These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1361 - 2013-08-14 14:42:28 UTC
Keep up the test server testing guys, thanks for the feedback so far. We'll be keeping an eye on things like the Astarte and Eos on the test server but my feeling at this point is that the balance between them is pretty good. The blaster Astarte will do more damage at 500m, but the Eos is less vulnerable to TDs, ECM, Neuts, can hit smaller targets more effectively and can choose damage types.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1362 - 2013-08-14 14:45:04 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread


Fitting what you want on a ship is intended to take creativity and require tradeoffs.

In your case I advise checking out meta modules. Switching the LSEs and DC to meta 4 and dropping to two BCUs allows your fit to work without any fitting mods or implants, even with T2 links. Add Genolution CA-1 and CA-2s and a 3% cpu implant it works with 3 BCUs.


yes 12 mil for a meta 4 DC really??
those 2 implants are 25mil each minimum and i would imagine ASB's would be even harder to fit

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
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1363 - 2013-08-14 14:54:03 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread


Fitting what you want on a ship is intended to take creativity and require tradeoffs.

In your case I advise checking out meta modules. Switching the LSEs and DC to meta 4 and dropping to two BCUs allows your fit to work without any fitting mods or implants, even with T2 links. Add Genolution CA-1 and CA-2s and a 3% cpu implant it works with 3 BCUs.


yes 12 mil for a meta 4 DC really??
those 2 implants are 25mil each minimum and i would imagine ASB's would be even harder to fit


It's a 200m isk ship. And that's fitting three links with full tank in the mids. Swapping in any of a scram, sensor booster, eccm, small cap booster would all make the fit much easier.

X-LASB actually fits fine with a copro and CPU rig even with three links and four HAMs.

Now that I'm looking at it we should probably nerf its CPU a little.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1364 - 2013-08-14 14:54:51 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Dav Varan wrote:

Its 785 v 702.
You need links in the fits to be taken seriously.


Dude, if anything running links on grid should not be taken seriously... As long as there is the option of OGB, that's going to continue to be the proper way to provide links.

So please don't sit here and tell people that fitting these ships w/o links is not serious because it does not make any sense.


CCP Fozzie wrote:

For years one of the most hotly discussed issues surrounding warfare links is their ability to apply bonuses to fleet members anywhere in the same solar system. We will not be changing this aspect of the feature in Odyssey 1.1. There are some serious technical hurdles to adjusting this aspect of the features, which are being worked on as we speak but for which we are not currently ready to announce an ETA.


^^ Taken from the links thread
I take this to mean that while it won't happen in this patch the commands we are talking about the balance of here are going to be required to be on grid to link in the near future.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1365 - 2013-08-14 14:59:20 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread


Fitting what you want on a ship is intended to take creativity and require tradeoffs.

In your case I advise checking out meta modules. Switching the LSEs and DC to meta 4 and dropping to two BCUs allows your fit to work without any fitting mods or implants, even with T2 links. Add Genolution CA-1 and CA-2s and a 3% cpu implant it works with 3 BCUs.


yes 12 mil for a meta 4 DC really??
those 2 implants are 25mil each minimum and i would imagine ASB's would be even harder to fit


It's a 200m isk ship. And that's fitting three links with full tank in the mids. Swapping in any of a scram, sensor booster, eccm, small cap booster would all make the fit much easier.

X-LASB actually fits fine with a copro and CPU rig even with three links and four HAMs.

Now that I'm looking at it we should probably nerf its CPU a little.


LOL at that foz... whilst you're here any chance of talking about the vulture since i haven't seen you write a single thing about it?
in particular why it has too have the same bonuses as a eagle? rather than more HP or damage bonus?

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
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1366 - 2013-08-14 15:02:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Lloyd Roses
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread


Fitting what you want on a ship is intended to take creativity and require tradeoffs.

In your case I advise checking out meta modules. Switching the LSEs and DC to meta 4 and dropping to two BCUs allows your fit to work without any fitting mods or implants, even with T2 links. Add Genolution CA-1 and CA-2s and a 3% cpu implant it works with 3 BCUs.


yes 12 mil for a meta 4 DC really??
those 2 implants are 25mil each minimum and i would imagine ASB's would be even harder to fit


It's a 200m isk ship. And that's fitting three links with full tank in the mids. Swapping in any of a scram, sensor booster, eccm, small cap booster would all make the fit much easier.

X-LASB actually fits fine with a copro and CPU rig even with three links and four HAMs.

Now that I'm looking at it we should probably nerf its CPU a little.


plsnotplsnotplsnot.

The first wonderful fit that jumped into my eyes atleast has around 16 CPU leftover - and two nanos. Any major adjustment and it needs implants :| Many other decent fits also just fit right now using some trickery, can't that be generously overlooked?


Claymore is fine.... really, just ~ fine ♫
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1367 - 2013-08-14 15:05:29 UTC
Dav Varan wrote:


^^ Taken from the links thread
I take this to mean that while it won't happen in this patch the commands we are talking about the balance of here are going to be required to be on grid to link in the near future.


I'm not exactly sure what you're quoted fozzie point was suppose to relay...

The reality is that until the links come on grid (forcefully), your best bet is to keep them off grid. Nothing has really changed in this regards compared to TQ. So again, I'm not sure what your point was.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1368 - 2013-08-14 15:09:12 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread


Fitting what you want on a ship is intended to take creativity and require tradeoffs.

In your case I advise checking out meta modules. Switching the LSEs and DC to meta 4 and dropping to two BCUs allows your fit to work without any fitting mods or implants, even with T2 links. Add Genolution CA-1 and CA-2s and a 3% cpu implant it works with 3 BCUs.


yes 12 mil for a meta 4 DC really??
those 2 implants are 25mil each minimum and i would imagine ASB's would be even harder to fit


It's a 200m isk ship. And that's fitting three links with full tank in the mids. Swapping in any of a scram, sensor booster, eccm, small cap booster would all make the fit much easier.

X-LASB actually fits fine with a copro and CPU rig even with three links and four HAMs.

Now that I'm looking at it we should probably nerf its CPU a little.


LOL at that foz... whilst you're here any chance of talking about the vulture since i haven't seen you write a single thing about it?
in particular why it has too have the same bonuses as a eagle? rather than more HP or damage bonus?


Well it has double the damage bonus of the Eagle, but otherwise their bonuses are the same yes.

The optimal range bonuses work especially well with rails in a gang support role, and 7.5 hybrid turrets isn't inconsiderable dps. You can fit three links, four 250mms, three magstabs and full tank+MWD, and deal 463 dps out to 41km while also providing links and having 153k ehp. That's not bad at all.
Rather than add more +50% Hp bonuses to the command ships we're starting down the path that will allow us to remove that bonus from the Damnation and get them all into better balance.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Oddsodz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1369 - 2013-08-14 15:10:16 UTC
Still wish the EoS would lose that repping bonus and have something else in it's place. That is the ship that will be used in fleets with Logi. It's role will not be about DPS or how much damage it can put out. It's role will be to help it's fleet stay alive. And we all know how Active taking works in big fleet fights. Please get rid of it and put something else in there. Maybe even a Drone tanking bonus or a ship base speed bonus. Anything but the repping bonus. I Can understand the Astarte have a rep bonus. That is the ship for small gang and solo play. But EoS is a "FLEET" ship. And in the intended role. It will have logi fleet member's to rep him. So it needs no repping bonus. Please PLEASE think of something else for that please.
Kara Vix
Perkone
Caldari State
#1370 - 2013-08-14 15:11:30 UTC
Has the ship models changed yet and if so, any images? Curious minds want to know Big smile
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1371 - 2013-08-14 15:12:04 UTC
Quote:
Well it has double the damage bonus of the Eagle, but otherwise their bonuses are the same yes.

Rather than add more +50% Hp bonuses to the command ships we're starting down the path that will allow us to remove that bonus from the Damnation and get them all into better balance.


btw could you convince Rise to give that double damage bonus to the eagle along with some decent speed and drones please? :)

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
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1372 - 2013-08-14 15:13:24 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Keep up the test server testing guys, thanks for the feedback so far. We'll be keeping an eye on things like the Astarte and Eos on the test server but my feeling at this point is that the balance between them is pretty good. The blaster Astarte will do more damage at 500m, but the Eos is less vulnerable to TDs, ECM, Neuts, can hit smaller targets more effectively and can choose damage types.


Drone bay fozzie drone bay... 250m3 means that your drones are going to be shot out from under you in no time when fighting anyone w/o an amoeba brain. Atm you don't even have a backup wave of heavies if you intend to fit any other types of drones which any sane person will do.

Give it 325m3 and I'll be "more" inclined to believe that they are well balanced.


also Fozzie, any word on current cargo holds for these ships? If they are not suppose to match their t1 parents via a balancing decision it's at least intended. Just wanted to make sure you did not overlook this.

Regardless, thanks for breathing some more life into the game with these changes.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1373 - 2013-08-14 15:16:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Dav Varan
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Dav Varan wrote:


^^ Taken from the links thread
I take this to mean that while it won't happen in this patch the commands we are talking about the balance of here are going to be required to be on grid to link in the near future.


I'm not exactly sure what you're quoted fozzie point was suppose to relay...

The reality is that until the links come on grid (forcefully), your best bet is to keep them off grid. Nothing has really changed in this regards compared to TQ. So again, I'm not sure what your point was.


Yeah I agree with you that at the moment OG is best of course it is.
But I think this is the balance pass for Commands that will be on grid eventually.

for now run 6 links on your command at pos or stay aligned with stabs in the lows.
all 8 commands are equal for current offgrid tactics theres no point discussing balance of ships that arnt in the fight.

But do you really think there's going to be another pass to balance commands when they are forced on grid ?
I don't know but I assume that this balance pass is it !

So discuss here the balance as command ships linking ongrid, because thats what there going to have to do Soon.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1374 - 2013-08-14 15:19:38 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Keep up the test server testing guys, thanks for the feedback so far. We'll be keeping an eye on things like the Astarte and Eos on the test server but my feeling at this point is that the balance between them is pretty good. The blaster Astarte will do more damage at 500m, but the Eos is less vulnerable to TDs, ECM, Neuts, can hit smaller targets more effectively and can choose damage types.


Drone bay fozzie drone bay... 250m3 means that your drones are going to be shot out from under you in no time when fighting anyone w/o an amoeba brain. Atm you don't even have a backup wave of heavies if you intend to fit any other types of drones which any sane person will do.

Give it 325m3 and I'll be "more" inclined to believe that they are well balanced.


also Fozzie, any word on current cargo holds for these ships? If they are not suppose to match their t1 parents via a balancing decision it's at least intended. Just wanted to make sure you did not overlook this.

Regardless, thanks for breathing some more life into the game with these changes.


The 400m3 on the Astarte and Eos was a conscious decision, yes. It's possible we might change it but we don't automatically give ships every feature their "parent" has.
The giant cargobays on the Damnation and Nighthawk I mostly left in place because there wasn't a good enough reason to drop them down and overloading players holds on patch day isn't something we want to do without a good reason.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1375 - 2013-08-14 15:20:21 UTC
Kara Vix wrote:
Has the ship models changed yet and if so, any images? Curious minds want to know Big smile


Ship models are not changing for 1.1, that is something planned for later. I'll see about getting that sticky up asap so we can link to it.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1376 - 2013-08-14 15:23:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

The 400m3 on the Astarte and Eos was a conscious decision, yes. It's possible we might change it but we don't automatically give ships every feature their "parent" has.
The giant cargobays on the Damnation and Nighthawk I mostly left in place because there wasn't a good enough reason to drop them down and overloading players holds on patch day isn't something we want to do without a good reason.


Word, just wanted to make sure. Although I do find it questionable that ships w/o an active tanking bonus are the ones that get the biggest hold. What's purpose of this hold? Unless it's there to hold charges for the more "thirsty" commands.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1377 - 2013-08-14 15:23:18 UTC
Can we get a bit more drone bay for the Eos please, 2 flights of heavies is quite limiting, maybe 300 just enough to carry a extra set of smaller drones.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1378 - 2013-08-14 15:24:03 UTC
Fozzie

Have you looked at the sleipnir armour version proposal i posted a couple of pages back? and what do you think?

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
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#1379 - 2013-08-14 15:24:48 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Keep up the test server testing guys, thanks for the feedback so far. We'll be keeping an eye on things like the Astarte and Eos on the test server but my feeling at this point is that the balance between them is pretty good. The blaster Astarte will do more damage at 500m, but the Eos is less vulnerable to TDs, ECM, Neuts, can hit smaller targets more effectively and can choose damage types.


Drone bay fozzie drone bay... 250m3 means that your drones are going to be shot out from under you in no time when fighting anyone w/o an amoeba brain. Atm you don't even have a backup wave of heavies if you intend to fit any other types of drones which any sane person will do.

Give it 325m3 and I'll be "more" inclined to believe that they are well balanced.


^ This much, pls rethink this fozzie.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Oddsodz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1380 - 2013-08-14 15:25:43 UTC
Oh maybe it would be nice to have a remote ECCM module bonus instead of the repping bonus on the EoS. That way I can help my Logi from jamming.