These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#961 - 2012-04-17 17:24:44 UTC
Our tests show a titan can still easily blap a mwding dictor, which is...not good.
Callic Veratar
#962 - 2012-04-17 17:30:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Callic Veratar
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
what will the new_attribute be on other guns / ships? Or will this be capital specific?


Supposed to be titans only for now, but I would love to see something to the effect of:

Titan = 2000
Capital = 1200
Battleship = 700
Battlecruiser = 400
Cruiser = 100
Destroyer = 50
Frigate = 20
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#963 - 2012-04-17 17:31:50 UTC
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Raivi wrote:
Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :)


Simple area comparison: damage is multiplied by sig_radius^2/new_attribute^2, where new_attribute is set to 2000 for all turrets on titans.

[edit] With a maximum value of 1, obviously.


ahhh, ok

So damage will now be:
rawTurretAlpha(charge dmg * multiplier) * damage modifier (from ChangeToHit) * max(1,(targetSigRad^2 / new^2)), yes?

what will the new_attribute be on other guns / ships? Or will this be capital specific?


Yup, and the only time the new value is set is for turrets fitted to titans.
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#964 - 2012-04-17 18:07:59 UTC
<3 you Greyscale. Good work.
pmchem
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#965 - 2012-04-17 19:12:47 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Raivi wrote:
Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :)


Simple area comparison: damage is multiplied by sig_radius^2/new_attribute^2, where new_attribute is set to 2000 for all turrets on titans.

[edit] With a maximum value of 1, obviously.


ahhh, ok

So damage will now be:
rawTurretAlpha(charge dmg * multiplier) * damage modifier (from ChangeToHit) * max(1,(targetSigRad^2 / new^2)), yes?

what will the new_attribute be on other guns / ships? Or will this be capital specific?


Yup, and the only time the new value is set is for turrets fitted to titans.


perhaps that max() call is actually a min()?

https://twitter.com/pmchem/ || http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/community-spotlight-garpa/ || Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

steave435
Perkone
Caldari State
#966 - 2012-04-17 19:53:35 UTC
james1122 wrote:
Some data from sisi with the changes that are on there

4 webs 0 tps

16:57:57 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I lightly hits Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Raven), doing 403.6 damage.

4 webs 4 tps

17:02:39 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I is well aimed at Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Raven), inflicting 4355.5 damage.


0webs 0tps mwd on

16:55:30 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I lightly hits Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Raven), doing 14632.6 damage.

XD


Armor fit raven orbiting a t2 fitted rev at 10km


Couldn't hit a cruiser at all unless it was sat still and then only

17:12:05 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I is well aimed at Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Caracal), inflicting 620.2 damage.


Looks pretty dam balanced to me..........

Long as the x-instinct carrier thing is patched this does look pretty sexy.....

From the time dreads were introduced up until now, that has always been the case. Despite that, blapping dreads have never been a problem simply due to the fact that coordinating all that EW with the very slow and limited locks on more then a very small number of targets at a time - just like any other fleet can do as well. The difference is that they become ineffective as soon as those Rapiers/Huginns die.
Why? Because, unlike current titans, they half as fast, they can't be remote repped, they lock slower and they have way less tank. Kill the dreads support and they're sitting ducks, up until now that wasn't the case for titans supported by SCs.
John Caffeine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#967 - 2012-04-17 20:14:41 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Raivi wrote:
Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :)


Simple area comparison: damage is multiplied by sig_radius^2/new_attribute^2, where new_attribute is set to 2000 for all turrets on titans.

[edit] With a maximum value of 1, obviously.


ahhh, ok

So damage will now be:
rawTurretAlpha(charge dmg * multiplier) * damage modifier (from ChangeToHit) * max(1,(targetSigRad^2 / new^2)), yes?

what will the new_attribute be on other guns / ships? Or will this be capital specific?


Yup, and the only time the new value is set is for turrets fitted to titans.


But we'll still be able to sigtank titanguns in carriers and dreads right?

With Loki bonuses, a cheap lg halo-set and strong x-instinct I get teh sig radius down to 1400m.
With Ragnarok bonuses it goes down to 880.

Reducing the incoming damage by 50% and 80% respectivly.

Or if I don't want to spend isk on the lg halo set, I can still the sig down to 1000m with rag/loki bonuses and drugs, reducing titan gun damage by a massive 75%.


So beyond being able to maybe kill one cap per 10 minutes with a doomsday, they won't really be usefull on the battlefield at all beyond sitting in POSes for fleet bonuses and doomsday the occasional triage carrier.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#968 - 2012-04-17 20:37:02 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
steave435 wrote:
james1122 wrote:
Some data from sisi with the changes that are on there

4 webs 0 tps

16:57:57 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I lightly hits Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Raven), doing 403.6 damage.

4 webs 4 tps

17:02:39 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I is well aimed at Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Raven), inflicting 4355.5 damage.


0webs 0tps mwd on

16:55:30 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I lightly hits Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Raven), doing 14632.6 damage.

XD


Armor fit raven orbiting a t2 fitted rev at 10km


Couldn't hit a cruiser at all unless it was sat still and then only

17:12:05 Combat Your group of Dual Modal Giga Pulse Laser I is well aimed at Talek Miriden &lt;K162&gt;(Caracal), inflicting 620.2 damage.


Looks pretty dam balanced to me..........

Long as the x-instinct carrier thing is patched this does look pretty sexy.....

From the time dreads were introduced up until now, that has always been the case. Despite that, blapping dreads have never been a problem simply due to the fact that coordinating all that EW with the very slow and limited locks on more then a very small number of targets at a time - just like any other fleet can do as well. The difference is that they become ineffective as soon as those Rapiers/Huginns die.
Why? Because, unlike current titans, they half as fast, they can't be remote repped, they lock slower and they have way less tank. Kill the dreads support and they're sitting ducks, up until now that wasn't the case for titans supported by SCs.


Dreads weren't popular in the past b/c they didn't have: T2 mods which allow 3 targets, 5 minute siege timers, and more range and damage with close range guns. Even after all those changes came out, titans were the defacto I win, so why would dreads be used.

You somehow think alliances won't exploit them next when titans get the nerfbat?

Greyscale, you never answered why this fix would do anything productive to stop titan blobbing? I can short answer it for you with the simple fact that it doesn't. You further didn't address the larger issue of this negatively affecting player choice in game. It does hugely. Why do you keep avoiding the can of worms you opened? Just once, I'd like to see you justify what you hope to get out of this patch that actually addresses any of the issue. Why should I not drop 20-40 titans on an enemy battleship blob if I can still find ways to get super high damage and not experience a threat?

Furthermore, can we get a concrete statement that this will not be the permanent change and that you will go back and fix the tracking formula, or are you going to pull the old time Dev trick of, we'll just have to see what happens?
I've yet to understand why you know the tracking formula is the bigger issue, but you've wasted 5 weeks by the time it launches on this crap when you could have spent that same 5 weeks fixing tracking.
steave435
Perkone
Caldari State
#969 - 2012-04-17 20:54:44 UTC  |  Edited by: steave435
John Caffeine wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Raivi wrote:
Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :)


Simple area comparison: damage is multiplied by sig_radius^2/new_attribute^2, where new_attribute is set to 2000 for all turrets on titans.

[edit] With a maximum value of 1, obviously.


ahhh, ok

So damage will now be:
rawTurretAlpha(charge dmg * multiplier) * damage modifier (from ChangeToHit) * max(1,(targetSigRad^2 / new^2)), yes?

what will the new_attribute be on other guns / ships? Or will this be capital specific?


Yup, and the only time the new value is set is for turrets fitted to titans.


But we'll still be able to sigtank titanguns in carriers and dreads right?

With Loki bonuses, a cheap lg halo-set and strong x-instinct I get teh sig radius down to 1400m.
With Ragnarok bonuses it goes down to 880.

Reducing the incoming damage by 50% and 80% respectivly.

Or if I don't want to spend isk on the lg halo set, I can still the sig down to 1000m with rag/loki bonuses and drugs, reducing titan gun damage by a massive 75%.


So beyond being able to maybe kill one cap per 10 minutes with a doomsday, they won't really be usefull on the battlefield at all beyond sitting in POSes for fleet bonuses and doomsday the occasional triage carrier.

Since titans can just DD any halo/x-instict capitals, I'm fine with that. Then use guns on the remaining ones.

Yaay, yes, they may do a bit more damage now, but that has never been the limiting factor for them. Since always, if you get them to actually hit the target is dead anyway. Nothing has changed.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#970 - 2012-04-18 08:03:47 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
Quote:

Also, for the record, I don't do private chats; I deal with too many bits of high-end gameplay to risk (plausible) accusations of bias. If you're not a CSM delegate, a volunteer or a fanfest attendee, the forums are your only point of contact. Sorry, that's just how it has to be.


Greyscale, I never asked for a private chat. But there has been a documented history at your company of other events occuring that were published after the fact.

I think saying the forums are your only means of communications with the players outside of an expensive trip to Iceland or a fictitious representation by the CSM, a group who has little real weight on decisions in this game and usually very marginal expertise in a specific part of gameplay as a whole entity, is pretty bad.

Use technology to your advantage. There's skype, IRC, video conferencing, and a host of other tools at your disposal that are not "Private meetings" where you can pool together a group of players who are heavily experienced in this field to actually hash out what the problems are, and a variety of means to fix those problems. And any one of those solutions is better than a forum polluted with many people who have never even been in an event with Supers, less not had to manage them in some capacity.

I think there's maybe 2 people on the entire CSM who have had any extensive use of titans in the past, and one of them is responsible for the last welp fix because by his own admission, he was self serving in his titan buff changes.

You've got more than just me on this forum saying artificial damage reduction is not a good option and opens up a can of worms.

Your entire company has a history of not effectively communicating with the player base.

And this is the companies 4 or 5th attempt to fix supers.


I appreciate all the time you've spent reading this forum in the first place. It's certainly an effort the company as a whole has lacked for years. But maybe it's not enough bro.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#971 - 2012-04-18 08:04:13 UTC
Just a thought on implanted archons : don't they have slave at the moment ? If they use something else, they won't have slave anymore right ? How many ehp will they lose in the operation ? Does it worth it ? Won't this counterbalance any dps loss ?
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#972 - 2012-04-18 08:07:50 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Just a thought on implanted archons : don't they have slave at the moment ? If they use something else, they won't have slave anymore right ? How many ehp will they lose in the operation ? Does it worth it ? Won't this counterbalance any dps loss ?


Archon with titan and gang link bonuses and a +5% armor implant can get somewhere between 3-5 million ehp to tank depending on exact fitting choices and damage types.

Without using expensive halo implants, you can still easily get a carrier down to 1600 sig, meaning damage reduction, and the ability to tank at least 1 doomsday assuming multiple doomsdays were synced. For a ship with massive spider tank potential, this is a huge threat to the imbalance caused by sig damage reduction effects. It's only one of about 4-6 problems I can think up off hand with this idea for a fix.

This same issue can apply to dreads out of siege, which reinstates the 2004-8 problem of capital ships online. The one current counter to capital ships online is the maelstrom blob simply because they can alpha through them.

However, adjustments are already being made by alliances to adapt to the maelstrom blob by enhancing EHP of capital ships. Instead of the old 200 for alpha rule, Capitals are approaching 400 maelstroms required for alpha with adjusted fittings. Anyone with marginal FC experience knows how exponential more difficult it is to get more pilots to sync fire, especially across 2 different fleets.

And since Carriers a blob of 100 carriers out of triage can still burst repair 150,000 ehp with just 1 repairer, and 300,000 ehp with 2, this means that you can take any normal capital ship from 0 to full armor on just 1 burst cycle of repair.... well short of a 2nd volley from 400 maelstroms.

Can... meet worms.
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#973 - 2012-04-18 10:41:25 UTC
pmchem wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Raivi wrote:
Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :)


Simple area comparison: damage is multiplied by sig_radius^2/new_attribute^2, where new_attribute is set to 2000 for all turrets on titans.

[edit] With a maximum value of 1, obviously.


ahhh, ok

So damage will now be:
rawTurretAlpha(charge dmg * multiplier) * damage modifier (from ChangeToHit) * max(1,(targetSigRad^2 / new^2)), yes?

what will the new_attribute be on other guns / ships? Or will this be capital specific?


Yup, and the only time the new value is set is for turrets fitted to titans.


perhaps that max() call is actually a min()?

Yes indeed! The code fragment that this example was based on uses max correctly, but only because it is written in a different order. Oops

It should look something like this:
finalDamageMultiplier = numTurretsInGroup * turretDamageMulitplier * min(1, (targetSigRad^2 / turretSigTheshold^2))

where turretSigTheshold is 1 for everything except for XL guns on a Titan. Hopefully that is clearer!

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law

Strathcaron
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#974 - 2012-04-18 10:44:19 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Raivi wrote:
Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :)


Simple area comparison: damage is multiplied by sig_radius^2/new_attribute^2, where new_attribute is set to 2000 for all turrets on titans.

[edit] With a maximum value of 1, obviously.


ahhh, ok

So damage will now be:
rawTurretAlpha(charge dmg * multiplier) * damage modifier (from ChangeToHit) * max(1,(targetSigRad^2 / new^2)), yes?

what will the new_attribute be on other guns / ships? Or will this be capital specific?


Yup, and the only time the new value is set is for turrets fitted to titans.


WTB developers who can understand the game instead changing values and rules as testing.
CynoNet Two
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#975 - 2012-04-18 13:02:59 UTC  |  Edited by: CynoNet Two
Hi Greyscale!

After some testing we've found that dictors are still hilariously vulnerable to being picked off, especially since the tracking and target painter situations are unchanged. Current supercap fleet setups can still shake off their tacklers without any change to fitting, and without any support ships required.

With this in mind, (and the fact it only applies to titans now) the formula should be changed to either:
a) Use unmodified sig (with no MWD or TP effects), or
b) Use a cubed formula: sig_radius^3/new_attribute^3 to scale down damage more sharply.

May I direct you to this very exciting spreadsheet that shows these effects:

>>>>>>>>>> http://i.imgur.com/B3EOC.png <<<<<<<<<<<

edit: FYI a typical fleet dictor has 3-5k EHP, dropping below 3k if it fits no buffer tank.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#976 - 2012-04-18 13:07:55 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Just a thought on implanted archons : don't they have slave at the moment ? If they use something else, they won't have slave anymore right ? How many ehp will they lose in the operation ? Does it worth it ? Won't this counterbalance any dps loss ?


Archon with titan and gang link bonuses and a +5% armor implant can get somewhere between 3-5 million ehp to tank depending on exact fitting choices and damage types.

Without using expensive halo implants, you can still easily get a carrier down to 1600 sig, meaning damage reduction, and the ability to tank at least 1 doomsday assuming multiple doomsdays were synced. For a ship with massive spider tank potential, this is a huge threat to the imbalance caused by sig damage reduction effects. It's only one of about 4-6 problems I can think up off hand with this idea for a fix.

This same issue can apply to dreads out of siege, which reinstates the 2004-8 problem of capital ships online. The one current counter to capital ships online is the maelstrom blob simply because they can alpha through them.

However, adjustments are already being made by alliances to adapt to the maelstrom blob by enhancing EHP of capital ships. Instead of the old 200 for alpha rule, Capitals are approaching 400 maelstroms required for alpha with adjusted fittings. Anyone with marginal FC experience knows how exponential more difficult it is to get more pilots to sync fire, especially across 2 different fleets.

And since Carriers a blob of 100 carriers out of triage can still burst repair 150,000 ehp with just 1 repairer, and 300,000 ehp with 2, this means that you can take any normal capital ship from 0 to full armor on just 1 burst cycle of repair.... well short of a 2nd volley from 400 maelstroms.

Can... meet worms.


Well said on the numbers, but remember that just because 1 DD won't alpha the archon if boosted right (+1 for strategy, yay!), that doesn't mean that 2 or 3 cannot be used at the same time. While alpha'ing a basi requires more than one ship, fleets manage to do it. No one says it has to be easy. That's half the fun in it. Carriers should be no different. The fact that as few as 2 or 3 ships can alpha a carrier actually ruins the strategic aspect of the game. The "massive spider tank potential" is scaled with the ship EHP, but the far more massive alpha available against it per ship is not scaled with ship EHP. To be honest, I think that a carrier should only be able to be alpha'd by 50 dreads or 20 Titans. Otherwise, they must fight the dps war or use EW or some other strategy where you actually think beyond the F1 key.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#977 - 2012-04-18 14:06:33 UTC
CynoNet Two wrote:
Hi Greyscale!

After some testing we've found that dictors are still hilariously vulnerable to being picked off, especially since the tracking and target painter situations are unchanged. Current supercap fleet setups can still shake off their tacklers without any change to fitting, and without any support ships required.

With this in mind, (and the fact it only applies to titans now) the formula should be changed to either:
a) Use unmodified sig (with no MWD or TP effects), or
b) Use a cubed formula: sig_radius^3/new_attribute^3 to scale down damage more sharply.

May I direct you to this very exciting spreadsheet that shows these effects:

>>>>>>>>>> http://i.imgur.com/B3EOC.png <<<<<<<<<<<

edit: FYI a typical fleet dictor has 3-5k EHP, dropping below 3k if it fits no buffer tank.


Where does this fall on the "game breaking" to "inconvenient" scale? Am I correct in assuming that this just gives a strong incentive to supers with hictors rather than dictors?
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#978 - 2012-04-18 14:15:45 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
CynoNet Two wrote:
Hi Greyscale!

After some testing we've found that dictors are still hilariously vulnerable to being picked off, especially since the tracking and target painter situations are unchanged. Current supercap fleet setups can still shake off their tacklers without any change to fitting, and without any support ships required.

With this in mind, (and the fact it only applies to titans now) the formula should be changed to either:
a) Use unmodified sig (with no MWD or TP effects), or
b) Use a cubed formula: sig_radius^3/new_attribute^3 to scale down damage more sharply.

May I direct you to this very exciting spreadsheet that shows these effects:

>>>>>>>>>> http://i.imgur.com/B3EOC.png <<<<<<<<<<<

edit: FYI a typical fleet dictor has 3-5k EHP, dropping below 3k if it fits no buffer tank.


Where does this fall on the "game breaking" to "inconvenient" scale? Am I correct in assuming that this just gives a strong incentive to supers with hictors rather than dictors?


Looks pritty balanced to me :) + the titans will have hard time to actually hit the dictors because of tracking and lock time, unless it's a bad dictor pilot

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934

Max Teranous
Reign of Steel
Brave Collective
#979 - 2012-04-18 14:18:56 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Where does this fall on the "game breaking" to "inconvenient" scale? Am I correct in assuming that this just gives a strong incentive to supers with hictors rather than dictors?


Alternatively it could prompt changing fleet setups of dictors that will be hunting supers to a dual AB/MWD setup.

Max Cool
Cid Tazer
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#980 - 2012-04-18 14:24:25 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
CynoNet Two wrote:
Hi Greyscale!

After some testing we've found that dictors are still hilariously vulnerable to being picked off, especially since the tracking and target painter situations are unchanged. Current supercap fleet setups can still shake off their tacklers without any change to fitting, and without any support ships required.

With this in mind, (and the fact it only applies to titans now) the formula should be changed to either:
a) Use unmodified sig (with no MWD or TP effects), or
b) Use a cubed formula: sig_radius^3/new_attribute^3 to scale down damage more sharply.

May I direct you to this very exciting spreadsheet that shows these effects:

>>>>>>>>>> http://i.imgur.com/B3EOC.png <<<<<<<<<<<

edit: FYI a typical fleet dictor has 3-5k EHP, dropping below 3k if it fits no buffer tank.


Where does this fall on the "game breaking" to "inconvenient" scale? Am I correct in assuming that this just gives a strong incentive to supers with hictors rather than dictors?


While posing a question to answer a question is usually bad form, is restricting the role of tackling supers to heavy dictors something that you are ok with? Are you ok with a titan being able to hit and easily pop destroyer class hulls? Does a dictor still have an appropriate role after this?