EVE Search - Minmatar Capitals are being re-worked

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Minmatar Capitals are being re-worked

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 186	Posted - 2011.10.12 01:40:00 - [1] - Quote Hi guys, CCP Tallest is giving a lot of attention to Minmatar capitals and how they can be re-worked. He will be putting up a post sometime in the near future about it on the Test Server forum. Please post here or there as to what you would like to see re-done on Minmatar caps [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img]
Goose99 Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 46	Posted - 2011.10.12 01:42:00 - [2] - Quote Let me guess, you're building those?
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 186	Posted - 2011.10.12 01:43:00 - [3] - Quote no [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img]
Mfume Apocal Origin. Black Legion. 24	Posted - 2011.10.12 01:54:00 - [4] - Quote This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer.
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 186	Posted - 2011.10.12 01:57:00 - [5] - Quote Mfume Apocal wrote: This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer. They already do. One thing i was thinking of though is creating a new implant set just for shield amount. If that was available, it would go great with the Hel [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img]
Songbird 9	Posted - 2011.10.12 02:07:00 - [6] - Quote maybe instead of new implants just cut off the slaves from affecting caps and super caps - it will go great with the new "more vulnerable(and in touch with their feelings) caps
Lyris Nairn GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1251	Posted - 2011.10.12 05:53:00 - [7] - Quote Headerman wrote: Mfume Apocal wrote: This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer. They already do. One thing i was thinking of though is creating a new implant set just for shield amount. If that was available, it would go great with the Hel It would also go great with Alphafleet, Drakefleet, Shieldfleet, Tengufleet and Welpfleet fleet doctrines. I think a lot of PVE boats, such as the Caracal, Drake, Nighthawk and possibly Sleipnir and Tengu would benefit from such implants as well.
Lyris Nairn GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1251	Posted - 2011.10.12 05:53:00 - [8] - Quote Songbird wrote: maybe instead of new implants just cut off the slaves from affecting caps and super caps - it will go great with the new "more vulnerable(and in touch with their feelings) caps The correct solution to game balance or design problems is very rarely "remove content," especially in a game already so starved for content as EVE Online.

CCP Spitfire C C P C C P Alliance 226	Posted - 2011.10.12 06:45:00 - [9] - Quote Headerman, thanks for making this thread! I'll make sure that good and constructive feedback will be passed to the development team. CCP Spitfire \| Russian Community Coordinator @ccp_spitfire

Lyris Nairn GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1348	Posted - 2011.10.12 06:48:00 - [10] - Quote I personally really like the Nidhoggur. I don't know much about the Hel, but the Nidhoggur is probably the coolest, or at least the most realistic and functional, of all the carriers. I also like that it has bonuses to both armor and shield logistics, which make it pretty awesome and versatile.
Aamrr HnL Enterprise 66	Posted - 2011.10.12 07:14:00 - [11] - Quote Quoting this from the old forums... Am I the only one that doesn't see a problem here? Someone has to get the worst supercapital. There's four supercapitals, and as they're naturally homogenous, they're inevitably going to get a pecking order. Gallente are the drone race. They get the best supercarrier -- or at least the most damaging one. Amarrians are the flying brick race. They get the tankiest supercarrier. If slaves get nerfed, the Aeon will fall slightly behind the Wyvern, but will have the thematically appropriate capacitor advantage. Defensively, the Caldari are close behind the Amarr, but with the usual capacitor-related drawbacks that shield tanking entails. Minmatar lag at the back, as their racial combat philosophies are completely and utterly foreign to supercarrier combat. The Minmatar specialize in fast, nimble hit-and-run combat with superior interdiction and and flexible damage application (good tracking/falloff). Capital ships are none of these. At best, you can argue that their turret ships should be able to do the most damage. Looking at the damage potential of the Ragnarok and Naglfar, this isn't really a concern. They are not a particularly drone oriented race, possessing no ships with drone bonuses of any kind (in contrast to the Gallente and Amarr). Indeed, they possess only ONE hull capable of fielding a full flight of heavy drones (the Typhoon and its T2 cousin, the Panther). The Minmatar can't be the best at everything. This is an area where you need to take one for the sake of game balance. Even the lore supports this.
Aamrr HnL Enterprise 66	Posted - 2011.10.12 07:15:00 - [12] - Quote I will concede that there are specific issues relevant to shield tanking that make the Hel and Wyvern unattractive. These are legitimate, and probably should be addressed. In no particular order, they are: Slave implants. Really, does it need to be said? The best option is probably to make them not work on capital ships. Pilots with the ability to fly supercapitals should probably have the implants removed and placed in their cargohold or hangar, as appropriate. Gang link bonuses. Session change timers and the nature of jump drives deny shield supercapitals the benefit they should derive from these effects. Additional shield hit points should be given relative to the current shield integrity, as is the case with armor tanking. Deadspace omni-resist hardeners. Armor-tankers have access to A-type passive, omni-resist modules. Shield tankers must either downgrade to faction or pay a significant premium for officer modules. (Both tanking styles have access to X-type specific hardeners.) Capital shield boosters and (lesser extent) transporters. These really do take an inordinate amount of CPU. Please remember that powergrid scales exponentially with ship size, while CPU scales only linearly. This is obviously more relevant to the Nidhoggur than the Hel, but is relevant to the Chimera as well. If you're looking to boost the Hel, start with one of those.
Lorginir 0	Posted - 2011.10.12 07:23:00 - [13] - Quote Make Caldari capitals useful instead of boosting Minmatar.
Aamrr HnL Enterprise 66	Posted - 2011.10.12 07:40:00 - [14] - Quote Lorginir wrote: Make Caldari capitals useful instead of boosting Minmatar. Quite. It's really not an issue with Minmatar capitals as it is with shield tanking capitals in general. You'll notice that almost all of my suggestions are just as relevant to the Chimera as they are to the Nidhoggur. Edit1: Though the topic of discussion seems to indicate it's also a case of squeaky wheel getting the grease... Edit2: Since it's probably going to come up later in the thread, passive tanking doesn't necessarily mean we can't have shield-slave implants. Those implants would just have to come with a corresponding reduction in shield recharge rate. Whether or not this is a good idea is another matter entirely.
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari 111	Posted - 2011.10.12 08:12:00 - [15] - Quote Amrr basically has the right point, but I disagree on the consequences: The Minmatar racial priorities do not fit to capital / supercapital warfare, so they need reworking. I like the current split tank (ama) / tank (cal) / damage (gal) / gang helper (min), and this can be worked on, but the differences should not be as drastic as they are today. E.g. the Amarr and Caldari ships should have some better tank, not triple the tank. Amarr and Caldari should have similar tanks (just armor/shield). Etc. On the other hand, shield tanking caps and supercaps need some rework to be comparable to armor. Losing a quarter of your buffer on jump-in is just not good ;-) I posted something regarding carrier balance here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=15674 Dreads are mostly balanced (unless you introduce the 8.9k dps Moros as per devblog, that isn't), except that missiles are horribly underpowered when trying to hit sub-capitals (either make all guns that bad or make missiles similar to turrets). Oh, and dreads likely shouldn't have tracking issues with capitals and especially supercapitals, as the latter can't be webbed or painted.
Aamrr HnL Enterprise 67	Posted - 2011.10.12 08:44:00 - [16] - Quote Triple the tank? Seriously? Relative to the Thanatos, the Archon trades a midslot for a low and a 25% resist bonus. In practice, that means ~5% better cap recharge and 33% stronger tank at the expense of fighter damage. It's fine to argue statistics, but at least make them factual. Addressing the CPU consumption of capital shield boosters and transporters seems a far better route to addressing fitting disparities between armor and shield-tanked capital ships. Nerfing an already marginalized ship class hardly seems like the correct route to take here -- particularly when the recent doomsday change makes them the premier target for instant death...
Meltmind2 Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 0	Posted - 2011.10.12 08:44:00 - [17] - Quote For the Naglfar: adding a 3d turret hardpoint (and removing the launcher slots obviously). - It would bring the Nag more in line with the post-patch Moros, although the Moros will still out-dps all the other dreads. - It would remove the need to train up for a subpar weapon system on a hull that doesn't give it any bonusses anyway. - It would require a new shipmodel (but that could be in the pipeline already right?!) - Turrets are cooler then missiles.
Limvala Adur Starwinders Mortal Destruction 0	Posted - 2011.10.12 09:34:00 - [18] - Quote I'd like to see Minmatar capitals doing something new and unique. I don't like seeing more of the same with different hulls.
Dorian Wylde Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 31	Posted - 2011.10.12 12:39:00 - [19] - Quote Lyris Nairn wrote: Songbird wrote: maybe instead of new implants just cut off the slaves from affecting caps and super caps - it will go great with the new "more vulnerable(and in touch with their feelings) caps The correct solution to game balance or design problems is very rarely "remove content," especially in a game already so starved for content as EVE Online. This. I would rather see more implant sets affect capital ships. Would make things more dynamic. Limvala Adur wrote: I'd like to see Minmatar capitals doing something new and unique. I don't like seeing more of the same with different hulls. They're the only ones that get a bonus to armor and shield repairs, how is that not unique? Some people might complain that it just makes them the best for PoS repping, but considering how important that can be, I really don't see an issue. Meltmind2 wrote: For the Naglfar: adding a 3d turret hardpoint (and removing the launcher slots obviously). - It would bring the Nag more in line with the post-patch Moros, although the Moros will still out-dps all the other dreads. - It would remove the need to train up for a subpar weapon system on a hull that doesn't give it any bonusses anyway. - It would require a new shipmodel (but that could be in the pipeline already right?!) - Turrets are cooler then missiles. I would love to see this. 1 laser dread, 1 hybrid dread, 1 missile dread, and 1 projectile dread. Don't get me wrong, I love the Typhoon. It's my favorite ship, and I fly it old school: 4 torpedoes, 4 autocannons. But dreads are a different species. Keep them balanced, use the Revelation as the template since it has no reload time. Figure out how much damage it can put out during a single siege cycle, and work out the other 3 weapon systems to that number. Keep up the good work CCP, and thanks to all the blues and reds who keep coming to the forums and talking to us.
Aamrr HnL Enterprise 67	Posted - 2011.10.12 13:01:00 - [20] - Quote Dorian Wylde wrote: [quote=Lyris Nairn]Figure out how much damage it can put out during a single siege cycle, and work out the other 3 weapon systems to that number. This is an astoundingly bad idea. Projectiles have massive advantages over lasers and hybrids in their capacitor independence and damage type selection. Relative to Hybrids, they get massively improved falloff. Relative to lasers, significantly better tracking. There's a reason why autocannons have the worst DPS values in their short-range turret lineup. Removing this would be a balance nightmare.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts 10	Posted - 2011.10.12 13:38:00 - [21] - Quote Fix shield capitals' shield gang bonus recharge issue. Make Slaves have no effect on capitals, rebalance EHP if necessary. Reduce Archon PG and increase Chimera and Nidhoggur CPU, so they have similar ease of fitting RR. Move two lowslots on Nidhoggur to medslots so the Chimera isn't the only shield carrier. Leave the Naglfar with the split weapon system so the Phoenix isn't the only missile-using dreadnought (which would make it (even more) unwanted and effectively useless), but ensure that the Naglfar has a significant DPS advantage over even the Moros in compensation. Do something, anything, to better balance the Hel with the Nyx.
Duchess Starbuckington Starbuckington Manor 9	Posted - 2011.10.12 13:58:00 - [22] - Quote Quote: Make Slaves have no effect on capitals, rebalance EHP if necessary. This. Removing Slave set bonuses from capitals is long overdue, especially with how much they contribute to the shield/armour gap.
Aamrr HnL Enterprise 67	Posted - 2011.10.12 14:04:00 - [23] - Quote Duchess Starbuckington wrote: Quote: Make Slaves have no effect on capitals, rebalance EHP if necessary. This. Removing Slave set bonuses from capitals is long overdue, especially with how much they contribute to the shield/armour gap./quote] [quote=Aamrr]On the subject of slave implants, please do consider whether you want to remove their benefit on all capital ships, or just supercapitals. A slave set currently retails for over twice the cost of a carrier before insurance. There's nothing particularly absurd about tripling your ship cost to get another 50% hp. On a ship with a 20 billion isk hull, on the other hand... Really, do think about this question. I'm absolutely in favor of denying slave implants to supercapitals, but I don't think I have ever heard anyone whining about a slaved Thanatos or Archon. As far as normal capital ships are concerned, these implants offer a perfectly reasonable cost-performance ratio. There's a lot of things I'd improve on an Archon before slaving it (low-grade deadspace hardeners, faction EANMs, etc). And given the number of T2-fit carriers popping lately, people aren't doing that, either.
Lili Lu 8	Posted - 2011.10.12 16:33:00 - [24] - Quote Gypsio III wrote: Fix shield capitals' shield gang bonus recharge issue. Make Slaves have no effect on capitals, rebalance EHP if necessary. Reduce Archon PG and increase Chimera and Nidhoggur CPU, so they have similar ease of fitting RR. Move two lowslots on Nidhoggur to medslots so the Chimera isn't the only shield carrier. Leave the Naglfar with the split weapon system so the Phoenix isn't the only missile-using dreadnought (which would make it (even more) unwanted and effectively useless), but ensure that the Naglfar has a significant DPS advantage over even the Moros in compensation. Do something, anything, to better balance the Hel with the Nyx. Interesting suggestions. However, is it necessary to alter slaves as they relate to supercaps now? The 15 minute logoff will be gone. The slaved super/titan will no longer be hoping to hp=survive a logoff. For those that suggested it, introducing a new shield slave equivalent presents a whole new set of balancing problems. What would the regen effect of a shield slave equivalent be? Might that not be op itself? It would certainly leapfrog Caldari shield buffers past Amarr armor buffers. These implants would affect all ships as well. It would upset the delicate if imperfect balance between shield and armor tanking that exists in the game for all ship classes. I'm not conviced with the whole shield rr cpu cost being harsher than armor rr. I am not an eft ***** so I won't throw numbers around. I'll just say anecdotally that my shield ships have rarely had cpu problems compared to the pg problems my armor ships regularly run into. Again, is it necessary to mess with this? What would the consequences be for all ship classes? Are the folks who complain about cpu costs experienced with pg costs on armor ships? I agree with a rearrangement of the minmatar caps. I've always wondered why they aren't to Caldari caps analogous to the Amarr and Gallente slot distribution. There should be more focus on shield tank. The Nid has a same mid layout as the Thanny (6 low and 5 mid). That should probably be 5 low and 6 mid. Especially since the Hel is a shield tanker. I think however that the Naglfar would operate better as a 4 high slot with 3 turret and no missile dread. Training up a Nag is already more skill intensive than other dreads due to split weapons. Noone else has to do this. I could again see a slot change to 5 low and 7 mid again to shield focus. If there is a problem still with capital missiles or 3 cap projectile turrets address these each individually, but don't continue to burden the Naglfar with split weapons. Having cruise, torps, lg arty, and lg ac already trained to 5 and tech II it does not affect me personally, but it should not be a burden for every minmatar dread aspirant. As to changing Nid and Hel bonuses, I like that my Nid can rep better. I never saw carriers as a combat focused ship anyway. I do not perceive the changes as making them such either. They serve more a logistical role imo. The Hel on the other hand is the odd duck for a ship class that is meant to be used in a combat role. Something definitiely needs to be changed with its bonus.
Dank Man FinFleet Raiden. 3	Posted - 2011.10.12 16:49:00 - [25] - Quote Give the Hel the ability to launch drones, along with fighters and FBs, it will be a true support ship. Also like the idea of being able to jump using less cap because of the racial bonuses to other ships (guns dont use cap, and min have fastest/most mobile ships) possible boost to fighters warp speed? and yes more CPU so we can have more shield reppers. 5% faster cap recharge per lvl, that may be helpful as well. Anyways any boost will be welcome as its already the sexiest of all the supers
MastahFR ANZAC ALLIANCE RAZOR Alliance 1	Posted - 2011.10.12 19:07:00 - [26] - Quote As some other have already said, the Hel need to be balanced. The ship should have more tank (EHp) than a nyx. Nyx bonus is for DPS, Hel bonus is for ... (? not used at all) Hel as less EHP than Nyx, less DPS than Nyx. I'm not even speaking about the Wyvern or the "3x more EHP than Hel" Aeon. I can understand it's hard to find a good bonus for the minmatar super carrier class. I've not much idea myself. But something must be done and not just a little fix. Hel is rarely (if ever used) in fleet. There is a reason behind it. As an Hel owner I know I'll go down first since have same DPS as Aeon or Wyvern and weaker tank. All FC not too much dumb will know that removing the Hel is easier than other supercarrier and remove the same amount of DPS from field. The Hel need a bonus so that this situation change to something more balanced. Make it the only super carrier able to use 20 bombers, 20 fighters and still all drones (or just warfare and logistics drones). Give it a bonus to shield recharge time or maybe give it the same bonus as wyvern ? So the Hel can at least have more EHP than a Nyx.
Mfume Apocal Origin. Black Legion. 24	Posted - 2011.10.12 19:38:00 - [27] - Quote Headerman wrote: Mfume Apocal wrote: This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer. They already do. When did that happen? Opening up EVE right now, I get "Note: Does not affect capital class modules." in the description.
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 189	Posted - 2011.10.12 20:23:00 - [28] - Quote Mfume Apocal wrote: Headerman wrote: Mfume Apocal wrote: This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer. They already do. When did that happen? Opening up EVE right now, I get "Note: Does not affect capital class modules." in the description. I was on the Test server a week or 2 ago and was using them in my Nag i was testing. Looks like it was a bug though that has since been fixed. Sorry I always thought a Hel SC fleet could be awesome in it's spider tanking abilities, and as Aamrr said, a slight bump to 7.5% bonus would make it pretty good, a 2% per level of capacitor cost reduction per level would make it really good. As for the slave set not affecting SCs... i think that like a SC it self, they are an "end game" prize and should go together. Expansions are about addin in content, and removing a Slave sets abilities from a SC would be a nerf too far [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img]
DogTyred Cool4Cats 2	Posted - 2011.10.12 20:53:00 - [29] - Quote I'd like to see more capital modules : capital warp disruptor capital heavy interdictor module ? that'll ruin ure supercap day capital smartbombs capital nuet and nos capital AB and MWD modules (yeah i know they should never be really fast) capital shield and armour extenders T2 Capital Weapons ability to jump thru stargates, have to limit to nulsec i guess , but roaming cap gangs would be fun perhaps. all these things would make dreads more versatile
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 193	Posted - 2011.10.12 21:26:00 - [30] - Quote ^^^ What about the shield equivelent of the armor module that increases base armour amount by 8%? A capital module, that fits in a low slot and requires capital amounts of PG, that increases the shields by 8-10%? Would be a lot easier to implement than a new implant set [img]http://i53.tinypic.com/bebnf8.jpg[/img]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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