These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Interstellar travel, Capital RR, and Triage discussions
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#221 - 2012-07-28 20:44:09 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
No other T2 ship EHP exceeds the T1 as much as a supercap exceeds its T1.



Jesus christ.

Supercarriers are not T2 variants of carriers.

Literally no end to your ignorance, is there?
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#222 - 2012-07-28 21:16:33 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
No other T2 ship EHP exceeds the T1 as much as a supercap exceeds its T1.



Jesus christ.

Supercarriers are not T2 variants of carriers.

Literally no end to your ignorance, is there?

At this point I think it is fairly obvious Andy is either a very unfunny troll, or a complete idiot. Either way this thread is going nowhere, and we can all sleep easy knowing his terrible ideas will never come to pass.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#223 - 2012-07-28 21:58:23 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:

Supercarriers are not T2 variants of carriers.


Well, let's just put your theory to the test and see how right .. or wrong .. you are.
SC bonuses = carrier bonuses plus a couple others (more like T2)
SC cost >> carrier cost (more like T2)
SC hull similar to carrier hull (more like T2)
SC insurance % << carrier insurance % (more like T2)
SC skill requires Carrier level 3 while carrier requires level 1 (more similar to higher meta than to T2 but hey, whatever)
Base resists are equal (more like a meta variation)
Base SC EHP >> base carrier EHP (much stronger than T2 variation)
Both can use Triage (like T2)

So 6 of 8 tests show that it is more like a T2 variation, while 2 of them indicate similarities to a meta variation. Since T2 is meta 5, then all tests indicate that it is more like a higher meta version of a carrier than like an entirely different ship. Looks like I am right once again. The description may not say that the SC is a T2 or higher meta version, but all the tests do. Let's not get stuck on a single line which turns out not to be wrong by the relevant tests. There is so much more interesting material to discuss once the mind becomes open.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#224 - 2012-07-28 21:59:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Emperor Salazar
You're literally too stupid to grasp the concept of T2.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#225 - 2012-07-28 22:09:34 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:

Both can use Triage (like T2)


Shocked
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#226 - 2012-07-28 22:10:52 UTC
Please tell me you are just Grath's alt trolling us.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#227 - 2012-07-28 22:55:42 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Emperor Salazar wrote:

Supercarriers are not T2 variants of carriers.


Well, let's just put your theory to the test and see how right .. or wrong .. you are.
SC bonuses = carrier bonuses plus a couple others (more like T2)
SC cost >> carrier cost (more like T2)
SC hull similar to carrier hull (more like T2)
SC insurance % << carrier insurance % (more like T2)
SC skill requires Carrier level 3 while carrier requires level 1 (more similar to higher meta than to T2 but hey, whatever)
Base resists are equal (more like a meta variation)
Base SC EHP >> base carrier EHP (much stronger than T2 variation)
Both can use Triage (like T2)

So 6 of 8 tests show that it is more like a T2 variation, while 2 of them indicate similarities to a meta variation. Since T2 is meta 5, then all tests indicate that it is more like a higher meta version of a carrier than like an entirely different ship. Looks like I am right once again. The description may not say that the SC is a T2 or higher meta version, but all the tests do. Let's not get stuck on a single line which turns out not to be wrong by the relevant tests. There is so much more interesting material to discuss once the mind becomes open.

But supercarriers aren't build from t2 blueprints, you don't use a thanatos to build a nyx, and the supercarrier info says it's tech level is ONE.
ilammy
Amarr Empire
#228 - 2012-07-28 23:17:56 UTC  |  Edited by: ilammy
Andy Landen wrote:
Supercapital tanks are already way too strong, and I do want them weaker.
By quadrupling the indefinitely supported RR strength, lol?

Andy Landen wrote:
No other T2 ship EHP exceeds the T1 as much as a supercap exceeds its T1. That is another major issue with Supercaps Online.
For this it is better to observe the scaling of the EHP/DPS ratio. Even the dreadnoughts roughly fit into the sequence. If the supercaps did too, they would have ~120k DPS. This is a better solution to Supercaps Online: boost titans and supercarriers destructive power to 100k DPS vs supercaps, 10k DPS vs caps (and sovstructures), lol-dps against subcaps.
But something tells me that this would make them used (and shot to wrecks) even more infrequently.

Or yeah, lower the EHP and boost the DPS, but not in ten times. Like 40k DPS and 10 mil EHP average pre-fleetboosters.

Maybe. That seems kinda logical to push them in line with other classes when it comes to same class vs same class battles.

Andy Landen wrote:
I personally don't think that CCP designed Triage for subcap battles specifically, and they certainly didn't say that explicitly.
My bad. CCP should never say they designed something for a specifical reason in a sandbox. Read 'is meant for' as 'seems to help a lot with'. And after all, the triage with its restriction of RR was brought into the game when 10 dreadnoughts were considered an alliance capfleet. But with time the uses evolved into what we see now: subcap support mainly. It is fine, carriers are not useless, triage has not lost its value in general.

Andy Landen wrote:
I don't think carriers ruin the sub-cap world anymore than BS's ruin the sub-BS world. Yes, BS have omg-super effective dps compared to cruisers, but they aren't ruining or unbalancing anything in the sub-BS world.
Let's see... A typical cruiser DPS: about 400-500. A typical battleship DPS: 700-1000. About 80% growth. (Plus not so crucially important – for a damage dealer – lock time difference: three times faster for a cruiser.)
Now a triage carrier and a logi ship: 9000 vs 1920 rep alpha (370% growth), 2400-3600 vs 384 raw rep power per second (680% growth), plus vital rapidity of reaction via 3 vs 7 seconds of minimal time before the reps kick in.
Yes, it is fairly even scaling.

Andy Landen wrote:
Best wishes in your 1.8 bil ISK per week ratting to pay for a new carrier plus fit every week.
You do want your toy, don't you?

> SC hull similar to carrier hull (more like T2)
Uh, sorry if this surprises you. In what damn part are they similar? Jumpdrive?
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#229 - 2012-07-30 04:37:24 UTC
ilammy wrote:

> SC hull similar to carrier hull (more like T2)
Uh, sorry if this surprises you. In what damn part are they similar? Jumpdrive?


They have the same general shapes, colors, and styles. I think the Nyx looks cooler than the thanny though. The hulls have large similarities in appearance.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#230 - 2012-07-30 08:54:17 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
ilammy wrote:

> SC hull similar to carrier hull (more like T2)
Uh, sorry if this surprises you. In what damn part are they similar? Jumpdrive?


They have the same general colors

With the exception of the niddy and the hel (which do look somewhat similar) this is pretty much the ONLY thing you got right. (also this actually works against your argument because t2 ships use different color schemes than their t1 counterparts)
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#231 - 2012-07-30 13:37:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Astroniomix wrote:

With the exception of the niddy and the hel (which do look somewhat similar) this is pretty much the ONLY thing you got right. (also this actually works against your argument because t2 ships use different color schemes than their t1 counterparts)


Take the Archon and replace the port side with a command center. Take the Chimera, remove the sides, and add a command center.. okay, you may have to stretch to see the similarities but I have to admit that while the Wyvern is very different, it is also very cool! Okay, so I got it wrong with the Caldari line concerning hull similarities. And the SCs don't have the traditional T2 paint jobs or the traditional T2 resistance increases, both indicative of a meta variation. Which still reinforces my point that carriers and SCs are very similar ships and should not be so different in ehp. SCs either need to be made T2 variations or the bonuses, capabilities, skills, etc. need to be entirely shifted to represent an entirely different ship line and purpose. I vote for the former while bringing the ehps of the carrier and SC onto similar level (up, if the DD is not changed).

PS, I never said that SCs were T2. Never said that. Only made an analogy. Read it for yourself.
Andrew Landen wrote:
Supercapital tanks are already way too strong, and I do want them weaker. In the meantime, the triage changes attempt to benefit the carrier more than the super with flat hp bonuses instead of percentage hp bonuses. No other T2 ship EHP exceeds the T1 as much as a supercap exceeds its T1. That is another major issue with Supercaps Online. Yes, I know the cost is so much more, but so is the cost of most other T2s compared to their T1 counterparts. Cost doesn't justify making the T2 OP because that creates P2W and unbalances the game.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Hiyora Akachi
Blood Alcohol Content
T O P S H E L F
#232 - 2012-07-30 19:12:30 UTC
I agree, I feel that dreadnoughts and Titans should not have a big EHP differential.


They're both big combat ships, plus, look at them! They're so similar! Titans are obviously T2 Dreads.



Oh, also, -shoots Andy in the crotch- no children for you.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#233 - 2012-07-31 12:32:38 UTC
ilammy wrote:
Let's see... A typical cruiser DPS: about 400-500. A typical battleship DPS: 700-1000. About 80% growth. (Plus not so crucially important – for a damage dealer – lock time difference: three times faster for a cruiser.)
Now a triage carrier and a logi ship: 9000 vs 1920 rep alpha (370% growth), 2400-3600 vs 384 raw rep power per second (680% growth), plus vital rapidity of reaction via 3 vs 7 seconds of minimal time before the reps kick in.
Yes, it is fairly even scaling.


I know you are trying to make a point, but the carrier is not doing 9000 RR / 5s because a) it needs 6 slots to be filled with capital RR and it only has 5, b) the ship needs the capacitor to power all 6 cap RR, and c) the ship needs enough CPU/powergrid to online them all. Carriers only have 5 slots in the highs to start with and will never see 9000 RR / 5s. Typical carrier fitting has some of those slots fit with a) smartbombs, b) neuts, c) dcu's, d) triage, etc. 5 cap RR requires around 852 GJ/s for shield Chimera and about 765 GJ/s for armor Archon. Fitting for tank with extenders/trimarks in the highs puts the typical carrier at around 100 GJ/s (Chimera) - 140 GJ/s (Archon). Fitting specifically for spider tank leaves the carrier very vulnerable to being alpha'd (can't refit rigs on the field). I am not saying that it is impossible to fully power a full rack of cap RR in the high slots, but it can only put out 7500 RR / 5s (T1-non-triage) and it comes at a substantial cost in tank and cost in faction mods and implants/drugs.

Also, the reps per second are: 1500 RR / s (5 cap RR) vs 384 RR / s (5 Lg RR). Looks like about 3.91x to me.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#234 - 2012-07-31 13:56:19 UTC
Let it go man.

Let it go.
ilammy
Amarr Empire
#235 - 2012-07-31 14:54:43 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
...
My calculations were about a triage carrier supporting subcapital fleet.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#236 - 2012-08-01 02:32:15 UTC
ilammy wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
...
My calculations were about a triage carrier supporting subcapital fleet.

Them are apples and oranges. A triage carrier cannot recieve RR like a traditional sub-cap logi, so as long as we are all clear that the comparison is merely academic concerning the amount of RR a sub-cap could receive from a single ship, then yeah, ok. Plus your numbers are still off. The Chimera can barely sustain 3 cap RR (3600 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. The Archon can barely hold 4 cap RR (4800 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. But if you assume only 2-3 cap RR sustained then I guess your numbers correctly compare the outgoing RR between the two ship classes.

To be fair, the dps baseline should probably look at cruiser dps vs dread dps, since the logistics ship is technically a cruiser What? and the carrier is technically a capital ship Blink .

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#237 - 2012-08-01 04:09:13 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
ilammy wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
...
My calculations were about a triage carrier supporting subcapital fleet.

Them are apples and oranges. A triage carrier cannot recieve RR like a traditional sub-cap logi, so as long as we are all clear that the comparison is merely academic concerning the amount of RR a sub-cap could receive from a single ship, then yeah, ok. Plus your numbers are still off. The Chimera can barely sustain 3 cap RR (3600 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. The Archon can barely hold 4 cap RR (4800 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. But if you assume only 2-3 cap RR sustained then I guess your numbers correctly compare the outgoing RR between the two ship classes.

To be fair, the dps baseline should probably look at cruiser dps vs dread dps, since the logistics ship is technically a cruiser What? and the carrier is technically a capital ship Blink .

How is a 20k dps tank "minimal" by any stretch of the imagination?
ilammy
Amarr Empire
#238 - 2012-08-01 08:33:38 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Them are apples and oranges. A triage carrier cannot recieve RR like a traditional sub-cap logi, so as long as we are all clear that the comparison is merely academic concerning the amount of RR a sub-cap could receive from a single ship, then yeah, ok. Plus your numbers are still off. The Chimera can barely sustain 3 cap RR (3600 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. The Archon can barely hold 4 cap RR (4800 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. But if you assume only 2-3 cap RR sustained then I guess your numbers correctly compare the outgoing RR between the two ship classes.

To be fair, the dps baseline should probably look at cruiser dps vs dread dps, since the logistics ship is technically a cruiser What? and the carrier is technically a capital ship Blink .
Learn to read, please.

I was saying about 2400–3600 RR/s of course meaning 2 active modules and 1 pulsing. (I would not bother saying again that carriers aren't logistic cruisers.)

And about baseline. Technically I was answering on this:
Quote:
I don't think carriers ruin the sub-cap world anymore than BS's ruin the sub-BS world. Yes, BS have omg-super effective dps compared to cruisers, but they aren't ruining or unbalancing anything in the sub-BS world.
to show that if 'BS have omg-super effective dps compared to cruisers' (+80%), then a carriers have OMFG-OMEGA EFFECTIVE (+450%) repping capabilites compared to logisitcs.
And about dreadnoughts you should consider that they can outdamage cruises/battleships in 5+ times only versus a semi-stationary target (slow, or stupid with low transversal, or fixed with webs and painted).
Also, you said that stuff as if it excuses you ruining subcap world more with new triage mechanics, because the dreadnoughts can (with certain non-trivial circumstances present) ruin it more dramatically than carriers. Can you see a flaw in this logic?
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#239 - 2012-08-05 22:08:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
ilammy wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Them are apples and oranges. A triage carrier cannot recieve RR like a traditional sub-cap logi, so as long as we are all clear that the comparison is merely academic concerning the amount of RR a sub-cap could receive from a single ship, then yeah, ok. Plus your numbers are still off. The Chimera can barely sustain 3 cap RR (3600 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. The Archon can barely hold 4 cap RR (4800 RR/s) in triage with minimal tank. But if you assume only 2-3 cap RR sustained then I guess your numbers correctly compare the outgoing RR between the two ship classes.

To be fair, the dps baseline should probably look at cruiser dps vs dread dps, since the logistics ship is technically a cruiser What? and the carrier is technically a capital ship Blink .


Learn to read, please.
I was saying about 2400–3600 RR/s of course meaning 2 active modules and 1 pulsing. (I would not bother saying again that carriers aren't logistic cruisers.)

I agree that carriers aren't (currently) logistics cruisers and yet their entire design revolves around logistics bonuses, and they really don't do anything else well. meh dps compared to other battlefield caps. meh tank in the face of the super dps. No ewar bonuses. So you can refit off of them and they can carry 10 fit cruisers or 2 fit BS, but those non-logi bonuses are very secondary abilities because no-one fits for those roles and those roles can be filled off of the battlefield. The Rooks trick of refiting during combat for high resists on specific damage types to tank impressive damage demonstrated the tactical use of refitting and Triage pulsing both of which speaks volumes of logistics work adaptations to problematic mechanics.

ilammy wrote:

And about baseline. Technically I was answering on this:
Quote:
I don't think carriers ruin the sub-cap world anymore than BS's ruin the sub-BS world. Yes, BS have omg-super effective dps compared to cruisers, but they aren't ruining or unbalancing anything in the sub-BS world.
to show that if 'BS have omg-super effective dps compared to cruisers' (+80%), then a carriers have OMFG-OMEGA EFFECTIVE (+450%) repping capabilites compared to logisitcs.
And about dreadnoughts you should consider that they can outdamage cruises/battleships in 5+ times only versus a semi-stationary target (slow, or stupid with low transversal, or fixed with webs and painted).
Also, you said that stuff as if it excuses you ruining subcap world more with new triage mechanics, because the dreadnoughts can (with certain non-trivial circumstances present) ruin it more dramatically than carriers. Can you see a flaw in this logic?

Webs, TPs, and Neuts should not be difficult to come by for your primary and secondary targets. Dreads should own BS for sure. How does the dread dps compare to the cruiser dps? Cruiser is doing well to deliver 500 dps. The dread can deliver over 14k dps. That's 28 times or 2700% more dps than a cruiser, both accessing the fleet's dps tank. Care to comment on how effective the dread is with those numbers before us? Caps don't ruin anything. The alpha of a Moros is over 60k, but that won't alpha a BS. A Titan can easily alpha a Moros though. And a triage carrier doesn't even get fleet tank from other triaged carriers. Logistics cruisers don't fit for local tank but triage carrier has no other choice but to include local tank as well.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#240 - 2012-08-05 22:16:39 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
A Titan can easily alpha a Moros though.

So you're going to keep on claiming this fallacy, alongside your "make carriers OP through OP triage" etc suggestion?

Okay, then.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat