|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
276
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 12:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
MastahFR wrote:Bump again and again until CCP start to give us feedback. We shield supercapital pilots are still waiting on your feedback on : - Fleet bonus applying directly (so we don't start a fight with half our shield). - The new deadspace invu - Boosting the Hel (changing the bonus or/and boosting the tank) because this ship is currently a shame.
If only there was some kind of forum search function that meant you could find these answers yourself instead of wailing like a petulant child. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
276
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 12:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote: 1 thing that is for sure is that Supers need a manditory drone bay capacity of room for 20 Fighter bombers & 20fighter. Theres no question about that in Super pilots minds. Would very much like feedback from CCP to if & when this ammendment is going to resume?
o7
Wrong. You do not speak for me or other supercap pilots. There are very valid balance reasons why the fight bay is limited as it is now posted throughout this thread. And I post this as someone who not only owns 3 supercaps, but builds several of them each month for others.
If you're still confused as to why, I'll refer you to this. You can apply it to all supercaps/ |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
397
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 11:01:00 -
[3] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote: 1. There has been several pages + of valid reasons from a multitude of various alliances to why the supers drone bay should be a manditory capacity for 20 Fighter Bombers & 20 Fighters & not 1 reason why there shouldn't! I cba to summon all those valid reasons just for 1 speacial needs character! Read what has been said, so you at least don't look ignorant!
Funny... a cursory glance through some recent pages shows these posts: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=468876#post468876 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=472485#post472485 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=400642#post400642 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=487642#post487642 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=427970#post427970 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=416940#post416940 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=400592#post400592
All from people offering reasoning or alternatives to make supercaps less effective versus subcaps.
Just because you're fantastic at selective reading and skimming over other peoples' reasons does not mean that they don't exist. Please note that this next part is not for your attention, as I know you will just skim over it and handwave my points away without providing any logical reasoning. Feel free to skip over it and mash the reply button to hurriedly post something about how terrible goons are because they don't understand complicated things like capitals and fighting without 10,000 ships in a fleet.
Supercaps, like any other ship in EVE, need to have a weakness. EVE has always been balanced in a rock>scissors>paper fashion were one ship or fleet style is always effective against another, and is in turn weak against something else. In some cases this is done by letting people fit the same ship for different roles, but not for all of its roles at the same time (see: Close range RR Dominix vs Sentry Dominix vs hybrid gank Dominix, etc).
1. Supercarriers bringing both bombers and fighters at the same time let them fight both capitals and sub-capitals at the same time. A smaller fighter bay forces a trade-off between the ability to fight capitals or sub-capitals, but not both roles at full effectiveness at once.
2. A large fighter bay means that even if they don't pack both kinds, it is alot of redundancy and severely restricts the tactical option for an opposing sub-cap fleet to engage them by killing off drones. It's one thing to destroy 40 fighter/bombers on a single supercarrier, it's completely another thing for them to destroy 4,000 on 100 supercarriers. A skilled stealth- or smart-bombing run on a poorly managed supercap fleet can cause a significant reduction in their damage, and that's exactly how EVE should be. Punishing one side for a mistake and rewarding the other for a successful and well-executed idea. If the supercarriers could just launch another few thousand drones and continue as-is it would severely diminish this hard counter, no matter how well it was pulled off.
3. Due to ISK inflation, supercaps have effectively reached the status that regular caps were in 4-5 years ago. Powerblocs need a fleet of them to compete in any serious territorial fashion. And if you cast your mind back to 2006, an alliance that deployed capitals without proper support deserved to lose them. The reasons above mean that a supercap fleet needs a respectable support fleet to counter sub-caps in exactly the same way.
Phunnestyle wrote: 2. Your a Goon so however many Supers/Titans you sell-have,doesn't make any difference when it comes down to knowing how & when to use them. Goons are widely considered for being terrible Super/titan users & know neither how or when to use them,hence goons sold off most of there super capital fleet. Going further into explaining why your troll post means next to nothing, Goons even lose Super capitals whilst under there own Cyno jammer. Thats facts right there. Fail, not all,but majority of DC are noobs, an you wisely stick to your canes/meals comps, as DC strength does not lay in quality,it lays in mass numbers as is widely known.
1. Your primary point here seems to be that you're heavily biased against my ingame faction, and that this is a valid basis to balance ships upon. I assume pointing out that you're posting under an NPC corp alt would be lost on you, as you clearly don't want to discuss any possible history of your own alliance and what they may have done in the past.
2. If you're talking about this fight, the ships were reimbursed by a GM after we were hotdropped by ev0ke lighting multiple cyno's under our online jammer. The GM was even nice enough to rep all our POS mods too! Perhaps we'd lose less supercaps in that way if only we stopped fighting people with magical Cheetahs and infinite ferrogel...
Phunnestyle wrote: P.S. your links for ammendments are old news, we talk of further ammendments & benificial balanci...
|
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
401
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 09:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
Svennig wrote:Venustas Blue wrote:Svennig wrote:Keep spamming phunnestyle. I'm sure being an annoying ass will do loads to make CCP consider your argument carefully. His arguements arn't just his, they are alot of peoples arguements and common sence. I mean what are you trying to point out Svennig, your comments have always seemed kinda mehhh. LOL! Hello Phunnestyle's alt. You consistently misspell words, such as when you write "sence", "arguement" and "alot". If you're going to fake popular support for your ideas by making lots of "I support Phunnestyle, he's a cool guy and I worship him and his opinions", you need to take an extra couple of minutes to make it less unbelievably staggeringly goddamn obvious it's you I thought that guy did have a Phunnestyle of posting...
ba dum tish |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 23:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
MastahFR wrote:Can we get the troll post removed from here ? They have no purpose here.
And we (shield capitals and super capitals (especially the Hel pilots)) are waiting on CCP feedback on when the change will hit singularity. Also, CCP, we (Hel pilots) are still waiting on the re-balance you promised. It's been already too long that this ship has been useless, it's now the time to end that and make it worth his 14bil isk hull price.
What was wrong with the Crucible changes? Thanks to the lesser shield nerf supercaps got, the Hel is basically on par with the Nyx in terms of EHP. Once they fix way shield fleet bonuses apply and add deadspace invulns it'll be fairly competitive. Especially now that it has a better niche with more base cap for some ewar-immune remote-repping. One rep from a Hel negates more than a supercap's worth of damage on another ship with decent resists.
The Nid and Chimera could use a CPU bump though; or better yet just reduce the CPU need on CSBs and CETs by about 15%.
As for the proposed shield changes (instant fleet bonus application, deadspace invulns, etc) they were proposed in here fairly late on in the Cruicible development cycle, and as such probably haven't been started. I'd guess that we're probably going to have to wait on an intermediate content patch for them (such as Crucible 1.1 or 1.2) which puts them at least a few months away. Maybe around March if things go well. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
405
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 00:17:00 -
[6] - Quote
Phunnestyle wrote:ROFL like your interesting little rant about restrictions of Subcaps in comparison to Supers. Let me think ohh a BS for instance, ermm lets say 200mill with fittings relatively low SP character able to max out the use.
& then on the other hand your would like to say that becuase a cheap ship with a relatively low SP character has these particular resrictions, that a 22+ bill Super + dedicated holding toon, also with a dedicated high end SP Super pilot toon, should also share with all these resrictions. LOOOOOL I'm considering clicking 'Like' on your post.
Please understand that this is not because I agree with it; but because it validates my theory that you're unable to respond to someone without involuntarily dribbling in a strategic pattern upon the keyboard that resembles the post seen above.
Which, if you think about it, is a pretty special skill. You're special. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
406
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 08:39:00 -
[7] - Quote
Headerman wrote:CynoNet Two wrote:As for the proposed shield changes (instant fleet bonus application, deadspace invulns, etc) they were proposed in here fairly late on in the Cruicible development cycle, and as such probably haven't been started. Was this proposed by players or CCP though?
Proposed by players in this thread, then confirmed as planned by CCP here. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
406
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 12:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
Xtover wrote:Post with your main.
He did on the last page.
Roboticus420 wrote:Phunnestyle wrote: I LOL@U over & over. +1 Signed
I had my money on him being NCdot too, as he didn't bite on the ev0ke comments I made. +1 to me!
However at this point I'm going to have to ignore his posts. Him self-quoting above without even realising he forgot to switch alts means either; a) Phunnestyle is a master troll feeding off this thread - who doesn't care about supercaps so much as our replies to his posts, or b) he is actually serious, and therefore so mentally deficient he doesn't realise how bad his posting is. In which case any continued prodding is just plain cruel. |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
413
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 16:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
Soon Shin wrote:Capital Shield Transporters have had their cpu fitting decreased significantly:
Data from Sisi:
Capital Murky Shield Screen Transmitter I cpu: 157.0 => 126.0
Capital Shield Transporter I cpu: 175.0 => 140.0
I don't fly a chimera or a nid, but looks like you'll be able to fit your shield carriers properly now.
Oh and there are now Deadspace Invulnerability fields. Hopefully this will cause Faction Invuls to fall down in price.
Yeah it's now possible to fit suicide shield-triage fits that dont require special named mods and CPU implants.
The deadspace invuln fields bring the Caldari supercaps inline with the other races very well (if a Leviathan goes all-tank it's actually now the best titan for EHP). The Rag could use a slight buff (5% shield) while the Hel and Revenant should probably get some kind of raw shield HP-related bonus. After this I don't see any need for 'shield slave set' or 'armour crystal set' equivalents.
MastahFR wrote:Good they did put a new deadspace invu. But fact is, the Hel still suck as supercarrier and need an urgent fix. That's an insightful and well-reasoned arguement you've put forward there. I'm sure CCP will get right on fixing this critical issue at once! |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
433
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:40:00 -
[10] - Quote
DurrHurrDurr wrote:Hi.
The current Raiden. turret-fit Titans have an average tracking of 0.02. The Pandemic Legion turret-fit Titans are similar.
To give everyone a basline; the GSF/CFC Alphafleet Maelstrom has a tracking of 0.01 and the standard pulsebaddon has a tracking of 0.04.
While this is a very obvious issue that isn't particularly difficult to figure out, part of the issue arises not from the actual supercapital hull but from the current meta involving min/maxing the fits as much as humanly possible for maximum results through the liberal usage of faction/officer mods.
The single worst issue with current supercapital meta is their intensely effective tracking; so much so that titans are able to obliterate even ships like a Cynabal and Dramiel moving at high transversal due to the fact that all it takes to one-shot them is a glancing blow.
The practical application of damage from a titan against a subcap is obscene. Raw damage capabilities of a grouped set of Titan weapons fit for tracking and damage lead to the only requirement for use against subcapitals being whether or not they hit. Their immense raw damage means that any hit will instantly kill nearly any subcapital ship regardless of how well they hit. A glancing blow will instantly destroy all but the heaviest of buffer-fit battleships. The issue of immensely heavy-buffer fit battleships, however, is that a tracking of 0.02 will have no issues whatsoever landing solid blows against them.
Agreeing with a DHD post... times must be tough
Nerf bazookas, protect the flies! |
|
|
|
|