Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1779
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 02:41:27 -
[211] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: This is not new, the supers have much better bonuses because they are a much more valuable target that costs 200 times what a carrier does to field.
Ok, if a normal carrier costs about 1.5-2 bil, please show me a 300-400 bil super besides a very shiny Revenant. My bad, was supposed to be 20 times not 200
and besides that carriers have always been better at hitting sub caps than suppers as they could use sub cap drones so not only are carriers now being forced into nothing but an anti sub cap role suppers are getting the tools to do that better
i have no issue with carriers not getting bombers so long as carriers can do the anti sub cap role or on par with HAW and supers
if not that then let them be better with E-war fighters (can start by making these useful)
there is already enough of a reason to use supers over a carrier but currently there is very little reason to use a carrier over a dread or a T3 cruiser
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Side1Bu2Rnz9
Trojan Legion Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 02:50:46 -
[212] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:
A new skill is being introduced called 'Light Fighters', this provides a 5% velocity bonus per level and is required for the operation of light fighters. A new skill is being introduced called 'Support Fighters', this provides a 5% hitpoint bonus per level and is required for the operation of support fighters. The fighters skill now provides a 5% damage bonus per level and is required for the operation of all fighters. [/list]
All of these changes are on Sisi, and we'd appreciate you jumping on and helping to test them! [/list] So I got onto Sisi, fit up a carrier, bought the new fighters... and realized they all require Fighters 5, Light Fighters/Support Fighters 5 to use. Will all fighters require the Fighters and Light/Support/Heavy Fighters just to use in the first place on TQ? Either that was a while back when the requirements were incorrect or you bought the T2 versions. T1 fighters require Fighters 1 and Light/Support/Heavy Fighters 1. Yes, all the fighters will require the new skills on TQ but not to 5 for T1. I really hope they rethink the requirements for T2 though. Having to train two 12x skills to 5 seems excessive. It seems like something more like Fighters 5, Light/Support/Heavy Fighters 4, and racial Drone Specialization 1 would be more reasonable. Welp, that fixes it. Thank you. I have Fighters, Light Fighters, and Support Fighters to 4 right now. If I wanted to get the T2 versions I would have to put in 3 months (96 days)? That does seem steep, especially when T2 capital guns will only take 1 7x skill (<30 days)
If you look at the capital focus group logs. https://focusgrouplogs.tech.ccp.is/capitals/2016-03-31/#17:16:52
Larrik states that he agrees T2 fighters should only require lvl 5 Fighter and lvl 4 light/support/heavy fighter skill. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1781
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 04:20:22 -
[213] - Quote
Side1Bu2Rnz9 wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:
A new skill is being introduced called 'Light Fighters', this provides a 5% velocity bonus per level and is required for the operation of light fighters. A new skill is being introduced called 'Support Fighters', this provides a 5% hitpoint bonus per level and is required for the operation of support fighters. The fighters skill now provides a 5% damage bonus per level and is required for the operation of all fighters. [/list]
All of these changes are on Sisi, and we'd appreciate you jumping on and helping to test them! [/list] So I got onto Sisi, fit up a carrier, bought the new fighters... and realized they all require Fighters 5, Light Fighters/Support Fighters 5 to use. Will all fighters require the Fighters and Light/Support/Heavy Fighters just to use in the first place on TQ? Either that was a while back when the requirements were incorrect or you bought the T2 versions. T1 fighters require Fighters 1 and Light/Support/Heavy Fighters 1. Yes, all the fighters will require the new skills on TQ but not to 5 for T1. I really hope they rethink the requirements for T2 though. Having to train two 12x skills to 5 seems excessive. It seems like something more like Fighters 5, Light/Support/Heavy Fighters 4, and racial Drone Specialization 1 would be more reasonable. Welp, that fixes it. Thank you. I have Fighters, Light Fighters, and Support Fighters to 4 right now. If I wanted to get the T2 versions I would have to put in 3 months (96 days)? That does seem steep, especially when T2 capital guns will only take 1 7x skill (<30 days) If you look at the capital focus group logs. https://focusgrouplogs.tech.ccp.is/capitals/2016-03-31/#17:16:52 Larrik states that he agrees T2 fighters should only require lvl 5 Fighter and lvl 4 light/support/heavy fighter skill.
Bit he had since stated on the greed back thread on the test server that they now have the accurate skill requirements
And they are 5/5 :/
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 06:54:29 -
[214] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:It always has been - Supers have had Bombers for ever, that hit like battlecruisers compared to T1 cruisers from carriers. This is not new, the supers have much better bonuses because they are a much more valuable target that costs 200 times what a carrier does to field. They are meant to be a focal point or main force of a battle, where a carrier is like the meat shield.
The whole discussion here should not be about how powerful supers are, it should be about how under powered new carriers are.
But the old bonus were not strictly better. Supercaps were a lot better against caps, because of the high damage of bombers, and thats ok. But carriers could use normal drones, and also fit triage module. That gave them uses that super caps didnt have. Now this is gone, and supers are just better at everything.
Also while carriers are very underpowered right now, we should not forget that fixing the bugs alone will mean a 50% damage increase, 20% fighter hp increase and 20% fighter speed increase. Thats a lot. So before the discussion about carriers being underpowered can go on, ccp needs to fix the bugs.
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF Violence of Action.
62
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 07:29:03 -
[215] - Quote
Marranar Amatin wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:It always has been - Supers have had Bombers for ever, that hit like battlecruisers compared to T1 cruisers from carriers. This is not new, the supers have much better bonuses because they are a much more valuable target that costs 200 times what a carrier does to field. They are meant to be a focal point or main force of a battle, where a carrier is like the meat shield.
The whole discussion here should not be about how powerful supers are, it should be about how under powered new carriers are. But the old bonus were not strictly better. Supercaps were a lot better against caps, because of the high damage of bombers, and thats ok. But carriers could use normal drones, and also fit triage module. That gave them uses that super caps didnt have. Now this is gone, and supers are just better at everything. Also while carriers are very underpowered right now, we should not forget that fixing the bugs alone will mean a 50% damage increase, 20% fighter hp increase and 20% fighter speed increase. Thats a lot. So before the discussion about carriers being underpowered can go on, ccp needs to fix the bugs. But when the skills apply properly it will affect supers just as much as normal carriers. It should definitely help the carrier/dread balance, but not the carrier/super balance. On the other hand, titans are becoming basically stronger dreads that don't need to siege, so the same lack of purpose affects that side too. |
Zenafar
1
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 08:06:18 -
[216] - Quote
without triage carriers are useless. So they need to be more powerfull now.
Speaking of Scarrier/Carrier balance - maybe role bonus + Light fighter dmg for carriers? So carriers will be stronger against subcaps. Just thinking. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1783
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 08:31:44 -
[217] - Quote
Zenafar wrote:without triage carriers are useless. So they need to be more powerfull now.
Speaking of Scarrier/Carrier balance - maybe role bonus + Light fighter dmg for carriers? So carriers will be stronger against subcaps. Just thinking.
Assuming The missing skills will help the damage is think it would be better to give them e-war fighter bonuses (the crappy range ones don't count) and/or a speed bonus to the fighters (with a higher bonus still on the nid)
I also still like the idea of giving them an extra launch bay and second support fighter squad
As well if a support fighters bonus is given idk if it should be racial or general (worried about one carrier being to strong with its racial e-war) but at the same time more individually is not a bad thing
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
885
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 09:07:07 -
[218] - Quote
Marranar Amatin wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:It always has been - Supers have had Bombers for ever, that hit like battlecruisers compared to T1 cruisers from carriers. This is not new, the supers have much better bonuses because they are a much more valuable target that costs 200 times what a carrier does to field. They are meant to be a focal point or main force of a battle, where a carrier is like the meat shield.
The whole discussion here should not be about how powerful supers are, it should be about how under powered new carriers are. But the old bonus were not strictly better. Supercaps were a lot better against caps, because of the high damage of bombers, and thats ok. But carriers could use normal drones, and also fit triage module. That gave them uses that super caps didnt have. Now this is gone, and supers are just better at everything. Also while carriers are very underpowered right now, we should not forget that fixing the bugs alone will mean a 50% damage increase, 20% fighter hp increase and 20% fighter speed increase. Thats a lot. So before the discussion about carriers being underpowered can go on, ccp needs to fix the bugs. Pretty sure I mentioned in an earlier post - CCP is not going about any of this in a very professional way. What is on SISI is far from what is expected on TQ and we are running out of time to test any of it before it goes live.
By under powered I was including the carrier itself which is possibly more important than the dps from the anti subcap fighters they will use. But again, your right, half the modules required to realistically test the new carriers and Fax's are not available on sisi or just bugged.
What strictly made Supers better was their ability to tank as well as they did combined with massive DPS from Bombers and the fact you needed a Hic to stop one just warping off or jumping out.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Morrigan LeSante
Black Omega Security The OSS
1362
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 09:36:47 -
[219] - Quote
To be fair they have a always said it was released waaaaaay earlier than would normally be so we can get a feel for mechanics etc.
Patience on our side is fair.
Just remember to bug reports weird stuff. |
Circumstantial Evidence
274
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 16:17:06 -
[220] - Quote
The devs are working hard to get all the modules and mechanics working. Anything related to how much better this is from that - is a game balance question. Those get fixed in quick patches following the expansion. I've no doubt that on day 1 some module or mechanic will be underpowered and another OP. It's been a long time since CCP has made SO MANY changes to the game at once. Lots of new combinations to try out. Very exciting. |
|
Gevlin
Fink Operations The Volition Cult
281
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 17:51:07 -
[221] - Quote
Would be interesting to have fighters with an entosis link - to sorta mirror the drones used in Valkyrie .
Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
3006
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 19:27:50 -
[222] - Quote
What about dropping the damage bonus on the thanny and simply adding a fourth fighter tube? |
HandelsPharmi
Pharmi on CharBazaar
1798
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 22:32:28 -
[223] - Quote
Will Etosis Links cylcle 5 times longer (as mentioned in the Titan thread) or will there be no penalty? |
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
887
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 23:16:55 -
[224] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:The devs are working hard to get all the modules and mechanics working. Anything related to how much better this is from that - is a game balance question. Those get fixed in quick patches following the expansion. I've no doubt that on day 1 some module or mechanic will be underpowered and another OP. It's been a long time since CCP has made SO MANY changes to the game at once. Lots of new combinations to try out. Very exciting. The real problem here is - Stuff isn't working AT ALL not that it is OP or under powered.
Modules we are supposed to be testing aren't available or just don't work when fitted.
Morrigan LeSante; Yes, yes they did but do please tell me how we are supposed to test mechanics with modules that either aren't there or just don't work, when skills aren't applied and especially - When you can't get ant input from devs.
Submitting bug reports or tickets - It takes them 3 to 4 WEEKS to acknowledge a ticket - Why bother. Also, I don't think it is a bug when shield modules use up to triple the cpu of armor mods yet shield ships have less cpu - That's just poor game design. The capital game has always been about armor superiority, why look at that now just because it would be the perfect time to address it.
Trying to fit some of these new ships leaves me feeling a bit disgusted because fitting requirements have been increased substantially but the PG and CPU has not changed to encompass the extra needed. - Or is it some of these new ships were designed with a certain meta in mind and screw anything else.Yet it is way too late to be trying to get any answers or input from Devs on these things - They seem to be too busy preparing for fanfest to worry about responding to issues posed by players.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
887
|
Posted - 2016.04.05 23:32:07 -
[225] - Quote
HandelsPharmi wrote:Will Etosis Links cylcle 5 times longer (as mentioned in the Titan thread) or will there be no penalty? Reading the descriptions, nothing changes as far as capitals / supers and entosis links - The penalty stays as is.
Gevlin; I agree, entosis fighters could be interesting but with the drawback that those are the only fighters the entosising ship can launch. While entosis fighters are deployed all other launch tubes are locked.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1785
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 01:41:54 -
[226] - Quote
so did ccp think carriers did to much damage the fighter DPS just got nerfed or am i missing something??
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
753
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 01:49:05 -
[227] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:so did ccp think carriers did to much damage the fighter DPS just got nerfed or am i missing something??
Heavy fighters at least can really crank out the deeps. Several thousand damage per hit. Are they as good as current fighters? No not really if you want to talk about ratting or whatever but they're quite effective in pvp where they can smush subcaps quite quickly. Do not expect to see these fighters being especially well balanced for a good year or two though.
Many might not know this but one of the focus group members outright quit the team on the basis of the removal of afk carrier ratting, citing it as an essential component of EVE pve because pve is so horribly bad and that it isn't a problem because going afk carries its own risks and darwins law kicks in eventually. Apparently the new fighter mechanics turn money making back in to a second job and was deemed unacceptable.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1785
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 01:50:37 -
[228] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:so did ccp think carriers did to much damage the fighter DPS just got nerfed or am i missing something??
Heavy fighters at least can really crank out the deeps. Several thousand damage per hit. Are they as good as current fighters? No not really if you want to talk about ratting or whatever but they're quite effective in pvp where they can smush subcaps quite quickly. Do not expect to see these fighters being especially well balanced for a good year or two though. Many might not know this but one of the focus group members outright quit the team on the basis of the removal of afk carrier ratting, citing it as an essential component of EVE pve because pve is so horribly bad and that it isn't a problem because going afk carries its own risks and darwins law kicks in eventually. Apparently the new fighter mechanics turn money making back in to a second job and was deemed unacceptable.
... carriers cant use heavy fighters
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF Violence of Action.
62
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 02:03:33 -
[229] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:so did ccp think carriers did to much damage the fighter DPS just got nerfed or am i missing something??
oh its to compensate for the damage skill applying :/ Yep, carriers went from decent on paper and crap in reality to crap on paper and crap in reality. |
Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
57
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 06:44:42 -
[230] - Quote
Carriers can do some decent dps, because the drone damage amplifiers still do not have a stacking penalty.
Since it is still not fixed, and CCP is ignoring all complaints about carriers having not enough damage, maybe this is on purpose to allow carriers decent dps, if you are willing to sacrifice tank. |
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1787
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 06:50:30 -
[231] - Quote
Marranar Amatin wrote:Carriers can do some decent dps, because the drone damage amplifiers still do not have a stacking penalty.
Since it is still not fixed, and CCP is ignoring all complaints about carriers having not enough damage, maybe this is on purpose to allow carriers decent dps, if you are willing to sacrifice tank.
Except It's only the archon that needs to of this is the case
For their role the thanny and nid get more than enough tank from shields
Of this is how ccp is planning to give carriers more dps the Chimera and archon will be good for nothing other than over tanked space bricks
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Anthar Thebess
1488
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 09:07:03 -
[232] - Quote
Bricks, scale well. The more bricks you have the more things you can do, and stuff is more resistant to external force.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF Violence of Action.
63
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 09:17:04 -
[233] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Bricks, scale well. The more bricks you have the more things you can do, and stuff is more resistant to external force. Exactly. There's a reason T3 fleets are so popular, and the reason isn't that they have amazing DPS. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1787
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 09:55:37 -
[234] - Quote
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Bricks, scale well. The more bricks you have the more things you can do, and stuff is more resistant to external force. Exactly. There's a reason T3 fleets are so popular, and the reason isn't that they have amazing DPS.
But dreads with HAW fill that role better
And T3 fill it even better than that
Is not about will they have a use is about how many other things will out preform them if what ever use they have
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Anthar Thebess
1488
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 10:00:29 -
[235] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Bricks, scale well. The more bricks you have the more things you can do, and stuff is more resistant to external force. Exactly. There's a reason T3 fleets are so popular, and the reason isn't that they have amazing DPS. But dreads with HAW fill that role better And T3 fill it even better than that Is not about will they have a use is about how many other things will out preform them if what ever use they have
Fighters can project fighters to frew thousand kilometers, dreads cannot shoot so far. More EHP, better resist profile give you more time when something go wrong.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Zenafar
3
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 10:20:08 -
[236] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Bricks, scale well. The more bricks you have the more things you can do, and stuff is more resistant to external force. Exactly. There's a reason T3 fleets are so popular, and the reason isn't that they have amazing DPS. But dreads with HAW fill that role better And T3 fill it even better than that Is not about will they have a use is about how many other things will out preform them if what ever use they have Fighters can project fighters to frew thousand kilometers, dreads cannot shoot so far. More EHP, better resist profile give you more time when something go wrong. Dreads must be close to each other to project your damage to enemy, carriers can be spread on the grid 200km away from each other.
yeah and feed enemy with cheap fighters
edit: But i'ts good that carriers have big fighter bay so they can launch another group of fighters and after 5 mins (or so) fighters will finally reach enemy and feed them more |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1787
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 10:40:37 -
[237] - Quote
Zenafar wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Bricks, scale well. The more bricks you have the more things you can do, and stuff is more resistant to external force. Exactly. There's a reason T3 fleets are so popular, and the reason isn't that they have amazing DPS. But dreads with HAW fill that role better And T3 fill it even better than that Is not about will they have a use is about how many other things will out preform them if what ever use they have Fighters can project fighters to frew thousand kilometers, dreads cannot shoot so far. More EHP, better resist profile give you more time when something go wrong. Dreads must be close to each other to project your damage to enemy, carriers can be spread on the grid 200km away from each other. yeah and feed enemy with cheap fighters edit: But i'ts good that carriers have big fighter bay so they can launch another group of fighters and after 5 mins (or so) fighters will finally reach enemy and feed them more
Lol yeah just because you have the lock range doesn't mean you have the effective range
The range of a nid is generously 100km and when that may sound like a lot is not 100km from your ship but your fighter so of your enemy is on two sides of you you have to cut that in half.
Anyway my original comment was the unballanced nature of leaving DDA woth no stacking penalty of that status the case even without the hull bonuse one the thany and nid the Chimera and archon will be dwarfed and unable to stay competitive
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Zenafar
3
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 11:02:47 -
[238] - Quote
Yep. I thought ccp will fix Drone interfacing and add stacking for DDA, so it's + and - dps. And then we'll see what carriers can do. But something went wrong :) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1787
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 11:16:10 -
[239] - Quote
Zenafar wrote:Yep. I thought ccp will fix Drone interfacing and add stacking for DDA, so it's + and - dps. And then we'll see what carriers can do. But something went wrong :)
Yeah they fixed done interfacing then lowered total fighter damage
Odds ate they will add the penalty and all hope of carriers doing damage dies
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Morrigan LeSante
Black Omega Security The OSS
1374
|
Posted - 2016.04.06 13:25:06 -
[240] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Bricks, scale well. The more bricks you have the more things you can do, and stuff is more resistant to external force. Exactly. There's a reason T3 fleets are so popular, and the reason isn't that they have amazing DPS. But dreads with HAW fill that role better And T3 fill it even better than that Is not about will they have a use is about how many other things will out preform them if what ever use they have Fighters can project fighters to frew thousand kilometers, dreads cannot shoot so far. More EHP, better resist profile give you more time when something go wrong. Dreads must be close to each other to project your damage to enemy, carriers can be spread on the grid 200km away from each other.
No one and I mean no one is going to use carriers at extreme range. The fighters speed prevents it being remotely viable as well as the fact on grid probing is STILL not nerfed.
Drop them point blank is all that will happen. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |