These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rythm
True Power Team
#881 - 2012-04-16 21:07:57 UTC
Two step wrote:
A sig radius bump while in siege/triage wouldn't be a nerf at all from the the current mechanics, it would mostly preserve the status quo among the capitals. The nerf would be restricted to a dread's ability to alpha subcaps off the field, which is nothing but a good thing. It would also require subcap support for using dreads in PVE, which is also a very good thing.


This will mean that you cannot triage at all. People will just run RR carrier blobs largely immune to dreads.
jonnykefka
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#882 - 2012-04-16 21:20:48 UTC
Rythm wrote:
Two step wrote:
A sig radius bump while in siege/triage wouldn't be a nerf at all from the the current mechanics, it would mostly preserve the status quo among the capitals. The nerf would be restricted to a dread's ability to alpha subcaps off the field, which is nothing but a good thing. It would also require subcap support for using dreads in PVE, which is also a very good thing.


This will mean that you cannot triage at all. People will just run RR carrier blobs largely immune to dreads.


Well, not in W-space. You can't move around with that many carriers at once.

My only concern for w-space PvP is that it makes Bhaalgorns a bit more powerful. Right now the main counter to a T3 fleet with a carrier and Bhaals is either to have more Bhaals than the opponent or web 'n' blap the enemy bhaals before they cap out your dreads, and straight through carrier reps. Without the latter option, Bhaalgorns become even harder to deal with, especially with a triage carrier behind them. You basically need to cap out the enemy bhaals AND the enemy carrier or have truly ludicrous subcap dps on tap (that is not cap-dependent).

It's not a game-ruiner, but I do like having more than one viable strategy against an incredibly powerful ship aside from n+1.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#883 - 2012-04-16 21:28:30 UTC
Rythm wrote:
Two step wrote:
A sig radius bump while in siege/triage wouldn't be a nerf at all from the the current mechanics, it would mostly preserve the status quo among the capitals. The nerf would be restricted to a dread's ability to alpha subcaps off the field, which is nothing but a good thing. It would also require subcap support for using dreads in PVE, which is also a very good thing.


This will mean that you cannot triage at all. People will just run RR carrier blobs largely immune to dreads.


No, because they can be painted out of triage, and would quickly take full damage, even in a wolf-rayet (4 unbonused RF painters get you to 1825m sig, which means you are taking 83% of the normal damage. 3 bonused RF painters take you to 2129m, for full damage).

Psihius wrote:

As far as I see there is only one dread that really hits things up-close and personal - Moros. I fly a perfect tracking-wise Revelation with 2 tracking computers and 2 tracking enhancer + a middle booster for tracking, and I pretty much fail to hit anything closer than 15 km until it's webbed to hell (~25-15 m/sec) and painted with 4-6 painters so it's signature rockets through 1000m. And even when I can hit something solidly only after 20-25 km when angular velocity can really drop to low values. It's required to bring at least 6-8 friends along to really make the difference.

And why is it bad that if someone brings 10 ships with webs and painters is it bad for dreadnoughts to hit the target? Right now it is possible because signature is not affecting damage formula much. If it would do that like tracking does, them hitting even painted (with 6 reaper level 5 painters) and webbed to hell Loki would be a pain cause it's signature would go only up-to 450 m, that means dread can deliver only 45% of it's potential damage if scale is linear and much less if it's exponential. And if that ship gets close on low orbit - dread will have hard time hitting because of tracking.


The issue is that when you do hit people with that Moros, they die. I will say that your numbers don't match mine, and it is certainly *very* easy to hit BS sized ships even when they are fairly close. If someone was invading one of the larger wormhole groups, two blogs of dreads 40-50 km from each other is pretty damn tough to beat unless you have greater dread numbers yourself. Note just how similar this sounds to the arguments about why Titans need a tracking nerf...

Psihius wrote:

As PvE wise for WH - the only real broken thing is the wall sleeper hunting that allows people to do it solo. There was an idea from fanfest to add a sleeper dread or something like that to counter it - that would be the way to go, make sites more chalanging. Not nerfing dreads to oblivion, because there is a difference in how you live. That's one thing to live in numbers like 200 people in one system when you sweep in 40 T3 and clear the sites like hurricane anytime and other is when you live in small numbers and you really have to wait for people half the evening to start something going (I personally despise the wall sleeper blaping, and where we live it's out of the question and we hope it gets changed so one day sleepers get to those dreads on the wall and nuke them flat).


I agree that exploiting the weakness in the way Sleepers work is bad, and I actually think this nerf would help minimize the effects of that until CCP decides to fix it. I think you are wildly overestimating the numbers of ships we have on the field for PVE, and ships need to be balanced for PVP first, and PVE after. This change would make killing sleepers with dreads take longer, which is a good thing. Longer time spent doing PVE means more opportunities to be jumped while running a site.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#884 - 2012-04-16 21:48:09 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
CCP Greyscale wrote:


We're probably going with the square-over-square scaling, so you're hitting the 50% damage point around 1400 sig rather than around 1000, which *somewhat* mitigates this. The real solution here though is improvements to the tracking formula, and we're reluctant right now to go overboard with this stuff in the meantime, plus it's getting late in the day and we need to lock down something workable ASAP so we can ship it next week.


Alright, now I'm going into true ******* mode.

This is why your player base has such a horrible connection to you developers. We try to help you and give you massive feedback, and you just **** on everything we do and say so that you can rush in a **** ass patch which I see you're now leaning towards **** ass mechanics once again. I mean, do you even get the point that this game is not spreadsheets online?

At what point did you guys think that "omg, this spreadsheet looks good so this idea must be good."


YOUR new latest greatest idea does nothing at all to address titan blobbing. It doesn't address titans in bulk on a field. It doesn't address tracking issues as range increases. It doesn't address natural titan counters with the 1 small exception that it removed maelstroms from being as useful a tool against capital fleets since they get hammered even harder now. And if you played the game, you'd see how this is a further buff to titans since the counter to carriers supporting titans just got a nerf.. It very weakly addresses the ability of the ship to hit. And then you throw back in the bullshit artificial damage modification with a small tweak even though we've already addressed in mass why this is a horrible idea.

How do you expect the player base to ever get along with you when you make such poor decisions in haste. I mean this is exactly why we have gotten so emo over the years to the point of nearly collapsing your company last fall.

I even offered to sit down and have a chat with you in real time free of charge so as to help you along this process which seemed ignored. It's amazing since I'm Literally the most experienced Super Capital FC in game in terms of combat applications and I fly with the most seasoned alliance in terms of Super capitals as well. And that's not even trying to gloat... it's just raw fact.

I mean jesus christ, make the proper fix or just delay the fix. But stop doing this ass backwards approach.

Next Server patch, Nuke the tracking by half with further changes down the llne and leave it at that. At least it will have some small effect with promises of larger fixes on the way. Then you can go fix your damn tracking formula and make all the appropriate and reasonable sig adjustments there as I've already explained to you how to do.
Psihius
Perkone
Caldari State
#885 - 2012-04-16 21:51:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Psihius
Two step wrote:
Psihius wrote:

As far as I see there is only one dread that really hits things up-close and personal - Moros. I fly a perfect tracking-wise Revelation with 2 tracking computers and 2 tracking enhancer + a middle booster for tracking, and I pretty much fail to hit anything closer than 15 km until it's webbed to hell (~25-15 m/sec) and painted with 4-6 painters so it's signature rockets through 1000m. And even when I can hit something solidly only after 20-25 km when angular velocity can really drop to low values. It's required to bring at least 6-8 friends along to really make the difference.

And why is it bad that if someone brings 10 ships with webs and painters is it bad for dreadnoughts to hit the target? Right now it is possible because signature is not affecting damage formula much. If it would do that like tracking does, them hitting even painted (with 6 reaper level 5 painters) and webbed to hell Loki would be a pain cause it's signature would go only up-to 450 m, that means dread can deliver only 45% of it's potential damage if scale is linear and much less if it's exponential. And if that ship gets close on low orbit - dread will have hard time hitting because of tracking.


The issue is that when you do hit people with that Moros, they die. I will say that your numbers don't match mine, and it is certainly *very* easy to hit BS sized ships even when they are fairly close. If someone was invading one of the larger wormhole groups, two blogs of dreads 40-50 km from each other is pretty damn tough to beat unless you have greater dread numbers yourself. Note just how similar this sounds to the arguments about why Titans need a tracking nerf...


I agree on the Moros thing, and I think it just got massively over-boosted. XL Blasters have the highest tracking, the best damage and are pretty effective even at long range (even outpreform my Revelation on optimal where Blasters are hitting on the falloff already :( ). As a Revelation pilot I would compare my role in the fleet against Moros as being about 50% - you need 2 Revelations to replace 1 Moros. Just nerfing all turret dreads will probably just kill Revelation and Naglfar and we will get Moros'es all over the place. People consider me crazy for buying a Revelation (I've got it after the Moros boost) until I say that it was a Revelation today or a Moros half a year later.

Two step wrote:

Psihius wrote:

As PvE wise for WH - the only real broken thing is the wall sleeper hunting that allows people to do it solo. There was an idea from fanfest to add a sleeper dread or something like that to counter it - that would be the way to go, make sites more chalanging. Not nerfing dreads to oblivion, because there is a difference in how you live. That's one thing to live in numbers like 200 people in one system when you sweep in 40 T3 and clear the sites like hurricane anytime and other is when you live in small numbers and you really have to wait for people half the evening to start something going (I personally despise the wall sleeper blaping, and where we live it's out of the question and we hope it gets changed so one day sleepers get to those dreads on the wall and nuke them flat).


I agree that exploiting the weakness in the way Sleepers work is bad, and I actually think this nerf would help minimize the effects of that until CCP decides to fix it. I think you are wildly overestimating the numbers of ships we have on the field for PVE, and ships need to be balanced for PVP first, and PVE after. This change would make killing sleepers with dreads take longer, which is a good thing. Longer time spent doing PVE means more opportunities to be jumped while running a site.

If a dread is useless - it will be just warped in and out, like carriers usually do and clear out everything with subcapitals. It was the first thing that came to mind in our voice chat. If a dread deals the same damage as does a battleship - why field any caps at all, just warp them 300km, get the spawn, warp back to safety (with inertia stabilizers in the low's). Monitor the probes and get out first thing a new sig shows up - there are no caps sitting in siege pinning you down, where you have two options - defend them or just leave them to die. Here it's a now brainer - align to pos, kill the scrambling rats and warp to pos (and in case agressors warp in - warp what you can to POS - your losses probably will be minimal).
Rythm
True Power Team
#886 - 2012-04-16 21:58:46 UTC
jonnykefka wrote:

Well, not in W-space. You can't move around with that many carriers at once.

Home system.
Quote:

Adding a "minimum sig radius" attribute to turrets, below which damage would fall off regardless of tracking

Too big a change and more technical work than we actually needed to solve the problem.

I think that halo carrier discussion has run its course ;)
Centra Spike
Lonetrek Consulting Group
#887 - 2012-04-16 21:58:56 UTC
I don't care about tracking just let me doomsday in lowsec.

Follow us @PLIRC!
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#888 - 2012-04-16 22:13:36 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

We're probably going with the square-over-square scaling, so you're hitting the 50% damage point around 1400 sig rather than around 1000, which *somewhat* mitigates this. The real solution here though is improvements to the tracking formula, and we're reluctant right now to go overboard with this stuff in the meantime, plus it's getting late in the day and we need to lock down something workable ASAP so we can ship it next week.



So am I understanding right that this is an overall formula change and not just a bandage applied to titans, in other words, are BS now going to do significantly less damage to frigates and sig tanking ships with their guns?

Currently 1400 or 1200 artillery ships are fairly powerful in the amount of alpha they bring to bear on any target they should choose, can we expect BS guns to now suffer the same that XL guns will?

Will a very low sig cruiser have its damage mitigated in the same fractal fashion because the new formula is being applied universally to all guns?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Raivi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#889 - 2012-04-16 22:27:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Raivi
Giant facepalm

I don't know what part of this post to talk about first, so I'll do it in order.

I'm Down wrote:

Alright, now I'm going into true ******* mode

This is why your player base has such a horrible connection to you developers. We try to help you and give you massive feedback, and you just **** on everything we do and say so that you can rush in a **** ass patch which I see you're now leaning towards **** ass mechanics once again. I mean, do you even get the point that this game is not spreadsheets online

At what point did you guys think that "omg, this spreadsheet looks good so this idea must be good.



Chill dude. He is interacting with players, that's what this thread is for. His changes have been taking into account concerns by people posting reasonably here.

I'm Down wrote:

YOUR new latest greatest idea does nothing at all to address titan blobbing.


Yes, technically no titan nerf will change the fact that 20 titans > 10 titans. Any changes to that are going to have to come from more general mechanic changes, which can be done later. What this change does is reduce the effectiveness of titans to put them more in line with the place CCP wants them from a risk/benefit standpoint.

I'm Down wrote:

It doesn't address titans in bulk on a field. It doesn't address tracking issues as range increases. It doesn't address natural titan counters with the 1 small exception that it removed maelstroms from being as useful a tool against capital fleets since they get hammered even harder now. And if you played the game, you'd see how this is a further buff to titans since the counter to carriers supporting titans just got a nerf.. It very weakly addresses the ability of the ship to hit. And then you throw back in the bullshit artificial damage modification with a small tweak even though we've already addressed in mass why this is a horrible idea.

How do you expect the player base to ever get along with you when you make such poor decisions in haste. I mean this is exactly why we have gotten so emo over the years to the point of nearly collapsing your company last fall.


It doesn't fix everything about the game all at once, but it makes a reasonable step to solve a balance problem without breaking more things. It also does it in a timeframe that allows it to get released in the next patch.

The only way this nerfs dreads vs carriers is a slight reduction in DPS that can be mitigated by one or two painters against an un-triaged carrier and the sig radius penalty in triage that Two Step proposed earlier in this thread.

The sig resolution nerf reduces chance to hit, the damage reduction change reduces damage when you do hit. It does the job well and although I don't like how much it makes XL turrets like missiles, that's a drawback I'm able to live with.

I'm Down wrote:

I even offered to sit down and have a chat with you in real time free of charge so as to help you along this process which seemed ignored. It's amazing since I'm Literally the most experienced Super Capital FC in game in terms of combat applications and I fly with the most seasoned alliance in terms of Super capitals as well. And that's not even trying to gloat... it's just raw fact.


/o\ I have no words. You've commanded a lot of supercap blobs in your career, but that doesn't automatically mean you are the be all end all of supercap balance knowledge. Do you really think your voice has greater weight here than someone like Shadoo or Elise?

Yes you fly with the most seasoned supercap alliance, but nobody in that alliance thinks you are good at this kind of balance discussion. There's a reason every theorycrafting post you make on our forums garners loud sighs. You have your strengths, but this is not one of them

There is Literally nobody within PL who will read that paragraph and not laugh at you.

I'm Down wrote:

I mean jesus christ, make the proper fix or just delay the fix. But stop doing this ass backwards approach.

Next Server patch, Nuke the tracking by half with further changes down the llne and leave it at that. At least it will have some small effect with promises of larger fixes on the way. Then you can go fix your damn tracking formula and make all the appropriate and reasonable sig adjustments there as I've already explained to you how to do.


I agree that a change to the tracking formula is the best solution long term, but that will take an extremely long time to balance and test. This solves a balance problem in a quick but somewhat dirty way that allows the damage reduction to be phased out later as the tracking formula get changed.
Raivi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#890 - 2012-04-16 22:28:27 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

We're probably going with the square-over-square scaling, so you're hitting the 50% damage point around 1400 sig rather than around 1000, which *somewhat* mitigates this. The real solution here though is improvements to the tracking formula, and we're reluctant right now to go overboard with this stuff in the meantime, plus it's getting late in the day and we need to lock down something workable ASAP so we can ship it next week.



So am I understanding right that this is an overall formula change and not just a bandage applied to titans, in other words, are BS now going to do significantly less damage to frigates and sig tanking ships with their guns?

Currently 1400 or 1200 artillery ships are fairly powerful in the amount of alpha they bring to bear on any target they should choose, can we expect BS guns to now suffer the same that XL guns will?

Will a very low sig cruiser have its damage mitigated in the same fractal fashion because the new formula is being applied universally to all guns?


It's just for XL guns. Hopefully they'll come up with a solution that can be applied to all guns soon, but that can't make this patch.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#891 - 2012-04-16 22:41:12 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
Actually Raivi, when it comes to super capital experience, not only do I have have the same anti fleet experience as both of them, I've also got quit a bit more super on super and super on capital experience than either. I mean honestly, they've been involved in 1-2 major super fights between them, not counting the fountain black screen. I've got 4-5, all historically the largest in game to date, with the one exception of the WN massacre in Venal, which was also a blackscreen of death fight if I'm not mistaken.

I don't hold their weight as less, but when PL boasted about their 100 super cap kill as an alliance, I was already involved in somewhere around 60 on my own either participated in or FC'd. Since then I've accrued quite a bit more experience. Personally, I'd like the Devs to get as many quality voices involved as possible in a true sit down and hash it out sesson. And thinking the CSM as a whole is a quality voice for what's the problem with supers is just a joke. Outside Elise, and maybe Seleene, there's hardly any experience on that panel at all dealing with supers.

But nothing in their suggested changes is a move in the right direction with the small exception of increasing the gun sig. The sig damage ratio is just horrible, and the maxed locked targets won't do a thing.

They need to address the actual mechanical issues, not create some fubar'd fix b/c of a time crunch.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#892 - 2012-04-16 22:46:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Raivi wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

We're probably going with the square-over-square scaling, so you're hitting the 50% damage point around 1400 sig rather than around 1000, which *somewhat* mitigates this. The real solution here though is improvements to the tracking formula, and we're reluctant right now to go overboard with this stuff in the meantime, plus it's getting late in the day and we need to lock down something workable ASAP so we can ship it next week.



So am I understanding right that this is an overall formula change and not just a bandage applied to titans, in other words, are BS now going to do significantly less damage to frigates and sig tanking ships with their guns?

Currently 1400 or 1200 artillery ships are fairly powerful in the amount of alpha they bring to bear on any target they should choose, can we expect BS guns to now suffer the same that XL guns will?

Will a very low sig cruiser have its damage mitigated in the same fractal fashion because the new formula is being applied universally to all guns?


It's just for XL guns. Hopefully they'll come up with a solution that can be applied to all guns soon, but that can't make this patch.


Ok then its dumb.

This change should be applied to the entire tracking formula, not just for XL guns.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
WNT TK
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#893 - 2012-04-16 22:46:30 UTC  |  Edited by: WNT TK
Two step wrote:
Rythm wrote:
Two step wrote:
A sig radius bump while in siege/triage wouldn't be a nerf at all from the the current mechanics, it would mostly preserve the status quo among the capitals. The nerf would be restricted to a dread's ability to alpha subcaps off the field, which is nothing but a good thing. It would also require subcap support for using dreads in PVE, which is also a very good thing.


This will mean that you cannot triage at all. People will just run RR carrier blobs largely immune to dreads.


No, because they can be painted out of triage, and would quickly take full damage, even in a wolf-rayet (4 unbonused RF painters get you to 1825m sig, which means you are taking 83% of the normal damage. 3 bonused RF painters take you to 2129m, for full damage).

Psihius wrote:

As far as I see there is only one dread that really hits things up-close and personal - Moros. I fly a perfect tracking-wise Revelation with 2 tracking computers and 2 tracking enhancer + a middle booster for tracking, and I pretty much fail to hit anything closer than 15 km until it's webbed to hell (~25-15 m/sec) and painted with 4-6 painters so it's signature rockets through 1000m. And even when I can hit something solidly only after 20-25 km when angular velocity can really drop to low values. It's required to bring at least 6-8 friends along to really make the difference.

And why is it bad that if someone brings 10 ships with webs and painters is it bad for dreadnoughts to hit the target? Right now it is possible because signature is not affecting damage formula much. If it would do that like tracking does, them hitting even painted (with 6 reaper level 5 painters) and webbed to hell Loki would be a pain cause it's signature would go only up-to 450 m, that means dread can deliver only 45% of it's potential damage if scale is linear and much less if it's exponential. And if that ship gets close on low orbit - dread will have hard time hitting because of tracking.


The issue is that when you do hit people with that Moros, they die. I will say that your numbers don't match mine, and it is certainly *very* easy to hit BS sized ships even when they are fairly close. If someone was invading one of the larger wormhole groups, two blogs of dreads 40-50 km from each other is pretty damn tough to beat unless you have greater dread numbers yourself. Note just how similar this sounds to the arguments about why Titans need a tracking nerf...


Problem is not in the dreads - its in the fact that wormholes are so isolated one from another. Imagine you can cyno in one hi level wh from 2-3 other hi level wh's (and one is "close" enought to portal people with bo). So its much easier to bring your capitals, and with some effort subcaps to the fight and thus unbeatable number of caps is less of a problem, becouse you or someone you want to be your friend for a night can bring their stuff to the field.

Also dreads cant be repped while dealing damage (unlike titans) - so numbers needed to kill dread are much more reasonable than ones needed to kill titan under 10+ triage carriers. Thats why i think whole "dreads in wh are like titans in 0.0 and need a nerf" is more like "wh's are so isolated that its quite hard to project force needed to kill even small amount of capitals, but you can still get your hands on a lot of them and thats a problem".
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#894 - 2012-04-16 22:49:52 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
Actually Raivi, when it comes to super capital experience, not only do I have have the same anti fleet experience as both of them, I've also got quit a bit more super on super and super on capital experience than either. I mean honestly, they've been involved in 1-2 major super fights between them, not counting the fountain black screen. I've got 4-5, all historically the largest in game to date, with the one exception of the WN massacre in Venal, which was also a blackscreen of death fight if I'm not mistaken.


*Tells girls in bars about how he's an elite spaceship commander responsible for vast fleets of supercapital class vessels!*
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#895 - 2012-04-16 22:51:06 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
This change should be applied to the entire tracking formula, not just for XL guns.


Skill yourself (for missiles, since you want to kill guns).
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#896 - 2012-04-16 22:54:13 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Ganthrithor wrote:

Because we've gone through so many stages / revisions on the impending nerf, could you write up a quick summary of where your proposed changes are at as of this moment?




What we're looking at right now as a complete package is:
- Sig res nerf to ~2000 (mathematically identical to the tracking nerf, but more intuitive)
- Max locked targets to 3
- Scaled damage reduction below ~2000-~2500 target sig radius, using the modified rather than unmodified sig. Not 100% sure if we're going to end up on linear or area-based scaling just yet.





Explain to me how this does not promote further Tengu's Online?
Raivi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#897 - 2012-04-16 22:57:02 UTC
Are you really saying that titans are the only thing preventing Tengu Online? If tengus are a problem change tengus.
steave435
Perkone
Caldari State
#898 - 2012-04-16 22:58:49 UTC
Being involved with a lot of fleets and/or kills does not necessarily mean you're good at it. +1 to Raivis post.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#899 - 2012-04-16 23:00:38 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
Raivi wrote:
Are you really saying that titans are the only thing preventing Tengu Online? If tengus are a problem change tengus.


I'm stating that the developers have this awful habit of seeing a stopgap fix as a solution to further problems and will be encouraged to apply it to all guns. I'm saying that trying to artificially scale damage due to ship size removes any reason for pilot skill and only encourages trump smaller ships like the tengu that have artificially high damage/range ratios.

Yea sure, the tengu is a separate problem, but it's an analogy to a bigger problem with this type of **** fix.

steave435 wrote:
Being involved with a lot of fleets and/or kills does not necessarily mean you're good at it. +1 to Raivis post.


Yea, lets rely on theory crafting and spreadsheets instead. I hear that worked out well for PL when they thought they had a snipe and exit strategy for their titans 2 fine winters ago.
John Caffeine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#900 - 2012-04-16 23:43:15 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
[quote=MisterAl tt1]

Are people actually running x-instinct/halo carriers? I see the theoretical problem, and it's something we may want to look into at some point, but I don't want to do a lot of running around for something that's largely theoretical.


We're not now, but I promise you X-instinct using, Haloed carrier will be standard for triage carriers with these changes, and I very much look forward to pwnzoning dreads in 800m sig Pantheon carriers.

We're also using dreads to shoot subcaps on a very frequent basis, which works well if you invest a few billion into webbing ships. This will heavily nerf the use of dreads, but we didn't like that shipclass anyway, and not having to worry about dreads killing our triage is well worth the loss of the dreads' combat role.