|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
150
   |
Posted - 2016.06.15 13:08:16 -
[1] - Quote
I find the nerf to light fighter salvo DPS a bit concerning. Reducing the alpha and application is a good move, but carriers will need at least as much DPS as they have now, if not more, to be viable without the alpha. I would expect roughly a 25% increase in overall DPS with this much of a hit to application, not a ~15% decrease. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
150
|
Posted - 2016.06.15 14:48:27 -
[2] - Quote
NaK'Lin wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:I find the nerf to light fighter salvo DPS a bit concerning. Reducing the alpha and application is a good move, but carriers will need at least as much DPS as they have now, if not more, to be viable without the alpha. I would expect roughly a 25% increase in overall DPS with this much of a hit to application, not a ~15% decrease. I'm not having access to excel right this very moment. Can I get the math behind this? What's the exact impact to sustained DPS now? -15%? (ignore application, pure perfect numbers)
- it's -40% salvo damage
- reload shortened by 1/3 (6s to 4s)
- More charges by 50% (8 charges to 12 charges) (this should cancel itself out with the shortened reload times. no change on the "hey, i'm not contributing to combat" time)
- Rate of fire increased (18s cycles down to 14s cycles).
Normal "auto-attack" has not been affected in damage numbers, only application, iirc. So only the difference in Special attack (F3) needs to be considered. It used to contribute roughly about 45% of total sustained DPS, iirc. So the sustained number of the Salvo special attack (F3) must've gone down by 33.33333333333333333333333333333333333% for it to affect the total sustained DPS by -15%. Again, I might be wrong, I'm on the road and doing napkin math. Someone please do an actual math behind this and check by how much sustained DPs is affected. it's rather important. Thank you.
My math wasn't precise for the 15%; doing the math again it looks more like 11% less paper DPS while the missile attack still has ammo. The cycle time effectively went from 19 seconds to 15 (remember you can't activate the ability till after the cycle has finished, then you have to wait till the next tick.) for a 26.67% improvement. With the 40% decrease in damage, that comes out to a 24% decrease in DPS for the salvo.
On top of the paper DPS nerf, the salvo can no longer fully apply to most battleships, let alone cruisers or frigates.
Beyond the paper math it's more subjective, but I just can't really see a noteworthy use for carriers if they lose the one thing they were good at, which was doing a lot of damage in a very short time. If you want sustained DPS, HAW dreads are a little better against battleships and with proper support, vastly better against smaller targets. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
152
|
Posted - 2016.06.16 23:55:58 -
[3] - Quote
Honestly I'm baffled at the DPS nerf combined with the application changes. In my experience, carriers have never had enough DPS against large targets, but were a bit too strong against small stuff with the volley. Now they're even worse against large targets and it remains to be seen how the application changes affect damage to small stuff.
I'd personally keep most of these changes but make the following tweaks:
Main gun explosion radius 210 instead of 160.
Main gun explosion velocity 130 instead of 150.
Main gun damage +25%.
Salvo explosion radius 300 instead of 350.
Salvo explosion velocity 110 instead of 100.
Salvo damage -30% instead of -40%. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
155
|
Posted - 2016.06.20 06:39:47 -
[4] - Quote
Another concern about switching carriers from relying on alpha to DPS is gate/station guns in lowsec. As it is now, if a carrier is a valid target for the guns, they rarely manage to get more than 2 volleys off before the guns start shredding fighters and they need to be pulled. That's fine when camping a gate and you only need one volley, but it's a major pain in any real fight to repeatedly have to pull fighters and wait for them to reload and get back to the target. It basically forces the carriers to stay far off the gate/station, which was literally the exact thing fighter aggro was intended to prevent. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
155
|
Posted - 2016.06.22 16:17:56 -
[5] - Quote
C-137 wrote:PS. Please post Zealot fit that can apply 100+ dps @ 50km @ 3100ms transveral @ 33m sig. KTHXBAI.
First things first, in a Zealot you have the ability to go around 1500m/s before links in an attempt to reduce transversal. You can also use that speed to close some of the distance, and Zealots are a lot better around 40km than 50km. If you just sit there while the tackle orbits you in a perfect circle at their max speed, you probably won't apply over 100 DPS.
This fit I threw together in a couple minutes can apply over 200 DPS at 50km if it manages to put 1000m/s of its own speed into matching transversal. Obviously there are cap issues but it's just a quick proof of concept.
[Zealot, Anti Tackle]
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
1600mm Rolled Tungsten Compact Plates
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Reactor Control Unit II
Tracking Enhancer II
Target Painter II
Target Painter II
50MN Microwarpdrive II
Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch M
Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch M
Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch M
Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch M
Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch M
Medium Energy Locus Coordinator II
Medium Energy Locus Coordinator II |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
155
|
Posted - 2016.06.25 12:11:35 -
[6] - Quote
Well, RIP carriers. I guess there's a reason they're the only combat capital the Serpentis don't have. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
155
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 14:49:19 -
[7] - Quote
Marcin Ichinumi wrote:Too Much Fighter nerf!
Too Much Fighter nerf! |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
156
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 15:20:30 -
[8] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:...
and the Svipul remains the top ship in the game for a two year period.
The Svipul has only existed for 16 months. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
156
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 17:03:33 -
[9] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:mgr71 Dragon wrote:Nikel Ivanovich wrote:give the carriers something to enable them to be called the capital. the distance of the jump? lot armor shield? dps? many drones? remove useless buttons F3. for what it's ridicule
do the developers not understand that to play in a T1 cruiser I can free the first 14 days.
why would so humiliate the ships for which it is necessary many days of subscription? Not even days - you need MONTHS to fly capital class ship.... His English seems a bit wacky, but I think that's precisely what he's trying to convey. Also, without diving into EvEmon to check for exact numbers, I'm pretty sure you'd need more than one full year to adequately fly a carrier. Drone support skills are a bugger, and there's a lot of them, and they're time-consuming.
I have about 26m SP specifically into skills applicable to carriers. The training is indeed long. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
156
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 21:25:48 -
[10] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Henry Plantgenet wrote:can you please add it to all capital modules if they can't be used on subcapitals?
I try to fit this capital shield extender to my vindicator and it says it doesn't fit even though it makes no mention of it ;( Seriously? That PG requirement wasn't hint enough - It would not fit... Or was common sense (check fitting requirements) too hard for you? I mean do Devs also need to put, won't fit on a frigate on T2 1600 plates and Large guns. Yeah but it is a hardcoded limit. Some battleships CAN meet the fitting requirements. Please show me a battleship that has 75,000 PG (T1 Capital Shield Extender). Even the Regolith (62,500 PG) - Which requires the least fitting, WILL NOT fit any battleship, even with 3 T2 Ancillary Current Routers. Have I been missing something? Like a new Battleship that can get at least 3 times the maximum PG of any existing Battleship.
Ok, here's a ridiculously blingy one I had in pyfa, but a good proof of concept. Note that it can fit not only the shield extender, but also a full rack of Tachyon beams, which are well known for their insane power grid use.
[Apocalypse Navy Issue, Capital Shield]
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
Dark Blood Power Diagnostic System
CONCORD Capital Shield Extender
Pithum A-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pithum A-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pithum A-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Large Ancillary Current Router II
Large Ancillary Current Router II
Large Ancillary Current Router I
Inherent Implants 'Squire' Power Grid Management EG-605
With a Genolution pod, 6% implant, 2 T2 + 1 T1 Ancillary Current Routers, and a full rack of faction Reactor Control Units, the Apocalypse Navy Issue can hit 140900 PG. |
|
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
157
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 22:42:57 -
[11] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Rowells wrote:
I would show you the dual compact XL extender fit, but that would just be rediculous, no? :)
Ok, I'll concede. If someone wants to spends billions of isk on a ship that will be next to useless, in any situation other than bait, they can fit it. I suppose it's no different to my Bhal being cap stable perma running 7 heavy neuts with 1 heavy cap booster and 3200 charges. Of course they aren't in a category that states "Capital" as the fitting requirement. Tell me, did you put these fits together with the intention of using them, or just to see if you could fit it? My reasoning still stands, if capital mods need to be marked "Capital Only", Large guns should be marked "Won't fit anything below a battleship aside from a tier 3 battlecruiser". Do Eve players really need to have their hands held that tightly?
Yes, because for everything else it's just fitting that stops you from using them, not the absolute inability to put them on the ship. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
158
|
Posted - 2016.06.29 18:24:36 -
[12] - Quote
The thing about the damage reduction is that carriers didn't have very good damage output to begin with. The incredible alpha with a long cycle time helped a lot because it let you apply a huge amount of damage instantly, allowing fighters to move to another target while the cycle finishes. With that gone, the raw DPS is too low to be useful given the drawbacks and the fact that fighters can't keep up with fast targets after the MWD cycle finishes. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
188
|
Posted - 2016.06.30 23:15:17 -
[13] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Capital Modules are all very clearly marked - They are under a Capital Heading in each group.
I don't go to "Small Rigs" when fitting a capital.
Same as I don't go to Large Shield when fitting a capital.
There is specific categories for "Capital", Large, Medium and Small.
Common Sense has to come into this somewhere. It did, all the Capital Modules are now clearly marked in-game.  Didn't even hurt, did it?  I'm so glad Devs were able to hold your hand so tightly and lead you the the lollie shop. Only thing now is - Did they do a good enough job, 3 or 4 clicks to discover a capital module isn't intended for a subcap. I'm sure that must be annoying. It would be such a shame if you had to think for yourself. Much better CCP lead you by the hand.
If love to think for myself and see if a capital module can be used on a subcap or not, but CCP decided to change the rules all of a sudden. At least the unique new rules are now documented instead of unexpectedly stopping players from doing what they can do with everything else. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
207
|
Posted - 2016.07.02 17:31:54 -
[14] - Quote
Szchyactszky wrote:Tony Anders wrote:She11by wrote:What's the point of getting 9 fighters in 1 squad if u lock all 9 at once? If u want so then make one fighter 9 times stronger \ more durable. Becouse carrier (A CAPITAL SHIP) having only 3 fighter (a.k.a. drones) would be re_tarded since even frigates can operate 5 drones at once. and super big ship with super stroong computers controling only 3 drones again is stupid. That's why it having 27 fighter's. :D but essentialy you have only 3 drones....
No, they designed everything around supers, so they still have 5. Normal carriers have to be weaker though, so of course the easiest way is to just force them to use less fighters and only the weak kind. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
207
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 05:06:26 -
[15] - Quote
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:We will be looking at... Light Fighter application / alpha. Tread lightly. Carriers can counter the subcaps that are too small/fast for the HAWs to manage, and that's about it. They are a small nerf away from being totally outclassed by dreads. CCP Larrikin wrote:As always, we welcome your feedback!  Sigh. Wellp, let me login here and see how these changes work. I expect better application and higher dps against big targets and poor effectiveness against kitey bull$#&%. Let's see how it compares to the dreadnaught.
They actually have about 11% less DPS against the few things they can hit perfectly and about 20% less DPS against armor battlecruisers and smaller. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen.
LowSechnaya Sholupen
208
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 05:57:07 -
[16] - Quote
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:haven't had a chance to test a carrier since the changes, can anyone confirm that fighter control range is nerfed?
The control range is still as far as you can lock. The fighters just have their own lock ranges enforced now, so they can't attack when they're beyond about 60km anymore. It also means they're now vulnerable to range damps. |
|
|
| |
|