These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

[Carrier Rebalance] Discussion.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2015-10-27 18:33:17 UTC
Valacus wrote:
I wish they'd address the Chimera's cap issues along with its lack of low slots when they talked about carrier rebalancing. It is the least desirable carrier for anything but POS repping. That isn't a good thing.


Could you have meant the nidhoggur? The Chimera is to shield capital fleets like archons are to armor. When you have a fleet set up with remote capacitor modules, capacitor isn't an issue.

All carriers have the same capacitor regen.

The nidhoggur has the smallest base capacitor but the shortest duration to fully refill.

The nidhoggur has no place in slow cat fleets, armor or shield. It doesn't have a damage bonus to make up for the lack of resists. All it can do is suicide triage or POS rep.

If you are using a Chimera to rep a POS's armor, you are doing it wrong. The shields will regen naturally, requiring only armor reps and a little structure rep.
Valacus
Streets of Fire
#22 - 2015-10-27 19:23:43 UTC
Rosal Milag wrote:
Valacus wrote:
I wish they'd address the Chimera's cap issues along with its lack of low slots when they talked about carrier rebalancing. It is the least desirable carrier for anything but POS repping. That isn't a good thing.


Could you have meant the nidhoggur? The Chimera is to shield capital fleets like archons are to armor. When you have a fleet set up with remote capacitor modules, capacitor isn't an issue.

All carriers have the same capacitor regen.

The nidhoggur has the smallest base capacitor but the shortest duration to fully refill.

The nidhoggur has no place in slow cat fleets, armor or shield. It doesn't have a damage bonus to make up for the lack of resists. All it can do is suicide triage or POS rep.

If you are using a Chimera to rep a POS's armor, you are doing it wrong. The shields will regen naturally, requiring only armor reps and a little structure rep.


The Chimera's cap battery isn't even big enough to rep ONE target and itself at the same time while triaged, even with CCC rigs and a mostly cap mods. The entire reason fleet's field unified armor, and leave shield out entirely, is because Archon's are exponentially better than Chimeras. They're Amarr, so their cap batteries are massive, and they get all the remote rep goodies that pantheon carriers are supposed to have. They can rep themselves and other ships without capping out while in triage mode no problem. At least the Nidhogger has the option of going armor and finding a place in an armor cap fleet. The Chimera is doomed to shield only and doesn't have the capacitor necessary to perform its duties. Doesn't help that capacitor power relays murder your local tank, which is another blow to the triage Chimera.
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Unreasonable Bastards
#23 - 2015-10-27 19:25:52 UTC
grr, change! rabble rabble rabble!
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2015-10-27 19:44:35 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Rosal Milag wrote:
Valacus wrote:
I wish they'd address the Chimera's cap issues along with its lack of low slots when they talked about carrier rebalancing. It is the least desirable carrier for anything but POS repping. That isn't a good thing.


Could you have meant the nidhoggur? The Chimera is to shield capital fleets like archons are to armor. When you have a fleet set up with remote capacitor modules, capacitor isn't an issue.

All carriers have the same capacitor regen.

The nidhoggur has the smallest base capacitor but the shortest duration to fully refill.

The nidhoggur has no place in slow cat fleets, armor or shield. It doesn't have a damage bonus to make up for the lack of resists. All it can do is suicide triage or POS rep.

If you are using a Chimera to rep a POS's armor, you are doing it wrong. The shields will regen naturally, requiring only armor reps and a little structure rep.


The Chimera's cap battery isn't even big enough to rep ONE target and itself at the same time while triaged, even with CCC rigs and a mostly cap mods. The entire reason fleet's field unified armor, and leave shield out entirely, is because Archon's are exponentially better than Chimeras. They're Amarr, so their cap batteries are massive, and they get all the remote rep goodies that pantheon carriers are supposed to have. They can rep themselves and other ships without capping out while in triage mode no problem. At least the Nidhogger has the option of going armor and finding a place in an armor cap fleet. The Chimera is doomed to shield only and doesn't have the capacitor necessary to perform its duties. Doesn't help that capacitor power relays murder your local tank, which is another blow to the triage Chimera.


Then you are missing out. Triumvirate and several other groups run with triage chimeras all the time. Rattlesnakes and machs are typically shield fit.

Capacitor flux coils are what you need in your lows, not relays.

And let me repeat myself, ALL CARRIERS HAVE THE SAME BASE REGEN. The Chimera doesn't have the smallest cap battery, the Nidhoggur's is smaller.

Triage isn't to rep yourself and your buddies at the same time. Its an either or. Either they focus your buddies to stress your capacitor or they focus you to break your tank. Doing both is the result of a poor FC or a sole carrier in triage. With the current meta, you should be refitting constantly as you are agressed or deaggressed to manage your cap.

Also, look at the mindflood booster and the CA genolution implants. That combo alone can net +20% capacitor regen.
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#25 - 2015-10-27 19:57:33 UTC
Eeeeerrrrr... Why are you guys whining about the cap...? All that is going to be transfered to the new capital logies, so... That should definitely not be a concern anymore?

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#26 - 2015-10-27 20:25:51 UTC
Nyalnara wrote:
Eeeeerrrrr... Why are you guys whining about the cap...? All that is going to be transfered to the new capital logies, so... That should definitely not be a concern anymore?


It's the forum. You can't expect people to stop whining about stuff just because it will become irrelevant...
Spartikos Asterius
Gallente Special Operations Center
#27 - 2015-10-27 21:07:44 UTC
Earlier in this thread, I read how someone was exceedingly thankful that capitals will be no longer be useful for NPC ratting. On that note, CCP has completely neglected integrating capitals into NPC/DED sites or missions in null. I make more money in hisec during these incursions than risking time and money out in the sandbox. Are the only benefits to being at the capital level is fighting for space in order to get moon goo and morphite? It's really pathetic....

I think these changes are good, but I am like the others. I'm a little nervous.

My biggest concern is: WHEN IS THE MOROS GETTING DRONES AGAIN?

:D
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2015-10-27 21:16:25 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Nyalnara wrote:
Eeeeerrrrr... Why are you guys whining about the cap...? All that is going to be transfered to the new capital logies, so... That should definitely not be a concern anymore?


It's the forum. You can't expect people to stop whining about stuff just because it will become irrelevant...


Mainly because concerns over the slot layout and capacitor design of the current carriers may carry over to the Force Auxiliary ships.

As far as ratting goes, nothing has been said that would kill ratting carriers. Fighters were a faster way to clear anoms with high enough skills. I see nothing to change that with the new changes, only that my faction large smart bomb will get replaced with a capital one.
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#29 - 2015-10-27 22:05:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Nyalnara
Rosal Milag wrote:
only that my faction large smart bomb will get replaced with a capital one.


Nope. No smartbomb. Would be too op.


See devblog.
Quote:
  • All existing XL guns and XL launchers
  • New: High Angle Weapon Batteries
  • Remote armor repairers
  • Remote shield transporters
  • Remote energy transporters
  • Remote hull repairers
  • Local armor repairers
  • Local shield boosters
  • New: Local hull repairers
  • New: Capital Armor Plates
  • New: Capital Shield Extenders
  • New: Capital Microwarpdrives
  • New: Capital Energy Warfare Modules
  • New: Capital Cap Boosters and Charges
  • New: Capital Capacitor Batteries
  • New: Capital Warp Disruptors & Scramblers

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#30 - 2015-10-28 04:04:58 UTC
Is it wrong to be more excited about ship explosions?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Naomi Anthar
#31 - 2015-10-28 05:51:14 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
I demand that the Chimera gets a huge fighter tracking bonus for the lack of lowslots.


Denied. You can use med slot aswell for even better results. And before you say you lose tank - those using armor carriers can say they lose tank too if they use enhancer in lows too.

So same argument would sound - we need huge damage buff on archon we cannot fit many DDAs, because armor tank.
Tiddle Jr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2015-10-28 06:55:29 UTC
They are going to cut of EHP. And having cap size both tanking mods make the fitting games very interesting.

I would be personally waiting details on these changes.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#33 - 2015-10-28 09:20:27 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
I demand that the Chimera gets a huge fighter tracking bonus for the lack of lowslots.


Denied. You can use med slot aswell for even better results. And before you say you lose tank - those using armor carriers can say they lose tank too if they use enhancer in lows too.

So same argument would sound - we need huge damage buff on archon we cannot fit many DDAs, because armor tank.


What you have just said is ridiculous.

Armour ships are going to use mids for application every time. I have literally not ever seen a drone TE in use.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#34 - 2015-10-28 12:09:34 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
I demand that the Chimera gets a huge fighter tracking bonus for the lack of lowslots.


Denied. You can use med slot aswell for even better results. And before you say you lose tank - those using armor carriers can say they lose tank too if they use enhancer in lows too.

So same argument would sound - we need huge damage buff on archon we cannot fit many DDAs, because armor tank.


What you have just said is ridiculous.

Armour ships are going to use mids for application every time. I have literally not ever seen a drone TE in use.


Yeah but there are no mid slot DDA so the armor tanked carrier sacrifice tank for raw damage while shield tankers sacrifice tank for application. Both type have something they want overlapping with their tank slots.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#35 - 2015-10-28 14:07:33 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
I demand that the Chimera gets a huge fighter tracking bonus for the lack of lowslots.


Denied. You can use med slot aswell for even better results. And before you say you lose tank - those using armor carriers can say they lose tank too if they use enhancer in lows too.

So same argument would sound - we need huge damage buff on archon we cannot fit many DDAs, because armor tank.


What you have just said is ridiculous.

Armour ships are going to use mids for application every time. I have literally not ever seen a drone TE in use.


Yeah but there are no mid slot DDA so the armor tanked carrier sacrifice tank for raw damage while shield tankers sacrifice tank for application. Both type have something they want overlapping with their tank slots.


Context is important don't ya think?

Sentry carriers might care more about raw damage, fighter carriers care about application.

Maybe you go for both? Maybe you go for neither?

This is just the same argument we've seen for armour vs shield since the beginning. Don't use the wrong weapon system for your tank type.
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2015-10-28 15:38:53 UTC
Chimera's should have a struggle to fit application. Its the shield vs armor paradigm. Do you fit max tank and get max damage with low application? Or do you sacrifice tank to get that high damage to hit better? Armor has to balance tank and damage, which means they get an easier time to max application, albeit at lower damage of paper thin hulls.
Xavindo Sirober
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#37 - 2015-10-28 22:29:25 UTC
Ele Rebellion wrote:
Xavindo Sirober wrote:

2. its not a nerf since there are no definite numbers so thats bull, even with or without modules for all you know they could have insane damage.
Light fighters are for subcaps for damage, and have diffrent abilities in terms heavy's or support

3. they give a half broken wooden stick so they have something to defend themselves with, Again no numbers, light fighters might do tons of damage.



I would suggest you take your own advice and actually read the dev blog. It says Light fighters are "Optimized for anti-Fighter combat and light damage roles." while the havy fighters are "Optimized for launching waves of bombs or torpedoes, able to do tremendous damage to capitals and structures."

So the Light Fighters are basically for killing the heavy fighters, and the heavy fighters are for killing capitals or structures. Where do you get that these are going to be effective against sub-caps?

(kinda the whole point of where I said that the carrier and dread are changing roles..)




Eve vegas itself said light fighters itself are ment for Subcaps aswell, but are optimized for taking down heavy fighters in fleet battles, again, they all have abilities like bomb/torps, they still have standard autoattacks like the current drones do,
tritarian
Amarr Technical and Logistics Institute
#38 - 2015-10-28 23:48:27 UTC
If I understand the dev blog and what has been presented so far,

Carriers as they currently exist will loose the ability to mount capital remote rep gear, (or at least the bonuses to do so),
as that function will (eventually?) be for a Triaged Force Auxiliary Capitals ship, and then it will be immobile or very slow(?).

Assuming that is the case the carriers are left with only their fighters and/or drones for this spot on the battle field.

I would like to see a few things now the carrier has been (possibly) removed from capital remote rep roles.
How about a screening ship for some defensive abilities (assuming the Force Auxiliary Capitals do not take this role as well?)

1) Role or ship bonus for point defense missile systems or a new turret ammo to mirror the existing missile bay ammo that track and take down incoming enemy missiles. Although this and other Dev blogs has eluded to missile defense systems as well this may be a moot point. (not sure if it was mentioned as a station service or ship module included for completeness)

2) the ability to mount sub-capital weapons to fight against enemy fighters, and other sub-capital targets. I believe that using smart bombs for this may be a good tactic, but I like options. I would think like four turret or missile hard-points would be plenty for this kind of idea.
Possible class of weapon ideas: Any small or medium turret.
Rocket or light missile bay.
Any equivalent weapon system suitable for anti fighter/drone/frigate(?)

The idea here is not to choke out cruiser sized ships but to offer the ability to defend itself without having to hold (as many) fighters in reserve to do so, but not to make the defenses so thick that it is impossible to take carrier out without a committed attack.
Xavindo Sirober
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#39 - 2015-10-29 04:06:27 UTC
If I understand the dev blog and what has been presented so far,

tritarian wrote:
Carriers as they currently exist will loose the ability to mount capital remote rep gear, (or at least the bonuses to do so),
as that function will (eventually?) be for a Triaged Force Auxiliary Capitals ship, and then it will be immobile or very slow(?)


No, they can still mount capital remote rep gear, it will just be inefficient compared to the new caps that are designed for such.

Assuming that is the case the carriers are left with only their fighters and/or drones for this spot on the battle field.

tritarian wrote:
I would like to see a few things now the carrier has been (possibly) removed from capital remote rep roles.
How about a screening ship for some defensive abilities (assuming the Force Auxiliary Capitals do not take this role as well?)


They are basicly being removed for remote rep roles, because there is a actual dedicated logi capital coming, and the carriers are designed to be, well a spaceship carrier in this point. which original idea was to be using fighters. just like a mining barge is to mine.

tritarian wrote:
Role or ship bonus for point defense missile systems or a new turret ammo to mirror the existing missile bay ammo that track and take down incoming enemy missiles. Although this and other Dev blogs has eluded to missile defense systems as well this may be a moot point.


I believe there are already defender missles in game that counter incoming missles? tell me if im wrong, don't believe there are actual bonuses for ships for defender missles, would be interesting/chaotic to use in a fleet battle i presume.

Would also be slightly unfair because if it were to become an actual thing, what are you gonna do to offer counter to people using guns and lasers? mirror's and kevlars on ships would seem impractical. countering counters with counters is a bit excessive to a game for me though, let me know what you think. There is no defender missle for stations at the moment in design as they said so far, but again, brings back up mirrors and kevlars.

tritarian wrote:
2) the ability to mount sub-capital weapons to fight against enemy fighters, and other sub-capital targets. I believe that using smart bombs for this may be a good tactic, but I like options. I would think like four turret or missile hard-points would be plenty for this kind of idea.


In a cap vs cap fight the entire idea i believe is that the carrier swarms the other target, if it were vs a dread shoots, the carrier throws fighters that shoots, if the dread would be able to easy kill the fighters, whats the carrier gonna get to counter his guns? unless its a supercarrier it can't even disrupt it with EC Warfare properly. Basicly the logical way would be having smaller ships in a fleet that burn those squadrons, or aoe bombs/missles would gib said squadrons. carriers got light fighters for fighting other carriers, and vs dreads its just a damage race, the dread is already getting a subcap gun, which would prolly work vs heavy fighters. Giving a carrier smartbombs would prolly only result in carrier ratting isk/hr going massive
Previous page12