These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Anattha
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1601 - 2013-08-19 02:15:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Anattha
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
Trying to make sense of 80 pages of ranting: so, what are Absolution and Damnation's new starts again?

Abso still useless for pvp. Damnation still a fat brick. Will this stats are correct for you?
Eldrith Jhandar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1602 - 2013-08-19 04:25:38 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
to be fair the eos and astarte can be fitted with a 160k ehp buffer and a good active tank without spending much money. they're not exactly weak.

as mentioned, it's all a matter of tradeoffs.

as they stand, for the purpose they serve, they seem ok. tbh



As of now there's no reason to use te eos over an Astarte unless u can't use t2 blasters but u can use t2 ogres
Anything the eos can do the Astarte can do better without te fear of getting your (very) limited supply of drones killed
And I've mentioned how the eos has -1 slot, which is standard blah blah but the other drone boats are comparable to their turret based counterparts, unlike the eos
The eos IS lacking
Not by an outrageous amount but it is lacking
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1603 - 2013-08-19 07:13:41 UTC
Eldrith Jhandar wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
to be fair the eos and astarte can be fitted with a 160k ehp buffer and a good active tank without spending much money. they're not exactly weak.

as mentioned, it's all a matter of tradeoffs.

as they stand, for the purpose they serve, they seem ok. tbh



As of now there's no reason to use te eos over an Astarte unless u can't use t2 blasters but u can use t2 ogres
Anything the eos can do the Astarte can do better without te fear of getting your (very) limited supply of drones killed
And I've mentioned how the eos has -1 slot, which is standard blah blah but the other drone boats are comparable to their turret based counterparts, unlike the eos
The eos IS lacking
Not by an outrageous amount but it is lacking


yes i think that's a fair point. it could use more drone space, and i agree that the mere presence of drones does not really justify the loss of a slot. I'd still be happy to take it on an armour roam though. For me its role would absolutely be boosting though. 4 links. Probably 3 armour and 1 skirmish

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#1604 - 2013-08-19 07:58:35 UTC
Please BUFF the NH and dont nerf it even more ... DPS went down even more, and they were abysmal before.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1605 - 2013-08-19 08:02:20 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:
Please BUFF the NH and dont nerf it even more ... DPS went down even more, and they were abysmal before.


They're not for brawling. They're for tanking huge alpha while boosting.

See above

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Open Graves
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1606 - 2013-08-19 10:43:51 UTC
I want to add my support for hulls matching weapon systems. If Eos is going to be drone focused please make it a T2 Myrm not a Brutix and likewise for the other races.
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#1607 - 2013-08-19 11:35:44 UTC
I cannot find the posting now, but Fozzie mentioned something about removing the +10% HP from Damnation.
THere is an issue with FCs in large fleets being primaried who need survivability vs insane buffer tanks in small scale.

Idea: would it be a solution to allow Target Spectrum Breakers on Command Ships?

That would not affect smaller engagements so much, but add another defensive option for these key ships in large fleets. Then maybe a loss of that HP ship bonus could be compensated.
Serenity Eon
League of Paranoid D-Scanners
#1608 - 2013-08-19 12:00:40 UTC
Fozzie, can you give us an update? Please Smile
Alsyth
#1609 - 2013-08-19 12:09:05 UTC
Edward Olmops wrote:
I cannot find the posting now, but Fozzie mentioned something about removing the +10% HP from Damnation.
THere is an issue with FCs in large fleets being primaried who need survivability vs insane buffer tanks in small scale.

Idea: would it be a solution to allow Target Spectrum Breakers on Command Ships?

That would not affect smaller engagements so much, but add another defensive option for these key ships in large fleets. Then maybe a loss of that HP ship bonus could be compensated.



Buff to armor only once again, and shield CS are in a far worse situation.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1610 - 2013-08-19 12:28:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe
Eldrith Jhandar wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
to be fair the eos and astarte can be fitted with a 160k ehp buffer and a good active tank without spending much money. they're not exactly weak.

as mentioned, it's all a matter of tradeoffs.

as they stand, for the purpose they serve, they seem ok. tbh



As of now there's no reason to use te eos over an Astarte unless u can't use t2 blasters but u can use t2 ogres
Anything the eos can do the Astarte can do better without te fear of getting your (very) limited supply of drones killed
And I've mentioned how the eos has -1 slot, which is standard blah blah but the other drone boats are comparable to their turret based counterparts, unlike the eos
The eos IS lacking
Not by an outrageous amount but it is lacking


I generally agree with you on the eos vs astarte.

Something that no one has really mentioned is that the EOS also has worse cap pool than the Astarte however both of them have about 1/2 the cap regen of the deimos (wtf?).
Capt Canada
What Corp is it
#1611 - 2013-08-19 13:38:32 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
With the greatest respect, until you give the devs numbers you are not in a position to tell them how to improve the design.

They're just not going to listen to "it's ****" claims.

Give a concrete example.

Here is a concrete example:


The numbers are with a siege warfare implant, bad drone skills, and no other implants for drugs - but include the siege boosts.

Nighthawk:
high slots: 3 siege boosters, 4 heavy missiles, navy scourge
med slots: EM ward II, infvuln II, LSB II x 2, 10mn MWD (meta-3)
low slots: DC II, ballistic control II x 2, nanofiber II, PDU II
rigs: T1 field extenders (I dont have the skills for T2)

Stats:
EHP: 122,395 (unheated)
Resists: 81/93/89/81 (unheated)
shield recharge: 55hp/s = approx 250dps peak (unheated)

damage output (for me): 300dps to 54km. This will increase with better skills to about 400 i think (unheated).

122k ehp does not suggest to me that this ship will die immediately - it's the same as a battleship.

I'd be happy to take this in a moderately-sized shield fleet. No, it's not going to survive massive alpha from 2000 ships.
I guess it's designed for durability in a smaller fleet with some logi.
If that is the design goal, then it has met its targets. If the design goal is "massive fleet alpha" then it has probably not.

So, some questions:

Q1: what are your design goals? What size alpha do you need to counter?
Q2: Does the ship meet the criteria while providing link boosts?


Incidentally, Sisi seems to have a bug that prevents the nighthawk from activating more than one siege module at a time. Since I'm the first to mention it, I presume I'm the first to actually fit up a ship before complaining?
Yeah, sorry I stand corrected.. Seems I have a lot more training to be able to fly command ships at any level of competency. With the fit you linked and my skills (defence skills all at 5, heavy missile spec 4 warhead upgrades 4, command ships 4) specs are, 254 dps @ 58k, 79k EHP 101k with link boosts, 49% cap stable without MWD, peak shield recharge of 37hp p/s. Probably usable in a larger fleet situation, don't think I'd risk it in the size fleets I usually fly in though (20 to 30).

NB; I've had no issues with sisi running 3 links on the nighthawk. Try removing & refitting them, it worked for me. I have actually fitted all command ships on sisi, the nighthawk has by far, the worst spec's
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1612 - 2013-08-19 13:49:17 UTC

it's easy to get quickly concerned by the base numbers ccp have put out, and it's natural for all of us to want the ships we like flying to be not left behind. But when these ships are fitted up on the test server, they get pretty powerful. I would urge everyone to try it before posting comments here.

with deadspace gear on both, good skills and links, both the damnation and vulture/NH have similar ehp (about 400,000).

for their use as alpha-resisting fleet boosters there is no practical difference.

If we use them in other roles, for which they are not designed, we can'y really complain if they don't meet our expectations.

Similarly with the gallente/minny hulls - you can;t get them to anywhere near the fleet command EHP, because they are for skirmishing, for which they are surprisingly good, each in their own way.

None of these hulls will ever have spectacular damage projection, because it's not their role.

astarte gets close, but it's such a slow hulk of a ship with tiny range that alone it's never going to get near a target :-)


Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1613 - 2013-08-19 14:01:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Lloyd Roses
Noemi Nagano wrote:
Please BUFF the NH and dont nerf it even more ... DPS went down even more, and they were abysmal before.


Just regarding the offense, you're wrong. Damageoutput went up a lot. As exapmle, 4 launcers (and 3 links), 2 BCUs and (edit: NAVY, not rage) for 520dps, or more extreme, 3 BCUs + t2 damagerig and hobgoblins II for 1000 flat dps at all V using rage. Nerfed so hard.... Also not a dreamfit, it's a superdrake with scrambler and some 110k EHP.

regards
Capt Canada
What Corp is it
#1614 - 2013-08-19 14:17:55 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:

it's easy to get quickly concerned by the base numbers ccp have put out, and it's natural for all of us to want the ships we like flying to be not left behind. But when these ships are fitted up on the test server, they get pretty powerful. I would urge everyone to try it before posting comments here.

with deadspace gear on both, good skills and links, both the damnation and vulture/NH have similar ehp (about 400,000).

for their use as alpha-resisting fleet boosters there is no practical difference.

If we use them in other roles, for which they are not designed, we can'y really complain if they don't meet our expectations.

Similarly with the gallente/minny hulls - you can;t get them to anywhere near the fleet command EHP, because they are for skirmishing, for which they are surprisingly good, each in their own way.

None of these hulls will ever have spectacular damage projection, because it's not their role.

astarte gets close, but it's such a slow hulk of a ship with tiny range that alone it's never going to get near a target :-)


So the suggestion to give command ships a better chance of survival is to turn a 300mil ship into a 1.3 bill isk ship by fitting faction/deadspace mods? Now that isn't going to make them more of a juicy target is it?
Looking at it from a small fleet/gang (15 to 20) point of view, faction dead space fit command ships = shi**y killboard for the owner. Yes having a command ship requires trade off's in fitting but should those trade off be, run a command ship or not?
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#1615 - 2013-08-19 14:37:48 UTC
Capt Canada wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:

it's easy to get quickly concerned by the base numbers ccp have put out, and it's natural for all of us to want the ships we like flying to be not left behind. But when these ships are fitted up on the test server, they get pretty powerful. I would urge everyone to try it before posting comments here.

with deadspace gear on both, good skills and links, both the damnation and vulture/NH have similar ehp (about 400,000).

for their use as alpha-resisting fleet boosters there is no practical difference.

If we use them in other roles, for which they are not designed, we can'y really complain if they don't meet our expectations.

Similarly with the gallente/minny hulls - you can;t get them to anywhere near the fleet command EHP, because they are for skirmishing, for which they are surprisingly good, each in their own way.

None of these hulls will ever have spectacular damage projection, because it's not their role.

astarte gets close, but it's such a slow hulk of a ship with tiny range that alone it's never going to get near a target :-)


So the suggestion to give command ships a better chance of survival is to turn a 300mil ship into a 1.3 bill isk ship by fitting faction/deadspace mods? Now that isn't going to make them more of a juicy target is it?
Looking at it from a small fleet/gang (15 to 20) point of view, faction dead space fit command ships = shi**y killboard for the owner. Yes having a command ship requires trade off's in fitting but should those trade off be, run a command ship or not?



He is probably to Space Rich, to recognize this. Blink

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Capt Canada
What Corp is it
#1616 - 2013-08-19 14:38:18 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Capt Canada wrote:
...That depends on how big a fleet your in, how much logi you have compared to the incoming dps.. Won't matter how much logi you have if the command ship is primary vs a high alpha fleet...

Only one thing will save links from alpha when they come on grid, adopting a pragmatic approach by having enough baskets for ones eggs. Look at the command redundancy built into modern armies, order givers start appearing all the way down at a squad level whereas in Eve we have gotten accustomed to having one big cheese.

Of course that paradigm change that is necessitated by eventual on-grid change will force CCP to cook up a more fluid way of assigning boosters as they should be expected to be near top of primary lists, if only to test tanks and having to manually assign boosters throughout a fight will drive people mad(der).
Another thing that might help on the extreme end of the scale is the Spectrum Breaker, a novel idea when they introed it but it kind of fizzled. Redesign/fix it and add a bonus to its use on CC's, effectively making them immune to pure alpha headshots.

The self same paradigm change is the reason why ALL the CC's should be on roughly equal footing when it comes to damage/application/tanking which is simply not the case with Damnation being the odd one out with even less output than its HAC counterpart but being able to brick itself.

In other words: It is impossible to balance anything to function on the large scale without unbalancing it on all other scales, so paradigms (read: fleet compositions) must be reevaluated and CCP must develop ways/means to ease that shift.

Luckily for CCP the heavy load won't come until links actually are to come on-grid so they have oodles of time to do the napkin dance and sketch out a solution .. but unless we are all willing to go through another CC balance pass when that glorious day arrives the fact that they are coming on-grid should be included in any and all deliberations this time around (all comes down to Dev time as with most things Big smile)
Yes as with most things in life, trying to get something done in 3 months that should take 6 or 9 months usually means shortcuts are taken and overall result is less than ideal. Often resulting in more time, energy, money etc spent fixing it at a later date than was originally needed.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1617 - 2013-08-19 15:07:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Mournful Conciousness
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Capt Canada wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:

it's easy to get quickly concerned by the base numbers ccp have put out, and it's natural for all of us to want the ships we like flying to be not left behind. But when these ships are fitted up on the test server, they get pretty powerful. I would urge everyone to try it before posting comments here.

with deadspace gear on both, good skills and links, both the damnation and vulture/NH have similar ehp (about 400,000).

for their use as alpha-resisting fleet boosters there is no practical difference.

If we use them in other roles, for which they are not designed, we can'y really complain if they don't meet our expectations.

Similarly with the gallente/minny hulls - you can;t get them to anywhere near the fleet command EHP, because they are for skirmishing, for which they are surprisingly good, each in their own way.

None of these hulls will ever have spectacular damage projection, because it's not their role.

astarte gets close, but it's such a slow hulk of a ship with tiny range that alone it's never going to get near a target :-)


So the suggestion to give command ships a better chance of survival is to turn a 300mil ship into a 1.3 bill isk ship by fitting faction/deadspace mods? Now that isn't going to make them more of a juicy target is it?
Looking at it from a small fleet/gang (15 to 20) point of view, faction dead space fit command ships = shi**y killboard for the owner. Yes having a command ship requires trade off's in fitting but should those trade off be, run a command ship or not?



He is probably to Space Rich, to recognize this. Blink


Well look, if I was using a command ship on grid in a 200-man fleet then I think 2 billion to keep the command ship alive is a fairly sensible trade - it's a 10 million premium per ship.

If it's a 10-man defence fleet against a marauding pack of cruisers, then probably the T2-fitted ship is fine. The other guys are unlikely to be able to organise enough simultaneous damage to alpha it.

Once on-grid boosting is mandated, people will have a choice of command link ships that will look something like this:

100m T1 battlecruiser (120k ehp?)
250m T2 command ship with T2 mods (200k ehp)
300m-1.5Bn T2 command ship with varying levels of faction mods (200-400k ehp)
2Bn+ Carrier with various fittings (2.5m ehp)
60Bn+ Titan (60m ehp)

pay your money, take your chances. This is Eve. It's not a nice game. That's how we like it, right?

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Capt Canada
What Corp is it
#1618 - 2013-08-19 15:34:04 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Capt Canada wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:

it's easy to get quickly concerned by the base numbers ccp have put out, and it's natural for all of us to want the ships we like flying to be not left behind. But when these ships are fitted up on the test server, they get pretty powerful. I would urge everyone to try it before posting comments here.

with deadspace gear on both, good skills and links, both the damnation and vulture/NH have similar ehp (about 400,000).

for their use as alpha-resisting fleet boosters there is no practical difference.

If we use them in other roles, for which they are not designed, we can'y really complain if they don't meet our expectations.

Similarly with the gallente/minny hulls - you can;t get them to anywhere near the fleet command EHP, because they are for skirmishing, for which they are surprisingly good, each in their own way.

None of these hulls will ever have spectacular damage projection, because it's not their role.

astarte gets close, but it's such a slow hulk of a ship with tiny range that alone it's never going to get near a target :-)


So the suggestion to give command ships a better chance of survival is to turn a 300mil ship into a 1.3 bill isk ship by fitting faction/deadspace mods? Now that isn't going to make them more of a juicy target is it?
Looking at it from a small fleet/gang (15 to 20) point of view, faction dead space fit command ships = shi**y killboard for the owner. Yes having a command ship requires trade off's in fitting but should those trade off be, run a command ship or not?



He is probably to Space Rich, to recognize this. Blink


Well look, if I was using a command ship on grid in a 200-man fleet then I think 2 billion to keep the command ship alive is a fairly sensible trade - it's a 10 million premium per ship.

If it's a 10-man defence fleet against a marauding pack of cruisers, then probably the T2-fitted ship is fine. The other guys are unlikely to be able to organise enough simultaneous damage to alpha it.

Once on-grid boosting is mandated, people will have a choice of command link ships that will look something like this:

100m T1 battlecruiser (120k ehp?)
250m T2 command ship with T2 mods (200k ehp)
300m-1.5Bn T2 command ship with varying levels of faction mods (200-400k ehp)
2Bn+ Carrier with various fittings (2.5m ehp)
60Bn+ Titan (60m ehp)

pay your money, take your chances. This is Eve. It's not a nice game. That's how we like it, right?
Now again here your talking about large fleets with multiple boosters?? With command ship hulls slowly creeping up in price your not going to get much of a ship for 300mil and a T2 fit with 200k ehp, your looking at only those with perfect skills flying them. Yes this is eve where even the under dog with less than perfect skills deserves a chance (if he or she is prepared to take the risk). But with everything from sov doctrines and ship balancing done using all level 5 skills as the base, anyone with less than 50 to 70 mil SP becomes kill board fodder .
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1619 - 2013-08-19 15:53:59 UTC
Capt Canada wrote:
But with everything from sov doctrines and ship balancing done using all level 5 skills as the base, anyone with less than 50 to 70 mil SP becomes kill board fodder .


You can be more or less "maxed" on multiple sup class ships with far less than 50m sp...
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1620 - 2013-08-19 16:09:57 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Capt Canada wrote:
But with everything from sov doctrines and ship balancing done using all level 5 skills as the base, anyone with less than 50 to 70 mil SP becomes kill board fodder .


You can be more or less "maxed" on multiple sup class ships with far less than 50m sp...


I have 57 million skill points. I never fly an expensive ship in combat without all skills to V for that hull, and never use a weapon system in combat on an expensive ship until I am level 4+ in its specialisation, but that's just me.

Expensive for me means "more than 10 million isk"

My alt, Goody Twoshoes Virpio has been trained from birth to be a maxed scanning and fleet boosting alt. All other roles are secondary to him. He has something like 37 million skill points and is level 4 command ships. He started boosting in a drake and a cyclone, to great effect. He focussed on the T2 warfare links prior to focussing on T2 command ships.

He's also a perfect tengu pilot (yes, even I, loather of the tengu, use one for scouting in wormholes), however I cannot bring myself to commit 600m isk to an off-grid boosting tengu as I find the idea offensive.

With the new changes he'll be polishing off his command skills in order to get into a minny command ship for shield roams, and probably an Eos for armour work since he can become effective with drones more quickly than with blasters.

I'm looking forward to seeing on-grid boosting, aka "Putting your money where your mouth is."

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".