These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Capital ship balancing

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Daedalus II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2011-10-10 17:17:33 UTC
Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers. But I might be a bit biased Blink
cBOLTSON
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#82 - 2011-10-10 17:17:44 UTC
Raquel Smith wrote:
I have to echo the thoughts to add fighter and fighter bomber signature resolution as a penalty to the appropriate ships. It seems to impose an unnecessary penalty to carriers.


I agree. I like the changes for the most part, I do definatly still think you will need to tweek things as this all progresses.

I honestly dont like the fighter changes however. Also removing drones full stop from dreads seems a bad idea.

The good old days of Unreal Tournament, fragging and sniping on Facing Worlds, listening to Foregone Destruction.......
Kel'taith
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#83 - 2011-10-10 17:19:12 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Kel'taith wrote:
So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.

I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes.

"a smartbomb"

"someone, anywhere, who likes you enough to shoot a single dictor in the 23 hours (probably actually forever as I bet it can't beat shield regen) it takes to grind down an SC"


Even a ******** dictor pilot can orbit out of range of a smartbomb.
Emmerik
NED-Clan
Goonswarm Federation
#84 - 2011-10-10 17:19:47 UTC
is there going to be a range buff on the fighers (bombers)
as in; so they can hit POS ?

(https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19838)
Mekhana
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2011-10-10 17:20:05 UTC
This thread made my day =)

Now I want to hear about the hybrid buff!

Vide longe er eros di Luminaire VII, uni canse pra krage e determiniex! Sange por Sange! Descanse bravex eros, mie freires. Mortir por vostre Liberete, farmilie, ide e amis. lons Proviste sen mort! Luminaire liber mas! 
KayTwoEx
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#86 - 2011-10-10 17:20:47 UTC
Daedalus II wrote:
Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers. But I might be a bit biased Blink

They didnt say that regular Carriers cant use normal drones anymore.

Quote:
In fact, we found that drones on capital ships in general to be detrimental to the way fleet fights should work. If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier. Supercarriers will now have a smaller drone bay and will only be able to put fighters and fighter bombers in it.
ToXicPaIN
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#87 - 2011-10-10 17:20:55 UTC
Kel'taith wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Kel'taith wrote:
So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.

I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes.

"a smartbomb"

"someone, anywhere, who likes you enough to shoot a single dictor in the 23 hours (probably actually forever as I bet it can't beat shield regen) it takes to grind down an SC"


Even a ******** dictor pilot can orbit out of range of a smartbomb.


make the Smartbomb range up to 20-30km :-)))
and more DPS on smartbombs
Sakaali
Perkone
Caldari State
#88 - 2011-10-10 17:20:57 UTC
1) Without sentry drones supercarriers are unable to attack POS. Is this intentional then?

2) Will anything be done about being able to use remote tracking links on titans? If capitals are not intended to fight subcaps it seems like this should be addressed.
CCP Tallest
C C P
C C P Alliance
#89 - 2011-10-10 17:21:03 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
xxxak wrote:
After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.

Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary?


preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat


Bingo. That is exactly why.

[b]★ EVE Game Designer ★ ♥ Team Super Friends ♥[/b]
Cedric deBouilard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2011-10-10 17:21:43 UTC
Quote:
Fighters

  • Increase signature resolution to 400



that's x4 increase from 100 to 400. isn't that a bit too much? 250-300 is ok. but 400 is overkill.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#91 - 2011-10-10 17:21:49 UTC
Kel'taith wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Kel'taith wrote:
So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo? This doesn't strike me as balanced. SC's should have some degree of defense against sub caps. It isn't often that enemy fleets field capitals or you get a titan tackled, even with metagaming. Essentially every SC pilot now has a ship that is only good for reinforcing structures. Just what I wanted to spend billions of isk on.

I agree that they are too powerful as it stands but reducing drone bays, nerfing fighters(which already suck), and removing the ability to field other drones at the same time is too much. Perhaps you should consider implementing a single nerf at a time and see how that goes.

"a smartbomb"

"someone, anywhere, who likes you enough to shoot a single dictor in the 23 hours (probably actually forever as I bet it can't beat shield regen) it takes to grind down an SC"


Even a ******** dictor pilot can orbit out of range of a smartbomb.


im gonna guess the 'friends' thing didn't go well for you either

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Raptor217
Nomadic Spacial Bunnies Support Division
#92 - 2011-10-10 17:21:56 UTC
The only thing i can think of that still needs to be implemented is a tracking bonus while dreads are in siege.
CCP Soundwave
C C P
C C P Alliance
#93 - 2011-10-10 17:22:01 UTC
If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Big smile

Keep an eye out for the blogs.
Helothane
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#94 - 2011-10-10 17:22:38 UTC
Perhaps someone can explain to me how these changes change the fact that dreads are underutilized today? At best all they are good for now is shooting structures, for which SCs are far better suited. Cutting siege mode timer down by half I guess allows for some quicker attacks on smaller POSs, but they are still sitting ducks in a fight with other capitals. If dreads are meant to be used against other capitals, they will need a lot more help. Increasing the tracking of the weapons themselves will just make Titan boosted tracking even more of an issue, so it would need to be something inherent to the Dread class itself.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#95 - 2011-10-10 17:22:45 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Misanth wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Excellent.


Let the map burn.


That's quite short-sighted. Supers will be doing (nearly) same damage as they do today. The only difference is they won't engage subcaps, and those superblobs might be more likely (than they used to) too. What differs is they might carry a subcap fleet with them. Subcap fleet can be cynoed around with the superblob, using bridges.

So in essence, for blobs and powerblocs, this is no nerf. This is a nerf to smaller alliances and/or groups. Especially the removal or regular drones, which is going to make non-blob moving alot more dangerous.

This game just goes more into a blob-game than ever, and looking at the map.. well it might not burn, as you say, it's more likely it'll stay stagnant than before these changes.


I'm in a smaller alliance. We're pretty happy about these changes. The DD change is the big deal, with the log-off change close behind. We already have doctrine to deal with supercarriers, and the drone bay changes will only make that easier. Likewise, we have doctrine prepared to deal with titans that can't DD subcaps.

if CCP actually deploy changes, we anticipate a merry winter of boat-violence amongst our neighbours.


I know alot of people from your alliance since the short time I was in Pure. I considering your alliance another blobby powerbloc, fyi. Most of your "roams" is dozens/tens of people, alot of the people that used to fly ceptors now fly supers, etc. Your alliance is a perfect example of people who used to be good small scale (5-10 man) roaming pvpers, who now turned into a super-blob.

Even tho yes, you're not big compared to the biggest blobs, but compared to young alliance who wants to move out to nullsec, alliance like your own will be boosted by these changes and even less likely to lose their space to younger competition. It's not like when Triumvirate used smaller blobs and harrassed Pure in their homeland, or when Pure roaming gangs did it against whoever. Nowadays smaller alliance just can't roam like we used to, and you guys, and your supers, are part of the problem. And these changes did nothing at all, to help.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
WarFireV
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2011-10-10 17:23:13 UTC
Sakaali wrote:
1) Without sentry drones supercarriers are unable to attack POS. Is this intentional then?.


Then use dreads dumby :P
ToXicPaIN
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#97 - 2011-10-10 17:23:20 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
xxxak wrote:
After further thought, I am more and more disturbed that a super carrier cannot carry a full flight of fighters and FB.

Can a Dev explain why this was considered necessary?


preventing SCs from having overly large reserves of fighters/fighterbombers means they can be defanged by shooting their fighters, providing more interesting types of combat


Bingo. That is exactly why.


why you not only make the DroneBay smaller ??

but remove normal drones are realy sucks
Sakaali
Perkone
Caldari State
#98 - 2011-10-10 17:23:39 UTC
Also, has anyone looked at the math of giving the moros a rate of fire bonus? It seems like with the way hybrids currently function its going to be brutal on its cap usage.
Svennig
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#99 - 2011-10-10 17:24:58 UTC
Cedric deBouilard wrote:
Quote:
Fighters

  • Increase signature resolution to 400



that's x4 increase from 100 to 400. isn't that a bit too much? 250-300 is ok. but 400 is overkill.


Yeah this is a little extreme. It relegates fighters to fighting capitals. And in that situation, fighterbombers are going to be preferable (for supercarriers at least). This needs a slight change so that Carriers are still able to hit BS and (maybe) battlecruisers.
Jackk Hammer
MinnieZ
#100 - 2011-10-10 17:25:14 UTC
Cedric deBouilard wrote:
Quote:
Fighters

  • Increase signature resolution to 400



that's x4 increase from 100 to 400. isn't that a bit too much? 250-300 is ok. but 400 is overkill.


It's actually 125 but I would be grateful for any nerd who can work out if this means thanatos won't be good for doing sanctums anymore.