These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
FlameOfSurvival
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#141 - 2011-10-10 17:39:42 UTC
Can we get Triage modules on supercaps? plz plz plz :D
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#142 - 2011-10-10 17:40:23 UTC
obviously with the 5m siege timer they can ninja towers better but that's a sort of niche role and not one that really justifies the training: it's now just something people who got the skills when they were useful will use on rare occasions

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Raivi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#143 - 2011-10-10 17:40:57 UTC
Good changes. Possibly haven't gone far enough, but as long as you guys will iterate on them as needed this is the way to go.

The logoffski change is spectacular, will go a huge way towards fixing the problems with supercaps.
Svennig
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#144 - 2011-10-10 17:41:25 UTC
Raid'En wrote:
ovenproofjet wrote:
You kinda just nerfed the standard carrier there with the change to the fighter sensor res, carriers are gonna have trouble doing what you say here: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier"

Perhaps add the sensor res reduction as a penalty to supercarriers so as to avoid a knock on effect on the ordinarty carrier

Other wise good changes, especially to the Dreads, siege timer change is long overdue

this.
don't nerf the normal carriers with supercarriers



Not empty quoting.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#145 - 2011-10-10 17:41:49 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
is there an upgrade plan for all those cap pilots which have now to switch from analog modem to a DSL connection? :)


People still analog modems? Don't think I seen one in fifteen years..

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#146 - 2011-10-10 17:41:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
Misanth wrote:
A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase.


This change was needed, to be perfectly honest. Super Capitals have been making EVE Online a worse game for ages by representing an absolute ultimate that is incredibly difficult to beat. The guys QQing about not being able to hotdrop with their super carriers to win smaller scale fights represent the worst of the problem these ships constitute, and they do it to the strongest degree. If this is the change that will drive you out of the game, good riddance to bad rubbish.

To the rest of the players that left the game because of the utterly ludicrous power Super Capitals have held over the battlefield for the past two years, welcome back.

To make these changes really stick though, the Titan tracking issue must be addressed alongside the extraordinary potency of slave implants. The slave set's bonuses should not apply to super capital ships, else the HP nerf simply will not have enough impact.
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din
Commonwealth Vanguard
#147 - 2011-10-10 17:43:24 UTC
I like and welcome the changes, maybe they will need a little tuning later but good start.

As for dreads and tracking, fit tracking mods, think about fitting for the job you want tehm to do. Titans can track subcaps? Yes they should be able to, though at a worse and worse capability down to no chance of hitting frigates.

Supercarriers most definitely do need this nerf, anyone saying they dont clearly either A: has lots of them, or B: Has never seen them in action.

The end of logoffski: Awesome stuff. Can we have killmails for self destructed ships too please? Fine to have the modules all destroyed but at the end of the day the people shooting the ship actually killed it by forcing the pilot to choose self destruct, so it should be reflected in those pilots statistics.

Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing.
David Grogan
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2011-10-10 17:43:43 UTC  |  Edited by: David Grogan
i think the term Doomsday needs to be scrapped and replaced with "Anti-capital Weapon" cos it no longer implies doomsday if it cant hit sub caps too


also ccp any chance ye could make the fuel bay on regular carriers double the size to allow for multiple jumps and enough stront for multiple triage cycles??

Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs.
Fonac
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#149 - 2011-10-10 17:44:09 UTC
So am i the only one worried about SC's still dominating everything larger than Battleships?

It's nice that the log-off-ski is fixed, LONG overdue. I also like the fact that the ridiculous EHP of the SC's are being nerfed.


But, there it ends.

Why nerf the carriers even further? Fighters are hardly a problem against any fleet, the fact that you can field no less than 20 of them is. SC's needs to do less damage not just nerf their EHP. Am i the only one seeing a problem with a 50 million EHP, 8000 dps spewing monster?

Carriers are hardly fielded for anything but emergency suicide triage, for repping up dieing supers or trying to keep up an Ihub, not an actual engagement, and before you ask... Yes i own two of them and i can count on one hand how many times ive used they in combat.

After this we'll still have carriers and dreads being alphad to death in seconds, what good does it, to reduce a siege timer if you know you're going to die before the 5 minuts timer is up anyway.

Make dreads and carriers usefull, buff their EHP, i dont see why this change makes much of a matter, SC's will still dominate the field and still make dreads and carriers look like puppies.


Sorry for the grammar, and sorry for the cluttering of words and sentences, i'm extremely tired and just had a 16 hour shift.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#150 - 2011-10-10 17:44:26 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
I am vaugely suspicious that dreads will still have any role with this change. Their dps is still nothing impressive and they're made of paper compared to supercap fleets: their sole use is sieging pos (which SC's can't touch). They're the wrong answer for a hub or a station, and I think that's a mistake. Their role now is pretty much glass cannons, but they're not damaging enough to fill that role well.


Shoot POS. Supers won't.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Easley Thames
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2011-10-10 17:44:38 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
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.


I just want to thank you for listening. I know there are going to be angry super-cap pilots who disagree, but these changes are a huge step forward in game balance.

Supers will go from being imbalanced pwn-mobiles to a powerful tool that has some obvious weaknesses when used without support.

This was the right thing to do. After all, even the Death Star had to launch a few TIE fighters to keep people away from the thermal exhaust port. Nothing in Eve should be too "safe," and the more ships blow up, the better.

Focusing on flying-in-space (FIS) is the single best decision you guys have made since Dominion, and I think this is only the first pay-off of CCP's internal shift in priorities.

The adjustments you guys made, especially to dreads and fighters, are really well thought-out and carefully tuned. I applaud your careful approach. Sometimes CCP has been a bit too heavy-handed, and luckily this is not that kind of change.

In particular, I think people are under-appreciating how amazing the log-off change is. A ship with aggression will never just "disappear" ever again while being shot-at. It makes me misty-eyed thinking about all the people who will die to small roaming gangs because they can't just "ctrl + Q" as soon as they get tackled.

Thanks CCP, and keep up the the current trend of good work.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#152 - 2011-10-10 17:45:00 UTC
These changes are interesting, but I hope that you guys continue to follow the situation afterwards and make sure that you are continuously make balancing changes if you see that you haven't gone far enough/have gone too far.
Kari Trace
#153 - 2011-10-10 17:45:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Kari Trace
"...We are changing the logoff mechanics in such a way that as long as your enemies are actively engaged in fighting you, logging off is not going to save your ship...."

This, THIS! one statement: whoever did this understand `internet spaceships is serious business`. Whoever did this deserves to be in charge.

I like making things explode.

Kari Trace
Sanguine Sky
Perkone
Caldari State
#154 - 2011-10-10 17:46:00 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.



There is a problem with is that Fighters and bombers are designed for two different roles. Essentially you are telling super pilots you can reinforce structures with your fighter bombers all day long and if a bunce of BS come you have 5 fighters to defend yourself with.

That's a stupid idea. They are SUPER captials. They should be capable of both fighting structures and subcap with correct types of drones. We all already know how well fighter bombers do against battleships.

The HP nerf seems doesn't make any sense. WIth the extention of the log off timer due to aggro you effectively answered the problem of capitals logging in combat. With the reduction in HP your just making our ships weaker.

Of all of these the only thing that make sense is the removal of regular drones. I'm not disagreeing with the log off timer change either, but overall I would say you are dropping the ball hard on this one.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#155 - 2011-10-10 17:46:01 UTC
SloMoJoe wrote:
Nerfing the Moros drone bay and applying that bonus to a rate of fire bonus without adjusting the cap usage of hybrid guns isn't such a great trade. Here's hoping the rumored hybrid re-balance straitens this out.




Yeah would be interesting if CCP takes away our drone dps so much, then decrease cap usage from guns. Forgot that the drones gave cap free dps to some ships. Would be annoying with no balance to that, or so.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Aprudena Gist
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#156 - 2011-10-10 17:46:14 UTC
Capital Turrets that titans and Dreadnoughts should not be a 400m sig radius it should be much larger they should not be doing full damage to battleships.

Also all pos modules should have their sig radiuses dramatically increased since they are designed to be sieged by capitals like the dreadnought it doesn't make any sense by the smaller guns have sig radius's as low as 125m.
Cuisinar
Eternal Silence Ltd.
#157 - 2011-10-10 17:46:50 UTC
proud ? lol

ya proud to be doing goons bidding..

change by change, exactly as goons asked for, in the myriad of forum spam you mention .. so proudly BIASED
chunorris
Jabonosos.
#158 - 2011-10-10 17:47:04 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
chunorris wrote:
In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance.

Quote:
Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers


Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.




Excuse me sir, but the forums have taught me that the CSM is a completely powerless entity and that the Chairmanship is a title without meaning.

Try to keep up!



Shut up lier manipulator. Now you have what you wanted last 3 years. Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#159 - 2011-10-10 17:47:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Misanth
Evelgrivion wrote:
Misanth wrote:
A couple of goon-devs being higher-ups helps as well. Especially since they're good at posting zero content on forums and insulting the playerbase.


This change was needed, to be perfectly honest. Super Capitals have been making EVE Online a worse game for ages by representing an absolute ultimate that is incredibly difficult to beat. The guys QQing about not being able to hotdrop with their super carriers to win smaller scale fights represent the worst of the problem these ships constitute, and they do it to the strongest degree. If this change that will drive you out of the game, good riddance to bad rubbish.

To the rest of the players that left the game because of the utterly ludicrous power Super Capitals have held over the battlefield for the past two years, welcome back.

To make these changes really stick though, the Titan tracking issue must be addressed alongside the extraordinary potency of slave implants. The slave set's bonuses should not apply to super capital ships, else the HP nerf simply will not have enough impact.


Lol you should read through my posting history before making stupid assumptions.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Micerinos
Zima Corp
Legion of xXDEATHXx
#160 - 2011-10-10 17:47:53 UTC
Yeahhh Welcome to hurricane online......