EVE Search - A discussion of Carrier balance issues.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

A discussion of Carrier balance issues.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:03:00 - [1] I'm sure this has been discussed before. You'll have to excuse me, I haven't browsed the forums for a good month or so, but I feel the need to discuss this issue with the community. First and foremost a few disclaimers. Foremost, I'm talking about balance and only balance in this thread. Leave your roleplay out of this. Sure, Gallente are supposed to be the "drone race" and perhaps you think this means they should be justified in having a more powerful capital drone ship than all the others. I don't. Once you start applying roleplay to the most powerful ships in the game, you make a very real threat to game mechanics and balance. While the ships still should be unique and still make use of race advantages, they should remain as balanced as possible. Second, don't take my word for all this. I'm a Caldari carrier pilot. If you don't agree with what I say, fire up the test server, head to fight club and mess around with this stuff yourself. If you can't fly a carrier (most of the community), at least take the time to review all the advantages and disadvantages of these ships before posting something silly. First, let me run down the main bonuses of the carriers for each race as an overview. Minmatar Carrier Skill Bonuses: 50% bonus to Shield and Armor transfer range per level 5% reduction in Shield and Armor transfer duration per level Amarr Carrier Skill Bonuses: 50% bonus to Energy and Armor transfer range per level 5% bonus to all Armor resistances per level Caldari Carrier Skill Bonuses: 50% bonus to Energy and Shield transfer range per level 5% bonus to all Shield resistances per level Gallente Carrier Skill Bonuses: 50% bonus to Shield and Armor transfer range per level 10% bonus to deployed FightersÆ damage per level Lets look at these and compare. The first thing we see is a rather weak bonus for the Minmatar Carrier, a 20% reduction in remote repairer cycle time. Sure, that may slightly useful to the team players out there, and might prove useful in a few isolated circumstances, but in standard combat situations, it won't help. If your carrier is flying alongside a bunch of other ships and engaged in combat with a hostile force, either the enemy is likely focused on killing your carrier, killing your drones, or is probably smart enough to fire on those of your friends NOT being boosted by your ship. Either way, if your billion-isk ship falls under attack, it won't help you. Its easy to notice Caldari and Amarr have virtually the same bonuses, only applied to their tanking style. Speaking reasonably here, a skilled carrier pilot will have Carriers 4, and thus have a 20% bonus to shield or armor resistances flying either ship respectively. Not too shabby. Resistances are always a good thing, right? But now let's look at the Gallente Carrier. 40% fighter damage increase! Hot damn, that's friggin crazy! Especially with all the damage those drones put out, especially if you've got Fighters 4. Let's not even mention what happens after Advanced Drone Interfacing and Drone Control Units start to see combat! We're looking at some serious extra firepower here. You might be saying "So, the Caldari and Amarr get resistance bonuses! That's cool too." Hmmm. Yeah... about that. I have an idea. Lets use one of those 6 low slots, and fit an Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II (Or an Invulnerability Field if you want to shield tank it) Voila! It's almost like I had Amarr or Caldari Carrier IV. And all with just using 1 of the 16 module slots on the ship. So that's the real issue here. What module can I fit to a Chimera, Archon, or Nidhoggur to boost my damage 40%? Nothing, there is no such module. But for a Thanatos to sneak in the bonuses of the other ships in addition to it's very powerful damage bonus? Only the cost of 1 module slot. "But the Caldari and Amarr can just fit a resistance mod in addition to their bonuses!" True, but with resistance stacking you don't gain as much the second time around. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:12:00 - [2] Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 21/05/2006 08:14:50 You thought I was done? Of course not! There's ship stats to mention as well. Take note of the fact that the Gallente Thanatos has more hit points as well as more speed than the Caldari and Amarr Carriers. The Nidhoggur has the speed advantage obviously, but when it comes down to capital ships, that isn't exactly a huge bonus. They tend to do a lot of sitting still. The fact that the Thanatos has so much in the way of structure hit points is also very useful if you decide to fit a damage control, which results in a carrier that will take quite a while to kill, all while it puts out insane damage through its fighters. The Thanatos also has a much larger drone bay than the other carriers (which you'd expect of Gallente), however in conjunction with its bonus, is a very nice advantage. It means that you can keep all that extra firepower coming for that much longer if you encounter an enemy that is skilled at destroying your drones. So here we have it. The Minmatar Nidhoggur is woefully lacking, the Caldari Chimera and the Amarr Archon are run-of-the-mill, and the Thanatos has such a powerful bonus that it far surpasses the other carriers, all while being able to gain the resistance benefits of the Caldari and Amarr carriers with the use of just 1 module. Doesn't that seem a little bit out-of-whack? So, though I'm sure you've all done it before, I'm interested in hearing your ideas and comments. Please, remember, this is with the interests of balance in mind here. I could care less if "such and such's race has this, so this carrier should be better". It doesn't work that way. All ships should on fairly even ground, and if other ships aren't balanced, then they need to be, it's no excuse for unbalancing some of the largest, most powerful ships in EVE. Thanks for reading. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
ragewind	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:28:00 - [3] yes they seem to have broken the bonuses, they should all have a resitance bonus and all have a fighter spersific damage bonus ------------------------------------ fix eves industrial sector! advanced industrial ship
Troye	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:28:00 - [4] A very well written post. The Amarr and Caldari carriers are geared more towards combat on the front line due to their resistance bonus's making them able to withstand greater amounts if damage. As their front line ships they should have afew more bonus's which make them better suited to this job. Amarr and Caldari should get a Cap/duraction boost to remote sheild/armour transfer amount on top of their resistance bonus's and a 100% boost to locking time so they can instantly lock a target and heal it before it goes down. This would make them top of the range ships for front line warfare, and the thanatos would still apeal to people who prefer the "sit at SS" and boost fleet from afar tactic. Its a shame all the other carriers suck in comparision to the Gallente one, it just means we see les variation as everyone flys about in a Thanatos nowadays. _______________________________________________
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:32:00 - [5] Originally by: ragewind yes they seem to have broken the bonuses, they should all have a resitance bonus and all have a fighter spersific damage bonus I very much like that idea. That way, Gallente can still get a damage edge (thermal drones do the most damage), but it remains reasonable. Also the other carriers become more geared towards a damage type. Now why in God's name didn't I think of that? -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
Lord Goodberry	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:33:00 - [6] Originally by: ragewind yes they seem to have broken the bonuses, they should all have a resistance bonus and all have a fighter specific damage bonus yes and they should all have the same hp/bay/cap/resists.... wait..
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:38:00 - [7] Originally by: Lord Goodberry Originally by: ragewind yes they seem to have broken the bonuses, they should all have a resistance bonus and all have a fighter specific damage bonus yes and they should all have the same hp/bay/cap/resists.... wait.. Do HACs all have the same resists? No. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
Remedial	Posted - 2006.05.21 08:48:00 - [8] Change the fighter damage bonus on the gallente to 5% per level and call it a day. But if you do that, you need to give the Nemesis a third launcher.
xaioguai	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:01:00 - [9] Minmatar Carrier Skill Bonuses: 50% bonus to Shield and Armor transfer range per level 5% reduction in Shield and Armor transfer duration per level I just notice that, since when minmatar become the "healer" race
twit brent	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:22:00 - [10] Ha im laughing at all the caldari pilots that said that the manticores extra slot is justified because they are the missile race.
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:28:00 - [11] Originally by: twit brent Ha im laughing at all the caldari pilots that said that the manticores extra slot is justified because they are the missile race. I've never agreed with that. From the start I knew it was a mistake putting 1 more cruise launcher on the Manticore than on the other bombers. But as I stated above, just because one race's ship is overpowered doesn't mean another race's has the right to be. All it does is mess everything up and make everyone unhappy. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:29:00 - [12] Originally by: twit brent Ha im laughing at all the caldari pilots that said that the manticores extra slot is justified because they are the missile race. i have no problem with the thanatos being the "best" carrier, but its kind of the best by a lot.. i mean if the thanatos had a 25% fight damage bonus over the rest okay.. 50% is kind of crazy though, its really so good that flying the other carrriers is pretty retarded as for the manticore.. yes it "can" fit 3 cruise launchers but fitting the third is really incredibly hard even with advanced weapon upgrades V, fyi.. also the other stealth bombers can fit turrets and get some turret bonuses.. considering that the biggest weakness of the stealth bomber is getting jacked upclose by an interceptor or something having some guns on for dogfighting isnt a bad idea (i dunno if that really HELPS though i haven't flown the other races) i know for a fact the manticore is pretty damn helpless, up close. ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD
Kaell Meynn	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:35:00 - [13] cough Stealth Bombers cough
DarK	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:36:00 - [14] Originally by: twit brent Ha im laughing at all the caldari pilots that said that the manticores extra slot is justified because they are the missile race. Which is made even more funny by the fact that fighters are a Caldari creation :)
bundy bear	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:38:00 - [15] You might be saying "So, the Caldari and Amarr get resistance bonuses! That's cool too." Hmmm. Yeah... about that. Lets use one of those 6 low slots, and fit an Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II (Or an Invulnerability Field if you want to shield tank it) Voila! It's almost like I had Amarr or Caldari Carrier IV. And all with just using 1 of the 16 module slots on the ship. This only works if you are planning to fit 1 energised adaptive nano membrane to your gallente carrier. Otherwise your logic is flawed, due to stacking penalties that nano membrane will decrease the effectiveness of other nano membranes fitted to your ship so it does more than "just sacrifice 1 slot" if you fit more than one. The only carrier that needs to be fixed is the minmatar one.
dabster	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:43:00 - [16] minnie carrier sucks hairy monkey ass ;( ___________________________ Brutors Rule! My Eve-vids; Click.
mazzilliu	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:43:00 - [17] maybe they should give the FIGHTERS the resistances rather than the carrier itself... ---------
twit brent	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:43:00 - [18] Originally by: Jim Raynor Originally by: twit brent Ha im laughing at all the caldari pilots that said that the manticores extra slot is justified because they are the missile race. i have no problem with the thanatos being the "best" carrier, but its kind of the best by a lot.. i mean if the thanatos had a 25% fight damage bonus over the rest okay.. 50% is kind of crazy though, its really so good that flying the other carrriers is pretty retarded as for the manticore.. yes it "can" fit 3 cruise launchers but fitting the third is really incredibly hard even with advanced weapon upgrades V, fyi.. also the other stealth bombers can fit turrets and get some turret bonuses.. considering that the biggest weakness of the stealth bomber is getting jacked upclose by an interceptor or something having some guns on for dogfighting isnt a bad idea (i dunno if that really HELPS though i haven't flown the other races) i know for a fact the manticore is pretty damn helpless, up close. Just FYI the nemesis cannot use all its slots without a MAPC and needs 2 MAPC's to fit decent turrets. The caldari stealthbomber does 50% more damage. Its amazing how many caldari pilots said the manticore is justified because they are the missile race but ***** when we get a better carrier.
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:45:00 - [19] Originally by: bundy bear You might be saying "So, the Caldari and Amarr get resistance bonuses! That's cool too." Hmmm. Yeah... about that. Lets use one of those 6 low slots, and fit an Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II (Or an Invulnerability Field if you want to shield tank it) Voila! It's almost like I had Amarr or Caldari Carrier IV. And all with just using 1 of the 16 module slots on the ship. This only works if you are planning to fit 1 energised adaptive nano membrane to your gallente carrier. Otherwise your logic is flawed, due to stacking penalties that nano membrane will decrease the effectiveness of other nano membranes fitted to your ship so it does more than "just sacrifice 1 slot" if you fit more than one. The only carrier that needs to be fixed is the minmatar one. Most people will not fit stacks of Nano membranes to their ship for resistances. I was attempting to illustrate a point, that a Thanatos can fit a single module for the same bonuses that the Caldari and Amarr ships get, while they don't have that same luxury. Give me a single module that gives me 40% to drone damage and I'll call it balanced. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
locus 777	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:48:00 - [20] Yeh thats right, nerf the Thanatos to the SS, while the other Carriers have all the fun. I'm sure all Gallente pilots will love that suggestion Sig removed, please keep it below 24000 bytes, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus
Novarei	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:49:00 - [21] I can understand their reasoning behind it, but the damage bonus is just way too high.
twit brent	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:49:00 - [22] Originally by: ELECTR0FREAK Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 21/05/2006 09:47:36 Originally by: mazzilliu maybe they should give the FIGHTERS the resistances rather than the carrier itself... Another cool idea. Since Carriers tend to just assign fighters to a friendly and sit tight somewhere safe while their fighter-escorted buddy goes and wreaks havoc, that does indeed make sense. I like it. Originally by: bundy bear You might be saying "So, the Caldari and Amarr get resistance bonuses! That's cool too." Hmmm. Yeah... about that. Lets use one of those 6 low slots, and fit an Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II (Or an Invulnerability Field if you want to shield tank it) Voila! It's almost like I had Amarr or Caldari Carrier IV. And all with just using 1 of the 16 module slots on the ship. This only works if you are planning to fit 1 energised adaptive nano membrane to your gallente carrier. Otherwise your logic is flawed, due to stacking penalties that nano membrane will decrease the effectiveness of other nano membranes fitted to your ship so it does more than "just sacrifice 1 slot" if you fit more than one. The only carrier that needs to be fixed is the minmatar one. Most people will not fit stacks of Nano membranes to their ship for resistances. I was attempting to illustrate a point, that a Thanatos can fit a single module for the same bonuses that the Caldari and Amarr ships get, while they don't have that same luxury. Give me a single module that gives me 40% to drone damage and I'll call it balanced. Give me a module that gives the nemesis an extra missile launcher.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:52:00 - [23] Originally by: twit brent Originally by: Jim Raynor Originally by: twit brent Ha im laughing at all the caldari pilots that said that the manticores extra slot is justified because they are the missile race. i have no problem with the thanatos being the "best" carrier, but its kind of the best by a lot.. i mean if the thanatos had a 25% fight damage bonus over the rest okay.. 50% is kind of crazy though, its really so good that flying the other carrriers is pretty retarded as for the manticore.. yes it "can" fit 3 cruise launchers but fitting the third is really incredibly hard even with advanced weapon upgrades V, fyi.. also the other stealth bombers can fit turrets and get some turret bonuses.. considering that the biggest weakness of the stealth bomber is getting jacked upclose by an interceptor or something having some guns on for dogfighting isnt a bad idea (i dunno if that really HELPS though i haven't flown the other races) i know for a fact the manticore is pretty damn helpless, up close. Just FYI the nemesis cannot use all its slots without a MAPC and needs 2 MAPC's to fit decent turrets. The caldari stealthbomber does 50% more damage. Its amazing how many caldari pilots said the manticore is justified because they are the missile race but ***** when we get a better carrier. maybe because arguing best stealth bomber vs carrier is like arguing who gets the best rookie ship vs who gets the best battleship manticores arent that easy to fit either really, i am pretty sure I needed 2 MAPC to fit 2 "arbalest" cruise launchers even with weapon upgrades V and stealth bombers V or something, ive tried it and i was pretty disappointed, and honestly, stealth bombers aren't all that great in pvp.. as far as carriers go, the thanatos is a lot better amarr and caldari one, and the minmatar one is just a huge joke honestly i won't argue the manticore is the best stealth bomber because it IS the best at what they're designed for, but the thanatos vs the rest of the carriers is a worse situation because there is a lot more training involved with capital ships and while the manticore is slightly better, i wouldnt say the other stealth bombers arent WORTH training for, obviously the only carrier WORTH the effort, is the thanatos ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:53:00 - [24] Originally by: twit brent Originally by: ELECTR0FREAK Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 21/05/2006 09:47:36 Originally by: mazzilliu maybe they should give the FIGHTERS the resistances rather than the carrier itself... Another cool idea. Since Carriers tend to just assign fighters to a friendly and sit tight somewhere safe while their fighter-escorted buddy goes and wreaks havoc, that does indeed make sense. I like it. Originally by: bundy bear You might be saying "So, the Caldari and Amarr get resistance bonuses! That's cool too." Hmmm. Yeah... about that. Lets use one of those 6 low slots, and fit an Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II (Or an Invulnerability Field if you want to shield tank it) Voila! It's almost like I had Amarr or Caldari Carrier IV. And all with just using 1 of the 16 module slots on the ship. This only works if you are planning to fit 1 energised adaptive nano membrane to your gallente carrier. Otherwise your logic is flawed, due to stacking penalties that nano membrane will decrease the effectiveness of other nano membranes fitted to your ship so it does more than "just sacrifice 1 slot" if you fit more than one. The only carrier that needs to be fixed is the minmatar one. Most people will not fit stacks of Nano membranes to their ship for resistances. I was attempting to illustrate a point, that a Thanatos can fit a single module for the same bonuses that the Caldari and Amarr ships get, while they don't have that same luxury. Give me a single module that gives me 40% to drone damage and I'll call it balanced. Give me a module that gives the nemesis an extra missile launcher. Read my PS above. Make a thread about it, and I'll support you on it. But I'll be damned if I wrote an essay about carriers to see my thread derailed. I thought I covered this pretty thoroughly in my disclaimer at the beginning of my first post. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
twit brent	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:54:00 - [25] Originally by: ELECTR0FREAK Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 21/05/2006 09:47:36 Originally by: mazzilliu maybe they should give the FIGHTERS the resistances rather than the carrier itself... Another cool idea. Since Carriers tend to just assign fighters to a friendly and sit tight somewhere safe while their fighter-escorted buddy goes and wreaks havoc, that does indeed make sense. I like it. Originally by: bundy bear You might be saying "So, the Caldari and Amarr get resistance bonuses! That's cool too." Hmmm. Yeah... about that. Lets use one of those 6 low slots, and fit an Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II (Or an Invulnerability Field if you want to shield tank it) Voila! It's almost like I had Amarr or Caldari Carrier IV. And all with just using 1 of the 16 module slots on the ship. This only works if you are planning to fit 1 energised adaptive nano membrane to your gallente carrier. Otherwise your logic is flawed, due to stacking penalties that nano membrane will decrease the effectiveness of other nano membranes fitted to your ship so it does more than "just sacrifice 1 slot" if you fit more than one. The only carrier that needs to be fixed is the minmatar one. Most people will not fit stacks of Nano membranes to their ship for resistances. I was attempting to illustrate a point, that a Thanatos can fit a single module for the same bonuses that the Caldari and Amarr ships get, while they don't have that same luxury. Give me a single module that gives me 40% to drone damage and I'll call it balanced. I am just saying that its not a simple as just "sacrificing 1 slot" as you want people to think. Amarr and caldari can and will outtank the gallente carrier all fitted for pure tank. Fit 2 energised adaptives to the gallente carrier, and 1 to the amarr one and suddenly the amarr one is on top (quick maths here could be wrong).
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:58:00 - [26] Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 21/05/2006 09:59:00 ^ True, but when you get down to the maths, and you end up comparing the fact that the Thanatos ends up slightly behind the other ships in tanking potential, but is still doing 40% more damage, which will win? Set an Archon and a Thanatos up with the same armor tank, and the Archon's tank will without a doubt be better. But pit the two against one another and the Thanatos will still easily win the slugfest due to its insane damage bonus. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
DarK	Posted - 2006.05.21 09:59:00 - [27] Originally by: twit brent stuff Hang on a second, how is this at all related to the manticore? That whole class of ships is totally retarded so let's just leave it out ok? Just for reference, I think the non-caldari bombers suck too and think they should all have 3 launchers. Another point I'd like to make is that if you are going to be difficult, keep in mind fighters are a Caldari creation, not a Gallente one. So in theory the Chimera should be the best. You can tell that a particular bonus is overpowered by the fact that the people that fly the ship are totally unwilling to compromise. You guys know the other bonusses suck but because it doesn't affect you you don't give a ****. And here is something for the clue deficient: Each race can have their speciality and excell at that, ONLY if the class of ships isn't based on one particular race's speciality! Cruisers, Frigs, etc are generic classes, stealth bombers and carriers are NOT!
ELECTR0FREAK	Posted - 2006.05.21 10:03:00 - [28] Thank you DarK, for bringing back some sense into my thread :) -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula
twit brent	Posted - 2006.05.21 10:03:00 - [29] I think the gallente carriers bonus should be dropped to 7.5% so at lvl 4 it will be a 30% bonus which is 10% more than the amarr and caldari resistance bonuses. Gallente carrier should do more damage as its the "drone race" but even I have to agree that 10% is a bit much.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2006.05.21 10:05:00 - [30] honestly id like to see carriers get racial bonuses.. and see the fighters themselves changed a bit. even the fighters themselves should be more.. race specific, and then they can be like drones currently are, with the thermal (and technically gallente) ones being the best DPS wise right now fighters are basically all the same, i think the amarr one is the best, slightly ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.