Also carriers look dumb coming out of the large hangers have them come out of the sub cap hangers they fit in them perfectly and it doesn't look so silly

Okay, homeworlding fighters is in, and it has a problem.
A big problem
A camera problem.

Well, okay, it's actually a sympthom of a bigger problem - the general control problem.

Currently fighter movement commands are issued in two steps - first you choose azimuth, then you choose elevation.
This means that if the desired waypoint is off-plane, you HAVE to properly determine azimuth before you can visually identify elevation, otherwise you have to redo the sequence from scratch.

This means that a proper identification of azimuth is crucial, and it's best done switching to "top" view (placing the camera to look perpendicularly to the, ehhhm, universal New Eden ecliptic plane).

Here lies the problem - you can't rotate your camera when issuing fighter movement commands, because both things are done with LMB, and fighter movement mode prevents the use of LMB for camera rotation. So you are stuck with whatever viewport you have chosen before entering the fighter movement mode for the whole duration. USing top view from the starts will prevent you from correctly determining elevation. Using any other view from the start will prevent you from determining azimuth.

There are 2 possible solutions:
1) The bad one. Use some other button to separate command steps. This will allow for camera rotation.
2) The good one. Do not atomize the movement mode. Make it possible to freely change both azimuth and elevation at any point during the fighter movement mode, so you could fine-tune the destination in steps.

Okay, actually, do both.

No today it was 2.5 dmg and velocity for minm 2.5 damage and hit points for gal just 4% tank resists for amarr and caldari

The caldari now has an anemic capacity of sub 70k fighter storage while minm and galleries are over 80 these numbers are with fighter hanger skill maxed it a has changed since carrier bonuses were first altered

To be honest the dps isn't even the main issue is the limited fighter capacity that will make the biggest difference

Hell the two carriers with the largest fighter bays also are the two with fighter survivability bonuses

EDIT

They all also get 5%optimal to racial Ewar fighters

I tend to agree.

I also am concerned about the slot layouts. Archon is 5/4/7 and Thanatos is 5/5/6. That extra low slot on the Archon lets it put a LOT of tank on, and still fit some DDAs. While the extra mid on the Thanny does... what? Not very useful for a carrier, IMO. It would have been better two swap the slot layouts - give the Thanny the extra low so that it can fit some tank to compensate for not having a tank bonus, and give the Archon the extra mid since it doesn't need to use as many low slots to get its tank up. (But maybe that'll make the two carriers too similar? Then maybe the Thanny can have a 6/4/6 layout, with that extra high for an additional Fighter Support to help out those fighters, or smartbombs/neuts/links to complement it's DPS combat role?)

Well, dunno about thanny, but the Nid has a single advantage. It's fast. Namely, it can be made fast enough to outrun fighters and FBs. In fact, it can be made faster than some typical battleship fits while still retaining capital level tank, capacitor and DPS. Which begs the question. What's the position of battleships in the new meta?

Final thought, there will be a huge sale of nyxes, aeons and wyvers soon-ish since you can nano a hel and why would you fly any other boat?

I think you are forgetting a key attribute the nyx and than have, A much larger fighter bay the thans is nearly 20km larger than a chimeras thats over 2 extra flights of lights. also the nid can't tank as well as the than and again has slightly few fighters

well i have already found a very powerful use for the new nid in WH ^.^


and lol if you think any shield RR ship is going to be usefull




any chance we can change the E-war optimal range to a strength bonuse (doesn't need to be 5%) except on the Thanatos currently that extra range doesn't help these fighters at all and a power bonus would give more diversity in carrier use. atm E-war fighters are just as strong or weaker than their mid slot counterparts but you have to give up 1/3 of your DPS to use them that's just to week

the idea of giving carriers 4 flights 3 light 1 support would also work and i think this would be fine but it would detract from a way to more define the carriers. Giving pilots a reason to train more than one

while there are plenty of reasons to use the web fighters besides some one screwed up (such as only shortly to catch something till your fleets tackle can get there) the cap and ecm ones i can only see right now being used as a last minute crap i need to break tackle and the disruption one is just a joke in a popper fleet.




maybe giving the fighters a limited 3rd ability

the two i like the most with this are

a short duration 5-10s powerful paint for the minmatar ones (this will allow for a timed fleet alpha if coordinated right)

and a short duration scram 10-20 for the gal (this will help your tackle catch a ship using an mwd but cant hold it on their own)


the amarr and caldari ones are harder as i cant really find a way to give them a fleet oriented ability

for amarr a high alpha nuet maybe?

caldari an ECM burst or perhaps a very strong ecm blast with a long cool down?


these would all have a limited number of uses b4 heading back to the carrier 3-5

Hey all,

Endless thanks for all the great feedback so far. We've been working as hard as we can to get all the features implemented and smash some through the outstanding bugs. so apologies for the lack of hard stats or responses to design questions in this thread. Rest assured, all your feedback is being read and considered, even if we don't have the time to reply. For now I just want to summarise whats landed on Singularity in the last few days and whats been fixed!

New Things/Fixes

• All T1 & T2 new and updated capital modules should now be seeded on the market. This includes but is not limited to: Superweapons, Armor Plates, Shield Extenders, Skills, Prop Mods, Capital Weapons, Fighters & Ammo. Go forth and see what you can find!
• Fighters should now deal with being abandoned appropriately (They will go inert after a cycle if their controller disappears).
• Fighters will now warp back to you if you recall them from another location in a system
• The stats for all capital related items are still being iterated upon. Full feedback threads for these will be coming soon!
• Fighters will now obey the safety settings of their controller (And their UI should reflect this)
• Fighters now honour skill requirements in all cases
• Fight navigation lines go red when the squadron is engaging the target.
• Fixed various text errors
• Removed drone bays from Carriers and Supercarriers
• The Fighter navigation UI now doesn't draw vertical lines while the Tac Overlay is off
• Fighter show info windows now include skill requirements (And they are correct in all cases)
• Force Aux wrecks now have appropriate hit points
• Capital Shield Extenders now give more than a measly 94 hp bonus
• Fighter abilities now stop flashing green when deactivated.

That's all for now! Many more things will be fixed and implemented in the coming days, so stay tuned for more info! For now, to allow a bit more flexibility in what you can test, I'm providing an additional 8 injectors for every Singularity pilot, check your redeeming queues!

The issue (apples to apples comparison):

Due to the 8th low slot, Drone Damage Units, and current 7.5% hull damage bonuses, the Aeon will have significantly more HP than Nyx's -and- deal more damage! DDUs and the new need for armor plates changed the old dynamic where Nyx's did 25% more damage in all cases giving the pilot a choice of damage or tank.

The fit: 2 Plates, 3 Active Hardners, 2 EANMs. The difference being the Aeon gets the 20% resistance hull bonus, higher base armor, and the 8th low slot to put on a 20+% drone damage unit, meaning they have higher HP and deal 7.5+% more damage than nyx's! Or, if the Aeon chooses to add an additional damage control instead of a DDU, they have even more EHP and only deal 12.5% less damage. If the Nyx chose to use DDUs in lieu of EANM, they lose 2 million EHP which is a non starter. In all cases, the Aeon is clearly the winner.


Best solution:

Keep current hull bonuses but give the Nyx the ability to use a 4th squad of heavies/lights while limiting the tank classes to 3. I find this idea interesting, and would preserve the nyx as the pure damage choice unless the aeon goes multiple DDUs which would sacrifice its tank advantage.


Other possible solutions:

Revert to 10% hull damage bonus for Nyx or reduce aeon (and wyvern) fighter damage bonus to 2.5%. Unfortunately this doesn't fix the issue because while Nyx's will do more damage than an Aeon with above fit and DDU, it's only 5% more damage while having significantly less HP (and less than 5% dmg with faction DDU). Aeons still win in this scenario.

Add mid slot drone damage mods. The downside is this will affect all ship classes and could lead to balance issues.

Nyx gets -1 mid/+1 low. This goes against tradition of slot layouts for Gallente vs Amarr.

What is the reasoning behind making carriers take so much longer than any other ship to train? their hulls are already higher than dreads and now they need 2 x12 skills just to use T2 weapons and 4x12 and 1x14 to be at peak effectiveness

either way if a ship is moving slower than your tracking you apply full dmg if it is in optimal regardless of sig

Can someone confirm pls that DDA don't affect light or heavy fighters anymore ?

no it is ok. why because if a capital loses the ability to rat then thats OK if they hasn't then it makes no diferance

I guess that "Remote Repair Impedance" that siege and triage have as bonus don't work as planed.
I've tested in Sisi. And I've confirmed that siegeDN and triageFAX can receive not only cap transfer(Is it included in remote assistance?),but also remote repair.
I wonder if that "Remote Assistance Impedance" don't work too.

I have heard at Siemens this is called a "Banana Product". It matures at the Customer.

anyone else notice that the Satyrs tend to just randomly take off sometimes? i was messin around ratting with a thanny since i couldnt find any other way to test them out (im nowhere near c-6 or whatever it is) after i cleared one site, i hit recall all drones, started to warp to the next site then i noticed my satyr squadron was still stuck in "returning" mode but couldnt see them anywhere. panned out and looked, and they were almost 700km away from the ship.

at this point, warp drive activated. this leads me to the next issue. if for whatever reason, you leave a squadron behind, they get stuck in returning mode. even if you dock up, you can not reload that tube. even logging off and back on, i couldnt reload that tube until after downtime the next day

A short test to get more reliable numbers:

Templar II with an all V Thannatos with 5 FSU II and 5 DDA II is roughly 1445 dps (only main weapon). Tested against a target with ~450k ehp, so the error should be pretty low.

Thats quite sad damage, considering that a tranq thanny with 5 DDA and 5 DCU and all V is about 3214 damage.

The secondary weapon does roughly the same dps as the primary (damage per hit ~2x, and reload time also 2x), so assuming you would constantly spam the missiles, and would magically not need to reload, then you would still be only at ~2900 dps, which is still 10% below tranq values.

This is just too low.
Carriers got quite a nerf with the removal of the drone bay and more importantly with the removal of their logistic abilities. And dps was never the reason to bring a carrier anyway. They need more dps if they are supposed to be useful.

Also the application against fast-moving smaller targets like good fitted cruisers for example ist significantly worse than currently on TQ, the fighters simply lose a lot more of their DPS because they juse some kind of "missile mechanic" for their attack.

On TQ a carrier with 2 Omnidirectional Tracking Links (Tracking Scripts) and 1 TargetPainter can apply Damage pretty pretty hard even against tough cruisers (try Sleeper or T2 Playercruisers for example), but you cannot support your fighters with Omnidirectional Tracking Links any more and 3 Targetpainters have not even close the same effekt, because they do nothing against the damage-reduction because of the targets speed. And in most cases Webs cannot be used because they won't reach the target. Supportfighters are also not an option, their use cut your DPS down by 1/3 because you lose a squad of damagefighters. The "tackle" ability on the anti-fighter fighter does not seem to work yet and they do even worse DPS.


Not even counted the fact that the Fighters are way too weak now. They are shot down like flies once tackled. They need proper Values for Shield, Armor and Hull inc. resists, like those on TQ currently.

That would be really strange, considerung that fighters do not even have a tracking attribute.
Or are you talking about heavy fighters? They might be affected.

hell my phoenix gets over 5kdps with out heat

so i just did the math 3 mill for one t1 light fighter ? thats 89 3 flights

and you have 3 flights of T2 at 189 mill

so a thanny needs to hold 609mill (if it goes all light fighters) thats over half the cost of the hull

I did like 10 Drone Horde and Serpentis Heaven/Sanctum with Thanatos and didn't lose a single fighter. I recall them for rearm only and i did these anomalies faster than i can do on TQ.
And when skills like Drone interfacing and navigation will work it would be even better.

Look at the faction mods, they are much reduced in fitting (shield booster upto 90tf!), and seem to the only way to effectively make use of the fitting room on all capitals...

And the shield carriers i would say. Armor seems to be in a pretty good place right now. Allthough that is mostly for PVE, i have no idea how they will work out for PVP. Shame. Supers seem better in every way.

None of the carriers seem to have fitting issues now that CCP confirmed FSU are meant to stack

Well I suppose the Chimera needs one co-processor for a full on tank fit but it's really the fax that have fitting issues

Gùï We have still no shortcuts (keyboard hotkeys) for launching and recalling fighters? Please use the same commands like for drones (launch, recall, engage), since there are no ships that have fighters and drones at the same time, so there will be no conflicts anyway.

Gùï Still no damage estimation for fighters in the fitting screen. "Drone DPS" says zero.

Gùï Fighters with enabled MWD still having problems when trying to land in the hangar bay. They sometimes stay outside next to the carrier until their mwd cycle has ended, then you need to recall them again to force them to land.

Gùï Reload time for the light fighters missile attack is way too long. You lose more damage during the recall-reload-reengage period from not shooting with the primary attack, then the secondary attack brings you in bonus damage.

Gùï Fighter squads still die like flies once tackled from multiple webs. Their buffer is too weak to survive even the way back to the hangar bay.

Gùï When you recall fighters, they keep shooting their target, prolonging your aggression timer! They should immediately stop shooting when recalled, like drones.

Gùï Stacking Penalty f++r Fighter Support Units is an incredibly bad idea, given the small boni each one gives. The increasing effect is barely noticable when using more than one or two of them, and that for a capital module in a very expensive high-slot? Either increase their effect A LOT or remove the stacking penalty.

Uhh, was out of touch with new eden for a while. What's the new movement interface binding for fighters again?
It was M or something. Is it Q now?
Because I have module activation binded to the WASD corner, so Q is my F1, and I can't seem to find the fighter navigation in bindings.

Only 2 days to release and there is still no DPS-value in the fitting screen for carriers and no hotkeys for launching, recalling etc.?

still i can't believe they are putting this in w/o the dps being displayed (or several other UI things that are needed) and with FAX the way they are.

You sir are not flying or fitting well. A carrier can at most get one volley off on an unassisted frig sized target b4 its mwd shuts down one volley is not enough to kill the frigate.

Also fighters can be perma jammed and made a none issue.

They are also very easy to tackle as well as highly susceptible to all forms of e-war.

They're very week against anything bigger than a t1 cruiser so long as you have logistics

Carriers are built to be a counter to sub capitals but they themselves are very easy to counter so long as you are not trying to fight them like old carriers.

What I meant by unassisted was no one was tackling or painting the frig so if our was not moving fast it would be poor fit or piloting. And really they are unaffected by missile disruptors they were working on sisi before release? Of course ccp does break things from time to time. Also webs and scram are very effective against fighters considering you only need to pin 3 per carrier down. I didn't bother testing taking disruptors