These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Wrayeth
Inexorable Retribution
#1661 - 2013-08-20 09:00:18 UTC
No news on the Nighthawk slot layout, eh? I haz a sad. Sad

As nothing's been said about it at all, I'd expect that there's still internal debate going on at CCP's end regarding it, otherwise Fozzie would've just come out and said, "Nope, not changing the Nighthawk's slot layout at this time. We feel the NH is competitive as-is." or something to that effect. Since that hasn't been said, but nothing's been mentioned in favor of the idea either, that tells me that it's still under discussion within the balancing team. I.E. there's still hope.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1662 - 2013-08-20 09:40:59 UTC
Wrayeth wrote:
No news on the Nighthawk slot layout, eh? I haz a sad. Sad

As nothing's been said about it at all, I'd expect that there's still internal debate going on at CCP's end regarding it, otherwise Fozzie would've just come out and said, "Nope, not changing the Nighthawk's slot layout at this time. We feel the NH is competitive as-is." or something to that effect. Since that hasn't been said, but nothing's been mentioned in favor of the idea either, that tells me that it's still under discussion within the balancing team. I.E. there's still hope.



It seems that the NH was designed around needing a RCU or PDU.
It does this without sacrifice as it basically has 1 useless low anyway.
You then end up with a ship that has enough grid but is basically a slot down over other layouts.

It needs to be much closer to the Clay fittings wise so that there are choices to be made when fitting.

6:4 layout and 1000 grid would give a ship that has potential.

em/inv/scram/web/prop/injector/booster or lse

Still not enough mids for all thats needed but at leasst the ship is not totally compromised when trying to fit tackle.


Shield tankers need mids.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#1663 - 2013-08-20 09:54:20 UTC
I agree here, and apart from that the NH needs more DPS too. Its been nerfed in DPS (do the maths, 5*1.75 < 6*1.5!) and its DPS have been poor even before the HML nerf (!), and now it should be nerfed down even more. Give it similar DPS to other ships, and make it able to use all its slots with a reasonable layout. The PG and CPU buff are good though, now one more med, one less low and DPS on par with the rest (or even on top - there is no reason for a Caldari ship to be NOT best in its class in something, right?)
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1664 - 2013-08-20 10:23:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Lloyd Roses
I'd also be very interested what the reasons are for the vulture having a 6/4 and the nighthawk having a 5/5 slot-layout regarding turrets and missiles. Claymore and Sleipnir demonstrate very impressively how to make use of those respective slots to favor their intended weapon system.
While shield+missiles don't really benefit from the 5th low and beyond (unless nano makes sense), as seen on 2 XL-ASB Nscorps with cargo expanders, if for once no corpoc is needed.
The Vulture on the other side is really pushed into a linking-focus, as 4 lows (3, subtracting the DCU) is hardly worth a shield-turret-ship's attention.

Not stating that they are currently broken or bad, just that the tendency seems awkward. With the recent PG-increase announced on terms of the nighthawk, the former premier usage appeared to be stuffing PDUs in those lows to actually make it fit, you now got 1-2 lows for really random usage. Going through the history of excess lowslots on missile ships, I can barely remember anything besides nanos, fitting mods and cargo expanders to have ever reliably filled a missile ship's lows.
If that's a hidden wink at missile-TEs... \o/ - though I doubt that's the case.

I could imagine well that even a 6/4 nighthawk might be terryfying on a smallscale-confrontation, but so are sleipirs and oh so many others, I'd also not think that such a change would impact the largest of fleets, the ship names vulture/nighthawk would just be switched out in fleet, just with the nighthawk now appearing in 2-3 man roams aswell (as LSE, EM-ward, invuln, point+WEB, mwd would be supported)

As for the Eos, a fifth mid would be a total boner, but would also just turn it into a simply superior myrmidon :(

Also:

Noemi Nagano wrote:
I agree here, and apart from that the NH needs more DPS too. Its been nerfed in DPS (do the maths, 5*1.75 < 6*1.5!) and its DPS have been poor even before the HML nerf (!), and now it should be nerfed down even more. Give it similar DPS to other ships, and make it able to use all its slots with a reasonable layout. The PG and CPU buff are good though, now one more med, one less low and DPS on par with the rest (or even on top - there is no reason for a Caldari ship to be NOT best in its class in something, right?)


http://i.imgur.com/YrtiteU.png - afaik wasn't possible before
Janeway84
Insane's Asylum
#1665 - 2013-08-20 10:50:25 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:


http://i.imgur.com/YrtiteU.png - afaik wasn't possible before


Hmm looks ok ish but Imo they should add the extra mid slot so you could fit a web or a TP so you can have full tackle fit.
But i guess NH can work like that too in a decent fleet w supporting ships Smile

EOS really should have 200 m3 more drone bay so it can stay in a fight longer in a skirmish against decent oponents who will shoot them drones down.. Pirate
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1666 - 2013-08-20 11:08:49 UTC
Janeway84 wrote:
Lloyd Roses wrote:


http://i.imgur.com/YrtiteU.png - afaik wasn't possible before


Hmm looks ok ish but Imo they should add the extra mid slot so you could fit a web or a TP so you can have full tackle fit.
But i guess NH can work like that too in a decent fleet w supporting ships Smile

EOS really should have 200 m3 more drone bay so it can stay in a fight longer in a skirmish against decent oponents who will shoot them drones down.. Pirate


No, this would obsolete all other drone ships. the purpose of the command ships is to support dps ships, not to replace them. They are all deliberately gimped for this reason.

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".
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1667 - 2013-08-20 11:09:34 UTC
Janeway84 wrote:
Lloyd Roses wrote:


http://i.imgur.com/YrtiteU.png - afaik wasn't possible before


Hmm looks ok ish but Imo they should add the extra mid slot so you could fit a web or a TP so you can have full tackle fit.
But i guess NH can work like that too in a decent fleet w supporting ships Smile

EOS really should have 200 m3 more drone bay so it can stay in a fight longer in a skirmish against decent oponents who will shoot them drones down.. Pirate



I don't think I have ever seen anyone win a fight by shooting drones in anything other than a 1v1.
Given that you destroy the ship you stop the drones anyway I think you should amend that statement.

EOS really should have 200 m3 more drone bay so it can stay in a fight longer in a skirmish against drone shooting nubsters.

375 bay size should do it fine.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1668 - 2013-08-20 11:39:54 UTC
Dav Varan wrote:
Janeway84 wrote:
Lloyd Roses wrote:


http://i.imgur.com/YrtiteU.png - afaik wasn't possible before


Hmm looks ok ish but Imo they should add the extra mid slot so you could fit a web or a TP so you can have full tackle fit.
But i guess NH can work like that too in a decent fleet w supporting ships Smile

EOS really should have 200 m3 more drone bay so it can stay in a fight longer in a skirmish against decent oponents who will shoot them drones down.. Pirate



I don't think I have ever seen anyone win a fight by shooting drones in anything other than a 1v1.
Given that you destroy the ship you stop the drones anyway I think you should amend that statement.

EOS really should have 200 m3 more drone bay so it can stay in a fight longer in a skirmish against drone shooting nubsters.

375 bay size should do it fine.


*launches navy ogres* - *sees enemy gang shoot his drones for the first 30 seconds of a fight* - *launches second set, remaining enemies are sadpanda*
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1669 - 2013-08-20 11:56:53 UTC
It's a bit strange that the slow Eos was not turned into a sentry ship, which has been proven to be a working concept in PVP now as well.

It's certainly better than before, but it might work better with Gardes than Ogres. Or at least expand the speed and tracking bonus to all moving drones- I don't see myself filling the drone bay with just heavies, and once they are down/sucked back in to deal with smaller ships, it loses quite a bit of applied dps.

It remains a bit confused ship in terms of bonuses.

.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1670 - 2013-08-20 12:00:16 UTC
form a fleet on sisi. take it to the front line. use cases will begin to come clear.

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
#1671 - 2013-08-20 12:11:10 UTC
Roime wrote:
It's a bit strange that the slow Eos was not turned into a sentry ship, which has been proven to be a working concept in PVP now as well.

It's certainly better than before, but it might work better with Gardes than Ogres. Or at least expand the speed and tracking bonus to all moving drones- I don't see myself filling the drone bay with just heavies, and once they are down/sucked back in to deal with smaller ships, it loses quite a bit of applied dps.

It remains a bit confused ship in terms of bonuses.


As far as our beloved wh-space is concerned, heavies are well protected against smartbombs atleast in direct vicinity of a wormhole. Given the combination with a chance at skirmish links, the mwd-bonus to heavies also looks quite favorable. Given a scenario as some ***hat bumping you off the hole, and especially away from sentries, might force you to jump while abandonning your sentries, which cannot occur for heavies. In null, the concept of sentries in a smallgang (and you'd surely use a damnation beyond that) is somewhat flawed, and it's direct concurrence for being a fleetship is given by the sentry-bonused Ishtar, that also got damage mitigation by size speaking in its favor.

I believe that by having no sentry bonus for the Eos nothing has been lost.

I can totally follow up on you gazing at a tracking bonus to med/small drones, that would be somewhere between fantastic and gorgeous. Though with web/scram on a frigate, the applied dps from Ogres is existant and in case of berzerkers, not even bad at all.
Capt Canada
What Corp is it
#1672 - 2013-08-20 12:15:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Capt Canada
Goldensaver wrote:
Capt Canada wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


However in the long run, adding HP is not the solution to key ships being volleyed off the field. As EVE battles grow in numbers..

At the same time we are continuing to push more viable gang boosting options into lower brackets of SP and isk requirements. Many of you will have noticed that one effect of the gang link changes is that T1 Battlecruisers will provide better bonuses, and a character with level 3 or 4 skills will be vastly improved compared to the current situation. There will still be significant benefits to training skills to 5 and upgrading to a Command Ship, but for people that can't afford to bring redundant Command Ships, redundant Battlecruisers will be a fine option.

I've also seen the idea expressed a few times to expand Target Spectrum Breakers to the Command Ships, and that's an idea I think has some serious merit. There likely isn't time to get it in for 1.1, but we'll investigate further and see what comes out.
I might be missing some thing really big here, could you explain how a T1 battlecruiser with low SP pilot is going to provide better bonuses? T1 battlecruiser can only fit 1 link, gets no specific ship bonuses to gang links. Lower SP pilots aren't going to be boosting for 2000 man fleets, they will be the small fleet / gang boosters. Lower SP pilot, with all level four skills for gang links is only getting the base boost from the gang link (lvl 4 skills means no leadership implants), how is that any better than it is now??
Maybe T1 battlecruisers could get a small fixed bonus to 1 link, which only works with T1 links?? It could still be used by higher skill pilots but the bonus is negated if the pilot fits a T2 link or has leadership implants.

Target spectrum breakers on command ships?? Why?? All your doing is giving the enemy a chance to relock you faster than your logi can. Unless the Target Spectrum Breaker can be scripted to work only on a targeted ship it will probably be more of a hindrance than help.


NB; there is a bug in SISI, when I use "strip fitting" to try it on another ship, yes the ship gets its fittings stripped but they do not appear in items hanger, all the fitted modules are gone. I tried re-logging, seems the eve gods needed my modules.

As far as I can tell, in that quote he's talking about how the average T1 BC will be better at boosting than it was before the patch. What with the lower emphasis on skills and mindlinks to have a proper booster, you can be closer to peak with a T1 BC than you could before.

Hell, after this you won't absolutely require a mindlink since it's going from 50% increase to only 25%. You won't need perfect level 5's. It all makes it better, of course. But it's not going to be nearly as bad as today where a level 1 skill doesn't get you the mindlink and only gets you a 2.2% increase to resists for example.

Edit: also, it'll take 100 less PG to fit so less gimping on the fit.
I'm not so sure, in fact all the changes to gang links is going to put more emphasis the need for mind links and unless the skill requirements for these ( currently specialization 5) is going to change then the only benefit coming to T1 BC's running a link will be the lower fitting requirements. In fact at a squad boost level (small gang) 1 link with specialization 4 will actually provide less of a boost than it does now.
The difference between lvl 1 specialization and level 2, remapped for leadership skill training with +4 implants is 2hrs 13 mins. So the fact the link is unavailable until level 2 is pretty much a mute point.

Sorry for the double post. For some reason it posted the quote only the 1st time.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1673 - 2013-08-20 13:02:01 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:


As far as our beloved wh-space is concerned, heavies are well protected against smartbombs atleast in direct vicinity of a wormhole. Given the combination with a chance at skirmish links, the mwd-bonus to heavies also looks quite favorable. Given a scenario as some ***hat bumping you off the hole, and especially away from sentries, might force you to jump while abandonning your sentries, which cannot occur for heavies. In null, the concept of sentries in a smallgang (and you'd surely use a damnation beyond that) is somewhat flawed, and it's direct concurrence for being a fleetship is given by the sentry-bonused Ishtar, that also got damage mitigation by size speaking in its favor.

I believe that by having no sentry bonus for the Eos nothing has been lost.

I can totally follow up on you gazing at a tracking bonus to med/small drones, that would be somewhere between fantastic and gorgeous. Though with web/scram on a frigate, the applied dps from Ogres is existant and in case of berzerkers, not even bad at all.


I'm not really worried about smarties against HP-bonused heavies, they are more vulnerable to turret and missile damage, and since everybody knows the limited amount of Eos drone bay, it's a no-brainer to pop them before even going for the rep-bonused hull itself. There's a good chance the Eos only has one spare heavy, rest is only dmg-bonused meds and lights.

I've been in many situations where I had to jump thru a hole before heavies (and even scouts) didn't have time to make it back to the bay.

I did think of the Ishtar, as it's quite obvious that the Eos doesn't really have a place in an Ishtar fleet, at least not dealing damage. Which is sad since it's the drone command ship.

Current Domi with 10% bonus to tracking does apply decent damage to small ships with heavies, idk how well the 7.5% works- the difference to non-tracking bonused heavies is neglible or situational, and Eos doesn't have the slots to fit Omnis like Domi. The speed bonus might have a saying, hope someone does proper testing on SiSi :)

.
Conci Furiram
EVE University
Ivy League
#1674 - 2013-08-20 13:54:45 UTC
There's 84 pages so I don't know if this has been suggested:

The Armor types have a ship that gets super tank; the Damnation with 10% hitpoint bonus. Where's the equivalent Shield ship? I think they should change the Vulture; there really is no need for double MHT optimal range bonuses...

Vulture:
Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Shield Resistances
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
Command Ships skill bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range ----> 10% bonus to all Shield hitpoints
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
3% bonus to strength of Siege Warfare and Information Warfare links
Sparkus Volundar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1675 - 2013-08-20 14:04:21 UTC
Thanks for the updates Fozzie.

I still think the NH would be best ballanced around having 6 mids though.

Regards,
Sparks


Sparkus Volundar wrote:
Hello,

Thanks for all the work on everything of late.

I think the premier shield tanking race command ships should follow the Drake and have of 6 mids (e.g. like the Claymore). The Nighthawk will also be shooting missiles like the Drake after all.

It makes no sense to me to have the Caldari missile command ship mirror the hybrid weapon T1 battlecruiser model of 5 mids while the hybrid weapon T2 command ship has 6 mids. Nighthawk still seems to suffer from the old tier issue of being based on the lower tier BC hull.

My suggestion would be to move one low to a mid.

Regards,
Sparks

.
Alsyth
#1676 - 2013-08-20 14:13:43 UTC
Thank you for listening regarding Sleipnir CPU.

Claymore still struggles.
Nighthawk slot layout still prevent it from being really good.


I hope your acknowledgement that the EHP problem for CS in big fleets comes from them being "unique" in a way logis or other ship aren't will lead you to consider something like:
-make best links automatically boost the fleet no matter what.
-use fleet hierarchy only for wing-warps & such, not for bonuses.

This way bringing 10 CS on grid in a fight will be possible, killing them will be possible but time-consuming, yet rewarding in case of success.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1677 - 2013-08-20 14:41:35 UTC
Alsyth wrote:

I hope your acknowledgement that the EHP problem for CS in big fleets comes from them being "unique" in a way logis or other ship aren't will lead you to consider something like:
-make best links automatically boost the fleet no matter what.
-use fleet hierarchy only for wing-warps & such, not for bonuses.



From what the last devposts reads, boosting will be something close to AoE, or being in the vicinity as a condition to receive them. As such, secondary bonding to a hierarchy won't (I guess that's what was hinted at) be needed anymore, so a hp-bonus on a linkship wouldn't be necessary anymore, as 'redundancy' starts kicking in.
Deacon Abox
Black Eagle5
#1678 - 2013-08-20 15:15:04 UTC
Conci Furiram wrote:
There's 84 pages so I don't know if this has been suggested:

The Armor types have a ship that gets super tank; the Damnation with 10% hitpoint bonus. Where's the equivalent Shield ship? I think they should change the Vulture; there really is no need for double MHT optimal range bonuses...

Vulture:
Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Shield Resistances
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
Command Ships skill bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range ----> 10% bonus to all Shield hitpoints
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
3% bonus to strength of Siege Warfare and Information Warfare links

The only thing I agree with you on is that the "Caldari" double 10% ! range bonus should go. The extreme range bonusing on the corm and harpy and on the missile boats are overdone. It is a stupid attempt to give short range weapon platforms on these ships a different flavor, but most people simply end up making fleet snipers out of them that no other fleet comp can come close to.

As for the hp alternative, you've got to be kidding. Sure have the hp bonus, but only if it also reduces your shield regen to zero. Otherwise it will just become the worst pve monstrosity ever in the game. "Look at me mom I can't ever die to the npcs blah blah . ."

Noemi Nagano wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
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


I am perfectly aware what CS are for. Still there is no need to severerly gimp the NH in DPS-aspects in comparison to other CS! I want the NH to be fixed and afterwards on par or even on top of the rest - Caldari deserve a good ship for sure. Btw, did someone notice how the Drake ceased to exist as a combatship like it used to do before? Exactly how I predicted .... now no one with their brains set right seems to pvp in a Drake anymore ... but yeah, go on and nerf everything more :)

So, someone points out the obvious reason why dps is secondary on these ships, and you don't seem to get it. They are meant to be pvp support ships, not a pve-ers wet dream.

Also, Lol Good to see you haven't lost your lack of perspective. After 3 years of Drake dominance cry us all a river Noemi. It is still a decent ship. But everyone abandoned it because it was no longer simple cheap and easy mode. Also, Talwar and Caracal say "hi and missiles are fine" btw. That eve-kill top twenty is looking healthier than it has ever looked. Such a mix of ship sizes, races, and weapon types. And the raw number variance is very small from number 1 to number 20, let alone number 2 or 3. So, good riddance to Drakes Online. Now if we can only avoid Cerbs Online.Straight

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

Doed
Tyrfing Industries
#1679 - 2013-08-20 15:37:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Doed
Noemi Nagano wrote:
I agree here, and apart from that the NH needs more DPS too. Its been nerfed in DPS (do the maths, 5*1.75 < 6*1.5!) and its DPS have been poor even before the HML nerf (!), and now it should be nerfed down even more. Give it similar DPS to other ships, and make it able to use all its slots with a reasonable layout. The PG and CPU buff are good though, now one more med, one less low and DPS on par with the rest (or even on top - there is no reason for a Caldari ship to be NOT best in its class in something, right?)


Did you fail math in school? Atleast get stuff right before whining

5x1.6x1.375 = 11 6x1.33x1.25 = 10(rounded up 2 last decimals)

11 is more than 10
Frothgar
Take The Bait.
Pandemic Horde
#1680 - 2013-08-20 16:04:00 UTC
I think some folks are greatly underestimating just what a pig the four armor command ships become when you add a 1600 plate (Which is mandatory since 60k EHP and an active rep is not cutting it for anything over 5 people) 10mn MWDs really don't give that much oomph, add in Trimarks and you're going to have some serious problems.

Long story short. You're only ~200m/sec faster than a plated baddon. And when using pulses you're dealing ~70% of the damage with 30% of the range. The irony is the 1600 Astarte is probably never going to be able to escape from a megathron either.

Rails/Beams are really your only option because they don't have the speed to chase anything down, and you're limited to 20km.
While the Railstarte has some chance of fitting LR guns and 2 links, its still reaaaaaally tight.

The Damnation is still the only viable one for fleet fights, the shield ships can kite and outrange stuff just fine, and probably didn't need any fitting help to boot.

What is your plan for the other armor ships to make them viable in fleet fights? It just seems like they're all stuck in the position of the old Deimos which is you're slower than your counterparts, but you have to scram them and kill them otherwise you're dead.

They all need some form of damage projection, you can probably pull it off with the Eos with sentries and focus on all out buffer. I just don't see any role for the Absolution and Astarte except a subpar active tank lowsec ganker.