These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Titan changes - update

First post First post First post
Author
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#141 - 2012-03-27 17:49:08 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Retar Aveymone wrote:
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
There needs to be a capital ship that can 'blap' subcaps. It just can't have 30 million EHP. Roll.

There is, a carrier. The issue is a supercap doing it.


Carriers are more Swiss army knife support then specifically anti- subcap.

Sure but that's also because they're incredibly outclassed in their anti-subcap role. But yes, they are not pure anti-subcap blappers.
Calmoto
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#142 - 2012-03-27 17:51:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Calmoto
Kyle Myr wrote:
[quote=CCP Greyscale][quote=Hakaru Ishiwara][quote=CCP Greyscale]...

- Remove Titan electronic warfare immunity, and give them a high amount of innate sensor strength and warp core stabilizers
*** This change would put the fix to Titan tracking in the hands of electronic warfare ships and normal tacklers. It would enable coordinated efforts to counter Titans, as well as fixing the issue of tackling Titans in low sec. While this would remove some of the specialized role of hictors/dictors, these ships already have tremendous utility in combat in all areas (save dictors outside of 0.0), and their infinite points and bubbles would still be very useful for tackling anything.

There are plenty of options to consider which work within the current game mechanics. These are simply a few.



they already have very high sensor strength and just 1 eccm (again screwing over shield titans) almost doubles that

and in the end you have just glossed over the problem, should you not be able to correctly put some ewar strat into action youve still lost your fleet to something broken, just now you have some half cocked reason as a glossy excuse.
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#143 - 2012-03-27 17:53:10 UTC
Greyscale, you have yourself said that CCP has moved away from the idea of Titans as subcapital killers. So why not take the consequence of that and remove all turrets and missile slots, and rebalance the DD so at Titan can dish out approximately the same damage as before? And then you also adjust it so that a DD can hit structures (with reduced damage, roughly equvalent to old turret DPS). Problem solved.

Personally I think Titans belong in EVE. An Epic game needs Epic battles, Epic ships and Epic losses. If you dont want supercaps to kill subcaps, I am also fine with that. But logically, if titans isnt able to touch subcaps, subcaps should ideally NOT be able to touch (as in damage) titans. Right now however, there is just too few options for a true combined arms capital battlefield for this to be practical. The capital lineup is far too simplistic and offer too few options compared to the subcap lineup. What I cannot understand is why CCP insist on further bandaiding what the CSM last year called the "sucking chestwound" of EVE Online instead of just bite the bitter apple and do a complete revamp of capital warfare? EVE is 9 years old. It has currently about 11.000 active players with more than 100 million skillpoints. Its GREAT that you make the game more accessible for newer players. But vets WILL leave (dont trust your statisics departement on this) if you dont start to understand that you have to cater for this player segment as well.
Styrling
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#144 - 2012-03-27 17:53:12 UTC
Another benefit to moving away from the Turret/Launcher Titan to a DD only Titan is that now we have dread fleets required to Hit POS' again.

We want reasons to use others ships too.
Styrling
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#145 - 2012-03-27 17:54:02 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Greyscale, you have yourself said that CCP has moved away from the idea of Titans as subcapital killers. So why not take the consequence of that and remove all turrets and missile slots, and rebalance the DD so at Titan can dish out approximately the same damage as before? And then you also adjust it so that a DD can hit structures (with reduced damage, roughly equvalent to old turret DPS). Problem solved.

Personally I think Titans belong in EVE. An Epic game needs Epic battles, Epic ships and Epic losses. If you dont want supercaps to kill subcaps, I am also fine with that. But logically, if titans isnt able to touch subcaps, subcaps should ideally NOT be able to touch (as in damage) titans. Right now however, there is just too few options for a true combined arms capital battlefield for this to be practical. The capital lineup is far too simplistic and offer too few options compared to the subcap lineup. What I cannot understand is why CCP insist on further bandaiding what the CSM last year called the "sucking chestwound" of EVE Online instead of just bite the bitter apple and do a complete revamp of capital warfare? EVE is 9 years old. It has currently about 11.000 active players with more than 100 million skillpoints. Its GREAT that you make the game more accessible for newer players. But vets WILL leave (dont trust your statisics departement on this) if you dont start to understand that you have to cater for this player segment as well.


No no no no no structures, give dreads a role.
Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#146 - 2012-03-27 17:56:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyle Myr
CCP Greyscale wrote:

lots of good discussion
...

None of it's hugely hard to implement - the work goes into a) determining that we're happy with the resulting balance and b) getting it tested to make sure I didn't fat-finger something.


Fair point. As long as you continue to iterate balance on Titans, this is what everyone is asking for. I know we'd all prefer solutions sooner rather than later, but provided the changes make EVE a better game, that's what everyone should want.

I didn't mean to come off implying you did not understand game mechanics. I posted to clarify how ships are being currently used on the battlefield. Given the somewhat heated nature of this issue at times, I can see how this might come off poorly, and I do not mean for that.

I am trying to stick to proposing changes which do not require the addition of new modules or ship roles, in line with the current changes and the reversed change (which is to say, direct adjustments to tracking numbers, max targets, and the removed scan resolution change). The only reason I delved into the Leviathan discussion was because it seems to function with the desired role currently on the modern battlefield with current formulas. It wasn't to suggest that you were unfamiliar with the damage formula of missiles, but that the way that damage formula was being applied by Leviathans does fine damage to capital ships and not sub capitals, given how fleet engagements go down.

-edited for clarity of my last point.
Gnaw LF
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#147 - 2012-03-27 17:57:39 UTC
Ivana Twinkle wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:
If you are going to do this then you will also need to split off the XL gun into a category used by Dreadnaughts and Titans. Otherwise the Dreads will be inadvertently nerfed.


Currently dreads cant hit the broad side of a barn anyway.



Correction, the dreads can't hit the broad side of a barn by themselves. However, paired up with some webbing support ships the Dreads are a great weapon. I understand that such support might not be feasible or practical in null sec but in w-space the Dreads have an important role. Nerfing them to fix Titans will inadvertently impact the game play of many w-space residents.
Calmoto
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#148 - 2012-03-27 17:58:33 UTC
Styrling wrote:
Another benefit to moving away from the Turret/Launcher Titan to a DD only Titan is that now we have dread fleets required to Hit POS' again.

We want reasons to use others ships too.


so this
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#149 - 2012-03-27 18:00:09 UTC
Styrling wrote:

No no no no no structures, give dreads a role.


Titans today allready shoot structures. A modified DD would just compensate for the gun removal. But yes, I am all for a capital revamp.
penifSMASH
ElitistOps
Deepwater Hooligans
#150 - 2012-03-27 18:00:17 UTC
when are you going to fix the titan bridge bug
Akelorian
FinFleet
Northern Coalition.
#151 - 2012-03-27 18:00:35 UTC
Oh The tears! They are delicious!
Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#152 - 2012-03-27 18:01:53 UTC
Calmoto wrote:
Kyle Myr wrote:
[quote=CCP Greyscale][quote=Hakaru Ishiwara][quote=CCP Greyscale]...

- Remove Titan electronic warfare immunity, and give them a high amount of innate sensor strength and warp core stabilizers
*** This change would put the fix to Titan tracking in the hands of electronic warfare ships and normal tacklers. It would enable coordinated efforts to counter Titans, as well as fixing the issue of tackling Titans in low sec. While this would remove some of the specialized role of hictors/dictors, these ships already have tremendous utility in combat in all areas (save dictors outside of 0.0), and their infinite points and bubbles would still be very useful for tackling anything.

There are plenty of options to consider which work within the current game mechanics. These are simply a few.



they already have very high sensor strength and just 1 eccm (again screwing over shield titans) almost doubles that

and in the end you have just glossed over the problem, should you not be able to correctly put some ewar strat into action youve still lost your fleet to something broken, just now you have some half cocked reason as a glossy excuse.


True, I'm not saying that this shouldn't be going hand in hand with a change to tracking and locked targets. I mainly was putting this forward as a method of addressing the difficulty of holding down Titans given their ability to blap dictors and hictors. If half a dozen or so ships with scrams fit can act as a substitute for one of these ships, engagements, especially in low sec, become less likely to be consequence free.

Current Titan sensor strength is somewhat of a moot number anyway, given their electronic warfare immunity. Just as the scan resolution change was balanced considering sensor strength, I'm sure any consideration of this idea would account for Sensor Boosters, Cap Boosters, Tracking Computers, and ECCM.
Poaw
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2012-03-27 18:04:31 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Furthermore, the decision we've made is based partly on a desire to avoid special-casing so this sort of approach isn't really on the table right now.


Would you at least be open to not making it a special case and instead extending something like this to all turret classes? This kind of nuance is what leads to depth in the combat system, especially with regards to David v Goliath scenarios.
Worker Bee1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#154 - 2012-03-27 18:05:26 UTC
i propose that any titannerf has to clear the "titan-nerf-test" which consists of the following:

2 full fleets of bs-sized ships attacking 50 titans sitting on a pos (that is not stronted). No warping allowed. If the bs are not able to kill the titans and pos, this nerf is not enough.
Styrling
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#155 - 2012-03-27 18:05:46 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Styrling wrote:

No no no no no structures, give dreads a role.


Titans today allready shoot structures. A modified DD would just compensate for the gun removal. But yes, I am all for a capital revamp.


I know bro, I have one, but that doesn't mean it needs to stay the status quo. Titans reinforcing POS' pre-aligned where they can just warp out the minute local goes up by one is boring as hell. Dread Siege mechanic forces fights and there's no reason that requiring Dreads to siege a POS is a bad thing.
EnderCapitalG
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#156 - 2012-03-27 18:06:33 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
EnderCapitalG wrote:
EnderCapitalG wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
EnderCapitalG wrote:
I updated my previous ~Graph~ post. Here's a graph with resists added in (our maelstrom fitting has its largets resist to Kinetic due to drakes, so I'm going with the Biggest Buffer option, which will default to kinetic):

http://i.imgur.com/FOp7y.png


Can you do me one with say double-web/triple-TP?


Raw EHP: http://i.imgur.com/Q7gWs.png

Resists added: http://i.imgur.com/wUfQ7.png


Basically this shows that a Leviathan with perfect support against the target still does worse than a turret titan.


Yup, but it is reliably doing ~200k EHP damage every single volley, which ought to be plenty enough to one-hit most battleships.


Incorrect. Its volley at full is 153k. Its volley at half (with 3x TP and 2x web in a "perfect" situation) is half that. Our Maelstrom fitting is approx 118k EHP, so even in this "perfect" situation, it still does not one-volley a Maelstrom.
Calmoto
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#157 - 2012-03-27 18:09:30 UTC
Ironicly the sig res nerf actually did more for titan blapping than the tracking ever will as anyone who was sorting by transversal wouldnt of been able to lock the target fast enough to apply their deeps and would have to wait until the next repeat of the orbit
Ivana Twinkle
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#158 - 2012-03-27 18:10:05 UTC
Gnaw LF wrote:
Ivana Twinkle wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:
If you are going to do this then you will also need to split off the XL gun into a category used by Dreadnaughts and Titans. Otherwise the Dreads will be inadvertently nerfed.


Currently dreads cant hit the broad side of a barn anyway.



Correction, the dreads can't hit the broad side of a barn by themselves. However, paired up with some webbing support ships the Dreads are a great weapon. I understand that such support might not be feasible or practical in null sec but in w-space the Dreads have an important role. Nerfing them to fix Titans will inadvertently impact the game play of many w-space residents.


It would be equalised if support ships incl. players could dock in carriers and could cyno with them.
XxTheKmanxX
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#159 - 2012-03-27 18:13:15 UTC
still think that titans shouldn't be able to hit subcaps.. or if they are even able to too the biggest they can hit is a battleship that is at 0 speed and transversal with 100 TP's on it
Kaj'Schak
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#160 - 2012-03-27 18:15:41 UTC
There is also the question, if you field 50 Ships worth 70b each, you should be somehow able to vaporize an enemy fleet, that has only the value of one or two of these ships

Battles which are effected by these masses of titans are between entities, which both can afford to lose dozens of these.

Ranges:
Titans can only inflict their dread-compareable DPS at relativly short ranges (+ Doomsday all 10 Minutes).
Motherships can inflict their fighterbomber dps at over 200km where titans won't hit them at all (except DDs)

DPS/Tank:
Titans that are fitted for rapes, are not fitted to max tank. So they are realativly vuernable
Motherships can always carry their nearly titan tank and to unleash their imense DPS


Signature:
Titans **** these Drakes and Maelstroms because they have a huge signature. Shieldtanks (Maels/Drakes) do have a big signature which enables these tracking fitted/booster boosted titans (!) to hit subcaps at all. Aditionally, these perma mwding drakes also have a very big signature from their mwd-> easy to hit for titans. So there is a reason why these titans are effective at all.

You have to take on compromisses with Titans to kill supportfleets and have to put them into great danger of being lost.

Some entities made wrong decisions by not using their recources in the past to build a suiting fleet for their upcomming enemy. There never was a doubt how many Titans and Motherships are around and could be fielded against them. That these ships would knock on their door one day was expectable. Now these entities shoud should have to deal with their decissions they made in the past.

At least if this is a sandbox, where your decision matters and can have an influence on the entire universe. The ballance is fine.