These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey 1.1] Command Ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1001 - 2013-08-07 20:04:59 UTC
Shpenat wrote:

I can understand his motives. If he gives every CS the tank of damnation he will have to kill its gank. ANd people will complain again that they do no damage and are thus not good for anything.


You know that each race has two CS, right?

... Make one ship gank and one tank. Simple!

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Elendar
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#1002 - 2013-08-07 20:05:37 UTC
Mister Vee wrote:
Ugh, Fozzie, I'm sorry but this is all really stupid. I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve exactely, but it's failing hard.


Still can't use on-grid boosting

  • Wing commanders will not get FC bonuses, which means they cannot survive at all
  • Even if they did get FC bonus, only the damnation has enough hp to survive getting volleyed right off the field. Vultures will instadie in large engagements, while claymore hp is just laughable (often less than a regular battleship).


Off-grid boosting just got more annoying
  • Everyone is using boosters because they are too good to ignore, and because command ships just die, people HAVE to use off-grid boosters. Everyone does it on alts, because obviously it's boring to sit in a pos, but at least you could park it and leave it. Forcing them into safes because you don't fix boosting properly seems unfair to me
  • Off-grid boosting is dumb and boring, but it's necessary to level the playing field since everyone is doing it.


What's the point? Why not go all the way? I'm no game designer, but my suggestion would be something like

  • Fix wing command bug first
  • Rebalance field command to skirmish/active tank/dps bonuses, 1 link
  • Rebalance fleet command to universally very high ehp, slots for utility instead of dps, 3 -4 links
  • Find an alternative for command processors entirely, they're dumb
  • Then remove off-grid boosting entirely
  • And don't ignore smaller fleets who are too fast for bringing slow command ships with them...


I completely agree with everything posted here.

On grid links simply are not viable against any decent fleet that can co-ordinate alpha, they don't even have to be especially large to alpha vultures let alone claymores if they have high alpha guns (tornadoes for example).
Kane Fenris
NWP
#1003 - 2013-08-07 20:08:50 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
Lixia Saran wrote:
CCP Fozzie:

so are we getting the hull changes (to the sleipnir, nighthawk, absolution, eos) in 1.1 as well?



plz not

in his thread he told us he will only change it when theres enough backup in the comunity and imho there wasnt.
so i hope this was just a troll...

plz let it be a troll
lol. There was plenty of feedback in the thread that said "yes, please." The hard core Sleipnir lovers said no, but many of them even said "well, if I have to lose the beloved Sleipnir to get the other hulls, then I guess it'd be a good tradeoff."

Maybe you can go back and take a look through the thread and not only pick out the negative comments you agreed with, and you might have a more objective viewpoint of the feedback. Big smile


last time i looked about a week after post i had an diffrent impression....

i cant understand why they cant give the cyclone the hurricane hull IF they do the change..... after all ist just a modell and nobody cares about the cyclone model (i suppose)
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1004 - 2013-08-07 20:09:41 UTC
FOZZIE

Have you considered reducing the sig radius on all these ships to help mitigate some damage alongside adding more EHP???

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1005 - 2013-08-07 20:09:45 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Fozzie can't make all the command ships a brick like the Damnation. It would 1) destroy the damnation and 2) ... umm.. ok I don't have a 2.

He wants the ships to have roles. The main command ships have 4 roles, Two Large Fleet Doctrine Ships (one armor, one sheild), one small fleet doctrine ship (one armor, one shield).

I get it... I would love to have the EOS be a Brick. Anyway.


The problem is how the boosts are distributed. For big fleets the 2 boosts you want are your primary tank (shield/armor) and skirmish boosts. The way they originally laid out the boosts it would've been fine with the legion being able to give both armor and skirmish boosts (lol shield doctrines). Unfortunately they decided to switch up the boosts and instead gave the skirmish boost to galente.

If they would undo that change the discontent would switch from "we need better brick tank command ships" to "we need a brick tank shield skirmish booster." It's like CCP knows exactly what people want out of a fleet booster and they keep making decision to spite them.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#1006 - 2013-08-07 20:09:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Kane Fenris
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
Lixia Saran wrote:
CCP Fozzie:

so are we getting the hull changes (to the sleipnir, nighthawk, absolution, eos) in 1.1 as well?



plz not

in his thread he told us he will only change it when theres enough backup in the comunity and imho there wasnt.
so i hope this was just a troll...

plz let it be a troll
lol. There was plenty of feedback in the thread that said "yes, please." The hard core Sleipnir lovers said no, but many of them even said "well, if I have to lose the beloved Sleipnir to get the other hulls, then I guess it'd be a good tradeoff."

Maybe you can go back and take a look through the thread and not only pick out the negative comments you agreed with, and you might have a more objective viewpoint of the feedback. Big smile


last time i looked about a week after post i had an diffrent impression....

i cant understand why they cant give the cyclone the hurricane hull IF they do the change..... after all ist just a modell (clarification: whats wrong with a hurricane hull shooting missiles) and nobody cares about the cyclone model (i suppose)

[edit] double post mistake plz remove first post
Durrr
Polaris Rising
Goonswarm Federation
#1007 - 2013-08-07 20:15:25 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Shpenat wrote:

I can understand his motives. If he gives every CS the tank of damnation he will have to kill its gank. ANd people will complain again that they do no damage and are thus not good for anything.

He can't give them bot tank and gank because they would be way to overpowered. Imagine a CS doing 1200 dps (like astarta can) while having ovek 250k ehp (damnation). I call that bad balancing.

So if his goal is to give all of those ships good enough dps he needs to reduce the tank.



But that's absolutely not what we're asking for !

As Vee perfectly explained we need A command ship per race able to push Damnation tank, DPS is not the FC/commander problem because there are better ships dedicated or specialized for this, ok to hoar on KM's but no need 800dps CS.
Make the second one still tanky but less, less links and eventually take down some of that dps, COMMAND ships should not be solo pownmobiles no matter the number of ships on the gang or solo. For that people should train T3's or take faction ships.
Look at the sleipnir and how many people bring for fleets? -none, it's a gang/solo pownmachine CS that not even fits links most times, this is silly.
Gallente get two clones of Sleipnir and matar gets one half good tanker slow as a battleship with bulkheads in lows.


Logisitcs can perfectly survive with little tanks, with current large fleets numbers command ships never, if it's not a Damnation or if you don't have 30 logis on the field 10 already exclusively dedicated to the FC (and all other pre locking also) even then with perfect volleys despite so many logis I've seen super tank Vultures get two volleyed off the field (alpha is really stupid for this)

Command ships are specialized boosting ships, why the hell should they do more dps than HACs? -take dps out and give them HP for higher tiers and loose some dps for mobility for second tiers.



It all depends on what roll CCP wants them to fill. If we want them to fill the HAC/T3 roll, then the current changes are pretty good. If we want them to be true Command ships (if they are indeed intended to be for FCs and what not), their main purpose should be to keep them on field with heavy resists and strong overall tank, a sig radius that's not overly large, and decent mobility. DPS should be a giant afterthought. So it comes down to what we want their roll to be.
sXyphos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1008 - 2013-08-07 20:15:31 UTC  |  Edited by: sXyphos
Meh i was expecting more dramatic changes like in the HAC thread(babysteps so far Roll), lots of people had some valid points in the thread but i think they lack *charisma considering the result Big smile, keep it going guys, 45 more pages and we get another 75PG on the nighthawk Roll
Acidictadpole
Lethal Dosage.
Scary Wormhole People
#1009 - 2013-08-07 20:16:30 UTC
Why is your view of these ships allowing them to have a brawler role? It really feels like a fleet command ship should be avoiding direct combat itself, but have the defenses to hold off until backup arrives.

While I like the fact that some of these ships can hold their own in a fight, I'm not sure that a vision which includes them as potential brawlers is a good step forward.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1010 - 2013-08-07 20:16:31 UTC
Shpenat wrote:
That's a bit tricky. Which one should do which? Lets take astarte and eos (as those are ships I know best).

It seems astarte is better for small fleets while eos for larger. SO in the end there will again be no option for eos to do any significant damage. So skirmish commander who wants to use drones now has no ship to fly.




Fozzie is telling you with this change: want to boost fleets cross train Damnation

This is what is boring people who spend time training command ships with views on either FC or simply boost friends.

Then there's fleet bug Vee explained already, wing commanders not receiving fleet commander boosts. This is not a simple annoyance, it's really really annoying specially flying paper tank ships getting volleyed by a bazillion of sentries or hundreds of battleships alpha.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1011 - 2013-08-07 20:22:27 UTC
Shpenat wrote:
That's a bit tricky. Which one should do which? Lets take astarte and eos (as those are ships I know best).

It seems astarte is better for small fleets while eos for larger. SO in the end there will again be no option for eos to do any significant damage. So skirmish commander who wants to use drones now has no ship to fly.


They could still use the Eos, it just wouldn't have as much DPS. If you're choosing to fly a command ship the niche you're choosing to fill is that of a fleet booster, not a gank mobile. Other ships, specifically the domi and ishtar, are drone gank mobiles. But this is coming back around to what role these ships are suppose to fill. Are they battlecruiser sized HAC's, or are they fleet boosters?
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1012 - 2013-08-07 20:25:32 UTC
CS also need more cap Fozzie some more than others please recognize this in the cap recharge rate .. details are everything Fozzie stop being lazy

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Elendar
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#1013 - 2013-08-07 20:36:38 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
CS also need more cap Fozzie some more than others please recognize this in the cap recharge rate .. details are everything Fozzie stop being lazy


I get my cap by nosing whatever friendly ahac is nearest to me at the time Lol
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#1014 - 2013-08-07 20:44:17 UTC
Mister Vee wrote:
Ugh, Fozzie, I'm sorry but this is all really stupid. I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve exactely, but it's failing hard.


Still can't use on-grid boosting

  • Wing commanders will not get FC bonuses, which means they cannot survive at all
  • Even if they did get FC bonus, only the damnation has enough hp to survive getting volleyed right off the field. Vultures will instadie in large engagements, while claymore hp is just laughable (often less than a regular battleship).


Off-grid boosting just got more annoying
  • Everyone is using boosters because they are too good to ignore, and because command ships just die, people HAVE to use off-grid boosters. Everyone does it on alts, because obviously it's boring to sit in a pos, but at least you could park it and leave it. Forcing them into safes because you don't fix boosting properly seems unfair to me
  • Off-grid boosting is dumb and boring, but it's necessary to level the playing field since everyone is doing it.


What's the point? Why not go all the way? I'm no game designer, but my suggestion would be something like

  • Fix wing command bug first
  • Rebalance field command to skirmish/active tank/dps bonuses, 1 link
  • Rebalance fleet command to universally very high ehp, slots for utility instead of dps, 3 -4 links
  • Find an alternative for command processors entirely, they're dumb
  • Then remove off-grid boosting entirely
  • And don't ignore smaller fleets who are too fast for bringing slow command ships with them...


+1 from me on this.

I don't use command ships often, but the changes made so far seem a bit.. vanilla. Each of the Command Ships seem to be just a minor variation of the other. Now, I know both you and CCP Rise aren't afraid of variety or of giving ships a bit of difference, so I'm of the mind that these particular changes are being influenced by upcoming changes in other ships. Am I correct?

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
El Scotch
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1015 - 2013-08-07 20:46:41 UTC
Might I suggest unfucking the game before you start ******* it up more?

Making things less fun/interesting for fleet commanders really isn't a good model.
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#1016 - 2013-08-07 20:50:47 UTC
Field Command ships:
DPS / active tank bonuses, can use 2 links at once
Approx 150-200k ehp with typical t2 fit


Fleet Command ships:
HP bonus, can use one link per level of Command Ships
Approx 400k ehp with typical t2 fit

Fire command procs into the nearest sun. Or make it so they boost link strength by like 1% or something idc

Do this thing~
Michael J Caboose
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1017 - 2013-08-07 20:51:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael J Caboose
Maybe it's all an indirect nerf to skirmish links?

Maybe CCP wants you to chose;

1) Want bonused skirmish links so your fleet can be super fast, have uber range tackle and itty bitty sigs while it pwns all the things? Fine, here's your ship with it's crappy paper tank.

2) Want an epic fleet boosting brick that can withstand the alpha of ten thousand Arty Maelstroms? Fine, here's your heroic brick with it's crappy info war links that almost no one cares about.
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#1018 - 2013-08-07 20:56:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Fredric Wolf
Maybe we can have both?

Lets look at something that would give command ships more EHP and Less DPS by fitting them the warfare links. What if we change how the link give bonuses to the ships. So for every Warfare Link you fit to a ship you get a 15% bonus to shilds and armor or some other number and a reduction of 15% DPS to Guns, Missiles, and Drones. This would allow ships that want to support fleets to get they EHP they need and allow members that want to use command ships to pvp not not boost a way to still maintain their DPS.

[EDIT] With this set up an Astarte would go from 135k EHP to 220 EHP with the bonus from then changes to link bonus and mind link. This would be a good start. The damge reduction on the weapons systems might be to much but I think this is the right direction to take this as it would be the simplest balance for it.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1019 - 2013-08-07 20:56:55 UTC
Michael J Caboose wrote:
2) Want an epic fleet boosting brick that can withstand the alpha of ten thousand Arty Maelstroms? Fine, here's your heroic brick with it's crappy info war links that almost no one cares about.



Translation: fly Amarr command ship because it's the ONLY one doing so but then there's a little issue, bring an armor command ship to shield fleets is a bit annoying heh?

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Aplier Shivra
#1020 - 2013-08-07 20:57:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Aplier Shivra
Stopping by to voice that I am happy with the proposed changes to Absolution in the OP, although I guess that's not too surprising considering that it is pretty much an all-around buff.

However, I would like to make the suggestion of swapping the RoF bonus with the resist bonus for Amarr BC/CS skills. With 5%/5% damage per level there was already a large emphasis on dps coming from the CS skill, but at 5%/10% this becomes a fairly punishing gap between each level of CS. The increase in absolution's T2 resists up to damnation's level will somewhat help offset the resist loss for pilots below CS 5 compared to current TQ stats.

EDIT: just want to add, I like my current model. A lot. So if I'm getting a new model for it, the guys in charge better be putting their heart and soul into making it just as awesome.