These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Velin Dhal
Zeonic CG
#1221 - 2011-10-11 15:24:59 UTC
Dirala wrote:
Tippia wrote:
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.


Indeed, but "everyday life" in eve not only consists out of huge battles. Eventually you have to login your SC to do other stuff than hotdropping fleets with a big support Gang. Like moving the ship somewhere. Especially because you can't simply eject from the ship.

Tippia wrote:
Dirala wrote:
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.


The support fleet has to get rid of the attacking 5 ships. Cause the SC can't do anything really.
Thats what I'm saying. It's completly useless against smaller ships. I agree, that the super should not be able to take on a 20man fleet singlehanded, but with ..say 20 light Drones... its at least able to do something against a couple smaller ships.

When it comes to big Battles, thats all fine, cause the role of a SC is not to kill small ships. But 20 lights wont do you any good in a medium to big fight.



For the support fleet to get there and save the SC depends on how close and what comp the other fleet has for support. Giving it absolutely no chance of getting out is moronic.
FlameOfSurvival
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1222 - 2011-10-11 15:25:26 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.


AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER






BUT



AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.


That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?

To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.



and a 60b Titan? ^^

supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;)
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#1223 - 2011-10-11 15:27:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Misanth
Ganthrithor wrote:
Misanth wrote:
Exactly this. The only reason CCP is removing the drone bays is same reasons titans/dreads are losing theirs: CCP hates drones and been trying to remove the drones from capitals since 2007. Each time players have been "quite upset" (to say the least). This time tho, CCP can disguise their drone-removal under the flag of 'capital revamp'.

The drone removals has nothing to do with actual gameplay, CCP just want less drones around. Probably for performance issues, but instead of being honest about it, they repeatedly keep trying to keep their reasons hidden and just blatantly try remove drones at every chance possible.


I don't know that its due to a conspiracy theory-- if they wanted to reduce drone counts for performance reasons, the easiest thing to do would be to leave carriers / SCs with 5 drones each and give them a corresponding bonus to drone damage and hitpoints to make them functionally equal to ten or twenty drones with a fraction of the performance cost.


Not if the blobs are growing. 2k people now x5 = 10k drones. 4k people in future = 20k. The easier way for CCP to solve this long-term is to remove drones altogether.

I'm personally in favour of doing what you mention; reduce the amount of drones, increase their damage. It's what they did back when Drone Interfacing used to add +1 drone rather than +dmg. A good and welcome change. I would like to see this happen to all drones, including Fighters/FB's. The Revenant actually has a good core mechanic built in, in this regard. I just don't see CCP agree tho, why else would they keep removing drones? It makes no sense, they have the tools to make a sub-Fighter drone bay don't they? We have those fuelbays already. Removing them all just smells "we want no drones", since it's really not a gamebreaking issue and not a warranted nerf. Especially since the exact same thing happens to Dreads/Titans.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1224 - 2011-10-11 15:27:57 UTC
FlameOfSurvival wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.


AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER






BUT



AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.


That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?

To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.



and a 60b Titan? ^^

supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;)


Yea, don't even get me started on the fact that the pinacle of my races starship engineering can't launch 5 warrior II's

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Dirala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1225 - 2011-10-11 15:29:05 UTC
Velin Dhal wrote:
Dirala wrote:


The support fleet has to get rid of the attacking 5 ships. Cause the SC can't do anything really.
Thats what I'm saying. It's completly useless against smaller ships. I agree, that the super should not be able to take on a 20man fleet singlehanded, but with ..say 20 light Drones... its at least able to do something against a couple smaller ships.

When it comes to big Battles, thats all fine, cause the role of a SC is not to kill small ships. But 20 lights wont do you any good in a medium to big fight.



For the support fleet to get there and save the SC depends on how close and what comp the other fleet has for support. Giving it absolutely no chance of getting out is moronic.


Thats what I'm saying
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1226 - 2011-10-11 15:29:59 UTC
Dirala wrote:
Indeed, but "everyday life" in eve not only consists out of huge battles.
No, but that is something you have to take up with whomever decided that they can't be docked or parked or stowed somewhere safe.
Quote:
The support fleet has to get rid of the attacking 5 ships. Cause the SC can't do anything really.
Thats what I'm saying. It's completly useless against smaller ships. I agree, that the super should not be able to take on a 20man fleet singlehanded, but with ..say 20 light Drones... its at least able to do something against a couple smaller ships.
Nah. That's not its job, and it should simply stay away from those situations. See the Hulk vs. BC example above.
Velin Dhal wrote:
For the support fleet to get there and save the SC depends on how close and what comp the other fleet has for support. Giving it absolutely no chance of getting out is moronic.
No. What is moronic is for the SC to stray so far away from its support that it can't provide… well… support any more.
Velin Dhal
Zeonic CG
#1227 - 2011-10-11 15:30:05 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Velin Dhal wrote:
Apparently balance is anything you personally want it to be
No. In this case, I used your definition: bring the wrong thing and you're screwed — balance.

What's so strange about that one ship being completely defenceless against that gang? It's outnumbered, it didn't bring the right stuff to deal with the situation, and it didn't have the situational awareness to gtfo while there was time. Being completely defenceless in that situation is entirely appropriate.


The fact that if you still bring an SC solo again a large fleet, your still going to lose the SC. The point is that you should still be able to fight back. Otherwise no one is going to fly them. Not to mention that you don't gtfo too well in a SC. Its not as if you can just warp to the gate or dock. If your waiting for your cyno, where the **** are you going ? Not to mention it takes forever to align and warp anywhere.
Evil Celeste
#1228 - 2011-10-11 15:31:26 UTC
FlameOfSurvival wrote:
supercarrier in lowsec could still ECM Burst a HIC ;)


Yeah, kill its point immunity or remote ecm burst in lowsec.
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1229 - 2011-10-11 15:33:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadowsword
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.



If a solo random tackler or a small nano gang catch you, they still have to:

1/ Overpower your active tank.

2/ Chew out your millions upon millions of EHP. I suspect most of that gang would have run out of ammo long before you got to structure.

Whatever, it's going to take them time. Lots of it.

So the important question is, what are your alliance mates doing while you're tackled? If they do nothing, you lose it, and it's working as intended. If their batphone is more effective than your own, you lose it after some interesting fight, and again, it's working as intended. But it's not a small random nano gang that will have killed you, it will be a whole fleet. If your own batphone prevail, you live, and it's also working as intended.
Velin Dhal
Zeonic CG
#1230 - 2011-10-11 15:36:12 UTC
Shadowsword 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.



If a solo random tackler or a small nano gang catch you, they still have to:

1/ Overpower your active tank.

2/ Chew out your millions upon millions of EHP. I suspect most of that gang would have run out of ammo long before you got to structure.

Whatever, it's going to take them time. Lots of it.

So the important question is, what are your alliance mates doing while you're tackled? If they do nothing, you lose it, and it's working as intended. If their batphone is more effective than your own, you lose it after some interesting fight, and again, it's working as intended. If your own batphone prevail, you live, and it's also working as intended.


Single small ships should not be able to solo kill a Super Carrier. It is unrealistic.
iulixxi
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#1231 - 2011-10-11 15:36:14 UTC  |  Edited by: iulixxi
Grath Telkin wrote:
SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.


AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER






BUT



AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.


That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?

To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.


A 6 bil Jump Freighter can’t do that either, a 1 bil Freighter same thing …. What exactly is your point? The ship was not design for that … simple as that. A super is immune to EW, has an insane amount of HP and it was design to fight caps.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#1232 - 2011-10-11 15:37:47 UTC
Evil Celeste wrote:
Yes, this is exactly the thing most people are against - ability to fend of subcaps. Supercaps should not be able to do it easily, you should have support fleet for that.

If you gave them just "few" drones, with remote ecm bursts, neuts and "few" drones a squad of supercaps could completely clear floor with bunch of hics that are hoping to keep at least 1 or 2 of them.

Thats why Im for completely removing fighters from scs.


Have you ever sat in a mothership and tried to fend off subcaps? Two HIC's that know what they do can't be removed by a single mothership pilot. I usually flew my motherships with 3 officer neuts and an ECM burst, with ecm drones, obviously full flight of Fighters/FB's etc.. theoreticly: 2-3 HIC's that rotate ongrid bm's/warps, and rotate keeping their points, all staying at well enough range from me to keep their point up but make my drones suffer from travel time.. they could technicly keep me there indefinately.

Assuming this is lowsec, I could probably hope to get max align, then hit ECM burst and warp off. This situation requires the HICs not to bump me ofc, which they probably won't with just 2-3 of them and bouncing the drones between them. But they could easily maintain my three neuts and disable my ecm drones. A single HIC that gets attacked by Fighters (even if neuted) will just warp off and warp back in. He'll even tank them for a decent while.

"clear floor" only happens when the HIC pilots set orbit on the mom, stay on field, with their focused script up (or bubble in null, so they can't warp themselves) and don't communicate with the other HIC pilots to make sure there's always at least one point up. Those pilots don't deserve a kill.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Velin Dhal
Zeonic CG
#1233 - 2011-10-11 15:38:16 UTC
iulixxi wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
SERIOUSLY LETS PAY ATTENTION REALLY QUICK.


AN 900 MILLION ISK CARRIER CAN LAUNCH 10 WARRIOR 2'S TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM A SABER






BUT



AN 18 BILLION ISK SUPER CARRIER CAN'T.


That sounds fair and balanced and normal to everybody here that makes this game?

To be very clear, I do not own a supercarrier, and do not care about them whatsoever, I'm just trying to make sure we're all working with the same amount of sanity.


A 6 bil Jump Freighter can’t do that either, a 1 bil Freighter same thing …. What exactly is your point? The ship was not design for that … simple as that. A super is immune to EW, has an insane amount of HP and it was design to fight caps.


You do realize that JFs and Freighters are industrial haulers right ? Not combat ships ?
Evil Celeste
#1234 - 2011-10-11 15:38:41 UTC
Velin Dhal wrote:
It is unrealistic.


True, it wouldnt happen in real life. Oh wait...
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#1235 - 2011-10-11 15:38:57 UTC
Shadowsword wrote:
1/ Overpower your active tank.


There is no such thing in a supercarrier due to broken cap self rep.

Winner ATXI , 3rd place ATXII, winner ATXIII, 2nd ATXIV - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1236 - 2011-10-11 15:39:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Velin Dhal wrote:


Single small ships should not be able to solo kill a Super Carrier. It is unrealistic.


No, retards should always die when they're being ********.


However, having a version of a carrier that can launch light drones, and a more advanced version of a carrier that CAN'T, even though it costs 20x the amount of the base version, is whats dumb.



iulixxi wrote:


A 6 bil Jump Freighter can’t do that either, a 1 bil Freighter same thing …. What exactly is your point? The ship was not design for that … simple as that. A super is immune to EW, has an insane amount of HP and it was design to fight caps.



Carrier = Can launch standard drones

SUPERCarrier = Cant?

In the evolutionary scale of weapon design, while coming up with the bigger better version of something, they decided to scrap its small anti ship defenses?

And that seemed like a good idea?


I can only assume that the engineer in question would have since been shot for being so incredibly dumb that his breeding couldn't be tolerated for the sake of the human race.

When you make a super version of something you generally try to not make it worse than its standard counterpart.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1237 - 2011-10-11 15:39:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Velin Dhal wrote:
The point is that you should still be able to fight back.
Why? That's not what they're meant for, so why?
Quote:
Otherwise no one is going to fly them.
Sure they will, as long as there are appropriate targets for them where the SCs shine. And guess what? There are!
Bettoesai
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1238 - 2011-10-11 15:40:18 UTC
Napoleon Bonapart wrote:
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.


Wow people are still thinking that they are raising the fighters sig rad? Its their resolution not their radius!

"Sir I keep firing our planet destroying super weapon but I can't seem to hit that x-wing!"

Vile rat
Kari Kari
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1239 - 2011-10-11 15:40:26 UTC
Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:
I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.

It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.

This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship.


Pure Epic post here. CCP you better do this.
Klytior Am'jarhs
Amarrian Retribution
#1240 - 2011-10-11 15:43:01 UTC
Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:
I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.

It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.

This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship.


Why should you have something everybody else didn't get when other ships where balanced/nerfed.
I think you have had an unfair advantage long enough.
Training a account just to fly one ship in eve kinda proves the point that they are overpowered don't you think?