These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Minmatar Capitals are being re-worked

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Headerman
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2011-10-12 01:40:04 UTC
Hi guys,

CCP Tallest is giving a lot of attention to Minmatar capitals and how they can be re-worked. He will be putting up a post sometime in the near future about it on the Test Server forum. Please post here or there as to what you would like to see re-done on Minmatar caps

Australian Fanfest Event https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=90062
Goose99
#2 - 2011-10-12 01:42:55 UTC
Let me guess, you're building those?Roll
Headerman
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2011-10-12 01:43:55 UTC
no

Australian Fanfest Event https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=90062
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2011-10-12 01:54:58 UTC
This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer.
Headerman
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2011-10-12 01:57:14 UTC
Mfume Apocal wrote:
This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer.


They already do. One thing i was thinking of though is creating a new implant set just for shield amount. If that was available, it would go great with the Hel

Australian Fanfest Event https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=90062
Songbird
#6 - 2011-10-12 02:07:11 UTC
maybe instead of new implants just cut off the slaves from affecting caps and super caps - it will go great with the new "more vulnerable(and in touch with their feelings) caps
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#7 - 2011-10-12 05:53:11 UTC
Headerman wrote:
Mfume Apocal wrote:
This is more generalized, but Crystals should affect capitals shield boosters if slaves affect capital buffer.


They already do. One thing i was thinking of though is creating a new implant set just for shield amount. If that was available, it would go great with the Hel

It would also go great with Alphafleet, Drakefleet, Shieldfleet, Tengufleet and Welpfleet fleet doctrines. I think a lot of PVE boats, such as the Caracal, Drake, Nighthawk and possibly Sleipnir and Tengu would benefit from such implants as well.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#8 - 2011-10-12 05:53:48 UTC
Songbird wrote:
maybe instead of new implants just cut off the slaves from affecting caps and super caps - it will go great with the new "more vulnerable(and in touch with their feelings) caps

The correct solution to game balance or design problems is very rarely "remove content," especially in a game already so starved for content as EVE Online.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
CCP Spitfire
C C P
C C P Alliance
#9 - 2011-10-12 06:45:16 UTC
Headerman, thanks for making this thread! I'll make sure that good and constructive feedback will be passed to the development team.

CCP Spitfire | Marketing & Sales Team @ccp_spitfire
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#10 - 2011-10-12 06:48:56 UTC
I personally really like the Nidhoggur. I don't know much about the Hel, but the Nidhoggur is probably the coolest, or at least the most realistic and functional, of all the carriers. I also like that it has bonuses to both armor and shield logistics, which make it pretty awesome and versatile.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Aamrr
#11 - 2011-10-12 07:14:45 UTC
Quoting this from the old forums...
Am I the only one that doesn't see a problem here? Someone has to get the worst supercapital. There's four supercapitals, and as they're naturally homogenous, they're inevitably going to get a pecking order.

  1. Gallente are the drone race. They get the best supercarrier -- or at least the most damaging one.

  2. Amarrians are the flying brick race. They get the tankiest supercarrier. If slaves get nerfed, the Aeon will fall slightly behind the Wyvern, but will have the thematically appropriate capacitor advantage.

  3. Defensively, the Caldari are close behind the Amarr, but with the usual capacitor-related drawbacks that shield tanking entails.

  4. Minmatar lag at the back, as their racial combat philosophies are completely and utterly foreign to supercarrier combat.

The Minmatar specialize in fast, nimble hit-and-run combat with superior interdiction and and flexible damage application (good tracking/falloff). Capital ships are none of these. At best, you can argue that their turret ships should be able to do the most damage. Looking at the damage potential of the Ragnarok and Naglfar, this isn't really a concern.

They are not a particularly drone oriented race, possessing no ships with drone bonuses of any kind (in contrast to the Gallente and Amarr). Indeed, they possess only ONE hull capable of fielding a full flight of heavy drones (the Typhoon and its T2 cousin, the Panther). The Minmatar can't be the best at everything. This is an area where you need to take one for the sake of game balance. Even the lore supports this.
Aamrr
#12 - 2011-10-12 07:15:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Aamrr
I will concede that there are specific issues relevant to shield tanking that make the Hel and Wyvern unattractive. These are legitimate, and probably should be addressed. In no particular order, they are:

  • Slave implants. Really, does it need to be said? The best option is probably to make them not work on supercapital ships. Pilots with the ability to fly supercapitals should probably have the implants removed and placed in their cargohold or hangar, as appropriate.

  • Gang link bonuses. Session change timers and the nature of jump drives deny shield supercapitals the benefit they should derive from these effects. Additional shield hit points should be given relative to the current shield integrity, as is the case with armor tanking.

  • Deadspace omni-resist hardeners. Armor-tankers have access to A-type passive, omni-resist modules. Shield tankers must either downgrade to faction or pay a significant premium for officer modules. (Both tanking styles have access to X-type specific hardeners.)

  • Capital shield boosters and (lesser extent) transporters. These really do take an inordinate amount of CPU. Please remember that powergrid scales exponentially with ship size, while CPU scales only linearly. This is obviously more relevant to the Nidhoggur than the Hel, but is relevant to the Chimera as well.

  • Resist bonuses vs. RR. A ship with a 25% resist bonus receives 33% more EHP per cycle than a ship without one. A Nidhoggur repairs only 25% more than its fleetmates. In a spider fleet, Archons and Chimeras clearly have the advantage, even before you consider alpha resistance. If you want to retain the RR-bonus, you should consider improving it to 7.5%. In the interests of making triage survivable, you could also consider extending this to a local tank bonus. This is in flavor with the many active-tank bonused ships like the Cyclone, Sleipnir, and Maelstrom.

    • If you're looking to boost the Nidhoggur or Hel, start with one of those.

    If you're looking for a flavorful alternative to the RR-bonus, look at Jump Drive Operation. The Minmatar are known for having light, nimble, and mobile ships. Translating this to a capital ship means a more efficient warp drive. Making it the only carrier to enter the field with more than 1/3 capacitor would be interesting and flavorful.
    Lorginir
    #13 - 2011-10-12 07:23:08 UTC
    Make Caldari capitals useful instead of boosting Minmatar.

    Licensed 07.06.2010 R.I.P 10.06.2012 nevermore.
    Aamrr
    #14 - 2011-10-12 07:40:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Aamrr
    Lorginir wrote:
    Make Caldari capitals useful instead of boosting Minmatar.

    Quite. It's really not an issue with Minmatar capitals as it is with shield tanking capitals in general. You'll notice that almost all of my suggestions are just as relevant to the Chimera as they are to the Nidhoggur.

    Edit1: Though the topic of discussion seems to indicate it's also a case of squeaky wheel getting the grease...
    Edit2: Since it's probably going to come up later in the thread, passive tanking doesn't necessarily mean we can't have shield-slave implants. Those implants would just have to come with a corresponding reduction in shield recharge rate. Whether or not this is a good idea is another matter entirely.
    Edit3: On the subject of slave implants, please do consider whether you want to remove their benefit on all capital ships, or just supercapitals. A slave set currently retails for over twice the cost of a carrier before insurance. There's nothing particularly absurd about tripling your ship cost to get another 50% hp. On a ship with a 20 billion isk hull, on the other hand...
    Arkady Sadik
    Gradient
    Electus Matari
    #15 - 2011-10-12 08:12:32 UTC
    Amrr basically has the right point, but I disagree on the consequences: The Minmatar racial priorities do not fit to capital / supercapital warfare, so they need reworking. I like the current split tank (ama) / tank (cal) / damage (gal) / gang helper (min), and this can be worked on, but the differences should not be as drastic as they are today. E.g. the Amarr and Caldari ships should have some better tank, not triple the tank. Amarr and Caldari should have similar tanks (just armor/shield). Etc.

    On the other hand, shield tanking caps and supercaps need some rework to be comparable to armor. Losing a quarter of your buffer on jump-in is just not good ;-)

    I posted something regarding carrier balance here:
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=15674

    Dreads are mostly balanced (unless you introduce the 8.9k dps Moros as per devblog, that isn't), except that missiles are horribly underpowered when trying to hit sub-capitals (either make all guns that bad or make missiles similar to turrets). Oh, and dreads likely shouldn't have tracking issues with capitals and especially supercapitals, as the latter can't be webbed or painted.
    Aamrr
    #16 - 2011-10-12 08:44:45 UTC
    Triple the tank? Seriously? Relative to the Thanatos, the Archon trades a midslot for a low and a 25% resist bonus. In practice, that means ~5% better cap recharge and 33% stronger tank at the expense of fighter damage. It's fine to argue statistics, but at least make them factual.

    Addressing the CPU consumption of capital shield boosters and transporters seems a far better route to addressing fitting disparities between armor and shield-tanked capital ships. Nerfing an already marginalized ship class hardly seems like the correct route to take here -- particularly when the recent doomsday change makes them the premier target for instant death...
    Meltmind2
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #17 - 2011-10-12 08:44:54 UTC
    For the Naglfar: adding a 3d turret hardpoint (and removing the launcher slots obviously).
    - It would bring the Nag more in line with the post-patch Moros, although the Moros will still out-dps all the other dreads.
    - It would remove the need to train up for a subpar weapon system on a hull that doesn't give it any bonusses anyway.
    - It would require a new shipmodel (but that could be in the pipeline already right?!)
    - Turrets are cooler then missiles.
    Limvala Adur
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #18 - 2011-10-12 09:34:38 UTC
    I'd like to see Minmatar capitals doing something new and unique. I don't like seeing more of the same with different hulls.
    Dorian Wylde
    Imperial Academy
    Amarr Empire
    #19 - 2011-10-12 12:39:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Dorian Wylde
    Lyris Nairn wrote:
    Songbird wrote:
    maybe instead of new implants just cut off the slaves from affecting caps and super caps - it will go great with the new "more vulnerable(and in touch with their feelings) caps

    The correct solution to game balance or design problems is very rarely "remove content," especially in a game already so starved for content as EVE Online.



    This. I would rather see more implant sets affect capital ships. Would make things more dynamic.

    Limvala Adur wrote:
    I'd like to see Minmatar capitals doing something new and unique. I don't like seeing more of the same with different hulls.



    They're the only ones that get a bonus to armor and shield repairs, how is that not unique? Some people might complain that it just makes them the best for PoS repping, but considering how important that can be, I really don't see an issue.

    Meltmind2 wrote:
    For the Naglfar: adding a 3d turret hardpoint (and removing the launcher slots obviously).
    - It would bring the Nag more in line with the post-patch Moros, although the Moros will still out-dps all the other dreads.
    - It would remove the need to train up for a subpar weapon system on a hull that doesn't give it any bonusses anyway.
    - It would require a new shipmodel (but that could be in the pipeline already right?!)
    - Turrets are cooler then missiles.



    I would love to see this. 1 laser dread, 1 hybrid dread, 1 missile dread, and 1 projectile dread. Don't get me wrong, I love the Typhoon. It's my favorite ship, and I fly it old school: 4 torpedoes, 4 autocannons. But dreads are a different species. Keep them balanced, use the Revelation as the template since it has no reload time. Figure out how much damage it can put out during a single siege cycle, and work out the other 3 weapon systems to that number.

    Keep up the good work CCP, and thanks to all the blues and reds who keep coming to the forums and talking to us.
    Aamrr
    #20 - 2011-10-12 13:01:31 UTC
    Dorian Wylde wrote:
    [quote=Lyris Nairn]Figure out how much damage it can put out during a single siege cycle, and work out the other 3 weapon systems to that number.


    This is an astoundingly bad idea. Projectiles have massive advantages over lasers and hybrids in their capacitor independence and damage type selection. Relative to Hybrids, they get massively improved falloff. Relative to lasers, significantly better tracking.

    There's a reason why autocannons have the worst DPS values in their short-range turret lineup. Removing this would be a balance nightmare.
    123Next pageLast page