Ships & Modules

This is exactly what I was thinking. Sig radius should be far more relevant to range than it is to tracking, and it should be relevant to both.

I very much disagree with many conclusions you've drawn, but wanted to comment on that particular paragraph. Even if we just assume that what is currently planned as a titan-only-fix (scaling damage based on unmodified sig) will be applied to all ship classes soon [tm], it doesn't let you answer the "will they hit me" question any better than it does now. Hit chance isn't being discussed (as much as I'd love to have the hit chance revamped and the sig-relations moved away from the damn tracking component where it doesn't belong). Damage is. They are just as likely to hit you as they are now, but if you are much smaller you know it's gonna be much less damage as well. That's all.

When/If the finally/hopefully do actually implement a revised hit-chance-formula for all ships (not just XLs as it is planned at the moment) I sincerely believe it will be based on actual sig radius. I also hope that damage scaling will be used for sig differences, not hit chance modification. It might also bring some new modules lowering the sig res of your guns as an example. Target painters will have a meaningful place on a turret based ship. You will hit stuff more easily (as smaller sig no longer reduces the hit chance) but will do less damage (sig radius taken into account).
Well, at least that would be my dream, fingers crossed I guess?

Edit to clarify: I do agree that the dynamics of EVE have to be kept, but I disagree that this change (the one proposed now or the hopefully coming change in the future) is a threat to that. "Small" should be a counter to "Big". It shouldn't generally be better be use big! Yes it is, but only to some degree (and not that much). I believe this will improve upon the dynamics, not reduce (let alone kill) them.


This isn't about evening things out, this would be about differentiating! Currently a big ship can hit a ship of any size for full damage (at least in some conditions), after that it would only be able to hit same-sized targets for full damage, not smaller ones. There would be more differentiation, not less.
Missiles will still be different, absolute speed matters for them. You can still get under the tracking of turrets, range/transversal matter here. Signature radius would only be taken into account at a logical part of the damage calculation, not at a component that has nothing to do with that.

Depends how they implement it but then you can just say 'will they have a chance to kill me?" Either way he's just as right. On a frig damage would likely be zero for a big enough gun, so they don't hit.


Also, when it says ewar immunity on titans, do they mean to pointing or letting us be jammed by falcon as well?

I keep thinking EWar immunity should include no remote effects at all (sensor booster, scrams, and remote reps) should be an all-or-nothing super-expensive supercap only rig.

That's always been my take on it. A shell bigger than your ship should obliterate you if it hits. The problem should be hitting to begin with.

Ability to hit 1 size lower with webs + painters + at around optimal range (not too close, not too far into falloff) is about how it should be. It should still struggle to hit, but hitting at that point should be possible. The problem that needs addressing, therefore, is that sig needs to affect range, not tracking.

EDIT: Or maybe sig should affect range and tracking.

EDIT 2: I'd also like to note that there should be no real size difference between capital ships and "supercapital" ships. I'd be very much in favor of making tier 1 carriers and dreadnaughts bigger than they currently are (about the same size, at least model-wise, as a machariel, which frankly is just too small.) A supercarrier is really just a tier 3 carrier. I'd say the size difference should be no more pronounced than it is between Cruisers and Battlecruisers (both medium sized, battlecruisers slightly larger to counterbalance more firepower, or Destroyers and Frigates (both small sized,) while the size difference between battleships and capital ships should be just as pronounced as every other size increase. But that'll probably have to wait until the balancing team works it way up to capital ships. Since they're starting with frigs, I won't be holding my breath.

IMO it makes sense that such a massive and powerful ship could not be held down by a single rifter with a warp scram. Also, changing titan mechanics for a perceived problem that only occurs with a handful of alliances and only in the largest of fleet battles should not make a single one defenseless to a small roaming gang with a falcon.

This I can really agree with.

I know for now we need a quick fix to go on top of an antiquated formula to stop the rifter blapping titans.

But one day we'll need to redo the entire tracking / sig radius formula that will effect every ship.

One of the bigger complaints I have heard is that the signature radius doesn't "look" any smaller to the attacker when the target gets further away. You'l need to add a bit of trigonometry to the formula to accurately model the whole "things look small from far away" effect.

Damn Grayscale, when you guys will start using your head?

Dreads (and caps in general) should relate to Battleships in much the same way that Battleships relate to cruisers. This probably means changing the way siege mode works. With the proposed changes to tracking/range/sig, it'd mean that dreads would have a lot of difficulty hitting Battleships without support, but it'd be doable. Tack on some solid web/painter/tracking/range support and all of a sudden dreadnaughts can start mopping up battleships like nobody's business. This should be, of course, counterable with modules like tracking disruptors, damps, etc. Dreadnaughts (or any capital) being able to hit battlecruisers, though, should be extremely difficult even with support. Without support it should be just /barely/ doable, and likely not a very good idea. Just like we don't really want Battleships that can easily track and destroy Destroyers. The size difference is roughly the same, there, and accuracy/damage formulas should reflect that. I actually recommend putting tracking/range bonuses on Dreadnaughts to help them fight off battleships.

Titans should be primarily only for use against other cap ships and structures, in addition to their force projection roles (Corp hangars, jump bridges, etc.) So, assuming they keep their turrets rather than having some sort of doomsday buff/tweak, they should not have any tracking/range bonuses at all (consider, even, a tracking penalty like the old Destroyers, or like dreads currently are when in siege mode.) An outright damage bonus or RoF bonus would very much still have a place on Titans, though, as would simply removing the turrets and buffing/tweaking doomsdays so that they're very effective against both other caps and structures alike.

As to that whole subs < caps < supers thing, it's worth noting that you bring this up when talking about a counter to battleships. I'd argue that battleships ought to also be easily countered by well flown and supported cruisers, in addition to also being countered by well flown and supported dreadnaughts.

It's pretty simple. If you want to counter a specific ship size, hop into any ship that's either half a size up, or one whole size down provided you bring enough pilots with you to break tanks. If you go a whole size larger than your opponent, expect to need EWar if you want to hit it accurately, and expect that they won't be able to break your tank unless they outnumber you. Of course, simply bringing more battleships would work, too, but if you employ a good counter you should be able to win even when outnumbered assuming your pilots know how to fly well.