These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Citadels] Carriers

First post
Author
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#261 - 2016-04-07 13:27:41 UTC
Gary Webb wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
so i just did the math 3 mill for one t1 light fighter ? thats 89 3 flights

and you have 3 flights of T2 at 189 mill

so a thanny needs to hold 609mill (if it goes all light fighters) thats over half the cost of the hull


How has ccp still not given us a statement on this yet? Carriers will be so prohibitively expensive they will never be used. So all these carriers/fighters will flood the market and sit at stupid high prices. I'm probably wrong, but hey. I'm feeling a bit pissed off that i stand to wind up in possession of like 10 bil worth of hulls and fighters that will be ultimately useless


Fighter cost, volume etc are all wrong on sisi atm.

Generic PSA: Slack is a really good place for quick questions btw, the guys hanging out there are typically right up to date.
Anthar Thebess
#262 - 2016-04-07 13:29:06 UTC
I hope that current fighters will be split.
CCP Larrikin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#263 - 2016-04-07 13:42:09 UTC
Marranar Amatin wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Gary Webb wrote:
@CCPLarrakin can we get a list of regular drone modules that will no longer affect fighters (if any?)

The only drone module that doesn't effect Fighters is the Drone Link Augmentor.
I think the description of all the modules has been changed to indicate that they also effect fighters. If you see one we've missed please bug report it!



Could we have the same information for stacking penalties please? Which modules are supposed to have stacking penalties?
The ones that have are not identical with the ones that have them in the description. So how is it supposed to be?

Good call. We'll add the stacking penalty warning to the description of fighter support units.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Generic PSA: Slack is a really good place for quick questions btw, the guys hanging out there are typically right up to date.

+1 for this. There has been some fantastic discussions regarding capitals, fighters and carriers in the #capitals channel on tweetfleet. I often answer questions there :)

Anthar Thebess wrote:
I hope that current fighters will be split.

Current fighters will be split by 6 (and become light fighters).
Current fighter-bombers will be split by 4 (and become heavy fighters).

Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#264 - 2016-04-07 15:57:16 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Marranar Amatin wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Gary Webb wrote:
@CCPLarrakin can we get a list of regular drone modules that will no longer affect fighters (if any?)

The only drone module that doesn't effect Fighters is the Drone Link Augmentor.
I think the description of all the modules has been changed to indicate that they also effect fighters. If you see one we've missed please bug report it!



Could we have the same information for stacking penalties please? Which modules are supposed to have stacking penalties?
The ones that have are not identical with the ones that have them in the description. So how is it supposed to be?

Good call. We'll add the stacking penalty warning to the description of fighter support units.


Thanks, but I am not just talking about the FSU.

We also have:
DDA:
tooltip: stacking penalty
testserver: no stacking penalty
supposed to be: ???

Tracking Link:
tooltip: stacking penalty
testserver: no stacking penalty (as of ~week ago, didnt test today)
supposed to be: ???

Tracking enhancer:
tooltip: stacking penalty
testserver: no stacking penalty (as of ~week ago, didnt test today)
supposed to be: ???

Drone navigation Comp
tooltip: no stacking penalty
testserver: stacking penalty
supposed to be: ???



Also I just noticed you finally increased ability 1 damage, and ability 3 burst, while also incraesing ability 3 cd.
Great, thats a step in the right direction!

But the fighters are still very unbalanced among the races. Could you please comment on that?
Are the Gallente fighters simply supposed to be better than the rest, while minmatar are the worst, with caldarin second best and amarr third?
Or do you really think that a speed bonus equals a damage bonus of the same percentage? Because it really does not. Thats why nav comps have a much higher bonus than damage amplifiers, and damage amplifiers are still fitted much more frequently than nav comps.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#265 - 2016-04-07 18:44:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Marranar Amatin wrote:


But the fighters are still very unbalanced among the races. Could you please comment on that?
Are the Gallente fighters simply supposed to be better than the rest, while minmatar are the worst, with caldarin second best and amarr third?
Or do you really think that a speed bonus equals a damage bonus of the same percentage? Because it really does not. Thats why nav comps have a much higher bonus than damage amplifiers, and damage amplifiers are still fitted much more frequently than nav comps.


to be honest the speed i have found is much better than the DPS when my guys get test fleets together


also for the ability 3 it feels really close to what it should be but needs just a bit more damage


also if DDA are still not stacking then the damage these do in general is still to low if stacking is working i think you all are very close as far as the class balance goes but interclass still needs work
DharkenGray
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#266 - 2016-04-07 18:57:07 UTC
Participated in mass test in a Thanatos.

Constantly having to click on the special attack buttons of each squadron is not much fun.
CCP Larrikin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#267 - 2016-04-07 19:08:57 UTC
Marranar Amatin wrote:

Thanks, but I am not just talking about the FSU.

We also have:
DDA:
tooltip: stacking penalty
testserver: no stacking penalty
supposed to be: ???

Tracking Link:
tooltip: stacking penalty
testserver: no stacking penalty (as of ~week ago, didnt test today)
supposed to be: ???

Tracking enhancer:
tooltip: stacking penalty
testserver: no stacking penalty (as of ~week ago, didnt test today)
supposed to be: ???

Drone navigation Comp
tooltip: no stacking penalty
testserver: stacking penalty
supposed to be: ???


Ah ok. This is a bug. If the Description of the item mentions a stacking penalty then it should have one. Please lodge a bug report :)


Marranar Amatin wrote:
But the fighters are still very unbalanced among the races. Could you please comment on that?

Fighters maintain drone differences. Amarr/Minmatar are faster but do less damage, while Gallente/Caldari are slower and do more damage.
Mobility of fighters (like drones) is such a huge part of their gameplay (and getting into range to apply that damage) that we do think the speed bonus equals the damage bonus.

Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin

Lugh Crow-Slave
#268 - 2016-04-07 19:13:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
CCP Larrikin wrote:


Marranar Amatin wrote:
But the fighters are still very unbalanced among the races. Could you please comment on that?

Fighters maintain drone differences. Amarr/Minmatar are faster but do less damage, while Gallente/Caldari are slower and do more damage.
Mobility of fighters (like drones) is such a huge part of their gameplay (and getting into range to apply that damage) that we do think the speed bonus equals the damage bonus.


but they do not maintain their range or tracking


also the E-war fighters need to be exempt from this if there is going to be any balance the disrupt fighters are the slowest and nearly everything can out run them

the nuet and ecm fighters can be slow as you will have fleet m8 tackle for them but if you have fleet tackle then the web/disrupt are pointless overall i think the speed of support fighters needs to go up or they need a longer MWD than the light fighters

finally can we please hear something on why the sensor power of fighters is so low?

i mean is it intended that a griffin can jam down a carrier and a half 100% of the time using multies?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#269 - 2016-04-07 19:14:37 UTC
DharkenGray wrote:
Participated in mass test in a Thanatos.

Constantly having to click on the special attack buttons of each squadron is not much fun.


the ability needs to be stronger with an even higher cool down i think the idea is you dont want to be firing volly after volly
Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#270 - 2016-04-07 19:40:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Marranar Amatin
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Marranar Amatin wrote:
But the fighters are still very unbalanced among the races. Could you please comment on that?

Fighters maintain drone differences. Amarr/Minmatar are faster but do less damage, while Gallente/Caldari are slower and do more damage.
Mobility of fighters (like drones) is such a huge part of their gameplay (and getting into range to apply that damage) that we do think the speed bonus equals the damage bonus.



Ok thanks for the answer.

But I really dont think speed and damage is equal for drones, and this is reflected basically everywhere in existing modules. I dont see why fighter should be such a huge exception.

Quick check in Jita:
Drone Nav comps are sold roughly 200.000 per day. Drone Damage amplifiers are about 800.000. Most Drone fittings use damage amplifiers, but hardly ever navcomps. Even though the nav comps give a 50% bigger increase. Damage is clearly more valued as a stat.

Or maybe look at Hobgoblin and Warrior for another comparison.
Hobgoblin is ~23% more damage (similar to firbolg vs einherji), but Warrior is 50% faster and also has 50% better tracking.

My prediction for the future if the stats stay this way:
In pve players will use the drone with the best damage types, so players that have to use einherji/templar are simply out of luck. In pvp it will be mostly Firbolgs, and sometimes Einherji, but not much in between. Just like in old times where no one used Amarr or Caldari Drones.
I really dont mind the fighters being different, I also think they should maintain their differences, but it should not be that one type is simply better. Maybe lower the difference in damage a bit, and/or increase the speed difference, or also give the faster drones a smaller explosion radius.
Circumstantial Evidence
#271 - 2016-04-07 20:26:24 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
DharkenGray wrote:
Participated in mass test in a Thanatos.

Constantly having to click on the special attack buttons of each squadron is not much fun.
the ability needs to be stronger with an even higher cool down i think the idea is you dont want to be firing volly after volly
It's asking a lot of players to mash all these buttons in the new manual-everything world, per each squad, and manage their ship, and other situational awareness. CCP please give us auto-repeat option for special attacks.

I noticed the standard attack doesn't stop when squads are recalled; you actually have to turn it off separately from a recall command, if you're attempting to de-aggress.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#272 - 2016-04-07 23:32:13 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Gary Webb wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
so i just did the math 3 mill for one t1 light fighter ? thats 89 3 flights

and you have 3 flights of T2 at 189 mill

so a thanny needs to hold 609mill (if it goes all light fighters) thats over half the cost of the hull


How has ccp still not given us a statement on this yet? Carriers will be so prohibitively expensive they will never be used. So all these carriers/fighters will flood the market and sit at stupid high prices. I'm probably wrong, but hey. I'm feeling a bit pissed off that i stand to wind up in possession of like 10 bil worth of hulls and fighters that will be ultimately useless


Fighter cost, volume etc are all wrong on sisi atm.

Generic PSA: Slack is a really good place for quick questions btw, the guys hanging out there are typically right up to date.

Really? So CCP is handing out correct information to slack users only?

Sorry sweety but the guys on slack are guessing, just like the rest of us - NO-ONE knows - CCP don't know themselves yet. It is all - this is what is expected, this is what we think but it isn't working yet so it is all best guesses.


Quote:
CCP Larrikin wrote
that we do think the speed bonus equals the damage bonus.
Sorry but with the use cases as spelled out in old blogs - It doesn't or it might.

The less than 200m/s speed difference between the fastest fighter and the slowest, is there a difference.

It is a little hard to tell as skills, ship bonuses and module effects aren't applied yet on SISI, so any guess is a good one.


Right now on SISI you can't interact with fighters other than to launch and recall them.
Overview is broken, again. There are 5 keepstars and 3 or 4 other Citadels on grid but only one shows up on the overview. The one I undocked and warped away from. Switching tabs back and forth usually clears this bug but even it isn't working.

Which by the way is broken (or is it) at login, when you get to the login screen docked in a Citadel, it says you are undocked. You log in appear to be in space and need to click several buttons to see if you are or aren't docked. Not a problem really on a test server but if this goes live like this, it will be very worrying if you need to try and remember if you actually docked or not before logging off last night.

There is a lot of work to be done before even a slight idea of how the new fighter mechanics (or any of the new mechanics for that matter) can be assessed.

NB; The reattach fighters to HUD button needs to be moved well away from recall fighters button. It makes a horrible mess when you in a hurry hit the wrong one.

It is great getting early access to changes (if you can call a couple of weeks early) but not much help if they don't or only partially work. And of course things can be tweaked on TQ because testing changes is so much better on a live server isn't it.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
My Other Laboratory is a Distillery
#273 - 2016-04-07 23:46:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Sgt Ocker wrote:
The less than 200m/s speed difference between the fastest fighter and the slowest, is there a difference.

It is a little hard to tell as skills, ship bonuses and module effects aren't applied yet on SISI, so any guess is a good one.

200m/s is quite significant when you're talking about numbers in the 780-970 range. Fighters are so slow that I can imagine quite a few situations where Einherjar/Templars are the only option because of their speed. The MWD is handy to get them in range of a target, but if the target manages to pull out of range again, damage means nothing.

Skills, ship bonuses, and module effects all work. There are some issues with certain modules not having stacking penalties like they should, but the effects work. The only thing that might not apply yet are the drone speed/durability/range rigs, but with the heavy CPU penalties I doubt many people would use them.
MR Spleen
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#274 - 2016-04-08 01:48:02 UTC
Asked if anyone had a fit for the LIF on SISI and this reply summed up my opinion 'Crazy KSK > lif is bad trainf for the cal one' so glad I'm not the only one that thinks so just wish I'd never trained Minmatar carriers.

Personally I'm seriously considering just self destructing my carrier before patch.

Here's my comment from capital thread about them so far.

Quote:
As for the carriers and supers I am converting my carrier into a facs and cancelling my order for a hel as the new user interface is horrible and fighters are horrendously weak in terms of hp, although the dps from heavy bombers is immense. why not just let us continue with the old drone system its way better!

Btw I'm not saying the FACS are good there not really as these also have huge powergrid and cpu issues for example in order to fit a Lif (Minmatar FACS) to be a descent logi boat it required me fitting 2x reactor control units and 2 cpu's just to fit the ship which will tank 1 dread with ease but 2 would be too much in-spite of getting highest resists I could with capital shield booster and cap injector while having max skills. It can also be 1 shot off the field by any titan even though the conventional DD has had its damage reduced to a maximum of 1.5mil hp. NOT GOOD.

Join IAPUB in game if you want 0.0 pvp.

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#275 - 2016-04-08 02:03:02 UTC
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
The less than 200m/s speed difference between the fastest fighter and the slowest, is there a difference.

It is a little hard to tell as skills, ship bonuses and module effects aren't applied yet on SISI, so any guess is a good one.

200m/s is quite significant when you're talking about numbers in the 780-970 range. Fighters are so slow that I can imagine quite a few situations where Einherjar/Templars are the only option because of their speed. The MWD is handy to get them in range of a target, but if the target manages to pull out of range again, damage means nothing.

Skills, ship bonuses, and module effects all work. There are some issues with certain modules not having stacking penalties like they should, but the effects work. The only thing that might not apply yet are the drone speed/durability/range rigs, but with the heavy CPU penalties I doubt many people would use them.

Launch a couple of squads of firbolgs and einherji (fastest and slowest) to a target 70K away - Both arrive together.
Launch those same fighters at a target 100K away they land less than 5 seconds apart.

There is not enough difference in speed to say damage over speed is enough of a difference. Firbolgs are best option fullstop.
Want to make speed vs dps count, give einherji and templars mwd effect 595% velocity bonus as opposed to the same bonus as the others. This would differentiate them enough so that speed vs dps is there, without making them op.

Skills, ship bonuses, etc working on SISI now - Only shows there is not enough difference in fighter speed to make a difference.

Speaking of drone rigs - Related question. 1, Why is it capital shield booster uses 4 times the cpu as armor, yet armor carriers have more cpu than shield. 2, Why do local armor reps have such a stupidly long cycle time in a changing meta that could use to local reps.

And for the love of Bob, please seed deadspace and faction modules to SISI so we can at least fit a ship as we intend to use it. With a fittings being so tight having access to ore than T2 modules is pretty important..

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Circumstantial Evidence
#276 - 2016-04-08 02:12:56 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
--------------
Right now on SISI you can't interact with fighters other than to launch and recall them.
1) lock target 2) make sure locked target is selected 3) Activate a function button over a deployed fighter squad, such as Attack or MWD. Then fighters will move to the selected target.

Here's to hoping that shortcut keys like "F" will eventually work on squads, like it does for regular drones.
Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2016-04-08 07:09:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Marranar Amatin
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
The less than 200m/s speed difference between the fastest fighter and the slowest, is there a difference.

It is a little hard to tell as skills, ship bonuses and module effects aren't applied yet on SISI, so any guess is a good one.
200m/s is quite significant when you're talking about numbers in the 780-970 range. Fighters are so slow that I can imagine quite a few situations where Einherjar/Templars are the only option because of their speed. The MWD is handy to get them in range of a target, but if the target manages to pull out of range again, damage means nothing.


No.
With FSU and a nav comp, all fighters go significantly above 1000 m/s. If you need an additional 20% speed increase just to keep up with the target, you are not going to do any damage anyway, because of the explosion speed.
The situations in which you use carriers against targets which you cant catch without that speed increase will be very very rare.
Usually the faster fighters will arrive just a little faster at the target. But they will spend much more time shooting the target than flying to the target, so the dps increase is much better.

Also:
Do you remember the discussion about the slot layout here? Low slots being more valueable then midslots etc.
No one said midslots are more valueable because of nav comps. Even when navcomps actually give a relatively larger bonus.

If you had the option to fit a free DDA without stecking penalty, or a free navcomp without stacking penalty, but only 2/3 effect, which one would you choose? Because that is quite exactly the difference between einherji and firbolgs.
Sekeris
Order of Celestial Knights
#278 - 2016-04-08 07:27:27 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Speaking of drone rigs - Related question. 1, Why is it capital shield booster uses 4 times the cpu as armor, yet armor carriers have more cpu than shield. 2, Why do local armor reps have such a stupidly long cycle time in a changing meta that could use to local reps.

And for the love of Bob, please seed deadspace and faction modules to SISI so we can at least fit a ship as we intend to use it. With a fittings being so tight having access to ore than T2 modules is pretty important..


I dont think shield carriers is the problem, it seems to be mostly the nid that is CPU starved. And while i agree deadspace mods would be nice, a T2 fit should work also (or at least a mostly T2 fit) without having to use a faction cap mods just to be able to fit. I have made a post on the capital thread on the test server feedback forum showing that for a normal cap fit you could gain 200 tf of cpu with faction mods, which on under 1000 tf total seems a bit excessive.
Sekeris
Order of Celestial Knights
#279 - 2016-04-08 07:40:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Sekeris
Marranar Amatin wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
The less than 200m/s speed difference between the fastest fighter and the slowest, is there a difference.

It is a little hard to tell as skills, ship bonuses and module effects aren't applied yet on SISI, so any guess is a good one.
200m/s is quite significant when you're talking about numbers in the 780-970 range. Fighters are so slow that I can imagine quite a few situations where Einherjar/Templars are the only option because of their speed. The MWD is handy to get them in range of a target, but if the target manages to pull out of range again, damage means nothing.


No.
With FSU and a nav comp, all fighters go significantly above 1000 m/s. If you need an additional 20% speed increase just to keep up with the target, you are not going to do any damage anyway, because of the explosion speed.
The situations in which you use carriers against targets which you cant catch without that speed increase will be very very rare.
Usually the faster fighters will arrive just a little faster at the target. But they will spend much more time shooting the target than flying to the target, so the dps increase is much better.

Also:
Do you remember the discussion about the slot layout here? Low slots being more valueable then midslots etc.
No one said midslots are more valueable because of nav comps. Even when navcomps actually give a relatively larger bonus.

If you had the option to fit a free DDA without stecking penalty, or a free navcomp without stacking penalty, but only 2/3 effect, which one would you choose? Because that is quite exactly the difference between einherji and firbolgs.


I have seen 1100 m/s ish for the gal light fighter, and the heavy moving at 700 m/s ish. Agreed though that this might make it difficult to apply dps in pvp. However i dont think a capital should really work all that well without support.

I dont think slot layout is the problem by itself, its the compound of the loss of a slot in the tank rack (low or mid depending on tank type) combined with the effectiveness of those slots. The dmg bonus is not enough to overcome the 2 slot effective difference on the tank. If the Archon and Thanny had the same slot layout it would work, but relatively the mid slot the thanny has extra is less useful for either dps or tank. For the shield carrier it is probably the other way arround.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#280 - 2016-04-08 10:06:13 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Gary Webb wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
so i just did the math 3 mill for one t1 light fighter ? thats 89 3 flights

and you have 3 flights of T2 at 189 mill

so a thanny needs to hold 609mill (if it goes all light fighters) thats over half the cost of the hull


How has ccp still not given us a statement on this yet? Carriers will be so prohibitively expensive they will never be used. So all these carriers/fighters will flood the market and sit at stupid high prices. I'm probably wrong, but hey. I'm feeling a bit pissed off that i stand to wind up in possession of like 10 bil worth of hulls and fighters that will be ultimately useless


Fighter cost, volume etc are all wrong on sisi atm.

Generic PSA: Slack is a really good place for quick questions btw, the guys hanging out there are typically right up to date.

Really? So CCP is handing out correct information to slack users only?

Sorry sweety but the guys on slack are guessing, just like the rest of us - NO-ONE knows - CCP don't know themselves yet. It is all - this is what is expected, this is what we think but it isn't working yet so it is all best guesses.


Where is it guesses they say, where dev confirm it, they also say.

You don't need to believe me, I've told you what to do; whether or not you take the advice is up to you.