is worthless to me. But I admit that stupid agruements are your speciality.
1) Not really you can still use your drones in a carrier and all other ships having maxed out skills is a big bonus. In addition it did not take you years to train for one. Ship requirement is the same as for carrier pilot you only needed 55 days training more for Fighters 5. Support skills do not count in. Since they apply to more than 1 ship. So in essence you are loosing nothing in skill time if you decided to max out support skills was your investment live whit it.
I spent same amount you spent for support skills JDC5 etc.. training for all strategic cruisers, logistic, battleships, blackops and marauders etc. AND we all KNOW that EVERYTHING IN GAME is SUBJECT TO CHANGE you do everything in game accepting that FACT.
2) Makes no sense because people like you are not interested in balancing the ships but buffing them even more due to your ignorance and arrogance and stupidity. 99% of game population disagrees whit your proposal. CCP said that changes are final except for the dread so cry all you want your SOLO pew pew and SUPER BLOB is going away. You will have to prove yourself on sub capital lvl if you are worthy to keep your space.
3) You cry about Goons 2 much they get around your stupid tactics. You guys tried you SUPER blob but were overtaken by their tactics "Hell Cage" and you failed badly. Congrats you suck. There is no fun in a game where you can have 100 super ships and steam roll everything and smaller alliances that cant field more than 100 dont stand the chance.
This SUPER CAPITAL thing has gone out of control the day they were released.
Sorry if i offended you i tend to be a di ck.. |
RavenNyx
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:14:00 -
[2094] - Quote
Peregrine wrote:My Suggestions:
1) 22.5m in drone skills + another 20M in SC specific skills to not be able to use drones on my MS? If you take drones away from SC's then give back drone skills if the player wants to have them returned. Done through the petition process.
2) To get some real feedback from players who are experienced in the use of SC's open a thread that only Titan and SC pilots can post in. Verified through API. All that is happening in this thread is little testies and goons bleating against SC's because the chief goon Mitiani has told them too.
3) SC's and Titans were brought into the game because BS and carriers were too powerfull. Every time you bring a new ship class in the same thing happens. Noobs whine and complain that it isn't fair etc etc etc. Visa vis the intrduction of the HIC. Well if titans and SC's are too powerfull then bring in something designed to kill them. A death Star if you will. Price it at like 250B to build. Make it so 10 people have to be skilled and online to use it. And give it a death star type weapon. Every 10m it can pop a SC or a titan etc etc. 1. LOL - I made two gallentean toons 2 years ago - GIVE ME MY SKILLPOINTS BACK!
2. Have you ever been in an engagement with 20+ supers on the opposite side? Most null-sec'ers have, at some point.. Mitani and his goons, they've been at the recieving end of ALOT of supers during the years - they have exactly the experince you're calling for...
3. SCs and Titans are ePeens that suddenly became useful. Well, titans already was, but against 40 dreads there where only som much they could do. Now CCP found out that long-time effects of being too focused on 'peen are bad for all those around you and their experience everytime you enter the room, so they're hacking your 'peen down to fit with the rest of the ePeen wielding mob... |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:15:00 -
[2095] - Quote
ccp the changes that have been suggested will empower the minority like FHM don't let the minority rule.
most of eve are not happy with a total removel of the stranded drone bay but you can limit it goons are only a small percent of eve they do not control and speak for the populous
look at the suggestions coming out in this thread and make some planed out changes to balance the up coming nurf. |
vurdosek
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:21:00 -
[2096] - Quote
FHM wrote:vurdosek wrote:FHM wrote:vurdosek wrote:wow i haven't seen a dumber statement then saying because you spent time and more money in a ship it shouldn't be useful against other ships. sorry to use an analogy from another game, but im going to have too. since there are is no standard raiding in this game or normal ways of leveling up, spending time and isk in this game is relatively the same as raiding and leveling to upgrade your character. balancing on overpowered ship is one thing, outright making it useless is a ****** move. if a supercap couldn't destroy a subcap what's the point of having them in a fleet? to shoot a structures in a system? it should take alot of subcaps to kill a supercap, the problem is finding the right balance of numbers needed to do so. Again you forget these ships are 1st meant to be extra rare. Second they serve their role as killing enemy carriers that may be used as DPS ships or Triage Logistic carriers and in the end killing opponents super capital ships that may appear on field to assist their own sub capital fleet. If you want to let super capitals have offensive ability against subcapital ships then they need to do reduced damage to them, they need to take 5min to lock these ships. Also this is not WoW where everything is unbalanced. These ships need to be balanced and need their own role and that is not killing sub capital ships. Titans were created to move big fleets from A to B the fact they have a DD and guns is just a small bonus to help and take out the most crucial capital ship opponent fielded.
Super Carriers were created to support friendly Titans while being there to help sub capital ship kill a Titan not help a sub capital fleet kill another sub capital fleet. Thats just plain stupid. so supercarriers were made to protect a super awesome cyno generating ship that has no purpose in this game other than to jump fleets large distances. so why not just get rid of both of them and make a subcap that jumps fleets large distances so you don't have the imbalances of overpowered ships? and give all people that trained for those titan/supercarrier skills their sp back. i just solved the problem ur welcome. Again stupid argument from a person who now sees that SC is a stupid investment on a "personal" level. Titan is meant to be the "ultimate fleet command ship" and supper carrier the "ultimate fleet support ship" as stated these were their roles: Quote:Titans were created to move big fleets from A to B the fact they have a DD and guns is just a small bonus to help and take out the most crucial capital ship opponent fielded.
Super Carriers were created to support friendly Titans while being there to help sub capital ship kill a Titan not help a sub capital fleet kill another sub capital fleet. Thats just plain stupid. No meant to be subcapital killers. Titan was created because we needed a command ship that can move our fleet when we need to go 50 jumps away. Super Carrier is there to defend us against carriers and defend our Titan or help our sub capital fleet kill another Titan or Super Capital ship. END OF STORY... Super Capitals need to be useless against Sub Capitals Now even more when most alliances can reimburse a super capital loss the same day or when they can say well if SC's get nerfed bad we will just put all our pliots in Titans. We need to cut the number of Super Capitals badly to a point where they are still something really amazing to have and bee seen. And to a point where killing one is humiliating for entire alliance that lost it not just an everyday event that has no effect at all.
remove role of "ultimate command ship" "super awesome fleet cyno jumping ship" from titan put that on a subcap command ship and remove titan/sc from game. problem solved again. that will cut the number of titan/sc and you won't have to worry about having ships unable to kill other ships which would be a stupid game mechanic, minus transport ships. hell even tier 10 tanks in world of tanks can kill tier 1 tanks, though a tier 1 can't damage a tier 10. am i advocating for that in this game? No. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:27:00 -
[2097] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:well ..For SC we must talk in two aspects PVP and PVE . in PVE SC bought people who can earn money who rent a systems ratting and want to feel safely especially with cynosural jammer why not? Citizen players is also big community and they spent their time to earn for buy SC and after this SC will be useless. PVP players also different somebody will buy for solo pvp another for alliances. i disagree that SC will unable to destroy subcups .
SC will not be useless.. IT WILL FINALY SERVE IT'S MAIN ROLE. Super Carrier is a Super Capital and Capital killer and nothing more. Makes no sense for them to be able to blob up and kill a fleet of sub capitals. Super Capitals in general have gone out of control and they need to be brought back to a point of rarity. This will do just that.
So tell me an alliance of hardcore PVP'ers that can field 200 ships wants to make a push for their own 0.0 space. How do they do it.
1) They SBU few systems 2) Enemy supercapitals bridge in kill them in 5min 3) Move to 0.0 denied and failed
1) They have a 0.0 sytem 2) They bring their 200 people to defend it 3) Enemy brings a coalition of super capitals 60-200 4) Defense failed
Here is what happens whit changes you people are suggesting:
1) They SBU few systems 2) Enemy supercapitals bridge in kill them in 10min 3) Move to 0.0 denied and failed
1) They have a 0.0 sytem 2) They bring their 200 people to defend it 3) Enemy brings a coalition of super capitals 60-200 4) Defense failed - it took 10min longer to get the job done
Here is what will happen when these changes come to effect:
1) They SBU few systems 2) Enemy supercapitals bridge in kill them in 10min 3) Enemy looses 50% of super capitals in a humiliating fight because they brought only super capitals 3.1) Enemy brings a subcapital fleet as support but they fail to defend them they die and super capitals die 3.2) Enemy brings a sub capital and super capital fleet they do their jobs prove they are good and get to keep their space 4) Victory is decided by the people that have better tactics and fc and fleet compositions and guess in the end better PC's
1) They have a 0.0 sytem 2) They bring their 200 people to defend it 3) Enemy brings a coalition of super capitals 60-200 4) Defense succsesfull 50% of super capitals died 4.1) Defense failed 30% of super capitals died 5) Enemy brings super capital fleet and sub capital fleet 5.1) Defending forces win the sub capital fight they kill super capitals they defended their space 5.2) Defending force loses the sub capital fight they dont deserve to keep that system
And before you go and blab about 300 people not being able to defend against 700 or 60 against 200 you are wrong check the killboards lots of successfull uneven fights. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:28:00 -
[2098] - Quote
RavenNyx wrote:Peregrine wrote:My Suggestions:
1) 22.5m in drone skills + another 20M in SC specific skills to not be able to use drones on my MS? If you take drones away from SC's then give back drone skills if the player wants to have them returned. Done through the petition process.
2) To get some real feedback from players who are experienced in the use of SC's open a thread that only Titan and SC pilots can post in. Verified through API. All that is happening in this thread is little testies and goons bleating against SC's because the chief goon Mitiani has told them too.
3) SC's and Titans were brought into the game because BS and carriers were too powerfull. Every time you bring a new ship class in the same thing happens. Noobs whine and complain that it isn't fair etc etc etc. Visa vis the intrduction of the HIC. Well if titans and SC's are too powerfull then bring in something designed to kill them. A death Star if you will. Price it at like 250B to build. Make it so 10 people have to be skilled and online to use it. And give it a death star type weapon. Every 10m it can pop a SC or a titan etc etc. 1. LOL - I made two gallentean toons 2 years ago - GIVE ME MY SKILLPOINTS BACK! 2. Have you ever been in an engagement with 20+ supers on the opposite side? Most null-sec'ers have, at some point.. Mitani and his goons, they've been at the recieving end of ALOT of supers during the years - they have exactly the experince you're calling for... 3. SCs and Titans are ePeens that suddenly became useful. Well, titans already was, but against 40 dreads there where only som much they could do. Now CCP found out that long-time effects of being too focused on 'peen are bad for all those around you and their experience everytime you enter the room, so they're hacking your 'peen down to fit with the rest of the ePeen wielding mob...
+1 |
Dogeatdog
Clarity of Purpose Wildly Inappropriate.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:29:00 -
[2099] - Quote
So seeing how hybrid damage is weak moros's are usless with no drone damage.Will the hitpoints be dropped on drones also? Nice that ccp is always looking to nerf stuff to make the new players happy.Reminds me of another game that isnt around anymore. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:31:00 -
[2100] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:ccp the changes that have been suggested will empower the minority like FHM
most of eve are not happy with a total removel of the stranded drone bay but you can limit it goons are only a small percent of eve they do not control and speak for the populous
look at the suggestions coming out in this thread and make some planed out changes to balance the up coming nurf.
Super Capital pilots represent 1% of EvE Online population and they are the only ones that are crying about the changes not to mention these are mostly people belonging to big alliances that go by leaning on the fact they are holding sov because they can field so many super capitals.
99% of eve population will tell you these nerfs are badly needed and that they are not severe enough. |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:34:00 -
[2101] - Quote
Quote: remove role of "ultimate command ship" "super awesome fleet cyno jumping ship" from titan put that on a subcap command ship and remove titan/sc from game. problem solved again. that will cut the number of titan/sc and you won't have to worry about having ships unable to kill other ships which would be a stupid game mechanic, minus transport ships. hell even tier 10 tanks in world of tanks can kill tier 1 tanks, though a tier 1 can't damage a tier 10. am i advocating for that in this game? No.
Have 0 arguments against removing them but i think that would mean more work and effort and more people would be unhappy whit that. Think we are past the point of removing them. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:38:00 -
[2102] - Quote
FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:ccp the changes that have been suggested will empower the minority like FHM
most of eve are not happy with a total removel of the stranded drone bay but you can limit it goons are only a small percent of eve they do not control and speak for the populous
look at the suggestions coming out in this thread and make some planed out changes to balance the up coming nurf. Super Capital pilots represent 1% of EvE Online population and they are the only ones that are crying about the changes not to mention these are mostly people belonging to big alliances that go by leaning on the fact they are holding sov because they can field so many super capitals. 99% of eve population will tell you these nerfs are badly needed and that they are not severe enough. Not to talk about % ! For people who live in empire who majority in eve doeesn't matter what will be and what now in capital ships. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:41:00 -
[2103] - Quote
Quote: Not to talk about % ! For people who live in empire who majority in eve doeesn't matter what will be and what now in capital ships.
What ? It concerns everybody absolutely everybody even care-bares in empire that will eventually become 0.0 players or low sec pirates etc.. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:41:00 -
[2104] - Quote
Its problem 0.0 sec ONLY and many players from 0.0 have many chars as you know and its not 1% much more |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 20:49:00 -
[2105] - Quote
thread is going off track again. lets start it up with my suggestions.
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET advanced carriers DOCK
Trolling removed. Zymurgist |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:02:00 -
[2106] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:Its problem 0.0 sec ONLY and many players from 0.0 have many chars as you know and its not 1% much more
Everyone that is paying for this game has a word in this its not only a 0.0 problem it conserns all players and if you read theve Q2 report you would know that super capital pilots represent barely 1.3 % of entire game population. 99% of people agree to this changes and also think they are not enough at least on Dreadnaught and Titan part.
Titans guns need nerfing, Dreads guns buffing same guns still you get the point.
Only thing i dissagree is that they applied EHP reduction to Hel that ship is poor as it is. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:06:00 -
[2107] - Quote
Yes nerf must be changes on dred and titand drone bay is away its ok i think it not play a big role on this ships on SC drone bay can be reduced but players must decide themseves how to fit it . |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:10:00 -
[2108] - Quote
this will affect high sec miners mine in high sec for the mins empire builders makes the rails for the huge about of mins needed to build supers and are going to be efected by this. so before you say 99% are with this think about it goons do not make up 99% of eve not eve 5% so think again about the statement you made. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:15:00 -
[2109] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:Yes nerf must be changes on dred and titand drone bay is away its ok i think it not play a big role on this ships on SC drone bay can be reduced but players must decide themseves how to fit it .
Ok how about this ? Give super carriers reduced 500m3 drone bay for other drones apart from Fighters and Fighter Bombers but make them take even when fully seboed and boosted 5min to lock a sub capital ship.
Or dont nerf the drone bay but make them able to field only 5 standard drones at once. That way they can hit sub capital ships but not for much they will still be useless in a BLOB since they can only field 5 standard drones at once and fighters cant hit anything anymore.
Those 2 solutions work.
In the end giving them any kind of ability to damage sub capitals is stupid. So any other change is stupid.
Just like this one: If they dont nerf them then make a very very cheap ship like t1 frig that costs 1mil isk but can disable any super carrier or titan for 5min.
So this small ship would be able to shoot 1 projectile at a super capital that would disable the super capital ship for 5 min rendering it unable to launch drones, activate any modules apart from hardners.
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:20:00 -
[2110] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:this will affect high sec miners mine in high sec for the mins empire builders makes the rails for the huge about of mins needed to build supers and are going to be efected by this. so before you say 99% are with this think about it goons do not make up 99% of eve not eve 5% so think again about the statement you made.
I have no link to to goons.. Nor do i favor them. You had a chance to vote against Mittani or put your own person in CSM but you didnt know deal whit it. I dont care what bunch of sociopaths think.
99% of people are the people that live in WH space, Empire doing L4s, Trade, Industry, Mining, Contracts, Piracy etc... , Low sec corporations and alliances that do piracy pvp, low sec incursions etc. And 0.0 that are unable to defend them selves against a steam roller that is a super capital blob.
If DRF came at SW whit a sub capital blob it would have been a long long war prolly ended up by DRF loosing. Consider i belong to no 0.0 alliance or corporation but this is the 99% of people. 99% of people do not sit in a super capital ship.
Read the EvE Quarterly reports it shows very well how many active super capitals are there in game... |
|
RavenNyx
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:21:00 -
[2111] - Quote
Dogeatdog wrote:So seeing how hybrid damage is weak moros's are usless with no drone damage.Will the hitpoints be dropped on drones also? Nice that ccp is always looking to nerf stuff to make the new players happy.Reminds me of another game that isnt around anymore. lol
New players are flying moros' now, with T2 sentry drones? Oh, and I guess I just imagined the part about the buffing of hybrids, the ROF bonus comming to the moros, and the damage-buff to all dreads...
Ummm.. What where you saying again? |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:24:00 -
[2112] - Quote
I agree that SC is using for kill capitals but i even agree that SC can will have only 125k m3 drone bay its enough for 25 fb 20 for skills and +5 for drone units but if you dont want using fb you can fit any drones but you can't fit 25 fb its all and if SC alone in home system it can protect itself . |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:25:00 -
[2113] - Quote
RavenNyx wrote:Dogeatdog wrote:So seeing how hybrid damage is weak moros's are usless with no drone damage.Will the hitpoints be dropped on drones also? Nice that ccp is always looking to nerf stuff to make the new players happy.Reminds me of another game that isnt around anymore. lol New players are flying moros' now, with T2 sentry drones? Oh, and I guess I just imagined the part about the buffing of hybrids, the ROF bonus comming to the moros, and the damage-buff to all dreads... Ummm.. What where you saying again?
Hes saying he does not know jack S H I T about the game. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:29:00 -
[2114] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:I agree that SC is using for kill capital but i even agree that SC can will have only 125k m3 drone bay its enough for 25 fb 20 for skills and +5 for drone units but if you dont want using fb you can fit any drones but you can't fit 25 fb its all and if SC alone in home system it can protect itself .
Again you argument is stupid. SC Alone is not an option it does not work. SC Can protect is self against a dread or a carrier but not against a subcapital fleet that is just stupid. If you are caught solo you are dead. SC is meant to have sub capital support to defend it against other sub capitals.
You should only be able to fit and decide between Fighters or Fighter Bombers. Giving them any kind of ability to field other drones just gives them ability to put damage on sub capitals and does nothing to super capital BLOB warfare. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:34:00 -
[2115] - Quote
FHM wrote:The Dealmaker wrote:I agree that SC is using for kill capital but i even agree that SC can will have only 125k m3 drone bay its enough for 25 fb 20 for skills and +5 for drone units but if you dont want using fb you can fit any drones but you can't fit 25 fb its all and if SC alone in home system it can protect itself . Again you argument is stupid. SC Alone is not an option it does not work. SC Can protect is self against a dread or a carrier but not against a subcapital fleet that is just stupid. If you are caught solo you are dead. SC is meant to have sub capital support to defend it against other sub capitals. You should only be able to fit and decide between Fighters or Fighter Bombers. Giving them any kind of ability to field other drones just gives them ability to put damage on sub capitals and does nothing to super capital BLOB warfare.
ok HOW SC protect from heavydictors? 4-5 heavy dictors cost 600-700 kk able to kill ship which cost 20b its funny |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:35:00 -
[2116] - Quote
the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:38:00 -
[2117] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic
Passive shield regen should be enough... |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:41:00 -
[2118] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic Passive shield regen should be enough...
it may not take any damage but all it will take to hold the ship in place for the small lol fleet to come and kill it it want be able to log off or get out so it will need some type of defense |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:41:00 -
[2119] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic Passive shield regen should be enough... ?? Just looking about passiive shield on nyx and aeon and you thing its enough?)) |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:48:00 -
[2120] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:FHM wrote:The Dealmaker wrote:I agree that SC is using for kill capital but i even agree that SC can will have only 125k m3 drone bay its enough for 25 fb 20 for skills and +5 for drone units but if you dont want using fb you can fit any drones but you can't fit 25 fb its all and if SC alone in home system it can protect itself . Again you argument is stupid. SC Alone is not an option it does not work. SC Can protect is self against a dread or a carrier but not against a subcapital fleet that is just stupid. If you are caught solo you are dead. SC is meant to have sub capital support to defend it against other sub capitals. You should only be able to fit and decide between Fighters or Fighter Bombers. Giving them any kind of ability to field other drones just gives them ability to put damage on sub capitals and does nothing to super capital BLOB warfare. ok HOW SC protect from heavydictors? 4-5 heavy dictors cost 600-700 kk able to kill ship which cost 20b its funny
By having sub capital support whit it. SC can do **** solo its not meant to be a solo ship i dont understand what you dont get here. SC depends on sub capital escorts to defend it against HICTORS... Or are you 2 stupid to understand that. |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:50:00 -
[2121] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic
Again R E T A R D E D and STUPID argument. No they are no able to defend them selves against a solo hic or dic. If they are caught solo by a HICTOR they deserve to die. SC is not a solo ship that is not its role nor design it depends on sub capitals to defend her.
And solo HIC cant kill it solo it needs a fleet.
I dont get it how you are 2 stupid to understand that. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:52:00 -
[2122] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic Passive shield regen should be enough... it may not take any damage but all it will take to hold the ship in place for the small lol fleet to come and kill it it want be able to log off or get out so it will need some type of defense
No if you are caught SOLO whithout subcapital support you are RE TARDE D and STUPID and deserve to die. SC is not a SOLO ship there is nothing this thing should be doing whitout sub capital support if its going to be fielded it needs a sub capital support. Thats why its getting nerfed cuss people like you are 2 stupid and 2 noob to get kills on even levels you need Super Capital ships to kill a lone frigate.
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:53:00 -
[2123] - Quote
you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:54:00 -
[2124] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic Passive shield regen should be enough... ?? Just looking about passiive shield on nyx and aeon and you thing its enough?))
Yes against 1 HIC yes it will last forever. 1 HIC cannot kill it it will need a fleet and they will still have enough EHP or Active tank to sustain them until friendly fleet comes to help but honestly if you are caught SOLO in a super capital ship you deserve to die and there should be no way of escape for you.
YOU WERE 2 STUPID TO REALIZE YOU ARE TAKING A FLEET SUPPORT SHIP OUT AS SOLO YOU DESERVE TO DIE IN IT |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 21:55:00 -
[2125] - Quote
why not solo!!! solo pvp must exist !! its FUN some people have solo SC pvp and have fun as supcap pvp maybe even more if you want to protect from cap ships install cynosural jammer = 600kk ISK per month and cap ship not disterb you |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:00:00 -
[2126] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier.
Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:04:00 -
[2127] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:why not solo!!! solo pvp must exist !! its FUN some people have solo SC pvp and have fun as supcap pvp maybe even more
You are R E T A R D E D. Super capital is not a SOLO pvp ship. Its a fleet support ship. When they were created and added to the game all super capitals were meant to be fleet support ships if you have an idea of solo PVP whit a Super Capital you are ********.
SOLO PVP and RATTING is not what SC and Titan are meant for and after this patch they will be unable to do that. This will also end the SC blob warfare.
The 2 of you post most stupid and irrelevant arguments and comments possible. Its fun to watch you cry knowing that those changes are FINAL and that Super Capitals are going to become a useless pile of crap metal against sub capital ships. They will finally need sub capital ships to defend them against other sub capital ships. |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:06:00 -
[2128] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic Passive shield regen should be enough... ?? Just looking about passiive shield on nyx and aeon and you thing its enough?))
Fine, give me a second... Ok, Passive shield regen is 86, so I guess not.
Phobos w/ neutrons and 3x mag stabs (see: not how phobos is fit): 436 DPS
Nyx has 1064039 Shield EHP
Ignoring passive regen, it will take the Phobos 2440 seconds to break shields or 40.6 minutes.
Lets look at armor EHP 32,970,318 75,619 seconds 1260 minutes 20 hours
1875000 Structure EHP 4300 seconds 71 minutes
OR: 21.85 Hours
(this is using antimatter M because I am lazy) For Void: 17.04 hours This all assumes no damage loss due to shield regeneration
This is probably the highest dps thing you will come up against in a SC, it has to be in range of your officer smartbombs, and will run out of ammo at:
((315m3 cargo) / (.025 m3/charge) ) / (5* (charges / 2.89 seconds)) = 7282 Seconds 121 minutes 2 hours
So, there is no reason to think you will lose your SC to a solo Hic/dic. If he manages to sit on top of you in neut range and smartbomb range receiving ammo drops from his indy alt for 17 hours and you can not get someone to save you, you deserve to lose your SC.
If you lose it to his gang, you really should be more careful and deploy with support, and it is not to be considered losing it to a solo hic. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:06:00 -
[2129] - Quote
FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier. Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff.
Well i playing in EVE for fun if game not satysfying me i change the game its not problem) ALL games must bring FUN!!!! and im not stupid , stupid you if you made a serious problem for all of it and propose to restrict all cap |
Demon Azrakel
Bite Me inc Exhale.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:09:00 -
[2130] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier. Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff. Well i playing in EVE for fun if game not satysfying me i change the game its not problem) ALL games must bring FUN!!!! and im not stupid , stupid you if you made a serious problem for all of it and propose to restrict all cap
You know what was like that? AoE DD. Did it get removed? Yes.
Setting it up so that one player with a SC can have fun at the expense of dozens who cannot touch it without their own caps / supers is poor game design. CCP is fixing this. |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:13:00 -
[2131] - Quote
The Dealmaker wrote:FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier. Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff. Well i playing in EVE for fun if game not satysfying me i change the game its not problem) ALL games must bring FUN!!!! and im not stupid , stupid you if you made a serious problem for all of it and propose to restrict all cap
Go ahead and leave. This game is no FUN because of people like you who want to get in to a 20B ship and want it to be a ship that cant die and can kill everything there is and can go 1v50.
Leave you wont be missed if you truly loved this game you would be oke whit these changes you are useless in pvp and only kills you can get is if you go SC v T1 Frigate. You are pathetic and we dont need people like you that support BLOB Warfare you dont deserve 0.0 space or the ship you are flying.
Leave think CCP wont care if 1% leave think they care more if 99% leave because these changes were not implemented there are so many people that dont want to be part of big stupid alliances lead by stupid, greedy and arrogant people like Raiden, Goons, WN., Solar. etc.. but what to form own alliance and make a push in to 0.0 but they cant because they get blobed by retards like you.
Leave the game its going to be much more fun. If you consider having a solo ship that really isnt a solo ship to be unkillable and be able to kill anything in the game you are stupid and should go play the game all defunct people play simply head over to Blizzard they will point you in the direction. They made a game just for people like you. |
The Dealmaker
Kant Coup
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:20:00 -
[2132] - Quote
FHM wrote:The Dealmaker wrote:FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier. Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff. Well i playing in EVE for fun if game not satysfying me i change the game its not problem) ALL games must bring FUN!!!! and im not stupid , stupid you if you made a serious problem for all of it and propose to restrict all cap Go ahead and leave. This game is no FUN because of people like you who want to get in to a 20B ship and want it to be a ship that cant die and can kill everything there is and can go 1v50. Leave you wont be missed if you truly loved this game you would be oke whit these changes you are useless in pvp and only kills you can get is if you go SC v T1 Frigate. You are pathetic and we dont need people like you that support BLOB Warfare you dont deserve 0.0 space or the ship you are flying. Leave think CCP wont care if 1% leave think they care more if 99% leave because these changes were not implemented there are so many people that dont want to be part of big stupid alliances lead by stupid, greedy and arrogant people like Raiden, Goons, WN., Solar. etc.. but what to form own alliance and make a push in to 0.0 but they cant because they get blobed by retards like you. Leave the game its going to be much more fun. If you consider having a solo ship that really isnt a solo ship to be unkillable and be able to kill anything in the game you are stupid and should go play the game all defunct people play simply head over to Blizzard they will point you in the direction. They made a game just for people like you. you a nervous guy) well is fun)) one day solo SC killed my carrier another day subcap ship but its OK its just a game and this FUN! |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:24:00 -
[2133] - Quote
Quote: you a nervous guy) well is fun)) one day solo SC killed my carrier another day subcap ship but its OK its just a game and this FUN!
You plain stupid... |
vurdosek
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 22:49:00 -
[2134] - Quote
FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier.Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff.
acutally that's not true at all, you might wanna click on the dev blog about fighters part and reread what the guy wrote, calling people stupid and r e t a r d e d, when you are wrong is lol. in fact here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=169936#post169936 |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 23:25:00 -
[2135] - Quote
vurdosek wrote:FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier.Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff. acutally that's not true at all, you might wanna click on the dev blog about fighters part and reread what the guy wrote, calling people stupid and r e t a r d e d, when you are wrong is lol. in fact here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=169936#post169936
Today on SISI CCP Habakkuk clearly stated that Fighter nerf stays since this is where SC's draw the most of their anti sub capital power considering Fighters can hit anything down to a Frig. So the Fighter nerf stays meaning SC will no longer be able to hit anything bellow an Target Painted BS. |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
200
|
Posted - 2011.10.14 23:55:00 -
[2136] - Quote
vurdosek wrote:FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:you are thinking about fleets
we are talking about solo supers moving making isk and so on not every super are being used in the fleets
look at the post about ppl using them to make isk and so on
such ships need to be moved its not possible to move a fleet every time a ship needs to move.
1st of all you are beyond STUPID if you are using a super capital to do anomaly's. That is just plain stupid and if that is what you are doing you deserve to DIE. Even so when this patch gets out fighters will no longer be able to hit NPC BS so you wont be able to make any ISK anymore whit that Super Carrier.Therefore SC's will no longer be able to defend them selves against sub capital ship. This change is final i dunno why we are even talking about this. Its the best change and its the most needed change right next to Titans DD and Gun nerf and Dreads gun buff. acutally that's not true at all, you might wanna click on the dev blog about fighters part and reread what the guy wrote, calling people stupid and r e t a r d e d, when you are wrong is lol. in fact here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=169936#post169936
Its because nobody bothers reading through an entire thread before ranting and raving. :/ |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 03:05:00 -
[2137] - Quote
Gogela wrote:xxxak wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote:The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise. This is a great point No. It is not a great point. It's ridiculous. In this scenario you have a guy in a supercap and was disconnected for FOUR HOURS. So you get logged while attacking in a 20 billion isk ship and you can't get logged back in for four hours?? That's not realistic at all. Even if there was a real reasion server side for him to DC, and assuming the GMs didn't reimburse the loss, he still would have been able to log back in within that time frame. The odds of this happening at all are very slim. The odds of a supercap pilot not being able to log back in for four hours are astronomical. This situation could only affect a tiny micro-fraction of people... say one a year... and you want to accommodate that one person and alter the entire mechanic for that? That's just stupid. The point is that there are many scenarios where super capital pilots will unjustly die. If the ship wasn't going to die, it shouldn't die. You seem to be arguing that you don't agree with the original premise of my post, that "if the enemy has you trapped in an aggressed log, you should die." If they do not have you trapped, you should not die. How is this an unreasonable or complicated change to the aggression rules?
It gives the enemy plenty of time to come ensure that they have you permanently trapped. As I've stated in other posts, this very closely approximates the original intention of the aggressed logging rules. The current proposition oversteps the rules and only serves to punish rather than balance.
|
Veinnail
FinFleet Raiden.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 04:31:00 -
[2138] - Quote
Great laughs ITT,
retract this entire Original Post, and start over CCP.
post each "change" separately, there is entirely too much crying in here |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 06:28:00 -
[2139] - Quote
Demon Azrakel wrote:The Dealmaker wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:the hp nurf with the agro change will result in more supers being killed
super need to be able to defend itself from a solo hic or dic Passive shield regen should be enough... ?? Just looking about passiive shield on nyx and aeon and you thing its enough?)) Fine, give me a second... Ok, Passive shield regen is 86, so I guess not. Phobos w/ neutrons and 3x mag stabs (see: not how phobos is fit): 436 DPS Nyx has 1064039 Shield EHP Ignoring passive regen, it will take the Phobos 2440 seconds to break shields or 40.6 minutes. Lets look at armor EHP 32,970,318 75,619 seconds 1260 minutes 20 hours 1875000 Structure EHP 4300 seconds 71 minutes OR: 21.85 Hours (this is using antimatter M because I am lazy) For Void: 17.04 hours This all assumes no damage loss due to shield regeneration This is probably the highest dps thing you will come up against in a SC, it has to be in range of your officer smartbombs, and will run out of ammo at: ((315m3 cargo) / (.025 m3/charge) ) / (5* (charges / 2.89 seconds)) = 7282 Seconds 121 minutes 2 hours So, there is no reason to think you will lose your SC to a solo Hic/dic. If he manages to sit on top of you in neut range and smartbomb range receiving ammo drops from his indy alt for 17 hours and you can not get someone to save you, you deserve to lose your SC. If you lose it to his gang, you really should be more careful and deploy with support, and it is not to be considered losing it to a solo hic.
Gratz for taking the time to spell it out, tought anyone with two brain cells to rub together would have already realized how hollow the "SC are expensives, they should'nt die to lone hictors!" argument is. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 07:43:00 -
[2140] - Quote
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
ewar impunity How to fix a titan by making remote links stop working on them. take away the ability to receive remote links and remote sebo's
nurf changes
hp hit the ships have to much hp but also balance them all out think of the hel its being dealt with on a seprite level. the aeon is the most tanked ship in the game over that of a titan they need a balance
Doomsday one more great change but with the planed change allow them to use less fuel then 50k each time, given they are only able to hit large ships
agro timer great again most of us agree on this change. but a solo hic or dic should not be able to hold any ship in place for hour after someone have logged off
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
sc drone bay let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3. if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf, at the moment we have so meny sc that their not uncommon so move them to the next level.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. let advanced carriers DOCK. |
|
Zomg Panties
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 08:02:00 -
[2141] - Quote
@FHM
normally I wouldn't speak in a foul mannor on a forum post but you have got to be the most ******* ******** person i've seen post in this thread PERIOD!
supercarriers are not a ******* support ship they are like the titan and dread MASSIVE ******* DPS SHIPS the super carrier is a ship that does dmg with drones, the titan is a ship that has the highest dps in the game and has a ultimate weapon to do a massive burst of dmg, and the dread was supposed to be MASSIVE dps gunboat - the incomming changes will put their role back into check - DO NOT EVER CALL A SUPER CARRIER A SUPPORT SHIP AGAIN YOU ******** DUMBASS
a carrier is a support ship, a falcon is a support ship, a curse is a support ship, those are all support ships, ****.
titans should not be able to hit anything sub battleship and even then hardly at all, so yes incomming nerfs in that respect all fine and dandy, but taking away drones from a ******* drone boat? and only giving it max 25 fighters OR bombers?
I understand the point of making so you can defang a super but holy **** a 10 man fleet can defang a carrier in less than 30 seconds and then a 200 mill fleet kills a 15 billion dollar ship, how the **** is that fair? especially if they take a month and a half to build - your lack of intelligence is absolutely enlightening.
I remember when I was in 9th grade too but god damn.
titans and supercarriers should not be able to be killed by 10 man fleets, (subcaps) i dont even think 20 man fleets should be able to - it's a capital ship you are supposed to run away from it - and I really dont care if it's unfair to smaller alliances, they can get on the same page as everyone else there is always small alliances to pick on go **** them up and steal their **** grow larger as a alliance then take on the biggest alliance in eve.
what you are saying is that a 50 man alliance should be able to take a system from Raiden alliance because YOU WANT subcaps to kill a supercarrier that took a month to build in 5 minutes, and you want to do it with a 10 man fleet and not lose a single ship LOL you so mad bro.
it's so easy to kill a super carrier as it is now lol all you have to do is get a hic point on it with 10-20 high dps ships and 4 minutes later POP, anyone can do it - most alliances take 15-20 minutes to respond to a carrier tackle anyway, especially if you catch a super ratting - anyone who thinks otherwise doesnt live in null sec, or doesnt have supers in their alliance - it's plain and simple.
super carriers are easy enough to kill - now should they be abe to hold 5 million drones in their bay? hell no!
but the best super carrier pilots dont hold that many drones in their bay anyway, most just have an assortment of ecm drones a set of lights mediums and heavies and maybe sentries for pos shooting + 20 fighters and bombers.
IF a super carrier is using it's drones 1 of 2 situations has occured. 1) you're a ******** noob alliance roaming into a big boy system and you lack the skill to even warp away LMAO 2) they are DESPERATELY trying to break 3 or more hic tackles.
as it stands now if you tackle a carrier and a super warps in to help it, IT WONT HAVE RR on it only fail baddies put rr on a super, it'll be there to either use ecm on you or try to pew pew - but most pvp ships can out run any drone from a super cap LOL which makes me think you are even more fail.
if you can't kill a supercarrier you are just terrible at pvp - go back to high sec scrub
i can prolly do a search on battleclinic to show you 400+ kill mails within the last 3 months of supers being killed with less than 30 ships, but i'm not gonna spoon feed you l2play spaceships then come post on the big boy forums. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 08:19:00 -
[2142] - Quote
ITT: people pretended that heavy neuts don't exist and that HICs are DPS machines.
Oh and that it's reasonable to balance the game around people who take 4 hours to log in. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 08:24:00 -
[2143] - Quote
any ship no matter what class should not be held in place for hours after being logged off.
if some one points a ship just after DT he then logs they can hold it their until DT the next day. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 08:37:00 -
[2144] - Quote
Sad but determined, ELITE PVPER Needa3 is dedicated to using his titan as it should be used, as God meant it to be used, right to the end.
The game and everyone who plays it will be poorer when stories - no, let us say legends - like this can no longer be written in it.
Godspeed, sir. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Karim alRashid
Aliastra Gallente Federation
114
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 08:51:00 -
[2145] - Quote
When I grow up, I want to become a ~leet pvper~ like this. |
Shin Dari
Covert Brigade
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 10:16:00 -
[2146] - Quote
Thinking further about it, I have come to the conclusion that SC should only be allowed to field bombers. However as compensation they should get several manufacturing lines. |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
200
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 10:55:00 -
[2147] - Quote
Shin Dari wrote: Thinking further about it, I have come to the conclusion that SC should only be allowed to field bombers. However as compensation they should get several manufacturing lines.
All ships in the game should be replaced by the Ibis. |
Sangard
Firebrands
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 11:16:00 -
[2148] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:
Fighter EHP is fine. The other day, a hostile carrier sitting on a station deployed fighters to shoot an anchorable bubble of mine 100km off the undock. I proceeded to kill three of his fighters in my battleship before he could recall them, while my mate in a cruiser picked off another. If a measly two ships can take out 40% of a carrier's offensive capabilities in the time it takes him to recall his fighters, I doubt fighters "need an ehp nerf."
Don't punish carrier pilots for peoples' general lack of competence.
Lack of competence is exactly your business, mate :)
Don't compare your one-time experience with fighters to the overall mechanics. Your example is just pointless, Docking games and station camping is not the real pvp serious players focus on.
fyi: Einherji stats: Shield:2,750 HP Armor:3,250 HP Structure: 3,750 HP Peak Passive Recharge Rate: 26.40 HP/s
Stabber stats: Shield:1,485 HP Armor:1,250 HP Structure: 1,289 HP Peak Passive Recharge Rate: 2.85 HP/s |
BRICKS4BALLS
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 11:33:00 -
[2149] - Quote
Why shouldnt Super-capitals' have some sort of means to defend themselves from smaller ships for a short period of time at least.
Some people have played this game for an awful long time and have accumulated lots of isk/skills etc, and decided to never stay in smaller alliances/corps. At the same time some of these smaller groups may have a few supercaps, this change will take away those players ability to ever use these ships, knowning the increased chance of being pinned down now with no way to defend yourself. Some of the smaller corps/alliances simply wont ever have the numbers playing to have proper support.
Yea sure, I am aware that in the real world small organizations would'nt own massive ships like this.
The changes may work well to prevent big alliances blobing, but I'm sure they restrict smaller groups using them at all now.
Giving them an ability to field fewer drones than fighters/bombers may have been a better option, so at least a single HIC cant keep them pinned down for 30mins or so whilst they get a fleet together.
Also if someone goes to the trouble of baiting a frigate or cruiser so they drop a titan in to use the doomsday, then why not? Surely acts like this are humouous. |
Rhaegor Stormborn
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
218
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 12:13:00 -
[2150] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Sad but determined, ELITE PVPER Needa3 is dedicated to using his titan as it should be used, as God meant it to be used, right to the end. The game and everyone who plays it will be poorer when stories - no, let us say legends - like this can no longer be written in it. Godspeed, sir.
You still butthurt from all the times BE has raped whatever pathetic excuse for an alliance you belonged to? Inappropriate signature removed. CCP Spitfire |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 12:19:00 -
[2151] - Quote
Zomg Panties wrote:@FHM
normally I wouldn't speak in a foul mannor on a forum post but you have got to be the most ******* ******** person i've seen post in this thread PERIOD!
supercarriers are not a ******* support ship they are like the titan and dread MASSIVE ******* DPS SHIPS the super carrier is a ship that does dmg with drones, the titan is a ship that has the highest dps in the game and has a ultimate weapon to do a massive burst of dmg, and the dread was supposed to be MASSIVE dps gunboat - the incomming changes will put their role back into check - DO NOT EVER CALL A SUPER CARRIER A SUPPORT SHIP AGAIN YOU ******** DUMBASS
a carrier is a support ship, a falcon is a support ship, a curse is a support ship, those are all support ships, ****.
titans should not be able to hit anything sub battleship and even then hardly at all, so yes incomming nerfs in that respect all fine and dandy, but taking away drones from a ******* drone boat? and only giving it max 25 fighters OR bombers?
I understand the point of making so you can defang a super but holy **** a 10 man fleet can defang a carrier in less than 30 seconds and then a 200 mill fleet kills a 15 billion dollar ship, how the **** is that fair? especially if they take a month and a half to build - your lack of intelligence is absolutely enlightening.
I remember when I was in 9th grade too but god damn.
titans and supercarriers should not be able to be killed by 10 man fleets, (subcaps) i dont even think 20 man fleets should be able to - it's a capital ship you are supposed to run away from it - and I really dont care if it's unfair to smaller alliances, they can get on the same page as everyone else there is always small alliances to pick on go **** them up and steal their **** grow larger as a alliance then take on the biggest alliance in eve.
what you are saying is that a 50 man alliance should be able to take a system from Raiden alliance because YOU WANT subcaps to kill a supercarrier that took a month to build in 5 minutes, and you want to do it with a 10 man fleet and not lose a single ship LOL you so mad bro.
it's so easy to kill a super carrier as it is now lol all you have to do is get a hic point on it with 10-20 high dps ships and 4 minutes later POP, anyone can do it - most alliances take 15-20 minutes to respond to a carrier tackle anyway, especially if you catch a super ratting - anyone who thinks otherwise doesnt live in null sec, or doesnt have supers in their alliance - it's plain and simple.
super carriers are easy enough to kill - now should they be abe to hold 5 million drones in their bay? hell no!
but the best super carrier pilots dont hold that many drones in their bay anyway, most just have an assortment of ecm drones a set of lights mediums and heavies and maybe sentries for pos shooting + 20 fighters and bombers.
IF a super carrier is using it's drones 1 of 2 situations has occured. 1) you're a ******** noob alliance roaming into a big boy system and you lack the skill to even warp away LMAO 2) they are DESPERATELY trying to break 3 or more hic tackles.
as it stands now if you tackle a carrier and a super warps in to help it, IT WONT HAVE RR on it only fail baddies put rr on a super, it'll be there to either use ecm on you or try to pew pew - but most pvp ships can out run any drone from a super cap LOL which makes me think you are even more fail.
if you can't kill a supercarrier you are just terrible at pvp - go back to high sec scrub
i can prolly do a search on battleclinic to show you 400+ kill mails within the last 3 months of supers being killed with less than 30 ships, but i'm not gonna spoon feed you l2play spaceships then come post on the big boy forums.
This just shows how stupid and arrogant super capital pilots really are. Super Carrier is a big useless ship that is used as fleet support to carry extra ships to fights, and provide DPS to kill a Capital or Super Capital ship and not sub capitals.
If super capitals have any means of defense against sub capital ships than we are just giving power to stupid noobs in alliances like Goonswarm, Raiden, PL, WN etc. Who are to noob to sit in a sub capital and face his opponents on equal grounds but require a super capital to kill a lone frigate you are pathetic.
Also yes show me the 400+ killmails where less than 30 ships killed a super capital. ... You are stupid man you are really stupid.
SUPER CAPITAL SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY MEANS OF DEFENSE AGAINST SUB CAPITALS NO MATTER THE COST RATIO.
It is not a SOLO ship IT DEPENDS on having sub capital support to defend it against OTHER SUB CAPITAL ships if you solo in a SUPER CAPITAL SHIP you deserve to DIE. IF we left SUPER CAPITALS have any means of getting DAMAGE ON TO SUB CAPITAL SHIPS than we will never STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB warfare.
The nerf would not be needed if these ships were RARE or if not every alliance would be able to REIMBURSE 100s of such loses EVERY DAY whit EASY. That is just STUPID. Look at WN they said oh we will just turn 100 of our SUPER CARRIER pilots to 100 TITAN PILOTS if nerf is 2 BAD for SUPER CARRIERS.
The END is that SUPER CARRIERS nerfs have been confirmed and are FINAL apart from the HEL so is the Fighter nerf so you can now stick you SUPER CAPITAL BLOB up your A S S H O L E. It is not OK that 1% of game population makes it impossible for 99% to enjoy their game.
Ant that is what you are supporting, 99% of eve population disagrees whit you go over this forum topic you will find that the wast majority thinks these nerfs are not good enough that they need to be more severe for Titans.
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 12:32:00 -
[2152] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:Why shouldnt Super-capitals' have some sort of means to defend themselves from smaller ships for a short period of time at least.
Some people have played this game for an awful long time and have accumulated lots of isk/skills etc, and decided to never stay in smaller alliances/corps. At the same time some of these smaller groups may have a few supercaps, this change will take away those players ability to ever use these ships, knowning the increased chance of being pinned down now with no way to defend yourself. Some of the smaller corps/alliances simply wont ever have the numbers playing to have proper support.
Yea sure, I am aware that in the real world small organizations would'nt own massive ships like this.
The changes may work well to prevent big alliances blobing, but I'm sure they restrict smaller groups using them at all now.
Giving them an ability to field fewer drones than fighters/bombers may have been a better option, so at least a single HIC cant keep them pinned down for 30mins or so whilst they get a fleet together.
Also if someone goes to the trouble of baiting a frigate or cruiser so they drop a titan in to use the doomsday, then why not? Surely acts like this are humouous.
No that is exactly what needs to happen if you are 2 stupid to go and do something SOLO whit a FLEET SUPPORT ship whitout sub capital backup you deserve to die. The time when you did that and then got caught and log-offed and survived is over.
NO MORE BLOB WARFARE - NO MORE SOLO SUPER CAPITALS Anyways Super Carrier and Fighter nerf is final and you can cry about it all you want. 20B does not buy you immunity or ability to kill everything in game. You had your fun for 2 years NOW IT OVER go SUCK A LEMON.
Also the argument saying you are bound to that ship or that you need a holding toon is compleate bullshit all Super Capital pilots can leave their ship and go to market or go fly sub capital ship for a moment. Thats why we have Capital Hangars and password protected POS where you can jump out of it and go do what you need to do.
So all following argmuents: - They cost 20B ISK - They cant be docked - They took 1 month more to train than a ordinary carrier - They need to be massive DPS ship - They need to be unkillable - Super Capital blob warfare needs to stay - They need 500m3 drone bay at least - They need to be able to defend them selves against sub capital - They need to be SOLO and FLEET ships
All those arguments are beyond STUPID and GAME BRAKING none of those arguments are valid not enough to even consider not implementing this nerf. Support skills you need for Super Capitals do not apply and are not valid you need the same skills you need for a carrier only you need carrier 3 meaning you did not spend any extra time for these ships training support skills is completely you decision and since these skillls apply to other ships as well they are not a valid argument nor will they be reimbursed.
SOLO SUPER CAPITALS AND SUPER CAPITAL BLOB are OVER FINALY SUPER CAPITALS NEED TO RELY ON SUB CAPITAL SUPPORT TO DEFEND THEM AGAINST OTHER SUB CAPITALS
DEAL WHIT IT |
Oljud Zork
Evolution
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 12:38:00 -
[2153] - Quote
Posting in a +100 page thread...
Well first off, the loggoff timer was needed and I have to quote Molle on this "Fear of loosing your ship makes you weak"
Yes I am one of the 3k SC pilots in game and I actually agree with Shadoo-¦s posting on page 3.
Shadoo wrote:The only change that was needed -- was the logoff timer, now that even the biggest whiners had figured out how to force the enemy to avoid committing supercaps without support fleet.
So, good change with logoff timer.
The ehp reduction will not work the way you intended. It will simply encourage more people to move to Titans and ensure whoever has more titans will always win the engagement since no one will want to risk third of their fleet being wiped by DDs on the first jump in.
There was nothing wrong with supercapital EHP, except it was hard to kill them in a lagged system with the logoff timer. All your EHP reduction now does is make titans even more king than before. Was this your intention?
Dronebays -- fine, but I'd consider allowing every class of a supercarrier to store one flight of BOTH fighters and fighter bombers.
Siege Timer -- good, will make small ninja stuff viable.
ECM Burst -- good, seemed like a bug to begin with tbh.
I would have much rather personally seen a complete redesign of the supercapital shipclass and taken them off the battlefield. This one will simply buy you a bit of time, without really addressing the issue at all. It will stealth boost titans, and make entities who can regularly field 30+ of them more overpowered than before.
The longer you prolong the titan issue, the bigger problem you face when you finally face up to the fact they need a no-combat role and you have to somehow make 2k+ titan accounts worthwile in a non-combat role.
SC don't need to be nerfed, the reason they got buffed last time was that they were to vulnerable alone, remember it is still a carrier and carriers can field a truckload of drones. End of discussion, by removing all but the Fighters and FB's then they will be rather limited in its use...
Instead buff the Dreads to a certain level that they justify to be brought on to the battlefield, for example for every Dread in the same fleet let their eHP expand with a few % and when fielding lets say 20 or more dreads then their eHP exceeds what a focused DD can do in damage?
Don't remove content by nerfing what the older players have spent so much time and money on to get, instead tweak, fine tune and add content to resolve the issue... 2003 players will always have more SP, experience and isk than 2011 players regardless a metric-fekk-ton of postings on E-O claiming that the game is broken. The only difference now are that the bees shows up in Canes instead of Rifters...
Anyone who remember when the Danish corp X-13 killed the first Mothership in lowsec? Or how about when the BoB/GBC fleet smashed a "billboard" during the travel fleet on the way to the Max Damage campaign? Or when ASCN lost the first Titan ingame? Nothing in EvE are impossible, you just have to find a way to do it!
I am looking forward to see how the changes will look like when the winter expansion hits TQ, in the end its back to mr Darwin's theory:
"Evolve or die, those who refuse to adopt will become victims of Evolution."
Regards // Zork |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 12:45:00 -
[2154] - Quote
Oljud Zork wrote:Posting in a +100 page thread... Well first off, the loggoff timer was needed and I have to quote Molle on this " Fear of loosing your ship makes you weak" Yes I am one of the 3k SC pilots in game and I actually agree with Shadoo-¦s posting on page 3. Shadoo wrote:The only change that was needed -- was the logoff timer, now that even the biggest whiners had figured out how to force the enemy to avoid committing supercaps without support fleet.
So, good change with logoff timer.
The ehp reduction will not work the way you intended. It will simply encourage more people to move to Titans and ensure whoever has more titans will always win the engagement since no one will want to risk third of their fleet being wiped by DDs on the first jump in.
There was nothing wrong with supercapital EHP, except it was hard to kill them in a lagged system with the logoff timer. All your EHP reduction now does is make titans even more king than before. Was this your intention?
Dronebays -- fine, but I'd consider allowing every class of a supercarrier to store one flight of BOTH fighters and fighter bombers.
Siege Timer -- good, will make small ninja stuff viable.
ECM Burst -- good, seemed like a bug to begin with tbh.
I would have much rather personally seen a complete redesign of the supercapital shipclass and taken them off the battlefield. This one will simply buy you a bit of time, without really addressing the issue at all. It will stealth boost titans, and make entities who can regularly field 30+ of them more overpowered than before.
The longer you prolong the titan issue, the bigger problem you face when you finally face up to the fact they need a no-combat role and you have to somehow make 2k+ titan accounts worthwile in a non-combat role. SC don't need to be nerfed, the reason they got buffed last time was that they were to vulnerable alone, remember its a 20Bil ship. It is still a carrier and carriers can field a truckload of drones. End of discussion, by removing all but the Fighters and FB's then they will be rather limited in its use... Instead buff the Dreads to a certain level that they justify to be brought on to the battlefield, for example for every Dread in the same fleet let their eHP expand with a few % and when fielding lets say 20 or more dreads then their eHP exceeds what a focused DD can do in damage? Don't remove content by nerfing what the older players have spent so much time and money on to get, instead tweak, fine tune and add content to resolve the issue... 2003 players will always have more SP, experience and isk than 2011 players regardless a metric-fekk-ton of postings on E-O claiming that the game is broken. The only difference now are that the bees shows up in Canes instead of Rifters... Anyone who remember when the Danish corp X-13 killed the first Mothership in lowsec? Or how about when the BoB/GBC fleet smashed a "billboard" during the travel fleet on the way to the Max Damage campaign? Or when ASCN lost the first Titan ingame? Nothing in EvE are impossible, you just have to find a way to do it! I am looking forward to see how the changes will look like when the winter expansion hits TQ, in the end its back to mr Darwin's theory: "Evolve or die, those who refuse to adopt will become victims of Evolution."
Regards // Zork
Titans will after nerf be only good against capitals and super capitals. Enetitys that will move SC pilots from SCs to Titans will gain nothing due to those ships being unable to lay damage to sub capitals. Meaning BLOB Warfare whit Titans ends here. SC nerf is badly needed 20B is no money today.
20B when you can make that money in 10-15 Days, or in 1 Day is no valid argument. We reached a point where 20B is really puny ISK amount. Yes the SUPER CARRIERS were BUFFED because they were not strong enough "ALONE" but finally CCP realized these are not SOLO ships so BYE BYE.
|
leich
Nocturnal Romance
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 12:54:00 -
[2155] - Quote
Ive still heard alot of people saying the fighter nerf is still going through even though dev has currently said it wont.
People have said that not nerfing fighters is pandering to care bears This is BS.
If the nerf were to go through Rorq's would be better at pvp the carriers.
Argument over you can all fo home now. |
Bluemelon
Perkone Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 12:55:00 -
[2156] - Quote
FHM
You are a moron.
'Nuff said |
Max Khaos
Anger Management
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 13:14:00 -
[2157] - Quote
Quote:SOLO SUPER CAPITALS AND SUPER CAPITAL BLOB are OVER FINALY SUPER CAPITALS NEED TO RELY ON SUB CAPITAL SUPPORT TO DEFEND THEM AGAINST OTHER SUB CAPITALS
DEAL WHIT IT
Typing in caps still doesn't stop you looking like an idiot.
Look at the game designers own description of the Thanatos and then the Nyx and then come back with a silly argument why the Nyx shouldn't be able to do anything the Thanatos can do and more. ------------- Insert Goon Tears Here ------------- |
Kleg Nighthawk
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 13:29:00 -
[2158] - Quote
The fighter change needs reworking. Every single class of ship in the game iwns the class smaller it and can also bring a significant portion of it's damage agains ships two classes smaller
A battle ship is only two classes of ship smaller than a super carrier so the super should be able to hit it.
My solution would be to increase the Sig resolution of the fighters as the update sugests BUT actually make it a larger figure approx600-800m. This would make fighters totaly useless agains Cruiser and smaller hulls. Now to compensate for this and to keep a portion of their damage against BC/BS optimal range and tracking need to be altered to have fighters able to hit them, currently their optimal and tracking make them suck at it.
This in conjunction with the removal of drones would reduce a super carriers ability to engage all sizes of ship while not just limiting them to attaking Capitals. Saying that though I think removing the regular drones is reducing their capabilities in too many places in one hit.
When fault finding change one thing at a time. If you **** around with all variables in one hit you have no idea what you're going to end up with and more mportantly even IF you get the desired effect you dont actually know why. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 13:37:00 -
[2159] - Quote
Max Khaos wrote:Quote:SOLO SUPER CAPITALS AND SUPER CAPITAL BLOB are OVER FINALY SUPER CAPITALS NEED TO RELY ON SUB CAPITAL SUPPORT TO DEFEND THEM AGAINST OTHER SUB CAPITALS
DEAL WHIT IT Typing in caps still doesn't stop you looking like an idiot. Look at the game designers own description of the Thanatos and then the Nyx and then come back with a silly argument why the Nyx shouldn't be able to do anything the Thanatos can do and more.
Thanatos is a capital costs about 1.5B to fit and doesn't have 20+mil EHP, and need to be in triage to have any supporting ability worth mentioning while you loose your offensive ability. So yes it can be solo.
Nyx is a 20B ship that can melt a single BS under 30s and no Logi can repair is fast enough considering most alliances can field 20+ of these they dont need no sub capital support you drop 30 of them on 250 sub capital fleet and they are dead.
Blob warfare whit super capitals is getting abused and it needs to stop and whit this nerfs it will so suck on it. You can cry all you want but they are getting nerfed and the Super Capital BLOB and SOLO Super Capitals are DEAD after this.
If super capitals not just super carriers have any ability to do damage to sub capital ships than game will slowly die since there will be no point in PVPing anymore. Any fleet you take out will simply be matched by a much larger Super Capital fleet. That is not how things work. SUPER CAPITALS need to be useless against SUB CAPITALS
And all you guys that are super capital pilots have not provided 1 solid argument why this should not go in to effect all i hear is: - They are worth 20B that is alot even tho we make about 10 Trillion / week - They needed 1 year of skill training even tho it only take carrier 3 - support skills do not count - They dont have enough DPS as it is we need more - They are killable we need to change that - The log off timer is 2 long i want to disappear 1 second after i log even if i am agrssed - They need to be able to sit 300km off the gate and just kill everything that passes - They need to be able to dock - They need to be able enter empire - O no my alliance is goining to fail now because we cant field anything other than super capitals - O no my BOTs are no longer going to work i cannot RMT anymore - O no i can no longer hog up all the anomaly's anymore - O no i can no longer be a ****** to my corpmates cuss i now need their support - No i can no longer kill a sub capital ship - i am in a fleet support ship and i been caught solo without support what now
Those are the only arguments you guys come up whit and they all FAIL.
I have not hear 1 argument that would be valid where it would meet the mutual ground between super and sub capital pilot. All you want to support is an idea of a unkillabe ship, super capital blob warfare and great BOTTING machine. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 13:43:00 -
[2160] - Quote
Kleg Nighthawk wrote:The fighter change needs reworking. Every single class of ship in the game iwns the class smaller it and can also bring a significant portion of it's damage agains ships two classes smaller
A battle ship is only two classes of ship smaller than a super carrier so the super should be able to hit it.
My solution would be to increase the Sig resolution of the fighters as the update sugests BUT actually make it a larger figure approx600-800m. This would make fighters totaly useless agains Cruiser and smaller hulls. Now to compensate for this and to keep a portion of their damage against BC/BS optimal range and tracking need to be altered to have fighters able to hit them, currently their optimal and tracking make them suck at it.
This in conjunction with the removal of drones would reduce a super carriers ability to engage all sizes of ship while not just limiting them to attaking Capitals. Saying that though I think removing the regular drones is reducing their capabilities in too many places in one hit.
When fault finding change one thing at a time. If you **** around with all variables in one hit you have no idea what you're going to end up with and more mportantly even IF you get the desired effect you dont actually know why.
Thats exactly the problem Super Carriers and Titans being able to hit ships smaller than BS. You said SC is 2 classes above BS so it should be able to hit them and battle-cruisers. Meaning BS whit no tracking enhancer or web should be able to hit a frig whit 0 sig thats moving at 500 orbit at 5km/s speed.
That is not balanced. If they should be able to hit sub capitals then they should not be able hulls below BS no matter how much they are Target Painted. The end result is to STOP super capital BLOB once and for ALL and for now. SC and Titans not being able to hit SUB CAPITAL ships is the only way to achieve that.
But the most pathetic thing i see is people that are part of alliances that can reimburse any number of super capital loses any time are crying about this. Not to mention so many SC losses get reimbursed by CCP we also have Alliances now sitting on such stupendous amounts of ISK that 20 Billion isk is really crap wallet balance. |
|
leich
Nocturnal Romance
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 14:11:00 -
[2161] - Quote
I think part of the problem people have have with the supers nerf is that a single Hic could kill a super on it's own.
I theroy that is.
Supers have no way to push them off. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 14:20:00 -
[2162] - Quote
leich wrote:I think part of the problem people have have with the supers nerf is that a single Hic could kill a super on it's own.
I theroy that is.
Supers have no way to push them off.
That is the most stupid argument you can come up whit:
1) HIC could never solo kill a Super Capital 2) Super Capital should not be doing anything on their own 3) If you get caught without sub capital support you are dead period 4) If supers have any ability to damage sub capitals then nothing will be fixed and the Super Capital BLOB will continue to exist
SUPER CAPITALS DEPEND ON SUB CAPITALS TO DEFEND THEM AGAINST OTHER SUB CAPITALS
For super capitals to be able to hit sub capitals makes no sense and i have not heard 1 proper argument against that. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 14:37:00 -
[2163] - Quote
FHM you have no idea what will happen after this nurf you are holding to the idea even with the said changes that they will be nothing but the odd ship you see from time to time that will kill all the pos mods sov mods and so on.
what about that the only safe place to have them will be low sec give the ecm mod will get them out of trouble is something happens
you also can't grasp the idea that you buy a ship you need to move it 4 cap jumps to the your home system you think you need to have a full support fleet to move 1 ship 4 jumps and to have a fleet at every point you are not being realistic about any of the suggestions coming forth.
you said you want to have small alliance move to 0.0 and take space from alliance with large super cap fleets at the moment they have the fleets but they never started out with them every alliance holding space on a large scale have a sub cap fleet that know how to fight and will not just be using the 1 fleet comp but several,he power blocks have large amount of players backing them from several alliances if you think its possible for 1 alliance just starting out in eve to take space from one of the big players then you need to think again after the nurf you may see some change in the way 0.0 is structured but on the most part it will be the same setup.
old eve players that have invested a massive amount of time in to eve deserve some reward from the game not just a kick down from new payers and the people thinking its unfair they can't afford and use some ship types this is just not about supers but also in general.
FHM you can troll all you want
lets try and and salvage the thread for suggestions
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET advanced carriers DOCK
|
BRICKS4BALLS
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 14:40:00 -
[2164] - Quote
"No that is exactly what needs to happen if you are 2 stupid to go and do something SOLO whit a FLEET SUPPORT ship whitout sub capital backup you deserve to die. The time when you did that and then got caught and log-offed and survived is over."
This is what some muppet wrote in response to my post, to stupid to actually understand my post it seems.
You say on one hand that if use a ship designed for fleet support solo then u deserve to die, well I agree, if you die, then u deserve it. Risk vs reward as always plays an important part in the game.
So if your saying this, then why do we need the nerf??
Answer, we dont, at least not to the extent that it will be implemented, what we perhaps need is more risk for the reward.
If you take away all the reward, nobody will risk their ships.
|
leich
Nocturnal Romance
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 14:52:00 -
[2165] - Quote
FHM how many supers have you killed?
|
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 15:18:00 -
[2166] - Quote
The 7 titans Red Alliance just lost are a lie. It is not possible. With current supercapital EHP they all would have been able to log off and survive the 15 minute aggression timer.
Also it is not possible for a force to be able field enough supercapitals to counter a member of the DRF. Just cant be done.
Oh wait those titans were dying in under 90 seconds each? How could that be? And oh wait, if another powerhouse alliance just fields supercapitals against supercapitals they don't have to worry about balancing them against subcapitals like hurricanes?
Yeah the problem with supercapitals must be the EHP, log off timers, fighters and bombers not that Goonswarm doesn't want to have to put their own supercapitals and capitals on field. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 15:18:00 -
[2167] - Quote
so what is the count his week 10 titans 7 sc lost even the non sov holders have super fleet and we will see them clash from time to time and fleets are lost. soon the time of supers will end and the time of the super massive subcap blob will rule eve again to the exceptions of goons and mittans |
The Economist
Logically Consistent
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 15:58:00 -
[2168] - Quote
Good changes:
ECM Burst fix (always assumed this was a bug anyway) Siege Module changes DD Change Logoff Timer
All long overdue and genuinely good ideas.
Bad Changes:
Fighter change HP nerf Removal of normal drone bays SC drone bay proposal
Bad for many reasons elaborated pretty succinctly in this thread.
|
Oljud Zork
Evolution
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 17:18:00 -
[2169] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:so what is the count his week 10 titans 7 sc lost even the non sov holders have super fleet and we will see them clash from time to time and fleets are lost. soon the time of supers will end and the time of the super massive subcap blob will rule eve again to the exceptions of goons and mittans
Nuff said
http://tinyurl.com/4yg9wyo
Battle summary containing seven destroyed titans...
|
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 17:31:00 -
[2170] - Quote
Oljud Zork wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:so what is the count his week 10 titans 7 sc lost even the non sov holders have super fleet and we will see them clash from time to time and fleets are lost. soon the time of supers will end and the time of the super massive subcap blob will rule eve again to the exceptions of goons and mittans Nuff said http://tinyurl.com/4yg9wyoBattle summary containing seven destroyed titans...
Good job Init
A real highsec carebear. |
|
ilmon
Unknown Soldiers GIANTSBANE.
39
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 17:38:00 -
[2171] - Quote
i can agree on almost all changes except the dronebay size change as you should be able to carry 2 full sets and have some spares so you ar enot gimped right away after losing 1 fighter or fb |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 17:40:00 -
[2172] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:FHM you have no idea what will happen after this nurf you are holding to the idea even with the said changes that they will be nothing but the odd ship you see from time to time that will kill all the pos mods sov mods and so on.
what about that the only safe place to have them will be low sec give the ecm mod will get them out of trouble is something happens
you also can't grasp the idea that you buy a ship you need to move it 4 cap jumps to the your home system you think you need to have a full support fleet to move 1 ship 4 jumps and to have a fleet at every point you are not being realistic about any of the suggestions coming forth.
you said you want to have small alliance move to 0.0 and take space from alliance with large super cap fleets at the moment they have the fleets but they never started out with them every alliance holding space on a large scale have a sub cap fleet that know how to fight and will not just be using the 1 fleet comp but several,he power blocks have large amount of players backing them from several alliances if you think its possible for 1 alliance just starting out in eve to take space from one of the big players then you need to think again after the nurf you may see some change in the way 0.0 is structured but on the most part it will be the same setup.
old eve players that have invested a massive amount of time in to eve deserve some reward from the game not just a kick down from new payers and the people thinking its unfair they can't afford and use some ship types this is just not about supers but also in general.
FHM you can troll all you want
lets try and and salvage the thread for suggestions
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. LET advanced carriers DOCK
It is not only the small and new alliances even quite some big and old alliances cannot stand against the might of a super capital BLOB. My alliance can be 2 years older than say WN. and we have 400 active people at any time but we dont have the 30 Trilion ISK income a week or month like a small group of alliances has there for we cannot play this game so you are basicaly saying 99% of eve population should just leave the game so that 1% can do whatever they do.
I see no FUN in sitting in a ship that is un killable..and that there is noting that can stand against me that just does not interest me. You played your games using cheats and its only way you get by and at the moment having a super capital is like cheating it gives you unbreakable advantage.
Only way to balance the game where EXPERIENCE, TACTICS and FLEET COMPOSITION actually matter again it to nerf SUPER CAPITALS to their primary and main role as SUPER CAPITAL AND CAPITAL killers and only way to do that is to take away their ability to do damage to SUB CAPITAL ships. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 17:52:00 -
[2173] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:"No that is exactly what needs to happen if you are 2 stupid to go and do something SOLO whit a FLEET SUPPORT ship whitout sub capital backup you deserve to die. The time when you did that and then got caught and log-offed and survived is over."
This is what some muppet wrote in response to my post, to stupid to actually understand my post it seems.
You say on one hand that if use a ship designed for fleet support solo then u deserve to die, well I agree, if you die, then u deserve it. Risk vs reward as always plays an important part in the game.
So if your saying this, then why do we need the nerf??
Answer, we dont, at least not to the extent that it will be implemented, what we perhaps need is more risk for the reward.
If you take away all the reward, nobody will risk their ships.
Again stupid and non valid argument why we shouldn't nerf them. As long as there is no way to counter them other than having the greater number of super capitals than your opponent on the field they are broken and need to be balanced. It's stupid to have 1 thing in game that can dominate all. Now ill just stack 1000 of those and ffs... Your logic is stupid.
1) Understand that super capitals are not SOLO ships 2) Once you understand they are not solo ships understand that by that they dont need anti sub capital support 3) Once you understand 2) you know they have anti capital and super capital ability 4) Once you understand 1) 2) and 3) you will understand that they depend on sub capital support
END OF STORY
BLOB warfare is the result of this NERF. Meaning Super Capitals on field can establish an unbrakable cap transfer and remote repair chain that no sub capital fleet can brake whit its DPS. And now these ships can also output the DPS 100x bigger than the entire output of any sub capital fleet.
This is stupid. I understand you are MAD about you ship getting nerfed but BLOB warfare need to end either that or it will be the end of the GAME as it is. Because there is no fun for me to get 500 of my allies to go fight our enemy just to see them bring 150 super capitals and wipe the floor whit my fleet. Next time i will bring 1000 ships and they will bring 150 super capitals and my client will crash leaving maybe 100 of my allies online and barely active and again super capital fleet wins.
The fleet fights should happen on sub capital lvl, where super capitals assist the sub capital fleet by removing enemy logistic carriers of the field, reparing our sov infrastructure and guarding our main command ship being the Titan.
If super capitals remain as they are then there is really no need for sub capital classes other than t1 frigs for lighting cynos and no point of sub capital powers to fight against super capitals so no point in playing the game meaning that 99% of eve population should just leave the game.
Your logic is flawed. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 17:55:00 -
[2174] - Quote
leich wrote:FHM how many supers have you killed?
Um last time i saw one on field was fighting DRF, we came at them whit 400 sub capital ships they countered us whit about 70 super carriers and 20 titans client crashed we lost. Was really great well least i know without the lag the fight would have lasted about 10minutes considering the dps and ehp of super capitals but i think we might be ablet o brake a aeons shield in that time. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 17:58:00 -
[2175] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:so what is the count his week 10 titans 7 sc lost even the non sov holders have super fleet and we will see them clash from time to time and fleets are lost. soon the time of supers will end and the time of the super massive subcap blob will rule eve again to the exceptions of goons and mittans
As it was meant to be as it should be 700 vs 700 on sub capital lvl is very even TD will help smoother the fights. I had 1000+ people in system fights and there were a few that were pretty fun. But having an entity that is so much more powerfull in a blob is stupid. 600 vs 900 on sub capital lvl is viable i cant imagine the lag and error messages but its viable...
Tho this is not the issue we will finally be going on roams whit sub capital ships and will be met whit sub capital ships and we will fight on even plane |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:03:00 -
[2176] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote:Oljud Zork wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:so what is the count his week 10 titans 7 sc lost even the non sov holders have super fleet and we will see them clash from time to time and fleets are lost. soon the time of supers will end and the time of the super massive subcap blob will rule eve again to the exceptions of goons and mittans Nuff said http://tinyurl.com/4yg9wyoBattle summary containing seven destroyed titans... Good job Init
+1 melt them.. http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=10821158
Thats a km from that fight and thats what we are trying to remove from the game. That is not normal. |
Kleg Nighthawk
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:16:00 -
[2177] - Quote
FHM wrote:Kleg Nighthawk wrote:The fighter change needs reworking. Every single class of ship in the game iwns the class smaller it and can also bring a significant portion of it's damage agains ships two classes smaller
A battle ship is only two classes of ship smaller than a super carrier so the super should be able to hit it.
My solution would be to increase the Sig resolution of the fighters as the update sugests BUT actually make it a larger figure approx600-800m. This would make fighters totaly useless agains Cruiser and smaller hulls. Now to compensate for this and to keep a portion of their damage against BC/BS optimal range and tracking need to be altered to have fighters able to hit them, currently their optimal and tracking make them suck at it.
This in conjunction with the removal of drones would reduce a super carriers ability to engage all sizes of ship while not just limiting them to attaking Capitals. Saying that though I think removing the regular drones is reducing their capabilities in too many places in one hit.
When fault finding change one thing at a time. If you **** around with all variables in one hit you have no idea what you're going to end up with and more mportantly even IF you get the desired effect you dont actually know why. Thats exactly the problem Super Carriers and Titans being able to hit ships smaller than BS. You said SC is 2 classes above BS so it should be able to hit them and battle-cruisers. Meaning BS whit no tracking enhancer or web should be able to hit a frig whit 0 sig thats moving at 500 orbit at 5km/s speed. That is not balanced. If they should be able to hit sub capitals then they should not be able hulls below BS no matter how much they are Target Painted. The end result is to STOP super capital BLOB once and for ALL and for now. SC and Titans not being able to hit SUB CAPITAL ships is the only way to achieve that. But the most pathetic thing i see is people that are part of alliances that can reimburse any number of super capital loses any time are crying about this. Not to mention so many SC losses get reimbursed by CCP we also have Alliances now sitting on such stupendous amounts of ISK that 20 Billion isk is really crap wallet balance.
Let me see
BS to BC that's one. BC to cruiser, that's two. Cruiser to Destroyer that's three and Destroyer to Frigate, that's FOUR classes down.
|
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:20:00 -
[2178] - Quote
The dark side is strong in you FHM A real highsec carebear. |
BRICKS4BALLS
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:32:00 -
[2179] - Quote
FHM wrote:BRICKS4BALLS wrote:"No that is exactly what needs to happen if you are 2 stupid to go and do something SOLO whit a FLEET SUPPORT ship whitout sub capital backup you deserve to die. The time when you did that and then got caught and log-offed and survived is over."
This is what some muppet wrote in response to my post, to stupid to actually understand my post it seems.
You say on one hand that if use a ship designed for fleet support solo then u deserve to die, well I agree, if you die, then u deserve it. Risk vs reward as always plays an important part in the game.
So if your saying this, then why do we need the nerf??
Answer, we dont, at least not to the extent that it will be implemented, what we perhaps need is more risk for the reward.
If you take away all the reward, nobody will risk their ships.
Again stupid and non valid argument why we shouldn't nerf them. As long as there is no way to counter them other than having the greater number of super capitals than your opponent on the field they are broken and need to be balanced. It's stupid to have 1 thing in game that can dominate all. Now ill just stack 1000 of those and ffs... Your logic is stupid.1) Understand that super capitals are not SOLO ships 2) Once you understand they are not solo ships understand that by that they dont need anti sub capital support 3) Once you understand 2) you know they have anti capital and super capital ability 4) Once you understand 1) 2) and 3) you will understand that they depend on sub capital support END OF STORYBLOB warfare is the result of this NERF. Meaning Super Capitals on field can establish an unbrakable cap transfer and remote repair chain that no sub capital fleet can brake whit its DPS. And now these ships can also output the DPS 100x bigger than the entire output of any sub capital fleet. This is stupid. I understand you are MAD about you ship getting nerfed but BLOB warfare need to end either that or it will be the end of the GAME as it is. Because there is no fun for me to get 500 of my allies to go fight our enemy just to see them bring 150 super capitals and wipe the floor whit my fleet. Next time i will bring 1000 ships and they will bring 150 super capitals and my client will crash leaving maybe 100 of my allies online and barely active and again super capital fleet wins. The fleet fights should happen on sub capital lvl, where super capitals assist the sub capital fleet by removing enemy logistic carriers of the field, reparing our sov infrastructure and guarding our main command ship being the Titan. If super capitals remain as they are then there is really no need for sub capital classes other than t1 frigs for lighting cynos and no point of sub capital powers to fight against super capitals so no point in playing the game meaning that 99% of eve population should just leave the game. Your logic is flawed.
No, my logic is relevant to me, and the way I play eve, i.e not in a large alliance with a **** load of supercaps on the field crashing my system.
Your logic is very much all about how YOU play the game, and how this change affects YOU!
Like I said in a small alliance or corp, having the ability to occassionaly use these ships is only right and fair. Anyone flying one of these solo will soon lose it, most people around null sec have some sort of bat-phone. Thats all part of the game, and a risk that people should be able to take outside of the large alliance.
So making these ships only useable in large alliances for a very specific role is pretty crap. If your arguement is that's what they were always intended for then they should never have been given the capabilities they have atm, and yes people are going to pissed off, people in smaller corps who now have no use for them whatsoever.
The real problem was created by the ease of acquiring these ships for the super alliances, I refer to the botting etc, if these problems had been addressed sooner then much less people would have them. I've reported botters myself only to have ccp ignore my mails. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:39:00 -
[2180] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote:The dark side is strong in you FHM +1 Death to these crappy and useless ships, we get so much by nerfing them. We get our game back, balanced pvp, get to see all these super capital noobs cry so much knowing they cant do **** and that SC Blob is about to die. Happy times finally the game braking part is being removed. |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:41:00 -
[2181] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:FHM wrote:BRICKS4BALLS wrote:"No that is exactly what needs to happen if you are 2 stupid to go and do something SOLO whit a FLEET SUPPORT ship whitout sub capital backup you deserve to die. The time when you did that and then got caught and log-offed and survived is over."
This is what some muppet wrote in response to my post, to stupid to actually understand my post it seems.
You say on one hand that if use a ship designed for fleet support solo then u deserve to die, well I agree, if you die, then u deserve it. Risk vs reward as always plays an important part in the game.
So if your saying this, then why do we need the nerf??
Answer, we dont, at least not to the extent that it will be implemented, what we perhaps need is more risk for the reward.
If you take away all the reward, nobody will risk their ships.
Again stupid and non valid argument why we shouldn't nerf them. As long as there is no way to counter them other than having the greater number of super capitals than your opponent on the field they are broken and need to be balanced. It's stupid to have 1 thing in game that can dominate all. Now ill just stack 1000 of those and ffs... Your logic is stupid.1) Understand that super capitals are not SOLO ships 2) Once you understand they are not solo ships understand that by that they dont need anti sub capital support 3) Once you understand 2) you know they have anti capital and super capital ability 4) Once you understand 1) 2) and 3) you will understand that they depend on sub capital support END OF STORYBLOB warfare is the result of this NERF. Meaning Super Capitals on field can establish an unbrakable cap transfer and remote repair chain that no sub capital fleet can brake whit its DPS. And now these ships can also output the DPS 100x bigger than the entire output of any sub capital fleet. This is stupid. I understand you are MAD about you ship getting nerfed but BLOB warfare need to end either that or it will be the end of the GAME as it is. Because there is no fun for me to get 500 of my allies to go fight our enemy just to see them bring 150 super capitals and wipe the floor whit my fleet. Next time i will bring 1000 ships and they will bring 150 super capitals and my client will crash leaving maybe 100 of my allies online and barely active and again super capital fleet wins. The fleet fights should happen on sub capital lvl, where super capitals assist the sub capital fleet by removing enemy logistic carriers of the field, reparing our sov infrastructure and guarding our main command ship being the Titan. If super capitals remain as they are then there is really no need for sub capital classes other than t1 frigs for lighting cynos and no point of sub capital powers to fight against super capitals so no point in playing the game meaning that 99% of eve population should just leave the game. Your logic is flawed. No, my logic is relevant to me, and the way I play eve, i.e not in a large alliance with a **** load of supercaps on the field crashing my system. Your logic is very much all about how YOU play the game, and how this change affects YOU! Like I said in a small alliance or corp, having the ability to occassionaly use these ships is only right and fair. Anyone flying one of these solo will soon lose it, most people around null sec have some sort of bat-phone. Thats all part of the game, and a risk that people should be able to take outside of the large alliance. So making these ships only useable in large alliances for a very specific role is pretty crap. If your arguement is that's what they were always intended for then they should never have been given the capabilities they have atm, and yes people are going to pissed off, people in smaller corps who now have no use for them whatsoever. The real problem was created by the ease of acquiring these ships for the super alliances, I refer to the botting etc, if these problems had been addressed sooner then much less people would have them. I've reported botters myself only to have ccp ignore my mails.
See i can agree to that. SC's need redefining and refurbishing BLOB warfare whit them needs to stop.
|
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:45:00 -
[2182] - Quote
That fight where RA & allies lost lots of super to a equal super number is the proof that its not about balancing. Its about balls and alliance management.
If NC leadership wasnt so busy saving isks not reimbursing theirs supers pilots, PL/Raiden/NCDot would have to face them in tribute with 200 supers + 300 subs against 200 supers + 1000 subcaps. When they decided not to stand by their pilots, all they did was jump to low sec and hide their toys. TBH, I cant blame them.
Now we have to deal with shortsighted people who thinks that innability to realize that using their massive subcap number in form of neuts + extra supercap DPS would wipe out lots of the tech cartel supers and evict the invasion.... The problem its not the ship stats, is how they are used well in one group and not on the other.
ALSO, FHM, want some cheese? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:51:00 -
[2183] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:The 7 titans Red Alliance just lost are a lie. It is not possible. With current supercapital EHP they all would have been able to log off and survive the 15 minute aggression timer.
Also it is not possible for a force to be able field enough supercapitals to counter a member of the DRF. Just cant be done.
Oh wait those titans were dying in under 90 seconds each? How could that be? And oh wait, if another powerhouse alliance just fields supercapitals against supercapitals they don't have to worry about balancing them against subcapitals like hurricanes?
Yeah the problem with supercapitals must be the EHP, log off timers, fighters and bombers not that Goonswarm doesn't want to have to put their own supercapitals and capitals on field.
Supercaps can kill supercaps therefore supercaps aren't overpowered?
OK. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:56:00 -
[2184] - Quote
Samanta Raiolaser wrote:That fight where RA & allies lost lots of super to a equal super number is the proof that its not about balancing. Its about balls and alliance management.
If NC leadership wasnt so busy saving isks not reimbursing theirs supers pilots, PL/Raiden/NCDot would have to face them in tribute with 200 supers + 300 subs against 200 supers + 1000 subcaps. When they decided not to stand by their pilots, all they did was jump to low sec and hide their toys. TBH, I cant blame them.
Now we have to deal with shortsighted people who thinks that innability to realize that using their massive subcap number in form of neuts + extra supercap DPS would wipe out lots of the tech cartel supers and evict the invasion.... The problem its not the ship stats, is how they are used well in one group and not on the other.
ALSO, FHM, want some cheese?
I actually agree whit you. You point out exactly what i have been saying in on sentence "SUPER CAPITAL BLOB NEED TO STOP" and you cannot achieve that by any other mean than forcing people not to use them to such extent in fleets and only way to do that would be either to limit the number of super capital ships that can be present in a system which is stupid or easier to just nerf super capitals to a point where they are what they were made to be ships to kill capitals and other super capitals and not sub capital killers.
Also yes please. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 19:29:00 -
[2185] - Quote
init and co we are still hostile to each other but you are my hero today
Dark Voodoo Cult Red Alliance Nyx (Supercarrier) Firbolg Damage done:13714 (50.96%) still going to happen after the nurf
Russian Specnaz Red Alliance Wyvern (Supercarrier) Firbolg Damage done:11369 (42.25% still going to happen after the nurf
zatrac Watch your six Gypsy Band Unknown (Unknown) Typhoon Damage done:610 (2.27%) still going to happen after the nurf
Risky eXplosion Death or Glory Unknown (Unknown) Typhoon Damage done:406 (1.51%) still going to happen after the nurf
Prox XQ Weavers Corp Gypsy Band Unknown (Unknown) Typhoon Damage done:406 (1.51%) hint smartbomb
Alexsandr The Curse of Distant Stars Bright Side of Death Unknown (Unknown) Typhoon Damage done:203 (0.75%) still going to happen after the nurf
Gypsy Band Hurricane (Battlecruiser) Typhoon Damage done:101 (0.38%)
Public.Enemy Death or Glory Unknown (Unknown) Typhoon Damage done:101 (0.38%) still going to happen after the nurf
Aquitane Bad Robot Inc. Red Alliance Damnation (Command ship) Target Painter II Damage done:0 (0.00%) still going to happen after the nurf
Bad Robot Inc. Red Alliance Erebus (Titan) Limited Mega Ion Siege Blaster I Damage done:0 (0.00%) still going to happen after the nurf titan missing a hit with meta 2 guns
Dark Voodoo Cult Red Alliance Nyx (Supercarrier) Domination Warp Disruptor Damage done:0 (0.00%) still going to happen after the nurf
Pact Of Honour Red Alliance Nyx (Supercarrier) Remote ECM Burst I Damage done:0 (0.00%) still going to happen after the nurf
High Venture Team Red Alliance Nyx (Supercarrier) Republic Fleet Target Painter still going to happen after the nurf |
Baron Agamemnon
The Einherji Supernova Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 21:29:00 -
[2186] - Quote
seems like good changes |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 22:08:00 -
[2187] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Supercaps can kill supercaps therefore supercaps aren't overpowered?
OK.
No you see its perfectly balanced because if you want to do anything outside of highsec you just have to get your own bigger supercap blob.
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Xue Slick
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 22:58:00 -
[2188] - Quote
tldr the last 20 pages. Any updates from CCPs side on this blog? |
L1m9n1663r
The Treehugger Corp
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 23:22:00 -
[2189] - Quote
L1m9n1663r wrote:- When a ship can not be sensor boosted or tracking disrupted, it should not be possible to remote sensor boost or tracking link. It makes no sense at all.
If you make cap size rigs, that should solve the issue with EHP without touching the numbers. Make shield extender rigs and Armor extender rigs take 200 rig-power-thingies, so you then lose 1 rig slot if buffer tanking. Make cap rigs only T1, that means tanked damage type HP * 1,15^2 instead of HP * 1,2^3. This will help for the HP's.
(Give the Hel some love first)
Destroy all T1 rigs in titans / supercaps (LOL-T1 rigs) Make all T2 rigs the T1 cap size. Any rigs that exeed the rig-power, eject rig in slot 3 to cargo bay. --
Make a rig that takes 150 rig power that will allow you to field 250 m3 of HEAVY drones. That is, sentries, heavy armor/shield bots, heavy EW drones. This will again cost you 15% of your 'tanked' HP buffer. That means your SC will have 70% less shield if you want to field 20 regular drones.
-- Throw the Super pilots a bone... Make Supercaps and Titans dock-able at stations with a SUPER CAP UPGRADE mod. This mod should cost 100 billion isk, and it should be impossible to board a super-cap if the station fitting services are off-line. Un-docking super caps should do so with 0 CAP and all high slots off-line. Gives people a reason to own some space.
--
Remove 1 gun / turret from each Titan. Remove DD.
Make a titan sitting at a CUSTOM OFFICE, tapping into its coordinate flux power generator able to start a 5 min 2 way bridge to another titan within 3-5 AU, at another CUSTOM OFFICE. (able to run freighters through)
Give Amarr titans a 50km radius energy neutralizing field that triggers every 30 seconds while in 'enforcer mode' (as in, stuck there for 75 seconds) neuting like a medium neut, not stackable with other amarr titans.
Give Minmatar titans a 50km web-field. (not stackable with other minmatar titans) while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Caldari titans a 25 km cloaking field, that will cloak any ship moving slower than 30 m/s and not targeting anyone. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Give Gallente titans a 40 km radius warp disruption field (same as large T2 bubble) with a scramble strength of 1. while in 'enforcer mode'.
Make Gallente and Minmatar able to trade each others Enforcement mods by use of a 200 power rig. (and Amarr / Caldari)
I fixed some typos. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 23:29:00 -
[2190] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:Supercaps can kill supercaps therefore supercaps aren't overpowered?
OK. No you see its perfectly balanced because if you want to do anything outside of high sec you just have to get your own bigger supercap blob. and thats coming from goons but they have a super cap fleet and space and all this issues about super cos pubbys can't fly supers
also their are no true goons in GSF its just a pubby alliance
Xue Slick wrote:tldr the last 20 pages. Any updates from CCPs side on this blog? nothing have poped up apart from the odd troll removed |
|
Stealthiest
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 00:54:00 -
[2191] - Quote
FHM wrote:Tore Vest wrote:The dark side is strong in you FHM +1 Death to these crappy and useless ships, we get so much by nerfing them. We get our game back, balanced pvp, get to see all these super capital noobs cry so much knowing they cant do **** and that SC Blob is about to die. Happy times finally the game braking part is being removed.
Balanced PVP?
You are re*tard*ed.
Team "A" brings 500 drakes requiring what 3-4m sp to fly? So just go to some stupid dotcom and recruit all your stupid something awful racist jerks to join for awhile and viola you have a ready made retar*d fleet. You can go anywhere at will.
Then you go into a system like c3n with your 500 drakes and guess what. 30 SC's and 7 titans are waiting. You go to wtfpwn the csaa and you get demolished. Thats the way it should be in a sandbox.
Because you can be stopped with your 500 drake bots with heartbeats you run to forums and whine like little bitches saying that the game is broken blah blah blah.
We are too scared/incapable/poor/small etc to defeat our enemy so DEV's do something to balance gthe game so we can win even tho we don't deserve it.
You calling everyone arguement stupid proves my point about small minded whiny little bitches. You once flew in a fleet and got lagged out and instead of blaming the 500-900 drake bots you blame SC's etc.
removing the AOE allowed for blobbing. Removing anything else that stops blobbing or at least counters it is stupid and short sighted.
Yeah I think Supercaps are broken but not for the reasons you constantly whine about.
Bring Back the AOE and that will stop the blob and force people to use strategy something that has been missing in the game since goons threadnaughted and got teh AOE removed.
The person with the most drake hurricanes or whatever the fotm will win.
I wonder who the 3 reta*rds were that gave you likes. Prolly your three alt accounts. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 01:42:00 -
[2192] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:FHM wrote:Tore Vest wrote:The dark side is strong in you FHM +1 Death to these crappy and useless ships, we get so much by nerfing them. We get our game back, balanced pvp, get to see all these super capital noobs cry so much knowing they cant do **** and that SC Blob is about to die. Happy times finally the game braking part is being removed. Balanced PVP? You are re*tard*ed. Team "A" brings 500 drakes requiring what 3-4m sp to fly? So just go to some stupid dotcom and recruit all your stupid something awful racist jerks to join for awhile and viola you have a ready made retar*d fleet. You can go anywhere at will. Then you go into a system like c3n with your 500 drakes and guess what. 30 SC's and 7 titans are waiting. You go to wtfpwn the csaa and you get demolished. Thats the way it should be in a sandbox. Because you can be stopped with your 500 drake bots with heartbeats you run to forums and whine like little bitches saying that the game is broken blah blah blah. We are too scared/incapable/poor/small etc to defeat our enemy so DEV's do something to balance gthe game so we can win even tho we don't deserve it. You calling everyone arguement stupid proves my point about small minded whiny little bitches. You once flew in a fleet and got lagged out and instead of blaming the 500-900 drake bots you blame SC's etc. removing the AOE allowed for blobbing. Removing anything else that stops blobbing or at least counters it is stupid and short sighted. Yeah I think Supercaps are broken but not for the reasons you constantly whine about. Bring Back the AOE and that will stop the blob and force people to use strategy something that has been missing in the game since goons threadnaughted and got teh AOE removed. The person with the most drake hurricanes or whatever the fotm will win. I wonder who the 3 reta*rds were that gave you likes. Prolly your three alt accounts.
Your alliance all the way back to its roots has been backed up by the idea of a super capital blob. You provided no argument 500 drakes alone should be able to kill entire super capital fleet no matter the size that is stupid enough to go out without proper sub capital support that is how its so-pose to work.
We have your logic implemented right now and it's not making any change.
Let me ask you this lets leave super carriers as they are but make logistic have 99% resists against drones and have their repair amount increased by so much that 1 guardian alone can repair 1 target whit 1 armor repair for entire damage a Nyx can do and he can repair 5 people at the same time for that amount of damage.
See balanced by your logic.
Giving Titan a AOE DD was CCP's temporary solution and a failed quick attempt at trying to fix lag in large fleet fights. Your logic is flawed because if i take 300 Machariels whit 8 Billion fits each i still wont be able to fight a super capital blob. So cry all you want but SUPER CAPITAL BLOB and SOLO SUPER CAPITAL ideas are dead after this nerf and ****** alliances that call them selves power block like yours will have to prove them selves on even plane whit others or be erased like a pathetic thing you are right now when you field a super capital fleet against a 10 man BS gang. |
Metal Dude
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 03:33:00 -
[2193] - Quote
Once again you fkn morons! The problem is the blob, NAPs and numbers instead of skill. The only thing the nurf will bring to the game is bigger blob, since there is no counter to it. CCP and all you ****** can never see the real issue, it has been like this for fkn 5 years and no matter how you balance the ships, it will always be there until the game discourages blobbing instead of encouraging it. But the loudest voice is that of the goons who always whine about nerfing the only counter to their blob that there is and since CCP has been bending over like a little ***** in heat to the goons for years, this game has been **** and it will continue to be ****. No nerf will change that, it will only bring more whines of "CCP, fix your game" when 3K blob cant do **** due to the lag that the nerf will bring. Idiots.
|
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 04:56:00 -
[2194] - Quote
To ppl that says that supers are overpowered and cant be killed. Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj9kKF9LhaM&feature=player_embedded An exelent made video . To bad that CCP is ruining this now.
Again... well done Init A real highsec carebear. |
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 05:42:00 -
[2195] - Quote
FHM wrote: Let me ask you this lets leave super carriers as they are but make logistic have 99% resists against drones and have their repair amount increased by so much that 1 guardian alone can repair 1 target whit 1 armor repair for entire damage a Nyx can do and he can repair 5 people at the same time for that amount of damage.
OMG you have NO idea how this game works... WTF are you doing here?
Logis can and should stay WAY out of regular drone range, and fighters already cant hit them for ****.
Why the hell do you think you are qualified to make any kind of sugestion when all you do is trow unrealistc numbers and situations... Please, excuse yourself and let those who have any idea how supercarriers work to point out what is broken. Just stop, get back into the game(friendly tip: you cant learn those things doing incursions)...stop with the forum pvp, go get some experience so you can stop making a fool of yourself by saying what YOU think its how is supposed to work and how its not when actually you know jack **** about how EVE works today. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 07:55:00 -
[2196] - Quote
Metal Dude wrote:Once again you fkn morons! The problem is the blob, NAPs and numbers instead of skill. The only thing the nurf will bring to the game is bigger blob, since there is no counter to it. CCP and all you ****** can never see the real issue, it has been like this for fkn 5 years and no matter how you balance the ships, it will always be there until the game discourages blobbing instead of encouraging it. But the loudest voice is that of the goons who always whine about nerfing the only counter to their blob that there is and since CCP has been bending over like a little ***** in heat to the goons for years, this game has been **** and it will continue to be ****. No nerf will change that, it will only bring more whines of "CCP, fix your game" when 3K blob cant do **** due to the lag that the nerf will bring. Idiots.
"Its not fair! I got a supercap which means I'm an Elite Pee Vee Peer! Look at all my SP, I should be able to kill as many of the untermenschen, at no risk to myself, as I like!" ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 08:09:00 -
[2197] - Quote
Thanks for the link to a group of supercaps being killed by a bigger group of supercaps.
Nice strawman too, since nobody is arguing that supercaps "can't be killed". ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
XPistolX
Muppet Factory 0ccupational Hazzard
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 08:42:00 -
[2198] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote: Thanks for the link to a group of supercaps being killed by a smaller group of supercaps.
Fixed for ya.
Evekill is down now, but IIRC they did it against a bigger supercap fleet, but with a good support fleet.
And ppl that goes 3:1 everyday in subcap numbers are too scared to drop supers.... So they drop tears on the forums. |
Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
295
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 09:53:00 -
[2199] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:Supercaps can kill supercaps therefore supercaps aren't overpowered?
OK. No you see its perfectly balanced because if you want to do anything outside of highsec you just have to get your own bigger supercap blob.
Are you trying to say you can manage a 45000 member coalition. Get 2 people from your own alliance elected to the CSM. However your entire group can muster to produce a supercapital force? CFC milks 60+ tech moons alone not counting other R64's. I would think that you are mismanaging your isk as alliances or spending it unwisely. Don't be hatin because you made bad strategic decisions. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7385
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 10:22:00 -
[2200] - Quote
zero2espect wrote:So i think that this is page 86 of a forum thread. I know i am wasting my time because a. it's page 86 of a forum thread and b. i've been playing eve since beta and CCP have never, once, listed to any advice or comment from its fan base (ok, maybe once when zealots only had 4 guns). But at least leaving a comment will make me feel better.
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
For me, the 15min logoffski timer would fix 40% of the issue anyway. Just by itself.
Stop capitals in missions. Just stop them.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Dreads. Halving the siege time. Perfect. Removal of drones. Stupid. ItGÇÖs ~1.8b of ships before mods and now has zero defence, in or out of siege. Put the drones back and donGÇÖt try to fix lag through cheating us.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 5-10 fighters and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
YouGÇÖd get just as much love out of non-capital pilots if you just fixed low sec and militia and bring in some new sub-capital ships into the game. Good post.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 10:46:00 -
[2201] - Quote
XPistolX wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote: Thanks for the link to a group of supercaps being killed by a smaller group of supercaps.
Fixed for ya. Evekill is down now, but IIRC they did it against a bigger supercap fleet, but with a good support fleet.
Nope. The raw killboard reports include some of the blob of White Noise/Raiden etc supercaps which bailed out the remaining RA fleet (the ones which appear on the report are there because they zapped a few straggling subcaps as the Curse guys disengaged, I'm assuming that more came in but didn't get onto any mails) but who weren't on the field when all the RA titans died.
http://kb.redalliance.pro/?op=related&id=526239 is up at the moment if you want to take some time to analyse the data - look at the participation of the Raiden/WhiteNoise supercaps, of those that got onto the report at all, all have only one kill because as soon as they showed up, the supercap numbers went against Curse, and they bailed. ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 10:55:00 -
[2202] - Quote
Quote: When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
That made sense to me... I don't really understand the adversion they have with people internrally with a job to regularly tweak algortihms .... there needs to be some discipline to be sure moves are gradual... no one wants things random or to get suddenly blindsided by something that hadn't been at least floated conceptually repeatedly... |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 11:19:00 -
[2203] - Quote
Metal Dude wrote:Once again you fkn morons! The problem is the blob, NAPs and numbers instead of skill. The only thing the nurf will bring to the game is bigger blob, since there is no counter to it. CCP and all you ****** can never see the real issue, it has been like this for fkn 5 years and no matter how you balance the ships, it will always be there until the game discourages blobbing instead of encouraging it. But the loudest voice is that of the goons who always whine about nerfing the only counter to their blob that there is and since CCP has been bending over like a little ***** in heat to the goons for years, this game has been **** and it will continue to be ****. No nerf will change that, it will only bring more whines of "CCP, fix your game" when 3K blob cant do **** due to the lag that the nerf will bring. Idiots.
The "We plucky rebels deserve to have super-imba-instapwn ships to FIGHT THE EVIL POWER" argument kind of falls over when the "plucky rebels" are part of a coalition that controls over 60% of sov 0.0
You're not the Luke Skywalkers in this show man. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 11:20:00 -
[2204] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:Supercaps can kill supercaps therefore supercaps aren't overpowered?
OK. No you see its perfectly balanced because if you want to do anything outside of highsec you just have to get your own bigger supercap blob. Are you trying to say you can manage a 45000 member coalition. Get 2 people from your own alliance elected to the CSM. However your entire group can muster to produce a supercapital force? CFC milks 60+ tech moons alone not counting other R64's. I would think that you are mismanaging your isk as alliances or spending it unwisely. Don't be hatin because you made bad strategic decisions.
You mean "strategic decisions" like throwing your alliance mates under a bus and joining the winning team? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 12:24:00 -
[2205] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote: Are you trying to say you can manage a 45000 member coalition. Get 2 people from your own alliance elected to the CSM. However your entire group can muster to produce a supercapital force? CFC milks 60+ tech moons alone not counting other R64's. I would think that you are mismanaging your isk as alliances or spending it unwisely. Don't be hatin because you made bad strategic decisions.
The thing that you don't seem to get is that it's possible to have a large supercap fleet and still think that supercaps are **** and need to be fixed. I've built (as just one of several builders in GSF) a tremendous number of titans and supercarriers in the last 12 months, but fact still remains that supercarriers are hilariously badly implemented right now.
|
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 12:36:00 -
[2206] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: Are you trying to say you can manage a 45000 member coalition. Get 2 people from your own alliance elected to the CSM. However your entire group can muster to produce a supercapital force? CFC milks 60+ tech moons alone not counting other R64's. I would think that you are mismanaging your isk as alliances or spending it unwisely. Don't be hatin because you made bad strategic decisions.
The thing that you don't seem to get is that it's possible to have a large supercap fleet and still think that supercaps are **** and need to be fixed. I've built (as just one of several builders in GSF) a tremendous number of titans and supercarriers in the last 12 months, but fact still remains that supercarriers are hilariously badly implemented right now.
trust him hes a doctor!
|
Midnight Firestarter
Anger Management
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 12:45:00 -
[2207] - Quote
Goons want a Super nerf because they don't have that many = Devs want Super Nerf. |
Xue Slick
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 13:02:00 -
[2208] - Quote
Midnight Firestarter wrote:Goons want a Super nerf because they don't have that many = Devs want Super Nerf.
What? |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 13:03:00 -
[2209] - Quote
Midnight Firestarter wrote:Goons want a Super nerf because they don't have that many = Devs want Super Nerf.
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to breakdown how many super caps I have built in the last 12 months while the numbers are still ~strategically sensitive~. Come back in winter and I'll tell you exactly how many super carriers I've made.
The 'I replaced my epeen with a supercarrier' brigade are trying to throw up a smoke screen of 'goons are jealous because they don't have any supercaps' while trying to obfuscate the fact that they are upset because they thought they'd 'won eve'.
Pro-tip for you guys: There's only one way to win eve, and it's not buy spending a lot of money on an internet spaceship. |
Death2all Supercaps
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 13:25:00 -
[2210] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Midnight Firestarter wrote:Goons want a Super nerf because they don't have that many = Devs want Super Nerf. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to breakdown how many super caps I have built in the last 12 months while the numbers are still ~strategically sensitive~. Come back in winter and I'll tell you exactly how many super carriers I've made. The 'I replaced my epeen with a supercarrier' brigade are trying to throw up a smoke screen of 'goons are jealous because they don't have any supercaps' while trying to obfuscate the fact that they are upset because they thought they'd 'won eve'. Pro-tip for you guys: There's only one way to win eve, and it's not buy spending a lot of money on an internet spaceship.
(hes not really sorry) ;) |
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 13:35:00 -
[2211] - Quote
how to win eve by goons
step 1 make a thread when you can't win make a thread have ccp change the game to suit goons
step 2 whine. wait a month goons lose again make a new thread and a million others and spam local ccp change it again for goons
step 3 have a goon join ccp this have happened still love you serge
step 4 try and take over CSM happened on part but they have a controlling interest (mittans grand ruler of the pubbys)
this leaves us with the majority of old time eve players being s--t on my ccp and the coming changes if anyone has noticed that the goons coalition is now the largest after most DRF have reset each other now they have the controlling interest in 0.0 what will they change next about goon online |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 13:43:00 -
[2212] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote: if anyone has noticed the larges coalition in eve is now goons with the reset from drf now they have the controlling interest in 0.0 what will they change next about goon online
I ignored the rest of your crap (because it was all crap) but this is exactly how 'reset' the DRF is:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=21828&find=unread
They are SO reset that they are still scrambling fleets to defend each others supercaps. So I guess it's the kind of reset where you keep your standings and actively work together on ops to achieve mutual goals.
It's probably just a language barrier thing, but native speakers would call that more of an ongoing coalition than a standings reset. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 13:52:00 -
[2213] - Quote
with most of the alliance making up the coalition neutral to each other and roaming each other space to find them faction fitted tengu its a reset not saying their no hip in place thi |
loser mclame fatty
Catelo Productions LLC
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 13:56:00 -
[2214] - Quote
the people in this thread are worse than the poor people in america who vote for republicans jesus christ you are all ******** |
Acwron
Meet The Fockers Vera Cruz Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 14:06:00 -
[2215] - Quote
loser mclame fatty wrote:the people in this thread are worse than the poor people in america who vote for republicans jesus christ you are all ********
I totally agree...wait, you're in this thread too ! Damn, I am also !
I have a question for those who want SC's nerfed :
HOW ARE WE GOING TO CALL THEM FROM NOW ON ??? Cos Super Carrier will be quite inappropriate ! What they will carry if they don't carry drones of all kinds? Prostitutes? I'd love that but I doubt CCP wants us happy...maybe in some future expansion, Pornucopia...
I agree they are abit overpowered but taking 20% HP should be enough imo.
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 15:08:00 -
[2216] - Quote
Acwron wrote:loser mclame fatty wrote:the people in this thread are worse than the poor people in america who vote for republicans jesus christ you are all ******** I totally agree...wait, you're in this thread too ! Damn, I am also !I have a question for those who want SC's nerfed : HOW ARE WE GOING TO CALL THEM FROM NOW ON ??? Cos Super Carrier will be quite inappropriate ! What they will carry if they don't carry drones of all kinds? Prostitutes? I'd love that but I doubt CCP wants us happy...maybe in some future expansion, Pornucopia... I agree they are abit overpowered but taking 20% HP should be enough imo.
You are really but hurt because your supercapital BLOB is about to die. Super Carrier... is a Carrier.. Super not standing there for being an invincible game braking ship but Super as in Super-sized Carrier. And no its not enough 20%EHP reduction is great for all apart for HEL that has been neglected since it came out.
End Story is final:
1) These ships had such powerhouse in them because they were so-pose to be rare then it would work if each alliance had maybe max 3-5 of these. 2) These ships are so many in numbers they can no longer poses so much survivability to damage ratio. 3) Any ability these ships have to do damage to sub capital ships is stupid and should be removed because it only encourages the super capital BLOB
It does not matter how much you spent for it, how much base price is, how much longer you had to train or what their title is. The fact is they were so pose to be ULTRA RARE then they can stay as they are but they are so many in numbers they need to be nerfed now once and for all.
REMOVE THE ABILITY FOR SUPER CAPITALS TO DO DAMAGE TO SUB CAPITALS
MAKE THEM DEPEND ON SUB CAPITAL SUPPORT AGAINST OTHER SUB CAPITALS
MAKE THEM USELESS SPACE "D I C K S" THAT THEY WERE MEANT TO BE BY GIVING THEM THEIR TRUE ROLE BACK
NERF THEM EVEN MORE |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 15:20:00 -
[2217] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Midnight Firestarter wrote:Goons want a Super nerf because they don't have that many = Devs want Super Nerf. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to breakdown how many super caps I have built in the last 12 months while the numbers are still ~strategically sensitive~. Come back in winter and I'll tell you exactly how many super carriers I've made. The 'I replaced my epeen with a supercarrier' brigade are trying to throw up a smoke screen of 'goons are jealous because they don't have any supercaps' while trying to obfuscate the fact that they are upset because they thought they'd 'won eve'. Pro-tip for you guys: There's only one way to win eve, and it's not buy spending a lot of money on an internet spaceship.
I dont like Goons i think they are a bunch of sociopaths but they alone did what most of us failed to do. They **** caged combined DRF and PL super fleet in one system and broke all attempts enemy tried at advancing or saving their super capitals and managed to kill their enemy's super carriers outside their space while on strict defense.
Say what you will but whole "POWER BLOCK" as they call them selves got BUT HURT so badly they only have on thing left and that is crying that Goons are the result of this nerf.
But if you take a closer look they are nerfing super capitals not because of GOONs or GOON CSM but because the same people who now cry about supers being nerfed and are blaming goons over abused SUPER CAPITAL BLOB to a point where heading out whit large fleets or making any kind of invasion plans is pointles.
So DONT BLAME - Goons for the SUPER CAPITAL NERF - You brought this to your self You people that participated in Super Capital BLOB warfare are the result of this nerf and how severe it has to be NOT GOONS.
You are only crying now because you know that most of these "hardcore pvp alliances", WN., RA, PL, Raiden.,NC., Shadow are 2 pathetic to fight on an equal plane and you know you will be loosing humiliating fights to alliances you call minor unimportant carebare alliances like : AAA, RAZOR, BRICK, MM, ROL, SE, COVEN, RL, TEST, GSF, FA etc.. |
Acwron
Meet The Fockers Vera Cruz Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 16:10:00 -
[2218] - Quote
FHM wrote:Acwron wrote:loser mclame fatty wrote:the people in this thread are worse than the poor people in america who vote for republicans jesus christ you are all ******** You are really but hurt because your supercapital BLOB is about to die. Super Carrier... is a Carrier.. Super not standing there for being an invincible game braking ship but Super as in Super-sized Carrier. And no its not enough 20%EHP reduction is great for all apart for HEL that has been neglected since it came out. End Story is final: 1) These ships had such powerhouse in them because they were so-pose to be rare then it would work if each alliance had maybe max 3-5 of these. 2) These ships are so many in numbers they can no longer poses so much survivability to damage ratio. 3) Any ability these ships have to do damage to sub capital ships is stupid and should be removed because it only encourages the super capital BLOB It does not matter how much you spent for it, how much base price is, how much longer you had to train or what their title is. The fact is they were so pose to be ULTRA RARE then they can stay as they are but they are so many in numbers they need to be nerfed now once and for all. REMOVE THE ABILITY FOR SUPER CAPITALS TO DO DAMAGE TO SUB CAPITALS
MAKE THEM DEPEND ON SUB CAPITAL SUPPORT AGAINST OTHER SUB CAPITALS
MAKE THEM USELESS SPACE "D I C K S" THAT THEY WERE MEANT TO BE BY GIVING THEM THEIR TRUE ROLE BACK
NERF THEM EVEN MORE
You want a SUPER CAPITAL SHIP dependent of some other ships ? That's their role, to be dependent ? LOL LOL LOL
Hey bro, I just spend a shite lot of isk on a SC...--> Cool bro ! But but...I can't do anything with it...---> Why bro ? Cos I'm dependent on other ships, I can't hit subcapitals, I can't carry drones, I'm you know...around...but can't do shite.
Bro, now I have a TITAN ! Spent all my isk earned in years, trained for years to fly it and now, here I am, KING OF THE HILL ! But but...I can't hit anything cos some lame arses complained...Why am I better than them? I dunno, maybe cos I have years of training and you have a few days? Hmmm...tough question...
You my friend are hopeless...go fly your glorious drake...These ships are THE BIGGEST and MOST POWERFUL SHIPS in game and that's the way they have to stay !
Biomass is your destiny...
<------Tetris this way Solitaire -------> That way |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 16:18:00 -
[2219] - Quote
sorry but i have to take a look at this list of minor unimportant carebare alliances you have lets start with this list here non of them are classed as unimportant each have show they can fight and fight well meny of them can't do it allow but its why their in a power block for the support of their allies : AAA, RAZOR, BRICK, MM, SE, COVEN, TEST, GSF, FA
unimportant carebare alliance ROL, nail on the head comes to mind
and who is RL,
=======
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. let advanced carriers dock
|
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 16:30:00 -
[2220] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:sorry but i have to take a look at this list of minor unimportant carebare alliances you have lets start with this list here non of them are classed as unimportant each have show they can fight and fight well meny of them can't do it allow but its why their in a power block for the support of their allies : AAA, RAZOR, BRICK, MM, SE, COVEN, TEST, GSF, FA
unimportant carebare alliance ROL, nail on the head comes to mind
and who is RL,
=======
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. let advanced carriers dock
Noob alliance reporting in , still have more space and do more battles in 0.0 than your leet pvp group brahh.
|
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 16:41:00 -
[2221] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:=======
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you loyal eve fans and addicts
How to fix a titan by making them remote links stop working on them. getting impunity for ewar means it should not get any form of help from remote links like tracking and sebo.
nurf changes hp hit great but not the hel DD fine agro timer great
sc let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3 this will cut if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
on a side note super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. let advanced carriers dock
Denial Anger Bargaining Depression Acceptance
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 16:42:00 -
[2222] - Quote
Quote:Noob alliance reporting in , still have more space and do more battles in 0.0 than your leet pvp group brahh.
bots ratting is not a battles trying to save your alliance leader from the ban hammer may be tho will have to check with ccp on that whats the count now 2 banned |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 16:50:00 -
[2223] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote: bots ratting is not a battles trying to save your alliance leader from the ban hammer may be tho will have to check with ccp on that whats the count now 2 banned
He mad |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 17:06:00 -
[2224] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:Quote:Noob alliance reporting in , still have more space and do more battles in 0.0 than your leet pvp group brahh. bots ratting is not a battles trying to save your alliance leader from the ban hammer may be tho will have to check with ccp on that whats the count now 2 banned
You mad brah? |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 17:26:00 -
[2225] - Quote
just stating that rol has lost 2 alliance leaders to a RMT bot scandal the only time you see rol is moving in high sec or ratting and warping to a ss
|
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 18:13:00 -
[2226] - Quote
I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? |
Acwron
Meet The Fockers Vera Cruz Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 18:19:00 -
[2227] - Quote
Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ?
Good point there :D
I can't hit you in SC or Titan but you wanna hit me, huh? FAIR ENOUGH ! I'll eject and bump you to death ! |
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 18:28:00 -
[2228] - Quote
Acwron wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Good point there :D I can't hit you in SC or Titan but you wanna hit me, huh? FAIR ENOUGH ! I'll eject and bump you to death !
After all... CCP calls this re-balancing. If there is some balance in this (nerf) I cant see an other solution
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 18:47:00 -
[2229] - Quote
Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ?
Truthfully i would not have a problem whit that. But it would be game braking. Since its only logical that Super Capitals cant damage sub capitals and sub capitals can damage super capitals.
Whatever the change it end result must be: STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:00:00 -
[2230] - Quote
Vaffel Junior wrote:Acwron wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Good point there :D I can't hit you in SC or Titan but you wanna hit me, huh? FAIR ENOUGH ! I'll eject and bump you to death ! After all... CCP calls this re-balancing. If there is some balance in this (nerf) I cant see an other solution
Also just cuss it would be Fair does not mean that it would be balanced. Only reason Titans and Super Carriers have so much power is because they were meant to be very very rare and if that were the case than there would be no need for nerf but we have taken these ships that are so much overpowered and multiplied them to 1000s. Not to mention killing one today means nothing since most alliances can reimburse the losses instantly.
There are 2 SOLUTIONS that work for long term to stop SUPER CAPITAL blob.
1) Either nerf all super capitals so they cant damage sub capital ships
2) Change the build time and build cost for Super Carrier to be 150 Billion and 2 Months and for Titan 500 Bilion and 6 months. In addition change the Titan skill to where it takes 25 days for lvl 2 + 35 for lvl 3 + 45 for lvl 4 + 55 for lvl 5 and if you die in a Titan you instantly loose all skill lvls in skill Titan.
Also make it so that Alliance needs an additional skill that takes 4 months to train to lvl1 that allows them to build super capitals and that even then they can build only 1 Titan and 1 Super Carrier at a time and that the skill book costs 100 billion.
There we go either of the solutions work. |
|
BRICKS4BALLS
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:00:00 -
[2231] - Quote
The same points being brought up by the same people, a reflection of the way they play the game.
I agree with the major points, stop the blobs and keep the supercaps able to defend themselves.
One way forward, possibly the best way forward would have been to reduce the ehp even more and keep the rest of their current capability. Keeping their build/cost requirements as they are but reducing the ehp to say around 20-30% would make them much easier to take down and also a risk that would have to be considered. This change coupled with the logoff timer change being introduced would perhaps be a better step. Yeah they may be many more factors to consider with balancing, logistics restrictions etc but they should be great ships at that price, but also able to be destroyed.
The current changes will make them suck too much. I would rather they have their current capability and a massive reduction in ehp whilst retaining their price.
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:21:00 -
[2232] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:The same points being brought up by the same people, a reflection of the way they play the game.
I agree with the major points, stop the blobs and keep the supercaps able to defend themselves.
One way forward, possibly the best way forward would have been to reduce the ehp even more and keep the rest of their current capability. Keeping their build/cost requirements as they are but reducing the ehp to say around 20-30% would make them much easier to take down and also a risk that would have to be considered. This change coupled with the logoff timer change being introduced would perhaps be a better step. Yeah they may be many more factors to consider with balancing, logistics restrictions etc but they should be great ships at that price, but also able to be destroyed.
The current changes will make them suck too much. I would rather they have their current capability and a massive reduction in ehp whilst retaining their price.
Whats the point if destroying one only means that you force that pilot to go to empire for 10min to grab new faction mods while his alliances takes 10min to hand him out a new one. Makes no sense.
When you kill a super carrier or a Titan it should hurt that alliance and it should hurt it really really bad and it should be humiliating to loose a titan and not just an everyday thing meh we lost 7 titans give me 1h ill get you all 7 back then we will petition CCP to reimburse them as well.
Nice process jhe we will RMT the one from CCP and keep the one from alliance and the stupid unbroken chain goes on and on. |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:22:00 -
[2233] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:Keeping their build/cost requirements as they are but reducing the ehp to say around 20-30% would make them much easier to take down and also a risk that would have to be considered. This change coupled with the logoff timer change being introduced would perhaps be a better step.
Reducing EHP only leads to bigger blobs cause supers need more protection from the support fleet. Today we come in 200, tomorrow we come with 400. We don't want that, do we?
Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:22:00 -
[2234] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:The same points being brought up by the same people, a reflection of the way they play the game.
I agree with the major points, stop the blobs and keep the supercaps able to defend themselves.
One way forward, possibly the best way forward would have been to reduce the ehp even more and keep the rest of their current capability. Keeping their build/cost requirements as they are but reducing the ehp to say around 20-30% would make them much easier to take down and also a risk that would have to be considered. This change coupled with the logoff timer change being introduced would perhaps be a better step. Yeah they may be many more factors to consider with balancing, logistics restrictions etc but they should be great ships at that price, but also able to be destroyed.
The current changes will make them suck too much. I would rather they have their current capability and a massive reduction in ehp whilst retaining their price.
i can agree on a bigger cut in hp to save their ability but the issues are only smoothed over for a limited time limiting the drone count and have 1 fighter bay and 1 drone bay works with the logged off timer can work
the timer need to be looked at tho being able to have a ship in held in place from dt to dt is silly |
BRICKS4BALLS
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:27:00 -
[2235] - Quote
Something along the lines of this is possibly what needs to happen.
Consider this hypothetical situation; 100 subcaps vs 100 supercarriers (not specifying the subcap ships, lets say they are mixed bs) The supercarriers SHOULD win, but at the cost of maybe 2 or 3 supercarriers. But they should still be able to hit the bs and win. Obvioulsy the cost of losing 2 or 3 supercarriers far outweighs the cost of 100 bs, so this would be a trade off (financially).
But this should be able to happen, this is the direction the balancing should go, not completely taking away their ability to hit anything below capital.
|
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:28:00 -
[2236] - Quote
also lets have a look at the DD and something most will hate
DD can only hit capitals right.
how about having the old dd back in play but as a scripted mods with scripted the DD will do 500 to 1000 dmg with out the scrip max dmg on a cap ship only DD skill level taken in to account, given that 500 to 1k dmg will not hurt any ship apart from frigs and drones even with 20 titans most ships can hold out with 40 titans on them even more,
so lets here some ideas on this is you like it
FHM say nothing we know you agree with me on this, |
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:49:00 -
[2237] - Quote
FHM wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Truthfully i would not have a problem whit that. But it would be game braking. Since its only logical that Super Capitals cant damage sub capitals and sub capitals can damage super capitals. Whatever the change it end result must be: STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB
What about : STOP THE SUB CAPITAL BLOB ?
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:52:00 -
[2238] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:also lets have a look at the DD and something most will hate
DD can only hit capitals right.
how about having the old dd back in play but as a scripted mods with scripted the DD will do 500 to 1000 dmg with out the scrip max dmg on a cap ship only DD skill level taken in to account, given that 500 to 1k dmg will not hurt any ship apart from frigs and drones even with 20 titans most ships can hold out with 40 titans on them even more,
so lets here some ideas on this is you like it
FHM say nothing we know you agree with me on this,
I dont really care for the type of the nerf as long as it STOPS SUPERCAPITAL BLOB . The scenario BRICKS4BALLS proposed is pretty much stupid because 100 subcapital ships a mix of high dps BS cannot brake the s super capital repair chain so the sub capital fleet can shoot at them for years nothing to happen.
And again his comparison is flawed because he thinks that just cuss something costs so much more expansive it should be able to dominate the field. Nor is the proposed scenario possible where the super capital fleet would loose ships that is impossible because titans can wipe floor sub caps in few minutes while subcapital fleet would not be able to kill 1 sc before they would be taken down.
Only way to stop the super capital blob is to make them useless against sub capital ships so sub capital ships can kill super capital ships easier and forcing super capitals to depend on sub capital support .
Or not nerf the ships stats as all but make it so we can no longer produce so many at a time by rasing build and time cost to a much higher lvl say 150billion / 2months for a SC and 500 billion / 6 months
Or make it that you can only have 3 super capital ships in fleet and change game mechanic where two super carriers from two different fleets cant repair each other or do cap transfer. That way you could have multiple fleets but only the 3 super carriers in the same fleet can repair eachother and not the others from another fleet. And make it so that they need to be in fleet if they want to use RR so they cant just drop fleet and RR them selves |
Nova Soldier
ROMANIA Renegades ROMANIAN-LEGION
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 19:59:00 -
[2239] - Quote
Can anyone confirm that the new T2 Modules are actualy T2 Capital Modules? |
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 20:01:00 -
[2240] - Quote
Make subcaps unable to lock supers.... supers unable to attack subcaps. Carriers and dreads able to attack bouth supers and subcaps. All aliances have to build caps to defend their structures... EVE online earning more money. All rifter pilotes are safe from supers... Everyone happy....
Cause this was all about protecting subcaps from supers.... yes ? |
|
BRICKS4BALLS
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 20:06:00 -
[2241] - Quote
FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:also lets have a look at the DD and something most will hate
DD can only hit capitals right.
how about having the old dd back in play but as a scripted mods with scripted the DD will do 500 to 1000 dmg with out the scrip max dmg on a cap ship only DD skill level taken in to account, given that 500 to 1k dmg will not hurt any ship apart from frigs and drones even with 20 titans most ships can hold out with 40 titans on them even more,
so lets here some ideas on this is you like it
FHM say nothing we know you agree with me on this, I dont really care for the type of the nerf as long as it STOPS SUPERCAPITAL BLOB . The scenario BRICKS4BALLS proposed is pretty much stupid because 100 subcapital ships a mix of high dps BS cannot brake the s super capital repair chain so the sub capital fleet can shoot at them for years nothing to happen. And again his comparison is flawed because he thinks that just cuss something costs so much more expansive it should be able to dominate the field. Nor is the proposed scenario possible where the super capital fleet would loose ships that is impossible because titans can wipe floor sub caps in few minutes while subcapital fleet would not be able to kill 1 sc before they would be taken down. Only way to stop the super capital blob is to make them useless against sub capital ships so sub capital ships can kill super capital ships easier and forcing super capitals to depend on sub capital support . Or not nerf the ships stats as all but make it so we can no longer produce so many at a time by rasing build and time cost to a much higher lvl say 150billion / 2months for a SC and 500 billion / 6 months Or make it that you can only have 3 super capital ships in fleet and change game mechanic where two super carriers from two different fleets cant repair each other or do cap transfer. That way you could have multiple fleets but only the 3 super carriers in the same fleet can repair eachother and not the others from another fleet. And make it so that they need to be in fleet if they want to use RR so they cant just drop fleet and RR them selves
OK, but in my previous post I said some logistic restictions should maybe be considered.
My post meant make it so 100bs would be defeated by 100 supercarriers at the cost of 2 or 3 supercarriers, so the balancing would come by whatever means necessary to make this possible. My idea is only the concept that 100bs should still lose the battle but the cost would be much greater to the team that brought the 100 supercarriers and lost a few of those ships.
They should be similar (by whatever means possible) to pirate faction bs and their counterparts; by that i mean better than carriers, i.e as they are now, but not much harder to kill (as they are now) at the same time costing a hell of alot more isk. |
BRICKS4BALLS
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 20:18:00 -
[2242] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:also lets have a look at the DD and something most will hate
DD can only hit capitals right.
how about having the old dd back in play but as a scripted mods with scripted the DD will do 500 to 1000 dmg with out the scrip max dmg on a cap ship only DD skill level taken in to account, given that 500 to 1k dmg will not hurt any ship apart from frigs and drones even with 20 titans most ships can hold out with 40 titans on them even more,
so lets here some ideas on this is you like it
FHM say nothing we know you agree with me on this, I dont really care for the type of the nerf as long as it STOPS SUPERCAPITAL BLOB . The scenario BRICKS4BALLS proposed is pretty much stupid because 100 subcapital ships a mix of high dps BS cannot brake the s super capital repair chain so the sub capital fleet can shoot at them for years nothing to happen. And again his comparison is flawed because he thinks that just cuss something costs so much more expansive it should be able to dominate the field. Nor is the proposed scenario possible where the super capital fleet would loose ships that is impossible because titans can wipe floor sub caps in few minutes while subcapital fleet would not be able to kill 1 sc before they would be taken down. Only way to stop the super capital blob is to make them useless against sub capital ships so sub capital ships can kill super capital ships easier and forcing super capitals to depend on sub capital support . Or not nerf the ships stats as all but make it so we can no longer produce so many at a time by rasing build and time cost to a much higher lvl say 150billion / 2months for a SC and 500 billion / 6 months Or make it that you can only have 3 super capital ships in fleet and change game mechanic where two super carriers from two different fleets cant repair each other or do cap transfer. That way you could have multiple fleets but only the 3 super carriers in the same fleet can repair eachother and not the others from another fleet. And make it so that they need to be in fleet if they want to use RR so they cant just drop fleet and RR them selves OK, but in my previous post I said some logistic restictions should maybe be considered. My post meant make it so 100bs would be defeated by 100 supercarriers at the cost of 2 or 3 supercarriers, so the balancing would come by whatever means necessary to make this possible. My idea is only the concept that 100bs should still lose the battle but the cost would be much greater to the team that brought the 100 supercarriers and lost a few of those ships. They should be similar (by whatever means possible) to pirate faction bs and their counterparts; by that i mean better than carriers, i.e as they are now, but not much harder to kill (as they are now) at the same time costing a hell of alot more isk.
Typo, "but not much harder to kill (as they are now)" I meant by this opposite to they are atm. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 20:53:00 -
[2243] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:Obvioulsy the cost of losing 2 or 3 supercarriers far outweighs the cost of 100 bs,
Not by all that much, 100 fleet BS @ ~200 mill each cost about the same as a well fitted supercarrier.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
103
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 01:59:00 -
[2244] - Quote
It is clear that Titans and Moms were poorly designed and have caused (and these changes will actually only force moms to blob more and titans become king again) a bundle of balance issues as a whole. I hope that this is a lesson that just because it looks cool, its large and shiny, does not mean it should be added.
SCs should be able to defend themselves, and like a previous poster said, their problem was not EHP per se but the massive damage they did with FBs. FBs spelled the end of dreads and broke the really good balance in terms of roles and features that carriers and dreads had (yes, there were some problems, but nothing this large). Now SCs will not be able to defend themselves and will get mothballed. but maby this is a good thing - short of of just removing them which in some respects is a better move then what is being attempted here.
The logoff timer is good, but that was an easy idea. Hard to go wrong there.
And what reason is there to bring a dread to a fight now? It will still snap like a twig.
It seems like we are right back in 06.
|
Stealthiest
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 03:03:00 -
[2245] - Quote
What is not being said here is the real problem with the proliferation of SC and Titans.
It is the macro miners and the massive proliferation of minerals on the markets.
I remember when We (ASCN) in a race with BoB had to work as a massive team to build Cyvok's Titan. The concept of procuring 100 Billion in Minerals and another 150Billion in BPO's was nearly unimaginable. Dozens of people mining in various groups pre-hulk etc etc took weeks to accumulate the minerals required. We beat BoB by getting the titan out of the oven before them by about 18 hours. (we also beat bob by having the first titan killed by a few weeks.(HI MOLLE :)
What I am getting at is hulks and all the stations in 0.0 has made minerals easy to come by. Rorquals compressing ore and shipping it to empire to be refined has led to me being able to buy a titans worth of minerals in 20 minutes. I can then contract red frog to haul it all to a rail gun builder. Then I get Black Frog to jump it to my low sec jumpout station. The in just a few JF jumps I can have it in my cyno jammed CSAA building comps and titans. I don't mean to brag but I have built over 2 dozen titans virtually by myself and about 100 MS.
It is the bots and the zydrine drones that have allowed me to build a titan every 15 days by myself and my army of alt cap builders.
If the hulks were not inserted into the game. If the Freighters had not been inserted, If jump freighters had not been inserted. If, if, if........... We would not be suffering from an plethora if Super capital Ships.
What about the wealth created by the complete imbalance of high end moon distribution. If CCP had not provided many allainces with a blank cheque every month they would not be so easily able to by the mins in Jita.
I own several very valuable BPO's which allows me to earn passive isk at a tremdous rate. This has allowed me to accumulate wealth that was reserved for only the richest of allainces a mere 5 years ago.
So should we take those other things out of the game to?
Many things have contributed to the amount of Super Caps in game. But crippling them is not the answer. The whole process needs to be reviewed. Knee jerk reactions to the whinging of special interest groups has never and will never work.
If something is too strong, build something stronger to kill it.
I do like several things in this nerf. But dislike and disagree with several more.
1) Log off timer. Capital and Supercapital Log off timers should be increased to 30 minutes - not the potential dt to dt timer that it it could be with the proposed changes. I mean some people legitimately DIsCo. Should they loose an 80b isk ship because they DisCo'd. 2) EW immune ships should be completely immune. No boosting etc. 3) Titans AOE should be reinstated with diminishing capacity.(scripted etc) 4) Dreads shoud be buffed in HP and EHP more then they are now. 5) New ships - Titan Killers - should be introduced.
If these things were introduced I strongly believe that that would be plently of balance. One of the problems with CCP in my opinion is that they react by over reacting.
Introduce things slowly and see if that helps. If not cut a bit more and a bit more until it does help. If I have cancer in my foot CCP would amputate my whole leg with their current mindset. |
Pandora Peaks
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 03:20:00 -
[2246] - Quote
SC:
Not a pilot and my only experience with SC is when they're trying to kill my carrier.
I'd like to see more versatility retained.
Changes as stated except, FB force a special situation. If FB are loaded, only FB+ fighters can be loaded. If FB are NOT loaded, then Fighters and standard drones may be loaded. Allows it to choose between two roles...
1) FB+Fighters for BS, cap and supercap engagements. 2) Fighters+drones for subcaps.
Kinda like a carrier+
If this has been suggested, please ignore. If you don't like it, please ignore. If you like my internet Bewbs, please like. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1276
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 05:25:00 -
[2247] - Quote
FHM wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Truthfully i would not have a problem whit that. But it would be game braking. Since its only logical that Super Capitals cant damage sub capitals and sub capitals can damage super capitals. Whatever the change it end result must be: STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB
That's the most ******** thing I've ever read.
It's only logical that a semi truck can drive over a mini cooper.
Therefore it's only logical that a super cap should be able to walk all up and down your cane.
there must be no such thing as risk free pvp. If a sub cap has the balls to attack a super, it should have a tank to take it or get wiped off the grid.
Go back to logic school.
Infact, everybody who's hating super caps and the sheer awesomeness with which they can chew through a sub cap fleet, are all just as pathetic as newbies crying over losing a newly purchased cruiser to a low-sec gate camp prior to knowing how low sec pvp works. Then they proceed to cry over it, make a petition, threaten to quit if they don't get their stuff back, then threaten to quit if the game isn't changed to suit their play styles. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 06:18:00 -
[2248] - Quote
Ruah Piskonit wrote:It is clear that Titans and Moms were poorly designed and have caused (and these changes will actually only force moms to blob more and titans become king again) a bundle of balance issues as a whole. I hope that this is a lesson that just because it looks cool, its large and shiny, does not mean it should be added.
SCs should be able to defend themselves, and like a previous poster said, their problem was not EHP per se but the massive damage they did with FBs. FBs spelled the end of dreads and broke the really good balance in terms of roles and features that carriers and dreads had (yes, there were some problems, but nothing this large). Now SCs will not be able to defend themselves and will get mothballed. but maby this is a good thing - short of of just removing them which in some respects is a better move then what is being attempted here.
The logoff timer is good, but that was an easy idea. Hard to go wrong there.
And what reason is there to bring a dread to a fight now? It will still snap like a twig.
It seems like we are right back in 06.
Thats why we need to dumb down all super carriers and titans so that the short and long term effect is the end of super capital blob warfare. And that in long term we can start reducing numbers of these ships back to the point of rarity. We need to bring mayhem to order so we can create another type of mayhem.
I do not understand how and why current super capital pilots are crying about these nerfs they are not even good enough they need to be more severe.
Super capital pilots just dont understand that these ships are to OVERPOWERED at the moment is because they were meant to be few they were meant to be very very very rare but somewhere down the line the whole idea behind them spined off to a blob of them.
And every super capital pilot knew they day the super capital blob came to be that they will at some point be nerfed and that they will be nerfed badly. And i think its stupid now to cry about these changes but rather accept them as even as they are they are not severe enough they had 2 years of fun blobing it needs to stop this has spined off way 2 much. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 06:21:00 -
[2249] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:What is not being said here is the real problem with the proliferation of SC and Titans.
It is the macro miners and the massive proliferation of minerals on the markets.
I remember when We (ASCN) in a race with BoB had to work as a massive team to build Cyvok's Titan. The concept of procuring 100 Billion in Minerals and another 150Billion in BPO's was nearly unimaginable. Dozens of people mining in various groups pre-hulk etc etc took weeks to accumulate the minerals required. We beat BoB by getting the titan out of the oven before them by about 18 hours. (we also beat bob by having the first titan killed by a few weeks.(HI MOLLE :)
What I am getting at is hulks and all the stations in 0.0 has made minerals easy to come by. Rorquals compressing ore and shipping it to empire to be refined has led to me being able to buy a titans worth of minerals in 20 minutes. I can then contract red frog to haul it all to a rail gun builder. Then I get Black Frog to jump it to my low sec jumpout station. The in just a few JF jumps I can have it in my cyno jammed CSAA building comps and titans. I don't mean to brag but I have built over 2 dozen titans virtually by myself and about 100 MS.
It is the bots and the zydrine drones that have allowed me to build a titan every 15 days by myself and my army of alt cap builders.
If the hulks were not inserted into the game. If the Freighters had not been inserted, If jump freighters had not been inserted. If, if, if........... We would not be suffering from an plethora if Super capital Ships.
What about the wealth created by the complete imbalance of high end moon distribution. If CCP had not provided many allainces with a blank cheque every month they would not be so easily able to by the mins in Jita.
I own several very valuable BPO's which allows me to earn passive isk at a tremdous rate. This has allowed me to accumulate wealth that was reserved for only the richest of allainces a mere 5 years ago.
So should we take those other things out of the game to?
Many things have contributed to the amount of Super Caps in game. But crippling them is not the answer. The whole process needs to be reviewed. Knee jerk reactions to the whinging of special interest groups has never and will never work.
If something is too strong, build something stronger to kill it.
I do like several things in this nerf. But dislike and disagree with several more.
1) Log off timer. Capital and Supercapital Log off timers should be increased to 30 minutes - not the potential dt to dt timer that it it could be with the proposed changes. I mean some people legitimately DIsCo. Should they loose an 80b isk ship because they DisCo'd. 2) EW immune ships should be completely immune. No boosting etc. 3) Titans AOE should be reinstated with diminishing capacity.(scripted etc) 4) Dreads shoud be buffed in HP and EHP more then they are now. 5) New ships - Titan Killers - should be introduced.
If these things were introduced I strongly believe that that would be plently of balance. One of the problems with CCP in my opinion is that they react by over reacting.
Introduce things slowly and see if that helps. If not cut a bit more and a bit more until it does help. If I have cancer in my foot CCP would amputate my whole leg with their current mindset.
Can you elaborate on point 3) and point 5) what that is and the mechanic behind it. |
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 06:24:00 -
[2250] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:FHM wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Truthfully i would not have a problem whit that. But it would be game braking. Since its only logical that Super Capitals cant damage sub capitals and sub capitals can damage super capitals. Whatever the change it end result must be: STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB That's the most ******** thing I've ever read. It's only logical that a semi truck can drive over a mini cooper. Therefore it's only logical that a super cap should be able to walk all up and down your cane. there must be no such thing as risk free pvp. If a sub cap has the balls to attack a super, it should have a tank to take it or get wiped off the grid. Go back to logic school. Infact, everybody who's hating super caps and the sheer awesomeness with which they can chew through a sub cap fleet, are all just as pathetic as newbies crying over losing a newly purchased cruiser to a low-sec gate camp prior to knowing how low sec pvp works. Then they proceed to cry over it, make a petition, threaten to quit if they don't get their stuff back, then threaten to quit if the game isn't changed to suit their play styles.
But...but.... CCP dont have any logic.... why should I ? Infact , I am a nyx pilot..... I love my ship... and when my sub runns out... i die in it |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 06:34:00 -
[2251] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:FHM wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Truthfully i would not have a problem whit that. But it would be game braking. Since its only logical that Super Capitals cant damage sub capitals and sub capitals can damage super capitals. Whatever the change it end result must be: STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB That's the most ******** thing I've ever read. It's only logical that a semi truck can drive over a mini cooper. Therefore it's only logical that a super cap should be able to walk all up and down your cane. there must be no such thing as risk free pvp. If a sub cap has the balls to attack a super, it should have a tank to take it or get wiped off the grid. Go back to logic school. Infact, everybody who's hating super caps and the sheer awesomeness with which they can chew through a sub cap fleet, are all just as pathetic as newbies crying over losing a newly purchased cruiser to a low-sec gate camp prior to knowing how low sec pvp works. Then they proceed to cry over it, make a petition, threaten to quit if they don't get their stuff back, then threaten to quit if the game isn't changed to suit their play styles.
I cannot believe Fiberton or Sirius would let someone so stupid in to SF... The argument you provided is down right stupid and makes no sense. Tell me how much do you enjoy flying your SC in sanctums is that very interesting to you ?
Show me your ship deployed in combat against DRF show me a fight where you dared to take MM/BRICK combines super fleet of say 30 super capitals against DRF's 150. Show me that or try a fight like that and tell me how much you enjoy it when you will be steam rolled to dust.
Just because something is expansive, big, takes 3 days to train should not be the END GAME KING OF THE HILL. There is no such thing these ships are only that powerful because they were meant to be really really rare since that idea has sailed long time nerfing them down in the only logical solution.
However nerfing just the ships is only a temporary solution we need a long term solution and that would include changes to sov warfare, sov system, 0.0, distribution of high rarity moon and implementation of limiting systems that prevent over abuse. I understand you do not want the nerf considering your alliance always ran away from a super capital fight and only uses them to farm NPC's so nerfing them nerfs your isk gain.
But the end point is your argument makes no sense and solves 0 problems. End point and get this in to your arrogant and stupid super capital head.. THESE SHIPS ARE SO POWERFULL BECAUSE THEY WERE MEANT TO BE VERY RARE IF YOU CAN USE THEM AS A BLOB THEY NEED TO BE NERFED TO A BALANCED PLANE. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 06:38:00 -
[2252] - Quote
Vaffel Junior wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:FHM wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Truthfully i would not have a problem whit that. But it would be game braking. Since its only logical that Super Capitals cant damage sub capitals and sub capitals can damage super capitals. Whatever the change it end result must be: STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB That's the most ******** thing I've ever read. It's only logical that a semi truck can drive over a mini cooper. Therefore it's only logical that a super cap should be able to walk all up and down your cane. there must be no such thing as risk free pvp. If a sub cap has the balls to attack a super, it should have a tank to take it or get wiped off the grid. Go back to logic school. Infact, everybody who's hating super caps and the sheer awesomeness with which they can chew through a sub cap fleet, are all just as pathetic as newbies crying over losing a newly purchased cruiser to a low-sec gate camp prior to knowing how low sec pvp works. Then they proceed to cry over it, make a petition, threaten to quit if they don't get their stuff back, then threaten to quit if the game isn't changed to suit their play styles. But...but.... CCP dont have any logic.... why should I ? Infact , I am a nyx pilot..... I love my ship... and when my sub runns out... i die in it
You fail to see that you represent the 1% of eve population. More people are complaining about the super capitals being overpowered in large groups and being used in blobs. People like you are the result of the nerf so dont complain now you knew what using these ships in BLOBS meant and people like you kept doing it this is the result you brought on your selves dont blame others now. |
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 07:01:00 -
[2253] - Quote
FHM.... you are NOT 50% of eve population.... deal with it |
Stealthiest
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 08:16:00 -
[2254] - Quote
FHM wrote:Stealthiest wrote: words plus .......I do like several things in this nerf. But dislike and disagree with several more.
1) Log off timer. Capital and Supercapital Log off timers should be increased to 30 minutes - not the potential dt to dt timer that it it could be with the proposed changes. I mean some people legitimately DIsCo. Should they loose an 80b isk ship because they DisCo'd. 2) EW immune ships should be completely immune. No boosting etc. 3) Titans AOE should be reinstated with diminishing capacity.(scripted etc) 4) Dreads shoud be buffed in HP and EHP more then they are now. 5) New ships - Titan Killers - should be introduced.
If these things were introduced I strongly believe that that would be plently of balance. One of the problems with CCP in my opinion is that they react by over reacting.
Introduce things slowly and see if that helps. If not cut a bit more and a bit more until it does help. If I have cancer in my foot CCP would amputate my whole leg with their current mindset. Can you elaborate on point 3) and point 5) what that is and the mechanic behind it.
Because, and only because, this is the first post in this thread that you didn't call someone stupid or any other insult and actually asked a question will I answer it.
Point 3) Titans AOE should be reinstated with diminishing capacity.(scripted etc) - what I mean about this is that to hit a sc or another titan the titans AOE weapon should have a script loaded that allows a high focused very powerfull version of teh aoe to be discharged allowing it to hit one specific target. That target should be very large for it to be accurately aimed such as a Capital ship including freighters etc. It should only be fireable once every 10m. Otherwise if no script is loaded then the titans Super weapon is more like a giant sized smart bomb. Not doing any damage to itself or to anyone in it's fleet (fleets would have their shield harmonized at the same frequency) , but would do massive damage within 10km, 80 percent to 20km, 60 percent to 30 km, 40 percent to 40km, 20 percent to 50km and 0 above 50km from the ship. Drones would be subject to damage if with in the radius. For targets further away it must rely on it's guns. Tracking should be nerfed so that it would have significantly reduced chances of hitting anything smaller then a BS. Much like the way that wrecking shots are calculated. This AOE weapon should only be able to be fired once per 5 minutes.
Point 5 - New ships - Titan Killers - should be introduced. Several people have suggested a new ship class be introduced that is damned expensive. Like 250B to build. It has no drone bays. It has no turrent or missile slots. It has no bridge capablity. It has no cargo bay or ship maintenence bay. It has one job and one job only. It is a boat to carry a giangantic gun. One so large that it cannot hit anything smaller then a supercapital. But is has the power to, if it gets a wrecking shot, to one shot kill a titan. It can always one shot kill a Super Carrier. It is immune to all forms of e-war. It cannot be boosted nor would it need to be. It costs a lot of isk to fire the mega-super weapon. Like 100k racial isotopes. (don't make it Oxy - damn you mittens) . Once that weapon is fired it is immbile for 10 minutes. Completely immobile. Then it can be jumped out. It can only be tackled if three or more scripted hic's maintain a lock and the interdiction module on it. As sson as this is not met then the ship is jumpable. It would be subject to the same log off timer as point 1.
|
Xue Slick
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 09:05:00 -
[2255] - Quote
Simple solution to all these problems.
- Reduce the alliance sizes to say a 1000 chars max - Remove the blue system. Make it so you only have the negetive range. From neutral to red. - To support the lack of blueing, make a treaty system that costs both sides x amount per week. Very much like the current war decc system. - Another option is to limit the amount of specific classes of ships in a fleet. X amount of Titans, X amount of Super carriers.
If you do want to to change the ships. Double the drone bandwidth requirements on the fighter bombers. This will allow you to still launch 20 regular drones. But limit you to only 10 Fighter bombers. Half the DPS and half the lag. Not sure why CCP wants to change fighters and why they want to **** the super carriers so badly that they become POS hiding bling again.
At the end of the day. The ships are not really the problem. They are fine on their own, as a blob they are a serious issue :S |
Rodamus Zero
Clans of the Sanctums Quantum Decadence
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 09:15:00 -
[2256] - Quote
Im liking so far what im seeing in the proposed changes, though its a small step that needs a further look at with the whole of the capital issues.
Titans: Now that they are restricted to DDing only Caps, its still makes it a problem when deploying Dreads and Carriers and now, with the 20% global hitpoint reduction on Supercaps, possibly more of an issue for SCs and other Titans.
Persoanlly, there should be a range cap on the DD, other wise it still has total range control on the battlefield, it DDs as far as it locks and its local weapons (at least in the case of the turrets) mop up things close.
Even without its own drone compliment, the Leviathan is left in the dark as the other Titans can be remote tracking linked boosted, enabling them to fend off Subcaps at will and with great ease, something that many people agree on currently should not be allowed to continue. On the note of its main weapons, 100% to damage to capital turrets still makes them twice as powerful as sieged dreads without any penalties involved, by all means keep Titans as the king of capitals but make sure that the others can still be useful in the intended roles they have. Leviathan needs a global damage bonus, 125% to only kinetic is restrictive enough to a missle boat, RoF seems to make more sense and turns it into a Raven of sorts.
Titan Summary: Range Cap on Superweapons and the discontinuation of tracking assistance. Damage reduction on the Titans turret bonus. Leviathan needs a bonus change, either global damage or changed to RoF.
Supercarriers: Main issue I keep running into is the shear damage that this shipclass can dish out with Fighterbombers, while I think that removing standard drones from them is a good idea, it slightly nullifies logistics SCs when people utilize logistic drones in combination with a logistic roled SC.
As alot of people have pointed out, its nice having less drones to deal with, but the SC still needs some versatility, espeically since its now totally commited to engagments with the new log off mechanics. If your removing the drone bay to only allow Fighters/Bombers, then that versatility needs to be maintained. Have two seperate "fighter" bays, one for a full (25/30) compliment of fighters and a second "Bomber" bay for a full (25/30) Fighterbombers, totalling 50/60 fighter class support craft in total.
Even with the fighters change in Signature Resolution to 400, its still able to fend off Battleships. With two "fighterclass" bays, its able to then engage both Caps and Subcaps, though its going to need help with anything smaller than a BS, then again, its own support fleet and smaller carrier brethern can deal with that.
Fighterbombers on the otherhand, personally, they are far too powerful and need to be addressed. For the price they are, the hitpoints should not be changed, however, its the combination that the weapon its uses (Compact Citadel Torpedos) and skill bonus as well as the number fielded by a SC that make them so powerful and dominating.
I never understood how a single Fighterbomber managed, with a compact version of a weapon, to output more damage (3,000 on FB to 2,000 Standand) than a standardized Citadel Torpedo. In my opinion, it should be less or equal to its parent counterpart in raw damage output. Add in the FB skill bonus of 20% per level and it exacerbates the difference even more, pushing out outside the range of siege dreads and Titans main weapons on short measure to where a SC deploying 15 Fighterbombers does more damage without penalty in range and abilities of the immobile Dread and a Nyx can handle a Titan with ease.
Supercarrier Summery: Logistics drones need to still be considered. 2 "Fighter Class" bays need to be implimented for full flight of Fighters and a full flight of Fighterbombers to maintain versatility with the commiment due to new log off aggression mechanic. Fightbomber damage needs adjusting, overall less "raw" damage (Less or equal to standard Cit Torps) FB skill bonus adjusted, 10% or 15% and possible reduction in RoF to 20secs from 15secs.
Hel... scrap it, look at the blueprints and lets see what went wrong (Im sorry, I really dont know how to address this other than saying MORE HP! and essentially turning it into a Nyx with ducktape *shrugs*)
Dreadnoughts: Even in todays capital warfare, thanks to the change to Titans Superweapons now one shotting Dreads, Titans main weapons out damaging even sieged Dreads, Motherships being changed to Supercarriers and the introduction of Fighterbombers once again, out damaging sieged Dreads and then of Titans and Supercarriers having massive hitpoint increases, so now the Dread has an impossible time against these monstrosities, its hard pressed to find a role for Dreads, even the poor Naglfar had a bunch of changes added to it that was ultimatlely reverted back to pure verticleness.
Even with the change to the damage mod of the siege module, Titans will still outdamage Dreads in siege with no penalty by a great margin in any given role. Dreads can only lock 2 targets? Well, now that they no longer have a Drone bay to speak of, lets have that back to what it was... oh yes, on that note, can we have so that when Dreads enter Siege it DOES NOT remove currently locked targets.
Pesonally, Siege mode is far too restrictive in a whole heap of things, outside of siege it is useless, however when its entered, its role is made obsolete by other ship types. Even with the deployment cycle time of the module being reduced its stuck in one place and can only really shoot in a straight line at stationary objects and its personally tanking abilites may as well not be used at all given the damage recieved from DDs and FighterBombers.
Dreadnought Summery: Removal or reduction in all weapons and locking penalties from siege mode. Enhance tanking attributes further. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 09:46:00 -
[2257] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:Point 5 - New ships - Titan Killers - should be introduced. Several people have suggested a new ship class be introduced that is damned expensive. Like 250B to build....
I don't think an even bigger ship is the answer. It put a steep entry ticket to any alliance trying to get some 0.0 space, and it would just be a race at who get the most of those monsters, a race the DRF would be in position to win. If one powerblock has 15 titan killers on the fields and 50 titans, no one is going to jump in with their 5 titan killers.
The answer is the Dreadnought. It needs to be revamped enough that you can play the attrition game against supercap blobs. If 150 dreds+ support jump on 50 supercaps + equal support, the result needed is 15-25 dead supers in return of the entire dead dread fleet. Supercaps would still have their use, as they're individually far superior to caps, but it wouldn't be faisible for a powerbloc to rely only on them.
And think on how the mineral market would get stimulated by such slaughter. |
Bill Blake
AIGR Inc. Empire Logistics Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 13:00:00 -
[2258] - Quote
Gonna try put this as simply as I can.
20% Hit point reduction will do nothing to stop a blob. It will only drive Supercap pilots to blob more to ensure survival.
Spider tanking of supers is still there, you still arent gonna kill any if they have the right support fleet.
A tank can defend itself against a militant and a jeep...why should a regular carrier be able to kill a sabre tackling it, but not a supercap? it is entirely illogical.
Titans are still gonna be baws in large groups, regardless of the nerf. Only now you are gonna see any dread or carrier gang get instapopped instead of the t3 boosters etc etc.
Little point crying over a supercap blob. Any ship used in a blob is relatively effective, be it drakes, hurricanes, tengu's, abaddons or supers.
Log off timer should not be unlimited. Extended perhaps. but coupled witht he 20% hit point reduction, any lone supers tackled by a good sized fleet will now die in 15mins anyway.
All in all. You have got the nerf entirely wrong. You are pushing SC pilots towards the blob instead of away, and you are reducing the number of solo hotdrops by super pilots.
Kindest Regards
-Blue
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
293
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 13:17:00 -
[2259] - Quote
Bill Blake wrote: A tank can defend itself against a militant and a jeep...why should a regular carrier be able to kill a sabre tackling it, but not a supercap? it is entirely illogical.
You know what happens to an unsupported tank, when it's up against properly trained and equipped infantry? There's a reason you use an infantry screen for tanks in a city. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator and other 'useful' utilities. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 14:50:00 -
[2260] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:FHM wrote:Stealthiest wrote: words plus .......I do like several things in this nerf. But dislike and disagree with several more.
1) Log off timer. Capital and Supercapital Log off timers should be increased to 30 minutes - not the potential dt to dt timer that it it could be with the proposed changes. I mean some people legitimately DIsCo. Should they loose an 80b isk ship because they DisCo'd. 2) EW immune ships should be completely immune. No boosting etc. 3) Titans AOE should be reinstated with diminishing capacity.(scripted etc) 4) Dreads shoud be buffed in HP and EHP more then they are now. 5) New ships - Titan Killers - should be introduced.
If these things were introduced I strongly believe that that would be plently of balance. One of the problems with CCP in my opinion is that they react by over reacting.
Introduce things slowly and see if that helps. If not cut a bit more and a bit more until it does help. If I have cancer in my foot CCP would amputate my whole leg with their current mindset. Can you elaborate on point 3) and point 5) what that is and the mechanic behind it. Because, and only because, this is the first post in this thread that you didn't call someone stupid or any other insult and actually asked a question will I answer it. Point 3) Titans AOE should be reinstated with diminishing capacity.(scripted etc) - what I mean about this is that to hit a sc or another titan the titans AOE weapon should have a script loaded that allows a high focused very powerfull version of teh aoe to be discharged allowing it to hit one specific target. That target should be very large for it to be accurately aimed such as a Capital ship including freighters etc. It should only be fireable once every 10m. Otherwise if no script is loaded then the titans Super weapon is more like a giant sized smart bomb. Not doing any damage to itself or to anyone in it's fleet (fleets would have their shield harmonized at the same frequency) , but would do massive damage within 10km, 80 percent to 20km, 60 percent to 30 km, 40 percent to 40km, 20 percent to 50km and 0 above 50km from the ship. Drones would be subject to damage if with in the radius. For targets further away it must rely on it's guns. Tracking should be nerfed so that it would have significantly reduced chances of hitting anything smaller then a BS. Much like the way that wrecking shots are calculated. This AOE weapon should only be able to be fired once per 5 minutes. Point 5 - New ships - Titan Killers - should be introduced. Several people have suggested a new ship class be introduced that is damned expensive. Like 250B to build. It has no drone bays. It has no turrent or missile slots. It has no bridge capablity. It has no cargo bay or ship maintenence bay. It has one job and one job only. It is a boat to carry a giangantic gun. One so large that it cannot hit anything smaller then a supercapital. But is has the power to, if it gets a wrecking shot, to one shot kill a titan. It can always one shot kill a Super Carrier. It is immune to all forms of e-war. It cannot be boosted nor would it need to be. It costs a lot of isk to fire the mega-super weapon. Like 100k racial isotopes. (don't make it Oxy - damn you mittens) . Once that weapon is fired it is immbile for 10 minutes. Completely immobile. Then it can be jumped out. It can only be tackled if three or more scripted hic's maintain a lock and the interdiction module on it. As sson as this is not met then the ship is jumpable. It would be subject to the same log off timer as point 1.
The idea proposed is actually not that bad considering such AOE could render Super Carrier's whitout offensive power by eliminating any fighters, fighter bombers or regular drones off the field. But than in question is should these be limited to how many can be used in a sequence because if 30-70 Titans unleash such AOE at once how much damage would that inflict on other ships.
As for implementing a new ship that is an idea i promoted and suggested as well but these ships should really be implemented in a way so they do not in the end game substitute current super capital blob. I mean Titan was created to that purpose so was Super Carrier they were given this great survivability to damage ratio that off-course would have been fine if the idea of them stayed as CCP intended as really rare ships but somewhere down the line it all went wrong and now we have just 2 many of them and that still would not be a problem if killing out would actually mean something but we are at a point where some alliances can reimburse these whit ease.
Since there are so many active in the game and this nerf afflicts both sub capital pilots and super capital pilots it is important to look at it from both perspectives in detail. |
|
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1276
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 16:46:00 -
[2261] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Bill Blake wrote: A tank can defend itself against a militant and a jeep...why should a regular carrier be able to kill a sabre tackling it, but not a supercap? it is entirely illogical.
You know what happens to an unsupported tank, when it's up against properly trained and equipped infantry? There's a reason you use an infantry screen for tanks in a city.
I lolled. Urban warfare.
You know what happens to polish cavalry who charge German tanks, out in the field?
Yes, it's a valid point. It's not recommended best practice to field unescorted tanks in areas where they can be picked off.
At the same time tho, these gangs of bcs and BS lovers who are hating caps and supers for ganging up as well, are too polish for my taste and deserve to get wiped off the map.
So what if CCP meant for super caps to be the ultimate and hoped they would remain rare....
I'm sure the same intention was true when they first introduced battleships back in ye olden days of eve, long before caps and supers were a sparkle in CCP's eye.
And I don't see any topics condemning the blobs of battleships. Just topics demanding moar battleships. |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 16:49:00 -
[2262] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 17:45:00 -
[2263] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:BRICKS4BALLS wrote:Obvioulsy the cost of losing 2 or 3 supercarriers far outweighs the cost of 100 bs,
Not by all that much, 100 fleet BS @ ~200 mill each cost about the same as a well fitted supercarrier. So just twice or triple. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 17:59:00 -
[2264] - Quote
Bill Blake wrote:Gonna try put this as simply as I can.
20% Hit point reduction will do nothing to stop a blob. It will only drive Supercap pilots to blob more to ensure survival.
Spider tanking of supers is still there, you still arent gonna kill any if they have the right support fleet.
A tank can defend itself against a militant and a jeep...why should a regular carrier be able to kill a sabre tackling it, but not a supercap? it is entirely illogical.
Titans are still gonna be baws in large groups, regardless of the nerf. Only now you are gonna see any dread or carrier gang get instapopped instead of the t3 boosters etc etc.
Little point crying over a supercap blob. Any ship used in a blob is relatively effective, be it drakes, hurricanes, tengu's, abaddons or supers.
Log off timer should not be unlimited. Extended perhaps. but coupled witht he 20% hit point reduction, any lone supers tackled by a good sized fleet will now die in 15mins anyway.
All in all. You have got the nerf entirely wrong. You are pushing SC pilots towards the blob instead of away, and you are reducing the number of solo hotdrops by super pilots.
Kindest Regards
-Blue
This really. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 18:20:00 -
[2265] - Quote
FHM wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:FHM wrote:Vaffel Junior wrote:I see that its ok to do so that supers cant attack sub capitals.... It must be fair to do so that sub capitals cant attack supers allso then.. Rigth ? Truthfully i would not have a problem whit that. But it would be game braking. Since its only logical that Super Capitals cant damage sub capitals and sub capitals can damage super capitals. Whatever the change it end result must be: STOP THE SUPER CAPITAL BLOB That's the most ******** thing I've ever read. It's only logical that a semi truck can drive over a mini cooper. Therefore it's only logical that a super cap should be able to walk all up and down your cane. there must be no such thing as risk free pvp. If a sub cap has the balls to attack a super, it should have a tank to take it or get wiped off the grid. Go back to logic school. Infact, everybody who's hating super caps and the sheer awesomeness with which they can chew through a sub cap fleet, are all just as pathetic as newbies crying over losing a newly purchased cruiser to a low-sec gate camp prior to knowing how low sec pvp works. Then they proceed to cry over it, make a petition, threaten to quit if they don't get their stuff back, then threaten to quit if the game isn't changed to suit their play styles. I cannot believe Fiberton or Sirius would let someone so stupid in to SF... The argument you provided is down right stupid and makes no sense. Tell me how much do you enjoy flying your SC in sanctums is that very interesting to you ? Show me your ship deployed in combat against DRF show me a fight where you dared to take MM/BRICK combines super fleet of say 30 super capitals against DRF's 150. Show me that or try a fight like that and tell me how much you enjoy it when you will be steam rolled to dust. Just because something is expansive, big, takes 3 days to train should not be the END GAME KING OF THE HILL. There is no such thing these ships are only that powerful because they were meant to be really really rare since that idea has sailed long time nerfing them down in the only logical solution. However nerfing just the ships is only a temporary solution we need a long term solution and that would include changes to sov warfare, sov system, 0.0, distribution of high rarity moon and implementation of limiting systems that prevent over abuse. I understand you do not want the nerf considering your alliance always ran away from a super capital fight and only uses them to farm NPC's so nerfing them nerfs your isk gain. But the end point is your argument makes no sense and solves 0 problems. End point and get this in to your arrogant and stupid super capital head.. THESE SHIPS ARE SO POWERFULL BECAUSE THEY WERE MEANT TO BE VERY RARE IF YOU CAN USE THEM AS A BLOB THEY NEED TO BE NERFED TO A BALANCED PLANE.
I typed a nice long reply but since I clicked post and it deleted what i wrote.....**** it. |
Vulpes Ignis
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 18:50:00 -
[2266] - Quote
want to nerf the super blob so that subcap blob becomes #1
ALSO: I demand my Clone Vat Bay back if your going to take away my 10000 drones |
Thelron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 19:03:00 -
[2267] - Quote
(snip)
WTF forums, throwing out what I wrote and posting what I'd deleted from the quote... |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 20:38:00 -
[2268] - Quote
Silly Code, wouldnt let me edit so i had to repost:
I think that the Super Carrier's role needs to be defined.
What do we want it to do?
I strongly feel that it should be versatile.
Why? Well, because it's my own construct for what a Super Carrier is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercarrier
Name a situation that one of the US's super carrier's can not handle?
The US's military, is not the biggest, in fact may other military's are much bigger. Where we have the advantage is Force Projection. We can mobilize and deploy a force anywhere in the world within 48 hours.
We pay for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures We spend almost 700b on military per year. We spend 6 TIMES that of China, which comes in 2nd. We spend 4.7% of our GDP on military spending.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford_class_aircraft_carrier A 2009 report said that the Ford (a new class of SuperCarrier's that is expected to roll out soon) would cost $14 billion including research and development, and the actual cost of the carrier itself would be $9 billion.[12]
This ship is a little more then 1% of what we spend annually.
What is it's role? It projects force.
I would like to see THAT be the role of the Super Carrier.
I would love to have a fleet with a SC, where when my ship get's popped, I can get a new one from the SC. Where having an SC in fleet means that I can fight harder and longer. Right now, they don't get used for this often, as if the ship is configured other caps can take the ships out of them into their bay.
But that's just me, the whole point is that CCP needs to define what an SC should do, and we should decide what we would like it to do.
CCP, tell us what you intended the role to be, not a huge request, but that will go a long way :) |
Rogatien Soldier
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 21:16:00 -
[2269] - Quote
So from what I've read, when the dust settles, daily combat will swing toward sub-cap engagement as the standard because SC will be more vulnerable while remaining just as expensive. SC will be hoarded until they are pulled out for MAJOR fleet engagements.
CCP is re-balancing end-game combat to make it more accessible to newer (sub-cap) players (subscriptions) while making SC into a strategic asset to be used in rare situations (instead of daily) and only when supported by huge sub-cap fleets. Bottom line, SC-pilot tears is actually the goal of this change, so keep em coming. Sorry :-(
Just what I was thinking as I read it. But I'm a 10m sp sub-cap noob so probably wrong. |
Tarra Nobilii
The Soul Forge Sefric Legation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 23:25:00 -
[2270] - Quote
I think the moves are 'good hearted' but poorly conceived. I do not live in nul but do see many hotdrops in low that do discourage smaller alliances from even bringing their caps out. I do agree something needs done...however...I reject the following;
1) As stated in blog: "Dreadnoughts are not good enough" yet when one scrolls down on the same page you read "Dreadnoughts Remove drone bay from all dreadnoughts. Siege Module I: Boost damage bonus from 625% to 700% to compensate for loss of drones. Siege Module I: Duration time reduced to 5 minutes. Fuel cost -50%. Moros: Remove drone bonus. Moros: New bonus: 5% bonus to Capital Hybrid Turret rate of fire per level."
Quite frankly, stating that dreads are not 'good enough' then taking their drone bay is counter intuitive to me. In addition, what kind of swing does a 50m3 bay actually give? I think a small bay is perfectly adequate. As a Moros owner, I have sold my ship in preparation of the changes as I think they are crap..as is. The Moros was a ship with alot of flexibility....now it will become just like the others as a pure POS basher. While that role may be needed, it is totally boring and limited. I think dreads had a chance to be 'anti supercaps' or 'anti carrier'...but from this feedback I dont see that as a possibility. At this point, I am discouraged that i wasted skillpoints, isk, and time training for one....
2) I think a concept like this would be more plausible;
-Dreads (option 1) are good vs. battleships and above; can be overwhelmed by small stuff (BC and below) or (option 2) they are kings of subcaps but dont do much vs. other caps...both work...both fun -Carriers counter Dreads with fighters/bomber (limited sized bay....you carry bombers which are good vs. dreads, worthless vs. subcaps; you carry fighters which are worthless vs. dreads; effective but not great at subcaps (basically like frigs)) -elminate or greatly limit logistical roles...fewer high slots; limited size of drone/fighter bay forces decisions to be made. If drone bay is limited in size, then pilots cannot carry wings of fighters/bombers...they might only have 10-15 total fighters/bombers...thus they can mix types or specialize. Mixing makes their dps ****...specializing makes them victimized by opponent if the wrong type of fighter/bomber is used. -Super Carriers as huge logistics ships (no increase in offensive ability from carrier)..more high slots than regular carrier; able to fit multiple reppers/cap transfers and/or gang links...keep fleet alive; idk about hitpoints...maybe more hull? -Titans used to break logistics chains by popping caps only; equal to dread at bombardment; worthless vs. supcap
Anyways, just being creative. But each ship having a specific role is the start. I may be wrong but it seems supercaps were originally created to be superawesome big ships...idk if they have a role in mind to start. In addition, make capital remote reppers unable to be fit to Titans/dreads to enhance specialization. Give dreads/carriers ability to use gates in nul; some of the gates are absolutely huge...dont tell me they cant fit. So if someone uses 20 titans to hot drop...they wont be able to kill any subcap ships (perhaps use drones). If someone hot drops 20 supercarriers...probably the hardest to counter with the logistics chain...need to counter with dreads and/or titans (depending no their drone selection). Finally, alter cyno so supercaps have a garbage jump range (prevents hot drops quickly)...provides more powerful force but they are unable to make huge leaps into space. Titan can still bridge...but in very short ranges. Perhaps tie this into some recent changes to jump bridges (not knowledgeable to offer any feedback with that).
Anyways, just some creative thinking. As stated, I am not a nul resident so maybe my feedback is crap... |
|
Neterti Axexut
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.17 23:31:00 -
[2271] - Quote
As we have seen this weekend, titans and SCs are vulnerable as is. Not just to other supers, but also to conventionals. See the battle between RA versus Gypsies and friends where SEVEN titans and a SC went down.
These proposed nerfs make supers significantly more vulnerable when used in smaller groups (no - I am not advocating fixes that would allow for solo use of what are meant to be fleet ships), but do not solve the real problems behind their designs and do not address the issues of N+1: Blobs of conventionals will still be a threat, and N+1 super (SC or Titan) is still a viable counter.
So, start by tossing out the existing proposed nerfs. (if you want to keep the logoff timer change, apply it to EVERYTHING in game)
A simpler and more complete solution could be:
Titans
Adjust the sensor strength and the way that sensor strength calculates targeting time. That is, make it geometrically longer time to lock a ship the smaller it is. A simplified example would be:
- If a titan is attempting to lock another titan, SC or structure . . . . no change in lock time.
- If a titan is attempting to lock a BS-class hull, increase the lock time from 20s to 40s
- If a titan is attempting to lock a cruiser-class hull, increase the lock time from 40s to 120s
- If a titan is attempting to lock a frigate-class hull, increase the lock time from 90s to 360s
(the multiplier number could be adjusted a lot easier by CCP later if needed)
Let titans have the ability to DD or hit with its capital weapons any target.
- and -
Let titans only lock one or two targets at once.
In this way, if you want to DD a HIC or command ship, or blast it with your cap weapons . . . . fine. But it is going to take you considerable time to lock. And, as you know, once you begin locking a ship, that process has to continue. Changing your mind so you can either DD or plink with Cap Weapons a different target would then be a serious strategic decision.
Supercarriers
Apply the same lock time adjusts as detailed above.
Removing 20% of their Shield / Armor / Hull is neat, but is irrelevant if you have 60 of them on field remote repping each other. Instead of "fixing" the tank by reducing it, make SCs unable to remote rep other SCs. Keep their old HP. Hell. Increase it. And for the love of whatever personal God or gods you pray to, keep the regular drones. Just remove the ability to remote rep.
Regular carriers could still rep the SC (or titan for that matter), but are squishier and now even more an essential aspect of the support fleet. Once the carriers die, the SCs and titans get in trouble.
Finally, CCP please fix the shield tanked ships (from conventional to super) in the way their bonuses are applied. And give the Levi, the red-haired-stepchild of titans, the ability to hit smaller ships with its citadels like that its gunboat brothers have. While the gunboats can receive remote bonuses that enable them to track BS and other hulls quite well, the Levi just has to sit there and look pretty. At least it does that well! |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 06:22:00 -
[2272] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:Silly Code, wouldnt let me edit so i had to repost: I think that the Super Carrier's role needs to be defined. What do we want it to do? I strongly feel that it should be versatile. Why? Well, because it's my own construct for what a Super Carrier is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SupercarrierName a situation that one of the US's super carrier's can not handle? The US's military, is not the biggest, in fact may other military's are much bigger. Where we have the advantage is Force Projection. We can mobilize and deploy a force anywhere in the world within 48 hours. We pay for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expendituresWe spend almost 700b on military per year. We spend 6 TIMES that of China, which comes in 2nd. We spend 4.7% of our GDP on military spending. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford_class_aircraft_carrier A 2009 report said that the Ford (a new class of SuperCarrier's that is expected to roll out soon) would cost $14 billion including research and development, and the actual cost of the carrier itself would be $9 billion.[12] This ship is a little more then 1% of what we spend annually. What is it's role? It projects force. I would like to see THAT be the role of the Super Carrier. I would love to have a fleet with a SC, where when my ship get's popped, I can get a new one from the SC. Where having an SC in fleet means that I can fight harder and longer. Right now, they don't get used for this often, as if the ship is configured other caps can take the ships out of them into their bay. But that's just me, the whole point is that CCP needs to define what an SC should do, and we should decide what we would like it to do. CCP, tell us what you intended the role to be, not a huge request, but that will go a long way :)
Take 3 coast guard frigates or cruiser and send them against that supper carrier let them unleash a salvo against that deck and see how many fighters can you get off of it. Or take a single battleship let it fire one salvo off its turrets and that super carrier goes from a ship to a useless husk.
Yes such a ship could respond fast to an attack but caught by even a frigate alone its pretty much dead.. Thats why these big ships depend on smaller, agaile and fast ships to defend it aka sub capitals. Thats why navy puts them in to battlegroups where a carrier or a super carrier is a main command vessel.
To give you an idea of how it looks like and how it should look like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abraham-Lincoln-battlegroup.jpg
Also loosing say USS Nimitz that is a super carrier would be a BIG DEAL for USS and it would severely disrupt its military operations where Nimitz was active and they would not have a new Nimitz 10 min after that one was sunk already doing the old ones job and the loss would have much more dire consequences.
Since we are already comparing to real life examples. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 06:43:00 -
[2273] - Quote
Neterti Axexut wrote:As we have seen this weekend, titans and SCs are vulnerable as is. Not just to other supers, but also to conventionals. See the battle between RA versus Gypsies and friends where SEVEN titans and a SC went down. These proposed nerfs make supers significantly more vulnerable when used in smaller groups (no - I am not advocating fixes that would allow for solo use of what are meant to be fleet ships), but do not solve the real problems behind their designs and do not address the issues of N+1: Blobs of conventionals will still be a threat, and N+1 super (SC or Titan) is still a viable counter. So, start by tossing out the existing proposed nerfs. (if you want to keep the logoff timer change, apply it to EVERYTHING in game)A simpler and more complete solution could be: TitansAdjust the sensor strength and the way that sensor strength calculates targeting time. That is, make it geometrically longer time to lock a ship the smaller it is. A simplified example would be:
- If a titan is attempting to lock another titan, SC or structure . . . . no change in lock time.
- If a titan is attempting to lock a BS-class hull, increase the lock time from 20s to 40s
- If a titan is attempting to lock a cruiser-class hull, increase the lock time from 40s to 120s
- If a titan is attempting to lock a frigate-class hull, increase the lock time from 90s to 360s
(the multiplier number could be adjusted a lot easier by CCP later if needed) Let titans have the ability to DD or hit with its capital weapons any target. - and - Let titans only lock one or two targets at once. In this way, if you want to DD a HIC or command ship, or blast it with your cap weapons . . . . fine. But it is going to take you considerable time to lock. And, as you know, once you begin locking a ship, that process has to continue. Changing your mind so you can either DD or plink with Cap Weapons a different target would then be a serious strategic decision. SupercarriersApply the same lock time adjusts as detailed above. Removing 20% of their Shield / Armor / Hull is neat, but is irrelevant if you have 60 of them on field remote repping each other. Instead of "fixing" the tank by reducing it, make SCs unable to remote rep other SCs. Keep their old HP. Hell. Increase it. And for the love of whatever personal God or gods you pray to, keep the regular drones. Just remove the ability to remote rep. Regular carriers could still rep the SC (or titan for that matter), but are squishier and now even more an essential aspect of the support fleet. Once the carriers die, the SCs and titans get in trouble. Finally, CCP please fix the shield tanked ships (from conventional to super) in the way their bonuses are applied. And give the Levi, the red-haired-stepchild of titans, the ability to hit smaller ships with its citadels like that its gunboat brothers have. While the gunboats can receive remote bonuses that enable them to track BS and other hulls quite well, the Levi just has to sit there and look pretty. At least it does that well!
The proposed changes make no sense. All it would do is prolong the fight for 10min and nothing else. Only way to stop the super capital blob is to take away their ability to either be able to blob up or to damage super capitals or carefully introduce a new type of ship and implement industry, 0.0 and sov changes that make it very very difficult to produce these.
Only reason RA lost that fight is because they were 2 stupid read upon it of what actually happened in the fight. Nerfing sub capital blob by implementing some kind of restrictions, limitations or say:
Countering sub capital blobs in a way Incursions are made, represented by a graf that defines income by the number of people you have. Consider more people you have pass the limit more ship bonuses you are loosing if you blob up 2 much you loose all your boosters and ship bonuses. Enjoy your ship then when the cap bonus no longer applies and you can only fire 1 salvo every 20-30s whit lowered dps and tracking etc.
And then introduce limits by how many fleets can be active so you cant bypass the changes.
|
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic Holy Empire of The Unshaven
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 07:27:00 -
[2274] - Quote
So..... "Dreadnoughts are not good enough".....
and you are going to FIX it by REMOVING all the Drone bays and adding NOTHING.
This is a "FIX" how, EXACTLY!?!??
Just so you have your vocabulary straight, REMOVING something, and adding NOTHING; yeah, that's a NERF not a FIX. And NO, adding something that works ONLY when you are in Siege mode does not count as "adding something" when you take AWAY something that you can use any time. Because removing drone bays makes dreads a HELL of a lot more vulnerable than is even closely compensated for by the SLIGHT increase in Siege DPS. You would lamost have to DOUBLE the DPS bonus to come even CLOSE to the worth of what you are taking away. I mean seriously, how many dread pilots would trade the 75% additional siege DPS for their drone bay back? I took a poll from the dozen or so dread pilots I know and NONE of them would trade their drone bay for the siege dps as proposed. NONE. Not a single one. But, here is comes anyway. Yet another nerf by CCP shoved down our throats.
Just checking in with that little point.
Oh, yeah, and HOW, again, EXACTLY, is NERFING the HELL out of CARRIERS (with the fighter 'FIX") going to fix SUPER-CARRIERS???!!??
Just CCP playing Russian roulette with our thousands of paid days of account time and millions of skill points.... AGAIN..... I guess....
F-ing JERK-OFFS!!!!
When is CCP going to STOP taking AWAY from the players and actually GIVE something to us..... NEVER I guess..... Time for a NEW GAME if you want that little "feature" of getting something BACK from the company you pay I guess.....
...out....
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 08:34:00 -
[2275] - Quote
Sylthi wrote:So..... "Dreadnoughts are not good enough".....
and you are going to FIX it by REMOVING all the Drone bays and adding NOTHING.
This is a "FIX" how, EXACTLY!?!??
Just so you have your vocabulary straight, REMOVING something, and adding NOTHING; yeah, that's a NERF not a FIX. And NO, adding something that works ONLY when you are in Siege mode does not count as "adding something" when you take AWAY something that you can use any time. Because removing drone bays makes dreads a HELL of a lot more vulnerable than is even closely compensated for by the SLIGHT increase in Siege DPS. You would lamost have to DOUBLE the DPS bonus to come even CLOSE to the worth of what you are taking away. I mean seriously, how many dread pilots would trade the 75% additional siege DPS for their drone bay back? I took a poll from the dozen or so dread pilots I know and NONE of them would trade their drone bay for the siege dps as proposed. NONE. Not a single one. But, here is comes anyway. Yet another nerf by CCP shoved down our throats.
Just checking in with that little point.
Oh, yeah, and HOW, again, EXACTLY, is NERFING the HELL out of CARRIERS (with the fighter 'FIX") going to fix SUPER-CARRIERS???!!??
Just CCP playing Russian roulette with our thousands of paid days of account time and millions of skill points.... AGAIN..... I guess....
F-ing JERK-OFFS!!!!
When is CCP going to STOP taking AWAY from the players and actually GIVE something to us..... NEVER I guess..... Time for a NEW GAME if you want that little "feature" of getting something BACK from the company you pay I guess.....
...out....
I could understand the "no time to read blog properly, must post!" approach if this had just been released and you were rushing for the first reply, but we're on page 114.
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Ivan Svyatoslav
RedSun Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 08:37:00 -
[2276] - Quote
I used to really like the idea of the Motherships of old. Just like how carriers were designed to be heavy support ships for squads and small fleets, the moms were designed to be the scaled-up version of that for large fleets. They could carry lots of other player's ships, had the clone vat bay to let players travel to it quickly, and had the ecm burst and RR to assist said fleet.
Currently the supercarrier is stuck somewhat in between what it used to be and where it is currently intended. (What that is I am not sure. Not sure anybody knows atm) This presents a problem as it can still do a lot of the RR and ecm bursting, but now has these fighter bombers added on to it, which lets be honest is really stepping on the turf of the dreads, being anti-capital and structure warfare. So, if we want the SCs to be more in that particular direction, it probably needs a couple of the inherent disadvantages of that method of warfare as well. For example (thought experement only, I am sure there are tons of reasons not to do this) why not give the SCs the siege module? All it would have to do is allow you deploy fighter bombers, at the standard expenses of movement and remote assistance. (Perhaps disable the ECM burst as well) Thus, without siege you can fly around and provide support to your fleet if you so desire, utilize an army of regular fighters to add a little offensive power, and provide RR without fear of electronic warfare, but if it really comes down to that you want to unleash hurt, well, you have to make some sacrifices as well, namely mobility and remote assistance. This is merely an example, I am not necessarily advocating exactly this, but hopefully it gets people thinking in perhaps a similar direction.
Right now I feel the reason the dreads are not being used is because the supercarriers do the same thing SO much better. Anti-capital warfare while being mobile, ecm immune while being mobile, all this and you can get RR'ed too. Perhaps what is needed is not so much taking the offense away but adding some element of risk in as well.
My two (probably greatly devalued) cents. |
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic Holy Empire of The Unshaven
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 12:48:00 -
[2277] - Quote
[/quote] I could understand the "no time to read blog properly, must post!" approach if this had just been released and you were rushing for the first reply, but we're on page 114. [/quote]
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. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 14:07:00 -
[2278] - Quote
Sylthi wrote: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.
I'm not going to dig through 114 pages to give you links, I suggest you take some time and read before you sperge out.
But in the interest of educating you a bit:
- Fighter change revoked, not going in, as said by a Dev in this thread
- Many of us think removing drones is dumb but saying you get 'nothing' in return is pretty dumb.
A) 50% tracking buff while in siege is huge. I shouldn't need to explain that to you.
B) increasing the damage bonus by another 75% is huge. I shouldn't need to explain that to you either
C) Dropping the siege timer to 5 minutes is so overdue its ridiculous.
If your dread pilots (all dozen or so) don't get why this is so huge to the dread then perhaps they should do some more studying of game mechanics for a bit.
Also if you haven't been reading, this is the thread where CCP decided that every cap ship needs a support fleet except carriers, so just take 5 or 6 carriers with your dozen dreads when you drop something and your need of light and medium drones is covered. The DPS increase from the guns far outstrips the DPS loss from any drones.
And if you think its dumb that you have to deploy support with a certain fleet type, well, get on the bus, so do the rest of us but Goons have talked CCP into craming this down our throats, so you either roll with it like everything else or you find a new game, its pretty simple.
|
Aase Nord
Vikinghall
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 14:21:00 -
[2279] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:
I'm not going to dig through 114 pages to give you links, I suggest you take some time and read before you sperge out.
But in the interest of educating you a bit:
- Fighter change revoked, not going in, as said by a Dev in this thread
- Many of us think removing drones is dumb but saying you get 'nothing' in return is pretty dumb.
A) 50% tracking buff while in siege is huge. I shouldn't need to explain that to you.
B) increasing the damage bonus by another 75% is huge. I shouldn't need to explain that to you either
C) Dropping the siege timer to 5 minutes is so overdue its ridiculous.
If your dread pilots (all dozen or so) don't get why this is so huge to the dread then perhaps they should do some more studying of game mechanics for a bit.
Also if you haven't been reading, this is the thread where CCP decided that every cap ship needs a support fleet except carriers, so just take 5 or 6 carriers with your dozen dreads when you drop something and your need of light and medium drones is covered. The DPS increase from the guns far outstrips the DPS loss from any drones.
And if you think its dumb that you have to deploy support with a certain fleet type, well, get on the bus, so do the rest of us but Goons have talked CCP into craming this down our throats, so you either roll with it like everything else or you find a new game, its pretty simple.
+1 |
Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 14:51:00 -
[2280] - Quote
FHM wrote:BRICKS4BALLS wrote:Why shouldnt Super-capitals' have some sort of means to defend themselves from smaller ships for a short period of time at least.
Some people have played this game for an awful long time and have accumulated lots of isk/skills etc, and decided to never stay in smaller alliances/corps. At the same time some of these smaller groups may have a few supercaps, this change will take away those players ability to ever use these ships, knowning the increased chance of being pinned down now with no way to defend yourself. Some of the smaller corps/alliances simply wont ever have the numbers playing to have proper support.
Yea sure, I am aware that in the real world small organizations would'nt own massive ships like this.
The changes may work well to prevent big alliances blobing, but I'm sure they restrict smaller groups using them at all now.
Giving them an ability to field fewer drones than fighters/bombers may have been a better option, so at least a single HIC cant keep them pinned down for 30mins or so whilst they get a fleet together.
Also if someone goes to the trouble of baiting a frigate or cruiser so they drop a titan in to use the doomsday, then why not? Surely acts like this are humouous. No that is exactly what needs to happen if you are 2 stupid to go and do something SOLO whit a FLEET SUPPORT ship whitout sub capital backup you deserve to die. The time when you did that and then got caught and log-offed and survived is over. NO MORE BLOB WARFARE - NO MORE SOLO SUPER CAPITALSAnyways Super Carrier and Fighter nerf is final and you can cry about it all you want. 20B does not buy you immunity or ability to kill everything in game. You had your fun for 2 years NOW IT OVER go SUCK A LEMON. Also the argument saying you are bound to that ship or that you need a holding toon is compleate bullshit all Super Capital pilots can leave their ship and go to market or go fly sub capital ship for a moment. Thats why we have Capital Hangars and password protected POS where you can jump out of it and go do what you need to do. So all following argmuents: - They cost 20B ISK - They cant be docked - They took 1 month more to train than a ordinary carrier - They need to be massive DPS ship - They need to be unkillable - Super Capital blob warfare needs to stay - They need 500m3 drone bay at least - They need to be able to defend them selves against sub capital - They need to be SOLO and FLEET ships All those arguments are beyond STUPID and GAME BRAKING none of those arguments are valid not enough to even consider not implementing this nerf. Support skills you need for Super Capitals do not apply and are not valid you need the same skills you need for a carrier only you need carrier 3 meaning you did not spend any extra time for these ships training support skills is completely you decision and since these skillls apply to other ships as well they are not a valid argument nor will they be reimbursed. SOLO SUPER CAPITALS AND SUPER CAPITAL BLOB are OVER FINALY SUPER CAPITALS NEED TO RELY ON SUB CAPITAL SUPPORT TO DEFEND THEM AGAINST OTHER SUB CAPITALS
DEAL WHIT IT
Buddy you've posted in this thread, what, 100 times? you have 4 likes, get a clue, get a life. what you say is not final, and you know it, thats why you keep posting.
You have your ideas, they are not the greatest thing in the world, but if you just shus now, you'll help the idea you defend, more then if you keep on blabing like EVE is your personal baby and you know whats best for it.
Nabuch out.
|
|
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 15:15:00 -
[2281] - Quote
zero2espect wrote: wrote:
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 10 fighters & 5 spare fighters/fighter bombers and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Remove the ability to bridge fleets or make it prohibitively expensive/limited GÇô e.g. costs much much more or limits the number of ships similar to a wormhole (more smaller ships, few bigger ships). Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
Listen to the guy. Rework the winter patch, Goons will cry, all they care about is self gain, evindently not eve community gain. Get rid of alot of that insulting winter patch & rework the rework & listen to some wisdom plz |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 15:18:00 -
[2282] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:A) 50% tracking buff while in siege is huge. I shouldn't need to explain that to you.
What? I missed that one. Not that I dislike this change. Where is the dev post about this?
/me finish amarr dread V tonight. |
Skarrudon
FinFleet Raiden.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 15:44:00 -
[2283] - Quote
1) Clearly loggoff timer past 30 mins is insane given the instability of the servers, and login servers during massive fleet fights and busy times. As seen in wicked creek 20,000 USD CCP RMT value worth of ships was destroyed in 25 mins with an even fleet. (plus 30 mins with time dilation? is that gonna be 1 hour+? lots of ships will die. 2) With years of time invested in skill training and the obscenely massive size of dreads, supercarriers, and titans, there is no way that the engineers did not put in massive drone bays so they would have some defense against smaller targets, there is no logic that could explain this. 3) some fixes may be needed, If minmatar caps are going to be the weakest and always be primary they better get more of a niche, more cap regen and cpu at least so they can act as better logistics caps if that's what they are determined to be. 4) again point 1, I cant see how this is a good idea at all, people will flow into a system and will continue to from the whole region if this is implemented just to get on a SC kill they don't care about because he will be held there indefinitely and eventually will die.
Anyways I sense that the main problem is the force projection involved with supers, the relatively cheap fuel/capacitor requirements for jumping such massive ships large distances are what allows for 200 man "superblobs" to come together so quickly/easily in the first place (and it wasn't so quick and easy) fear of the old Northern Coaliation with all the income in a the universe, direct access to the biggest trade hubs, and a sea of blue for regions all around the north. People feared that the nearly 100k players that made up that massive blob would eventually have all supers and all the money needed to pay for them so a group of players across multiple time zones banded together to push them out. Just because 100,000 USD RMT CCP value worth of ships (or more) is able to clear sov fast and stand up against massive fleets of Goons and some goon pets, doesnt mean supers need to be reduced in effectiveness. Maybe they should have helped their brosefs while they had the chance. We have seen time and time again supers can die, they die quick and easily is not supported by a good fleet already. Your nerfs will kill the whole class of ship in my opinion and disenfranchise some of your most loyal and dedicated veteran players which is clearly seen in the responses across this thread. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 16:02:00 -
[2284] - Quote
MEH **** THIS NERF ... LOOK AT THIS:
http://www.eveonline.com/en/winter2011/gallery/
Look at the first picture they are going to make it omg this is so ******* awesome they are making the ship that was the winner of ship design contest they had last year.
This is the link to winners entry take a look and be amazed at this beauty: http://dreamwa1ker.deviantart.com/art/EvE-Online-Tornado-182153653 |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 16:35:00 -
[2285] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:A) 50% tracking buff while in siege is huge. I shouldn't need to explain that to you.
What? I missed that one. Not that I dislike this change. Where is the dev post about this? /me finish amarr dread V tonight.
Look closely at the changes to the siege module, it went from a 99% tracking debuff, to a -50% tracking debuff so there wouldn't be a problem hitting Supers while in siege that were moving.
Its going to translate to Dreads being able to **** BS fleets while in siege but I doubt that will be a problem.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
429
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 16:35:00 -
[2286] - Quote
Also stop bawwing about the log timer Raiden, its so long overdue its ridiculous. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1276
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 17:02:00 -
[2287] - Quote
I think we should split the SCs into 2 groups:
Group 1: (Use existing models) Can use fighters + fighter bombers, they retain the existing +3 fighters per level of carrier, only with no Remote rep bonuses and no ewar immunity (these ships have teeth, so dont needs gods blessing to get out of trouble) THey also sacrifice ewar immunity for their current dps. They also lose a significant % of their ship maint bays since these ships are less concerned with fleet logistics and more concerned with pew pew. They retain their current HP, retain their current drone bays but cannot use standard drones anymore. Apply logoffski timer nerf. (These ships will be the big boys of the super carrier class, like hyperions, abaddons, maelstroms and rokhs are to battleships). Ship role = pure anti cap/anti infrastructure dps boat with a phat tank. (cannot effectively engage sub caps)
Group 2: (Will require new models) Can use standard drones and fighters only, no bombers. They are nerfed to only +1 extra drone per carrier level bonus (Thus reducing the # of drones they can field to 10 without DCUs) Has a remote rep bonus with ewar immunity (these ships have no teeth, so will need devine intervention to help them survive). nerf HP with 20%, buff cap with 25% (for dedicated nigh-perma remote repping) and apply logoffski timer nerf. Boost the ship maint bays with 100% These will be the smaller SCs (like Scorps, domis, typhoons and armageddons are to battleships) Ship role = Fleet logistics (moving ships, replacing losses)/capital fleet support/logistics boats for all ship types, with less tank and allot less dps (but can have limited effectiveness against sub caps using normal drones and fighters in much smaller quantities) |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 17:09:00 -
[2288] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Also stop bawwing about the log timer Raiden, its so long overdue its ridiculous. make the log off timer longer but to make it so you can have a ship in space for 23hours after its logged off. this is a step to far for even PL
make the self destruction so if you have agro it will not work now that is something we can all agree on |
Vincent VanOgh
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 19:46:00 -
[2289] - Quote
FHM wrote:Damian Gene wrote:Silly Code, wouldnt let me edit so i had to repost: I think that the Super Carrier's role needs to be defined. What do we want it to do? I strongly feel that it should be versatile. Why? Well, because it's my own construct for what a Super Carrier is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SupercarrierName a situation that one of the US's super carrier's can not handle? The US's military, is not the biggest, in fact may other military's are much bigger. Where we have the advantage is Force Projection. We can mobilize and deploy a force anywhere in the world within 48 hours. We pay for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expendituresWe spend almost 700b on military per year. We spend 6 TIMES that of China, which comes in 2nd. We spend 4.7% of our GDP on military spending. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford_class_aircraft_carrier A 2009 report said that the Ford (a new class of SuperCarrier's that is expected to roll out soon) would cost $14 billion including research and development, and the actual cost of the carrier itself would be $9 billion.[12] This ship is a little more then 1% of what we spend annually. What is it's role? It projects force. I would like to see THAT be the role of the Super Carrier. I would love to have a fleet with a SC, where when my ship get's popped, I can get a new one from the SC. Where having an SC in fleet means that I can fight harder and longer. Right now, they don't get used for this often, as if the ship is configured other caps can take the ships out of them into their bay. But that's just me, the whole point is that CCP needs to define what an SC should do, and we should decide what we would like it to do. CCP, tell us what you intended the role to be, not a huge request, but that will go a long way :) Take 3 coast guard frigates or cruiser and send them against that supper carrier let them unleash a salvo against that deck and see how many fighters can you get off of it. Or take a single battleship let it fire one salvo off its turrets and that super carrier goes from a ship to a useless husk. Yes such a ship could respond fast to an attack but caught by even a frigate alone its pretty much dead.. Thats why these big ships depend on smaller, agaile and fast ships to defend it aka sub capitals. Thats why navy puts them in to battlegroups where a carrier or a super carrier is a main command vessel. To give you an idea of how it looks like and how it should look like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abraham-Lincoln-battlegroup.jpgAlso loosing say USS Nimitz that is a super carrier would be a BIG DEAL for USS and it would severely disrupt its military operations where Nimitz was active and they would not have a new Nimitz 10 min after that one was sunk already doing the old ones job and the loss would have much more dire consequences. Since we are already comparing to real life examples.
Additionally these supercarriers cost billions to maintain.
In real lifeGäó, the upfront cost of a military asset is but a small fraction of the total cost of ownership. In EVE, all cost is front-loaded, you can buy a supercarrier and sit in it for a hundred years if you really want to.
This is why even as a cap pilot, I think we should be considering introducing maintenance costs associated with capital ships and larger. Fuel is one way of doing it - to move them costs resources directly, but it doesn't take it far enough.
Logistics becomes extremely important when dealing with large units and although it would make flying a supercap truly miserable, it would also be the most effective (and realistic) way of balancing them out.
This would:
Encourage people who own supercaps to use them, because why bother having them when they cost you to maintain?
Encourage co-operative play and make managing these large ships more challenging at the alliance level, and almost impossible for individuals to run effectively without multiple logistics/production alts behind them.
Simulate wear and tear on large-scale construction. In real life components break and need replacing, hulls corrode and become damaged. The bigger the ship, the harder this maintenance becomes, until it gets to a point where it is no longer cost effective. Regardless of self-repair or autonomous systems - which would absolutely be required for a ship the size of a titan or SC - they would still need steady deliveries of raw materials to keep running.
Make flying capitals less of an endgame choice - because why would you go commanding or flying around in such a huge isk sink without a good reason, when your cruiser is more effective for most tasks and doesn't cost a bean to run? |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 20:06:00 -
[2290] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote: make the log off timer longer but to make it so you can have a ship in space for 23hours after its logged off. this is a step to far for even PL
If a logged off super end up tackled, I really don't see it stay in space for 23 hours. Not with everyone, their grand-mothers and theirs dogs wanting to be on the killmail, or a piece of the loot. So it's a moot point. |
|
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 20:21:00 -
[2291] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:I think we should split the SCs into 2 groups:
Group 1: (Use existing models) Can use fighters + fighter bombers, they retain the existing +3 fighters per level of carrier, only with no Remote rep bonuses and no ewar immunity (these ships have teeth, so dont needs gods blessing to get out of trouble) THey also sacrifice ewar immunity for their current dps. They also lose a significant % of their ship maint bays since these ships are less concerned with fleet logistics and more concerned with pew pew. They retain their current HP, retain their current drone bays but cannot use standard drones anymore. Apply logoffski timer nerf. (These ships will be the big boys of the super carrier class, like hyperions, abaddons, maelstroms and rokhs are to battleships). Ship role = pure anti cap/anti infrastructure dps boat with a phat tank. (cannot effectively engage sub caps)
Group 2: (Will require new models) Can use standard drones and fighters only, no bombers. They are nerfed to only +1 extra drone per carrier level bonus (Thus reducing the # of drones they can field to 10 without DCUs) Has a remote rep bonus with ewar immunity (these ships have no teeth, so will need devine intervention to help them survive). nerf HP with 20%, buff cap with 25% (for dedicated nigh-perma remote repping) and apply logoffski timer nerf. Boost the ship maint bays with 100% These will be the smaller SCs (like Scorps, domis, typhoons and armageddons are to battleships) Ship role = Fleet logistics (moving ships, replacing losses)/capital fleet support/logistics boats for all ship types, with less tank and allot less dps (but can have limited effectiveness against sub caps using normal drones and fighters in much smaller quantities)
Group 1 +1 |
Damian Gene
Bloodtear Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.18 22:07:00 -
[2292] - Quote
FHM wrote:Damian Gene wrote: I think that the Super Carrier's role needs to be defined.
What do we want it to do?
Take 3 coast guard frigates or cruiser and send them against that supper carrier let them unleash a salvo against that deck and see how many fighters can you get off of it. Or take a single battleship let it fire one salvo off its turrets and that super carrier goes from a ship to a useless husk. Yes such a ship could respond fast to an attack but caught by even a frigate alone its pretty much dead.. Thats why these big ships depend on smaller, agaile and fast ships to defend it aka sub capitals. Thats why navy puts them in to battlegroups where a carrier or a super carrier is a main command vessel. To give you an idea of how it looks like and how it should look like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abraham-Lincoln-battlegroup.jpgAlso loosing say USS Nimitz that is a super carrier would be a BIG DEAL for USS and it would severely disrupt its military operations where Nimitz was active and they would not have a new Nimitz 10 min after that one was sunk already doing the old ones job and the loss would have much more dire consequences. Since we are already comparing to real life examples.
Beautiful pic by the way,
Yes, I agree. Although, the odds are great that the awareness of that AC is high, they should see anything coming (including subs) long before it materializes into a real threat. And on board, it could launch fighters with torps to take out incoming threats by sea, by air, or even take out arty on land. The air deployment is key. However, I STRONGLY agree with a supporting fleet. The more the better. I also see the point that was made about maintenance costs.
I hate to say it, but Blobs happen in RL.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again: The most important thing I think CCP needs to do is Define The Role for the Ship Classes.
Ask us, or tell us.
For all we know, CCP does not want Super carriers in eve to be like Supercarriers in RL. |
Subtarian
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 08:58:00 -
[2293] - Quote
Why are so many people refering to this as a goon patch? I think any who has been on the recieving end of DRF and gang 150 man super cap blob would like to see this pach implemented . Simply put as stated before, the reason they are a problem is because of the number of super carriers in fleet at a given time. Im sure when ccp implemented the fighter bomber thing they didnt expect such a proliferation of super carriers as observed in last economic cycle report. In the 4th quarter alone they were up 150 percent. There is no counter to them unless you bring your own blob of super carriers. And lets be real for just a sec shall we. How many alliances besides DRF have the capability whether legal or illegaly to obtain that many super carriers in such a short peroid of time.
Its not like CCP can just ask folks to play nice and not use the clear adavantage of blobing with the OMGWTFPWN mobiles now can they ? So now what ? Some of you want to complain even though you knew it was a FOTM ( albiet an expensive one) but none the less a FOTM and scream foul play? Its no different when everybody jumped head first into the nano FOTM and cried when they balanced it. But your suppose to be special because you spent 20b isk tough ****.
like they told the nano and falcon pilots get over it , adapt or quit this is EVE and the amount of isk you spend on your ship is not a guarantee of any sorts. And for goodness sake please stop comparing real life military to EVE. you cant make reference to real life ships to a Internet space ship (GAME )!!! only miltary tactics which is failry universal |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
203
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 09:04:00 -
[2294] - Quote
Quote:Dreadnoughts
GÇóRemove drone bay from all dreadnoughts. GÇóSiege Module I: Boost damage bonus from 625% to 700% to compensate for loss of drones. GÇóSiege Module I: Duration time reduced to 5 minutes. Fuel cost -50%. GÇóMoros: Remove drone bonus. GÇóMoros: New bonus: 5% bonus to Capital Hybrid Turret rate of fire per level
Great. so Super Carriers and Titans can still "Speedtank" Dreads.
Good work CCP. With this nerf Dreads will still be next to useless exept for shooting something which is not moving.
DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=706442#post706442 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 11:26:00 -
[2295] - Quote
Question:
Subtarian wrote:Why are so many people refering to this as a goon patch?
Answer:
Subtarian wrote: Its not like CCP can just ask folks to play nice and not use the clear adavantage of blobing
There is no other alliance in EVE that can gather as many duders as goons & co can.
There is nothing but supercaps to survive alpha from 1000+ dudes, stealth bombers are broken in huge fights so they are no good... The only way would be put some time and isk on it and get supercaps. They did. Now because goons realized that they are in danger, CCP will turn all that time/isk in ships in next to useless space bazingas. Tell me please, who is gonna use anything other than a odd triage carrier in a fleet fight? So why would a group of people pay CCP one extra sub to be stuck in one ship that you might use once i a while if u are lucky to have one dumb dude in range doing something stupid with his own super?
You can ask anyone you know that owns a SC or a Titan if they think its worth having up to 20 years worth of plex/gametime or an huge amount of subcapital ships (like...years worth of ships) + paying one extra sub so you can use it like... never.
Again, why would you need dreads and carriers (the first step for an escalation) if they add nothing and can be killed easily with subs? If one does not escalate, your super fleet doesnt have any weight.
I'm not stupid to think I've got all figured out. I might be wrong. But IMO if you completely remove regular drones from supercarriers, nerf titan tracking to a point that those two would add nothing against subcaps, there isnt going to be any scenario that they would be handy or worth the risk. If it comes to that point, I'll unsub that account. I will not quit eve, but it is a shame that eve is becoming an MMO that you can win through CSM and/or posting hard enough on the forums. |
Andrew Gunn
Battlestars S E D I T I O N
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 12:11:00 -
[2296] - Quote
That Capital balancing list is a big mistake. The only real issue has been supercarriers and that could have been mitigated by a reduction of the number of drones and fighters it could field or fighter bombers - which would help mitigate lag too.
You could have reduced the number of drones and fighters deployable by say 10 + 1 per level and perhaps reduced the number of fighter bombers to 5 + 1 per level and been done with it.
Isolating the titan super weapon to only hitting capitals is terrible idea. The targeted super weapon was a great improvement over the AoE DD - now it's just idiotic. Instead I think that CCP should allow the super weapon to shoot at all structures; as a caveat make an anchorable super weapon for POS.
You guys really know how to break your own game. Take more baby steps. |
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 13:36:00 -
[2297] - Quote
From what I understand the main problem with super caps isnGÇÖt that they are individually too powerful, itGÇÖs that when they blob up they are effectively unbeatable. It seems to me that decreasing the strength of the individual ships will not address that main problem at all GÇô in fact it will acerbate it.
Someone else already suggested imposing GÇ£maintenanceGÇ¥ costs on these ships, and I like that idea but I would take it further. I would make it a daily cost imposed on the alliance that the owner is a member of, and have it double for each additional such ship the alliance has. For example, Alliance A has a titan and gets charged 10m isk in maintenance for it. They add an SC and the charge for that ship is now 20m isk, making a total of 30m isk. Adding another Titan would cost 40m isk, for a total of 70m isk And so on. The numbers are representative only, and should be aimed at severely limiting the number of super caps that even the biggest alliances can afford to operate.
To allow alliances to have the ability to maintain some sort of strategic reserve / deterrent I would implement a new feature whereby it was possible to GÇ£decommissionGÇ¥ and subsequently GÇ£re-commissionGÇ¥ super caps. The process of decommissioning a super would take 24 hours to complete, during which time the ship would be immobile and unable to activate modules, launch fighters etc, and would be vulnerable to attack. The process could be halted at any point before completion to allow the ship to be used as normal, but the decommissioning process would then have to start from scratch again. Once a super is decommissioned it is stationary, inactive, un-boardable and invulnerable to attack. In this state it does not incur any maintenance fees. The re-commissioning process is the reverse, but takes much longer GÇô I suggest 2 or 3 days. You would need a password (specified during decommissioning) to initiate the re-commissioning process and the alliance would start to incur maintenance fees as soon as the re-commissioning process commenced. The ship would be vulnerable to attack while it was re-commissioning, would be immobile and unable to activate modules, launch fighters etc.
These changes would severely limit the number of super caps in everyday use, whilst still allowing alliances to keep large strategic reserves of these ships. The presence of these reserves would provide some excellent gaming (and meta-gaming) opportunities. To give a quick example:
Alliance A wants to attack Alliance B, but knows that Alliance B has a huge strategic reserve of super caps. Through excellent use of intelligence sources they identify the system where Alliance B has situated its reserve fleet, and launch an all-out attack to capture that system and neutralize the enemyGÇÖs reserve fleet. Is their intelligence accurate? Can they punch through and capture the system before the reserves are re-commissioned? Has Alliance B anticipated the attack and started re-commissioning in advance?
Anyway, by making these changes it becomes too expensive for alliances to operate huge numbers of super caps on a continual basis, but they can call up a reserve fleet that they can then afford to operate for a limited period. The super cap blob will cease to exist in most peopleGÇÖs daily lives, but the big alliances can still apply overwhelming power when they need to (and when they can afford to).
The key is to set the super cap maintenance fee high enough that operating more than half a dozen on a permanent basis is only possible for the biggest (richest) alliances, and when that alliance calls up its reserve fleet it can only operate it for days (a week or two at most) before going bankrupt.
If an alliance fails to pay the maintenance bill for one of their super caps the ship immediately starts to decommission. To halt this process the bill must be paid and then the pilot can give the halt command. If the pilot is afk / unavailable the process runs to conclusion (assuming the ship survives), the pilot is ejected and a system generated password for re-commissioning is sent to the pilot via evemail.
For super cap pilots who are not members of an alliance, and cannot afford to operate their ship under the new system, I suggest there should be a limited time option when the changes are implemented for them to reprocess their ship, either back to the base minerals or back to components.
TL:DR Impose an operating cost for super caps. Make it double for each ship after the first. Make it so high that the biggest alliances can only afford to operate half a dozen continuously. Allow for a reserve fleet to be called up, at ruinous cost. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 15:29:00 -
[2298] - Quote
Samanta Raiolaser wrote:There is no other alliance in EVE that can gather as many duders as goons & co can.
The DRF could, and did. Do you seriously think that having supercaps will lower the amount of players in your alliance who want to join the fleet?
Quote: Tell me please, who is gonna use anything other than a odd triage carrier in a fleet fight? So why would a group of people pay CCP one extra sub to be stuck in one ship that you might use once i a while if u are lucky to have one dumb dude in range doing something stupid with his own super?
Dunno. Maybe those who are interested in winning the fight? Last time I checked, 49 abbadons + 1 Nyx were still better than 50 abbadons.
Is it different now?
Quote: You can ask anyone you know that owns a SC or a Titan if they think its worth having up to 20 years worth of plex/gametime or an huge amount of subcapital ships (like...years worth of ships) + paying one extra sub so you can use it like... never.
I supsect that Seleene, for one, would approve of the nerfs. |
Subtarian
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 17:40:00 -
[2299] - Quote
[quote=Samanta] There is no other alliance in EVE that can gather as many duders as goons & co can.
There is nothing but supercaps to survive alpha from 1000+ dudes, stealth bombers are broken in huge fights so they are no good... The only way would be put some time and isk on it and get supercaps. They did. Now because goons realized that they are in danger, CCP will turn all that time/isk in ships in next to useless space bazingas. Tell me please, who is gonna use anything other than a odd triage carrier in a fleet fight? So why would a group of people pay CCP one extra sub to be stuck in one ship that you might use once i a while if u are lucky to have one dumb dude in range doing something stupid with his own super?
You can ask anyone you know that owns a SC or a Titan if they think its worth having up to 20 years worth of plex/gametime or an huge amount of subcapital ships (like...years worth of ships) + paying one extra sub so you can use it like... never.
Again, why would you need dreads and carriers (the first step for an escalation) if they add nothing and can be killed easily with subs? If one does not escalate, your super fleet doesnt have any weight.
I'm not stupid to think I've got all figured out. I might be wrong. But IMO if you completely remove regular drones from supercarriers, nerf titan tracking to a point that those two would add nothing against subcaps, there isnt going to be any scenario that they would be handy or worth the risk. If it comes to that point, I'll unsub that account. I will not quit eve, but it is a shame that eve is becoming an MMO that you can win through CSM and/or posting hard enough on the forums.[quote=Samanta]
your kidding right ? first off this is not the goons of the sec BOB war. second ive seen many different power bloc field incredible amounts of dudes with ease. One thing for sure is a numbers game can be countered. There is no way to counter a un even playing field in the aquisiton of super carriers and such. and please dont say something to the aspects of all those shiny Supers were aquired through good upstanding methods |
Dank Man
FinFleet Raiden.
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 17:52:00 -
[2300] - Quote
Nerf logoff timer to 23 hrs max, take away drones, and nerf EHP by 20%... so tons of SCs die. Any of the most powerful entities have isk to replace any lost SCs very quickly... So populations of SCs go down... people cheer, all small alliances have had their SC fleets destroyed, build times are still as long and build costs still as high. Big alliances continue to hold massive fleets of useless SCs likely on accounts they have let expire. Everyone fights in subcaps... hooray? |
|
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:39:00 -
[2301] - Quote
Subtarian wrote:your kidding right ? first off this is not the goons of the sec BOB war. second ive seen many different power bloc field incredible amounts of dudes with ease. One thing for sure is a numbers game can be countered. There is no way to counter a un even playing field in the aquisiton of super carriers and such. and please dont say something to the aspects of all those shiny Supers were aquired through good upstanding methods
So it all comes down to boting eh? Why dont you give us some of those pr0 statistics saying that 99,97% of all supercapitals were bought with bot/rmt isk cuz simply there isnt another way. No one can have more than 17mill isk without boting. You can also say that bot only works with russian clients, that could be one of the reasons.....
But what you cant ever say is that group A realized that building an respectable supercap fleet is an expensive/time consuming but effective way to fight, while group B for w/e reason didnt. Now the easiest, most effective way to kill all supers is to make them unsub supercap pilots due to lack of situations that they can be useful. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:18:00 -
[2302] - Quote
Dank Man wrote:Nerf logoff timer to 23 hrs max, take away drones, and nerf EHP by 20%... so tons of SCs die. Any of the most powerful entities have isk to replace any lost SCs very quickly... So populations of SCs go down... people cheer, all small alliances have had their SC fleets destroyed, build times are still as long and build costs still as high. Big alliances continue to hold massive fleets of useless SCs likely on accounts they have let expire. Everyone fights in subcaps... hooray?
Wrong, everyone fight with dread/carrier/support fleets, and Hooray! |
Subtarian
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:39:00 -
[2303] - Quote
Samanta Raiolaser wrote:Subtarian wrote:your kidding right ? first off this is not the goons of the sec BOB war. second ive seen many different power bloc field incredible amounts of dudes with ease. One thing for sure is a numbers game can be countered. There is no way to counter a un even playing field in the aquisiton of super carriers and such. and please dont say something to the aspects of all those shiny Supers were aquired through good upstanding methods So it all comes down to boting eh? Why dont you give us some of those pr0 statistics saying that 99,97% of all supercapitals were bought with bot/rmt isk cuz simply there isnt another way. No one can have more than 17mill isk without boting. You can also say that bot only works with russian clients, that could be one of the reasons..... But what you cant ever say is that group A realized that building an respectable supercap fleet is an expensive/time consuming but effective way to fight, while group B for w/e reason didnt. Now the easiest, most effective way to kill all supers is to make them unsub supercap pilots due to lack of situations that they can be useful.
I dont think I ever stated a percentage ...because I dont know it. I dont know how many Super were aquired through legal and illegal means. And botting in the drone lands produce compounds that produce minerals theres no need to change that into isk. but what I can say like I stated it before is that Group A jumped head first into a FOTM and knew that is was overpowered and reaped the benefits of doing so while group B didnt and suffered for not doing so. Now that The FOTM is being balanced group A shouldnt complain because common F*****G sense would've told them that this was inevitable . They choose to reap the benefits for that given time, they took the gamble for the immediate benefit ! So now dont come crying because its getting balanced. Its no different then group B not being able to complain for loosing countless system because they didnt do it first. |
Dank Man
FinFleet Raiden.
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:44:00 -
[2304] - Quote
Lol Subtarian so group A correctly predicts the 2nd most expensive and 2nd hardest to train (if not hardest to train due to immense drone skills 20m+) biggest ships in the game would be very powerful in groups. Lots of people see this ship as the best for the multiple uses and circumstances, so it becomes FOTM for the vets, therefor because some noobs havnt had time to train for them and cant beat these skilled vets they cry that their ships are OP, your argument seems to be flawless. |
Subtarian
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 21:50:00 -
[2305] - Quote
Dank Man wrote:Lol Subtarian so group A correctly predicts the 2nd most expensive and 2nd hardest to train (if not hardest to train due to immense drone skills 20m+) biggest ships in the game would be very powerful in groups. Lots of people see this ship as the best for the multiple uses and circumstances, so it becomes FOTM for the vets, therefor because some noobs havnt had time to train for them and cant beat these skilled vets they cry that their ships are OP, your argument seems to be flawless.
Umm. there was no prediction involved you act like there isnt a TEST SERVER that shows you the changes before they happen. Also there was no new skill to train for motherships besides fighter bomber. How can you say this was hard if u were training be a pro carrier pilot anyway. Immense drone skils...haha like those dont carry over from being a regular carrier pilot. it was harder training for the Naglfar than it was a super carrier. Once again your stating the price of the ship like it should guarantee you something extra cause you spent billions.
And to say that noobs are the ones complaining is really a pro aurgment. But i see you from raiden and would be group A..so i wouldnt expect you to like the change or admitt to the super carrier being overpowered ,just like I've been part of group B and would see the need for a change,and guess what Im no noob.
2nd hardest to train (if not hardest to train due to immense drone skills 20m+) ...had to laugh at this one again |
Jaiimez Skor
iSyte Inc.
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 21:51:00 -
[2306] - Quote
So I wrote a thread about this actually got quite a negative response of which I do not understand why I still think my argument is valid.
The current balancing that is happening to supercarriers I feel is going too far, you have gone beyond balancing them, and now have made them massive underpowered with the proposed ideas, the whole purpose on why someone would purchase a supercarrier is because it is versatile, while I agree that supercarriers where too versatile and far too effective against subcapitals (having had a fleet dropped by a lone Nyx) I still believe they need a certain amount of effectiveness against subcapitals, atleast some level of self-defence, as it has been said before, now a lone supercarrier is completely screwed if caught out, some people think this is a good thing, however I disagree and think it will be the death of supercarriers. I believe that they should still retain a limited amount of effectiveness against subcapitals while not being as effective as they are now, I even proposed the idea of how to achieve this, the mechanics are already in game, give all supercarriers the same 100% bonus to Fighter and Fighter-Bomber damage that the Revenant supercarrier currently has, and remove their 3 drones per level bonus down to 1 per level, giving a maxxed out supercarrier toon the same effective damage against a capital they currently have, yet they only have 10 drones for standard drones, meaning they are no more effective than dropping a regular carrier on a group of subcapitals, therefore giving it a certain level of self-defence against a small group of subcaps while it not being massively overpowered, and still giving it it's full power against other capitals meaning it is not worthless.
The current idea's right now are totally wrong, the drone bay is far too small, you can't even fit 20 Fighters and 20 Fighter-Bombers in the largest of bays, and they're going to totally lose their effectiveness against subcapitals, basically you are turning a supercarrier into a mini-titan, because that is all it will be, I for one have already sold my Nyx before the price crashes which I expect to happen as alot of supercarrier pilots realise their ship is completely useless after the balancing, you cannot let these current idea's be passed you are completely destroying the purpose of a Supercarrier and it being versatile, you might as well go and get a titan.
Also, how am I going to do mining ops in a Nyx if I can't launch Mining Drones =[ uMakeMeSad =[
Also on another note, I don't think the titans are getting balanced enough you are removing a drone bay that I VERY rarely see used by titan pilots, and I definitely have never met a titan pilot who feels his drone bay is an important part of his ships arsenal. and you are fixing the doomsday, I say fixing because I believe that the doomsday always should have been capital ships only, I don't see it as a nerf. The tracking on a titan needs to be sorted, I suggest removing the siege modules penalty to tracking on a dreadnaught, and instead make the standard tracking of capital guns exactly the same as it is of a sieged dreadnaught, meaning that dreads will still have the same tracking as now, but also so will titans, meaning they have absolutely no chance of hitting a subcapital.
I just think that the currently ideas are totally rushes by people begging for a nerf and havn't been thought through, I would appreciate some feedback, especially those who disagree with what I have said to help me understand why I am "wrong" because I don't see it. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:28:00 -
[2307] - Quote
Dank Man wrote:Lol Subtarian so group A correctly predicts the 2nd most expensive and 2nd hardest to train (if not hardest to train due to immense drone skills 20m+) biggest ships in the game would be very powerful in groups. Lots of people see this ship as the best for the multiple uses and circumstances, so it becomes FOTM for the vets, therefor because some noobs havnt had time to train for them and cant beat these skilled vets they cry that their ships are OP, your argument seems to be flawless.
"Best for multiple uses and circumstances" -> proof it needs a nerf.
"FOTM for vets" -> another proof it need a nerf.
Assumption that only noobs want supercaps nerfed -> Arrogance + Ignorance.
Not very skilled at arguing your point, are you?
Jaiimez Skor wrote: I still believe they need a certain amount of effectiveness against subcapitals, atleast some level of self-defence, as it has been said before, now a lone supercarrier is completely screwed if caught out, some people think this is a good thing, however I disagree and think it will be the death of supercarriers
You're basing your argument on the assumption that A/ A lone supercarrier deserve to live, B/ that whatever tackle it will have time to chew trought the dozen of millions EHP before the supercarrier get some help.
I disagree on both premises. |
Jaiimez Skor
iSyte Inc.
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 01:47:00 -
[2308] - Quote
Jaiimez Skor wrote: I still believe they need a certain amount of effectiveness against subcapitals, atleast some level of self-defence, as it has been said before, now a lone supercarrier is completely screwed if caught out, some people think this is a good thing, however I disagree and think it will be the death of supercarriers
You're basing your argument on the assumption that A/ A lone supercarrier deserve to live, B/ that whatever tackle it will have time to chew trought the dozen of millions EHP before the supercarrier get some help.
I disagree on both premises.[/quote]
i agree with the fact a lone supercarrier out trying to be cocky deserves to die, but say for whatever unfortunately circumstances it gets tackled, it is now helpless without it's buddys, and with the new logoff timer he can't just log off and he'll be gone in 15 minutes so he's stuck sitting there bored out of his skull for anywhere between 5 minutes to an hour depending where he is and how many people in both sides are online and ready to fleet up and go and he can't kill the hictor, so either he has to wait for his friends to turn up, or wait for the people wanting to kill him turns up, kinda stuck in a **** situation, he should atleast be able to try to kill the hic, okay it make take him 5/10 minutes to kill it because it's not very effective against it, but he should still be able to atleast have some method of killing it. I think it's just gonna cause alot of supercarrier pilots to say I can't be arsed with this, ain't worth the effort of owning a supercarrier, and not fly them anymore. |
Angel Lust
Vikinghall
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 04:02:00 -
[2309] - Quote
Its simple. If you dont like this game anymore... quit |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Unprovoked Aggression
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 07:57:00 -
[2310] - Quote
i agree with the fact a lone supercarrier out trying to be cocky deserves to die, but say for whatever unfortunately circumstances it gets tackled, it is now helpless without it's buddys, and with the new logoff timer he can't just log off and he'll be gone in 15 minutes so he's stuck sitting there bored out of his skull for anywhere between 5 minutes to an hour depending where he is and how many people in both sides are online and ready to fleet up and go and he can't kill the hictor, so either he has to wait for his friends to turn up, or wait for the people wanting to kill him turns up, kinda stuck in a **** situation, he should atleast be able to try to kill the hic, okay it make take him 5/10 minutes to kill it because it's not very effective against it, but he should still be able to atleast have some method of killing it. I think it's just gonna cause alot of supercarrier pilots to say I can't be arsed with this, ain't worth the effort of owning a supercarrier, and not fly them anymore.[/quote]
ppl fighters signature res gets only increased to 400 which is exactly the same as that of large guns and they still (if they don't screw around with it) will have twice the racking of a small large gun so a SC should still be able to kill a hictor just fine |
|
whaynethepain
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:17:00 -
[2311] - Quote
How interesting, CCP works to the best of their ability to produce very powerful, useful ships and people complain.
This means improvement, can only be in the form of a nerf.
Perhaps if people complain enough, we will all be flying round in barges and haulers?
I vote to end player interference in game play!
Yes, I am bothered.
If you can't take the heat, fuk off.
Getting you on your feet.
So you've further to fall. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:20:00 -
[2312] - Quote
ships costing so much in both isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you're loyal eve fans and addicts
E war immunity take away the ability to receive remote links and remote sebo's
nurf changes
hp hit the ships have to much hp but also balance them. the aeon is the most tanked ship in the game over that of a titan they need a balance.
Doomsday one more great change but with the planed change allow them to use less fuel then 50k each time, given they are only able to hit large capital size ships.
agro timer great again most of us agree on this change. but a solo hic or dic should not be able to hold any ship in place for hours after someone have logged off extended it.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct add so ships in combat can not selfdestruck.
sc drone bay let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3. super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will be able to deafened itself for a limited amount of time.
if you go ahead with the changes listed then turn them in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf, at the moment we have so meny sc that their not uncommon so move them to the next level.
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. let advanced carriers dock. |
Xue Slick
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:00:00 -
[2313] - Quote
whaynethepain wrote:How interesting, CCP works to the best of their ability to produce very powerful, useful ships and people complain.
This means improvement, can only be in the form of a nerf.
Perhaps if people complain enough, we will all be flying round in barges and haulers?
I vote to end player interference in game play!
Yes, I am bothered.
If you can't take the heat, fuk off.
I am sure that barges and haulers are the only ships you fly anyways v0v
Stick to your clothing and boots and let us help with the spaceships. |
whaynethepain
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:04:00 -
[2314] - Quote
If you really do agree, you will help me divert CCP to nerfing indy ships instead.
If you are trying to troll I wont see your face again. Getting you on your feet.
So you've further to fall. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:52:00 -
[2315] - Quote
Dank Man wrote:Lol Subtarian so group A correctly predicts the 2nd most expensive and 2nd hardest to train (if not hardest to train due to immense drone skills 20m+) biggest ships in the game would be very powerful in groups. Lots of people see this ship as the best for the multiple uses and circumstances, so it becomes FOTM for the vets, therefor because some noobs havnt had time to train for them and cant beat these skilled vets they cry that their ships are OP, your argument seems to be flawless.
Thats what they were meant to be but are not anymore. They are not 2nd hardest to train that is a supid argument because Super Carrier requires same skill as Carrier apart from the fact you need Carrier on 3 that is all and you cannot count in extra drone skills, jump cal, armor and shield skills you trained extra because those skills effect other ships as well and give you a cross plane advantages to saying you had to train longer for a Super Carrier or a Titan that only requires lvl 5 Capital Ships is stupid and invalid.
The fact they are 2nd msot expansive is a again stupid and not valid argument because you are saying that something that costs a lot should be the best and dominate all. So what about all those 30+ billion Officer BS that we seen on killboards they should be more powerfull than super carriers some of them costed as much a titan: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=3400057
Take that kill for a refrence, If i take 200 of those exact Nightmares and put them against 100 Super Carriers i would still loose and would probably kill nothing. Saying they are expansive and should be dominant, unkillable, versatile, without a role is stupid and makes no sense only reason they are so powerful actually OP is because they were sopose to be really rare. |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:56:00 -
[2316] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote: i agree with the fact a lone supercarrier out trying to be cocky deserves to die, but say for whatever unfortunately circumstances it gets tackled, it is now helpless without it's buddys, and with the new logoff timer he can't just log off and he'll be gone in 15 minutes so he's stuck sitting there bored out of his skull for anywhere between 5 minutes to an hour depending where he is and how many people in both sides are online and ready to fleet up and go and he can't kill the hictor, so either he has to wait for his friends to turn up, or wait for the people wanting to kill him turns up, kinda stuck in a **** situation, he should atleast be able to try to kill the hic, okay it make take him 5/10 minutes to kill it because it's not very effective against it, but he should still be able to atleast have some method of killing it. I think it's just gonna cause alot of supercarrier pilots to say I can't be arsed with this, ain't worth the effort of owning a supercarrier, and not fly them anymore.
ppl fighters signature res gets only increased to 400 which is exactly the same as that of large guns and they still (if they don't screw around with it) will have twice the racking of a small large gun so a SC should still be able to kill a hictor just fine[/quote]
Fighters were confirmed that they are not getting nerfed because they want the super capital BLOB to continue. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 11:03:00 -
[2317] - Quote
wanking monkey girl wrote:sc drone bay let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3.
That would be like an Abbadon pilot wanting to have 8 guns that can turn into Tachyons/Mega Pulse/Medium Pulse by pressing a button.
Good for the pilot? Yes.
Good for the game? Hell no.
I am glad they are going to force supercarrier pilots to make compromises, just like everyone else has to. |
whaynethepain
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 11:15:00 -
[2318] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:sc drone bay let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3.
That would be like an Abbadon pilot wanting to have 8 guns that can turn into Tachyons/Mega Pulse/Medium Pulse by pressing a button. Good for the pilot? Yes. Good for the game? Hell no. I am glad they are going to force supercarrier pilots to make compromises, just like everyone else has to.
Or would it be like having a Supercarrier? Getting you on your feet.
So you've further to fall. |
Isabella Thresher
Fat Kitty Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:08:00 -
[2319] - Quote
how is removing the drone bays of dreadnoughts fixing their general weakness? |
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
79
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:37:00 -
[2320] - Quote
whaynethepain wrote:Shadowsword wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:sc drone bay let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3.
That would be like an Abbadon pilot wanting to have 8 guns that can turn into Tachyons/Mega Pulse/Medium Pulse by pressing a button. Good for the pilot? Yes. Good for the game? Hell no. I am glad they are going to force supercarrier pilots to make compromises, just like everyone else has to. Or would it be like having a Supercarrier? Putting this upfront: I do not own a super carrier.
I completely agree that super carriers should be able to field a compliment of smaller drones. It is immersion-breaking to neuter such a large and capable ship and disallow the use of regular (light, medium, heavy) combat drones. While a support fleet is a highly desirable thing (see modern day carrier groups), super carriers (and modern day carriers) have smaller, point defenses to fend off pests and gnats.
CCP has no concept of moderation and, tbh, I completely disagree with their nerfing methodology. Instead, give the players the tools needed to counter powerful ships or combinations of ships. 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284286 |
|
Stealthiest
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 00:50:00 -
[2321] - Quote
not needed. |
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:05:00 -
[2322] - Quote
http://evedreams.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/46/ This guy sounds good.
P.S. FHM has earned himself a place on the ignore list :) |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:58:00 -
[2323] - Quote
John Hand wrote:http://evedreams.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/46/ This guy sounds good.
This guy does a lot of ranting but little arguing, bont bother to give any hard number, and back up his point only by claiming that a supercarrier should remain OP because it's expensive.
You can find this point debunked in this very thread enough times already. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:11:00 -
[2324] - Quote
Dank Man wrote:Lol Subtarian so group A correctly predicts the 2nd most expensive and 2nd hardest to train (if not hardest to train due to immense drone skills 20m+) biggest ships in the game would be very powerful in groups. Lots of people see this ship as the best for the multiple uses and circumstances, so it becomes FOTM for the vets, therefor because some noobs havnt had time to train for them and cant beat these skilled vets they cry that their ships are OP, your argument seems to be flawless.
Group A sees that supercaps have become massively powerful when deployed in large groups, gambles that CCP won't bother to rebalance them, spends a few trillion ISK to dominate 0.0 and lowsec for 12-18 months.
Group B sees that supercaps have become massively powerful when deployed in large groups, gambles that CCP will rebalance them, doesn't spend a few trillion ISK and has to weather the storm for 12-18 months.
Sorry your gamble on CCP's lethargy didn't pay off ~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Sarahs Sister
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:31:00 -
[2325] - Quote
Jaiimez Skor wrote:So I wrote a thread about this actually got quite a negative response of which I do not understand why I still think my argument is valid.
The current balancing that is happening to supercarriers I feel is going too far, you have gone beyond balancing them, and now have made them massive underpowered with the proposed ideas, the whole purpose on why someone would purchase a supercarrier is because it is versatile, while I agree that supercarriers where too versatile and far too effective against subcapitals (having had a fleet dropped by a lone Nyx) I still believe they need a certain amount of effectiveness against subcapitals, atleast some level of self-defence, as it has been said before, now a lone supercarrier is completely screwed if caught out, some people think this is a good thing, however I disagree and think it will be the death of supercarriers. I believe that they should still retain a limited amount of effectiveness against subcapitals while not being as effective as they are now, I even proposed the idea of how to achieve this, the mechanics are already in game, give all supercarriers the same 100% bonus to Fighter and Fighter-Bomber damage that the Revenant supercarrier currently has, and remove their 3 drones per level bonus down to 1 per level, giving a maxxed out supercarrier toon the same effective damage against a capital they currently have, yet they only have 10 drones for standard drones, meaning they are no more effective than dropping a regular carrier on a group of subcapitals, therefore giving it a certain level of self-defence against a small group of subcaps while it not being massively overpowered, and still giving it it's full power against other capitals meaning it is not worthless.
I totally hate this idea I for one love having my 20 fighters/FB but im not so attached to 20 drones so my adaptation to your idea is to change the ships bonus to "3 additonal fighters and fighter bomber per skill level and 1 additional drone per skill level" then we can still use fights and still defend our selves to the same extent that Carriers do. This is not a hard system to impliment.
On the other note i am still against the EHP nurf, yes the Aeon shoul have a nuef as it take the same as a Titan but it should just be leveled off with the other SC (the Wyvern and Hel need a small buff due to being shield tanks). My reason is that the log off timer has changed the need for lower EHP as it does not matter how long it take to kill them cause they wont log off.
Love the dread changes
Not keen on Titan DD change but im not a Titan pilot so cant comment.
Sarah |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:43:00 -
[2326] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:sc drone bay let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3.
That would be like an Abbadon pilot wanting to have 8 guns that can turn into Tachyons/Mega Pulse/Medium Pulse by pressing a button. Good for the pilot? Yes. Good for the game? Hell no. I am glad they are going to force supercarrier pilots to make compromises, just like everyone else has to.
Just a question did you ever in your corp had a big cap fight ? |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 10:43:00 -
[2327] - Quote
Yes. Disappointed? |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 11:07:00 -
[2328] - Quote
zero2espect wrote: wrote:
ItGÇÖs obvious to me that the number of players are dropping. the fury of recent blogs are designed to re-energise people into staying. Unfortunately, the changes that are listed as CCPs solutions are just ill thought through, knee jerk reactions by people so far removed from the playing of the game it makes me furious.
My preface is that the very people who have been paying subs for the last 5 years, the people who are growing tired of the game because it is broken, are being placed even more offside by these stupid changes. People who have invested millions of SP and billions of isk into capitals are being killed through stupid misconceptions about how they are used.
Another point is that there needs to be a mechanic separating 0.0 and low-sec. in 0.0 let the big boys duke it out for the billions of moon goo and the like GÇô jump the titans, supers and dreads around all you want. Have different rules for them GÇô theyGÇÖre fighting for sov, let them bring out the bling GÇô max bonuses. In low sec there needs to be protection for the 3643 (or whatever) corps of 50 people or less who want to pvp without the threat of their 5 baddons, 2 megas and scorp being dropped on by 15 SCs just because itGÇÖs fun on a Friday night. Limit the amount of ships that can jump through a cyno into low sec. Prevent fleets with more than 5 caps cynoing into a system. Implement a cyno cool-down onto fleets. Halve the bonuses due to security scanning protocols in low sec. Do something. You dont need to screw supers to fix the prob.
Supers. Where do I start. Forget your stupid idea with the drones. Listen, just give the super enough drone bay for 10 bombers and 10 fighters & 5 spare fighters/fighter bombers and halve the amount of drones able to be deployed at once. Balance this with an additional % of damage per level. Make the pilot choose between putting in bombers, fighters (cap vs bs shooting) and/or any mix of standard drones they wish GÇô a super with 10 sentries/heavies/jamming drones isnGÇÖt going to win the next fight in delve but makes a difference to a guy bumped off a pos tackled by a hic and being bumped by 2 machs. Remove the bonuses that allow SC only fleets to remote rep each GÇô force commanders to mix up fleets for reps. Change the ecm burst so that it uses stront so that there is a finite amount of bursting that can be accomplished. The EHP drop is there purely for SC haters GÇô but again itGÇÖs stupid. If people are flying supercaps theyGÇÖve earned the right to have some ehp buffer. The logoffski rules provide a means that committed smaller fleets have a chance at a kill if they deserve it. IGÇÖd be happy to see that the hanger bay and corp hangers on supers be taken away so that they are pure combat ships and must rely on other jump capable ships for logistical support, amp up the fuel bay if you do this.
Titans. Fleet fight suppression is more based on the fear of massive-hostile-fleets bridging in rather than OMG 35 titans have jumped in. Make the distinction between titan and super not guns but the DD and (rebalanced) jump portal. I can tell you for free that having an erebus gate camping in low sec instapowning anything with guns does not make for a fun eve (and unable to do anything because within range there are 12 supers waiting to jump in and take down anybody dumb enough to counter).
When will CCP learn that nothing good comes from BIG changes to anything. In a complex environment like EVE is, you can never understand what will happen when you make even little changes, and big changes are completely random in how they play out. LetGÇÖs be honest, CCPs record of deploying quality changes and balancing and game features is not stellar GÇô this smells like more of the same. This whole situation came about because of a BIG change to motherships to become supers. This is like a roundabout now.
For the love of god, instead of making all these changes do 1 or 2 like I suggest, see what happens. if itGÇÖs not enough in a month do another one, then another one. Half of why we hate you CCP is that you hype up all these big changes and they never deliver what was promised. Promise less, do more small things and keep your current players happy. You may be trying to grow the game but at this rate you wont grow faster than people will leave if you keep doing crazy wholesale changes that effect people with BILLIONS invested into your universe.
I donGÇÖt have a super but IGÇÖm not on the bandwagon of NERF THE SUPERS! just because I donGÇÖt have one. I want to aspire to one day have one on this toon and the way things are going there is nothing beneficial in GÇ£wanting moreGÇ¥ out of this game. I might as well stop producing items, buying plexes and adding value to the game and just fly ceptors and cruisers because at least when you **** them up I wonGÇÖt be throwing billions down the toilet.
Listen to the guy^ Rework the winter patch, only viable option. Current Patch is an insult to human species aptitude to retionaly think. Patch is not retional, no other way to describe it other than a waste of customers time. I do not think you can successfully organise and develop a positive & progressive rework for the so called winter patch by christmas, so I further call you to abandone the release on this patch until you have something worth showing us & worth implementing in the game. Not just chuck something blindly out there to fill in as a patch. To introduce the current narrow minded,ill thought through patch would be a catastrophe. Plz CCP recognise the difference between benifits for EVE community & self gain benifits for Goons/DC. The only thing this patch does so far is allow mass blobs of sub caps to lagg systems out again un-opposed, ruling through (Pro) lagg tactics excuse my sarcasm, hence benifiting enlarge only Goons/DC an a limited extent lowsec dwellers. |
Ranger85
Dark Vipers Logistic Minning Wormhole Kaleidoscope Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 14:34:00 -
[2329] - Quote
- Supercapitals are too hard to kill. = People crying about it because they cant kill a Super cap whit cruisers ^^ please... 20% is it just a litle bit ???? i would say ALOT ! for some reason Super Caps are hard to get ... -1
- Supercarriers are far too versatile. = Well a ship of that size needs to be versatile !!!!! no guns only drones... Carriers NEED the drone space... - 1
- The Titan superweapon is too powerful. for some reason you can only fit on a titan ... i wouldnt say no to incressing the cooldown on it...
- Dreadnoughts are not good enough. +1
- Remote ECM Bursts should not work on ships immune to ewar. = LOL +1
- Sub-capitals are useless in fleet fights. = they are indeed ! whit this new nerfs is bether not even logging on ... -1
Logoff timer
After a player logs out, there is a check for player aggression every 15 minutes. If you have been aggressed, the timer extends for 15 minutes; if you have not been aggressed, you disappear as before. Note: this is only for player aggression and will not change what happens when you log off during fights against NPCs.
*FINALLY* |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:11:00 -
[2330] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Yes. Disappointed?
Well i was checking eve kill and didnt see anything so ...
|
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:22:00 -
[2331] - Quote
John Hand wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
A 20bil isk ship should be able to deal with any situation, even if its to a limited degree. That is so wrong i dont even know where to begin.
how many times do I have to say it?
More expensive != More Powerful
Specifically the largest ships must be weak to a ship smaller than itself otherwise why would anyone ever fly anything smaller? |
GRIEV3R
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:34:00 -
[2332] - Quote
Sigras wrote:John Hand wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
A 20bil isk ship should be able to deal with any situation, even if its to a limited degree. That is so wrong i dont even know where to begin. how many times do I have to say it? More expensive != More PowerfulSpecifically the largest ships must be weak to a ship smaller than itself otherwise why would anyone ever fly anything smaller?
you've never flown a super, have you?
When you invest 20 billion isk into a single ship, it DAMN WELL BETTER be more powerful than small ships.
the existance of PLEX introduces an exchange rate to Eve. Isk now equals real money. For subcaps, the value of the ship in real money is so small it doesn't matter - $5, $10, something like that.
Supercapital ships cross out of the realm of intangible pixels and join the real world of real money. A fully fitted Nyx is worth a couple thousand dollars of real money. A titan is worth almost $10,000.
even a small mixed fleet of supers and titans represents over $100,000 of REAL MONEY.
when you're talking about that kind of money, the rules of the game have to change. It is extremely unfair to supercap pilots who have invested that much time and money into the game to allow them to have their ships destroyed by a group of players who have not - at least in aggregate - invested similar time and money.
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:25:00 -
[2333] - Quote
GRIEV3R wrote:Sigras wrote:John Hand wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
A 20bil isk ship should be able to deal with any situation, even if its to a limited degree. That is so wrong i dont even know where to begin. how many times do I have to say it? More expensive != More PowerfulSpecifically the largest ships must be weak to a ship smaller than itself otherwise why would anyone ever fly anything smaller? you've never flown a super, have you? When you invest 20 billion isk into a single ship, it DAMN WELL BETTER be more powerful than small ships. the existance of PLEX introduces an exchange rate to Eve. Isk now equals real money. For subcaps, the value of the ship in real money is so small it doesn't matter - $5, $10, something like that. Supercapital ships cross out of the realm of intangible pixels and join the real world of real money. A fully fitted Nyx is worth a couple thousand dollars of real money. A titan is worth almost $10,000. even a small mixed fleet of supers and titans represents over $100,000 of REAL MONEY. when you're talking about that kind of money, the rules of the game have to change. It is extremely unfair to supercap pilots who have invested that much time and money into the game to allow them to have their ships destroyed by a group of players who have not - at least in aggregate - invested similar time and money.
+1 |
Shin Dari
Covert Brigade
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:07:00 -
[2334] - Quote
GRIEV3R wrote:when you're talking about that kind of money, the rules of the game have to change. It is extremely unfair to supercap pilots who have invested that much time and money into the game to allow them to have their ships destroyed by a group of players who have not - at least in aggregate - invested similar time and money. Nope. The economy can be seen as the flow of value, the stronger and wider the flow is the better the economy is. So its better for the EVE economy for such ships to be destroyed regularly.
I will greatly anticipate your tears.
|
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:41:00 -
[2335] - Quote
Shin Dari wrote:GRIEV3R wrote:when you're talking about that kind of money, the rules of the game have to change. It is extremely unfair to supercap pilots who have invested that much time and money into the game to allow them to have their ships destroyed by a group of players who have not - at least in aggregate - invested similar time and money. Nope. The economy can be seen as the flow of value, the stronger and wider the flow is the better the economy is. So its better for the EVE economy for such ships to be destroyed regularly. I will greatly anticipate your tears.
When this things happens.... its time to adapt. Was done with gal.titan lvl 5... and half way with savings. Now... Its time for me to die... but.. My 3 alts have got my savings and can now live on plex for years I should be happy..... but im not
|
Subtarian
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:47:00 -
[2336] - Quote
GRIEV3R wrote:Sigras wrote:John Hand wrote:Goose Sokarad wrote:Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.
A 20bil isk ship should be able to deal with any situation, even if its to a limited degree. That is so wrong i dont even know where to begin. how many times do I have to say it? More expensive != More PowerfulSpecifically the largest ships must be weak to a ship smaller than itself otherwise why would anyone ever fly anything smaller? you've never flown a super, have you? When you invest 20 billion isk into a single ship, it DAMN WELL BETTER be more powerful than small ships. the existance of PLEX introduces an exchange rate to Eve. Isk now equals real money. For subcaps, the value of the ship in real money is so small it doesn't matter - $5, $10, something like that. Supercapital ships cross out of the realm of intangible pixels and join the real world of real money. A fully fitted Nyx is worth a couple thousand dollars of real money. A titan is worth almost $10,000. even a small mixed fleet of supers and titans represents over $100,000 of REAL MONEY. when you're talking about that kind of money, the rules of the game have to change. It is extremely unfair to supercap pilots who have invested that much time and money into the game to allow them to have their ships destroyed by a group of players who have not - at least in aggregate - invested similar time and money.
First off this is a game..Im going to say that one more freaking time " THIS IS A GAME " , it has nothing to do with how much these internet pixels cross over to real money. If you chose to use real money to help ur self aquire a Super Carrier Its you own DAMN fault. But dont you dare try and ruin my GAME because I view it as a GAME. You have no right to say that because you value your internet pixels as real money that you can have the GAME the way you want it. quit dammit and see how much worth you get out of it then.
comparing the GAME to real life military and now real money. Its a freaking game that needs to be balanced for everyone to enjoy not the selected few! |
Slappy McPewpew
Corsairs Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 01:37:00 -
[2337] - Quote
this question Prob been answered but 100 pages alot of reading to find answer to 1 question
As Dreads going to have no drone bay, will the BPO be changing so you don't need to build Capital drone bay parts and if so what would you have to build to replace them?? To Proud to beg, To Stubbon to try. |
Slappy McPewpew
Corsairs Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:25:00 -
[2338] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Keep an eye out for the blogs. Already cancelled all other subscriptions since EVE and CCP has gone to total sh**!
Get a life pal, why ppl say there going to quit but week later you see them flying in a ship.
+1 to this, make cap fight that bit more edge of you seat battles.. remember no:1 rule of PVP "if you can't afford to lose it DON'T FLY IT" To Proud to beg, To Stubbon to try. |
HelPilot of20Years
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 13:11:00 -
[2339] - Quote
I re-activated for five dollars to ask one question:
Will the Hel be shown any sort of attention? I devoted twenty years of my life to training for, and earning isk (the hard way) for a ship that is all but useless. With these changes, maybe Hel pilots should be reimbursed skill points and given a nyx or aeon of their choice, with deadspace/officer fittings of equal value to their current setup?
What changes can we expect regarding slave-implant equivalents for shield-tanking caps? The non-existence of a real gang bonus when compared to armor-tanked caps?
Minmatar capital pilots have been abused long enough, a statement on the potential changes of the Hel (and minmatar caps in general) is necessary at this point in my opinion.
Unlike many SC pilots, I ratted and plexed to earn my SC, therefore it cost me more man-hours and occasional plex than most who were subsidized by their alliance's goo output or personal bots.
(4 accounts, not just an SC pilot. But I refuse to come back to eve if my most hard-won and highly-trained character will be laughed at by any serious alliance.)
So please, can we have an answer to the 20 billion isk (>$1000 USD) question? ...designed for one purpose and one purpose only. GÇ¥Imagine a swarm of deadly hornets pouring from the devilGÇÖs mouth. Now imagine they have autocannons.GÇ¥ -Unknown Hel designer
|
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 15:09:00 -
[2340] - Quote
HelPilot of20Years wrote:I re-activated for five dollars to ask one question:
Will the Hel be shown any sort of attention? I devoted twenty years of my life to training for, and earning isk (the hard way) for a ship that is all but useless. With these changes, maybe Hel pilots should be reimbursed skill points and given a nyx or aeon of their choice, with deadspace/officer fittings of equal value to their current setup?
What changes can we expect regarding slave-implant equivalents for shield-tanking caps? The non-existence of a real gang bonus when compared to armor-tanked caps?
Minmatar capital pilots have been abused long enough, a statement on the potential changes of the Hel (and minmatar caps in general) is necessary at this point in my opinion.
Unlike many SC pilots, I ratted and plexed to earn my SC, therefore it cost me more man-hours and occasional plex than most who were subsidized by their alliance's goo output or personal bots.
(4 accounts, not just an SC pilot. But I refuse to come back to eve if my most hard-won and highly-trained character will be laughed at by any serious alliance.)
So please, can we have an answer to the 20 billion isk (>$1000 USD) question?
The dev already mention that they are going to try and fix the min supers. |
|
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 15:27:00 -
[2341] - Quote
Subtarian wrote:First off this is a game..Im going to say that one more freaking time " THIS IS A GAME " , it has nothing to do with how much these internet pixels cross over to real money. If you chose to use real money to help ur self aquire a Super Carrier Its you own DAMN fault. But dont you dare try and ruin my GAME because I view it as a GAME. You have no right to say that because you value your internet pixels as real money that you can have the GAME the way you want it. quit dammit and see how much worth you get out of it then. comparing the GAME to real life military and now real money. Its a freaking game that needs to be balanced for everyone to enjoy not the selected few!
In Grievers defense you do realize that Isk==time OR RL money; RL money ==time; thus isk ==RL money?
Having better ships !=winning...it just stacks the odds in your favor. If your opponent brings 10 SCs to a fight and you can only bring 1 subcap then you had better run because you are going to lose. You obviously need to adjust your strategy and try using overwhelming force(numbers) to mitigate their ship quality. Making the rich corps ships shittier to make it easier for the poor corps to compete against them is just ridiculous.
TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 17:21:00 -
[2342] - Quote
Bhaal Chinnian wrote:Making the rich corps ships shittier to make it easier for the poor corps to compete against them is just ridiculous.
That would be true if people had no option to go back and fly a smaller ship. IE in WoW level 85 has to be better than levels 1-84 because there is no way to go back and be whatever level you want, we call this linear progression, but in Eve we have non linear progression, you can fly whatever you want.
Bhaal Chinnian wrote:Having better ships !=winning...it just stacks the odds in your favor. If your opponent brings 10 SCs to a fight and you can only bring 1 subcap then you had better run because you are going to lose. You obviously need to adjust your strategy and try using overwhelming force(numbers) to mitigate their ship quality. I would completely agree with you if CCP had 20 THz processors for every system, but in Eve right now we're limited to about 1000 ships per system . . . 500 if you want less lag, this means that all you have to do is field 300 of the "most powerful" ship and you win.
Not to mention that it removes strategy from the game, if there is truly a ship that is great against everything why would anyone who can afford it fly anything else? |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 19:02:00 -
[2343] - Quote
Shin Dari wrote:GRIEV3R wrote:when you're talking about that kind of money, the rules of the game have to change. It is extremely unfair to supercap pilots who have invested that much time and money into the game to allow them to have their ships destroyed by a group of players who have not - at least in aggregate - invested similar time and money. Nope. The economy can be seen as the flow of value, the stronger and wider the flow is the better the economy is. So its better for the EVE economy for such ships to be destroyed regularly. I will greatly anticipate your tears. If you stopped drooling over the vain hope of supercapital kills and actually read his post, you would have noticed that he did not argue that they should not die. And by the way, compared to before the buff, they die in spades. Because they get used.
What he is arguing is basic risk vs reward. You want the reward of a 20b killmail? Bring 20b in ships. Any ships. Even ignoring insurance and putting a fleet bs at an average 200 million, thats 100 fleet bs. I HIGHLY doubt you will find a supercap that got caught by 100 bs and lived to tell the tale.
But please don't come here frothing around your mouth and argue how a kitchen sink "fleet" of 12 crap fitted stealth bombers somehow magically deserve to kill a supercap. Because quite frankly, until they start putting their asses on the line too, they simply don't.
And in other news, since so many people take offense with ships that are able to launch very different and many types of drones, we maybe should nudge CCP in the direction of dominix and ishtar? CLEARLY an overpowered ability, according to the last few pages in here. |
WisdomPanda
Goat Horde Industries Unethical Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 20:15:00 -
[2344] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:What he is arguing is basic risk vs reward. You want the reward of a 20b killmail? Bring 20b in ships. Any ships. Even ignoring insurance and putting a fleet bs at an average 200 million, thats 100 fleet bs. I HIGHLY doubt you will find a supercap that got caught by 100 bs and lived to tell the tale.
Quote: The Nimitz-class supercarriers are a class of ten nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in service with the United States Navy. With an overall length of 1,092 ft (333 m) and full-load displacements of over 100,000 long tons,[1] they are the largest capital ships in the world. Instead of the gas turbines or diesel-electric systems used for propulsion on many modern warships, the carriers use two A4W pressurized water reactors which drive four propeller shafts and can produce a maximum speed of over 30 knots (56 km/h) and maximum power of around 260,000 shp (190 MW). As a result of the use of nuclear power, the ships are capable of operating for over 20 years without refueling and are predicted to have a service life of over 50 years.
...
The total cost of construction for each ship was around $4.5 billion.
Quote:The Iowa-class battleships were a class of fast battleships ordered by the United States Navy in 1939 and 1940 to escort the Fast Carrier Task Forces which would operate in the Pacific Theater of World War II. Six were ordered during the course of World War II, but only four were completed in time to see service in the Pacific Theater. The last two had been laid down, but as a result of the postwar drawdown of the armed forces they were canceled prior to completion and eventually scrapped. Like other third-generation American battleships, the Iowa class followed the design pattern set forth in the preceding North Carolina- and South Dakota-class battleships, which placed great emphasis on speed as well as on the secondary and anti-aircraft batteries.
...
Cost:US $100 million per ship
I'd totally take 45 Iowa Class Battleships to take down a single Nimitz. (The point being that price is a poor measure of a ships worth.)
Personally, I think we should all fly BC's, with our pants hooked to the aerial, singing a terrible version of Tubthumping. |
Neterti Axexut
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 21:37:00 -
[2345] - Quote
WisdomPanda wrote:Mioelnir wrote:What he is arguing is basic risk vs reward. You want the reward of a 20b killmail? Bring 20b in ships. Any ships. Even ignoring insurance and putting a fleet bs at an average 200 million, thats 100 fleet bs. I HIGHLY doubt you will find a supercap that got caught by 100 bs and lived to tell the tale. Quote: The Nimitz-class supercarriers are a class of ten nuclear-powered aircraft carriers . . . The total cost of construction for each ship was around $4.5 billion.
Quote:The Iowa-class battleships were a class of fast battleships . . . Cost US $100 million per ship I'd totally take 45 Iowa Class Battleships to take down a single Nimitz. (The point being that price is a poor measure of a ships worth.)
Construction on the first Nimitz-class began in June 1968. The last hull of her class, CVN-77 the George H.W. Bush, was laid down in Sep 2003. That ship cost $4.5b. If you adjust monies for 1968, the ship would have cost each $ 860m.
he lead-class BS, the BB-61 Iowa, was laid down in July 1939. $ 100m in 1939 was equal to $ 250.3m in 1968.
So . . . . in real dollars, a Nimitz class Carrier cost as much as 3.4 BS in 1968.
For purposes of our game . . . this math is about right between titans and SCs. (A properly fit-out titan costing between 60-70b versus a SC at ~20b Iskies).
But, doesn't work when you apply it to large gangs of small ships. Wierd things do occur in RL war (the solo torp that disabled the rudder on the Bismark, or the Yamato running out of fuel and having to beach herself as examples). BUT - it still took significant firepower to down the Bismark.
That is where the ingame math starts to fall apart: IRL, a flotilla of smaller ships would have great difficulties with a larger capital ship.
FWIW |
Shin Dari
Covert Brigade
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 23:58:00 -
[2346] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote:Shin Dari wrote:GRIEV3R wrote:when you're talking about that kind of money, the rules of the game have to change. It is extremely unfair to supercap pilots who have invested that much time and money into the game to allow them to have their ships destroyed by a group of players who have not - at least in aggregate - invested similar time and money. Nope. The economy can be seen as the flow of value, the stronger and wider the flow is the better the economy is. So its better for the EVE economy for such ships to be destroyed regularly. I will greatly anticipate your tears. If you stopped drooling over the vain hope of supercapital kills and actually read his post, you would have noticed that he did not argue that they should not die. And by the way, compared to before the buff, they die in spades. Because they get used. What he is arguing is basic risk vs reward. You want the reward of a 20b killmail? Bring 20b in ships. Any ships. Even ignoring insurance and putting a fleet bs at an average 200 million, thats 100 fleet bs. I HIGHLY doubt you will find a supercap that got caught by 100 bs and lived to tell the tale. Your vision on what he was saying makes him sound like a spoiled brat.
In EVE Online (RL) money and time won't and shouldn't guarantee victory, it might only improve your odds. People getting killed in their expensive ships by cheaper gangs is normal in EVE. In fact making a profit from killing pilots is a sport in EVE.
Quote:And in other news, since so many people take offense with ships that are able to launch very different and many types of drones, we maybe should nudge CCP in the direction of dominix and ishtar? CLEARLY an overpowered ability, according to the last few pages in here. The fact remains that SC just provided to be too much to allow them to use regular drones. But the Dominix and the Ishtar are far more limited by their own stats. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 00:25:00 -
[2347] - Quote
ships costing so much in man hours. isk and skill time ccp think about rewarding the hard work of you're loyal eve fans and addicts
E war immunity take away the ability to receive remote links and remote sebo's
nurf changes ( the balance)
hp hit suprts do have a lot of hp but they are dieing at a good rate balance the ship below is the case of the aeon the aeon is the most tanked ship in the game over that of a titan they need a balance. hel looks the best out of all the ships but its unable to tank
Doomsday one more great change but with the planed change allow them to use less fuel then 50k each time, given they are only able to hit large capital size ships. or give them a script allow them to use a aoe dd but with a limited damage
agro timer again most of us agree on this change on part . but a solo hic or dic should not be able to hold any ship in place for hours after someone have logged off have it extended but not unlimited.
as many have pointed out with the agro timer you will see many more die in the weeks and month that follow..
but also fix the self destruct fix it so ships with aggression can not selfdestruck.
sc drone bay let them have 20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters and a small drone bay with about 500m3. super carriers in combat cannot refill on stranded drones lock the function with the agro timer. solo super carrier moving about will have some deference granted for a limited amount of time.
if you go ahead with the changes listed. turn the super carriers in to advanced carrier and let them dock at lest their going to be used and made after the nurf, at the moment we have so meny super carrier that their not uncommon so move them to the next level.
IF the planed changes are introduced allow them to dock and turn the super carriers in to advanced carriers. let advanced carriers dock. |
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar
The Three Musketeers
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 00:52:00 -
[2348] - Quote
Hey Guys,
So I really am not qualified to assess the impact of these changes, but I can tell you this: For years I have been training with certain things in mind, not totally scientifically, but using my intuition. I've attempted to prepare and guide myself on a path that might allow for future benefits. Now CCP in their infinite wisdom is using METAGAMING to manipulate things I began to hope for years ago (using the drone bays to help defend a lone dreadnaught, for instance).
When you mess with EVE, you mess with people. Real people in the real world, and the thousands of hours they have spent using your product, thinking about your product, and planning their lives around your product.
Sub OS Name Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit **** Motherboard EVGA__132-YW-E180-FTW 790i Digital PWM **** 2 x EVGA 8800 GTX in 2-way SLI Resolution 2560 x 1440 x 59 hertz-á**** Corsair Dominator GT 8GB Kit 2X4GB 2000MHZ DDR3 **** Processor Intel(R) Core2 Extreme CPU X9650 @ 3.00GHz |
Alexandria Aesirial
Fusion Death Inc. Eternal Evocations
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 04:15:00 -
[2349] - Quote
CAN SOMEONE TELL ME THE DPS ON THE REVAMPED MOROS???? It's only blobbing when you lose, otherwise it's good fleet comp. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 06:05:00 -
[2350] - Quote
Mioelnir wrote: What he is arguing is basic risk vs reward. You want the reward of a 20b killmail? Bring 20b in ships. Any ships. Even ignoring insurance and putting a fleet bs at an average 200 million, thats 100 fleet bs. I HIGHLY doubt you will find a supercap that got caught by 100 bs and lived to tell the tale.
You're basically saying that an Estamel fitted BS should be able to solo your deadspace carrier, then.
And what about a 50-titans blob? Should it be killable only by a a blob of 15 000 BS?
The flaws of your reasoning are obvious.
Eve's power curve is based on diminishing returns. You pay double to have something that perform 10% better. Get used to it. |
|
Veronica Kerrigan
Hand Of Midas F0RCEFUL ENTRY
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 06:50:00 -
[2351] - Quote
Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:Evil Celeste wrote:Dirk Tungsten wrote:
lol some people just are clueless. After this patch a single dictor and bunch of frigits will be able to over a period of time able to kill a super/titan, its just insainly stupid this whole new dynamic in the winter patch.
And this is how exactly it should be! Supercarriers must have their support fleet, if they are going solo, they deserve to die. Pure stupidness. If you are looking for solopwnmobile yes. If you are loking for balanced pvp enviroment with alot of variety, then its best way. Is best way lol, your insaine, a bunch of fail in shield tanked blaster prophecys with a dictor are able to kill a super after this patch, an the super is unable to do anything about it. If you dont have a dynamic well structured fleet compisition and good plan you neither deserve to kill a super/titan or should be able to. This patch is carebearing it down, so nubs in there fail mishmash fleets can down supers/titans. Supers/titans wont be fielded solo, an they wont be fielded in a system for more time than it takes them to jump out again after this patch. Supers/titans will purely be used to counter drop a capital target or lesser number of capital targets, wich yet again defeats the purpose of this patch supposedly being able to balance out super/titan fleet fights. Will do completely the opposite.
Or you could organize some friends to save you, have tea while you wait for them to travel by gate all the way across the cluster, come back, realize you still aren't through shields in a max EHP aeon, take a power nap, then come back in time to see said shield tanked blaster prophecies get annihilated by the lone daredevil that managed to get there ahead of everyone else. Ah well, if you want to lose your Aeon that's your decision...
|
Will DestroyYou
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 10:24:00 -
[2352] - Quote
If we must continue with (laggy/mindless/boring/dumb) blob warfare then I guess these fixes are as good as any...
Blobs are boring and I wonder when CCP will wake up to the fact. But let's face it, the CSM does not speak for the grunts - their "fixes" are in their own interests, and their "fixes" are what CCP is basing everything on.
somewhat off-topic, but related to the above point: Alliance leaders should not even be candidates for the CSM - it should be made up of grunts for CCP to get *valid* feedback on what *most* people want. The priorities of an alliance leader are rarely the same as that of their grunts. (note: this is not directed at any particular CSM members, just a general observation of the problems with the system - how this could be done, I have no idea)
back to the main topic: SC's/Titans are not even the source of the problem --- Alliance/NAP sizes are. Fix the source of the problem - permanently with something like this. It may not be the perfect solution, but somenting along the lines of the basic ideas behind it would make EVE much more fun for the general players, and make any overpowerred ships much less of an issue.
0.0 should be filled with many different entities, not just 2 or 3 huge ones. Fights should be fun, not tedious.
EVE used to be fun before alliance and NAP sizes got too large. All other problems stem from this one point. |
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 14:42:00 -
[2353] - Quote
First of all, please stop with those references to RL ships and RL money. This is a game, the only thing that should be considered is the effort that is put by someone into something.
While some people believe that having an wider recruiting policy with the goal of beeing able to field bigger fleets, others might set their goals to keep an smaller alliance with a considerable supercapital force. That alone shows that you have options in EVE and those options may affect the outcome...
When you break down to those 2 kinds of players (groups, alliances, coalitions...w/e) you will have to agree with me that its easier to the group with more dudes to acquire and field an supercapital fleet and still bring neuting BS, logistics, heavy tacklers.... its also waaay easier to defend cyno jammers, wich is an very important aspect of sov wars...
Two little things to add:
Risk vs Reward: When you talk about risk vs reward beeing risk the cost of a ship, you might want to keep it to build costs (in minerals, time, pos fuel, sov bills, the risk of losing it all during the build process..). You cant say that crap about fully estamel fit because this doesnt change the build costs/effort of said spaceship. Thats why there are tier 1 to 3 battleship I.E., beeing the tier 3 more expensive, with an smaller insurance payout, but with better stats and slots configuration.
You can have almost the same amount of officer stuff in a subcap and make it an utterly expensive fit, but that doesnt change the fact that they can be built everywhere, and with a freighter worth of minerals you can make lots of ships. Thats not even close to what you need to build any supercarrier.
About skill intesive "end game" ships: You can fly an t1 fitted hurricane with an 5 days old char. Does it worth it? When you scale it up to a supercarrier, you need lots of level 5 skills to fly it, and another load of lvl 5 to make it worth flying. In fact, to have the only the most valuable skills to fly it properly, it takes exactly 18 months. You can spin it whatever way you want it, but supercarriers with crappy skills arent welcome in any alliance (other than carebearing)... thats a fact. If you cant apply the bang for the buck, cant jump as far as your fleet, cant soak up enough damage, cant RR enough..... you should not be using it.
So, IMO: Yes you should take into account both price tag and skill req. when you look at versatility of any ship in some degree .By nerfing that hard the capabilities of supercaps to fight supcaps that balance its very far to beeing fair.
BTW 2.3 k posts and like 6 dev posts.... Is that the new, improved, customer friendly CCP? Its nice to talk among us etc... But how is that beeing translated to the actual "balancing"... its a mistery... same ol' same ol'
PS.: ctrl+c before posting, pro |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 16:08:00 -
[2354] - Quote
Samanta Raiolaser wrote:First of all, please stop with those references to RL ships and RL money. This is a game, the only thing that should be considered is the effort that is put by someone into something. ... Stuff
And even with those nerfs the supers will still be the most powerfull ships by a wide margin, so what are you complaining about?
Let's speak about effort put by the pilots.
I know one supercap pilot who, years ago, built himself a Wyvern. He did it all with the assistance of only one other player, so I'd have to agree that he deserved a bit of overpoweredness. And supercaps were still rare back then, only a half-dozen total for the whole of TCF. So it didn't matter if it was overpowered or not.
Now, take one random supercap pilot from an alliance like Shadow of Death. Odds are that the supercarrier/titan in question has been built with money coming from moon goo, or from renters. How much effort really comes from the pilot? Or even his corpmates? The answer is: not much, most of the task doesn't take active participation. And now that supers are that common, their balance really matter. |
Trader 99
The Black Hornets
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 16:33:00 -
[2355] - Quote
In eve all ships have roles and when you get to the biggest damage dealers in the game it seems only logical that they would be very vulnerable to subcaps.People keep talking about the cost of these ships but i think cost is irrelevant its about balance and having a super or a titan doesnt mean you should get to have your cake and eat it. |
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 17:16:00 -
[2356] - Quote
Will DestroyYou wrote:If we must continue with (laggy/mindless/boring/dumb) blob warfare then I guess these fixes are as good as any...
Laggy blob warfare is a thing of the past, Something people seem to keep forgetting when there posting, TiDi FIXED LAG! The only "lag" your ever going to see now is your computers own inadquicies to see the mass of drones. Turn off drone models and other effects when a fight over 50 people is going to happen....game runs real smooth after that.
Will DestroyYou wrote:SC's/Titans are not even the source of the problem --- Alliance/NAP sizes are. Fix the source of the problem - permanently with something like this. It may not be the perfect solution, but somenting along the lines of the basic ideas behind it would make EVE much more fun for the general players, and make any overpowerred ships much less of an issue. 0.0 should be filled with many different entities, not just 2 or 3 huge ones. Fights should be fun, not tedious.EVE used to be fun before alliance and NAP sizes got too large. All other problems stem from this one point.
CCP can't balance player relations, thie big NAP's ect that you are bitching about come from the PLAYERS, not CCP. If you want to break up the big NAPs then either wait for them to turn on themselves, or go fight against them yourself and make your own big coalition to wipe them out.
The only reason were even seeing this "nerf" at all is because the PLAYERS banded together and make a big super cap fleet. There is NOTHING stopping anyone else in the game from doing the same, getting together and encouraging people to train for supers.
Supers are fine as they are, there not OP or anything of that sort, its when there in large numbers and all blue to each-other that causes them to be "OP". If there wasn't a big coalition of super cap pilots all together and instead were fighting others, we wouldn't be having this discussion. |
Samanta Raiolaser
Republic University Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 17:34:00 -
[2357] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote: Now, take one random supercap pilot from an alliance like Shadow of Death. Odds are that the supercarrier/titan in question has been built with money coming from moon goo, or from renters. How much effort really comes from the pilot? Or even his corpmates? The answer is: not much, most of the task doesn't take active participation. And now that supers are that common, their balance really matter.
Well, I can only speak for myself.
My SC was bought with my own isk. But I would never have got to that amount if our battleships, logis, etc... wasnt full reimbursed on CTA's. CTA's that got us moons, sov to rent... Those same moons and systems now allow my alliance to continue growing and aiming for bigger objectives. They provide me content (pew pew) and I give them my time. Sounds fair to me.
Nothing comes for free. If your alliance can hand out SC's for free for regular grunts (which I doubt any alliance does) It means that someone at some point have gone for all that trouble that is necessary to build one. The rules and mineral requirements are the same for everyone, but the way that alliances handle in house built supers are up to them. Even if the corp just give you the isk and you buy it from someone, that isk comes from somewhere... maybe that 10% tax... Which means that everyone in said corp has put some of their own time to acquire said ship. Thats pretty obvious, simple, and thats nothing wrong with it. |
doombreed52
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 21:03:00 -
[2358] - Quote
I may not fly capital ships but before you go crazy just listen
The fighters seem to be a bit unbalanced between them the einherji seems to be hands down the best better tracking orbiting speed and so forth. The dragonfly has the best chance of survival but other then that nothing much, the firbolg has the best raw damage with thermal but nothing else to say about it, the templar seems to have nothing going for it besides a bit better armour which doesn't make up for it and being the only one that can deal EM damage. it just seems a bit odd to me that it would be this way and the regular drones are kinda the same way not many Amarr or caldari ones seen at all besides EWar but that shouldn't be counted in the first place about this. it seem like the only useful drones and fighters are the gallente and minmatar for raw damage and maneuverability respectively. |
Monikerina
Macross Space Defense Squadron The Conglomeration of Ill Advised Ideas
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 06:48:00 -
[2359] - Quote
Meh. I edited my whole post because I give up.
I'll TL; DR it.
CCP tosses out cap rebalances that have opposite effect of that intended.
CCP freaking out and doing everything they can to buy back loyalty. Seems like a lot of these things will be knee jerk reactions.
Hilmar and Zulu still sound arrogant and unapologetic to me. I still remember Zulu's rage post during Monoclegate.
I'm not on CCP bandwagon yet. In fact, I doubt I ever will be again. I feel right now like this is insult to injury, dozens of changes rushed out to buy favor with us.
7 years of Eve O just feels like 7 years of my life wasted at this point. |
Nyla Skin
Dark Circle Enforcement Templis Dragonaors
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 08:34:00 -
[2360] - Quote
John Hand wrote:
CCP can't balance player relations, thie big NAP's ect that you are bitching about come from the PLAYERS, not CCP. If you want to break up the big NAPs then either wait for them to turn on themselves, or go fight against them yourself and make your own big coalition to wipe them out.
CCP however has attempted to dabble in reasons why people fight, and having failed to do so. They should not do that and fix what they have attempted so far (moons).
Quote: The only reason were even seeing this "nerf" at all is because the PLAYERS banded together and make a big super cap fleet. There is NOTHING stopping anyone else in the game from doing the same, getting together and encouraging people to train for supers.
Yes there is, its called ISK.
Quote: Supers are fine as they are, there not OP or anything of that sort, its when there in large numbers and all blue to each-other that causes them to be "OP". If there wasn't a big coalition of super cap pilots all together and instead were fighting others, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
No they are not fine. Nobody is saying they shouldn't have a purpose. But they should not be the 'ultimate ship' that makes everything else obsolete. That is why a BLOB of them is a problem. These changes giving them actual vulnerabilities are a step in the right direction.
Also they should get destroyed more often, which is why fixing the logoffski problem is important. If they are not getting destroyed often enough, the pileup of supercaps just warps the whole game out of joint. |
|
UR13L
THORN Syndicate Initiative Mercenaries
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 09:27:00 -
[2361] - Quote
A few ideas i was thinking about:
- Instead of changing the siege module, maybe make a new module for it, say an "assault module" or something:
disable jump drive, but the dread can still move enable the dread to be RR'd w/ no active tank bonus increase tracking, slightly decrease DPS output no EW immunity with new assault mod, and better scan res than siege leave siege mod the way it is for shooting structures
- at least 5 small drones for dreads. they add negligible dps
- An overall +1 or 2 to warp strength for all capitals
- Nerf the DD so it does dmg according to sig rad (someone like 50 pages ago mentioned it)
full dmg vs supers 1 mil or so dmg vs regular caps less vs BS and down etc
- people hardly utilize carriers anymore, other than suicide triage fit, in combat since a titan can one shot it. Hardly anyone uses even faction mods on them either because of this as well
- Nerf fighter bombers further w/ worse sig res, so they dont annihilate regular caps as quickly (still full dmg on structure or supers), or require a siege like state for a mom to use t hem, and then they should only use them and no fighters.
Id like to see regular capitals not be so overpowerd by fighterbombers and doomsdays so that people will fit them well and field them on a standard battle field in conjunction with subcaps and supers complementing each other.
E: another option for the DD is to make it do its dmg over time , say 5-10 seconds |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Silent Infinity
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 11:38:00 -
[2362] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Dear CCP Tallest (btw tallest by what means? ;) ),
I'd like to ask three things, which i'm thinking most about these upcoming changes,
First, I think fighters should only be nerfed, that they shouldn't greatly affect carriers as they are currently. Carriers do need fighters, and to hit BSs, and to a size, cruisers. This is the way eve works, you can hit your current size, one down a bit, and two down pretty slightly. Carriers are very nice in this regard
Second, the matar carriers really need love, becuase they are such a hybrid breed right now, that makes them really hard to make use of, and the usage statistics of the ship(s) really reflect this.
And at last, about the dreads. I really do feel dreads are not really being used in fleet fights because they are nothing bot expensive killmails now. We only undock our dreads, when it's definitely we won't get resistances at POS bashings. The reason for this, is they are unable to recieve logistics support. It doesn't really matter how much self-tanking boost they got by entering siege mode, they don't even have the slightest chance to survive a fleet battle. Maybe if we could field dreads, which were able to receive some kind of logistics support (like cap transfers only, or from SCs only, or from scripted cap transfer only, or using scripted siege mods, whatever, i'm just a player), we could deal with cap fleets somewhat better. Maybe.
I hope I'll get some answers for these suggestions/ideas.
Best regards, Magic |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 23:32:00 -
[2363] - Quote
Magic Crisp wrote:I really do feel dreads are not really being used in fleet fights because they are nothing bot expensive killmails now. We only undock our dreads, when it's definitely we won't get resistances at POS bashings. The reason for this, is they are unable to recieve logistics support. It doesn't really matter how much self-tanking boost they got by entering siege mode, they don't even have the slightest chance to survive a fleet battle. Maybe if we could field dreads, which were able to receive some kind of logistics support (like cap transfers only, or from SCs only, or from scripted cap transfer only, or using scripted siege mods, whatever, i'm just a player), we could deal with cap fleets somewhat better. Maybe.
I hope I'll get some answers for these suggestions/ideas.
Best regards, Magic Ive long said that the best fix for dreads is to remove its tanking bonus in siege, nerf its EHP a little, add a bit of resist across the board in siege, and allow it to receive RR
After that change, you can keep the siege module at 600 seconds as a nerf to what may now be an overpowered ship. |
HelPilot of20Years
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 02:17:00 -
[2364] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted....Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.
Will these two semi-related portions of your post be executed inclusively and before the SISI mirror expires? SISI should always be free anyway, bittervets might re-sub if they knew their ships were space-worthy. You know, so we can see what you've done and not what you've said.
The 20/20 F/FB compromise and dread boost is enough. EHP reduction is a crime against humanity. A drone SP reimbursement is due for SC pilots if they prefer IMO, considering the months of training wasted on what in many cases is a character who is permanently stuck in a ship they were told would require said skills. ...designed for one purpose and one purpose only. GÇ¥Imagine a swarm of deadly hornets pouring from the devilGÇÖs mouth. Now imagine they have autocannons.GÇ¥ -Unknown Hel designer
|
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 09:49:00 -
[2365] - Quote
All CCP wants to do... is poke ppl in the eye with nerf nerf nerf NERF !! And... Why in h... is plex prices so high in Jita ? A real highsec carebear. |
Will DestroyYou
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 11:09:00 -
[2366] - Quote
John Hand wrote:Will DestroyYou wrote:If we must continue with (laggy/mindless/boring/dumb) blob warfare then I guess these fixes are as good as any...
Laggy blob warfare is a thing of the past, Something people seem to keep forgetting when there posting, TiDi FIXED LAG! The only "lag" your ever going to see now is your computers own inadquicies to see the mass of drones. Turn off drone models and other effects when a fight over 50 people is going to happen....game runs real smooth after that.
Actually, they only made larger blobs possible, nothing more. Give it a month or 2 and dilation will be lagged out too. In the short term it patches the symptom - in the long term it does nothing for the cause. Besides, who wants to spend 10 hours in a fight that should have taken 1 (because of dilation)??? - THIS IS NOT FUN (OR REASONABLE) FOR ANYONE... (*cough* except the alliance leaders drooling over the moon goo for their pockets)
Every single time CCP has made progress with lag, the blobs just get bigger - IT FIXES NOTHING!
Time dilation would be a great fallback however if it was only needed in emergencies; not every single battle in null like it will be with the current blob mentality.
John Hand wrote:Will DestroyYou wrote:SC's/Titans are not even the source of the problem --- Alliance/NAP sizes are. Fix the source of the problem - permanently with something like this. It may not be the perfect solution, but somenting along the lines of the basic ideas behind it would make EVE much more fun for the general players, and make any overpowerred ships much less of an issue. 0.0 should be filled with many different entities, not just 2 or 3 huge ones. Fights should be fun, not tedious.EVE used to be fun before alliance and NAP sizes got too large. All other problems stem from this one point. CCP can't balance player relations, thie big NAP's ect that you are bitching about come from the PLAYERS, not CCP. If you want to break up the big NAPs then either wait for them to turn on themselves, or go fight against them yourself and make your own big coalition to wipe them out.
Yes they can, they just fear the (current blob) alliance leaders causing more bad media attention over it for their own gain. Massive coaltions are not in the interest of the general players. I for one would be the first one posting replies to bad press caused by arrogant leaders over their loss of goo.
EVE should be about ALL PLAYERS, not just alliance leaders lining their pockets.
John Hand wrote: The only reason were even seeing this "nerf" at all is because the PLAYERS banded together and make a big super cap fleet. There is NOTHING stopping anyone else in the game from doing the same, getting together and encouraging people to train for supers.
Supers are fine as they are, there not OP or anything of that sort, its when there in large numbers and all blue to each-other that causes them to be "OP". If there wasn't a big coalition of super cap pilots all together and instead were fighting others, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I agree, in smaller scale battles SC's are fine. Unfortunately, CCP has allowed the game to get out of control by not imposing limitations.
Now, if CCP added reasonable limitations on alliance sizes and NAPing (through isk cost, or through a max limit on alliance system sov that is lowerred even more by each extra blue standing), EVE would be more fun for the grunts. Alliances shouldn't need whole regions(+) if the under-lying system is fixed. |
tesvtr
Volition Cult The Volition Cult
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 11:59:00 -
[2367] - Quote
Balance supercapital numbers using fleet command positions:
OPTION 1 - minimal constraint max six titans per fleet; can ONLY be in fleet or wing commander positions max 31 supercarriers per fleet; can only be in squad, wing, or fleet command positions no limit to carrier, dread, or subcap choices (naturally), unless theres a sensible constraint to force command ships/battlecruisers/command T3's into ... errr ... command positions within fleet (this is after all their role)
OPTION 2 - GO DREAD BLOB YEEEEEAAAHHHHHHH !!!!!!! one titan per fleet - FC position only max 6 supercarriers in wing/FC only max 31 carriers - squad/wing/FC only no restrictions on dreads
As a part-time revelation pilot, I like option 2 And lets face it, you are supposed to be capable of some sort of fleet enhancing if you take leadership roles, why not make the biggest ships fill those positions?
|
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:33:00 -
[2368] - Quote
The simple truth is that CCP have had their money out of the long term players. People that have been arond a very long time have skills and assets that currently make it very easy for them to wipe the floow with the masses of potential new players. Lots of new players will potentialy bring in several times more real money than the long term players that might leave.
It's all about the money baby, CCP dont give a damn about you if you've been playing for 5+ years they consider you a likely adict that will never leave so are confident in the fact that when they shaft you the vast majority will just go buy some lube and come back for more. |
Draconus Lofwyr
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:20:00 -
[2369] - Quote
John Hand wrote: Laggy blob warfare is a thing of the past, Something people seem to keep forgetting when there posting, TiDi FIXED LAG! The only "lag" your ever going to see now is your computers own inadquicies to see the mass of drones. Turn off drone models and other effects when a fight over 50 people is going to happen....game runs real smooth after that.
Wrong, All TiDi is doing is taking something everyone complains about, LAG, and turns it into a feature. Because CCP is now just spreading the lag around to everyone evenly. it doesn't address the deficiencies of the code or the servers. it just tries to mitigate the damage the deficiencies cause. It will basically end up turning EvE into a slideshow game in large fights, until the blobs get so massive that not even TiDi can compensate. but at the same time, i will complement CCP for at least doing something to compensate instead of "the logs show nothing".
But while were talking about changes to the supers, i have 2 small suggestions for changes and a suggested solution for supercarriers
1. Can the supercarriers in space size be increased to reflect their super status. according to the specs, they are supposed to be 1/3rd the size of a titan, yet they are dwarfed by some Battleships. make em LOOK their size.
2. Why do titans have a big ship maintenance bay than a supercarrier, for that matter, why do they have a ship maintenance bay at all? if they must have one, let it fit a few small emergency evac shps for the pilot and leave the fitting service, but 5M m3 bay? give me a break.
and for the supercarrier changes, make the restrictions for the drones, not the ship.
1. Fighterbombers can only agress capitals/supers and structures. 2. Fighters can agress down to Battleships 3. all other drones are not restricted, but dont get the bonus to deployed numbers the fighters and fighterbombers do. so they can potentialy defend themselves against a lone ship or 2 without being stuck with no recourse. |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
701
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:03:00 -
[2370] - Quote
So any news on the Minmatar capital reballancing? The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
|
Just Another Alt
IPT BR3
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:04:00 -
[2371] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:The simple truth is that CCP have had their money out of the long term players. People that have been arond a very long time have skills and assets that currently make it very easy for them to wipe the floow with the masses of potential new players. Lots of new players will potentialy bring in several times more real money than the long term players that might leave.
It's all about the money baby, CCP dont give a damn about you if you've been playing for 5+ years they consider you a likely adict that will never leave so are confident in the fact that when they shaft you the vast majority will just go buy some lube and come back for more.
Thats a perfect description, m8.
TBH I'm considering unsubing not only my supercap alt, but all my chars.
Eve its not my "main" game, but I do like it and for the years that I've been playing I did "sold it" to a lot of my friends. One of the first things I usually say to them its that EVE is THE hardest game out there. That its not just time, but also effort that its necessary to get the stuff that you want, and once you get it, try to have fun and enjoy the results of your hard work. At some point, you might take a huge hit (like welping a titan) but w/e you do must be a calculated risk, considering your experience and the tools that you earn to play with. If you lose something, its your fault. Thats not what is happening now.
That kind of arbitrary unreasonable nerf, rendering almost useless chars and assets of considerable value and, consequently, the time and money that you spent over the years... changes everything. There is no reason anymore to make any long term plan when that time that you are about to invest into something might just be a house of cards. I guess no one would spent years building one...
I have wasted my time and money in a lot of stupid things. A lot. Eve is about to join the top 5.
It's like drugs and hookers. Did I had fun? Hell yeah. Would I do it again? Probably not.
Ps.: I'm sure CCP don't care about how a single dude feels about the way they manage EVE, but by posting this i've just made them spend money on data storage. I guess i had my revenge \o/ |
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:48:00 -
[2372] - Quote
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:John Hand wrote: Laggy blob warfare is a thing of the past, Something people seem to keep forgetting when there posting, TiDi FIXED LAG! The only "lag" your ever going to see now is your computers own inadquicies to see the mass of drones. Turn off drone models and other effects when a fight over 50 people is going to happen....game runs real smooth after that.
Wrong, All TiDi is doing is taking something everyone complains about, LAG, and turns it into a feature. Because CCP is now just spreading the lag around to everyone evenly. it doesn't address the deficiencies of the code or the servers. it just tries to mitigate the damage the deficiencies cause. It will basically end up turning EvE into a slideshow game in large fights, until the blobs get so massive that not even TiDi can compensate. but at the same time, i will complement CCP for at least doing something to compensate instead of "the logs show nothing".
TiDi is going to give the servers something to work with. Since currently the game cannot handle massive fleet fights that bring in more players due to the videos and testmonies that such things bring. The current tech level of servers cannot handle EvE, plain and simple, they cry whenever there is a fleet fight. So CCP got a little smart and made a way for them to handle such massive fights, now with lag being something on the low down with TiDi they can work on making more stuff for us. The more cooler stuff we get to fly and play with means we will spread the word about eve.
Will DestroyYou wrote:John Hand wrote: The only reason were even seeing this "nerf" at all is because the PLAYERS banded together and make a big super cap fleet. There is NOTHING stopping anyone else in the game from doing the same, getting together and encouraging people to train for supers.
Supers are fine as they are, there not OP or anything of that sort, its when there in large numbers and all blue to each-other that causes them to be "OP". If there wasn't a big coalition of super cap pilots all together and instead were fighting others, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I agree, in smaller scale battles SC's are fine. Unfortunately, CCP has allowed the game to get out of control by not imposing limitations. Now, if CCP added reasonable limitations on alliance sizes and NAPing (through isk cost, or through a max limit on alliance system sov that is lowerred even more by each extra blue standing), EVE would be more fun for the grunts. Alliances shouldn't need whole regions(+) if the under-lying system is fixed.
Again that is LIMITING PLAYER INTERACTION. Limiting NAPing ect is limiting player interaction and that is something you CANNOT DO! If you want to limit how players talk to each-other or how they make friends then you just mind as well make it a single player game. Even if you did find a way to limit it, the players would find a way AROUND it, this is EVE and Player Interaction is what RUNS THIS GAME!
If you didn't nerf Super Caps or instead limited there drone bay the super cap blob would resolve itself. Coalitions do not stay together forever, they do eventually break up and fights break out and supers die. Only until the super cap fleets are made up of ONE alliance and not 4 or 5 that you MIGHT have an issue, and the only group that can do that alone is PL.
In fact CCP should assist player interactions by allowing alliances to make coalitions that the game would recognize. This is something people have already done, now its CCP's time to catch up. Just like how an alliance is made, allow alliances to make coalitions. Benefits of this would be, allowing the use of coalition cyno beacons, the option to have a single coalition sov bill and the eve map would show said coalition instead of the fragmented blocks you see now. There are a ton of benefits that doing this could bring, and the ones I just put out there are a few that could be added. |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 06:26:00 -
[2373] - Quote
Just Another Alt wrote:
Thats a perfect description, m8.
TBH I'm considering unsubing not only my supercap alt, but all my chars.
Eve its not my "main" game, but I do like it and for the years that I've been playing I did "sold it" to a lot of my friends. One of the first things I usually say to them its that EVE is THE hardest game out there. That its not just time, but also effort that its necessary to get the stuff that you want, and once you get it, try to have fun and enjoy the results of your hard work. At some point, you might take a huge hit (like welping a titan) but w/e you do must be a calculated risk, considering your experience and the tools that you earn to play with. If you lose something, its your fault. Thats not what is happening now.
That kind of arbitrary unreasonable nerf, rendering almost useless chars and assets of considerable value and, consequently, the time and money that you spent over the years... changes everything. There is no reason anymore to make any long term plan when that time that you are about to invest into something might just be a house of cards. I guess no one would spent years building one...
I have wasted my time and money in a lot of stupid things. A lot. Eve is about to join the top 5.
It's like drugs and hookers. Did I had fun? Hell yeah. Would I do it again? Probably not.
Ps.: I'm sure CCP don't care about how a single dude feels about the way they manage EVE, but by posting this i've just made them spend money on data storage. I guess i had my revenge \o/
Just so you know it m8. You are not alone. Im not verry found of that EVE online turns out to be something like " WOW in space" But... Hey... EVE online do what they like.... and so do I....
A real highsec carebear. |
Anile8er
GR3Y N0MADS
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:28:00 -
[2374] - Quote
I'd like to point out the massive imbalance in this "balance".
CCP Tallest, so the idea of this balance is to eliminate or limit supercapital domination in large fleet fights? Right? I.E. Large fleets of Titans won't be able to just Doomsday tacklers and Large fleets of Supercarriers won't be able to deploy vast amounts of sentry drones against subcapital fleets. Though Titans will still be tracking battleships and battlecruisers with capital class guns. And Supercarriers who are being given a "kill capitals and structures role" wont be able to kill POS's.
Okay so lets fast forward to after the winter expansion with the changes. Our first supercapital engagement of the expansion! How exciting!
The setup for the fight, CCP's employer, Goonswarm, have 30 dreads sieging a structure in 0.0 supported by a 500 man subcapital gang waiting to bridge in if needed. Pandemic Legion sees an opportunity to gank 30 dreads. So they form, lets say, 20 titans and 35 supercarriers with a small support gang of tacklers.
It begins, Pandemic Legion cyno up, 20 dreads instantly die to Titan Doomsdays (good thing they got siege timer buffed). The other 10 die pretty quick to Titan guns and fighter bomber damage. So now Goons counter! This has been what they have been waiting for! The big push for the patch! The NERF! Now they will show EVE whats up with subcapitals ganking supercapitals. So Goonswarm cyno up, 500 Hurricans, Maelstroms and tacklers come pouring through screaming "Boys we've got'em now!" So Pandemic Legion's supercapitals bunker down for the fight. Supercarriers start remote repairing and generating an unbreakable energy transfer. Since effective remote repairing is based on high resistance the 20% hit point reduction doesn't have any real effect here. Titans not being able to Doomsday tacklers is going to be a problem, but they will just fit of each other and change out to medium sized guns and murder the dictors and hics tackling the fleet. Supercarriers will fit off each other and change out fightbombers for fighters from their corporate hangers.
And so the fight will go on until Goonswarm retreats after loosing enough Hurricanes, Maelstroms and all their tacklers.
So now CCP Tallest, I ask you, will the patch accomplish it's objective? Or do all the changes you are making not really effect Large fleet fights but drastically effect individual supercapitals or a small gang of supercapitals?
Lets review:
* Siege timer buff was a useless buff in the example provided above, however it is a useful buff but dreads need more attention by far.
* Titan tracking has still not been addressed, even though if players had to vote about "What is the most annoying broken thing regarding supercapitals" that would be the top pick by far, but hey lets nerf everything else.
* The HP reduction was ineffective in large scale fights because supercapital remote repair tanking is based on high resistance, not hitpoints. However this does drastically effect a solo supercapital or small gang of supercapitals.
* The removal of regular drones from supercapitals doesn't really effect large scale fights that much where as it completely debilitates a solo supercapital or small gang of supercapitals.
So the way I'm reading the patch is, if I want to use my supercapital and have it be effective I have to be in a large alliance who is able to field Large fleets of Titans and Supercarriers.
Also I just wanted to get some definitions clear for you CCP Tallest.
Balance : Verb form - (1) to arrange so that one set of elements exactly equals another (2) to equal or equalize in weight, number, or proportion (3) to weigh in or as if in a balance (4) to bring to a state or position of equipoise (5) to poise in or as if in balance (6) to bring into harmony or proportion.
Imbalance : Noun - the state or condition of lacking balance, as in proportion or distribution.
Debilitate : Verb form - to make weak or feeble; enfeeble:
Unbalance : Verb form - to throw or put out of balance.
Ineffective : Adjective - (1) not effective; not producing results; ineffectual: ineffective efforts; ineffective remedies (2) inefficient or incompetent; incapable: an ineffective manager. |
Mauryce
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:09:00 -
[2375] - Quote
As SC pilot, I wanted to do my small contribution to the topic:
1-. Dont allow BuffFleets apply on Supers and Titan. That will be a huge balance in Hp, type of tank, resistans and traking problems on Supers.
2-. Remove the possibility to fit remote repairs on Supers.
3-.Keep dronebays on SC. Let me a chance to fight small gangs or solo hics if ill be penalized be permagroed and cant loggoff; In large combats, 60km control-drones range keeps subcaps alive without any Nerf.
4-. Keep proposed changes on DD;
4-.Rebalance HP issues on shield-tanked Supers;
You cannot combat blob tactics if you dont change your actual sov-mechanism.
Huge structures, predictibles timers, and the concentration of sov decisions/isk in few bloc leaders are the real problem.
S! |
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:02:00 -
[2376] - Quote
I'm disappointed.
This thread is spluttering to a halt and we've barely reached half the length of the trail of tears we got when the nano-nerf was announced. Guess that in the end most players are happy with this rebalance after all.
Good work CCP! |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:53:00 -
[2377] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:I'm disappointed. This thread is spluttering to a halt and we've barely reached half the length of the trail of tears we got when the nano-nerf was announced. Guess that in the end most players are happy with this rebalance after all. Good work CCP!
Not happy.... but it doesnt looks like CCP is watching this thread or care anymore... None response for 100 pages or so.... And.. i guess most ppl have made up their mind of what to do when nerf hit.
A real highsec carebear. |
ANGAL 2000
FinFleet Raiden.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 14:50:00 -
[2378] - Quote
ccp wanted to show they care about the eve player and eve but as you said no word from ccp in the last 100 pages just shows us how committed they are about eve players and our feedback on this subject.
The nurf will kill off a lot of older eve players not because supers are useless its because eve is being tailored to new toon over that of the older eve player with no benefits in anyway to us who have played the game for years, give us something back if you want some subjects then i will list some.
Fix the med clones Having to pay over 50mil just to update my clone is a sick joke
Better content for advanced players Advanced tier ship which take a long time to skill but can be useful and fun (not just caps but sub cap hulls) more content aimed at older players to get back in to the game.
we have to suffer under the weight of yet more nurfs, we as the older players are being treated as the unwanted party guest that hangs around. with some of the players still playing the game its been since 03 its been a long time.
also not a super pilot at the moment not a rage or a whine post about the nurf but it needs working on and i believe that caps need to have some defense against sub caps not on the level super have now but a limited drone bay as i suggested in some other thread.
also let super carriers dock |
Crexa
Star Mandate
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 16:19:00 -
[2379] - Quote
New ships for older players is nice, but new roles for said ships would be even nicer. Not like the half finished black ops. But meaningful ideas. As far as super caps are concerned, I would much prefer a role change to "nerfed into uselessness" Some that i have proposed in other threads and some that have been proposed by others.
Ship hauler :(new vessel?) a ship that can carry rigged vessels (attached to the outside of the ship) 4BS at a time, or 6 BC, or 8 Cruiser class. Perhaps you reintroduce the clone bay here. Ship jumps into a system, Pilots clone jump to ship, viola! Instant fleet.
Mobile POS ship: (titan?) a ship with a pos bubble, (perhaps relatively weak bubble). Once anchored and shield up, it cannot move for some period of time. Perhaps instead of a super weapon, that weapon is turned into an ability to anchor pos guns to the titan. The more mods added the more guns you could add. What would this do to gate camping? Dunno, but in conjunction with a role change to super caps and a major boost to black ops, it could be interesting. Anchoring it or them outside a station, a station which is now not only conquerable but destroyable would be interesting as well.
Mobile Gate ships: (sc?) Working as a pair, you can create a gate to another nearby system that functions just as any other gate works. How is this different from current bridging? Anchor timers and un-anchor timers. Thus the ship(s) are vulnerable. Perhaps super carriers fill this role while retaining much of their current strength, perhaps not.
What does this have to do with cap and super cap ships? Well perhaps some role changes are in order for Super Caps, as you have tried balancing them for years now with relatively no success. Perhaps changing them into the long range base ships you had originally intended them to be for starters.
***Reminder, these are just ideas. But I believe them to be preferable to super caps nerfed into uselessness. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 22:46:00 -
[2380] - Quote
Crexa wrote: What does this have to do with cap and super cap ships? Well perhaps some role changes are in order for Super Caps, as you have tried balancing them for years now with relatively no success. Perhaps changing them into the long range base ships you had originally intended them to be for starters.
If you think the tears are flowing now, just imagine if CCP had said "Attn all titan pilots: your ship is now a mobile POS instead of a combat vessel! Enjoy!".
|
|
Crexa
Star Mandate
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 23:28:00 -
[2381] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Crexa wrote: What does this have to do with cap and super cap ships? Well perhaps some role changes are in order for Super Caps, as you have tried balancing them for years now with relatively no success. Perhaps changing them into the long range base ships you had originally intended them to be for starters.
If you think the tears are flowing now, just imagine if CCP had said "Attn all titan pilots: your ship is now a mobile POS instead of a combat vessel! Enjoy!".
...well... "Witness the power of this fully armed and operational BATTLE STATION!" "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Eoin Donovan
The Soul Society Pax Romana Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:09:00 -
[2382] - Quote
Well i dont fly capitals so i wont presume to comment on how they should and shouldnt be changed,
I will say that i REALLY dont think the Moros should lose its drone bay!! Its totally out of character for a gallente ship and the Moros is supposed to be one of the caps that is capable of defending itself against smaller ships!! It would also give the Moros a bit of a boost as they will be considered essential for any cap fleets because they can field drones!!
Thats my 2 cents
Keep the drone bay on the Moros!!
Also I would like to say that all i ever see is people bitching in these "feedback" threads, if all of you hate ccp so much why do you play? i think they have done more than enough lately and they are trying to win back the respect of the community, even going so far as to write a "We F**cked Up" letter for everyone to read!! How many games companies would do that?!!!
So instead of moaning and complaining maybe some of you should cut them some slack and actually try and contribute to these threads instead of just flaming ccp all the time!! |
ANGAL 2000
FinFleet Raiden.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:32:00 -
[2383] - Quote
Eoin Donovan wrote:
Also I would like to say that all i ever see is people bitching in these "feedback" threads, if all of you hate ccp so much why do you play? i think they have done more than enough lately and they are trying to win back the respect of the community, even going so far as to write a "We F**cked Up" letter for everyone to read!! How many games companies would do that?!!!
So instead of moaning and complaining maybe some of you should cut them some slack and actually try and contribute to these threads instead of just flaming ccp all the time!!
ccp wanted to show they care about the eve player and eve but its been their has been no word from ccp in the last 100 pages just shows us how committed they are about eve players and our feedback on this subject.
once or twice a year we have a nurf that hits a group of eve players this time it is supers and dreds so far, but ccp are trying to fix a game that have been led in one direction for some time we do appreciate the time that have been devoted to the game over the year and trying to fix it after trying to build two other titles to expand the company . but we also want to hear from the devs as stated this is one of the main issues of this expansion that will be look at by many and to have a thread setup to look at it and to take from player feedback on the changes its in the opposite direction by not responding to what many of us have to say,
its starting to look like ccp have listen to 1% then made up their minds as where they need to take this and no matter what other people have to say or suggest , which haven't changed in ccp even with the letter but some roads are to well used to change to a new route.
all we ask for is to have some feedback Not to leave a thread cos its become to large and heated we want action and leaving issues like this is not action.
not a super holder at the moment |
Eoin Donovan
The Soul Society Pax Romana Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:50:00 -
[2384] - Quote
ANGAL 2000 wrote:
ccp wanted to show they care about the eve player and eve but its been their has been no word from ccp in the last 100 pages just shows us how committed they are about eve players and our feedback on this subject.
once or twice a year we have a nurf that hits a group of eve players this time it is supers and dreds so far, but ccp are trying to fix a game that have been led in one direction for some time we do appreciate the time that have been devoted to the game over the year and trying to fix it after trying to build two other titles to expand the company . but we also want to hear from the devs as stated this is one of the main issues of this expansion that will be look at by many and to have a thread setup to look at it and to take from player feedback on the changes its in the opposite direction by not responding to what many of us have to say,
its starting to look like ccp have listen to 1% then made up their minds as where they need to take this and no matter what other people have to say or suggest , which haven't changed in ccp even with the letter but some roads are to well used to change to a new route.
all we ask for is to have some feedback Not to leave a thread cos its become to large and heated we want action and leaving issues like this is not action.
not a super holder at the moment
Dude its 2am in Iceland, maybe just MAYBE they have gone to bed?!! I mean they do work a 9-5 job |
super hornet
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:29:00 -
[2385] - Quote
Supercapitals are too hard to kill.
shouldnt they be hard to kill after all, they are the 2nd best ship in the game
Supercarriers are far too versatile.
totally agree with this as they should be only as powerful as the fleet that supports it
The Titan superweapon is too powerful.
ahh the good old power beast *first the Dooms day killed every thing on grid and now the Super weapon is too powerful * ironic hmmmmmmm the last nerf on the highest tier Ship was catastrophic changed the whole Fleet way of battle those that had them had an advantage. I used to get a chill when i saw one, now i just go mehhh
if you think about it logically Put the cost of the titan compared to a Abaddon, then divide the abaddon cost in the titan.
multiply that by the abaddons DPS any comparison.
Dreadnoughts are not good enough.
any one know there history of the dread in real life the dreadnought was outclassed by the Battleship.
but yes they should have a huge bonus for Pos bashing , station pounding and Super caps after all they are a sub cap Gunner ship.
and the Mother-ship is a Support class vessel *super carrier
Remote ECM Bursts should not work on ships immune to ewar.
EWAR is EWAR
Sub-capitals are useless in fleet fights.
i think this is very Harsh , there is no useless ship in eve , every ship has its role and depends on how they are used. maybe its not the ships but the people flying them, i have met the best of the pilots, Awsome in a vaga put them in a BS and they are just a number a drone.
Maybe the correct Fleet Make-up hasn't been implemented yet, there is a counterable fleet for any Fleet in the game they call
EVE ONLINE |
ANGAL 2000
FinFleet Raiden.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:09:00 -
[2386] - Quote
Quote:Dude its 2am in Iceland, maybe just MAYBE they have gone to bed?!! I mean they do work a 9-5 job
granted this thread was made close to 3 weeks ago but after the first 4 days it has been left without any word from anyone at ccp time zone is not a issue for that amount of time and it shows the lack of commitment to the players. |
ANGAL 2000
FinFleet Raiden.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:39:00 -
[2387] - Quote
Quote:Sub-capitals are useless in fleet fights.
i think this is very Harsh , there is no useless ship in eve , every ship has its role and depends on how they are used. maybe its not the ships but the people flying them, i have met the best of the pilots, Awsome in a vaga put them in a BS and they are just a number a drone.
Maybe the correct Fleet Make-up hasn't been implemented yet, there is a counterable fleet for any Fleet in the game they call
its not like in the last 24h 5 super carrier have fallen some to the hands of sub caps and we will see how many this week will be killed.
ok point is sub caps are able to kill a super carrier even if its in a fleet with other no ship is safe even in a blob. goon/init/AAA have shown this using only sub caps tailoring the game for pure sub caps to takeout any ship without having to risk anything is not the sandbox we have learned to love.
taking the steps to balance super carriers in a way that will leave them unable to defend them selves when moving from point to point is just a way to kill them off and bring eve to a level where sub cap fleets own the sky.
small vent the true problem that have been in the face for years in the blob which in turn cos lag over the last year we have seen lag cut down so much but the blob have been seen to get bigger and bigger at times to the point their has been over 3300 in one system trying to fight (i was their and black screen for 2hours after DT back in march). We lost the aoe DD the blob got bigger will we ever see a time where ccp will act on this try and implement restrictions on the blob (answer no) its not in the sand box and i agree with it on part until the blob gets to the point we have 5000 in one system possible how about 10,000 i will let you think about it and how the system will act. |
Nyla Skin
Dark Circle Enforcement Templis Dragonaors
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 08:33:00 -
[2388] - Quote
super hornet wrote:Supercapitals are too hard to kill. shouldnt they be hard to kill after all, they are the 2nd best ship in the game
Not by metagaming (logging out). Thats something that spoils the otherwise reasonable ideas of something huge and difficult to kill.
Quote: ahh the good old power beast *first the Dooms day killed every thing on grid and now the Super weapon is too powerful * ironic hmmmmmmm the last nerf on the highest tier Ship was catastrophic changed the whole Fleet way of battle those that had them had an advantage. I used to get a chill when i saw one, now i just go mehhh
Have you imagined one going off every minute? How would you go on attacking such a grid? Thats what BoB used to protect their cyno jammer once.. 10 titans iirc. HF attacking that with a subcap fleet. Numbers do matter.
|
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 09:47:00 -
[2389] - Quote
ANGAL 2000 wrote:Quote:Dude its 2am in Iceland, maybe just MAYBE they have gone to bed?!! I mean they do work a 9-5 job granted this thread was made close to 3 weeks ago but after the first 4 days it has been left without any word from anyone at ccp time zone is not a issue for that amount of time and it shows the lack of commitment to the players.
Everything that needed to be said in this thread was covered in the first 5 or 6 pages.
Anything beyond that is just an echo, there's no point CCP taking time to respond to the same points over and over.
(having said that, never stop posting) |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 09:58:00 -
[2390] - Quote
I wonder if a capital sized Smart bomb would be suitable compensation for the loss of the regular drones. and before I get flamed I'm not advocating it be anything like the doomsdaw was, it should be a similar step up in range and damage as the existing steps from small to medium and medium to large. so something in the region of 13-16K range and 600-800 damage per burst with a cycle of 15-20 seconds. This would let supers deal with Dictors that they will have no counter to in current fleets but importantly leave HICs outside the damage range. HICs are disigned to tackle supers after all, Dictors were not. |
|
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 14:30:00 -
[2391] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:HICs are disigned to tackle supers after all, Dictors were not.
You realise that when supercaps lost their bubble immunity, Hictors hadn't even been introduced to the game yet?
Revelations II explicitly made regular Dictors the supercap-tackling hull.
|
Warrior Xena
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 15:10:00 -
[2392] - Quote
I do not think that supercaps are too powerful. They are the biggest ships in the game and the most expensive. It is not normal to have a supercapital defenseless against a destroyer-size vessel, the same way that a real-life carrier cannot be stopped dead by a boat with a hook. Forcing a 15km-ship to kill a single interdictor ( 90m across ) with a doomsday device in order to leave is an idea stupid enough, removing even that possibility and it is well beyond belief.
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 20:41:00 -
[2393] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:HICs are disigned to tackle supers after all, Dictors were not. You realise that when supercaps lost their bubble immunity, Hictors hadn't even been introduced to the game yet? Revelations II explicitly made regular Dictors the supercap-tackling hull.
To be more precise, HICs were introduced in a large part because it was relatively easy for supercaps to get out of dictor bubbles by using their officer smartbombs. |
Will DestroyYou
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 22:17:00 -
[2394] - Quote
Just a random idea. A possible fair way to balance out these changes...
Proposition: Why not create a new FOF style high-slot mod that gives limited auto (subcap) defence to caps (sort of like automated battlestar flak turrets)?
How they would work: Either one for dread size caps, another for supers, and another for titans - or just a single cap size one for all that shoots a group of BS guns. They could provide a short range blanket of fire around the vessels (and serve as a replacement for smartbombs and drones on these classes of cap ships as well). They can not be manually targetted, so are only a limited defensive weapon.
This would provide a limited defence to all classes of caps vs sub-caps (except carriers, they are fine as is)... They should also generate little lag.
Hell, why not do a version of multi-turret FOF mods for all weapon types on all (medium+) turret sizes?
(each works like a group of the smallest version of the weapon size below - eg: medium laser ver gives a group of small gattling and dual light beam turrets - say 3 + 3 - the 2 types of turrets could fire independently of eachother at indipendant targets if they exist). Note: they would only shoot ships (and possibly missiles/bombs), not structures.
Limit to 1 module (group of turrets) per ship and takes up a turret high slot.
A capital class ship *could* choose any size group to fit, they are not limited to the capital size - so they can customize who they want defence against. (also possibility to make the capital size ones be a group of varied size turrets?)
They would shoot based on standings (0 standings and below), but only when the module is online - so you can still use neut cyno alts.
This could be a creative replacement for the laggy drones, and smartbombs; and make up for the changes to SC's and DD's defences somewhat - so they have some defence, but not at the original levels vs subcaps. It is even possible that the spread fire from them could even make active tanking viable again in PVP.
In the future, it could maybe be even made possible to shoot the turrets on the cap sized versions. The technology could maybe then even be expanded to work on player outposts, TCU's, structures in some new missions/anoms/plexes, and other future structures.
.. just a thought .. |
Don Kartel
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 13:38:00 -
[2395] - Quote
Can the Dev's explain How bubbling a super within a POS is going to affect the aggression timers of supers after the changes?
My fear is this new aggression timer mechanic will result in another ECM Burst style exploit that the likes of PL love to take advantage of.
e.g. Super is in POS and gets bubbled - this prevents them leaving the POS under current machanics but does that also mean they are aggressed ? And if they log off will it mean they will remain aggressed and on grid while bubbled in that POS ?
|
Space Ra
Hugs N Cuddles
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 15:46:00 -
[2396] - Quote
Lucky I don't fly a moros, whit rate of fire bonus there gone be even more cap hungry, itGÇÖs like dropping a low slot... And if you chance capacitor leves, that would mean extra tanking.
For a mother ship/super carrier (master of drones) it will be a bit odd if they won't master most drones any more.
And better stop training for t2 drones if you just gone fly dread/super/titan. What a waste of skill training for so many...
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 19:32:00 -
[2397] - Quote
Space Ra wrote:Lucky I don't fly a moros, whit rate of fire bonus there gone be even more cap hungry, itGÇÖs like dropping a low slot... And if you chance capacitor leves, that would mean extra tanking.
For a mother ship/super carrier (master of drones) it will be a bit odd if they won't master most drones any more.
And better stop training for t2 drones if you just gone fly dread/super/titan. What a waste of skill training for so many...
Haven't you looked at the hybrid changes? Their cap usage is cut by a good 40%. |
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 22:26:00 -
[2398] - Quote
Don Kartel wrote:e.g. Super is in POS and gets bubbled - this prevents them leaving the POS under current machanics but does that also mean they are aggressed ? And if they log off will it mean they will remain aggressed and on grid while bubbled in that POS ?
A bubble only aggresses you if you attempt to warp whilst inside it. Logging off without first hitting warp means you vanish after 2 minutes.
|
MacGardner
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha TOGETHER WE STAND
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 20:00:00 -
[2399] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:[A bubble only aggresses you if you attempt to warp whilst inside it.
What if the bubble starts after you hit "warp" but you were still aligning ?
Warrior Xena wrote:It is not normal to have a supercapital defenseless against a destroyer-size vessel,.
I agree. Any ship in eve has the possibility to counteract the action of any other ship, either by having a couter-act module or by being able to engage and fight that ship. By making the supercaps unable to engage HICs it is a very big UNBALANCING.
How about making the supercaps immune to all current forms of interdiction ( bubbles included ) and invent a CAPITAL module that will allow only a CAPITAL ship to tackle a supercap ?
|
Jasperexty
Apple Industries Inc. Surely You're Joking
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 00:02:00 -
[2400] - Quote
can u make a fighter to mine then? since because of future nerfs of SC i cant mine in a nyx anymore |
|
Naughty Fox
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:53:00 -
[2401] - Quote
FHM wrote:wanking monkey girl wrote:ask ccp why titans where added to the game their is fenfest vid from when they where shown and added about their main use in eve to be a flying epeen for us all to enjoy.
FHM YOU MAD BRO Exactly a non cost effective big D I C K. ...useless for anything other than moving an alliance fleet from A to B. Thats why they were so-pose to be rare. I really dont care they stated their final decision on nerfs because voice of 99% of game population is stronger than 1%. In the end i gain nothing either way.
There are alot of noobs appluading the overall fail winter patch notes, but this guy FHM really does take the biscuit,blind deaf dumb ********,spastic.....shall I go on doesn't quite cut what this guy is.I just LOL&LOL@him
He says 99% of eve want this,well hes' extreamly wrong, any1 with a brain an some sence doesn't want whats been introduced through the winter patch notes in the game. Evident to say a huge majority say its total Bull$hit, & these are the vets & people who care for EVE community, not just for themselves. |
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
181
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:33:00 -
[2402] - Quote
Naughty Fox wrote:Evident to say a huge majority say its total Bull$hit, & these are the vets & people who care for EVE community, not just for themselves.
Outside of your Elite Pee Vee Peer echo chamber, most people are saying its long overdue and/or that it doesn't go far enough.
Anyway CCP have listened to the majority and are implementing the changes, feel free to quit and give me all your stuff. |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:20:00 -
[2403] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Naughty Fox wrote:Evident to say a huge majority say its total Bull$hit, & these are the vets & people who care for EVE community, not just for themselves. Outside of your Elite Pee Vee Peer echo chamber, most people are saying its long overdue and/or that it doesn't go far enough. Anyway CCP have listened to the majority and are implementing the changes, feel free to quit and give me all your stuff.
What majority ? Those 1% whining on eve forum ?
Edit: Dont talk about mittens and co A real highsec carebear. |
Xhondo Dhoru
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:42:00 -
[2404] - Quote
Changes are going to make the blob worse and the cry for nerf louder. Everyone with half a brain can already see this coming. Whatever.
Can we get an update on minmatar capital changes please. Take silly torp launchers off the nag, give guns a damage boost to compensate. (or give it a neut bonus or something cool, idk)
Give shield capitals (specifically: wyvern, hel) a shield hp increase, make them a bit more in line with the armor tanks. From what I am seeing with new stats, the hel is basically a shield tanked archon with more dps. That is silly. |
Brandon Tsero
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 05:03:00 -
[2405] - Quote
Super-carriers should honestly be able to carry 20 stealth bombers, 20 fighters, and at least have 5000 drone bay left to work with small anti sub-cap drones. Make them able to fight back in a Super vs. 100 sub cap fleet then be totally useless(maybe limit it to 10 drones(non fighter/fighter bomber), or give the Super a fighter tracking bonus? Making the super-carrier a sitting duck isn't the answer, people will stop using them. Dumbing them down, yes. The other changes are 100% great. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:03:00 -
[2406] - Quote
Brandon Tsero wrote:Super-carriers should honestly be able to carry 20 stealth bombers, 20 fighters, and at least have 5000 drone bay left to work with small anti sub-cap drones. Make them able to fight back in a Super vs. 100 sub cap fleet then be totally useless(maybe limit it to 10 drones(non fighter/fighter bomber), or give the Super a fighter tracking bonus? Making the super-carrier a sitting duck isn't the answer , people will stop using them . Dumbing them down, yes. The other changes are 100% great.
Can I get my Mega to have it's large railguns turn into large blasters or small railguns whenever I want, too, so I don't have to use my brain or make a choice?
Do this, or I'll stop using it. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1276
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:16:00 -
[2407] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Brandon Tsero wrote:Super-carriers should honestly be able to carry 20 stealth bombers, 20 fighters, and at least have 5000 drone bay left to work with small anti sub-cap drones. Make them able to fight back in a Super vs. 100 sub cap fleet then be totally useless(maybe limit it to 10 drones(non fighter/fighter bomber), or give the Super a fighter tracking bonus? Making the super-carrier a sitting duck isn't the answer , people will stop using them . Dumbing them down, yes. The other changes are 100% great. Can I get my Mega to have it's large railguns turn into large blasters or small railguns whenever I want, too, so I don't have to use my brain or make a choice? Do this, or I'll stop using it.
Food for thought....
Anti-matter ammo only effective vs capitals at close range. Still hits, but fails at killing anything smaller or farther away. Iron shells hits the smallest of things.... but not allot of damage and only at long range. and so on and so forth.
If a day like that ever came and all the sub cap pilots started crying over how they hate having ammo nerfed like that....... I'll be quoting this post and carrier nerf as epic karma justice. |
Draconus Lofwyr
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 21:38:00 -
[2408] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Brandon Tsero wrote:Super-carriers should honestly be able to carry 20 stealth bombers, 20 fighters, and at least have 5000 drone bay left to work with small anti sub-cap drones. Make them able to fight back in a Super vs. 100 sub cap fleet then be totally useless(maybe limit it to 10 drones(non fighter/fighter bomber), or give the Super a fighter tracking bonus? Making the super-carrier a sitting duck isn't the answer , people will stop using them . Dumbing them down, yes. The other changes are 100% great. Can I get my Mega to have it's large railguns turn into large blasters or small railguns whenever I want, too, so I don't have to use my brain or make a choice? Do this, or I'll stop using it.
Can i shoot your railguns and blasters? can i shoot your missile launchers? when i cant loose my DPS, then we can talk about limiting the amount of back up DPS, especially considering carriers and supercarriers can not fit ANY guns of ANY size.
the easiest compromise is just to remove the drone number bonus from non fighter drones. so its back to the base 5 non-fighter drones if i have to use those types to defend myself and leave the drone bay as is.
|
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 23:56:00 -
[2409] - Quote
The new Tier 3 BC's will make this nerf UN-needed, especially the EHP nerf. Supers will need as much EHP as they can get to fight back against the new Super Killers. There DPS is going to be so crazy that supers will run for the hills, even if they did keep there drone bay, supers will have a ship to fear. Currently there are no real ships a super fears, but those Tier 3's.....ya they will be scary. 800-1k DPS depending on the ship and guns, and still having a good tank, plus great speeds so supers would be forced to use light or med drones to attempt in keeping up with them.
Ya super nerf.....isn't going to be needed anymore. |
Pesadel0
the muppets RED.OverLord
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 09:27:00 -
[2410] - Quote
Xhondo Dhoru wrote:Changes are going to make the blob worse and the cry for nerf louder. Everyone with half a brain can already see this coming. Whatever.
Can we get an update on minmatar capital changes please. Take silly torp launchers off the nag, give guns a damage boost to compensate. (or give it a neut bonus or something cool, idk)
Give shield capitals (specifically: wyvern, hel) a shield hp increase, make them a bit more in line with the armor tanks. From what I am seeing with new stats, the hel is basically a shield tanked archon with more dps. That is silly.
Please CCP give minies some love.
|
|
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:05:00 -
[2411] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Naughty Fox wrote:Evident to say a huge majority say its total Bull$hit, & these are the vets & people who care for EVE community, not just for themselves. Outside of your Elite Pee Vee Peer echo chamber, most people are saying its long overdue and/or that it doesn't go far enough. Anyway CCP have listened to the majority and are implementing the changes, feel free to quit and give me all your stuff.
Yes a nerf is overdue,but refine Super down, don't make them near useless. Alot of the preposed changes are rediclious. There has been alot said in this thread that ccp can take upon themselves to provide a refinement of Supers wich can benefit both subcap, Capital/Supercapital pilots alike. Rework the winter patch again, so EVE community is not subject to a total co.ck up. TBH Goons vaguely saying its long overdue should not matter a damn to anyone. They are narrow minded focused on self gain, not EVE community Gain, Goons CSM have done alot well in the past, but influncing these such patch changes is a wrongful use of trust and responsibilty. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:50:00 -
[2412] - Quote
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:the easiest compromise is just to remove the drone number bonus from non fighter drones. so its back to the base 5 non-fighter drones if i have to use those types to defend myself and leave the drone bay as is.
Her's the core of the issue: you don't understand that capital were never meant for solo play, far less supercaps. You already have those effective drones for defense. You'll find them in the "Friends" section.
CCP does NOT want you to be anything but a wreck in the making if you're caught solo. They are enforcing it now. |
Blind Furry
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:53:00 -
[2413] - Quote
the only problem I see with this nerf is the complete removal of drones from a drone boat which is like taking tires off a care and leaving you with the rims to drive on it's a bit silly
As others have said cut back the small drones let the supers field 2-4 flights of small drones @ 10 drones a 500 or 700m3 drone bay apply the + drone per lvl to fighters fighter bombers only.
Other than that this will probably go though as intended most of the nerfs that ccp pushes though usually goes threadnaught hate /options from players to solve it. CCP releases a bunch of shiny overdue patches or a new item to draw attention away from the nerf and nerfs said item anyways the discussion threads for the dev blogs usually don't bear fruit for the community other than a usual response of doing what the dev blog said they were going to do. |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:49:00 -
[2414] - Quote
John Hand wrote:The new Tier 3 BC's will make this nerf UN-needed, especially the EHP nerf. Supers will need as much EHP as they can get to fight back against the new Super Killers. There DPS is going to be so crazy that supers will run for the hills, even if they did keep there drone bay, supers will have a ship to fear. Currently there are no real ships a super fears, but those Tier 3's.....ya they will be scary. 800-1k DPS depending on the ship and guns, and still having a good tank, plus great speeds so supers would be forced to use light or med drones to attempt in keeping up with them.
Ya super nerf.....isn't going to be needed anymore.
True the winter patch contridicts itself in so many ways its laughable biased in 1 area is the least you could say about it.
|
Xhondo Dhoru
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 04:30:00 -
[2415] - Quote
There are some very dim lightbulbs on this forum.
Shadowsword wrote:Her's the core of the issue: you don't understand that capital were never meant for solo play, far less supercaps. You already have those effective drones for defense. You'll find them in the "Friends" section.
CCP does NOT want you to be anything but a wreck in the making if you're caught solo. They are enforcing it now. There is far too much solo and small gang pvp in New Eden so let us force the handful of people who use these ships for that purpose to join the blob.
EVE needs more blobs.
Post patch, blobs will be even bigger. Dumb people in supers will still die, intelligent people will abuse the new mechanics to be even more difficult to kill than before.
"The patch made things worse!! :(" Calling it now. |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 07:15:00 -
[2416] - Quote
You're delluding yourself.
The few players using supercaps for solo pvp do it because they want risk-free pvp. They'll log in their supers only when they expect to fight at most a handfull of subcap, and when there is no risk to be hotdropped. Typical low-sec wannabe pvpers mentality.
Those who do real solo pvp aren't afraid of doing it with subcaps.
The blob argument is ridiculous anyway. Alliances always bring as many people as they can to each and every fight, regardless of ship type. Nerfs will change the ship types used, but not the amount of players who are interested in pvp.
Have you ever seen a fleet leader say to one of his own "Stay home, we have already OP supercaps, we don't need more than XX subcap"? No? Might say a lot about your reasoning... |
Kblackjack54
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 10:56:00 -
[2417] - Quote
[quote=ANGAL 2000]Quote:Sub-capitals are useless in fleet fights.
small vent the true problem that have been in the face for years in the blob which in turn cos lag over the last year we have seen lag cut down so much but the blob have been seen to get bigger and bigger at times to the point their has been over 3300 in one system trying to fight (i was their and black screen for 2hours after DT back in march). We lost the aoe DD the blob got bigger will we ever see a time where ccp will act on this try and implement restrictions on the blob (answer no) its not in the sand box and i agree with it on part until the blob gets to the point we have 5000 in one system possible how about 10,000 i will let you think about it and how the system will act.
Truth is it really does not matter how many players join a blob, CCP will have little or no choice but to expand the capabilities of the server/system to cope with the load or peeps will migrate away from the game, the reinforced node idea came from this need. Note to CCP: needs more work guys.
But realistically, EVE is just as much a sandbox for CCP as it is for the players, and the flux of ideas eminates from that, some as we have seen in the past are very good, recently others not, this attempt to address issues with Super-capitals will in my view go part way to giving the owners of such ships an increased element of risk in using such a ship on a level with that of using any other ship in fleet so the discussion should really be about that aspect and not about the individual tweaks to this or that attribute.
This brings with it the need for thought about how these ships or any ship really is used in fleet, to long the idea of jumping in and getting the order, 'Shoot those people over there' has been the norm, successful fleet engagment have always depended on many factors but recently as we have seen the balance has been tipped in favor of those that field the most Super-Capitals taking the field by wieght of numbers of ships rather than tactics.
The proposed changes will make this a far more risky enterprise for Super-capital fleets than it has been, the addition of the new ships will add an additional element into the mix as they from my read have to be flown very inteligently to get the best from them, but even so it will come down to tactics as it always should be and not numbers.
Having said all of this time has proven that the EVE pilots are very adept at finding the kinks in CCP's designs and no matter what tweaks they introduce, things will find there right level over time, meanwhle enjoy killing Super-caps. |
Ammath
Nasgul Collective Cascade Imminent
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:27:00 -
[2418] - Quote
I really think the claim of Super Caps raging around the universe in massive blobs is overstated. In fact the vast majority of fielded Supercaps can be found in about 10 alliances and the remaining alliances have few so they rarely if ever get deployed out of fear of loss. So making Super Carriers die quicker and have effectively zero defense against subcaps is only going to make things worse for those small alliances / smaller deployments of super carriers.
Do you think PL, WN, NC. RED, ROL, and others will all of a sudden stop deploying 20-30 super carriers and 10 titans to the field? Not likely their killing capacity against structures and capitals is still unrivaled and 20-30 SCs spider tanking will still be un-killable by a 100-200 sub-cap blob, sorry to break your bubble on that one.
What will happen is the smaller alliances who on occasion field 2-3 supercaps to kill off a SBU or something will stop using them, and those pilots will get frustrated and either will sell the ships, stop flying them, or join one of the SC heavy alliances to be able to use their toys.
There are smarter ways to address the issues around Super Carriers that dont involve throwing your hands in the air and saying "too powerful" and swinging a nerf bat recklessly and it involves the greater issue of fairly balancing ship classes against each other which is tricker than just nerfing one or two ships and boosting one or two.
One of the biggest issues is Capitals (carriers/dreads) are totally obsolete in terms of risk/reward in fleet fights.. people go supers or go battleships... there is ZERO point to a BS heavy fleet bringing in a handful of carriers or dreads for extra firepower if the enemy is using supers, they become a liability instead of being a credible threat to the supers/titans.
1. Define clearer roles for Capital and Super Capital ships (dreads, carriers, supercarriers, titans) 2. Match capabilities to these roles and vary but balance within the classes 3. Any ship class should be good against its own class and the tier above it, below it, and ok against 2 below. (Dreads good versus supers / caps / battleships, ok versus BCs, super carriers good versus super-caps and capital ships, and ok versus BS)
Before you nitpick and flame I am just trying to illustrate a point. In my logic above any capital ship is still fairly vulnerable to smaller tackling / picket ships who can hold them down while the "ships of the line" blow holes in them.
No class of ship should be stuck being only good at killing its own class, EvE has fallen into this trap for a few years now and it needs to be broken out of. The reason people raced to SCs is because for the first time did you see a class of ship be VERSATILE and useful against multiple classes of ships without needing 100s of numbers. The real issue is that more ships in the capital class, and other classes are NOT as versatile and therefore under represented (dreads).
You can talk about capital blobs but they are nothing compared to subcap blobs. When a ship costs 10x as much as the next lowest class I am sorry it should be able to kill about that many ships of that class before it dies unless absurdly outnumbered. But should 100 Caps/Supers be able to defeat a 500 person sub-cap fleet. yes... and soundly if those subcaps decide to hang around and be shot up like clay pigeons. Should that cap fleet take a beating doing it, yeah.. they should probably lose 1/3 to 1/2 their numbers in the melee. Now think about that for a second before you cry...
Lets say those subcaps are worth 100m a piece, thats 50bn gone in a helldeath scenario. Lets figure those capitals are worth 10bn a piece (figure 20% super carriers, 5% titans in the mix and the rest regular caps) if 30% die thats a 30bn ISK loss, if 50% die thats a 50bn ISK loss... wow looks like parity almost with the 500 battleship losses. Yes i know this is simplified that in fact 1/3 or 1/2 the SCs and Titans died but even if they wiped out 50 carriers thats still basically 50bn ISK destroyed as well.
So the argument comes down to should 500 customers get chewed up to entertain 100... well using my scenario above the fight is pretty even, and I dont know about you but I will lose a 100m battleship to get on 30 or 50 capital/supercap/titan killmails, what about you?
Again the problem is really that Carriers and definitely Dreads have lost a lot of their versatility through the years which means that they are big fat targets for SCs and Ttians so you don't see people bringing them to the field, they would rather bring the BS blob and risk less. If Dreads could blow holes in Supers/Titans and still hit battleships and maybe if carriers could survive more than 1 DD and could do some damage to SCs/Titans you would see them on the field more.
BOOST dreads so if in Siege mode they can rip up supers/titans, not in siege mode they can do 2-3x BS damage against moving battleships.
BOOST carriers against DD and give them some better ability to injure SCs/Titans (capital energy neuts?)
T3 BCs as glass tigers to go cap hunting is good.
DO NOT NERF SCs fix the other ships
NERF titan DD against carriers / non siege dreads so that it takes more than a glancing blow to pop one. Vaporizing a 100m ISK BS is one thing... popping 1bn - 2bn isk ships like zits is unacceptable. Also nerf titan DD against any ship under BC class. You should not be able to bring out 10 titans kill all the enemy logistics in 30 seconds via DD and rip apart the fleet, THAT is crap.
DO NOT think that nerfing SCs will make fleets bring carriers to support the SCs, it wont unless you take my above suggestions. Carriers are one shot dead on the field so they will not come out to play against enemy Titans / Supers etc until this is addressed.
end of rant.
|
Xhondo Dhoru
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:30:00 -
[2419] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:You're delluding yourself.
The few players using supercaps for solo pvp do it because they want risk-free pvp. They'll log in their supers only when they expect to fight at most a handfull of subcap, and when there is no risk to be hotdropped. Typical low-sec wannabe pvpers mentality.
Those who do real solo pvp aren't afraid of doing it with subcaps.
The blob argument is ridiculous anyway. Alliances always bring as many people as they can to each and every fight, regardless of ship type. Nerfs will change the ship types used, but not the amount of players who are interested in pvp.
Have you ever seen a fleet leader say to one of his own "Stay home, we have already OP supercaps, we don't need more than XX subcap"? No? Might say a lot about your reasoning...
It is you who is delluded.
Supers that are solo or in small groups are far easier to kill than those with 50 in gang. The upcoming changes will strongly discourage the people who use them in smaller engagements from continuing to do so, and will essentially force them to join a coalition with massive blue lists.
The change, in an attempt to force people into the open arms of the blob, is contrary to the foundation of EVE's sandbox ideology. Due to the HP reduction most will be far more reluctant to engage without overwhelming odds; there will be less supers dying while smaller engagements will continue to diminish. Again. People who are dumb will continue to lose supers, people who are not will be even harder to kill. These changes will simply widen the gap.
Your perception of "stay home we already have enough people" is fundamentally wrong. In reality the statement is "do not engage until we have a 2:1 numerical advantage." But with the cool new adjustments this will likely turn into "Never engage unless we have a 5:1 advantage"
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:44:00 -
[2420] - Quote
Xhondo Dhoru wrote: Supers that are solo or in small groups are far easier to kill than those with 50 in gang. The upcoming changes will strongly discourage the people who use them in smaller engagements from continuing to do so, and will essentially force them to join a coalition with massive blue lists.
Silly me, I tought a player joined or stayed in a corp/alliance because of the other people inside it. Not because it allowed safe use of one particular ship class.
Quote: Your perception of "stay home we already have enough people" is fundamentally wrong. In reality the statement is "do not engage until we have a 2:1 numerical advantage." But with the cool new adjustments this will likely turn into "Never engage unless we have a 5:1 advantage"
In short, those players you're refering to are cowards, and shouldn't use supers if they're not ready to lose them when the situation justify taking a chance..
Nothing wrong with CCp's changes, if they push those players out of supercaps, or shoot them from under their feet. |
|
Ammath
Nasgul Collective Cascade Imminent
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:28:00 -
[2421] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Xhondo Dhoru wrote: Supers that are solo or in small groups are far easier to kill than those with 50 in gang. The upcoming changes will strongly discourage the people who use them in smaller engagements from continuing to do so, and will essentially force them to join a coalition with massive blue lists.
Silly me, I tought a player joined or stayed in a corp/alliance because of the other people inside it. Not because it allowed safe use of one particular ship class. Quote: Your perception of "stay home we already have enough people" is fundamentally wrong. In reality the statement is "do not engage until we have a 2:1 numerical advantage." But with the cool new adjustments this will likely turn into "Never engage unless we have a 5:1 advantage"
In short, those players you're refering to are cowards, and shouldn't use supers if they're not ready to lose them when the situation justify taking a chance.. Nothing wrong with CCp's changes, if they push those players out of supercaps, or shoot them from under their feet.
Look im sorry a 20bn or 100bn ISK combat ship should not die to 1bn ISK of ships unless the pilot is a total moron. I'm sorry you don't own a Supercap or Titan and feel abused by them. The reality is smaller ships always have to wolfpack bigger ones wether its Frigates swarming a BS, BS swarming a carrier or whatever. If you are fighting 3 classes over your ship (or under) you should have difficulties.
A Supercap should be able to defend itself against Supers, Caps, and Battleships period. Yeah fine they have drones for smaller stuff, but combine locking time, and that drones can be shot-down, bombed or smartbombed, and have a flight time they are not an "i win" button people think they are. Should titans be able to DD cruisers and below? Hell no. Its a weapon system that cant be killed like drones, its instant unlike drones, cant be bombed, smartbombed, or anything else.. it is an I win button. When titan fleets lose the ability to alpha all the enemy logisitcs out of the sky fights will become more balanced and more supers/titans will die.
I have been in many Supercap fights where the side who wins has usually bombed the opposing fleets FBs and Fs into dust leaving them helpless, show me where you can do that to a titan..... oh wait you cant.
|
Cyxopyc
hirr Against ALL Authorities
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 22:52:00 -
[2422] - Quote
I see CCP is making changes to supers.
Could you guys figure out something with the 'can't dock a super' thing which effectively traps a highly skilled character? Keep in mind you won't be able to use an axe to try and fix this one. You'll need your imagination. |
John Hand
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 23:07:00 -
[2423] - Quote
CCP listened to the people who dont have the supers to get there nerf. Even tho it isn't going to fix a damn thing, hell even fighters can shoot BC's that don't have there MWD on. So many pages ago and many times its been reiterated, if you want to nerf them, talk to the people who FLY them.
so again.
1. EHP nerf isn't going to do anything and really? Why? its not like there godlike in there HP.
2. Drone bay.....split the drone bay or of you can't seem to be able to program that in, in time for the update then shrink the drone bay. Script in that only 70 or so normal drones can be placed into the bay, theres you split drone bay.
3. With the advent of those new Tier 3 super killers, (this points back to number 1) why do the EHP nerf at all? In fact, why nerf them in the first place now that theres a ship MADE TO KILL THEM. A fleet of them can take down even a small group of SC's spidertanking because of the sheer DPS that those new ships can pour out. Add in some blaster fit megas along with them and those SC's are DEAD. Again TACTICS WILL WIN YOU THE GAME.
4. Those who are bitching and whining about supers in the first palce.....This is EvE, someone will ALWAYS have an advantage over you. So to you I say this, "GET OVER IT". Oh and welcome to the real EvE. |
Chocolate Fort
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 03:43:00 -
[2424] - Quote
Mauryce wrote:
1-. Dont allow BuffFleets apply on Supers and Titan. That will be a huge balance in Hp, type of tank, resistans and traking problems on Supers.
2-. Remove the possibility to fit remote repairs on Supers.
3-.Keep dronebays on SC. Let me a chance to fight small gangs or solo hics if ill be penalized be permagroed and cant loggoff; In large combats, 60km control-drones range keeps subcaps alive without any Nerf.
4-. Keep proposed changes on DD;
5-.Rebalance HP issues on shield-tanked Supers;
+1 |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:16:00 -
[2425] - Quote
boost missiles give them some advantages over guns |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 20:08:00 -
[2426] - Quote
Limiting SCs to only being able to take 20-25 fighters/fighter bombers is totally fail,what idiot thought of that really, Some1 with no idea of how Supers will actually be used after the patch. Alot of out of touch people obviously had these half arsed idea's. With only enough room for 20-25 Supers will only have fighters,they will have no fighter bombers, this is reality & fact. So why CCP did you create Fighter bombers if there not going to be used due to this failure of sight. Need enough room for 20fighters & 20fighter bombers OR if drone hold capacity is going to be half it is now, then you should be able to deploy 10fighters or 10fighter bombers & double up the damage. Honestly so fail...... Listen to the the Pilots that actually fly the ships day in day out, We want a nerf also, but 1 wich will refine down supers not make certian niche aspects such as fighter bombers a no go area. (sigh) |
HelPilot of20Years
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 00:43:00 -
[2427] - Quote
Still waiting for a comment regarding Minmatar supers. ...designed for one purpose and one purpose only. GÇ¥Imagine a swarm of deadly hornets pouring from the devilGÇÖs mouth. Now imagine they have autocannons.GÇ¥ -Unknown Hel designer
|
The Economist
Logically Consistent
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:13:00 -
[2428] - Quote
No ccp response for a month.
Any chance we could get your feedback on our feedback that you're watching so avidly?
Still think these are all awesome, well thought out, ideas?
Any word on wether the same points raised again and again for 120 pages are valid criticsms?
Shield supers? Anyone?
Any new reasons in store to actually use sc's for anything? Does anything remain to even justify the pre-fix super? Why not just use dreads and titans?
Any chance sc's could maybe hold more fighter bombers so the entire offensive capability of a 20bil isk (fitted) ship can't be nullified with just one well-planned bombing run?
etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc (no point endlessly repeating what has already be endlessly repeated) |
Draconus Lofwyr
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:49:00 -
[2429] - Quote
get ready for a crap on supers patch. its obvious with the total lack of attention this thread has got and the massive amounts of "other content" that the intention was to dump the crap pile and cover it with all the other goodies to distract everyone from how craptacular this super nerf is going to be. Considering its been a month and were still commenting on it is a testament to how much it sucks.
|
Axexut
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:05:00 -
[2430] - Quote
Someone wake up the CCP guys: They fell asleep in the thread.
Lots of good points gone unread, or at least unaddressed.
Including no responses on subjects like:
GÇó Fixing Shield Bonuses so they are on par with Armor tankers (even more critical for Shield-Tanked supers) GÇó Still hoping for shield equivalents to the Slave set GÇó Give some love to the Leviathan: The "gunboat" ttans will still be able to hit sub-caps after the DD nerf. The Levi not (unless the red pilot is kind enough to not be moving at all) GÇóThink about putting off the HP nerf - especially as you introduce Tier 3 BCs that do ridiculous damage (Supers may even need a HP BOOST as you have superfast, small sig radius, DPS demon boats flying about) GÇó Still no comment on the biggest overpowered feature of SCs: Remote repping
And, if I dare to dream:
GÇó T2 Doomsdays that do some kind of AOE (perhaps via a script)
Keep one script for the anti-capital DD we will have after your changes. Add a second that does some kind of "Flak" damage that gives back to the biggest, most expensive, longest-to-train ship class in game some ability to defend itself.
I know titans are not meant to be solo ships and should be used in fleets, but that doesn't mean they should have zero defensive capabilities. |
|
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 10:19:00 -
[2431] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:Limiting SCs to only being able to take 20-25 fighters/fighter bombers is totally fail,what idiot thought of that really, Some1 with no idea of how Supers will actually be used after the patch. Alot of out of touch people obviously had these half arsed idea's. With only enough room for 20-25 Supers will only have fighters,they will have no fighter bombers, this is reality & fact. So why CCP did you create Fighter bombers if there not going to be used due to this failure of sight. Need enough room for 20fighters & 20fighter bombers OR if drone hold capacity is going to be half it is now, then you should be able to deploy 10fighters or 10fighter bombers & double up the damage. Honestly so fail...... Listen to the the Pilots that actually fly the ships day in day out, We want a nerf also, but 1 wich will refine down supers not make certian niche aspects such as fighter bombers a no go area. (sigh)
CCP will you be reinburseing all of us the Fighter Bomber skill points we so avidly trained. As quote points out, after this patch Super will 99% of the time be only used with Fighters & target painters in mids & tracking Links for the titans in fleet. You really need to prove more than ever, that your going to right many of these wrongs an that your listening to logic & reason and need to abandone this stupidity, this ofc includes many aspects brought forward in the winter patch notes. Use some common sence please.
Yes with the teir 3 BCs Supers/Titans will need all the HP they can get, TBH Goons/DC are luaghing @ CCP right now calling them their lap dogs. Got you wrapped round their finger. |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 10:51:00 -
[2432] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:Yes with the teir 3 BCs Supers/Titans will need all the HP they can get, TBH Goons/DC are luaghing @ CCP right now calling them their lap dogs. Got you wrapped round their finger.
No, we're not laughing at CCP. We're cheering CCP for making much needed changes to the game dynamic.
We're laughing at the people who bought 20b isk "I Win" buttons who put their fingers in their ears and ignored all the comments from CCP about how supercaps were going to be rebalanced.
Sell your character, buy one without fighter bombers 5 if it will make you happier. People with the capability to deploy supercaps with support fleets will still be using them to own everything. |
Venustas Blue
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 10:58:00 -
[2433] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Phunnestyle wrote:Yes with the teir 3 BCs Supers/Titans will need all the HP they can get, TBH Goons/DC are luaghing @ CCP right now calling them their lap dogs. Got you wrapped round their finger. No, we're not laughing at CCP. We're cheering CCP for making much needed changes to the game dynamic. We're laughing at the people who bought 20b isk "I Win" buttons who put their fingers in their ears and ignored all the comments from CCP about how supercaps were going to be rebalanced. Sell your character, buy one without fighter bombers 5 if it will make you happier. People with the capability to deploy supercaps with support fleets will still be using them to own everything.
By all means every1 is aloud their own say,but again & again Goons give replies such as this^ in other words is there any point of Goons posting when everything they say is crap? Every post by a Goon just makes me luagh at them. Regardless through the stupidity of what the majority of them say,they seem to get there own way. Listen to Goons = Eves downfall |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:49:00 -
[2434] - Quote
True may aswell create a thread just for Goons/DC so they can post all their self gaining nonescence there. All they are able to vaguely say is Supers are long over due a nerf,there not nerfed enough, this ladies & gentlemen doesn't hold water with any1, its weak nonescence, they are neither able to explain why the nerfs in place would benifit any1 but themselves or give constructive replies to help the refinement of Super Capitals, just as long as they get there own way.
Mean while those who want to benifit the EVE community from all aspects sub capital/capital & Super capital alike can get to work trying to help CCP sort this huge mess out they have got themselves into,help them develop a nerf to refine Supers down & help with other major issues the winter patch notes bring. Yes we are frustrated & sickened to think that such stupidy could happen, but we would rather sort it out than let it carry on. |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:12:00 -
[2435] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:Mean while those who want to benifit the EVE community from all aspects sub capital/capital & Super capital alike can get to work trying to help CCP sort this huge mess out they have got themselves into,
Your whingey comment about wanting reimbursement for fighter bombers 5 is not the pinnacle of constructive criticism you seem to think it is. |
Oppenheimer Quest
Lightbringer's Sanctuary BLACK-MARK
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 06:21:00 -
[2436] - Quote
I may have missed it, and forgive me if I did-but.... Was there some mention of T2 Capitals weapons? I.e. T2 Capital Rails? or T2 Capital Lasers, etc, etc? If everything has a T2 brother, I'm wondering if the T2 Capital weapons are in the idea forming process. Just a thought.... |
Zluke
AquariusArt AquariusArt Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:49:00 -
[2437] - Quote
What about next ship balancing ? hope ccp wont touch "nerf" T3 modular ships ................ |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:33:00 -
[2438] - Quote
Do ccp consider to balance capital launchers too vs turrets? |
Millie Tard
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:42:00 -
[2439] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Phunnestyle wrote:Mean while those who want to benifit the EVE community from all aspects sub capital/capital & Super capital alike can get to work trying to help CCP sort this huge mess out they have got themselves into, Your whingey comment about wanting reimbursement for fighter bombers 5 is not the pinnacle of constructive criticism you seem to think it is.
Haa a Goon, pitty the fool XD
Don't think thats all he was getting at, this much is obvious, but being a Goon you traditionally have a lack of understanding or care for anything that doesn't revolve around what you want.
|
Sertan Deras
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 04:43:00 -
[2440] - Quote
As a super carrier pilot, I honestly don't mind the loss of versatility or the HP nerf...but at least, for the love of god, let us have big enough bays for 20 fighters/20 fbs...that part of the change is really dumb. The rest of it I understand, EVE was becoming Super Capital Online. I can't see any reason, with completely losing the capability to use non-fighter sized drones, that we should also be limited to carrying a sub-optimal amount of the ones we can use. |
|
Movtaron
Spiritus Draconis
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 11:39:00 -
[2441] - Quote
im looking forward to killing supers after winter expansion :))
nananana.. |
Draconus Lofwyr
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:27:00 -
[2442] - Quote
Movtaron wrote:im looking forward to killing supers after winter expansion :))
nananana..
Good luck finding any after the expansion, with the sub optimal fits and nerfs, they will probably all be permanently logged off, or POS bound.
|
Keeley HaZZeLL
Doomheim
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:42:00 -
[2443] - Quote
and minmatar carrier need some upgrade or new bonus. |
Movtaron
Spiritus Draconis
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:49:00 -
[2444] - Quote
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:Movtaron wrote:im looking forward to killing supers after winter expansion :))
nananana.. Good luck finding any after the expansion, with the sub optimal fits and nerfs, they will probably all be permanently logged off, or POS bound.
hehe even better for us lowsec guys :) then again, i guess they will just double their numbers when dropping them. |
Roboticus420
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 10:31:00 -
[2445] - Quote
Movtaron wrote:Draconus Lofwyr wrote:Movtaron wrote:im looking forward to killing supers after winter expansion :))
nananana.. Good luck finding any after the expansion, with the sub optimal fits and nerfs, they will probably all be permanently logged off, or POS bound. hehe even better for us lowsec guys :) then again, i guess they will just double their numbers when dropping them.
You have no idea, this patch is the totally wrong way to go about it, is going to do absolutely nothing good for the game dynamics,fail in nearly everyway. As for all of the lowsec gangs, it will be little different from how it is now,will only mean that supers will jump in a radius of a titan bridge,so support can get to them ASAP. Means humungo blobs. To make lowsec dwellers happy all CCP had to do was disable Titans/Supers from traveling into lowsec. Create more routes for titans/supers to travel to every part of 0.0. Restructure. Then when 0.0 alliances are bored they can no longer drop your 10man RR BS gang that are trying to engadge a cyno kestral on station LOL,simples.
And yes you would be right, Supers will be when dropped,dropped in overwhelming numbers, so thank all the short sighted whiners for appluading this rediculious patch.
I would like to know how long after the winter patch are we going to have a patch to sort this stupidity out? |
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
155
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 16:07:00 -
[2446] - Quote
Pssst, you guys asking for CCP responses do know there's a thread in Test Server Feedback with updates and modifications to the Cap ship changes right?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29691&find=unread |
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 21:55:00 -
[2447] - Quote
That is when the damage is allready done..... Only one thing to say in there.... Undo the nerf And stop bringing the endgame to the players
A real highsec carebear. |
Draconus Lofwyr
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 01:48:00 -
[2448] - Quote
Yep and they are just as responsive and proactive as they have been here.. this nerf patch is turning into a load of crap with gold paint and glitter on top to sell a pretty picture.
|
Tore Vest
288
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 03:11:00 -
[2449] - Quote
I guess CCP is tired of this game.......
Ontopic: Last erebus killed went down within 5 minutes... How fast have CCP planned that the lagest ship in EVE should die ? 30 sec ? A real highsec carebear. |
Il Reverendo
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:35:00 -
[2450] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote: Last erebus killed went down within 5 minutes... How fast have CCP planned that the lagest ship in EVE should die ?
10 to the minus 43 seconds.
|
|
ogletorp
Surrender Dorothy Bipolar Stability
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 20:39:00 -
[2451] - Quote
ANGAL 2000 wrote:this is a act to kill super carrier you have 3000 toons in super carriers if not more and their useless let them dock.
they will get used after the patch and the ppl using them can use them for more then sitting in a pos waiting to die
LET SUPER CARRIER DOCK
I agree if they are only going to be useful as a role player. Let them dock so the pilot isn't stuck in a pos or claiked up in space! |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 04:10:00 -
[2452] - Quote
Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. |
Timewiz
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 07:14:00 -
[2453] - Quote
Was it the noobs whinning they cant kill a ms...or was it ccp ignorance of the fact they created a ship with certain qualities, you skill and save up for years to buy one then ccp nerfs it cause they were too stupid to design it correctly to start to start with. Well I am nerfing ccp by not renewing my 7 accts.
|
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 10:02:00 -
[2454] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players.
Hit the nail straight on the head there, CCP dont care as much about 100 vet players as they do about 3000 noobs, you each pay as much $$ to CCP so they are going to look after their biggest demographic. It's ALL about making money for CCP, every single change they make must at the very least not reduce their overall subscriber base. If they cause 1,000 people that have played for years to leave but get 10,000 new paying subscribers do you think they give a ****.
|
Passive62
1st Steps Academy Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 10:38:00 -
[2455] - Quote
Warrior Xena wrote:I do not think that supercaps are too powerful. They are the biggest ships in the game and the most expensive. It is not normal to have a supercapital defenseless against a destroyer-size vessel, the same way that a real-life carrier cannot be stopped dead by a boat with a hook. Forcing a 15km-ship to kill a single interdictor ( 90m across ) with a doomsday device in order to leave is an idea stupid enough, removing even that possibility and it is well beyond belief.
Some ppl talk about real-life situations with the carriers etc. Please dont forget that no navy is sailing out with just a carrier. They have carrier battle groups with dps agains submarines, ships and aircraft. If you cant kill a hic with a carrier, then ensure you have enough support in the form of sub-caps to counter that. maybe the era of the "cap-fleet" is dying now, with the start of the era of "carrier batlegroups" or "CAP-battlegroups" where all players can take part in, even the noob with a rifter |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 11:25:00 -
[2456] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote:I guess CCP is tired of this game.......
Ontopic: Last erebus killed went down within 5 minutes... How fast have CCP planned that the lagest ship in EVE should die ? 30 sec ?
That Erebus was logged off, didn't have any active hardener, wasn't remore repped, and took multiple doomsdays shots on top of all the conventionnal dps.
If you're trying to use that kill as an argument, you must be getting really desesperate.
Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players.
Ahah, more despair.
And believing that pre-nerf supers stopped the blobbing. Such innocence is almost touching... |
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 11:36:00 -
[2457] - Quote
never forgive never forget CCP is burning bridges |
Le Cardinal
Spricer Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 12:57:00 -
[2458] - Quote
Forums ate my post
Can devs please comment on the shieldtankers vs armortankers imbalance? The amount of armortankers alone give an indication of the shield flaws. The Leviathan is best used as a cab atm. Might as well fit trumpets instead of missile bays. They are equally effective. This has been brought up through many years and you still havent done anything about it.
The only good thing about the Leviathan is that you may survive to the end cause your not worth killing first either way. |
Lunce
PWNED Factor The Seventh Day
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 13:08:00 -
[2459] - Quote
[/quote]Some ppl talk about real-life situations with the carriers etc. Please dont forget that no navy is sailing out with just a carrier. They have carrier battle groups with dps agains submarines, ships and aircraft. If you cant kill a hic with a carrier, then ensure you have enough support in the form of sub-caps to counter that. maybe the era of the "cap-fleet" is dying now, with the start of the era of "carrier batlegroups" or "CAP-battlegroups" where all players can take part in, even the noob with a rifter[/quote]
If... IF CCP can make it happen, then....this ^
All the pain would be worth it if this was the net result. |
HelPilot of20Years
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:08:00 -
[2460] - Quote
Le Cardinal wrote:Forums ate my post Can devs please comment on the shieldtankers vs armortankers imbalance? The amount of armortankers alone give an indication of the shield flaws. The Leviathan is best used as a cab atm. Might as well fit trumpets instead of missile bays. They are equally effective. This has been brought up through many years and you still havent done anything about it. The only good thing about the Leviathan is that you may survive to the end cause your not worth killing first either way.
I concur. If any super-capital pilot's voice be heard, it should be that of the Leviathan. Since we can't seem to come to a logical solution to capital missiles/torps, give these poor bastards some hybrid hardpoints.
To state again: Shield capitals in this game are a joke. Sit in an Icelandic office and don't come out until you can add/subtract a few numbers that effect an overhaul of capital shield-tanking efficacy. ...designed for one purpose and one purpose only. GÇ¥Imagine a swarm of deadly hornets pouring from the devilGÇÖs mouth. Now imagine they have autocannons.GÇ¥ -Unknown Hel designer
|
|
Lee Anderson
EVE Portal INC Portal INC
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 23:22:00 -
[2461] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Well CCP, thanks for removing my initial post. I did not violate any forum rules. However, I'll explain since you didn't get it:
Removed again. Navigator.
Edit; to elaborate, as we know populist choices gets the blind sheeps running and they might miss the goal..
1) removing regular drones on motherships is ******** beyond belief, this is what Zulu and CCP wanted and tried to do repeatedly. Everytime this has idea has been put to rest. Now that moms need a rebalance, CCP finally can do their long-wet-dream - something that isn't even required.
2) the only issue with supers is their damage output, they had a hp boost for a reason, remember how even small industrialist corps in lowsec would drop a few mixed shield/armor carrier/dread-groups and kill them like they were nothing? Their hp is reasonable, after years of being nerfed, but their damage isn't. Fighterbombers and changed doomsdays made them from "laughable and mocked" to "way overpowered". The nerf should be to FB's and Fighters, not to dronebays and hp.
(and quite frankly, with supers doing same ridicilous damage to other supers and structures, they will have same strenght in sov war so this nerf could end up still promoting super-blobs)
3) The logoff timer change should be universal, for all ships, or it's a stupid change. The blog does not specify if this is for capitals only, but the blog is for capitals only. This needs to be addressed. Game mechanics should in general be universal, else they by themselves become a balance issue. TL;DR state if this is for capitals only, or all ships.. should be the latter.
CCP is showing ignorance on this issue, ignorance, populism, and of course they got their holy grail "death to all drones" slotted into this. I hope players arn't ignorant enough to miss out on this, it's quite embarrassing how you might just finally after four years get away with a stupid change nobody asked for. Nobody but you, CCP. CCP Navigator owning ppl again with his awesomeness... oh god this might be DEL to... god forbid as a paying customer we can talk to a company that we help make... Its are money that we spent that pays your paycheck... Don't forget if everyone in EVE stopped paying then there is no CCP
http://eveportal.net Great site for Mission Reports and more.
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 02:10:00 -
[2462] - Quote
Lee Anderson wrote:Misanth wrote:Well CCP, thanks for removing my initial post. I did not violate any forum rules. However, I'll explain since you didn't get it:
Removed again. Navigator.
Edit; to elaborate, as we know populist choices gets the blind sheeps running and they might miss the goal..
1) removing regular drones on motherships is ******** beyond belief, this is what Zulu and CCP wanted and tried to do repeatedly. Everytime this has idea has been put to rest. Now that moms need a rebalance, CCP finally can do their long-wet-dream - something that isn't even required.
2) the only issue with supers is their damage output, they had a hp boost for a reason, remember how even small industrialist corps in lowsec would drop a few mixed shield/armor carrier/dread-groups and kill them like they were nothing? Their hp is reasonable, after years of being nerfed, but their damage isn't. Fighterbombers and changed doomsdays made them from "laughable and mocked" to "way overpowered". The nerf should be to FB's and Fighters, not to dronebays and hp.
(and quite frankly, with supers doing same ridicilous damage to other supers and structures, they will have same strenght in sov war so this nerf could end up still promoting super-blobs)
3) The logoff timer change should be universal, for all ships, or it's a stupid change. The blog does not specify if this is for capitals only, but the blog is for capitals only. This needs to be addressed. Game mechanics should in general be universal, else they by themselves become a balance issue. TL;DR state if this is for capitals only, or all ships.. should be the latter.
CCP is showing ignorance on this issue, ignorance, populism, and of course they got their holy grail "death to all drones" slotted into this. I hope players arn't ignorant enough to miss out on this, it's quite embarrassing how you might just finally after four years get away with a stupid change nobody asked for. Nobody but you, CCP. CCP Navigator owning ppl again with his awesomeness... oh god this might be DEL to... god forbid as a paying customer we can talk to a company that we help make... Its are money that we spent that pays your paycheck... Don't forget if everyone in EVE stopped paying then there is no CCP
Everyone raging about this patch should sit outside of Jita and destroy anything that comes out of 4-4. Fill out local with pissed off people and when no one can do **** in Jita for a month, maybe CCP will listen. They certainly don't listen to anyone on here. |
Pastachick
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 18:00:00 -
[2463] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players.
our rifters shall block out the sun etc~ |
Xhondo Dhoru
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 18:15:00 -
[2464] - Quote
Passive62 wrote:Some ppl talk about real-life situations with the carriers etc. Please dont forget that no navy is sailing out with just a carrier. They have carrier battle groups with dps agains submarines, ships and aircraft. If you cant kill a hic with a carrier, then ensure you have enough support in the form of sub-caps to counter that. maybe the era of the "cap-fleet" is dying now, with the start of the era of "carrier batlegroups" or "CAP-battlegroups" where all players can take part in, even the noob with a rifter
Sometimes I truly wonder if people who make posts like these have fetal alcohol syndrome or some other terrible and debilitating handicap.
One thing that I can say for certain though is that you have absolutely no comprehension of the capabilities of a Nimitz class supercarrier and should stop referencing them entirely. |
Pastachick
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 18:33:00 -
[2465] - Quote
Xhondo Dhoru wrote:Passive62 wrote:Some ppl talk about real-life situations with the carriers etc. Please dont forget that no navy is sailing out with just a carrier. They have carrier battle groups with dps agains submarines, ships and aircraft. If you cant kill a hic with a carrier, then ensure you have enough support in the form of sub-caps to counter that. maybe the era of the "cap-fleet" is dying now, with the start of the era of "carrier batlegroups" or "CAP-battlegroups" where all players can take part in, even the noob with a rifter Sometimes I truly wonder if people who make posts like these have fetal alcohol syndrome or some other terrible and debilitating handicap. One thing that I can say for certain though is that you have absolutely no comprehension of the capabilities of a Nimitz class supercarrier and should stop referencing them entirely.
I too get my my top notch top seekret military information from playing vidya all day |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:01:00 -
[2466] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players.
Death to all supercaps. |
Jita Alt666
950
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:06:00 -
[2467] - Quote
This is my new favourite thread: Thanks for bumping it CCP; I know you just wanted to share the tears with everyone.
To ensure I am on topic: Thank you for the changes CCP, I look forward to leading small subcap gangs (10-15) through 0.0 without having to watch for the inevitable cyno alt attempting to get on grid with us to drop 15 unsupported super capitals on us for lols. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:07:00 -
[2468] - Quote
Jita Alt666 wrote:This is my new favourite thread: Thanks for bumping it CCP; I know you just wanted to share the tears with everyone.
To ensure I am on topic: Thank you for the changes CCP, I look forward to leading small subcap gangs (10-15) through 0.0 without having to watch for the inevitable cyno alt attempting to get on grid with us to drop 15 unsupported super capitals on us for lols.
They are still welcome to try this kind of garbage if they really want to :) |
CoLe Blackblood
the united Negative Ten.
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:46:00 -
[2469] - Quote
Lookin good CCP. The tears will be endless. |
Cid SilverWing
Grim Determination Clockworks Inc. Nulli Tertius
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:06:00 -
[2470] - Quote
Dreadnoughts are already sitting ducks when Sieging, they shouldn't be so unable to hit anything when not moving. The Tracking penalty on the Siege needs to go, badly. This will give Dreadnoughts the buff they've been crying for since the start and make them much more viable again. They're not supposed to be pigeonholed into POS-bashing, they should be able to shoot enemy caps and maybe even battleships. They ARE already vulnerable, so any more nerfing is just cruel on Dread pilots that enjoy being in the big ships.
And it seems to me it's the Titans that should have Tracking penalties, or be unable to fit/receive Tracking assistance. This to further stop people from simply replacing SC blobs with Titan blobs.
Further testing should be committed into this epic nerfing of carriers and supercarriers, however, because I have a terrible feeling they're being overnerfed into useless. I've seen people who like taking carriers out to ratting, even supercarriers. |
|
A Reynolds
Atlas Jupiter Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:08:00 -
[2471] - Quote
moros just got castrated. time to sell quick before palyers find out. Capital gallente ship with no drone bay lol |
zero2espect
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:26:00 -
[2472] - Quote
forget shooting stuff in jita 4-4. i'm waiting to see the unsubs. my super training toon is definately being put to sleep. |
Suiteii
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:33:00 -
[2473] - Quote
I love the changes.
Even for small alliances, the natural escalation of a fight will be as follows:
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) engages subcap fleet B (SF-B)
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) drops triage carrier to support the fleet.
- Subcap fleet B (SF-B) drops dreadnought + carrier to counter triage carrier from SF-A
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) drops mothership to counter dreadnought + carrier from SF-B
- Subcap Fleet B (SF-B) drops titan to counter mothership.
This is how Eve was meant to be played. Blobbing is an unforunate side-effect of Eve, but it happens. If you wanted even 10v10 fights matched isk for isk... you can try every other game on the market.
Having a mothership won't mean "I win" anymore. It's merely adding another tier to the escalation process.
As it is currently, you can just skipp this whole escalation process:
- SF-A warps in to SF-B
- SF-B drops a mothership.
- Over.
With the new changes, when SF-B drops its MOM, SF-A can still win with superior fighting ability/numbers |
zero2espect
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:43:00 -
[2474] - Quote
^^
if you think this is what is going to happen, i can't help you.
now what will happen is you will either see no supers or you will be dropped by 40 of them.
this is the kind of post which got us into this situation in the first place. |
S8nt
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:47:00 -
[2475] - Quote
CCP you are being ******** and short sited by making these changes to super carriers and Titans... you are only going to make the problem worse... get someone that can see what you are actually doing by making these changes...
A simple RL example:
I buy a Farrari which I spent years saving for. Now all of a sudden there is some emmisions concerns with it. So I take it in for a service. When they return it to me I find they have no put a mini's engine in because it was a problem before. Would you accept that change made or would you want something equivalent or better?
By making the changes to the ships and log of mechanics you are forcing corps and alliances to stay away from them, if they cannot fund or support them or you are going to force them to have hundreds of them so that if they do need to commit they are sure they are going to win...
I said this when you changed them in Dominion... you are not looking at the big picture and you are destroying your game. This is going to push it even further into the crap.
Please listen to reason and stop butchering features in this game for the sake of profit and your shareholders!
S8nt |
GRIEV3R
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:50:00 -
[2476] - Quote
I am a proud ally of Goons. I have flown my Nyx on numerous ops with the CFC Super Club. I have great respect for the Mittani and other highly placed members of Goons. Having flown with them, I can vouch for them being very smart players, and, as Malcom Reynolds would say, "kind and decent folk."
But I disagree very strongly with their thesis of "death to all supercaps"
I think SCs and Titans are awesome ships that could really add to the game, if they were balanced right. I was very sad to get rid of my Nyx, and in spite of this nerf I still dream of flying an Erebus. I hope CCP takes "death to all supers" under consideration as just one of many opinions. Please don't just automatically give Mittani everything he wants as far as supers are concerned and ignore all other views.
Mittani is almost always right, but this time, on this issue, he's got it all wrong. |
Suiteii
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:40:00 -
[2477] - Quote
Suiteii wrote:Blobbing is an unforunate side-effect of Eve, but it happens. If you wanted even 10v10 fights matched isk for isk... you can try every other game on the market.
zero2espect wrote:^^
if you think this is what is going to happen, i can't help you.
now what will happen is you will either see no supers or you will be dropped by 40 of them.
this is the kind of post which got us into this situation in the first place.
When someone drops 40 supercapitals to fight your one, you're going to lose. CCP isn't trying to nerf blobbing. Blobbing is a part of Eve.
CCP is only trying to stop those 40 supercarriers from being the answer to -every- situation. |
sarsa
FinFleet Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:42:00 -
[2478] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps.
So if 5000 goons voted CSM Mittani and Vile Rat the new brainiacs of eve that means they are the voice of eve community ? I must remind CCP of the times when there were 47.000 players online well now there are 35.000 soon there will be 25.000 in the way you are going. You just made a favor to the blobs that have the same capital capability but not the balls to field them. The problem was not that supers were to hard to kill because that works in both ways doesn't it ? You are failing to deliver what the community asks since 3 years. I like how Tallest responds in that blog saying "I" want to make some changes dude change away what ever you like soon you will play it as a network game. And you might rethink you strategies because you guys might have a surprise when Diablo 3 will be released. I play this game for 8 years in each year you bring only disappointment to the community you encourage blobs all the time. YOU as CCP made this game a BLOB FEST.
Remember the upper you get the bigger is the fall.
Pointless to say anything to people like Vile Rat and Mittani they are people that think they are always right. CSM members should be people with extensive knowledge about game mechanics and with good ideas CCP should recruit them through interviews/test not to put 5000 goons to vote them.
This is my opinion and how i had to put up to YOUR CHANGES patch after patch now you put up with My OPINION. |
algorythm
Evolution
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:45:00 -
[2479] - Quote
This makes me think about posting something on the lines of:
Will sell 100M SP supercap char with nyx for a couple of plexes. or extra quafe
This is just another step by CCP on making people who play the game for years to leave it.
Just a reminder dear CCP, Supercaps are hard to build, hard to fit, and on top they require a dedicated pilot to fly them, why the hell wont they be Super?!
From this day forward I shall call my Nyx Willy and will reffer to supercaps has littlecaps.
P.S. I've always called her willy |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:48:00 -
[2480] - Quote
Suiteii wrote:I love the changes.
Even for small alliances, the natural escalation of a fight will be as follows:
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) engages subcap fleet B (SF-B)
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) drops triage carrier to support the fleet.
- Subcap fleet B (SF-B) drops dreadnought + carrier to counter triage carrier from SF-A
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) drops mothership to counter dreadnought + carrier from SF-B
- Subcap Fleet B (SF-B) drops titan to counter mothership.
This is how Eve was meant to be played. Blobbing is an unforunate side-effect of Eve, but it happens. If you wanted even 10v10 fights matched isk for isk... you can try every other game on the market.
Having a mothership won't mean "I win" anymore. It's merely adding another tier to the escalation process.
As it is currently, you can just skipp this whole escalation process:
- SF-A warps in to SF-B
- SF-B drops a mothership.
- Over.
With the new changes, when SF-B drops its MOM, SF-A can still win with superior fighting ability/numbers
Are you a noob? Have you ever been in a 0.0 alliance?
People don't deploy caps (much less supers) as you just outlined. It simply does not happen that way.
lol..........
The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
|
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:51:00 -
[2481] - Quote
The most egregious change is the fact that Supercarriers cannot even carry a full flight of fighters and fighter bombers.
That is simply silly and insulting. I would rather have the ships taken out of the game, and receive a full reimbursement.
But beyond that, and mark my words, these changes on the whole simply mean that supers will ONLY be flown in HUGE blobs.
They will be used less, which might or might not be good for EVE, but when they are used, they will be used in ways that newer/weaker players find even MORE unfair. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Suiteii
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:57:00 -
[2482] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Suiteii wrote:I love the changes.
Even for small alliances, the natural escalation of a fight will be as follows:
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) engages subcap fleet B (SF-B)
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) drops triage carrier to support the fleet.
- Subcap fleet B (SF-B) drops dreadnought + carrier to counter triage carrier from SF-A
- Subcap fleet A (SF-A) drops mothership to counter dreadnought + carrier from SF-B
- Subcap Fleet B (SF-B) drops titan to counter mothership.
This is how Eve was meant to be played. Blobbing is an unforunate side-effect of Eve, but it happens. If you wanted even 10v10 fights matched isk for isk... you can try every other game on the market.
Having a mothership won't mean "I win" anymore. It's merely adding another tier to the escalation process.
As it is currently, you can just skipp this whole escalation process:
- SF-A warps in to SF-B
- SF-B drops a mothership.
- Over.
With the new changes, when SF-B drops its MOM, SF-A can still win with superior fighting ability/numbers Are you a noob? Have you ever been in a 0.0 alliance? People don't deploy caps (much less supers) as you just outlined. It simply does not happen that way. lol..........
Exactly. They drop MOMs because there's no point to anything else.....
PS. Yes. I fought in the NC war. As per the last part of my post. Fights were decided by who had more supercaps under the cyno blocker.
Edit: in case it wasnt clear. With these changes it's actually possible for a subcap fleet to go in under a cyno blocker, and take out said blocker without a fleet of MOMs/titans to **** your face. |
Edsback
MineOne
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:00:00 -
[2483] - Quote
xxxak wrote:The most egregious change is the fact that Supercarriers cannot even carry a full flight of fighters and fighter bombers.
That is simply silly and insulting. I would rather have the ships taken out of the game, and receive a full reimbursement.
But beyond that, and mark my words, these changes on the whole simply mean that supers will ONLY be flown in HUGE blobs.
They will be used less, which might or might not be good for EVE, but when they are used, they will be used in ways that newer/weaker players find even MORE unfair. something that have not been said in any of the blogs is that after this hurf super carrier will need more drone bay parts in order to make them, yes i said more drone bays so try and work that one out.
also due to having the drone bay taken away from titans and dreds ccp have added more parts to what is needed to make up for the change so if you where thinking dreds and titan build cost will be lower due to this you are wrong. |
Edsback
MineOne
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:02:00 -
[2484] - Quote
great job ccp now back to this thread for more good nights of fits and giggles |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5425
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:14:00 -
[2485] - Quote
S8nt wrote:A simple RL example: GǪwhich by very definition of GǣRLGǥ is completely irrelevant to EVE balancing.
Quote:By making the changes to the ships and log of mechanics you are forcing corps and alliances to stay away from them, if they cannot fund or support them Good. That's the goal here: get a support fleet, or die.
Quote:Please listen to reason They did. That's why the all-in-one-mobiles are getting nerfed to the point where they need some support ships to survive. It's the reasonable thing to do.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:25:00 -
[2486] - Quote
Tippia wrote:S8nt wrote:A simple RL example: GǪwhich by very definition of GǣRLGǥ is completely irrelevant to EVE balancing. Quote:By making the changes to the ships and log of mechanics you are forcing corps and alliances to stay away from them, if they cannot fund or support them Good. That's the goal here: get a support fleet, or die. Quote:Please listen to reason They did. That's why the all-in-one-mobiles are getting nerfed to the point where they need some support ships to survive. It's the reasonable thing to do.
Do you deny that these changes will force even more Blobbing with massive, face-crushing subcap "support" blobs to support the rich "Knights and Lords" in their supers?
Tippia, I want to hear you deny that once from your own lips, so I can make you eat crow in 6 months. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Suiteii
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:39:00 -
[2487] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Do you deny that these changes will force even more Blobbing with massive, face-crushing subcap "support" blobs to support the rich "Knights and Lords" in their supers?
Tippia, I want to hear you deny that once from your own lips, so I can make you eat crow in 6 months.
So you're admitting that these changes will bring subcaps back into the playing field without completely removing supercapitals from the fight.
Sounds like balance, to me. |
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5719
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:41:00 -
[2488] - Quote
sarsa wrote:Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps. So if 5000 goons voted CSM Mittani and Vile Rat the new brainiacs of eve that means they are the voice of eve community ? I must remind CCP of the times when there were 47.000 players online well now there are 35.000 soon there will be 25.000 in the way you are going. You just made a favor to the blobs that have the same capital capability but not the balls to field them. The problem was not that supers were to hard to kill because that works in both ways doesn't it ? You are failing to deliver what the community asks since 3 years. I like how Tallest responds in that blog saying "I" want to make some changes dude change away what ever you like soon you will play it as a network game. And you might rethink you strategies because you guys might have a surprise when Diablo 3 will be released. I play this game for 8 years in each year you bring only disappointment to the community you encourage blobs all the time. YOU as CCP made this game a BLOB FEST. Remember the upper you get the bigger is the fall. Pointless to say anything to people like Vile Rat and Mittani they are people that think they are always right. CSM members should be people with extensive knowledge about game mechanics and with good ideas CCP should recruit them through interviews/test not to put 5000 goons to vote them. This is my opinion and how i had to put up to YOUR CHANGES patch after patch now you put up with My OPINION.
Wow, how did I somehow miss this thread full of ex-BoB tears?
Oh, right - Skyrim. The Mittani, CSM7: Vote Here - One EVE. One Vote. One Chairman
The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:44:00 -
[2489] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:sarsa wrote:Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps. So if 5000 goons voted CSM Mittani and Vile Rat the new brainiacs of eve that means they are the voice of eve community ? I must remind CCP of the times when there were 47.000 players online well now there are 35.000 soon there will be 25.000 in the way you are going. You just made a favor to the blobs that have the same capital capability but not the balls to field them. The problem was not that supers were to hard to kill because that works in both ways doesn't it ? You are failing to deliver what the community asks since 3 years. I like how Tallest responds in that blog saying "I" want to make some changes dude change away what ever you like soon you will play it as a network game. And you might rethink you strategies because you guys might have a surprise when Diablo 3 will be released. I play this game for 8 years in each year you bring only disappointment to the community you encourage blobs all the time. YOU as CCP made this game a BLOB FEST. Remember the upper you get the bigger is the fall. Pointless to say anything to people like Vile Rat and Mittani they are people that think they are always right. CSM members should be people with extensive knowledge about game mechanics and with good ideas CCP should recruit them through interviews/test not to put 5000 goons to vote them. This is my opinion and how i had to put up to YOUR CHANGES patch after patch now you put up with My OPINION. Wow, how did I somehow miss this thread full of ex-BoB tears? Oh, right - Skyrim.
Mittens, your vile goal of the concentration of power in 2-3 power blocs and the destruction of fun in EVE is nearly complete.
Can I get an exclusive first-quote?
I, for one, look forward to seeing the Lords and Knights of EVE ride on their supercaps atop a wave of human filth and misery as the peasants in subcaps batter freemen out of their nullsec homes. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Sesshru
Lacking In Diplomacy RED.OverLord
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:46:00 -
[2490] - Quote
i've spent the last several months, training up all my skills to perfect for a niddy
and now i see this
capitals getting nerfed but the cost of them remains the same, and what it takes to make them remains the same
so i pay the same price for a nerf
why should it take the same materials for a lesser ship with these nerf's, i find this quite unfair to the eve community |
|
The Mittani
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5719
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:51:00 -
[2491] - Quote
xxxak wrote:
Mittens, your vile goal of the concentration of power in 2-3 power blocs and the destruction of fun in EVE is nearly complete.
Can I get an exclusive first-quote?
I, for one, look forward to seeing the Lords and Knights of EVE ride on their supercaps atop a wave of human filth and misery as the peasants in subcaps batter freemen out of their nullsec homes.
an amusing twist, you've managed through your delusions to somehow consider me a pro-supercap supporter
personally, i'd like to see them all removed from the game or shifted to a completely noncombat role (bridging only, leadership bonuses etc) but according to this thread full of howlers i ~have gotten everything that i want~
supercaps can still target subcaps and they still exist, i have not won vOv The Mittani, CSM7: Vote Here - One EVE. One Vote. One Chairman
The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:01:00 -
[2492] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:xxxak wrote:
Mittens, your vile goal of the concentration of power in 2-3 power blocs and the destruction of fun in EVE is nearly complete.
Can I get an exclusive first-quote?
I, for one, look forward to seeing the Lords and Knights of EVE ride on their supercaps atop a wave of human filth and misery as the peasants in subcaps batter freemen out of their nullsec homes.
an amusing twist, you've managed through your delusions to somehow consider me a pro-supercap supporter personally, i'd like to see them all removed from the game or shifted to a completely noncombat role (bridging only, leadership bonuses etc) but according to this thread full of howlers i ~have gotten everything that i want~ supercaps can still target subcaps and they still exist, i have not won vOv
Ironically, at this point, I would like to see them removed as well. Or as you said, changed into actual mobile stations of some kind.
For the record, I never meant to imply that you want to buff supers in any way. I think supers are merely useful leverage points upon which you can push to achieve your ultimate goals. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Slighet
Siempre Muerto
59
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:04:00 -
[2493] - Quote
Blimey, this thread is still going? Hurrah. Delicious sense of entitlement tears.
*Goes back to training vulnerable, fun, challenging subcaps* |
Freezehunter
126
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:13:00 -
[2494] - Quote
Dreads still have absolute crap tracking.
Is it possible to also add a tracking bonus per level of skill to dreads please?
Now that you removed the drones, a single neuting BS vs a dread can just orbit it close and it WILL eventually kill the dread, because the dread misses every shot, even when the ship is being webbed.
BS can win against frigates solo, dreads should have no problem with battleships solo, at least if they are webbed.
I made a setup on the test server, where all my rigs, and all my med slots were dedicated to improving tracking, and I had a tackler in the fleet, and I STILL missed every single freaking ( ion blaster) shot on a battleship that was moving 10m/s , 12 kilometers away, it's absurd.
Meanwhile, Minmatar dreads can kill interceptors going 3 KPS at 10-70 KM no problem. Bullshit much?
Not everyone has a fleet available to them at will, you know. Inappropriate signature, CCP Phantom. |
Edsback
MineOne
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:19:00 -
[2495] - Quote
Freezehunter wrote:Dreads still have absolute crap tracking.
Is it possible to also add a tracking bonus per level of skill to dreads please?
Now that you removed the drones, a single neuting BS vs a dread can just orbit it close and it WILL eventually kill the dread, because the dread misses every shot, even when the ship is being webbed.
BS can win against frigates solo, dreads should have no problem with battleships solo, at least if they are webbed.
I made a setup on the test server, where all my rigs, and all my med slots were dedicated to improving tracking, and I had a tackler in the fleet, and I STILL missed every single freaking ( ion blaster) shot on a battleship that was moving 10m/s , 12 kilometers away, it's absurd.
Not everyone has a fleet available to them at will, you know.
Now did you take them drugs
HINT (theirs no side effects anymore) |
drillerkiller2004
Spontaneous Castigation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:39:00 -
[2496] - Quote
I think that you should remove the ability to jump bridge freighters |
Miss President
SOLARIS ASTERIUS
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 00:21:00 -
[2497] - Quote
The only reason I trained sentry drones so I can kick ass in my dread.
I think dreads having 5 sentry drones, should be allowed, even if no bonus is given.
I say boost dreads as you say, but give them drones back. Limit to only sentry type. There are good reasons to not siege, and use drones when the tower is almost down, to save a cycle.
Bouncer IIs ftw
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 00:25:00 -
[2498] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps.
Whats amusing is that people in your own ******* alliance don't agree with this patch. Well, the ones that fly supers anyway. Its also amusing that your a "Voice of the eve community", yet if we look at the big picture this patch benefits very few people outside your own alliance. Not to mention that it completely handicaps every one of your major enemies.
My personal opinion is that this is a complete misuse of your and Mitanni's power. Goons is NOT eve. There are far more people playing this game than the people in your alliance. You never looked for a solution to the super cap imbalance. You just looked for the best way to destroy them and **** everyone else over. |
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 00:28:00 -
[2499] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps. Whats amusing is that people in your own ******* alliance don't agree with this patch. Well, the ones that fly supers anyway. Its also amusing that your a "Voice of the eve community", yet if we look at the big picture this patch benefits very few people outside your own alliance. Not to mention that it completely handicaps every one of your major enemies. My personal opinion is that this is a complete misuse of your and Mitanni's power. Goons is NOT eve. There are far more people playing this game than the people in your alliance. You never looked for a solution to the super cap imbalance. You just looked for the best way to destroy them and **** everyone else over.
Too bad we don't have a way to vote you out of the CSM |
Dietrich III
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 01:54:00 -
[2500] - Quote
Freezehunter wrote:Dreads still have absolute crap tracking.
Is it possible to also add a tracking bonus per level of skill to dreads please?
Now that you removed the drones, a single neuting BS vs a dread can just orbit it close and it WILL eventually kill the dread, because the dread misses every shot, even when the ship is being webbed.
BS can win against frigates solo, dreads should have no problem with battleships solo, at least if they are webbed.
I made a setup on the test server, where all my rigs, and all my med slots were dedicated to improving tracking, and I had a tackler in the fleet, and I STILL missed every single freaking ( ion blaster) shot on a battleship that was moving 10m/s , 12 kilometers away, it's absurd.
Not everyone has a fleet available to them at will, you know.
If you don't have a support fleet, then why the hell would you bring a dreadnought? Even so, did you try target painters? Did you look at the angular velocity of the target vs that of your dread guns to be absolutely sure it's tracking and not sig radius that's making your guns miss? But whatever, you're missing the point.
Stop looking at capital ships in one-to-one engagements, because they weren't designed for that. Dreads have a very specific role: killing other capitals and player-owned structures. You don't engage subcaps with a dread...that's what a subcap support fleet is for. |
|
Bettoesai
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 04:06:00 -
[2501] - Quote
Freezehunter wrote:Dreads still have absolute crap tracking.
Is it possible to also add a tracking bonus per level of skill to dreads please?
Now that you removed the drones, a single neuting BS vs a dread can just orbit it close and it WILL eventually kill the dread, because the dread misses every shot, even when the ship is being webbed.
BS can win against frigates solo, dreads should have no problem with battleships solo, at least if they are webbed.
I made a setup on the test server, where all my rigs, and all my med slots were dedicated to improving tracking, and I had a tackler in the fleet, and I STILL missed every single freaking ( ion blaster) shot on a battleship that was moving 10m/s , 12 kilometers away, it's absurd.
Meanwhile, Minmatar dreads can kill interceptors going 3 KPS at 10-70 KM no problem. Bullshit much?
Not everyone has a fleet available to them at will, you know.
Only if the Dread did not have a tank...... Which seems unlikely...... "Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"
Vile rat |
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
430
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 05:27:00 -
[2502] - Quote
The attention CCP is giving to the balancing of ships is invigorating. Also, it's not the end-all of balancing, it's a good start.
The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 05:54:00 -
[2503] - Quote
sarsa wrote:Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps. So if 5000 goons voted CSM Mittani and Vile Rat the new brainiacs of eve that means they are the voice of eve community ? I must remind CCP of the times when there were 47.000 players online well now there are 35.000 soon there will be 25.000 in the way you are going. You just made a favor to the blobs that have the same capital capability but not the balls to field them. The problem was not that supers were to hard to kill because that works in both ways doesn't it ? You are failing to deliver what the community asks since 3 years. I like how Tallest responds in that blog saying "I" want to make some changes dude change away what ever you like soon you will play it as a network game. And you might rethink you strategies because you guys might have a surprise when Diablo 3 will be released. I play this game for 8 years in each year you bring only disappointment to the community you encourage blobs all the time. YOU as CCP made this game a BLOB FEST. Remember the upper you get the bigger is the fall. Pointless to say anything to people like Vile Rat and Mittani they are people that think they are always right. CSM members should be people with extensive knowledge about game mechanics and with good ideas CCP should recruit them through interviews/test not to put 5000 goons to vote them. This is my opinion and how i had to put up to YOUR CHANGES patch after patch now you put up with My OPINION.
This would actually mean a thing if the CSM were Mittens and I. I suppose you're suggesting that the two PL guys, the two xdeath guys and a whole slew of CCP balancing guys just took what we said and put it in without considering the impact of the ships on the game? Interesting theory.
This is a nerf. This is a nerf to groups that use supercaps as the sole mechanism to project 0.0 power. This is a nerf to guys who like to bait small gangs then drop a titan on them much like a child melts ants with a magnifying glass. You're upset about this nerf and I can respect that because this is a hit to your playing style and you're hopping mad about it.
These changes are also the result of a significant amount of back and forth between parts of the CSM who represent SC heavy alliances, those who feel strongly that supercaps as they are now break the game and ruin the experience for the much larger percentage who don't have them, and CCP. These changes are also not the final word and there is going to be a great deal of attention given to the aftermath of these changes so if this wasn't done enough or too much it'll be addressed.
Now I'd love to have this conversation, a rational discourse on why we feel these changes are necessary, and why we pushed for them. Even though we didn't get nearly what we wanted, CCP did find another path that makes us mostly satisfied and that's why we were sent here.
So despite your immature words and incoherent rant I do get the motivation behind your anger. I think it's misplaced and you're coming across like a spoiled child, but that's in your delivery and not your sentiment.
|
Velin Dhal
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 07:48:00 -
[2504] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:sarsa wrote:Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps. So if 5000 goons voted CSM Mittani and Vile Rat the new brainiacs of eve that means they are the voice of eve community ? I must remind CCP of the times when there were 47.000 players online well now there are 35.000 soon there will be 25.000 in the way you are going. You just made a favor to the blobs that have the same capital capability but not the balls to field them. The problem was not that supers were to hard to kill because that works in both ways doesn't it ? You are failing to deliver what the community asks since 3 years. I like how Tallest responds in that blog saying "I" want to make some changes dude change away what ever you like soon you will play it as a network game. And you might rethink you strategies because you guys might have a surprise when Diablo 3 will be released. I play this game for 8 years in each year you bring only disappointment to the community you encourage blobs all the time. YOU as CCP made this game a BLOB FEST. Remember the upper you get the bigger is the fall. Pointless to say anything to people like Vile Rat and Mittani they are people that think they are always right. CSM members should be people with extensive knowledge about game mechanics and with good ideas CCP should recruit them through interviews/test not to put 5000 goons to vote them. This is my opinion and how i had to put up to YOUR CHANGES patch after patch now you put up with My OPINION. This would actually mean a thing if the CSM were Mittens and I. I suppose you're suggesting that the two PL guys, the two xdeath guys and a whole slew of CCP balancing guys just took what we said and put it in without considering the impact of the ships on the game? Interesting theory. This is a nerf. This is a nerf to groups that use supercaps as the sole mechanism to project 0.0 power. This is a nerf to guys who like to bait small gangs then drop a titan on them much like a child melts ants with a magnifying glass. You're upset about this nerf and I can respect that because this is a hit to your playing style and you're hopping mad about it. These changes are also the result of a significant amount of back and forth between parts of the CSM who represent SC heavy alliances, those who feel strongly that supercaps as they are now break the game and ruin the experience for the much larger percentage who don't have them, and CCP. These changes are also not the final word and there is going to be a great deal of attention given to the aftermath of these changes so if this wasn't done enough or too much it'll be addressed. Now I'd love to have this conversation, a rational discourse on why we feel these changes are necessary, and why we pushed for them. Even though we didn't get nearly what we wanted, CCP did find another path that makes us mostly satisfied and that's why we were sent here. So despite your immature words and incoherent rant I do get the motivation behind your anger. I think it's misplaced and you're coming across like a spoiled child, but that's in your delivery and not your sentiment. I would be the first to agree with you that Supers are broken. They are extremely over powered. They aren't to hard to kill if you bring the right fleet comp but the versatility is the problem.
The infuriating thing about this patch is that CCP is destroying Super Capital class ships. For what ? Game balance ?
I don't believe this patch is going to balance anything. I can understand the frustration that other must feel that they apparent answer to most peoples problems these days is "Drop Supers". Your right, the game shouldn't be that way. I just don't agree that they should be completely unable to defend themselves against Sub Capital ships. ECM burst and Smartbombs only take you so far.
Now i'm sure your going to say that you should have a support fleet, while I would agree with that, we know the world is not perfect, nor is eve. There are always going to be times where you are alone. Being in a stupid situation doesn't always mean the situation is your fault. At least prior to this update, you had a fighting chance.
These are extremely expensive ships we're talking about and I'm sure a lot of people feel that they wasted hard earned isk and large amounts of skill points for a ship they really have no use for now.
Unless I missed something, Supers still cannot dock. If CCP would allow these ships to dock, I'm sure a lot of people would be far less upset about this update. I know I would. If your going to take something away, you should be giving something in return. People asking for SP back, I think is a bit over the top but being able to dock ? I don't find that to be unreasonable at all.
Also, to promote these ships to stay in null most of the time, perhaps you could have an array for 0.0 stations. Said array would allow Super Capitals to dock. Without that array, they can't dock. This would in turn still disallow docking of these ships in low sec systems. Get creative. Like I said, I'm sure a lot of people would be more receptive to this patch if they didn't feel so alienated. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 08:07:00 -
[2505] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:I would be the first to agree with you that Supers are broken. They are extremely over powered. They aren't to hard to kill if you bring the right fleet comp but the versatility is the problem.
With the exception of the 15 min log off timer I agree so far. Supercaps are really difficult to kill currently unless you drop 30 on one dumb ratting nyx or something.
Quote: The infuriating thing about this patch is that CCP is destroying Super Capital class ships. For what ? Game balance ?
I don't believe this patch is going to balance anything. I can understand the frustration that other must feel that they apparent answer to most peoples problems these days is "Drop Supers". Your right, the game shouldn't be that way. I just don't agree that they should be completely unable to defend themselves against Sub Capital ships. ECM burst and Smartbombs only take you so far.
This is where we differ but permit me an opportunity to explain why. I think supercaps are overpowered currently, but the main reason why I think this is that supercaps were never meant to be solo ships or capable of operating without a support fleet. When you give supercaps the ability to defend against any ship class you've just created a swiss army cap that doesn't need subcaps. Think about this for a minute. You have a ship class that really doesn't need subcaps. Maybe you need a dictor or two to hold people down so you can butcher them, but you don't need subcaps to be successful. The impact of this is that the vast majority of players in 0.0 don't really have a role anymore since it's the minority in space who fly supercaps, not the majority. My response on this to you would be: "Why shouldn't supercaps need a support fleet to be effective?" I've seen arguments about people saying they've trained up forever to get their end game ship and they just can't stand the fact that they are being brought down to earth and if they spend 50b for some pimped out supertoy they SHOULD be able to wipe out whole fleets with a single button or perhaps they change the argument slightly to throw in some kind of quip about blob warfare and how this change just makes it so large groups of people can be highly effective against small groups of people.
Well I think that's how it should be. If you have a bunch of dudes you probably should be really effective against a small group of dudes. It shouldn't be the sole deciding factor of course, but the level of strategic thinking and tactical capabilty required to beat a larger force should ramp up as they get even more numbers and no, I do not consider being rich enough to buy a big expensive ship to be the answer to that. If you're fighting a much larger group then adjust your strategy to be a guerilla war instead of saying that they have a bunch more dudes than you so you should be able to buy your way to victory. That's a bullshit answer and one I reject out of hand.
Quote: Now i'm sure your going to say that you should have a support fleet, while I would agree with that, we know the world is not perfect, nor is eve. There are always going to be times where you are alone. Being in a stupid situation doesn't always mean the situation is your fault. At least prior to this update, you had a fighting chance.
These are extremely expensive ships we're talking about and I'm sure a lot of people feel that they wasted hard earned isk and large amounts of skill points for a ship they really have no use for now.
I'm a supercap pilot. I flew an Aeon before and I fly an Erebus now. I couldn't imagine ever putting myself in a situation where I was that vulnerable and I don't think stupidity (either on your part or the part of your alliance) should be a reason to make things easier for you. If you find yourself getting ganked in your expensive toy, then be less dumb. It's really not difficult.
Quote: Unless I missed something, Supers still cannot dock. If CCP would allow these ships to dock, I'm sure a lot of people would be far less upset about this update. I know I would. If your going to take something away, you should be giving something in return. People asking for SP back, I think is a bit over the top but being able to dock ? I don't find that to be unreasonable at all.
Give me the power to implement supercap docking and it'd be done before I finish this post (it's a longish post so maybe before this). I fully support unlocking characters from supercaps because frankly supercaps just aren't used that often. It was a mistake to mandate that they had to be stuck in the hull and it reduces the value of both the character and the gameplay experience by forcing this on them. CCP forced us to all be in supercaps by making the gameplay reliant on them, they should throw a bone and ease up this ridiculous requirement.
Quote: Also, to promote these ships to stay in null most of the time, perhaps you could have an array for 0.0 stations. Said array would allow Super Capitals to dock. Without that array, they can't dock. This would in turn still disallow docking of these ships in low sec systems. Get creative. Like I said, I'm sure a lot of people would be more receptive to this patch if they didn't feel so alienated.
Like this. |
sarsa
FinFleet Raiden.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 09:01:00 -
[2506] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:sarsa wrote:Vile rat wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:Well as of right now, I'm on the test server with the new patch. Way to drop the ball CCP.
Hybrid balancing is great stuff, but I'm glad to see that once again, the older players in eve get screwed over. From the nerfs I'm seeing on here, you didn't listen to anyone in this thread. The massive Super nerf I'm seeing here is insanity. They are completely worthless.
Good job CCP on making Test and Goons now strong enough to push just about anyone they want out of Null. Seeming you just made the counter to their high member count disappear. Who needs skills points anymore when you can just have 3000 noobs.
Its getting more and more pointless to keep paying for a game that keeps alienating its older players. Death to all supercaps. So if 5000 goons voted CSM Mittani and Vile Rat the new brainiacs of eve that means they are the voice of eve community ? I must remind CCP of the times when there were 47.000 players online well now there are 35.000 soon there will be 25.000 in the way you are going. You just made a favor to the blobs that have the same capital capability but not the balls to field them. The problem was not that supers were to hard to kill because that works in both ways doesn't it ? You are failing to deliver what the community asks since 3 years. I like how Tallest responds in that blog saying "I" want to make some changes dude change away what ever you like soon you will play it as a network game. And you might rethink you strategies because you guys might have a surprise when Diablo 3 will be released. I play this game for 8 years in each year you bring only disappointment to the community you encourage blobs all the time. YOU as CCP made this game a BLOB FEST. Remember the upper you get the bigger is the fall. Pointless to say anything to people like Vile Rat and Mittani they are people that think they are always right. CSM members should be people with extensive knowledge about game mechanics and with good ideas CCP should recruit them through interviews/test not to put 5000 goons to vote them. This is my opinion and how i had to put up to YOUR CHANGES patch after patch now you put up with My OPINION. This would actually mean a thing if the CSM were Mittens and I. I suppose you're suggesting that the two PL guys, the two xdeath guys and a whole slew of CCP balancing guys just took what we said and put it in without considering the impact of the ships on the game? Interesting theory. This is a nerf. This is a nerf to groups that use supercaps as the sole mechanism to project 0.0 power. This is a nerf to guys who like to bait small gangs then drop a titan on them much like a child melts ants with a magnifying glass. You're upset about this nerf and I can respect that because this is a hit to your playing style and you're hopping mad about it. These changes are also the result of a significant amount of back and forth between parts of the CSM who represent SC heavy alliances, those who feel strongly that supercaps as they are now break the game and ruin the experience for the much larger percentage who don't have them, and CCP. These changes are also not the final word and there is going to be a great deal of attention given to the aftermath of these changes so if this wasn't done enough or too much it'll be addressed. Now I'd love to have this conversation, a rational discourse on why we feel these changes are necessary, and why we pushed for them. Even though we didn't get nearly what we wanted, CCP did find another path that makes us mostly satisfied and that's why we were sent here. So despite your immature words and incoherent rant I do get the motivation behind your anger. I think it's misplaced and you're coming across like a spoiled child, but that's in your delivery and not your sentiment.
That is the truth like it or not. Reverse psihology and a little honey in between words will not make you look smarter. I am not even a capital pilot so you are very much failing sir. I was born and forged in the subcapital warfare doctrine i learned how to kill them and how to save them. You complained that are so hard to kill but if we match the number of supers from each side would be pretty much even so how that puts you off balance ? that means you are not capable people. The main thing that ruined this game was BLOBS and you sir with your minions do form a blob that crashed many systems and ruined many battles on purpose that i guess is something that RUINS THE GAME. I have no problem in making changes but do them rationaly with some brains. Next time when you call someone immature make sure you know what you are taking about. Cause you are out of your league sir. As for Mittani i would have expected a better answer from a bug. ( was never part of bob ).
My previous post was my opinion towards CCP and towards you 2 smart asses. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 09:41:00 -
[2507] - Quote
sarsa wrote:Next time when you call someone immature make sure you know what you are taking about. Cause you are out of your league sir. As for Mittani i would have expected a better answer from a bug. ( was never part of bob ).
My previous post was my opinion towards CCP and towards you 2 smart asses.
With all due respect (and trust me you are getting every bit of the respect you've got due) I think I nailed it.
|
Akrasjel Lanate
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
645
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 09:58:00 -
[2508] - Quote
People are afraid of change yet still they elected Obama.
Good job CCP. |
Ammath
Nasgul Collective Cascade Imminent
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 12:16:00 -
[2509] - Quote
Note to SuperCarrier Pilots concerning the Winter Expansion
Due to the changes in your ships -20% HP, loss of 100% of your drones, loss of 30% of your fighters we strongly suggest you quit your current corporation and join a corporation in a SuperCapital blob alliance to make sure your ship will actually be able to be used in combat. Coming out with less than 20-30 SCs to help keep you alive and do over whelming damage will be near suicide and at CCP we value our players and want to see them enjoy their eve experience. So please go join a super blob alliance to keep flying, because god knows your current FCs will never deploy 4-6 SCs anymore. This is CCPs way of helping you have fun in the game by making sure the SC rich get richer and those who scraped up enough to get a few SCs in their alliance get screwed. Happy holidays!
|
Vincent Gaines
245
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 13:23:00 -
[2510] - Quote
Ammath wrote:Note to SuperCarrier Pilots concerning the Winter Expansion
Due to the changes in your ships -20% HP, loss of 100% of your drones, loss of 30% of your fighters we strongly suggest you quit your current corporation and join a corporation in a SuperCapital blob alliance to make sure your ship will actually be able to be used in combat. Coming out with less than 20-30 SCs to help keep you alive and do over whelming damage will be near suicide and at CCP we value our players and want to see them enjoy their eve experience. So please go join a super blob alliance to keep flying, because god knows your current FCs will never deploy 4-6 SCs anymore. This is CCPs way of helping you have fun in the game by making sure the SC rich get richer and those who scraped up enough to get a few SCs in their alliance get screwed. Happy holidays!
Emorage never gets old. I can hear the inflection of held-back tears while reading your post. Love it. |
|
Nur AlHuda
Callide Vulpis Curatores Veritatis Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 13:45:00 -
[2511] - Quote
Drednoughts have terrible gun tracking no mater what race. If capital ship can speed tank dreadnoughts gun somethink is wrong. |
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar
The Three Musketeers
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 16:02:00 -
[2512] - Quote
Please, just add a nice big drone bay on the Dreadnoughts. That's all I want for Christmas. Seriously, with a name like Dreadnought, they need to be scary. Very scary. Please, mom. Please? OS Name Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit **** Motherboard EVGA__132-YW-E180-FTW 790i Digital PWM **** 2 x EVGA 8800 GTX in 2-way SLI Resolution 2560 x 1440 x 59 hertz-á**** Corsair Dominator GT 8GB Kit 2X4GB 2000MHZ DDR3 **** Processor Intel(R) Core2 Extreme CPU X9650 @ 3.00GHz |
Suiteii
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 16:56:00 -
[2513] - Quote
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar wrote: It began to appear that it would tend to attract additional accounts in one form or another because of the relative shift of advantage to sub-caps (which require less training time), and then I thought, well, who would profit from that? Certainly not Dread or Titan pilots. The answer I came up with is that CCP is the potential winner, as more accounts in the game would tend to offer more opportunity for paid subscriptions, especially from new pilots unable to generate enough income to use in-game plex.
It's easy to get behind the "I hate corporations" bandwagon, but believe it or not the player base and CCP are closely tied in this matter. When CCP is successful, more accounts are created, and the current players of Eve have more fun.
I don't see how you think that by CCP making money, it's somehow a bad thing for us... |
Suiteii
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 17:18:00 -
[2514] - Quote
Ammath wrote:Coming out with less than 20-30 SCs to help keep you alive and do over whelming damage will be near suicide
What makes the number of GÇÿtwenty to thirtyGÇÖ SCs so much more powerful than 15 SCs? Or 10 SCs? I think what you really mean to say is, GÇÿif you donGÇÖt vastly outnumber your opponentGÇÖs SC count, your alliance will not deploy their ownGÇÖ.
And how is that any different from how the game is currently?
As a smaller alliance (currently), I donGÇÖt see a difference between a major alliance dropping 10 SCs as opposed to 20-30. Either way, you may as well have the old Titan AoE doomsday.
But for this I can see your logic. If the deployment of SCs is dependent on the number of SCs being greater than your opponent, then every SC pilot will flock to the alliance with the most SCs.
But so what? If SCs are no longer the GÇÿswiss-army capGÇÖ as Vilerat so eloquently put it, having the most SCs is really only a means of protecting them and doesnGÇÖt project a power-blocGÇÖs influence over a region.
If somebody wanted to use their SC in relative safety, I think they need a reality check.
|
Jules Deathbringer
Mortal-Strike
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:18:00 -
[2515] - Quote
summary to date
eve introduces new sov mechanic and new changes to titan aoe so that fighter bombers dont simply get nuked out of existance.
everyone says hmm maybe i need a super (gets another account to hold and begins training for this)
ccp says oh wait guys we fkd up and now ur super isnt gonna do everything it could before (again no explanation just swing the nerf bat)
ccp says we want u to fight so were changing nullsec ability to make ez money now (nerf batta batta swiing)
everyone says hmm i really need that super now, so the supers are purchased and new accounts are made to hold the super.
ccp says hmm now how hard can i swing this here nerf stick..
what about the storyline, how can u take away from existing ship designs. would caldari be able to ****** gallente nyx specifications so that thier nyx isnt as powerful and why would they nerf thier already lacking wyvern class in doing so.. answer is they wouldnt they would invent new ships or sov structures to either limit how these are used or where they can be used.
all the changes made to the game recently have me very out of charactar for role playing my accounts. devs are not focusing on what makes eve interesting or real at all, progress comes with new technology making old technology obsolete not by overnite changing across the universe how existing technology works with no explanation of why or how this could happen.
imo, if u want to fix eve do it by adding counter ships or weapons not by eliminating the skills/modules/ships that currently exisit. this is just another prime example why other mmo games might be worth checking out. if im going to spend hours every week doing something i dont want that progress to be ashes because some dev burned down the barn i was stabling my livestock in.
bbq yuum.. but ofc enuf loss and any sane person would simply stop playing.
|
Garick Harnigen
Legion of the Guard
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 10:23:00 -
[2516] - Quote
you know if there making super capitals wanting to be useless in a subcap fight, they should balance it out with being able to dock their ships so that they can engage such subcaps and kill them with their own without having to own 2 accounts, so that they can deploy their super's |
Sernum
Total Mayhem. Northern Coalition.
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 13:53:00 -
[2517] - Quote
BOOOOOOO!!!!! w/e tho. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2360
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 14:08:00 -
[2518] - Quote
algorythm wrote:Supercaps are hard to build, hard to fit, and on top they require a dedicated pilot to fly them, why the hell wont they be Super?!
ahaha that's total bullshit and you know it
Thanks to BPC farms, mineral compression and jump freighters, a single dude with a few accounts can pump SCs and titans out of his supercap farm like it's nobody's business. The fittings are easily sourced off of the market and contracts, and there is so much damn ISK floating around that holder alts are a dime a dozen. "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
Blake Zacary
Nobilium Academy
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 17:37:00 -
[2519] - Quote
What role in a fleet fight are the moms gonna play after the changes ?
I'm curious as well,is anything getting done to counter massive blobs or are we heading back to a very static and boring null.Where massive coalitions hold the same space for years due to having large blobs with no real counter ?
It does look like the game is being pushed towards whoever turns up with more at a single focal point in null wins.But skill,tactics and imagination are getting pushed out and punished in null,is this really what we want ? |
Valia Deluri
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 19:02:00 -
[2520] - Quote
If you are going to make things smaller and have less hit points then their build times and build materials should be less as well. Also time to let Super Caps Doc. I stopped paying for ten accounts with you guys years ago and every time I see a nerf that effects super cap pilots, the result is buy more accounts if you want to survive.
|
|
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 21:25:00 -
[2521] - Quote
How about giving dreads a utility high slot so they could fit a Neut or a SB. this would return some form of defence to smaller ships that could get out of range of these modules making them defensive only and not offensive.
And while we're on the subject of capital modules why are there so many Frig/Cruiser/BS modules that do not have capital counter parts. Really the list of standard modules should be uniform across all classes of ship. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 21:32:00 -
[2522] - Quote
Andski wrote:algorythm wrote:Supercaps are hard to build, hard to fit, and on top they require a dedicated pilot to fly them, why the hell wont they be Super?! ahaha that's total bullshit and you know it Thanks to BPC farms, mineral compression and jump freighters, a single dude with a few accounts can pump SCs and titans out of his supercap farm like it's nobody's business. The fittings are easily sourced off of the market and contracts, and there is so much damn ISK floating around that holder alts are a dime a dozen.
SC Titans can be build with 2 or three toons with not too much hastle appart from their risk of being destroyed in the cooker, they are the only ship that this applies to. The isk/Inflation issue is actually one of the biggest issues in the game atm. The effective trade/isk deficite is massive. When CCP introduced PI they removed a large number of NPC items that removed isk from the game. Incursions added huge summs of new isk. something needs to be done to stabalise the increase in the isk in circulation. if this needs to be done through increasing market taxes or some other machanic so be it but this is a serious issue that needs addressing.
|
cstray
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 01:41:00 -
[2523] - Quote
The only reason that the Supercap Nerf is happening is because 20 Supercarriers and titans killed 475 goon drakes when they attacked a CSAA in c3n a year ago.
What this means is that sc's were the only effecive counter to the blob and since Goons cannot fight without the blob they had the dev's remove the SC's effectiveness. Same as the AOE nerf and the list goes on and on about the way the devs suck mitiani and goonswarms ****.
When this is over you will see the Goons splerge all over the map with drake gangs filled with 3m sp players and state that that is what is good for the game. |
Draconus Lofwyr
The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 03:17:00 -
[2524] - Quote
from the very start, goons have always been about scamming and ruining the game for everyone else. They have always been about not taking anything serious. So, congrats goons on another successful troll of the EvE universe. now the timer starts on how long till CCP realize they just got scammed and trolled all for the lulz. |
Wibla
Alcatraz Inc. Tactical Narcotics Team
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 06:04:00 -
[2525] - Quote
Ah, this is truly a thread that keeps on giving :D CEO Tactical Narcotics Team |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2360
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 10:39:00 -
[2526] - Quote
cstray wrote:The only reason that the Supercap Nerf is happening is because 20 Supercarriers and titans killed 475 goon drakes when they attacked a CSAA in c3n a year ago.
What this means is that sc's were the only effecive counter to the blob and since Goons cannot fight without the blob they had the dev's remove the SC's effectiveness. Same as the AOE nerf and the list goes on and on about the way the devs suck mitiani and goonswarms ****.
When this is over you will see the Goons splerge all over the map with drake gangs filled with 3m sp players and state that that is what is good for the game.
because goonswarm fields drake fleets and is the only entity in eve that supports nerfing supercaps into oblivion "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |
Vaffel Junior
Resilience. Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 11:56:00 -
[2527] - Quote
japp |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
560
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 21:40:00 -
[2528] - Quote
CCP, removing the capacity if the fighter/fighter bomber bay was the wrong final adjustment. Give super carriers the space back and instead remove the bonus range to remote repair and for the love of all that is holy, change the Hel bonus to fighter damage like the Nyx.
|
Tahnil
Sirius Fleet Bringers of Death.
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 08:52:00 -
[2529] - Quote
Nerf supercaps!
I'm not a goon.
We once roamed with a small Drake gang through the north. We were like 5 Drakes, and at the end of the day NC2 hotdropped several titans and supercaps right on our asses. That was the lamest thing I ever saw.
I respect that everybody would do it. Maybe even I myself. The ridiculous thing about it is that it is possible.
An EVE where a solitary rifter can be doomsdayed by a titan is no EVE at all! Thank you Mittani for opening my eyes. |
Angel Lust
Vikinghall
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 11:38:00 -
[2530] - Quote
Tahnil wrote:Nerf supercaps!
I'm not a goon.
We once roamed with a small Drake gang through the north. We were like 5 Drakes, and at the end of the day NC2 hotdropped several titans and supercaps right on our asses. That was the lamest thing I ever saw.
I respect that everybody would do it. Maybe even I myself. The ridiculous thing about it is that it is possible.
An EVE where a solitary rifter can be doomsdayed by a titan is no EVE at all! Thank you Mittani for opening my eyes.
And you could not simply warp off ? lol Titans and sc have something like 30sec locktime... What was the rifter doing there ? Was he afk ?
I think you should learn more about pvp before you start complaining about those large dangerous ships
But.. hey You are getting what you want.... After patch you can safely attack supers in your drakes and rifters They cant deffend them selves then |
|
bacitani intaki
AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 13:51:00 -
[2531] - Quote
Ranting of goons and new and old pets for the last year or so , GÇóSupercapitals are too hard to kill. GÇóSupercarriers are far too versatile. GÇóThe Titan superweapon is too powerful. GÇóDreadnoughts are not good enough. GÇóRemote ECM Bursts should not work on ships immune to ewar. GÇóSub-capitals are useless in fleet fights.
So people think its a good idea to nerf supercarriers lol fixing the log off tactic is the only fix you need to make any supercarrier vulnerable to a cruiser fleet well is just ignorant (wanted to say stupid).But good luck with that bet your gonna find loads of supercarrier alts like my self Expireing the account in which they live ..see ya whn you rebuff my boat I spent 3 years training for and learning to fly , I think rather than make my nyx a pos mod like days of old I'll expire my account to save honor see ya !! thanks for the fish newbs o7 |
idea
Tribe of One Tribal Conclave
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 17:28:00 -
[2532] - Quote
The NYX BPC was 2-4bn 15 months ago.
The nyx BPC today is 250m~
The nyx BPO on market is 17bn
the nyx BPO on contracts researched is 13bn
Plexes are from 300m~ to 500m~ since the patch was announced, People dont buy plexes to build there supercapitals any more.
conclusion CCP killed supercapitals.
An another note im reading in the patch info on eveonline site that supers HP will go down from 10% to 20%... when first they said all supers -20%... without confirmation im willing to bet that the AEON will get -20% while most others will get -10% JUST because the aeon has a racial bonus for resistances... CCP thinking INSIDE THERE TINY LITTLE BOX ONCE AGAIN. |
Maxwell Albritten
Dark Vanguard Moon Warriors
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 20:05:00 -
[2533] - Quote
bacitani intaki wrote: So people think its a good idea to nerf supercarriers lol fixing the log off tactic is the only fix you need to make any supercarrier vulnerable to a cruiser fleet well is just ignorant (wanted to say stupid).But good luck with that bet your gonna find loads of supercarrier alts like my self Expireing the account in which they live ..see ya whn you rebuff my boat I spent 3 years training for and learning to fly , I think rather than make my nyx a pos mod like days of old I'll expire my account to save honor see ya !! thanks for the fish newbs o7
Oh no, one less super cap in game! PATCH SUCCESS! |
Oppenheimer Quest
Lightbringer's Sanctuary BLACK-MARK
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:18:00 -
[2534] - Quote
Oppenheimer Quest wrote:I may have missed it, and forgive me if I did-but.... Was there some mention of T2 Capitals weapons? I.e. T2 Capital Rails? or T2 Capital Lasers, etc, etc? If everything has a T2 brother, I'm wondering if the T2 Capital weapons are in the idea forming process. Just a thought....
Does anyone have an update to this question? |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 10:55:00 -
[2535] - Quote
Oppenheimer Quest wrote:Oppenheimer Quest wrote:I may have missed it, and forgive me if I did-but.... Was there some mention of T2 Capitals weapons? I.e. T2 Capital Rails? or T2 Capital Lasers, etc, etc? If everything has a T2 brother, I'm wondering if the T2 Capital weapons are in the idea forming process. Just a thought.... Does anyone have an update to this question?
I haven't heard anything about this but the t2 siege module should help a lot, combined with reduced siege timer. |
wanking monkey girl
Capital Maintenance
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 11:01:00 -
[2536] - Quote
vile t2 guns on titans has to be a win. And given this thread has been largely ignored by ccp you will not get a answer Oppenheimer Quest. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
645
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 16:38:00 -
[2537] - Quote
Learn this word - Balance |
Temmu Guerra
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 21:22:00 -
[2538] - Quote
Looking at this patch (from the point of view of non super pilot atm) I think it is nice to see that these ships are receiving a balance. It was bad when I was in the old NC and you had 90 super carriers + 45 titans dropped on your head and everything went "pop". However i do not think it is right for CCP to go and nerf them this much. The log off timer would have been more than plenty to start along with a better buff to the dread. Hell I will even go far to say that the 20% hp nerf is "understandable". IMO was it necessary no but I could live with. Dreads should have been the super capital killer in the capital regard with the new tier 3 bc's the sub capital fleets. The main problem is mechanics encourage blobs at the moment. If there was a point where a group was forced to split his forces up (see the Panzer Elite tanks from WWII) then they are not overpowered and can be easily taken down by a smaller well trained group. With them in such large numbers however it becomes something that can not be defeated.
I would still like to show the argument if I am going to pay 17 bill + to fit a ship (13.5 bill for the hull by the forums + price of fitting) I dam well want it to be difficult to kill. Same thing goes for the titan. I agree that a smaller ship swarm should be able to attack and kill it. My offer would be to allow supers to be jammed (unable to target) however still require the super point to keep them in place.
I would say that the supers should receive their full drone bays back (whats the point of the term "carrier" when they do not look like a bee hive) and buff dreads a bit more. I know most people here are saying "death to super caps" and I am going to say that more then half of them are from the goons + pets. As a future super carrier owner I am probably very rarely going to see combat action. These are now only going to be good for either capital engagements or tcu/station/ihub bashing. They cannot even be used for pos bashing anymore as fighters/fb's cannot hit through the pos shield. The hope is that these do not turn into pos ornaments once more (when i first started my corp mates never logged their supers on). With the current stated changes though it will be very unlikely that capitals will ever be fielded for combat anymore. Triage carriers are probably the last useful capital as any sup cap fleet will be able to do the job of a capital fleet just as well with less risk of isk + the agility of a subcap fleet.
In the coming months people will probably begin to ***** about there are no more super caps to kill. |
Yulinki Atavuli
Caldari Investment and Security Industries Innovia Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 21:32:00 -
[2539] - Quote
Ok, in recap
Most players are asking for;
-Boost to normal carriers fuel bay
-Slave set on Super caps to be nullified
-Remote Tracking Boosters should be nullified on Titans
-Keep a close eye on the Moros during testing of hybrid buff (if not sufficient then buff)
-Decrease in drone bandwidth on SCs instead of drone-bay Nerf
|
Temmu Guerra
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 21:37:00 -
[2540] - Quote
Yulinki Atavuli wrote:Ok, in recap
Most players are asking for;
-Boost to normal carriers fuel bay
-Slave set on Super caps to be nullified
-Remote Tracking Boosters should be nullified on Titans
-Keep a close eye on the Moros during testing of hybrid buff (if not sufficient then buff)
-Decrease in drone bandwidth on SCs instead of drone-bay Nerf
I like all except the slave set idea. Slave sets go for roughly 2.5 bill isk (havent checked recently) and that is considered part of the fit for a super capital. If you nerf the 20% HP + make slaves useless then that is going to be a much higher nerf to the HP then originally intended.
Everything else seems pretty reasonable to me.
|
|
Yulinki Atavuli
Caldari Investment and Security Industries Innovia Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 21:52:00 -
[2541] - Quote
Temmu Guerra wrote:Yulinki Atavuli wrote:Ok, in recap
Most players are asking for;
-Boost to normal carriers fuel bay
-Slave set on Super caps to be nullified
-Remote Tracking Boosters should be nullified on Titans
-Keep a close eye on the Moros during testing of hybrid buff (if not sufficient then buff)
-Decrease in drone bandwidth on SCs instead of drone-bay Nerf
I like all except the slave set idea. Slave sets go for roughly 2.5 bill isk (havent checked recently) and that is considered part of the fit for a super capital. If you nerf the 20% HP + make slaves useless then that is going to be a much higher nerf to the HP then originally intended. Everything else seems pretty reasonable to me.
Most people are complaining because the nerf of the super caps won't make much of a difference when they factor in the slave set.
I haven't run the numbers myself. But, feel free to yourself.
|
Temmu Guerra
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 22:38:00 -
[2542] - Quote
Gotta redownload eve HQ and will hopefully get to it tonight. My argument though was Slave nerf + 20% ehp nerf would be very harsh indeed where as a 20% nerf with someone still using slaves will probably just be the equivalent to someone flying it without slaves (and lets be honest I know very few people who are flying it without slave sets) -T |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
379
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 22:41:00 -
[2543] - Quote
Yulinki, it does make a difference.
They nerfed the base HP values.
Let's say the slave set have a 25% bonus to armor HP.
Put it on a 100 armor HP ship. It enhance it to 125 HP, right ?
Put it on a 50 HP ship. It enhance it to 62.5 HP.
The less base HP you have on a ship, the less effective percentage-based stuff is.
Check out the resistances, and why resistance rigs are broken if you compare them to extenders/trimarks.
Let's say you have those 100 HP. And 50% resistances everywhere.
A trimark is 25% to armor HP, a resistance rig is 25% to the resistance you want.
A ship with 3 trimarks will end up with :
100 * 1.25^3
Let's put it this way :
First trimark => 100 * 1.25 = 125
Second trimark => 125 * 1.25 = 156.25
Third trimark => 156.25 * 1.25 = 195.3125
See ? You added 3 * 25% rigs. But it ain't a 75% increase. It's a 95.3125% increase over base HP.
Now, resistance rigs :
When you add a 25% resistance to let's say Kinetic resistance.
In this example, you have 50% omni-resistances. Your 25% kinetic resistance rig won't result in a 75% kinetic resistance. It will add 25% of the missing part, if you see what I mean.
On 50% kinetic resistance, it will add 25% of 100 - Actual resistance. AND, it's affected by stacking penalties (Test it yourself on EFT/Pyfa. With a 50% base value. Add a first rig. You'll get 65% because resistance rigs have a 1.3 modifier. Add another rig, you'll get 74.1%, which isn't 100-65 * 30, but 100-65 * 30 * 0.87 or something, I don't remember the stacking penalties values.
With one resistance rig, you will end up with a 62.5% kinetic resistance, and that's a 12.5% increase over base value.
Please consider this is not a direct comparison, I'm not arguing about anything. |
Tahnil
Sirius Fleet Bringers of Death.
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 11:20:00 -
[2544] - Quote
Angel Lust wrote:Tahnil wrote:Nerf supercaps!
I'm not a goon.
We once roamed with a small Drake gang through the north. We were like 5 Drakes, and at the end of the day NC2 hotdropped several titans and supercaps right on our asses. That was the lamest thing I ever saw.
I respect that everybody would do it. Maybe even I myself. The ridiculous thing about it is that it is possible.
An EVE where a solitary rifter can be doomsdayed by a titan is no EVE at all! Thank you Mittani for opening my eyes. And you could not simply warp off ? lol Titans and sc have something like 30sec locktime... What was the rifter doing there ? Was he afk ? I think you should learn more about pvp before you start complaining about those large dangerous ships But.. hey You are getting what you want.... After patch you can safely attack supers in your drakes and rifters They cant deffend them selves then
The Rifter part is a quote. We were flying around in Drakes. We couldn't escape because of catch bubbles and aggression timers.
|
Zey Nadar
Aliastra Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 05:48:00 -
[2545] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:Learn this word - Balance
Due to the large size of eve player demographic, all attempts of balance will be over-compensated by the players. Not that killing supercaps is that bad a thing. Now it might be possible for me to go back to null. ..if there was a reason for it.
As pointed out by this blog, high-sec incursions killed many reasons why an average player would want to go to null and join a sov-holding alliance..
Nerfing nullsec individual income by nerfing anomalies, and then introducing high-reward/small-risk highsec income. What were you thinking again, CCP?
When will CCP learn that you simply cannot offer same option for both highsec and nullsec, that there is no way to balance risk and reward this way? The riskless option will always be favored. |
Keeley HaZZeLL
Doomheim
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:30:00 -
[2546] - Quote
rebalancing minmatar carriers with add neutralizer & nosferatu capital version plus mimmatar carrier have bonus on their. |
idea
Tribe of One Tribal Conclave
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 19:17:00 -
[2547] - Quote
idea wrote:The NYX BPC was 2-4bn 15 months ago.
The nyx BPC today is 250m~
The nyx BPO on market is 17bn
the nyx BPO on contracts researched is 13bn
Plexes are from 300m~ to 500m~ since the patch was announced, People dont buy plexes to build there supercapitals any more.
conclusion CCP killed supercapitals.
An another note im reading in the patch info on eveonline site that supers HP will go down from 10% to 20%... when first they said all supers -20%... without confirmation im willing to bet that the AEON will get -20% while most others will get -10% JUST because the aeon has a racial bonus for resistances... CCP thinking INSIDE THERE TINY LITTLE BOX ONCE AGAIN.
BWHAHAHAHA READING THE PATCH NOTES I CAN CONFIRM CCP DOING THIS!!!!!!
STUPID IDIOTS TRY TO MAKE EVERYONE FLY ALL SHIPS EVENLY NOT REALISING NOBODY WANTS TO FLY SHIELD SUPERCAPITALS... TARDS |
killerkeano
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 02:08:00 -
[2548] - Quote
I cancelled my 3 accounts for a year after terrible patches, i have come back logged onto my nyx in 3ae, read the patch notes and logged off, there it shall remain till eternity.
All I will say is after playing this game for 6 years my end game was to fly a nyx, its not easy to own one,
so yeah they should be over powered.
unable to defend itself against anythign is ridiculous!! reduce the trackin, speed or something of drones not totally remove them!!! CCP .. like gary glitter in toys R us
total overkill, as usual. |
grazer gin
Raving Rednecks
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 04:13:00 -
[2549] - Quote
with soo many crybabys quitting we might be able to run a normal fleet from now on without being hot dropped every 10 mins |
Altolinchen
Sternenschauer AG Smacked Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 10:32:00 -
[2550] - Quote
grazer gin wrote:with soo many crybabys quitting we might be able to run a normal fleet from now on without being hot dropped every 10 mins
Don't forget the biggest crybaby's were those kids with 500BC/BS who weren't able to kill a 50 to 100 SC and titan blob... and now you will fly arround with your 250+ blob and will be blob by 500+ BS/BS and butt raped... Guess what the blob will just get bigger. with the t3 bc's who are designed to kill the old supers and just wipe the new nerft supers away like a BS a t1 cruiser... You need to bring more blob more supers more titans.. This was just something to support goons etc. even raiden and wn. profit from that because the have a huge super blob... Even they don't like this changes cause they don't want to blob like the little crying kids...
In the end this nerf just makes the blob bigger bigger and the big alliances stronger and stronger... and all small just will fall... fu*k you CCP make it fair again. |
|
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 10:36:00 -
[2551] - Quote
Are the fule bays on almost every capital in game not too small. I know people are going to say put fule in the corporate hangers BUT that is not the intended use of the corporate hanger. The only etceptions to this appear to be the Rorqual and Jump Freighters.
Funny that the two ships with Fule bays of a reasonable size are the two classes that are used to move large volumes of supplies so having to set aside part of their corporate hanger/cargo bay would get complaints. |
Fullmetal Jackass
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 18:56:00 -
[2552] - Quote
Bunch of cry babies... I swear do you all base you self worth on the cap ship you can fly? Or how great you alliance is vs others?
Good for CCP for trying to actually balance cap ships. Eve was never meant to be super caps online. Cap ships are tools like anything else in game. They are not "end game". They sure as hell weren't before bombers. |
Nyla Skin
Dark Circle Enforcement Templis Dragonaors
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 21:08:00 -
[2553] - Quote
I dont think CCP succeeded in 'balancing'supercarriers, but killing them is a better option than letting them stay overpowered. Supercaps were a bad design choice from the beginning. They would have been much more acceptable if they would have actually died once in a while. It just shows whats wrong in them now that people opt to not log in their supercap pilot instead of actually using the thing once it was built. Is it better value that way..? |
Airpizza II
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 23:34:00 -
[2554] - Quote
I'm getting a useless mothership after 7 years on EVE . Saving ISK to get a nice and really useful ship gave us a goal to achieve, now our only goal is to wait for a buff.
I just can't stand seeing my supercap toon logged off all time, those high-end and terrible ships meant that you managed to do something in EVE, now they're just totally pointless, even to shoot structures since dreads do almost the same DPS and are way cheaper.
Thank you -í-í-á for nerfing my EVE experience. |
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 01:18:00 -
[2555] - Quote
Airpizza II wrote:I'm getting a useless mothership after 7 years on EVE . Saving ISK to get a nice and really useful ship gave us a goal to achieve, now our only goal is to wait for a buff.
I just can't stand seeing my supercap toon logged off all time, those high-end and terrible ships meant that you managed to do something in EVE, now they're just totally pointless, even to shoot structures since dreads do almost the same DPS and are way cheaper.
Thank you -í-í-á for nerfing my EVE experience.
J'obtiens un ravitailleur inutiles apr+¿s 7 ans sur EVE. Sauvegarde ISK pour obtenir un bateau agr+¬able et vraiment utile nous a donn+¬ un but +á atteindre, d+¬sormais notre seul objectif est d'attendre un buff.
Je ne peux pas supporter de voir mon toon supercap d+¬connect+¬ tous les temps, ces navires haut de gamme et terrible signifiait que vous avez r+¬ussi +á faire quelque chose dans EVE, maintenant, ils sont juste totalement inutile, voire de tirer sur les structures, depuis redoute faire presque les m+¬mes DPS et sont beaucoup moins cher.
Merci pour -í-í-á nerfer mon exp+¬rience EVE.
Patri
Miners! Make Moar Isks Nao! |
matarkhan
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 20:19:00 -
[2556] - Quote
Quote:Titans:
- Remove drone bay from all titans.
- Reduce Shield, Armor and Hull hitpoints by 20%.
- Superweapon: Cannot shoot sub-capital ships.
When?
Quote:Bunch of cry babies... I swear do you all base you self worth on the cap ship you can fly? Or how great you alliance is vs others?
Good for CCP for trying to actually balance cap ships. Eve was never meant to be super caps online. Cap ships are tools like anything else in game. They are not "end game". They sure as hell weren't before bombers.
I don't understand why you're throwing "self-worth" into this.
If you train your character for 5+ years, then put them into a supercapital that *can't dock*, you're making a huge commitment. Not only does it cost 20-90billion isk, it also means that your main character is stuck in that ship.
If that ship loses its luster, you'll be pissed.
Human nature. |
Mauryce
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.08 12:38:00 -
[2557] - Quote
After a reasonable time from the deployment of last expansion, some useful feedback:
1) The supers blob need a good group of support subcaps to deploy:
False.
Titans blow everything in its vicinity and while Motherships may have problems when deploying their fightersbombers, now are used as platforms for repair with massive Hp. Combined with repair carriers with Sentry remain a challenge for any fleet subcaps, even without support.
2) Super fights are more common:
False.
Since expansion implementation, we see more concentration in super blobs, increased to contrarest the risk of loggof in aggression. Its imposible to track any fights super vs super on KB in actual warzones around 0.0.
3) Dread Bost increased their use in combat.
False.
Continue to be the damsel in distress in all engange.
4) Shield tanked supers are now more useful than before and tank better.
False.
The super bonus shield still ridiculous for such condition (Hel) and remain apart at 0.0 engages in favor of armor supers . Repair Bonus was not enough to promote their use or recommend its inclusion in the current blob of energy/tank aeons and dps/tank nyxes.
CCP, thanks for the magic?
PD: bad gramar?? shame on goggle traductor.
S! |
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar
The Three Musketeers
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 03:12:00 -
[2558] - Quote
If I was a new player, I would be totally put off by all this talk about nerfing the biggest and baddest ships in the game. What goal could be more cool to a new player than owning your own Titan someday? I have trained with them in mind for some time, and am disappointed to see that I share this single-sharded universe with masterminds who want to decrease, not increase their power.
Upon reflection however, I must admit this massive pool of intellect contained within the developer and player base can not be wrong. To think that would certainly draw the ire of the great and grand swarms of supporters throughout space, not to mention defying mankind's predeliction to always be on the lookout for ways to decrease it's utilization of powerful and sophisticated weaponry. Human beings have always preferred the more primitive weapons. Rocks for example. Dirtclods. Now THAT is a direction CCP could genuinely embrace.
Independent thinking is not encouraged in a professional Army. It is a form of mutiny. Obedience is the supreme virtueBritish Prime Minister Lloyd George, in his 'War Memoirs'-á |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 86 :: [one page] |