These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#1181 - 2011-10-11 14:52:18 UTC
Drop Dead Sexy wrote:
as a sub cap pilot, lo sec roamer i second this nerf, thank you dev's,
any chance on forbidding titans in low sec??? titan alfa kills are very annoying and must be looked at.
super cap hot drops on a single ship becoming more and more popular taking away all chances of survival for solo warrior.


What kind of ****** pilot are you that can't get away from a solo super? You don't fit propulsion mod? P

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#1182 - 2011-10-11 14:52:48 UTC
A hitpoint reduction is really necesary for both super carriers and titans - Very well done...
With the massive resist they can obtain and the many RR carriers on the field in battles I still believe a bigger hitpoint reduction would be in place without jeopardizing balance too much.
Also perhaps since Super capitals never seems too be active tanking perhaps a reduction in capacitor and recharge would make the fights better balanced and more interesting.

Limiting drones is a super choice. Good choice. You will still have a fleet problem of multiple ECM bursts. I would consider giving certain tacklers & supportships ecm burst immunity or higher sensor strength. Also plz make sure ecm bursts won't be able to negate the effects of bubbles (Getting paranoid here or am I?)

The doomsday weapon is not necesarily the most dangerous part of the Titan. The tracking of the guns can easily hit BC's while moving and not commiting as a Dread would have to. Also remote tracking in the current state of those guns fit on a titan will be very powerfull.

Don't hesitate too long about dreadnoughts. Those guns are really bad at hitting even a stationary pos. Making them hit better won't be a huge threat to battleships however still have a valid chance of hitting more than towers and capitals.

A reason while subcapitals have trouble with supers is not necesarily due to the supers themselves, however the massive RR capitals in support have a very easy time supporting with the massive resistance and hitpoints available. I am not convinced a 20% reduction in hitpoints is enough as RR support rarely have trouble keeping up with the damage taken after the massive resists.

Would it be too much to have a built in 20-50 % Hitpoints received on shield/armor transfer?

Anyway nice to see CCP giving a few shipclasses a major overhaul with well thought adjustments... Now you just need the last little details, kinks and perks to make it super usefull :p

Pinky Denmark
Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1183 - 2011-10-11 14:53:48 UTC
Misanth wrote:
ThaWolf wrote:
Maybe instead of nerving we should rather redo the Super-carrier as a whole, after reading this thread, i think they are not fitting in the game as they are, overpowered on one hand, mainly in larger groups, and close to useless if they get nerved that way, while the character is stuck in it.

So i came up with that:

New role, high end toy for all ppl who like to fly Caps, can do much but nothing Overpowered.

- Fighter Bombers will be pure Anti-Structure Weapons, bombing range 35km, anti Pos too, dmg should be like 2 Dreads

- Fighters stay like they are pre-nerv, the SCs should do Damage like 2 Carriers

- Drone bay gets nerved to 1 Bomber set 1 Fighter set and ~500m3 (yeah still normal Drones)

- SC cant use Remote repair mods, they should be only for Standard Carriers.

- ECM immunity stays

- remote ECM stays

- All SCs should be balanced to the defense Capabilities of a NYX (which i think is the most balanced EHP for SCs)

- balance production price of all SCs to the same amount

- SCs should be able to dock as a Compensation, and to make it possible that more ppl rely want to own them, so more can be killed


Agree with everything except the dock part. Supers are unique in the sense that they are a) e-war immune and b) can't dock. That's the benefit and tradeoff you get for flying one, something you accept by taking the seat, and something they should never change.



fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.
Furb Killer
#1184 - 2011-10-11 14:55:37 UTC
Quote:
They aren't universally better. There are many ships in the game that can kill them. Fleet comp is the all important here. I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight.

Just going to point this out, but generally when talking balance it is not assumed that something is balanced because they have to bail without losses when outnumbered over 10 to 1...
Velin Dhal
Zeonic CG
#1185 - 2011-10-11 14:55:57 UTC
Evil Celeste wrote:
Velin Dhal wrote:
[quote=Tippia]
I've watched 6 Supers have to bail on a fight because a 60-70 T2 cruiser gang would have ended up winning the fight.


Fun times.
Six 12k big slowass ships being able to "bail" from 70 t2 cruisers, just because these fools didnt bring at least 15 hics with them on roam...

That i call balance.


That is balance. One fleet didn't have enough HICs to hold the point. The HICs on field got nueted. It didn't happen because of a glitch or because something was broken.

You say this but its not different than not bringing enough tackle on sub cap vs sub cap engagement. Its not different except instead of throwing it on any old ship, you have to have specific ships. We're sorry if you find training skills to tedious.
WhiteSleeve
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1186 - 2011-10-11 14:57:47 UTC  |  Edited by: WhiteSleeve
Stupid forum. had it all nice and neat. Guess now I'll have to put in the TL DR version.

All Capitals should be monsters of the BattleSpace. Taking away drones from Dreads is stupid. They can find room in the hulls for a couple of flights of light scout drones if NOTHING else. They should all have the Possibility to pop a tackler, maybe not with their main weaponry but that's what light and medium scout drones are for. Siege mode should make hitting pretty much Anything more likely for dreads. Even a chance to pop frigs, (Likely? maybe not; but possible yes). They can't move after all and can't be repped. So what's the REAL advantage to it. Maybe no 700% bonus to damage against BattleCruisers and smaller, tracking increase instead against them. Super Carriers. should be able to bring a full flight of Fighters and Fighter Bombers. Just enough room in the Fighter Bay for that. They should also be able to deploy Light/Medium scouts for the same reason as other Capitals. Not enough room in the Fighter bay for a full flight of all drone types though. You want to carry more/other drones you gotta drop either fighters of fighter bombers to make room. The CHANCE to pop the tackler. This premise of a cap being able to pop tackle is predicated upon the idea that it's just a frig or two or maybe even one or two hictors. They should have the CHANCE to get away before the tacklers gang arrives. Bit more tackle than that, or the tackle fleet's got more support then to bad so sad for the support-less super. Titans. Even Titans should have a CHANCE to pop a tackler (light\medium scout drones). And from those better at Maths I agree, Straight nerf to Super EHP's is not fair to Minmi. no I'm not a Minmi pilot either. Look closer at that Please Tallest before just a straight drop. Carriers should be feared by all. they SHOULD be able to deploy Light Scouts all the way up through Fighters, full flights of each. You'd still have to pick and choose so you can either carry spares or the flights. But that's what a carrier should be able to do. With Supers, make it so FB's can attack structures. You can then eliminate them being able to carry heavy/sentry drones. But make it so that a Dread's Guns do a better job of it. Perhaps FB's don't do full damage against structures compared to Capital Class ships. That seems like a good fix to me. Dreads feared by Structure owners and Caps for sure. They should make on down to BC's Very Nervous (small number of them say 3-5 without other support) with their guns. Carriers should make everybody worry a bit. They can't bring the pain to Caps like Super Carriers with their Fighter Bombers or Dreads with their 'Big Guns' or Titans with their DD's. But they can make even Frigs have a bad day. Titans Should make Structures and Caps Quake in their boots. What else is a DD for? Up to a flight of 5 Sentry drones for Dreads is not unreasonable. They're for Structure bashing after all. up to a flight of Medium Scout drones for Super Carriers and Titans is also not unreasonable to give them a CHANCE to get away before the tacklers gang can arrive. Heard an idea surrounding Jump Bridging of titans on a pod cast recently. Instead of bridging, the titans take everything in a certain radius with them. I think that that'd be a better idea for Carriers and Super Carriers. Think refinement of technology. Carriers can jump a few non jump capable ships With them somewhere (make taking ships with them a script or something) but can't jump as far. Super Carriers the same idea but more cause they are larger. Titans should be able to jump their full limit with ships, but should use a script of some type to make a bridge; decreasing the chance they're put in danger. And as far as Jump range goes, Dreads should be comparable to Carriers. Maybe not exactly as far, but since they're the closest in size, they should have similar jump ranges imo.

With that all said, I'm not totally negative on the items in the dev blog. I just think they need to be through through a little deeper is all.

Just the 2 isk of a non capital pilot on the subject.

Just finally read through enough of the idea of not nerfing fighters. thank Goodness for that!
Subtarian
The Flying Dead
#1187 - 2011-10-11 14:57:48 UTC
I give a BIG THUMBS UP to all these changes. Thank you for not nerfing the fighters becasue it would've had a negative effect on carriers.

and for the numb skulls whining about a hic or sabre tackling an SC....Its a fleet ship you shouldnt be using it as a solo pwnmobile/low sec gankathon in the first place. Once again A FLEET SHIP.

CCP could you give us a general idea of how a basic fleet fight will look or stack in your minds. After being in one after another for so many years it will be interesting to see how you guys envision a typical fleet fight.

Once again we appreciate the re focust on the game at hand. As a player with 3 accounts running for 4 plus years , its nice to see you guys are intent on keeping me coming back for years moreP
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1188 - 2011-10-11 14:58:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Pinky Denmark wrote:
A hitpoint reduction is really necesary for both super carriers and titans - Very well done...
With the massive resist they can obtain and the many RR carriers on the field in battles I still believe a bigger hitpoint reduction would be in place without jeopardizing balance too much.
Also perhaps since Super capitals never seems too be active tanking perhaps a reduction in capacitor and recharge would make the fights better balanced and more interesting.

Limiting drones is a super choice. Good choice. You will still have a fleet problem of multiple ECM bursts. I would consider giving certain tacklers & supportships ecm burst immunity or higher sensor strength. Also plz make sure ecm bursts won't be able to negate the effects of bubbles (Getting paranoid here or am I?)

The doomsday weapon is not necesarily the most dangerous part of the Titan. The tracking of the guns can easily hit BC's while moving and not commiting as a Dread would have to. Also remote tracking in the current state of those guns fit on a titan will be very powerfull.

Don't hesitate too long about dreadnoughts. Those guns are really bad at hitting even a stationary pos. Making them hit better won't be a huge threat to battleships however still have a valid chance of hitting more than towers and capitals.

A reason while subcapitals have trouble with supers is not necesarily due to the supers themselves, however the massive RR capitals in support have a very easy time supporting with the massive resistance and hitpoints available. I am not convinced a 20% reduction in hitpoints is enough as RR support rarely have trouble keeping up with the damage taken after the massive resists.

Would it be too much to have a built in 20-50 % Hitpoints received on shield/armor transfer?

Anyway nice to see CCP giving a few shipclasses a major overhaul with well thought adjustments... Now you just need the last little details, kinks and perks to make it super usefull :p

Pinky Denmark


Your ideas are all terrible and neuter the ships to the point of extinction, raising the question of why somebody would pay that much for a ship that with your changes, does exactly nothing.

Keep your day job.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1189 - 2011-10-11 14:59:31 UTC
Velin Dhal wrote:
That is balance.
If you believe that, then guess what? The change will also be balanced.
Evil Celeste
#1190 - 2011-10-11 14:59:55 UTC
Misanth wrote:

Do you want free isk with the subscription too? CCP already gave lazy players like you the HIC to tackle supers. We used to tackle them by bumping, nossing and neuting, you should learn the core mechanics of the game before you even beg for free killmails. P

Since I'm all nice and posting helpful hinters today, I'll give you another: a) you can use multiple HIC that rotate their points, so they can be RR'd, b) you can keep at the edge of pointrange, pulse mwd and warp off/back.

It's so ridicilously easy to point supers today that anyone who fails to do so, does not deserve a kill.

Yes, its completely lazymode to be able to tackle supercarrier only with 1 type of ship, that is completely useless for anything else in lowsec.
Its also ridiculously easy to point scs, because you are not under 20 fighters from each, 2x 30k+ neuts from each and remote ecm burst.
Its also completely ok, that supercarriers - that can be built ONLY in 0.0 sovereignity space - can be used without any disadvantage in low sec space. Space, where you cannot built supercarrier.

Also how much supercarriers there were in game, when you used to tackle them with "bumps." Nice example of "always bet on stupid" pvp approach btw. And nice example of ccp providing good pvp balance. Making a ship, that basically cant be tackled withou pilot making mistake, mmm every fotmchaser goes wet...
Napoleon Bonapart
Draconis Holding Corporation
#1191 - 2011-10-11 15:00:00 UTC
I think the supercap nerf is long overdue however I don't think they will have the effects CCP is looking for

1) Hel - This thing really doesn't need anymore reduction of HP it's already crap. Leave Hel HP as is and reduce Aeon 20%, Nyx and Wyvern 15%

2) Titan tracking - Everyone hurfblurfing about nerfing titan tracking are not realizing that EVE will become Hurricane & Rifters Online. A nerf to tracking would guarantee that whoever brings the most bodies into the engagement will win. If you have the balls to drop supers on a fleet fight you shouldn't be punished by not being able to track subcaps. I agree the DD nerf is much needed but Titans are supposed to be game changers, if you nerf them down to where they are pointless and can't defend against sub caps then noone will ever deploy them unless they are 100% sure they will win engagement. 99% of the time they will spend logged off in a pos doing nothing but collecting dust.

3) Fighters/FB - I don't think removing drones is a good idea. Why not instead increase the bandwidth of Fighters/FB so they can deploy less. With the increase to sig radious a good bomber run will destory a supercarriers main weapon and they will be forced to either sit there and do nothing...or if able to jump back to safe pos and log off for another 3-4 months doing nothing.

I like that CCP is actually reading ideas in this thread and giving proper feedback, it just seems like with the current proposed changes EVE will move to whoever has the biggest subcap blob wins the game.
Dirala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1192 - 2011-10-11 15:00:26 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:


Anile8er wrote:
Shadowsword wrote:


If your Nyx doesn't have a support fleet, you deserve to lose it.



I dont disagree, however I dont deserve to loose a 26 bil isk ship because I could not deal with a solo random tackler by myself or small random nano gang with a dictor who never set out to kill a supercap.

Actually, yes, you do. You're doing something dumb by wielding a supercap solo, you deserve the risk of losing it because the other guy was better prepared than you were.

Bring a ******* support fleet.



Well, unlike Carriers and Dreads, you cant store a Supercap in a Station. So you are saying, you should only log in when there is a support fleet ready?
He is talking about some random roaming fleet and such.
I totally agree with the nerf, still the Supercarrier should have at least a little tooth against small ships. So that he is not completly helpless against a small gang of say 5 ships.
Anile8er
Holoband Research and Development
#1193 - 2011-10-11 15:01:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Anile8er
Another issue here is some players use supercarriers for other than PVP at times. Before all the flaming and name calling, I ask you why shouldn't they be able to? Players use PVP ships to PVE in EVE all the time, CCP allows those ships to be cross functional.

And for the guy in the purely PVE faction battleship, a ship class designed for PVP but often used for PVE, he can just dock and change ships when he wants. What if CCP said Navy Ravens should only be able to kill Battleship class hulls in this game, we are disallowing the fitting of cruise lunchers and removing the drone bay.

I would love to see the uproar in this game if CCP changed every ship to be single tasked, single focused. For example, Hurricanes and Drakes will only be able to damage other BC, we are making their weapon systems 100% ineffective against smaller ships and removing the drone bays, so make sure you bring a frigate support fleet with your BC roam or you will get raped a small frigate gang. Same with battleships, if you are flying a battleship you have a 0% chance of hitting or doing any damage to a ship smaller than another battleship and you will have no drone bay. In fact unless you are in a ship with drone bonuses you will not have a drone bay. And the type of drone you can use in your drone ship will be based on your ship class/size, so Ishkur can use lights, Vexor, Ishtar, Myrmidon and Gila can only use mediums, and the Dominix can only use heavys and sentries.

That is the kind of inflexibilty CCP is presenting for supercaps.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1194 - 2011-10-11 15:02:54 UTC
Dirala wrote:
Well, unlike Carriers and Dreads, you cant store a Supercap in a Station. So you are saying, you should only log in when there is a support fleet ready?
Yes. Bring the right tool for the job. Without a support fleet, the SC is not the right tool.
Quote:
I totally agree with the nerf, still the Supercarrier should have at least a little tooth against small ships. So that he is not completly helpless against a small gang of say 5 ships.
Why not? If it encounters a small gang of, say, 5 ships, it will survive long enough for the support fleet to get there and wipe the floor with those ships.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#1195 - 2011-10-11 15:03:03 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:

The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.


/emote breathes big sigh of relief.

Thanks for the love!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1196 - 2011-10-11 15:03:08 UTC
Vile rat wrote:

fwiw I hate supercaps more than just about anybody and even I can't think of a compelling reason that they can't dock. Seems like such a little thing to free up supercap pilots from boring endless hours of guarding a pos somewhere.


ehp bricks repping a station that dock up whenever they go into low armor and get free repairs

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Evil Celeste
#1197 - 2011-10-11 15:05:15 UTC
Misanth wrote:
Drop Dead Sexy wrote:
as a sub cap pilot, lo sec roamer i second this nerf, thank you dev's,
any chance on forbidding titans in low sec??? titan alfa kills are very annoying and must be looked at.
super cap hot drops on a single ship becoming more and more popular taking away all chances of survival for solo warrior.


What kind of ****** pilot are you that can't get away from a solo super? You don't fit propulsion mod? P


You are clearly not aware of 1337 pvpers "new" tactics.

You engage in 1v1 in any other than kiting ship (i know, completely stupid idea right?), you get tackled, sc warps/jumps in, reps target, applies neuts and bunch of drones. After the gank just leaves. Without any real danger.

Gogo ewar immunity in lowsec.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1198 - 2011-10-11 15:05:32 UTC
Subtarian wrote:


and for the numb skulls whining about a hic or sabre tackling an SC....Its a fleet ship you shouldnt be using it as a solo pwnmobile/low sec gankathon in the first place. Once again A FLEET SHIP.


So you would be ok with carriers having their drone bays removed on this basis too then right?

I mean, I've seen people go

* Its a carrier, its got fighters, they should be useful for something

* Supers are fleet ships, they should need a fleet


So by those two logics, Carriers should also have their drone bays neutered to only carry fighters, if your carrier gets tackled by a lone frigate, you should have a fleet with you to beat it back right?


RIght?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#1199 - 2011-10-11 15:06:14 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ganthrithor wrote:
Why even penalize SCs use of fighters? You realize that a SC's fighter dps output is only equal to 2 carriers' worth, right? It's not exactly game-breaking, outlandish dps capabilities you're talking about.
Because it still makes them too good against subcaps.


Only against bad subcap pilots who don't khow to a) pay attention to their surroundings, b) warp (on/offgrid) c) pulse mwd

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

Aldarean
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1200 - 2011-10-11 15:07:22 UTC
Kahrnar wrote:
Aldarean wrote:
Kahrnar wrote:
Removing drones period from Supercarriers just made them a huge hunk of scrap metal...I guess the next thing to do would be to remove the ability to have ammo in your cargohold...just load guns and when ur done ur done.



No it didnt they just made them more in role with there design.

Your not talking about defensive capabilities here. You talking about Offensive capabilites.

A SC should have Defensive capabilities against Sub-cap. It shouldnt have offensive capailities.

Increasing local tanking ability could rebalance



So when your fighters are gone, the fight is over....which should take a small gang about 30 seconds to do...then they can sit there and plug away til you die...its the same as running out of ammo...a ship with NO offence is useless...lol




Every fight you go into, runs that risk.

Again taking back to RL situation. A Carrier, without proper support (solo) is defensless against smaller, more mobile ships. And eventually will be taken down.

Eve is supposed to Mirror Real Life (Eve is REAL), this change will do that.

Increasing resistance, lowering EHP, and having a bonus to local repper gives you a defensive capability.

Making them immune to Sub-Cap scrammers and HIC Bubbles, increase defensive capability.

Adding a Capital HIC Bubble of some form adds balance.

How many BS should it take to bring down a SC. Cost is not a balancing factor.

Look around RL situation, the make the argument for most people that are for this "re-balancing"

Super-Carriers and Titan will still be needed. But more Tactically orientated hopefully.