These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Capital ship balancing

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
J'J'J'Jita
Ch'Ch'Ch'Chia Corp
#1621 - 2011-10-12 04:31:37 UTC
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
J'J'J'Jita wrote:
Will pilots with the Fighter Bombers or (racial) Titan skills trained be reimbursed their skillpoints in normal drones, since those skills are now totally useless for supercapital pilots?

My Erebus pilot would like those drone skillpoints back.



You will need those drone skills when your erebus gets popped and you are forced back into a regular battleship.


If I lose the Erebus I will just get another one. Like most titan pilots I'm rich personally and in a rich alliance.

CSMA / holding alt are not options because the titan needs to be able to log in at any time on very short notice for alliance ops. Retrieving and swapping out the titan would take too much time.

The fact is, drone skills are now totally useless for titan pilots and those skill points should be reimbursed.
Sigras
Conglomo
#1622 - 2011-10-12 05:05:05 UTC
Anile8er wrote:
Sigras wrote:
The best part of this is that your own argument is your gallows because you'd be completely safe jumping into a 30 man battleship gang because when you got into trouble you'd just warp off and cloak because they cant warp scramble you.



Maybe your 30 man gang should field some support ships like Hics, dictors and logi cruisers.

You were the one to propose the battleship scenario, dont blame me for your fail analogies

Anile8er wrote:
I forgot that when you cyno in you have full cap... right? hmmm more like 30 something percent.
And the lock time on my Nyx for those battleships must be in the what? 3 second range? be really hard for them all to get on me at once, what with those kinds of lock times. And lets say 20 of your BS have a single neut, your knocking back 16,000 of my cap every 24 seconds. Start doing the math on say 30 BS with 2 neuts each...


Ill do the math when you show me a fit for an armageddon that does 1200 DPS and has two neuts . . . Roll

The closest you can come is the tempest with about 1000 DPS and again lets remember that you are the one that was stupid enough to cyno your nyx on top of 30 tempests, which ofc is something that even you would never do . . .

The problem was that supercarrier hotdrops were never in danger, because against anything that can fight back, you'd cower systems away completely safe in your POS, and when you do decide to hotdrop, its against a small fleet that you KNOW cant kill you in 15 minutes . . . now logging off is not a tactic, and honestly it never should have been it should always have been an exploit.

Anile8er wrote:
Educate yourself before you post on a subject. Please.

Please take your own advice.
Ubee Rubiks
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1623 - 2011-10-12 05:06:20 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:
In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.

The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.

Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.

Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.



I have been playing this game a long time and this is the first time I have ever seen a reply like this, maybe CCP is true about being open and developing eve right! Shocked
Anile8er
Holoband Research and Development
#1624 - 2011-10-12 05:13:30 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Anile8er wrote:
Sigras wrote:
The best part of this is that your own argument is your gallows because you'd be completely safe jumping into a 30 man battleship gang because when you got into trouble you'd just warp off and cloak because they cant warp scramble you.



Maybe your 30 man gang should field some support ships like Hics, dictors and logi cruisers.

You were the one to propose the battleship scenario, dont blame me for your fail analogies

Anile8er wrote:
I forgot that when you cyno in you have full cap... right? hmmm more like 30 something percent.
And the lock time on my Nyx for those battleships must be in the what? 3 second range? be really hard for them all to get on me at once, what with those kinds of lock times. And lets say 20 of your BS have a single neut, your knocking back 16,000 of my cap every 24 seconds. Start doing the math on say 30 BS with 2 neuts each...


Ill do the math when you show me a fit for an armageddon that does 1200 DPS and has two neuts . . . Roll

The closest you can come is the tempest with about 1000 DPS and again lets remember that you are the one that was stupid enough to cyno your nyx on top of 30 tempests, which ofc is something that even you would never do . . .

The problem was that supercarrier hotdrops were never in danger, because against anything that can fight back, you'd cower systems away completely safe in your POS, and when you do decide to hotdrop, its against a small fleet that you KNOW cant kill you in 15 minutes . . . now logging off is not a tactic, and honestly it never should have been it should always have been an exploit.

Anile8er wrote:
Educate yourself before you post on a subject. Please.

Please take your own advice.



My math was based on BS doing an average of 850 DPS....

so 16000 cap every 24 seconds, thats 20 neuts... total for the fleet.
non judgement
Without Fear
Flying Burning Ships Alliance
#1625 - 2011-10-12 05:13:34 UTC
First time posting in a threadnaught.
Smile
I'd just like to say that it's amazing how much thought is going into this stuff without being able to see who it will affect the game. I haven't used a SC but I imagine these changes will change fleet composition a bit. I think they will help fleet battles. But I don't mind waiting until the changes hit the server before saying they were good changes. I was going to say Sisi but the main server is the best test to see how the changes work.
Sigras
Conglomo
#1626 - 2011-10-12 05:13:34 UTC
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:
The supercapital ships are different to other ships in one very important part; you cannot leave the ship and change to a new ship.

The only structure you can leave a supercarrier or a titan with even minimal secuirity is capital ship maintenance bay. This requires a control tower that can be killed and sovereignty and infrastructure upgrade.


but you can leave them, and in fact IIRC the CSMA doesnt even require CPU so you can still get your ship(s) out even if the tower is reinforced, this makes the fact that the tower can be killed insignificant, and honestly, if you cant afford the 1 mil a day for the sov upgrade, why are you even flying a supercap?

Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:
What this suggested nerf is doing, is removing lot of gameplay options from these said ships. In past, it has been possible that you have used the ship ingame for few hours a week (most of it is spent waiting something to happen inside a pos).

In future, the use would be even less. Games are supposed to be fun, but I totally fail to see where is the fun with the suggested supercarriers.

Since every ship has a role and purpose, please describe why would you want to own one of these new supercarriers?

Or do you think its good idea to make another ship class as succesfull as electronic attack frigates?

which is why they provided you with a POS module so you can leave your ship behind and fly a different one.

Also the role of the supercarrier should be to counter other cap ships; im personally of the belief that they need to get their 20% EHP back but even without it, theyre still extremely viable counters to dreadnaughts and able to blow through sov units.
Sigras
Conglomo
#1627 - 2011-10-12 05:18:37 UTC
Anile8er wrote:
My math was based on BS doing an average of 850 DPS....

so 16000 cap every 24 seconds, thats 20 neuts... total for the fleet.

The particular numbers are insignificant to the fact that you still had 100% of the initiative . . . if it is something that has any chance of killing you, you dont engage.

Well now everything has a chance to kill you, so you have to be far more strategic about how you deploy them . . . you may even have to resort to using them for the purpose they were intended . . . the horror! the horror!
Sigras
Conglomo
#1628 - 2011-10-12 05:24:06 UTC
J'J'J'Jita wrote:
If I lose the Erebus I will just get another one. Like most titan pilots I'm rich personally and in a rich alliance.

CSMA / holding alt are not options because the titan needs to be able to log in at any time on very short notice for alliance ops. Retrieving and swapping out the titan would take too much time.

The fact is, drone skills are now totally useless for titan pilots and those skill points should be reimbursed.

The fact that your alliance is press-ganging you into never leaving your titan is your problem, not a problem of the system. your character is free to leave the titan in the CSMA any time as far as the game is concerned, what you decide to do with your character is your business and should not result in retroactive changes for all of New Eden.
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1629 - 2011-10-12 05:25:44 UTC
Anile8er wrote:


My math was based on BS doing an average of 850 DPS....

so 16000 cap every 24 seconds, thats 20 neuts... total for the fleet.



You are aware that supercaps are generally found in groups, and that they can remote cap and remote repair each other, right?

Theory crafting is something you can twist to support whatever you want, but we need to deal with reality here...
Endeavour Starfleet
#1630 - 2011-10-12 05:47:27 UTC
I 100 percent agree with the logoff timer change. If someone is being attacked being able to wait it out and vanish is not fair in the least.

But I do not agree with things like the EHP decrease. Pre TiDi lag and logoffski were causing the ability for entire cap fleets to vanish. Those issues will be gone after Winter 2011. The EHP nerf isnt needed.

How about this CCP. Keep the EHP nerf on "Hot Standby" Ready to deploy by a patch if and ONLY if the other changes are not resulting in how cap and subcap combat ought to be.

That sounds fair to me does everyone agree?
Celery Man
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1631 - 2011-10-12 05:52:01 UTC
Aase Nord wrote:
Thank you CCP/goons/allies/alts.
Game is F.U.B.A.R

Its time for me to find an other game to spend my money on .

Bye


If this breaks the game for you, then gtfo :) we wont miss you.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1632 - 2011-10-12 06:04:41 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so.


You think they got the ISK to buy a supercap through their in-game actions.

heh



Thatsthejoke.jpg

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1633 - 2011-10-12 06:08:03 UTC
Celery Man wrote:


If this breaks the game for you, then gtfo :) we wont miss you.


Actually since we're already missing 20% of eve's subscriber base due to the retardation of incarna, I wouldn't so sure that ever super cap pilot quiting wouldn't be noticed at this point.


They'd be big babies to quit, but just the same, saying they wouldn't be noticed is extremely short sighted considering the current server population levels.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Bugcheck
Israeli Gold Miners Union
#1634 - 2011-10-12 06:10:21 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:
In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.

The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.

Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.

Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary.


Apologize if this was been suggested already but I didnt read the whole thread. Instead of nerfing the fighter, go along with nerfing the SC drone capabilities. What if you change FBs to have the same bandwidth as fighters, and change the drone deployment mechanics to validate you're in an SC to deploy FBs only (would allow carriers to move FBs just not deploy them). Change carrier skill bonus of drone deployment to be +2 per level for SCs instead of +3 drones. Buff FB DPS and HP 33% to compensate (also increase mineral build cost equally). Also reduce SC bandwidth and capacity further to balance with current plan. SCs then can only deploy 15 FBs with overall effect of fighter not touched but also only 15 fighters instead of 20. Makes sense that an SC could do more damage to subcaps w/ fighters than a carrier.

This would also help with war-on-lag etc since less drones on field overall.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1635 - 2011-10-12 06:12:47 UTC
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:
Demon Azrakel wrote:
[quote=Avon


Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.


The supercapital ships are different to other ships in one very important part; you cannot leave the ship and change to a new ship.


Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?

Right?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1636 - 2011-10-12 06:13:26 UTC
R0ze wrote:
Goddam .. few posts ago you said that price should be dictated by demand […] Now you state when the ship has "better performance" one should go with - NO I am not getting that ship I should toally look into something else!
No, I'm stating even if a ship has better performance, it must still die horribly when faced with its counter.
Quote:
at least be consistent in your forum poasting ..
Seeing as how one did not contradict the other, I am. What you just quoted had nothing to do with price, but with counters.
InnerDrive wrote:
A nyx for example moves at 137ms with a mwd and at 88ms without one. (notice you cant web supercarriers or titans either)
Ok. So it moves ~50% faster with an MWD. It is also 4-500% bigger. This means that it is now 200–250% easier to tack, and Dread pilot will be very happy for this.

So no, fitting an MWD to a titan to move faster than a Dread can track is a particularly bad idea because it doesn't work — it makes the titan easier to track.
Avon wrote:
That's a long but terrible argument.

If a ship actually costs more to produce then it *should* have some advantage, otherwise why bother?
You're still thinking the wrong way around. If a ship has some advantage, it should to cost more. That is all. However, it does not follow from this that something that costs more has some advantage.
Velin Dhal wrote:
Tell me this. IF this patch stays as is and launches this winter, how do you envision large scale 0.0 warfare ?
Same as now, except that one ship class cannot do it all any more.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1637 - 2011-10-12 06:19:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Malcanis wrote:



Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?

Right?


If you are dumb enough to bring your over priced pirtate implants an 6% concord implants out of the hull that keeps them safe, then you go right ahead.

I couldn't even guess at the value anymore of a super clone, they probably add 8ish billion to the hull cost.


Tippia wrote:
Same as now, except that one ship class cannot do it all any more.



Supercarrier can't shoot towers, so theres one thing they can't do right now, they also suck in support fleet fights, but ima let people like you, who don't own or fly one, go ahead and tell the rest of us what they can do.


Whoever started the myth that supercarriers ruin fleet fights is a god, because supers literally do NOTHING in fleet fights until other caps hit the ground, unless you count the 10 seconds of dps that sentry drones apply as the targets motor out of drone control range.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1638 - 2011-10-12 06:25:09 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?

Right?
If you are dumb enough to bring your over priced pirtate implants an 6% concord implants out of the hull that keeps them safe, then you go right ahead.
Because obviously there is no way to keep implants safe in this game…
Quote:
Supercarrier can't shoot towers, so theres one thing they can't do right now, they also suck in support fleet fights, but ima let people like you, who don't own or fly one, go ahead and tell the rest of us what they can do.
Ah, so you're saying that, in fact, nothing will actually change with this fix. Well then, all this whinging is really about nothing.
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1639 - 2011-10-12 06:27:52 UTC
LegendaryFrog wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Demon Azrakel wrote:


EDIT: you do realize that titans can still hit stuff and receive tracking links to help them with that, right?



What i realize is that if a ship the size of a dread, mothership, or titan can't find space for a drone bay, then theres absolutely no way anything smaller should have the space.


You see, EvE developers should endorse realism over game balance in a game about immortal pilots and their spaceships because...


Because it is impossible to make a ship larger than the smallest aircraft carrier that can't launch planes?
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1640 - 2011-10-12 06:30:39 UTC
Balor Haliquin wrote:
Relnala wrote:
Balor Haliquin wrote:
So at the risk of this not being read by any developer. I would like to point out a major flaw in the current balancing of super capital ships in eve. Super carriers are still to powerful. Having fought 300 man super capital fleets and understanding how they work the super carrier was always the more threatening then the titan. Simply because it has more effective DPS, had a better ECM system, and often had the same EHP as the titan for 16th the cost.

Looking at the cost end of the spectrum we see that a super carrier takes about 1billion isk in skills, about 4 months in training time to become effective and then another 17 billion isk for the hull and fittings. Contrast that with a titan that costs about 7 billion isk in skills and around a year to train for so that your can do more then just sit in it. You can understand why super carriers are out numbering titans by nearly 20 to 1. Simply put even with the nerfs and the super carriers inability to engage sub caps effectively, they are still going to be a better anti capital ships because they still have nerly the same EHP and can remote rep each other.

With the current glut of super carriers, you will not see dread fleets because the super carrier fleet is simply going to wipe the floor with the dread fleet. Anything not supported by super carriers becomes an easy target for super carriers and carriers. The simple fact is that the super carrier has too big of a performance envelope.

Looking at the current and proposed EHP stats you can see that the super carrier is equal to the titans EHP. While only requiring a quarter of the resources and a thrid of the time to train for. If we were to put that in sub capital terms we would be looking at a T1 cruiser that has the same EHP and firepower as a battleship, but with none of the draw backs of cost and training time. Either the DPS or the EHP, or both. Honestly i like the idea of a super carrier that has huge firepower but is not a solid rock of hit points. Remember that super carrier can remote repair each other and more often then not when you have 100 of them on field you simply can not break the remote repair tank on them even if you have 100 of your own super carriers hitting them.

If we take the reduced hit points of the titan (about 42 million EHP)and super carrier(about 41 million ehp) assuming both are dead space fit and slave implants. And we compare that to how many carrier it takes to build each (about 62 for a titan and 16 for a super carrier). We then take the Titans EHP and divide it by the number of carriers it takes and we get 677,419 EHP. we then multiply that by the number of carriers it takes to make a super carrier and we get 10,838,709 EHP. That is about where the super carrier should be sitting.

But because of the efficiencies of construction, i think a number of about 14,500,000 EHP is much more suitable. That means the super carrier is far more vulnerable to titans and dreads alike and there is an actual risk to flying them. This will also prevent the glut of super carriers from ensuring that nothing changes in eve. Because at the end of the day we will still need titans and dreads to hit sov structures. And if the fist counter is drop 100 super carriers on it and rep it up to save it, then we will see not shift in the current way eve is running in null sec.



go fit an archon like you fit a super carrier. It has about 10mil EHP with gang bonii.

So by your logic, the Aeon should have 200mil EHP.


No, by my logic they should have about 15mil EHP like i stated. As a point of interest an archon can get to 6 million EHP with a deadspace fit wit slaves. The point I am trying to make is that even with 20% less EHP the super carrier still has far to many hit points for far to cheep a hull.


It is silly to compare fitting the two with the same modules. Try modules and implants in proportion to the hull price. A 10 bil carrier vs a 20 bil sc is a far different story than a 1.5 bil carrier and a 20 bil sc. Or should the dramiel and daredevil, hell, every ship in the game, be balanced based on meta 14/13 fits?