These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Capital Ships

First post First post
Author
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2011-11-07 23:15:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Demon Azrakel
Magic Crisp wrote:
I've tested the dread changes on the naglfar recently. The damage boost indeed seems nice, though from other players' reports I clearly see that now the moros is way overpowered compared to the other dreads.

What was surprising me, that I couldn't hit a paladin orbiting me at 40K, and CCP clearly stated in the devblogs, that they wish to bring the dreads into fleet fights. However, I see no reason why would anyone field a dread into a fleet fight.

With the current stats on SiSi, the naglfar was good on completely stationary targets, but nothing else. I've even experienced various carriers speedtanking me, that surprised me a bit. Also everything not completely stationary was impossible to hit. With these changes, sieged carriers are not even good for KM whoring in a fleet. And when a dread is not sieged, it's just an expensive BS. Well, a rather stupid and big BS.

At the end, I wasn't really using the citadel torps on the naglfar, because i couldn't hit anything with it. Not even a moving phoenix, it did only minor damage. seeing this, citadel missiles clearly need some love. Also, i'd be still a lot happier if the naglfar weren't this ugly dualweapon platform.

In bigger fleets, when the DPS exceeds a dread's sieged tanking ability (3+ dreads, or 20+ battleships), then it's again pointless to field a dread, because they can't receive logistics.

Though I'm unable to handle the T2 siege module, I strongly agree on the opinion to increase the scan resolution with T2 siege modules, that'd also be a nice step for getting dreads back into the game.


As it stands now, an armor dread can barely tank one other dread, and often it cannot tank another dread at all.

Dreads are not intended to do that much damage out of siege. They are intended to shoot other capitals. Dreads are, and always have been, considered dead on cyno in. Free ship if it survives. Also, you can **** up subcaps with a dread if you have proper support on a smaller scale, though this is not terribly feasible outside of w-space.

I would like to repeat that CCP could double or tripple the explosion velocity on citadel weapons will little negative effect on the game. Also, capital autos need a bit of falloff.
MastahFR
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2011-11-08 00:27:27 UTC  |  Edited by: MastahFR
Mioelnir wrote:
Disclaimer: I have 3 minmatar capital characters, two of which are supercapital capable. So, apply a grain of salt or two.

Shield capitals: remove shieldrecharge. There, done. If you unsub because you passive shield tanked your capital, good riddance. Now, apply gang bonuses like armor ones. If you can't remove shield recharge due to code, set the recharge time to 14 days and apply gang bonuses like armor. Instant win.
Introduce a new implant type (concord lp?) that gives slave-like bonuses to capital shields (not subcap shields, since in subcap land there are valid reasons for passive shield tanks) Or also make them increase recharge time so that passive regen stays the same...

Naglfar:
I personally don't think there is anything wrong with it. A slight tad more cap recharge would be nice so we do not have to cripple our fittings to be jump capable after a 5 minute cycle would be nice, but I won't /emoragequitwristslash if it simply stays as it is.
The tracking increase in siege seems to work from my tests on Sisi (2* AC/Torp Naglfars vs Hel at 30-40km with 100m/s transversal; nice hits).

Nidhoggur:
I personally consider the niddy one of the best 0.0 carriers, because it has armor tank, armor-rr for fleets, shield-rr for towers and reasonable fittings and damage. But, since it is make-a-wish time:
- two Archons remote-repairing each other with unbonused reps receive a 33% increase in repair effectiveness from their resistance bonus. Two Nids doing that only gain +25%. The "logistics" carrier should be on even ground here.
- the Nid is the only carrier whose racial bonus affects a cap using module. Yet, is has by far the worst - probably because projectiles do not use cap.... Well, please subscribe to a current version of reality. Carriers do not have turrets. Similarly, archons do not have lasers either, but they get the built-in because-of-lasors cap bonus. There is something wrong with that.

Hel:
Oh boy. I could actually stop after those 2 words.
- the two points from the niddy apply as well, only more. In terms of RR-performance per needed capital energy transfer it is more effective to bring another nyx than a single hel. It's cap is THAT BAD. And do not get me started on the overall damage implications of the additional nyx.
- when SCs were rebuilt as DPS platforms, it was left behind as the only SC without either an offensive or defensive bonus as its originally intended bonus (-7.5%/lvl reduction to fighter bomber signature radius) was deemed too powerful (it had more effective dps against a subcap than a Nyx).
- all the racial t1 traits of Matari ships are built around versatility (extra slots here or there, a bit more speed, smaller sig (lol supercapital), weird half/half tanking slots etc), yet this expansion is explicitly about removing versatility. I consider this a problem. No ship should have design guidelines forcing it to be useless.
- Speed: the hel is too fast. An typical fit aeon has 62-66 m/s max speed. A typical fit hel has 100m/s. So to not leave the bulk, stay in range of its own RR modules to stay useful and the aeons RR-cap to not cap out, it has to slow down to those speeds too. At which point it is the only SC that is not above the warp threshold and therefor much more risky to deploy - at no gain. If you want to keep it minmatar with a mobility advantage, increase its agility, not topspeed.
- EHP: it wasn't stellar before. It sucks now. I do not have an armor SC (....yet), but currently on sisi the hel barely breaks 20m EHP with an officer fit containing modules whose price exceeds the entire fitting of an armor sc including the hg slaves. Price shouldn't be a balancing factor, yes, but it is a good indicator.
- CPU: the introduction of the meta shield transporters made fitting shield tank (hardeners, not boosters) locally and shield transfers (oh my, what a combination) more manageable, so this is probably fine now by way of costing a lot more isk..

It boils down to this:
Supercarrier pilots should be excited about a hel in their midst because of the things the ship contributes to the fleet, not because every additional hel means one ship that is a dead given primary before them like it is currently the case.

Ragnarok:
I haven't sat in one yet (Cry), but I would guess it could use an EHP nudge and a speednerf aswell.



CCP read, read and reread please. This dude is nearly right on the whole line about Minmatar capital. I've a ******* Hel since a year, I haven't been able to field it once because I know I would have been primary or be useless.
This ship is just a damn shame that no word can explain. The bonus is crap, the tank is crap, the over-speed is crap, the cap recharge is crap, everything is crap. Expect the price, the huge price as any supercarrier.
The whole concept of shield supercarrier are fail, and the Hel is even worst since it's bonus is toward something no one give a **** about.

I'm expecting from you better than what you are currently doing. I'm considering unsubing if things don't change.
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
#83 - 2011-11-08 01:33:24 UTC
LOL have to say your right above except the frigging nidhoggur.... niddys are laughed out of carrier fits due to the fact there known as the "damage control for the fleet" .... AKA 1m EHP extra for the entire fleet as its GOING TO DIE FIRST, its local tank is one of the worst, its what 5m/s faster? lol seriously if your going to make the niddy the logistics ship, give it a bonus to reduce its signature radius at V to say slightly bigger than a bs to give it the ability to tank a bit more, that and maybe a little bit more speed, i'd love the idea of a "speed/sig tanked" carrier logistics ship well speed and sig is relative, but something or a small ehp buff to make my poor baby not ALWAYS the first to get primared!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Siigari Kitawa
Weave
Weave.
#84 - 2011-11-08 07:08:47 UTC
http://m-devillers.ruhosting.nl/rmrnstuff.html

Need stuff moved? Push Industries will handle it. Serving highsec, lowsec and nullsec - and we do it faster and more reliably than anyone else. Ingame channel: PUSHX

Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices
#85 - 2011-11-08 08:49:07 UTC
Demon Azrakel wrote:
Magic Crisp wrote:
I've tested the dread changes on the naglfar recently. The damage boost indeed seems nice, though from other players' reports I clearly see that now the moros is way overpowered compared to the other dreads.

What was surprising me, that I couldn't hit a paladin orbiting me at 40K, and CCP clearly stated in the devblogs, that they wish to bring the dreads into fleet fights. However, I see no reason why would anyone field a dread into a fleet fight.

With the current stats on SiSi, the naglfar was good on completely stationary targets, but nothing else. I've even experienced various carriers speedtanking me, that surprised me a bit. Also everything not completely stationary was impossible to hit. With these changes, sieged carriers are not even good for KM whoring in a fleet. And when a dread is not sieged, it's just an expensive BS. Well, a rather stupid and big BS.

At the end, I wasn't really using the citadel torps on the naglfar, because i couldn't hit anything with it. Not even a moving phoenix, it did only minor damage. seeing this, citadel missiles clearly need some love. Also, i'd be still a lot happier if the naglfar weren't this ugly dualweapon platform.

In bigger fleets, when the DPS exceeds a dread's sieged tanking ability (3+ dreads, or 20+ battleships), then it's again pointless to field a dread, because they can't receive logistics.

Though I'm unable to handle the T2 siege module, I strongly agree on the opinion to increase the scan resolution with T2 siege modules, that'd also be a nice step for getting dreads back into the game.


As it stands now, an armor dread can barely tank one other dread, and often it cannot tank another dread at all.

Dreads are not intended to do that much damage out of siege. They are intended to shoot other capitals. Dreads are, and always have been, considered dead on cyno in. Free ship if it survives. Also, you can **** up subcaps with a dread if you have proper support on a smaller scale, though this is not terribly feasible outside of w-space.

I would like to repeat that CCP could double or tripple the explosion velocity on citadel weapons will little negative effect on the game. Also, capital autos need a bit of falloff.


I quite so agree on the falloff, it could definitely use some. I still feel bad about dreads and fleets. There should be something that makes dreads worthy for fielding in fleet fight. Like a scripted siege module, with reduced DPS, somewhat increased tracking, and the ability to receive logistics. I admit there has to be a price, but currently these ships are no good but for bashing structures.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#86 - 2011-11-08 12:25:43 UTC
All supers on top of losing thei way overpowered amount of hitpoints deserve to lose a medslot for shield tankers and lowslot for armor tankers :-) Resistance is the real trouble behind the RR hell the super blobs go into.
In regards to the fighter/drone issue I kind of like the proposed changes :-)
Emperor Salazar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#87 - 2011-11-08 14:18:51 UTC
xxxak wrote:
Supercarriers are too nerfed. Especially the shield carriers :(

They are going to diaf against tiny gangs now...


Just take it out on a patrol and your DPS per second should be enough.
bornaa
GRiD.
#88 - 2011-11-08 18:23:18 UTC
can i ask you because I cant log in to SISI:
is tracking for titans guns nerfed?
whats with fighters, are they nerfed??? or their usage with SC???
[Yes, I'm an Amateur](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRa-69uBmIw&feature=relmfu)
Captain Alcatraz
Did he say Jump
Dock Workers
#89 - 2011-11-08 19:46:46 UTC
I'm one happy dread pilot as I fly the moros, but with the changes its plain better than all other dreads

5 min siege cycle is an awesome change
Isbariya
Thundercats
The Initiative.
#90 - 2011-11-08 20:34:33 UTC
I can understand why CCp did those changes to supers, but I have to say, for shield tanked supers these changes mean death !
Shield tanked Supers already suffer of the imbalance and would do even further with these changes to the HP. Don't get me wrong, I do think Suers were over powered and needed a HP nerf, but in the end, all supers should have about the same HP, wether it's a shield or armor tanked one.
In regards to the drone bay change, I think supers should be able to field a full flight of fighters and bombers, especially when they have no other drones left. An option would be to apply the +3 per lvl bonus to fighters an fighter bombers only, not normal drones. The result would be that SC would at least be a little bit capable of fending of small tacklers and stuff.


Cain Leigh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#91 - 2011-11-08 21:15:15 UTC
Mioelnir wrote:
Disclaimer: I have 3 minmatar capital characters, two of which are supercapital capable. So, apply a grain of salt or two.

Shield capitals: remove shieldrecharge. There, done. If you unsub because you passive shield tanked your capital, good riddance. Now, apply gang bonuses like armor ones. If you can't remove shield recharge due to code, set the recharge time to 14 days and apply gang bonuses like armor. Instant win.
Introduce a new implant type (concord lp?) that gives slave-like bonuses to capital shields (not subcap shields, since in subcap land there are valid reasons for passive shield tanks) Or also make them increase recharge time so that passive regen stays the same...

Naglfar:
I personally don't think there is anything wrong with it. A slight tad more cap recharge would be nice so we do not have to cripple our fittings to be jump capable after a 5 minute cycle would be nice, but I won't /emoragequitwristslash if it simply stays as it is.
The tracking increase in siege seems to work from my tests on Sisi (2* AC/Torp Naglfars vs Hel at 30-40km with 100m/s transversal; nice hits).

Nidhoggur:
I personally consider the niddy one of the best 0.0 carriers, because it has armor tank, armor-rr for fleets, shield-rr for towers and reasonable fittings and damage. But, since it is make-a-wish time:
- two Archons remote-repairing each other with unbonused reps receive a 33% increase in repair effectiveness from their resistance bonus. Two Nids doing that only gain +25%. The "logistics" carrier should be on even ground here.
- the Nid is the only carrier whose racial bonus affects a cap using module. Yet, is has by far the worst - probably because projectiles do not use cap.... Well, please subscribe to a current version of reality. Carriers do not have turrets. Similarly, archons do not have lasers either, but they get the built-in because-of-lasors cap bonus. There is something wrong with that.

Hel:
Oh boy. I could actually stop after those 2 words.
- the two points from the niddy apply as well, only more. In terms of RR-performance per needed capital energy transfer it is more effective to bring another nyx than a single hel. It's cap is THAT BAD. And do not get me started on the overall damage implications of the additional nyx.
- when SCs were rebuilt as DPS platforms, it was left behind as the only SC without either an offensive or defensive bonus as its originally intended bonus (-7.5%/lvl reduction to fighter bomber signature radius) was deemed too powerful (it had more effective dps against a subcap than a Nyx).
- all the racial t1 traits of Matari ships are built around versatility (extra slots here or there, a bit more speed, smaller sig (lol supercapital), weird half/half tanking slots etc), yet this expansion is explicitly about removing versatility. I consider this a problem. No ship should have design guidelines forcing it to be useless.
- Speed: the hel is too fast. An typical fit aeon has 62-66 m/s max speed. A typical fit hel has 100m/s. So to not leave the bulk, stay in range of its own RR modules to stay useful and the aeons RR-cap to not cap out, it has to slow down to those speeds too. At which point it is the only SC that is not above the warp threshold and therefor much more risky to deploy - at no gain. If you want to keep it minmatar with a mobility advantage, increase its agility, not topspeed.
- EHP: it wasn't stellar before. It sucks now. I do not have an armor SC (....yet), but currently on sisi the hel barely breaks 20m EHP with an officer fit containing modules whose price exceeds the entire fitting of an armor sc including the hg slaves. Price shouldn't be a balancing factor, yes, but it is a good indicator.
- CPU: the introduction of the meta shield transporters made fitting shield tank (hardeners, not boosters) locally and shield transfers (oh my, what a combination) more manageable, so this is probably fine now by way of costing a lot more isk..

It boils down to this:
Supercarrier pilots should be excited about a hel in their midst because of the things the ship contributes to the fleet, not because every additional hel means one ship that is a dead given primary before them like it is currently the case.

Ragnarok:
I haven't sat in one yet (Cry), but I would guess it could use an EHP nudge and a speednerf aswell.


Couldn't agree more..
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#92 - 2011-11-09 11:58:01 UTC
Cain Leigh wrote:
Mioelnir wrote:
Disclaimer: I have 3 minmatar capital characters, two of which are supercapital capable. So, apply a grain of salt or two.

Shield capitals: remove shieldrecharge. There, done. If you unsub because you passive shield tanked your capital, good riddance. Now, apply gang bonuses like armor ones. If you can't remove shield recharge due to code, set the recharge time to 14 days and apply gang bonuses like armor. Instant win.
Introduce a new implant type (concord lp?) that gives slave-like bonuses to capital shields (not subcap shields, since in subcap land there are valid reasons for passive shield tanks) Or also make them increase recharge time so that passive regen stays the same...

Naglfar:
I personally don't think there is anything wrong with it. A slight tad more cap recharge would be nice so we do not have to cripple our fittings to be jump capable after a 5 minute cycle would be nice, but I won't /emoragequitwristslash if it simply stays as it is.
The tracking increase in siege seems to work from my tests on Sisi (2* AC/Torp Naglfars vs Hel at 30-40km with 100m/s transversal; nice hits).

Nidhoggur:
I personally consider the niddy one of the best 0.0 carriers, because it has armor tank, armor-rr for fleets, shield-rr for towers and reasonable fittings and damage. But, since it is make-a-wish time:
- two Archons remote-repairing each other with unbonused reps receive a 33% increase in repair effectiveness from their resistance bonus. Two Nids doing that only gain +25%. The "logistics" carrier should be on even ground here.
- the Nid is the only carrier whose racial bonus affects a cap using module. Yet, is has by far the worst - probably because projectiles do not use cap.... Well, please subscribe to a current version of reality. Carriers do not have turrets. Similarly, archons do not have lasers either, but they get the built-in because-of-lasors cap bonus. There is something wrong with that.

Hel:
Oh boy. I could actually stop after those 2 words.
- the two points from the niddy apply as well, only more. In terms of RR-performance per needed capital energy transfer it is more effective to bring another nyx than a single hel. It's cap is THAT BAD. And do not get me started on the overall damage implications of the additional nyx.
- when SCs were rebuilt as DPS platforms, it was left behind as the only SC without either an offensive or defensive bonus as its originally intended bonus (-7.5%/lvl reduction to fighter bomber signature radius) was deemed too powerful (it had more effective dps against a subcap than a Nyx).
- all the racial t1 traits of Matari ships are built around versatility (extra slots here or there, a bit more speed, smaller sig (lol supercapital), weird half/half tanking slots etc), yet this expansion is explicitly about removing versatility. I consider this a problem. No ship should have design guidelines forcing it to be useless.
- Speed: the hel is too fast. An typical fit aeon has 62-66 m/s max speed. A typical fit hel has 100m/s. So to not leave the bulk, stay in range of its own RR modules to stay useful and the aeons RR-cap to not cap out, it has to slow down to those speeds too. At which point it is the only SC that is not above the warp threshold and therefor much more risky to deploy - at no gain. If you want to keep it minmatar with a mobility advantage, increase its agility, not topspeed.
- EHP: it wasn't stellar before. It sucks now. I do not have an armor SC (....yet), but currently on sisi the hel barely breaks 20m EHP with an officer fit containing modules whose price exceeds the entire fitting of an armor sc including the hg slaves. Price shouldn't be a balancing factor, yes, but it is a good indicator.
- CPU: the introduction of the meta shield transporters made fitting shield tank (hardeners, not boosters) locally and shield transfers (oh my, what a combination) more manageable, so this is probably fine now by way of costing a lot more isk..

It boils down to this:
Supercarrier pilots should be excited about a hel in their midst because of the things the ship contributes to the fleet, not because every additional hel means one ship that is a dead given primary before them like it is currently the case.

Ragnarok:
I haven't sat in one yet (Cry), but I would guess it could use an EHP nudge and a speednerf aswell.


Couldn't agree more..


+1 , the man said everything it is meant to be said about shield supers and about minie supers.

The rag is actually fine .
Charles Edisson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2011-11-09 11:58:48 UTC
Taking away the drones from an SC and reducing it's drone bay so it can only carry Bombers OR Fighters is too much. As fighters/Bombers are too easy to kill the second most powerful ship in the game can easily be de-fanged by 4 stealth bombers in a lag fest. at the absolute very least fighters orbit range needs to be increased to if they are attacking something they are not at 2Km range from it, that just means every fighter from every carrier/FC dies in one volley.
Still as things stand my SC will not be logging on bar for skill changes till they are changed again, I'll probably just let the account lapse.
HelPilot of20Years
Doomheim
#94 - 2011-11-09 14:00:13 UTC
Mioelnir wrote:
Disclaimer: I have 3 minmatar capital characters, two of which are supercapital capable. So, apply a grain of salt or two.

Shield capitals: remove shieldrecharge. There, done. If you unsub because you passive shield tanked your capital, good riddance. Now, apply gang bonuses like armor ones. If you can't remove shield recharge due to code, set the recharge time to 14 days and apply gang bonuses like armor. Instant win.
Introduce a new implant type (concord lp?) that gives slave-like bonuses to capital shields (not subcap shields, since in subcap land there are valid reasons for passive shield tanks) Or also make them increase recharge time so that passive regen stays the same...

Naglfar:
I personally don't think there is anything wrong with it. A slight tad more cap recharge would be nice so we do not have to cripple our fittings to be jump capable after a 5 minute cycle would be nice, but I won't /emoragequitwristslash if it simply stays as it is.
The tracking increase in siege seems to work from my tests on Sisi (2* AC/Torp Naglfars vs Hel at 30-40km with 100m/s transversal; nice hits).

Nidhoggur:
I personally consider the niddy one of the best 0.0 carriers, because it has armor tank, armor-rr for fleets, shield-rr for towers and reasonable fittings and damage. But, since it is make-a-wish time:
- two Archons remote-repairing each other with unbonused reps receive a 33% increase in repair effectiveness from their resistance bonus. Two Nids doing that only gain +25%. The "logistics" carrier should be on even ground here.
- the Nid is the only carrier whose racial bonus affects a cap using module. Yet, is has by far the worst - probably because projectiles do not use cap.... Well, please subscribe to a current version of reality. Carriers do not have turrets. Similarly, archons do not have lasers either, but they get the built-in because-of-lasors cap bonus. There is something wrong with that.

Hel:
Oh boy. I could actually stop after those 2 words.
- the two points from the niddy apply as well, only more. In terms of RR-performance per needed capital energy transfer it is more effective to bring another nyx than a single hel. It's cap is THAT BAD. And do not get me started on the overall damage implications of the additional nyx.
- when SCs were rebuilt as DPS platforms, it was left behind as the only SC without either an offensive or defensive bonus as its originally intended bonus (-7.5%/lvl reduction to fighter bomber signature radius) was deemed too powerful (it had more effective dps against a subcap than a Nyx).
- all the racial t1 traits of Matari ships are built around versatility (extra slots here or there, a bit more speed, smaller sig (lol supercapital), weird half/half tanking slots etc), yet this expansion is explicitly about removing versatility. I consider this a problem. No ship should have design guidelines forcing it to be useless.
- Speed: the hel is too fast. An typical fit aeon has 62-66 m/s max speed. A typical fit hel has 100m/s. So to not leave the bulk, stay in range of its own RR modules to stay useful and the aeons RR-cap to not cap out, it has to slow down to those speeds too. At which point it is the only SC that is not above the warp threshold and therefor much more risky to deploy - at no gain. If you want to keep it minmatar with a mobility advantage, increase its agility, not topspeed.
- EHP: it wasn't stellar before. It sucks now. I do not have an armor SC (....yet), but currently on sisi the hel barely breaks 20m EHP with an officer fit containing modules whose price exceeds the entire fitting of an armor sc including the hg slaves. Price shouldn't be a balancing factor, yes, but it is a good indicator.
- CPU: the introduction of the meta shield transporters made fitting shield tank (hardeners, not boosters) locally and shield transfers (oh my, what a combination) more manageable, so this is probably fine now by way of costing a lot more isk..

It boils down to this:
Supercarrier pilots should be excited about a hel in their midst because of the things the ship contributes to the fleet, not because every additional hel means one ship that is a dead given primary before them like it is currently the case.

Ragnarok:
I haven't sat in one yet (Cry), but I would guess it could use an EHP nudge and a speednerf aswell.


Not empty quoting. Listen to this guy, so we don't have to unsub our multiple accounts. No idea why we even have to discuss this - is there a deficit of common sense on that island?

...designed for [u]one purpose and one purpose only[/u]. ”Imagine a swarm of deadly hornets pouring from the devil’s mouth. Now imagine they have autocannons.” -Unknown Hel designer

Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#95 - 2011-11-09 22:18:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Mioelnir
Also, CCP, just to throw it out there for pondering:

All 4 Minmatar capitals were once shield tanks. All Hel pilots once were Nidhoggur pilots. Prior to the HP stats being swapped during the supercapital buff, Hels had - despite their slot layout - more armor than shield hp and were usually armor tanked.

The idea behind above average speed and below average signature for Minmatar is to take below average damage since they have below average tanks. This patch takes measures to ensure supercapitals can't avoid taking damage.

If you need to make a clean cut to save the ship, do it. Be bold.

And, before going on, I have to apologize. All dreads, carriers and supercarriers have actually the same peak cap recharge. The differences in practice come solely from their fittings. I never realized until now.

My personal wishlist:

Shield in general
  • make bonus apply like armor bonus
  • add shield-hp set that keeps peak shield recharge unaffected by increasing recharge time accordingly

Add a crystal-set equivalent for armor if needed. While diversity is good, diversity for the sake of diversity is bad. Shield and armor tanking will still have meaningful differences after that.

Naglfar

  • no changes
It has split weapons and takes longer to train, yes. I see no reason why that warrants special treatment. Since all peak cap recharge levels are in fact equal, I can't in good conscience ask for a buff anymore. If you are bored, add visible launchers for capitals so you can remove the phoenix's one turret hardpoint without removing the visual siege effect and make the naglfar a 3 turret hardpoint shield/projectile dread. Put wax in your ears against the "skillpoint reimbursement" screams by Naglfar pilots.

Nidhoggur wrote:

  • remove 12'500 HP from shield
  • add 12'500 HP to armor
  • increase remote-rep bonus to 7.5%
  • move a medslot to a lowslot (Cap Power Relay > Cap Recharger)
This moves the "undecidedly equal" shield/armor/hull HP stats to "we realized we armor tank". The slot movement allows for better cap by different fitting. The increased bonus makes it the king of logistics. The archon still has the unpenalized resistance bonus and better base HP, so not stepping on toes there.

Hel wrote:

  • increase remote-rep bonus to 7.5%
  • swap shield and armor hp (= revert it back)
  • move two medslots to lowslots
  • reduce base speed to 70m/s
  • decrease base align time to 75 seconds
  • cut fighterbay to 125k m3
It still has the lowest EHP, but not by such a large margin. By being able to fit cap rechargers instead of power diagnostic systems the cap recharge issues should get better. Fitting armortank instead of shieldtank frees up some cpu. Fixes speed/agility. Moves minmatar caps from 1/3 armor/shield to 2/2 armor/shield for a clean divide. Adjust remote-repair efficiency. Emphasizes the nyx's role as attack supercarrier with offensive bonus by removing the extra spares.

Moros wrote:

  • remove rof bonus
  • add 5%tracking bonus (?)
A 5% RoF bonus adds 33% DPS. This is roughly what the moros is above the other dreads right now if I am correct. The tracking bonus is because I can't figure out any other even remotely useful bonus for it. If the RoF bonus removes too much DPS, bump the regular damage bonus to 7.5%.

Nyx wrote:

  • increase fighterbay to 175k m3

Emphasize the nyx's role as attack supercarrier with offensive bonus and being gallente by giving it the extra spares removed from the hel.

Remote ECM Burst wrote:

  • replace the tiny ball of tumbleweed effect
  • decrease duration to 10 seconds
  • increase base reactivation delay to 800 seconds
  • decrease optimal to 100000

The current effect is embarrassing. The halfed duration from initiation to effect makes the module itself easier to apply. The reactivation delay pushes it up to 600 seconds at level 5, reducing ecm burst spam by large supercarrier groups by roughly 3.

Also, why are we limited to 5 quote boxes per post? If it is because of pyramid quoting, limit quote depth by filtering for 3 nsted levels of quote tags.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#96 - 2011-11-10 09:37:02 UTC
If you're going to keep the Nidhoggur as an armour tank, it would probably be a good idea to make the Chimera an armour tank too, to avoid it being a useless Billy-no-mates when it comes to carrier tanking style. Say, switch the shield resist bonus to armour, move three meds to lows and switch the shield RR bonus to armour. This should solve its CPU problems too.
CCP Tallest
C C P
C C P Alliance
#97 - 2011-11-10 15:06:11 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Tallest
Update:

Based on feedback, the following changes have been made in addition to the previously proposed changes. They will most likely come to SISI on Monday or Tuesday.

Supercarriers
* All supercarriers: dronebay +25000 (5 extra fighters/fb)

Shield supercapitals
* Shield nerf changed from -20% to -10% (shield recharge rate also changed accordingly)
** New values should be 90% of current TQ value

Naglfar
* +2500 capacitor capacity (recharge time will be changed to have same base recharge.)

Nidhoggur:
* 7,5% bonus to armor and shield transfer amount per carrier level instead of 5%.
* +30000 PG
* +2500 capacitor capacity (recharge time will be changed to have same base recharge.)

Hel:
* 7,5% bonus to armor and shield transfer amount per carrier level instead of 5%.
* +5000 capacitor capacity (recharge time will be changed to have same base recharge.)

XL autocannons:
* +50% falloff

Titan tracking issue:
* "Immune to all forms of Electronic Warfare" will also make you immune to remote "electronic assistance", that is: remote tracking enhancers and remote sensor boosters.


I also want to tell you that there are other very valid concerns that we will be looking into, but they will not make it into the November release. We don't have the solutions to all of these, but as I said, we will to try to find solutions to these issues after the November release.

* Shield leadership bonus should work like an armor bonus and not require recharging shields after every jump.
* Capital ships cyno bumping/bouncing issue
* XL missiles explosion radius and explosion velocity
* There needs to be a shield HP implant set as a counterbalance to the Slave set.
* There needs to be a remote shield boost implant like the 'Gentry' ZEX2000 is for armor
* There need to be deadspace shield invulnerability fields equivalent to the A-Type EANM modules

[b]★ EVE Game Designer ★ ♥ Team Super Friends ♥[/b]

Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#98 - 2011-11-10 15:14:34 UTC
Awesome, thank you!

CCP Tallest wrote:
* There need to be deadspace shield invulnerability fields equivalent to the A-Type EANM modules
One of the biggest problems here is that shield faction modules are exorbitantly more expensive than the corresponding armor modules. E.g. there is no "Imperial navy EANM" equivalent for shields for 30m, say. CN invuls are better, but they're also at 300m.
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#99 - 2011-11-10 15:15:58 UTC
Has there been any discussion as to nerfing remote tracking for Titans, to make sure they can't hit subcaps easily?

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.

The Economist
Logically Consistent
#100 - 2011-11-10 15:23:19 UTC
Wow; a few more steps towards sanity than i was expecting! Nice one!

I still think SC's need a 500-1000m3 regular drone bay, and that titans should have a 125m3 one (or at least let it field 5 light drones) though.