These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Norto Azermoth
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2001 - 2011-10-13 23:59:35 UTC
Good old CCP... always overdoing things, even nerfs... Cry
They just grabbed that nerf bat.. started hitting... and realised shoving it up the supercapitals ass was more effective to cripple it.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#2002 - 2011-10-14 02:10:08 UTC
xxxak wrote:
Jita Bloodtear wrote:
The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.

The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:

Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise.


This is a great point


No. It is not a great point. It's ridiculous. In this scenario you have a guy in a supercap and was disconnected for FOUR HOURS. So you get logged while attacking in a 20 billion isk ship and you can't get logged back in for four hours?? That's not realistic at all. Even if there was a real reasion server side for him to DC, and assuming the GMs didn't reimburse the loss, he still would have been able to log back in within that time frame. The odds of this happening at all are very slim. The odds of a supercap pilot not being able to log back in for four hours are astronomical. This situation could only affect a tiny micro-fraction of people... say one a year... and you want to accommodate that one person and alter the entire mechanic for that? That's just stupid.

John Hand wrote:
Goose Sokarad wrote:
Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.


A 20bil isk ship should be able to deal with any situation, even if its to a limited degree.


Yah... well maybe they aren't worth 20 billion. You're working the market backwards, my man... an EvE pilot can only deal with other EvE pilots. I blew up a faction fit Navy Raven on my own faction warfare team one time because I am a d-bag and he was only a month old and had a faction fit navy raven. He should have been able to deal with that... but he couldn't. Those are the most tasty tears in the world. Remember: there's always two sides to a conflict. One side has tears, the other great satisfaction.

Speaking of tears... this threadnaught is full of them. I've enjoyed them immensely... but the only people speaking here now are sitting in supercaps as I type. The rest of us are amused and excited about CCP finally making 0.0 the wild west again and we're pumped. (The "we" I speak of has mostly stopped following this thread... I'm here mostly for market considerations but I had to interject because I think those that aren't following this thread anymore should have some representation)

Signatures should be used responsibly...
steveking
Rainbows in the Darkness
#2003 - 2011-10-14 04:09:21 UTC
come on people,its just a game!!
Aase Nord
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2004 - 2011-10-14 05:21:54 UTC
CCP is doing it now.
Hitting older players with multiple accounts rigth in their gutts.
I guess many are going to just let their super pilots die in their ships , use isk they needed to run their supers on plex for their alts.
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
#2005 - 2011-10-14 06:32:36 UTC
I again reiterate, with the changes on the Supercarriers, they need to be able to dock. Without the ability to rat or engage in anything other than anti capital/anti structure warfare which is such a limited role you need to allow them to dock so that the player can use the character in other ways, otherwise they'll just let those accounts lapse while not on campaign, costing CCP money.
Nathanial Victor
Pelennor Guard
#2006 - 2011-10-14 06:33:58 UTC
What? CCP finally fixing stuff?
People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?

Excellent.

They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.

These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP.
Aase Nord
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2007 - 2011-10-14 06:37:29 UTC
Nathanial Victor wrote:
What? CCP finally fixing stuff?
People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?

Excellent.

They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.

These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP.


You sound like a goon.......
Nathanial Victor
Pelennor Guard
#2008 - 2011-10-14 07:16:22 UTC
Aase Nord wrote:
Nathanial Victor wrote:
What? CCP finally fixing stuff?
People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?

Excellent.

They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.

These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP.


You sound like a goon.......


a goon?

You sound like an idiot.

Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha.

And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why?
Aase Nord
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2009 - 2011-10-14 07:30:14 UTC
Nathanial Victor wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
Nathanial Victor wrote:
What? CCP finally fixing stuff?
People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?

Excellent.

They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.

These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP.


You sound like a goon.......


a goon?

You sound like an idiot.

Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha.

And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why?


oops. Im sorry.
I can see you got hurt there.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2010 - 2011-10-14 07:35:05 UTC
Nathanial Victor wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
Nathanial Victor wrote:
What? CCP finally fixing stuff?
People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?

Excellent.

They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.

These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP.


You sound like a goon.......


a goon?

You sound like an idiot.

Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha.

And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why?


People who bot themselves into supercaps are Very Important Internet People, and CCP should bend over and pander to them at every opportunity or they will cry.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Ender Sai
Perkone
Caldari State
#2011 - 2011-10-14 08:29:18 UTC
Supercaps are just horrible.

They need a buff and a nerf;

Nerf: they should not be all and end all of 0.0 warfare.

Buff: pilots should be able to own one without them hogging a toon. (ie, dock them, hide them in a secure subspace pocket/ wormhole/ kestrel cargo hold exiting jita 4-4/ whatever).

Additionally, if you think supercaps are the Eve end game you're playing eve wrong. I'm also judging the way you play eve. I'm also entitled to my opinion. It's also unfortunate that I'm sharing it. My grammar is also horrible. Mostly I don't care about supercaps but I'm glad that they're getting the nerfbat.

TL;DR: -
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2012 - 2011-10-14 08:32:09 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Nathanial Victor wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
Nathanial Victor wrote:
What? CCP finally fixing stuff?
People too adjusted to their broken ships crying tears?

Excellent.

They should leave that fighter nerf as is. Their fighters will hit the bs targets just fine with some painting support or a painter module fitted.

These are much needed changes across the board. Good stuff CCP.


You sound like a goon.......


a goon?

You sound like an idiot.

Oh I get it, anyone that doesn't agree with you is painted with the same brush. Gotcha.

And with that attitude we should all care what you think... why?


People who bot themselves into supercaps are Very Important Internet People, and CCP should bend over and pander to them at every opportunity or they will cry.



A large alliance alliance member accusing others of botting , O.o.

With the changes scars will be able to kill BS ,yes they wil, but if the BS gang isnt a tard and doenst kill their fighters they deserve to die.
Goose Sokarad
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#2013 - 2011-10-14 08:33:29 UTC
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
Goose Sokarad wrote:
Obsidian you want to keep supers a swiss army knife by giving them normal drones to deal with ANY situation which isnt balanced.

There isnt anything wrong with the new logoff mechanics if you die because you logged off with aggression and didnt relog to deal with the aggression you deserve to die if someone finds you.Only bad thing with this is if your internet goes down that would be frustrating,but i wouldnt fly a super unless i could afford to lose it.



it meeting halfway.

IT's a very limited swiss army knife. Sure it would have all the tools but only 2 of the blades are metal, the rest are plastic.

25 light / medium / heavy / sentry / ewar drones. IF that seems to be too extreme limit it to a full fighter bay of 25 of fighters and FB and have a seperate drone bay that's 1250m³ for regular drones. That seems like a lot of drone bay but a full flight of 25 heavies is 625m³.

Anyway, Im trying to work for a well balanced compromise here. Sure they will be versatile but not as much as they are now. As for the comment of a swiss army knife, yes it would be a swiss army knife still, except it would have 2 blades and the screwdriver, wine opener, scissors would all be made of plastic.


Obsidian cap killers shouldnt have the option to get away in a 1v1 situation from anything that can hold them.A titan is loosing that ability and the same should apply to a super.Just because something is expensive that doesnt mean it should be able to deal with anything that is a threat to it.If people use supers and titans they should need a support fleet to keep them safe from ships that can hold them.
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#2014 - 2011-10-14 08:50:57 UTC
will trade my supers in for old school nano's

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2015 - 2011-10-14 09:12:53 UTC
Dreads without siege mode are utterly useless, and will be even more after this change.

A complete revision is needed. Dreads are supposed to be the line combat ships, those you put forward to absorb fire away from your support/command capitals as well as dish out signifiant damage on their own, but they are made into space trebuchets!

They are DREADNOUGHTS. I didn't train for them so I could park myself around a POS, go in siege, press F1 and go read a book. I trained for them because I wanted to be part of cap battles like I do in subcap battles with a battleship.

Give them back their role, CCP, unnerf their normal mode. Make them do 2500 dps in normal and 5000 dps in siege mode, and nerf XL guns base tracking and sig res so that normal-mode won't hit any battleship, and siege mode will hit only unmoving things. That nerf would also deal with the titan tracking issue.
Sangard
Bunny Industry Group
#2016 - 2011-10-14 09:41:07 UTC
fighters are cruiser size and they should be able to hit sub-caps. Otherwiese they are just useless.

Issue with fighters are there EHP. Bring them in line with an unfitted T1 cruiser. Create room for new/other tactics against super caps and do not nerf them that way, because Its a boring and uninspired way of balancing.

If supers are only good for sov shooting, which is boring anyway, it's not worth the money for most players.
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#2017 - 2011-10-14 10:07:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganthrithor
Scatim Helicon wrote:
iulixxi wrote:
Jazzmyn wrote:
I mean, in real life for example “Bismarck” didn’t have any trouble spanking smaller class vessels.


Bad example buddy (Bismarck was a battleship not a Carrier - or super carrier for that matter, it was a faction BS P) ... you do realise that he was always in fleet with a HAC (Prinz Eugen) just to be heavily damaged by a Carrier (HMS Ark Royal) later the final blow was made by BS'es ... Lol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Bismarck


Even better, the Bismark was completely unable to track and shoot down any of the Swordfish launched from HMS Ark Royal which torpedoed her rudder and sealed her fate.

Goodness me, a large, powerful, expensive ship being unable to engage smaller attackers and hence becoming vulnerable to them! Just like supercaps in the forthcoming rebalance!


Then again, this could be put down to the skill and or luck of the swordfish pilots, as Bismark was equipped with anti-aircraft weapons. It's almost as if the provision of limited defenses against smaller attackers wasn't enough to escape the consequences of a concerted attack! Sort of like how any competent dictor pilot should be able to avoid being blown up by a Supercarrier...

You see, EVE online is literally the battle of the Atlantic because...


Sangard wrote:

Issue with fighters are there EHP. Bring them in line with an unfitted T1 cruiser.


Fighter EHP is fine. The other day, a hostile carrier sitting on a station deployed fighters to shoot an anchorable bubble of mine 100km off the undock. I proceeded to kill three of his fighters in my battleship before he could recall them, while my mate in a cruiser picked off another. If a measly two ships can take out 40% of a carrier's offensive capabilities in the time it takes him to recall his fighters, I doubt fighters "need an ehp nerf."

Don't punish carrier pilots for peoples' general lack of competence.
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2018 - 2011-10-14 11:15:31 UTC
Mecinia Lua wrote:
I again reiterate, with the changes on the Supercarriers, they need to be able to dock. Without the ability to rat or engage in anything other than anti capital/anti structure warfare which is such a limited role you need to allow them to dock so that the player can use the character in other ways, otherwise they'll just let those accounts lapse while not on campaign, costing CCP money.



I'd like them being able to dock, under two conditions:

- Aggro timer to allow docking extended to 30-45 minutes for supercarriers, to avoid docking games.

- A nerf to their carrrying capacity. 1 SC trip is equivalent to 3 carriers trips. Campaign logistics is already too easy, it favor power blocks.
Monster Dude
Raging Angels
#2019 - 2011-10-14 11:32:22 UTC
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:
Monster Dude wrote:

If you got your SC by claping hands and say - "give me SC" then of course not.
If you got your SC by buying it on ISK made by boting - then of course not
If you build your SC by doing everything for it - hauling, building parts, making isks on your own etc... all by yourself then YES you will have a problem.
And this is why I'm saying that coming nerf will just favor very rich communities and make poor once weaker.


When you can make a few billion a week running 0.0 plexes, reaction farms, or doing mysterious things in wormholes, making something more expensive just adds a few extra days or weeks to the grinding period.


Awesome. Never made "few" billion a week.... Are you sure you are not confusing it with botting?
Reactions and such is corp size things, on top of that not too many reactions can give such good profit.
If you do wormholes you do not play the game at all.

I might be wrong here but "normal" active players life is split. Devote some time for making isk, devote some time for wasting them (PVP :))) ). An yes staying in this pattern there are few ways. Belts, Anoms (before nerfing those), Plexes, corp size things (I exclude for now). And here we come back to SC nerf. You can't use your SC for gaining isk. It is now changing that way that lose it even easier then before, but at same time abilities of the ship are reduced which turns out to a patch that gives benefit to very rich communities, making gap between of them and poorer once bigger.
Let me guess who wants that...
Floydd Heywood
Doomheim
#2020 - 2011-10-14 12:44:16 UTC
Monster Dude wrote:

If you do wormholes you do not play the game at all.

Why is that?

The stupidity of that remark aside, one could have a wh alt for PvE and still play the k-space 0.0 part of the game. And in wh I could easily pull in several billion a week all on my own, using two accounts in cheap ships. That is, if I could be bothered wasting my time like that. Not being or wanting to be a supercap pilot, I don't need more than maybe 500m a month, so I do sleeper sites only once a month. When I do it, I do it in one long op, pulling in a billion ISK in 5-6 hours of work.