EVE Search - Capital & Super Rebalance Suggestions

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Capital & Super Rebalance Suggestions

» 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 - 0 post(s)
Manfred Sideous North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion 1227	Posted - 2015.07.06 18:12:13 - [1] - Quote Capital & Super Rebalance Suggestions Prologue: The overarching strategy in these proposed changes is to give players meaningful reasons to field these ships in an environment where structure grinding doesnGÇÖt exist. Reducing the cost and adding utility to all classes is imho low hanging fruit thatGÇÖs easily sniped. On the subject of reducing cost it is imperative that Supercarriers and Titans are reduced so that the price point isnGÇÖt a deterring factor in fielding them in subcapital fights. I feel these changes will give all classes unique roles and reason for players to field them. Dreadnaught Add Corporate Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay ( The rationale for this is many new players when training for their first capital typically skill for a carrier for the utility of the suitcase adding a SMA & SMA allows players to instead choose which ship is more fun , useful for them). Change hull bonus out of siege dread does around 7.5k dps. Tracking only allows it to hit capital sized ships. Is not EWAR immune and can receive remote assistance. When dread enters siege it has highly improved tracking and does somewhere between 1-2k dps allowing it to hit subcapitals (dps amount is debateable , I think it should be higher than a short range BS but not more than double so imho 2k dps should be the ceiling). Dread cannot receive remote assistance while in siege but is EWAR immune. Carrier Increase Corporate Hangar and Ship Maintenance hangar size. Split existing carrier into 2 hulls per race. Logistics Carrier - Bonuses to Rep range , power. Capacitor Transfer range & power. Penalty to drone dps. DPS Carrier - Bonuses to Drone Damage penalties to remote assistance. The overarching idea is to kill the slowcat and limit the carriers ability to do all things good at one time. On patch day when players login they will choose which type of carrier they want their existing carriers to be (If this is impractical due to coding etc then I suggest turning existing carriers into the logistic carrier). Separate the fighter & drone bay. (suggest fighter bay being able to hold 20 fighters and the drone bay being 2-4k) Buff fighter ehp. Change Drone Control Units to affect Fighter HP & Resistance. Can the Nidhogger not be so bad please? Supercarriers Reduce hull cost (suggestion 3-5 billion isk to build a hull) Increase Corporate Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay as well as Fuel Bay (suggest at least double the current size) Separate Fighter & Fighter Bomber bays allow for 20 of each in each bay. Change Drone Control Units to affect Fighter & Fighterbomber HP & Resistance. Create Supercarrier specific module GÇ£Space HarpoonGÇ¥. High slot module that allows the Supercarrier to Harpoon another Capital or Supercapital and prevent it from warping. The Harpoon can then be reeled in. If the mass of the target is lower than the Supercarrier the result is the target will be dragged to the Supercarrier. If the mass is higher the result is Supercarrier is dragged to the target. This also creates unique gameplay opportunities for multiple supercarriers to team up and drag titans and heavier targets. Space Harpoons can affect sieged/triaged targets. Furthermore the Space Harpoon should be able to Harpoon to structures and pull themselves to the structure. Suggested Harpoon Range 75km for meta 1 and 100km for named/faction. Comparable fitting needs to the ECM Burst. Titans Reduce hull cost. (suggestion 15-20 billion isk to build a hull) Increase Corporate Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay as well as Fuel Bay (suggest at least double the current size) The titan should be the ultimate capital/supercapital killer. Increase turret DPS so that the titan does 50% more turret dmg than any other capitals possible maximum dps. Add scriptable highslot module that does an AOE or Cone force pull or push ( Heavy Interdictors are immune). This will give the titan great utility in subcap fights allowing it to reshape the battlefield. 10 min cooldown same rules apply as DDD. Double the amount of clones the clone vat bay can store. (With increased CHA/SMA size coupled with clonevat size this will allow the titan to be used in covert roles. Sneak into position summon a fleet strike and disappear. Rorqual Remove Ore Compression Bonus and Mission Create Capital Sized Gas HarvesterGÇÖs , Mining Lasers , Moon Extractors The Rorq becomes the ultimate expression of resource extraction when it enters siege allowing it extract resources from Clouds , Asteroids and Moons at rates beyond the capability of any other known device or mechanism. Normal Siege rules apply 5mins cycle canGÇÖt receive remote assistance and is EWAR immune. Increase ore bay size so that the rorq can do 2-3 cycles of siege before needing to empty. Modules Space Harpoon Titan Force Mod Capital sized Gas Harvester , Moon Harvester , Mining Lasers and requisite meta/faction versions Capital Sized Energy Neutralizers and NosferatuGÇÖs Drone Control Unit change to affect Fighter & Fighter Bomber EHP/Resistances. @EveManny https://twitter.com/EveManny
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1247	Posted - 2015.07.06 18:15:45 - [2] - Quote Supported. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2567	Posted - 2015.07.06 18:24:16 - [3] - Quote I'm having de ja vu
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1247	Posted - 2015.07.06 18:24:52 - [4] - Quote Rowells wrote: I'm having de ja vu Well, this time there is no talk of modes. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1825	Posted - 2015.07.06 18:28:33 - [5] - Quote Some interesting ideas for capital ships. I've proposed something similar for carriers a few times (split them into logi and fighter platforms) because it's never made sense to me that a logistics platform also has so much combat capability and hauling capability. The dreadnaught idea in particular is interesting in that you'd give each dread two roles based on whether it was in siege or not, but I fear it'd make them too flexible just like carriers are now. But, if I may be so bold, maybe do to dreads what you proposed to carriers: split them into two distinct classes, the existing dreads, and another class of dreads that gets the sub-cap combat siege bonuses you mentioned. I admittedly didn't read the supercap suggestions because I've never flown them and likely never will. Relatively Notorious By Association My Many Misadventures Inaugural C&P Thunderdome Champion
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2568	Posted - 2015.07.06 18:30:53 - [6] - Quote Also can we stop trying to justify existence of the industrial core by giving it whacky roles? No need to bedazzle the handcuffs unless you like that kind of stuff.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1825	Posted - 2015.07.06 18:31:54 - [7] - Quote Rowells wrote: Also can we stop trying to justify existence of the industrial core by giving it whacky roles? No need to bedazzle the handcuffs unless you like that kind of stuff. I can't unsee that mental image. Thanks for that. Relatively Notorious By Association My Many Misadventures Inaugural C&P Thunderdome Champion
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2493	Posted - 2015.07.06 19:13:52 - [8] - Quote I've got a few changes I'd make to your ideas: Dreadnoughts: Dreads in siege mode should be the higher damage dealers. I think I see what you're going for--making titans have less ability to hit subcaps than dreads have. But I think a better way to do it would be to give titans a role penalty to tracking, along with their bonus to damage. I'd say dreadnoughts should lose 50% tracking in siege mode, to reach the current tracking values. This means that out of siege mode their greatly-reduced DPS would come with double the tracking. It's not enough to easily hit battleships, but if you have subcap support to web and paint the battleships, they become much easier to hit. I'd also boost the base damage of capital weapons a lot--the siege module should only be doubling the DPS, out of siege the dreads should do a lot more DPS than a battleship. Carriers: I would not merge them, but I would possibly make more distinction between their roles. It is my understanding that operation of a triage module disallows the launching of drones, and thus slowcats operate without one. However, the triage module also disallows the capital from receiving remote reps. It is only useful for a carrier that is trying to mimic an Oneiros or Scimitar. It does not allow rep chains. I would alter the triage module to grant no defense bonuses but to allow remote reps. It will help defend the carriers by way of making multiple carriers more able to defend each other, and spider-tanking with triage modules can become a thing. In fact, I think real carrier spider-tanking should normally be done with triage modules. Capital reppers might need a nerf to make in-triage spider tanking similar in effectiveness to what could be done previously with what options were available through spider tanking. Carriers that would not spider-tank can still gain a defensive bonus if there are at least two of them on the field, as either one can repair the other even while both are in triage mode. Give me a top hat. http://i.imgur.com/Boi9sA8.jpg
Kenrailae Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 411	Posted - 2015.07.06 19:18:24 - [9] - Quote While you're not wrong in the slow cat needing to be redesigned from the ground up.... I honestly can't tell if you're being serious or dropping some heavy duty troll bait..... 1-2k dps sieged dread? They can already hit sub caps, the pilot just has to not be a scrub. Add in a couple webs and game over. Then the Super/Titan cost suggestions? 0.o Yeah, they need to be looked at but that is pure crazy. I'll wait for CCP to post something to respond, instead of CSM trolling. #Spaceharpoons The Law is a point of View
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 362	Posted - 2015.07.06 19:20:13 - [10] - Quote Space harpoons? There's a Moby **** joke in there somewhere.. We need a pure white ship skin for each titan. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role

Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2569	Posted - 2015.07.06 19:28:46 - [11] - Quote my pleasure bronson. That aside, I really like the idea for dreads with switching the damage roles (subduing a chubby over the idea of SMA on a dread). However, I dont see any mention of reduced hitpoints for any of the ships. The costs are going down a bit, but are the massive base HP still needed in the new roles? The way I see it, the need for massive dps against structures is gone so its entirely possible that the overall HP and max damage for these ships can be brought more in line and reduce the chance of balance issues and niche OP areas. It is one of the primary reasons for reduced damage against subcaps and terrible tracking for capital weapons. A more linear progression in stat increases would simplify a lot of things. On the rorqual, I really dont want to see the compression go away (and the mission?). I use it a lot since it has a bit more flexibility than a POS and I would definitely use it more if it didn't require a 5 minute siege timer. That is my single biggest issue with it. If people are deadset on keeping the indy core around, I would suggest removing all current roles from it and moving them to the base hull. Then add as many specialized gas/mining/moongoo-ing cores as you want. A bigger SMA might be nice too since its more restricted (and should therefore specialize). In my own vision, If you were to give it harvesting roles, those would be delegated to drone-like pieces, but thats just a personal aesthetic preference. Also, to the chagrin of many other rorqual pilots, I would like to see some cargo space moved from hull to fleet hangar (only slightly larger) and to the ore/x-material bay (possibly specialized hangars for materials?) in a greater tsum than what was lost. and while im at it, you dont need to split carrier roles, since you are reducing cost of supers anyway, you have your dps carrier right there. Even the skills are the same. Just remove any and all drone bonuses from normal carriers and focus on logistics. And remove all logistics bonuses from supers. Boom, roles split.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2569	Posted - 2015.07.06 19:30:36 - [12] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Space harpoons? There's a Moby **** joke in there somewhere.. We need a pure white ship skin for each titan. http://i.imgur.com/Hlqad2e.jpg
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2493	Posted - 2015.07.06 19:40:25 - [13] - Quote continuing post #8 Numbers, for those of you who prefer these: All capital weapons: +300% damage, +100% tracking Siege Module I: +100% damage (instead of +700%) Siege Module II: +135% damage (instead of +840%) Both siege modules: -50% tracking new bonuses for Titans: skill bonus: 15% bonus to weapon damage per level role bonus: 50% more weapon damage and 60% less tracking And now here's how my proposed values compare to what we currently have: DPS of Dreadnought in siege: no change Tracking of Dreadnought in siege: no change DPS of Dreadnought out of siege: +300% Tracking of Dreadnought out of siege: +100% DPS of Titan vs current value (with Titan skill at 3): +117.5% DPS of Titan vs current value (with Titan skill at 5): +75% DPS of Titan vs Dreadnought (current ratio): -10% (36/40) DPS of Titan vs Dreadnought (my proposal): +57.5% (63/40) Tracking of Titan vs current value: -20% Give me a top hat. http://i.imgur.com/Boi9sA8.jpg
Petre en Thielles Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 179	Posted - 2015.07.06 19:44:27 - [14] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Space harpoons? There's a Moby **** joke in there somewhere.. We need a pure white ship skin for each titan. EVE is going down the path to turn into this\ http://i.imgur.com/jO24Dfc.jpg or this http://i.imgur.com/OhpvCJj.png
Leto Aramaus Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop 172	Posted - 2015.07.06 20:39:56 - [15] - Quote A BIG NO from me about the massive cost reductions on Titans and Supercarriers. Like wtf? Why? You want everyone and their alt to have a Titan? You want 5-10 Titan losses a day, and 50-100+ Supercarrier losses? I'd prefer the opposite, frankly. I think it would be much cooler if Titans and Supers were brought back to the days of BoB and Atlas(? was it Atlas?), where there were "rumors that they have actually BUILT a TITAN". -1. not a fan. The UI update we deserve
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2571	Posted - 2015.07.06 20:53:17 - [16] - Quote Leto Aramaus wrote: A BIG NO from me about the massive cost reductions on Titans and Supercarriers. Like wtf? Why? You want everyone and their alt to have a Titan? You want 5-10 Titan losses a day, and 50-100+ Supercarrier losses? I'd prefer the opposite, frankly. I think it would be much cooler if Titans and Supers were brought back to the days of BoB and Atlas(? was it Atlas?), where there were "rumors that they have actually BUILT a TITAN". -1. not a fan. We've already hit the point of no return on that.
Petre en Thielles Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 181	Posted - 2015.07.06 21:00:36 - [17] - Quote Rowells wrote: We've already hit the point of no return on that. It's like inflation IRL, countries eventually stop printing the penny as their money is devalued. Obvious solution? Get rid of rookie ships completely, frigs become rookie ships, and we make a class bigger than the titan (the mega-titan). Problem solved. You're welcome all.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1985	Posted - 2015.07.06 21:05:52 - [18] - Quote Dread : How good does the tracking get in anti sub-cap role? It hits BS? BC? Cruisers? HACS? Scriptable siege module to anti cap or anti sub-cap as opposed to good anti-cap dps without commitment would be better imo. Carrier : Looks good Supercarrier : Do they lose their rep support bonus or they are still somewhat capable of hybrid operation? Harpoon is a neat idea but teaming up to pull larger target might be hard on the hamsters. Titant : I would not count on an AoE effect being integrated but who knows... Do those reduction in cost bring docking capabilities for super/titans? Reduction in EHP?
Tiddle Jr Galvanized Inc. 294	Posted - 2015.07.06 21:07:12 - [19] - Quote Time to make it even more worse or either interesting. Get rid of Triage/ Siege mods. Wait, don't cry yet. Buff Capital turrets/launchers overall DPS. Improve all XL ammo. Dreads should play their own very narrow role - kill other Capitals. Nothing else. Not sure about structures. Titans never leave null sec space ever and super carriers as well. Pilots should work on better utilization of non cap logistics tacticts. Build costshould be increase for all of them. Carriers 2.5 bil; Dreads 5.0 bil; Supercariers 35.0 bil; Titans 125 bil. CAPless this game is deff need that. Otherwsie we have cruisers vs capitals online.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2493	Posted - 2015.07.06 21:13:15 - [20] - Quote Howabout we bring back Motherships? Lets downplay the carrier aspect of the supercarrier and bring back its command and operations roles, making it extremely ideal as a subcap support ship, but pathetic to use directly as an attack vessel. I think the best way to fix supercaps is to make their best use to be on the battlefield in support of subcaps. Frostys Virpio wrote: Dread : How good does the tracking get in anti sub-cap role? It hits BS? BC? Cruisers? HACS? I think he was going for HICs. Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm The Succubus looks meaner But the Revenant cleaner Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm

Styphon the Black Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union 37	Posted - 2015.07.06 21:42:28 - [21] - Quote Too many changes and suggestions on one single thread. We need to break this up. I like some of the ideas and changes but I am not so hot on some of the others like space harpoon.
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 217	Posted - 2015.07.06 22:14:03 - [22] - Quote Carriers: Don't split carriers into two varieties. Nerf the Slowcat doctrine by moving the +1 drone per level bonus of the hull into the Drone Control highslot. Each module then gives +2 drones. Combat refitting isn't going to be prevalent because they're capital sized modules. This also nerfs ratting carriers, but only their ability to fend off light tackle. Dreadnoughts: Instead of making Siege mode the distinction between shooting caps and subs, change the stats on both long- and short-range guns so that long-range guns are anti-capital and shorts are anti-sub. They won't be 'long-range' or 'short-range' any more, but this will require dread pilots to commit to a role before entering the field. General: I'd like to see jump drives moved to a highslot module. Now that caps can take gates, a jump drive isn't explicitly needed to move about. The ability to cyno directly into, or out of, a fight should require a sacrifice on combat effectiveness. PS: **** yes, space harpoons.
D3N3R0TH ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 0	Posted - 2015.07.06 23:41:06 - [23] - Quote Supercarriers don't need a tweak they need a new role. Players should be able to dock ships inside supercarriers, like they would if they were docking in a station. When docked they would just see the outside of the Super. Supercarriers should then be able to jump to a cyno with players docked inside. Unlike a titan bridge which does not require an asset to be committed to the battle, players that enter the field via a Supercarrier jump "do not" gain jump fatigue - however the Supercarrier pilot does gain fatigue. To make this viable the size of the fleet hanger and ship maintenance bay need to be increased. Supercarriers also need to be given the role of ON GRID boosters which should be far superior to the current booster ships (which need to be nerfed because off grid boosting is stupid and Command ships are too **** to actually be effective on the battlefield - they need a new role but that's a different topic).
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky Black Iron Foundries Phoebe Freeport Republic 42	Posted - 2015.07.07 00:16:18 - [24] - Quote Holy crap, every suggestion so far has been the least thoughtout I've ever read. God I hope fozzie doesn't take ideas from you guys this is stupid. I can't even begin to see how many counter intuitive things I've read so far but its like a politicians wet dream. Reducing the cost of super hulls from 15b to 3-5? why even have a regular carrier? If I'm gonna blow 3 billion on a nice chimera hull why not blow 3 billion on the wyvern, theres literally no point to a regular carrier at that point. Why even have a space harpoon? we already have this with bubbles and HIC points Its like Manfred literally has zero experience with capitals with all these stupid changes.
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 218	Posted - 2015.07.07 00:23:31 - [25] - Quote Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote: Holy crap, every suggestion so far has been the least thoughtout I've ever read. God I hope fozzie doesn't take ideas from you guys this is stupid. I can't even begin to see how many counter intuitive things I've read so far but its like a politicians wet dream. Reducing the cost of super hulls from 15b to 3-5? why even have a regular carrier? If I'm gonna blow 3 billion on a nice chimera hull why not blow 3 billion on the wyvern, theres literally no point to a regular carrier at that point. Why even have a space harpoon? we already have this with bubbles and HIC points Its like Manfred literally has zero experience with capitals with all these stupid changes. You should elaborate on why the suggestions are bad. PS: There's no need for the excessive use of even. You're not a white girl.
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky Black Iron Foundries Phoebe Freeport Republic 42	Posted - 2015.07.07 00:28:17 - [26] - Quote Rawketsled wrote: Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote: Holy crap, every suggestion so far has been the least thoughtout I've ever read. God I hope fozzie doesn't take ideas from you guys this is stupid. I can't even begin to see how many counter intuitive things I've read so far but its like a politicians wet dream. Reducing the cost of super hulls from 15b to 3-5? why even have a regular carrier? If I'm gonna blow 3 billion on a nice chimera hull why not blow 3 billion on the wyvern, theres literally no point to a regular carrier at that point. Why even have a space harpoon? we already have this with bubbles and HIC points Its like Manfred literally has zero experience with capitals with all these stupid changes. You should elaborate on why the suggestions are bad. PS: There's no need for the excessive use of even. You're not a white girl. He has nothing to elaborate on why he even proposed this! Why reduce the cost of Super hulls, why reduce the cost of titans? why introduce all this categorical nonsense with all the carrier bonuses? why introduce all this extra SMA/CHA space and stuff. Its extremely obfuscating and theres nothing in here beyond these few cherry picked good things that might be useful but none of this fixes capitals.
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 219	Posted - 2015.07.07 00:36:58 - [27] - Quote You doesn't it fix capitals? You didn't answer my question.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2493	Posted - 2015.07.07 00:39:17 - [28] - Quote Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote: Holy crap, every suggestion so far has been the least thoughtout I've ever read. God I hope fozzie doesn't take ideas from you guys this is stupid. I'd agree that Manfred Sidious doesn't have all of the best ideas, but what he put in the OP isn't all bad, some of it is gold. And the rest of the thread seems to have even better ideas. Of course, as with any thread, not all of the ideas in it are good. But I'm actually impressed with this one. I think you should actually read the thread before you criticize it. Rawketsled wrote: You doesn't it fix capitals? You didn't answer my question. Actually, he did. He pointed out that the burden of proof is on Manfred Sideous to first explain why these ideas are any good. It's a decent point, the OP hasn't offered much in the way of in-depth explanation of how he expects the proposed changes to fix the game. Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm The Succubus looks meaner But the Revenant cleaner Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
Lt Shard Team Pizza Good at this Game 54	Posted - 2015.07.07 00:51:30 - [29] - Quote what the ****
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 220	Posted - 2015.07.07 00:53:14 - [30] - Quote You're right there is a burden of proof on Manny, but that doesn't mean the ideas are automatically bad.



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.