These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Titan changes - update

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#821 - 2012-04-16 16:47:44 UTC
steave435 wrote:

With a linear scaling it would get hit for 25% damage, or 4% if the values are squared..and the MWD is only used for a short period while approaching anyway, once you get there you turn it off since it does absolutely nothing with the bubble up anyway. With it off, it would be about 1% or 10% depending on method chosen.

Ignoring Steave's incorrect notion that you don't use an mwd after dropping the bubble, and assuming the 4% number is correct, that's 2400 raw damage per volley: that seems high for a titan shooting at a dictor.

In addition, given that an abaddon, properly target painted, has a sig of ~1300 (while not MWDing, so it's doing everything right), I think titans still doing 50% damage around that area is a little high: two erebuses will kill it in six seconds.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#822 - 2012-04-16 16:51:33 UTC
Yeah after discussing that's really bad: that means titans will reliably kill dictors, and it's really important they not be able to do that. Titans being unable to clear dictors by themselves is critical to balancing them: otherwise, you just start alphaing the dictors and cyno out even if you're completely beaten. I think you need to tweak the numbers so a titan hitting a dictor is basically scratching the paint.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#823 - 2012-04-16 16:54:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Mechael
steave435 wrote:
That works for a BS, but it gets too severe when it gets further down in sizes. Even a fully painted BC flying straight at a titan would be taking only ~6% damage, and a cruiser doing the same would take 1%. Without the squaring, it would be roughly 50% against a BS, 25% against a BC and 10% against a cruiser when you actually manage to hit and assuming you have perfect support. That may sound high, but restricting the titans target choices to only max painted ships with low transversal rather then any ship with low transversal on top of those raw damage reductions adds up to enough.


You're just plain weird, here, dude. XL turrets trying to hit a cruiser (two full sizes below) should be damn near impossible, unless the cruiser is being a total and complete moron (sitting still with MWD on while painted vs a tracking boosted titan.) The changes Greyscale is presenting are good things, even if the method is a little hacked and wonky. This shouldn't be a long-term (or even medium-term) fix, but it's good to get it on there as a band-aid for the short term.

EDIT: Only real long-term solutions are clearly defined and implemented roles for every ship in EVE, and damage formula adjustments.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#824 - 2012-04-16 17:03:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
Im no 0.0 commander but wouldnt a situtation of having two titan fleets seperated by optimal ranges of each other negate any attempt to tackle titans in a mordern warzone with current rules or some of these suggested ideas?

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#825 - 2012-04-16 17:06:21 UTC
Ampoliros wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Battleships and sig radius: our current thinking is that all those sig radius penalties are there for sound balance reasons, and the only thing they really open up a vulnerability to right now is cap ships. Ignoring them for the purposes of cap ship guns just makes passive shield tanking even more desirable than it is right now. If you're finding that your 2000m drake or 4000m maelstrom are still taking huge amounts of damage from capitals, and that this is causing you problems, that's an issue with your choice of fitting rather than with overall game balance

Dreadnaughts: this has no effect on their main role as anti-capital/anti-structure (all of which are around or above 2000m), so we've honestly not worried about them too much. We'll have a quick discussion about their use in PvE today or tomorrow, but that may not result in any further changes.


I hate to be pushy, but I don't really feel you're addressing my concerns here. I'm honestly not that concerned about the PvE issue, although i'm glad you're taking a look at it as other w-space folks are - i'm concerned about the PvP side of things.

Moreover, there are a multitude of sigradius reducing effects and bonuses that exist in the game, and properly stacked it would absolutely have an effect on the main role of dreadnaughts. A c6 wolf-rayet with loki skirmish links would see triage archons with 30k tank and 950m sigrad; that's not even including boosters or implant sets, which would push it down even further. 50% dmg reduction vs your intended targets is absolutely an effect, and that's assuming you guys stick with linear scaling.

e: with second-degree scaling, ie (target sigrad/gun radius)^2, you're talking about 22% dps. That means you go from needing two or three dreads to break it now to needing 10 to 15. Straight


The general case of dreads-out-of-siege honestly seems like a pretty marginal problem that doesn't warrant a lot of work to eliminate. If we could keep that "for free" we would, but we don't see the value in investing resources in ensuring that it happens.

W-space stuff specifically is an interesting case, but it's something I think I'd prefer to see develop before taking any specific action against it. Those effects are supposed to make life interesting, and they're not balanced towards any specific outcome. If it starts being actually problematic we can look into it.

Retar Aveymone wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

We're probably going with the square-over-square scaling, so you're hitting the 50% damage point around 1400 sig rather than around 1000, which *somewhat* mitigates this. The real solution here though is improvements to the tracking formula, and we're reluctant right now to go overboard with this stuff in the meantime, plus it's getting late in the day and we need to lock down something workable ASAP so we can ship it next week.


Could you just double-check that with your proposed formula, a titan hitting a hictor or a dictor (and here the dictor DOES need to be balanced around having an mwd) does very little? That's really important to ensure titans can't clear their tackles without support.

Working on some numbers to see what that would do in effect to battleships - thanks for the info.


MWDing Broadsword takes about 10% damage, MWD Sabre 3.5%, normal Broadsword around 0.45% and normal Sabre around 0.1%.
Chitsa Jason
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#826 - 2012-04-16 17:10:57 UTC
Wspace will see a huge problem with such a nerf as right now Dreads are used in PVE and sub cap PVP as well. They make great targets for organized gangs. After this nerf noone will use them except for POS bashing.

/me angry

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#827 - 2012-04-16 17:13:58 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

MWDing Broadsword takes about 10% damage, MWD Sabre 3.5%, normal Broadsword around 0.45% and normal Sabre around 0.1%.

Yeah that's a really big problem, I think you'll regularly see titans blapping dictors with that 3.5%. I think that's another good reason to not factor in sig radius changes.
MisterAl tt1
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#828 - 2012-04-16 17:17:17 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

W-space stuff specifically is an interesting case, but it's something I think I'd prefer to see develop before taking any specific action against it.

That means we will have to yell for half-a-year at least before you take notice that you killed some part of the game in w-space.

What damage do you expect on the Guardian battleship with (it seems) 350 sig raduis, having in mind that the beast is far more powerfull then ANY single player-driven battleship and you get 6 of them at least on your head with a capital escalation?
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#829 - 2012-04-16 17:24:34 UTC
Chitsa Jason wrote:
Wspace will see a huge problem with such a nerf as right now Dreads are used in PVE and sub cap PVP as well. They make great targets for organized gangs. After this nerf noone will use them except for POS bashing.

/me angry


Dreads were never supposed to be used for such things, that you been able to PVE with dreads for so long has just been an advantage for you... be happy about it, and deal with the future changes, if it's such a big problem, bring more target painters from golems or rapiers :)

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
Kralin Ignatov
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#830 - 2012-04-16 17:27:57 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


MWDing Broadsword takes about 10% damage, MWD Sabre 3.5%, normal Broadsword around 0.45% and normal Sabre around 0.1%.


For those curious, this means a 1-magstab erebus, obtaining a wrecking shot, would do 861 dmg on a mwd-broadsword, and 38 dmg on a non-mwd broadsword every 6.8s

Against a double bubble, cloaky sabre w/ no invulns, about 900 dmg, which is about 1/2 the shield (w/ a shield extender)

and, mind you, these are wrecking shots (in optimal, in tracking, and lucky shot)
Chitsa Jason
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#831 - 2012-04-16 17:29:00 UTC
Bubanni wrote:
Chitsa Jason wrote:
Wspace will see a huge problem with such a nerf as right now Dreads are used in PVE and sub cap PVP as well. They make great targets for organized gangs. After this nerf noone will use them except for POS bashing.

/me angry


Dreads were never supposed to be used for such things, that you been able to PVE with dreads for so long has just been an advantage for you... be happy about it, and deal with the future changes, if it's such a big problem, bring more target painters from golems or rapiers :)


Well i think they were intended as there are capital escalations from dreads. why else there would be such thing?

Also in wspace people usually only use few dreads to fight blobs as it sometimes is the only choice.

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me
MisterAl tt1
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#832 - 2012-04-16 17:29:35 UTC
Bubanni wrote:

Dreads were never supposed to be used for such things, that you been able to PVE with dreads for so long has just been an advantage for you... be happy about it, and deal with the future changes, if it's such a big problem, bring more target painters from golems or rapiers :)

Again, then why dreads coming to sites triggered escalations able to counter capitals? It seems like someone created w-space planned that. Just Greyscale doesn't know what those people planned for wormholes.

Chitsa already wrote that dreads are a significant part of PVP in worholes too.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#833 - 2012-04-16 17:34:18 UTC
Kralin Ignatov wrote:

Against a double bubble, cloaky sabre w/ no invulns, about 900 dmg, which is about 1/2 the shield (w/ a shield extender)

and, mind you, these are wrecking shots (in optimal, in tracking, and lucky shot)

Your math is wrong.
Ampoliros
Aperture Harmonics
#834 - 2012-04-16 17:36:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Ampoliros
CCP Greyscale wrote:
The general case of dreads-out-of-siege honestly seems like a pretty marginal problem that doesn't warrant a lot of work to eliminate. If we could keep that "for free" we would, but we don't see the value in investing resources in ensuring that it happens.

W-space stuff specifically is an interesting case, but it's something I think I'd prefer to see develop before taking any specific action against it. Those effects are supposed to make life interesting, and they're not balanced towards any specific outcome. If it starts being actually problematic we can look into it.


Not sure where you got out of siege dreads from, I'm not really concerned about that. What i'm concerned about is you tying together dread balancing (which sacrifice mobility for high damage), with titan balancing (which don't). They're different ships, with different balance concerns.

Even ignoring system effects, stacking halos, x-instinct, and skirmish links means you wind up 1200 sig on an archon. With your squared scaling, that's a 64% damage reduction against damage from dreadnaughts; what one dread can kill now would take ~3-4. That's a pretty massive nerf for one of the dread's primary roles.
Kralin Ignatov
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#835 - 2012-04-16 17:41:27 UTC
Retar Aveymone wrote:
Kralin Ignatov wrote:

Against a double bubble, cloaky sabre w/ no invulns, about 900 dmg, which is about 1/2 the shield (w/ a shield extender)

and, mind you, these are wrecking shots (in optimal, in tracking, and lucky shot)

Your math is wrong.


oh your right, i was only using the kin resists, silly me

its 1200, which is still only a little over 1/2 of the its shield
[49,000 alpha * .7(avg resist of sabre kin/therm) * .035 ]
Vheroki
Tranquility Tavern
Pandemic Horde
#836 - 2012-04-16 17:42:23 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


MWDing Broadsword takes about 10% damage, MWD Sabre 3.5%, normal Broadsword around 0.45% and normal Sabre around 0.1%.



So you are saying this is the way it should work ? So when a Tank hits a motocycle does only 10 % ok the dmg ? :) seriously ? You do no take in consideration the conditions of the applied dmg , like i was saying a BC even if is a bc or a POD should GET maximum dmg if is stationary and with o transversal velocity. What physics are you implementing again ? And stop with this bullshit that a Titan needs to miss a frig all the time because with 0 transversal and 0 speed should get max dmg.
MooCowofKow
EVE University
Ivy League
#837 - 2012-04-16 17:43:53 UTC  |  Edited by: MooCowofKow
Chitsa Jason wrote:
Wspace will see a huge problem with such a nerf as right now Dreads are used in PVE and sub cap PVP as well. They make great targets for organized gangs. After this nerf noone will use them except for POS bashing.

/me angry



Exactly this.

Also, why don't you just make XXL turrets with horrible tracking that only titans can fit?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#838 - 2012-04-16 17:44:02 UTC
MisterAl tt1 wrote:
Bubanni wrote:

Dreads were never supposed to be used for such things, that you been able to PVE with dreads for so long has just been an advantage for you... be happy about it, and deal with the future changes, if it's such a big problem, bring more target painters from golems or rapiers :)

Again, then why dreads coming to sites triggered escalations able to counter capitals? It seems like someone created w-space planned that. Just Greyscale doesn't know what those people planned for wormholes.

Chitsa already wrote that dreads are a significant part of PVP in worholes too.


Uh, that was me. Well, CCP Bettik and myself, anyway. The capital escalations were put in to make farming those sites with capital ships harder. We knew people would have capships and we didn't want that to make those sites a pushover, so we added some extra cap-triggered spawns to try and make them more of a struggle for people trying to run them with a couple of carriers.

Ampoliros wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
The general case of dreads-out-of-siege honestly seems like a pretty marginal problem that doesn't warrant a lot of work to eliminate. If we could keep that "for free" we would, but we don't see the value in investing resources in ensuring that it happens.

W-space stuff specifically is an interesting case, but it's something I think I'd prefer to see develop before taking any specific action against it. Those effects are supposed to make life interesting, and they're not balanced towards any specific outcome. If it starts being actually problematic we can look into it.


Not sure where you got out of siege dreads from, I'm not really concerned about that. What i'm concerned about is you tying together dread balancing (which sacrifice mobility for high damage), with titan balancing (which don't). They're different ships, with different balance concerns.

Even ignoring system effects, stacking halos, x-instinct, and skirmish links means you wind up 1200 sig on an archon. With your squared scaling, that's a 64% damage reduction against damage from dreadnaughts; what one dread can kill now would take ~304. That's a pretty massive nerf for one of the dread's primary roles.


Are people actually running x-instinct/halo carriers? I see the theoretical problem, and it's something we may want to look into at some point, but I don't want to do a lot of running around for something that's largely theoretical.
CynoNet Two
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#839 - 2012-04-16 17:51:07 UTC
Vheroki wrote:

So you are saying this is the way it should work ? So when a Tank hits a motocycle does only 10 % ok the dmg ? :)


You're playing a game about Internet Spaceships.

Let me repeat that, as it's important; Internet Spaceships.

You do not get to make parallels to real-life physics over game balance. Know why? Because the door that opens leads down a path to things like real-life collision physics. Which means everyone explodes the minute they undock from Jita 4-4. While that would be hilarious, and although it pains me to say, it makes for a very broken game.

Now please stop being ridiculous in a legitimate balancing thread.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#840 - 2012-04-16 17:51:34 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Are people actually running x-instinct/halo carriers? I see the theoretical problem, and it's something we may want to look into at some point, but I don't want to do a lot of running around for something that's largely theoretical.


You can bet that they'll do whatever gives them an advantage. If they aren't doing this now, they will be after these changes.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.