|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
6
   |
Posted - 2011.11.09 11:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
Taking away the drones from an SC and reducing it's drone bay so it can only carry Bombers OR Fighters is too much. As fighters/Bombers are too easy to kill the second most powerful ship in the game can easily be de-fanged by 4 stealth bombers in a lag fest. at the absolute very least fighters orbit range needs to be increased to if they are attacking something they are not at 2Km range from it, that just means every fighter from every carrier/FC dies in one volley.
Still as things stand my SC will not be logging on bar for skill changes till they are changed again, I'll probably just let the account lapse. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 14:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
I think a nice ballance to the restartable 15 mins agro would be the same thing for people on gates and at stations.
The main reason the in space aggression was put in place was because supers could just log and had soo many hit pints in 99% of ocasions they could not be killed in time.
Are people that play station games in 0.0 with the knowledge that they can just dock up again not doing exactly the same thing. Now I'm not suggesting that if you are shot but do not shoot back you should be stuck in space, BUT if you shoot at a hostile you should not only be stuck with a 30 second aggresion timer. This times should be increased to a value that almost garuntees your death if you are caught. something like 120 seconds. possibly even up to 300 seconds.
This should also be the case on Gates, if you choose to engage that should be it. You win or Die, no more jumping through gates all the time to get to safety. If the vast majority wanted no way for supers to disengage it should be the same for all.
Sub cap pilots shouldn'y be able to have their cake AND eat it. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 14:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
I have a list of additional cap mods I'd like to see added to round them off.
Cap Armor plates/Shield Extenders
Cap Scram/Disruptor (I know officer ones have cap fitting requirements but I want regular T1 versions)
Cap Vamp/Energy disruptor.
Cap smart bomb
Cap Cap injector
Cap Stassis webifier.
Cap AB and MWD
Battle ship fleets have all these modules available to them to assist with engaging HAC fleets, why dont caps have the same modules to enable them to engage smaller ships. Before you go saying that this will make them overpowered as they can instantly cap out HACs but cant BS already do that to frigates.
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 10:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
The drone bays on the supers are now too small. no other ship in the game relies 100% on Drones for 100% of it's offensive capabilities. So now SC cant even tage fighters and FIghter bombers, That's like forcing a BS fleet to only take long or short range ammo when they undock.
They should make the game like WOW and do RP resets at every update. Because at the moment the vet players are a smaller number but have soo many more RP that they can wipe the floor with newbies.
There are a lot more newbies/low skill players. the masses ***** and whine more, more importantly they give CCP a lot more money.
EVE is not a game it is a business.
CCP do what ever makes them the most money.
That is catering for the low skill masses.
That's the painfull cold hard truth of things, I'm expecting patricide to be the next big thing in next years summer expansion. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:The drone bays on the supers are now too small. no other ship in the game relies 100% on Drones for 100% of it's offensive capabilities. So now SC cant even tage fighters and FIghter bombers, That's like forcing a BS fleet to only take long or short range ammo when they undock.
They should make the game like WOW and do RP resets at every update. Because at the moment the vet players are a smaller number but have soo many more RP that they can wipe the floor with newbies.
There are a lot more newbies/low skill players. the masses ***** and whine more, more importantly they give CCP a lot more money.
EVE is not a game it is a business.
CCP do what ever makes them the most money.
That is catering for the low skill masses.
That's the painfull cold hard truth of things, I'm expecting patricide to be the next big thing in next years summer expansion. Bring a carrier with you to carry the other type of drones. WTF do you think fleet logistics are for? This isn't WoW, it's a big boy game, you have to think a bit. Try it sometime.
My appologies. I must have missed the carrier Buff that lets it carry 20 FIghter bombers.
Doesn't really matter the update is fixed bar bug fixing so I've suspended repayment on my SC toon.
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
I have a solution,
I'm not going to fire sale my super so I just suspended the count, RL money is the only think CCP listen to as it's what pays their wages.
Yes they were over powered and needed reducing BUT only one or two of the things CCP have done. They hit them with the nerf bat, then hit them again and again and again and again.
It's a shame, I know CCP wont listen to SC pilots as there are only a few thousand of them as opposed to the 10's or 100's of thousands of subscribers that donGÇÖt have them. We all pay the same for the sub so they listen to the masses.
It's a populist philosophy. Why not just label the oldest richest members something horrible (***) and kill them and take all their property. ***** ****, ***** ****.
It's ALL about the money. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 13:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Svennig wrote:I can't comprehend of the mental deficiency required to see these changes and want to take your ball and go home. Still, I think of it as a darwinian thing. The people who stay will be the people who are intelligent enough to understand that they're still immensely powerful ships whose role and deployment scenario has now changed slightly, and aren't a bunch of whiny drama llamas.
When people like you quit, the quality of super pilots improves. Long may this continue. Its because they got used to having invulnerable totally overpowered pwnmobiles with a guaranteed loss of > 4 even if a battle goes bad and now they dont want to play without them. The problem is that they want only whats good for them, and not whats good for the game . . .
Wrong, I could live with and agree with the new agression mechanics(I actualy think these should be made harsher and the 30 agression timer on gates should be upped to 60 secs), the HP reduction is also ok, even the removal of the regular drones I can live with. The straw that broke the cammels back was the reduction in the drone bay size so you have to choose between Fighters or Fighter Bombers.
Too many attributes of the ships were changed in one go. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 19:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
Getting slightly better with 30 and 35 but untill it's back to 40 and 45 fighter/bombers the nerf has gone too far.
You do realise just how simple it is for stealth bombers to totaly defang SC. AT the ABSOLUTE VERY least can you alter the tracking/optimal range of fighters having them orbit their target so closely just makes it far to easy to bombers to get a perfect strike.
The corp hangers arent even big enough to carry the second type of fighter/bomber so we cant re suply on the move.
I think CCP should offer a one time offer to put the ship in a highsec outpost with refining that you have best standings with so they can be reprocessed at the very least. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 20:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:Getting slightly better with 30 and 35 but untill it's back to 40 and 45 fighter/bombers the nerf has gone too far.
You do realise just how simple it is for stealth bombers to totaly defang SC.
The corp hangers arent even big enough to carry the second type of fighter/bomber so we cant re suply on the move.
I think CCP should offer a one time offer to put the ship in a highsec outpost with refining that you have best standings with so they can be reprocessed at the very least. This really.
To prove the point about just how many people thing the change has gone too far look to see how many SC BPOs are up on contract and the prices they are being sold for, most prices are at cost at best. I'd even be prepaired to loose another 10% HP to get the drone bay size back.
This patch feels very knee jerk, I imagine CCPs designers/Balancers are suffering with unrealistic delines that are being forced on them |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 20:20:00 -
[10] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:an ME2 nyx bpo couldn't be sold for NPC cost well before this was announced
Possibly but were they going for 2/3 NPC price ?
|
|
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:50:00 -
[11] - Quote
I'm baffled as to why the drone bay has been increased by 5.
There were two possible oppinions on the drone bay, either 25 was enough to have a flight and some spares and it should have been left as was OR the drone bay was too small for the purpose of the ship and it should have been increased to accomodate a flight of each type of fighter/Bomber.
To increase the drone bay by enough to accomodate 5 more drones acnowledges that the drone bay was too small for the purpose of the ship but does not resolve the problem.
Fighters/Bombers need a massive buff so they cant be all killed in 15 seconds by half a dozen stealth bombers. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 22:13:00 -
[12] - Quote
Innominate wrote:Innominate wrote:Quote:
New drone bay capacities will be: 30 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern; 35 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Nyx and Hel.
So, take as a given that all supercarriers will carry 20 bombers. This leaves the Aeon/Wyvern room to carry 10 fighters, and the Nyx/Hel room for 15. The nyx gets a 25% damage bonus to fighters on top of that, fielding effectively 18.75 fighters. Under these changes the nyx is able to do 87.5% more damage with fighters than the Aeon/Wyvern, this is more fighter damage than the Aeon/Wyvern generally do currently. It makes sense for the lower EHP Nyx/Hel to do more damage than the Aeon/Wyvern. The 50% effective fighter damage bonus from the drone bay size seems more than enough for fighters. The Nyx doing nearly double the fighter damage of the Aeon/Wyvern is ridiculous. Perhaps modify the nyxes damage bonus to apply to fighter bombers only? lol self quoting. I feel the need to elaborate and point out that the nyx's doing 90% more fighter damage than the wyvern/aeon is not an issue of supercaps vs subcaps, or whether they're being nerfed too hard or not hard enough. This is purely an issue of the supercarriers balance among themselves. The 5/10 fighters situation that existed prior to the current numbers is even worse, with the nyx getting 125% the fighter dps of the aeon/wyvern. Whatever the nerf ends up being, the nyx doing 90%(or more) more fighter damage than the aeon/wyvern is broken.
Seems the update is being rushed out. With CCPs re-org and the people left being rushed I'm expecting a lot of issues with this update. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 11:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Svennig wrote:Draconus Lofwyr wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:
Seems the update is being rushed out. With CCPs re-org and the people left being rushed I'm expecting a lot of issues with this update.
I think you just hit the nail on the head of the problem. Short timers disease as we called it in the military. You know your leaving, so why give a rats a55 about what you do or who else it messes up. This more than any reason is why the super nerfs should be put off till after the rest of the patch gets released, there are already a ton of game changing fight breaking updates coming in this new patch. please put some sanity back in the super ships. Have either of you been on Sisi lately? Given this is, you know, the test server feedback forum that's kinda important? If you had, you would know that this update is looking to be one of the easiest, simplest and best thought out updates in many many years. Tidi: an end to lag. New Nebulae. New skins for caldari and gallente. New T3 bcs. New T2 warfare links amongst other T2 goodies. Corp bookmarks. Changes to POS fuelling. Hybrid changes (need to go further, but it's a start) which have been the subject of iteration and discussion between the playerbase and CCP, a good precedent. The end to the logoffski. Warp and jump. Autopilot docks at stations. New session timer display. Engine Trails. Turret miss effects. So many UI changes I can't fuckin list them all, here's a few more: prerequisites show training time, ships show that they're uninsured, adding fitting to market quickbars, alliance jump bridges in in-game map, new warp effect, new cyno effect, new jump effect, stargates orientated as they should be. They solved issues that have been bugging me about the UI for years, and issues that I didn't even know I found annoying. It's like BFF got a steroid injection to get DONE some of the stuff that the players want. And they did it all in a period of turmoil and upheaval at CCP. But yeah, you're right, it definitely feels rushed out because they took your ******* cookie~ ******* ******.
Yes I've been on the test server, almost every day for the last 2 weeks.
I know CCP are making a lot of changes/possible improvements to the game.
What I was trying to get at is it's better to do say 8 things properly than have a shot at doing 12 things and get things wrong.
More haste, less speed
BTW in most instances people that resort to profanities are loosing the argument. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 17:47:00 -
[14] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Why do you need more than 15 fighters?
To give you a reason to disagree with more oppinions. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 16:49:00 -
[15] - Quote
Just compared the build costs of the Aeon on Sisi to TQ. now correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like CCP are really taking the ****. You have reduced the drone bay size on SC BUT you are going to make the Aeon require MORE capital drone bay components to build the thing.
FFS you cant nerf the things drone bays and at the same time make them require more of the things to build. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 20:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Sameyaa wrote:
Not really, when i get fueled i dont need my own alt, its done by a alliance hauler or corp hauler. In any case only a hauler is needed. takes less than 5 mins.
To refit i need to:
1) Have a useless alt sitting in my staging system that has a carrier (yes we all have free carrier alts laying around)
2) Login super (needs 30 secs)
3) Take all drones from drone bay of alt carrier, put needed fighters/fbs
4) Undock, get in fleet, warp to super
5) refit 1or2 fb/fighter at a time because for aeons/wyverns they will not have the free room to move fb/fighters in groups.
6) warp carrier back to station, refit drone bay like it was before (which in itself is annoying)
7) Logoff super, and sit at pos with an alt to make sure it disappeares without aggression.
You see where i'm going with this? does it remind you of something? maybe fueling a pos would be easier.
hmm... let's compare things to a subcap pilot. logs in spins ship oh look a fleet load new ship check fittings adjust and swap fittings as needed load ammo undock your time it took to have a rorqual or carrier swap out fighters/bombers takes less time than it takes for a subcap to prep for a fleet battle. You are just lazy. Your corp, your FLEET, should be there supporting your super. There are carrier pilots that would LOVE to do that. Why? because then they have a reason to use a carrier other than POS repping...hell, let a carrier pilot be your bish and haul your crap + keep you alive if needed. like a squire. heh.
so really a carrier can refit a SC with fighter bombers in a minute or two. I must have missed either their corp hanger increase to 100K m3 or their ability to hold fighter bombers.
seriously you must just troll for the sake of it.
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 21:15:00 -
[17] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:
so really a carrier can refit a SC with fighter bombers in a minute or two. I must have missed either their corp hanger increase to 100K m3 or their ability to hold fighter bombers.
seriously you must just troll for the sake of it.
you carry 15 fighters/FB in your bay. You can hold 5 in your corp hanger. You can hold 6 in the corp hanger of a rorq. You can hold 5 in the hanger of another carrier. You must have misread what you quoted.
no a standard carrier can NOT fit FB in it's drone bay, a carrier can only hold two FB in it's corp hanger.
keep flaming and I'll keep pissing on them.
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 16:32:00 -
[18] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:
so really a carrier can refit a SC with fighter bombers in a minute or two. I must have missed either their corp hanger increase to 100K m3 or their ability to hold fighter bombers.
seriously you must just troll for the sake of it.
you carry 15 fighters/FB in your bay. You can hold 5 in your corp hanger. You can hold 6 in the corp hanger of a rorq. You can hold 5 in the hanger of another carrier. You must have misread what you quoted.
You implied a carrier could be used to refit a SC. a carrier can not hold FB in it's drone bay, a carrier only has a 10K corp hanger so can only hold 2 Fighters/FB if it has nothing else in it's hanger like fule. The Aeon only has 20/10 capacity so to use one of these would require 5 carrier corp hangers to accomodate a swap to FB from fighters or visa versa.
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 16:33:00 -
[19] - Quote
Sameyaa wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:Sameyaa wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:
your time it took to have a rorqual or carrier swap out fighters/bombers takes less time than it takes for a subcap to prep for a fleet battle. .
LOL so... what does a subcap pilot have to do exactly? ... get in ship and join fleet. Did you forget what it's like to fly a ship in PvP? Here's a hint: It involves more than right click -> jump, right click -> launch drones -> ctrl+F. Nope, according to killboard i have almost 10 times more experience than you in fighting subcaps with subcaps. So your arguement is invalid. Try again.
You need to ignore him, he's a dusche, will post anything to get a ride out of you.
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 22:00:00 -
[20] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Headerman wrote:I would also like to go forward and say that super carriers, due to their now diminished versatility with only fighters and FBs, needs to be able to dock and the pilot get out of the ship.
In fact, i would be happy to have ANY safe harbour that does not involve the following:
- A POS
- CSMA
- Safe Spot
- SC sitting alts Yes, because everyone wants to play station games with supercarriers. If you can't see the obvious stupidity of that idea, why should anyone take your whining about fighter bays seriously?
Simple just make the agression timer a lot longer for docking. Station games is the equivilant of punching someone outside your house then running back inside and hiding behind your mothers skirt.
|
|
|
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 22:08:00 -
[21] - Quote
Jfox15101 wrote:VeloxMors wrote:Can't get on sisi since nobody ever re-enables accounts, but my impressions based on what I've read:
Carriers are getting screwed. DDs not targeting subcaps and dreads getting buffed leave carriers with the short straw. T2 triage is nice, but triage continues to be a death sentence to a carrier in most situations and most carrier pilots will continue to not bother with the triage module at all.
Moros getting buffed AND getting better hybrids? Seriously? The Naglfar seriously needs some love with its high slots, and the Phoenix just needs some serious professional help all around. The Moros was a solid dread before this, and could have definitely waited on getting the buff (especially with hybrids being tweaked).
SCs are messed up. I agree the nerf on the Aeon and Nyx was a step in the right direction, but the Hel and Wyvern are just pathetic now.
The wyvern is really not affected to an extensive degree, with the drones being lost, being the biggest drawback, its tank is still strong. IMO, a properly fit wyvern can still be hard to kill, maybe as much as an aeon before nerf. Being that the wyvern isnt an armor tank, it laughs at the nerf, shields remain the same, resists will make that ship be the new aeon. Now the phoenix, well lets just say with "Correct skilling" it is a royal pain in the ass. Unless neuted out, this ship can take a beating and keep throwing torps with its only downfall being range. Plenty more of this post for me to ramble on about, but i wanna go play eve :)
Capital Hybrids are NOT being changed. they are the only weapon size in the game that CCP made comparible across all races for range so all dreads could hit a large POS from outside it's shields.
Mind you I wouldn't put it past CCP reducing the range to force them to use long range ammo. Heaven forbid the Galle have one ship that's best in class in game. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 12:12:00 -
[22] - Quote
Fighter bombers hit a sig of what 2250m and Fighters 125. One is far too small, (Fightrers) and the other far too big(FB).
Fighters resolution should be increased to 400 as they are designed to hit BS. to compensate for this their optimal range and tracking should be adjusted to make then engage at a longer range but with less tracking so they have the same effective tracking at their optimal ranges.
Fighter Bombers need to have their explosion radius reduced significantly. Should they not be in the same ball park as that of capital guns. most other missile platforms are, if this were the case they should have an explosion radius of around 1000m, BS would still be safe as the explosion velocity is only 60m/s. FB can be speed tanked by anything in the game. Again another weapon platform that's theoretical paper damage and actual in game damage are worlds appart. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 12:23:00 -
[23] - Quote
Just have to face it. Supers are a tiny proportion of the game. Having anything in the ame that makes a small group of players too powerful is bad for CCPs remit of having as many subscribers as possible.
The only thing CCP will like about supers is that they cant dock so to have one you need a dedicated account. That's never going to change it's intentional.
Even if were to vote with our feet and leave or cancel subs this would be more than ofset by the new players they hope they will get.
To CCP you are just a source of money. We only got what we did in Crucible with the new content because too many areas of the player base had been treated like crap that total subscriber numbers were going down. Arrogant CCP made the assumption that they could treat the game like a matured company and sweat it for income with the absolute bare minimum of effort on their part. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness
Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 13:00:00 -
[24] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Headerman wrote:Klytior Am'jarhs wrote:Supers are to fight other capitals. That is what they need to do, no reason at all why they should have fighters. If thats the case then sub caps are there to fight other subcaps, no reason at all they need to be able to target supers or caps. Subcaps already can't fight caps without hugley outnumbering them, so your point is irrelevant. Them being able to target supercaps is useless if you can't achieve anything with it on your own. A more relevant comparaison would be to have battleships being able to switch whenever they want between Large, anti-BS guns and small, anti-frig guns. It's not done for balance purposes, to avoid solopwnmobiles. And there is no reason for supercaps to escape that balance rule just because they cost a bit to build. Don't forget that supercaps are two sizes above battleships.
Following this logic a BS should not be able to shoot a cruiser sized hull. |
|
|
| |
|