These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
SmarncaV2
Doomheim
#161 - 2011-11-10 20:29:11 UTC
Aragote wrote:
Vincent Gaines wrote:
Aragote wrote:
clap clap, motherships continue on the path of uselessnes go ccp go...

less of a supercap blob to destroy subcap fleets = working as intended.

Your alliance's modus operandi was limited to one trick, sounds like a personal problem.


Yes the ad hominem argument, always leads to such a nice debate....

Please tell me with the current changes in mind why would any body fly a supercarrier in the form they will be after the patch? They are going to be massive slow bricks with dps comparable / worse then that of a dread. Dps that is removable with a single decent bombing run and they can not even use that dps to reinforce poses.

Changes in this form will make supercarriers like the motherships of the old. None existent and definitely not worth their price. But you will see the 150 man carrier/dread blobs with the titans put in the mix for good measure.

Dreads do not need any more buffs then those that are incoming. Even those might be a bit over the top.


And when you're gonna see 150 man carrier/dread blob you will throw your precious motherships at them...
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#162 - 2011-11-10 20:40:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Gaines
Svennig wrote:
Vincent Gaines wrote:

I don't have a way to check this fit, but how does a triage mix fit work out? (2 shield, 2 armor)


Under on CPU (96.4%), 111% of powergrid. The powergrid is over by 81K MW.

But it's a fit that no-one's going to use on triage.

If you're doing a rooks'n'kings style support of subcaps, you want a full rack. No-one runs mixed gangs.
If you're doing hail-mary rep of, say, a titan, you want a full rack. But you can drop the CARs so you're under.
If you're repping POS shields, you want a full rack. And even without triage or CARs, you're over on cap.
If you're repping station shields, you want a full rack. And even without triage or CARs, you're over on cap.

Look at it this way.

Non-triaged, a 4x CRAR fit works fine without the powergrid buff, and that's with a heavy neut or smartie.
Non-triaged, a 4x CST fit is at 107% CPU with an empty highslot.

The Nid's problem isn't the powergrid , it's the CPU.




I don't think I've ever ran a full rack on my Chimera. I've run 3 CSTs before and can run 2 stable 3 in triage stable (it's been a long time since I've done it). In reality, while the other 3 carriers can fit a full rack, they don't use it. In my highs I usually run 2x CST, CET, and a smartbomb. If I know I'm doing a POS rep even as a suicide I would still only run a max of 3x CSTs CET and triage.

Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.

Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#163 - 2011-11-10 20:41:54 UTC
OK, glad to see the Nid's PG issues being addressed, now how about fixing the Chimera's epic CPU issues?
Archor is the armour equivalent and it can fit local dual rep, triage, capital energy and 3 capital remote reps without even being close on cpu of pg.
Try fitting an equivalent shield fit on a chimera and see what happens.
Only way of doing it is by spending 2bil on CN invulns and meta 2 cap mods which just isnt viable.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#164 - 2011-11-10 20:45:31 UTC
I like what I see.

Would still prefer the hel to switch to armor, since a logistics-hub supercarrier using a different tanking type than nearly everyone around it is such an obvious, expensive lynchpin.
Aragote
Fat Dragon Mining Co.
Darwinism.
#165 - 2011-11-10 21:04:37 UTC
SmarncaV2 wrote:
Aragote wrote:
Vincent Gaines wrote:
Aragote wrote:
clap clap, motherships continue on the path of uselessnes go ccp go...

less of a supercap blob to destroy subcap fleets = working as intended.

Your alliance's modus operandi was limited to one trick, sounds like a personal problem.


Yes the ad hominem argument, always leads to such a nice debate....

Please tell me with the current changes in mind why would any body fly a supercarrier in the form they will be after the patch? They are going to be massive slow bricks with dps comparable / worse then that of a dread. Dps that is removable with a single decent bombing run and they can not even use that dps to reinforce poses.

Changes in this form will make supercarriers like the motherships of the old. None existent and definitely not worth their price. But you will see the 150 man carrier/dread blobs with the titans put in the mix for good measure.

Dreads do not need any more buffs then those that are incoming. Even those might be a bit over the top.


And when you're gonna see 150 man carrier/dread blob you will throw your precious motherships at them...


And get countered by 10 bombers since one bombing run will wipe all of your dps...
Jeffrey Powel
Primal Elemental
MARABUNTA
#166 - 2011-11-10 21:08:12 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:

* There needs to be a shield HP implant set as a counterbalance to the Slave set.


Cool story, so there need to be a armor boost amount set as a counterbalance to the crystal set.
Isbariya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#167 - 2011-11-10 21:25:27 UTC
well, if supers are supposed to be ewar imune, maybe they shouln't be able to get neuted ;-P but I think that might be a little bit overpowerd
Ntrails
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
#168 - 2011-11-10 21:40:51 UTC
The Hel still sucks, and in general you need to reduce the EHP difference between the SCs a heck of a lot more incidentally. Look at the difference between a properly fit and bonused aeon/wyvern vs the nyx or the Hel - it is far far too much. Bring them more into line, and give the Hel an actually relevant bonus.

Rag could probably use a bit more EHP to be in line with other titans.

Also, if you are feeling like a pro, get the nagflar to be ambi dextrous. Double bonuses and room for 4 launchers OR 4 guns (or any mix of the 2...) so minmatar dudes don't need to train twice the skills for capital weapons and supports. You have done this with one of the new t3 BCs I believe, so it is doable!

Yes I will be annoyed if you render 1.6 bil worth of slave set completely useless on my supercap dude, but c'est la vie. It would be a better balance.

20 fighter bombers and 20 fighters seems like a fair limit for SCs? No reason to limit them below that tbh
Lili Lu
#169 - 2011-11-10 21:53:59 UTC
Please do not introduce any new implant sets. This will unbalance everything about subcap tanks. The simple solution is to limit slave effects to subcaps, like crystals are limited to affecting smaller than capital shield boosters.

As to shield hp getting immediate command buffs after a jump it is a valid complaint of shield tanking. But messing with new implants is a very dangerous thing that could un balance the present tanking relationships.
MastahFR
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#170 - 2011-11-10 21:55:01 UTC
CCP if you really want to give the Hel the logistic role, then I suggest you :
- Create a new type of fighter. This new type is the cruiser size drone armor/shield repair
- Give the Hel a new Drones bay just for them, so a Hel could at least use regular bomber/fighters as currently and also been able to take 10-15-20 (?) cruiser size repairs drones.
Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#171 - 2011-11-10 22:05:50 UTC
Having played around with some Nidhoggur fits, I have to agree that powergrid does not seem to be an issue.

The only fit I ran out of pg with was trying a R&K style triple armor rep triage setup, and 30k pg won't allow that, either (Archon can do it handily, btw).

Fitting a triage shield tank is slightly above cpu. Fitting a full shield tank is easily above cpu (+75 cpu would be nice), but that also has the problem that the lows are mostly useless (either you have no cap to run the shield booster, or you gimp your shield boost amount; the cap amount bonus might fix the flux coils, dunno).
Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#172 - 2011-11-10 22:16:52 UTC
Shield resist mods being more expensive than armor ones:

steave435 wrote:
Consider why that is though.
Lacking a deadspace level in between officer and faction, those that would have liked to buy a deadspace one but can't afford an officer one will instead be willing to pay close to the same for a faction invul.
I like that explanation and hadn't thought of it, but I also think one of the issues is that there is no invul field on the level of the IN EANMs (28% resists) available from empire faction LP stores. Something like the Domination invul field (25%), maybe slightly better, from something that's not just drop-based would be nice.
Akara Ito
Phalanx Solutions
#173 - 2011-11-10 22:28:34 UTC
Arkady Sadik wrote:
Shield resist mods being more expensive than armor ones:

steave435 wrote:
Consider why that is though.
Lacking a deadspace level in between officer and faction, those that would have liked to buy a deadspace one but can't afford an officer one will instead be willing to pay close to the same for a faction invul.
I like that explanation and hadn't thought of it, but I also think one of the issues is that there is no invul field on the level of the IN EANMs (28% resists) available from empire faction LP stores. Something like the Domination invul field (25%), maybe slightly better, from something that's not just drop-based would be nice.


T2 Invuls have 30 % Roll
Caldari/ DG Invuls have 37.5 %
Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#174 - 2011-11-10 23:10:10 UTC
Arkady Sadik wrote:
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.

You clearly haven't checked prices lately. The last CN Invuln I sold went for about 570 million ISK, and that was just a couple weeks ago.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#175 - 2011-11-10 23:14:59 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:
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

My main thoughts upon seeing this:

Won't we need Armor Crystals? Or will Shield Slaves have a lesser effect than the current HG implant rings (currently about 51 percent) ? What factions would these implants come from?

What will the effect on current Faction Invulnerability Fields be? Will they be nerfed, will they become cheaper? As it is now (and has been for ages), they are a wildly powerful improvement over standard invulns, meriting costs in the half-billion-isk range. Will they nerf them down to 33-35 percent and decrease the price? What will be the drop rate on deadspace invulns? They could concievably drive the price down on, or even obsolete, Caldari Navy Invulns if the existing modules are not changed.

I know these are things that CCP themselves probably have not figured out yet, but it gives an idea of the challenges that are met with such a decision. Some of the choices were easy: Fix shield leadership bonuses. All you need to do is make the bonused person's shields stay at the same percent-level as they were at prior to bonuses being applied.

But deciding to add new things to the mix, particularly Shield Slaves, could change the balance of power between different races and fleet compositions forever.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#176 - 2011-11-10 23:34:26 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
What will the effect on current Faction Invulnerability Fields be? Will they be nerfed, will they become cheaper? As it is now (and has been for ages), they are a wildly powerful improvement over standard invulns, meriting costs in the half-billion-isk range. Will they nerf them down to 33-35 percent and decrease the price? What will be the drop rate on deadspace invulns? They could concievably drive the price down on, or even obsolete, Caldari Navy Invulns if the existing modules are not changed.

Why would that incorporate any nerf? Did you not read what he wrote?
C-Type Invuls = Kaikka's
B-Type Invuls = Thon's
A-Type Invuls = Vepas'
(X-Type Invuls = Estamel's ... they do not exist, similar to X-Type EANMs which would correspond to Chelm/Draclira/Cormack EANMs and do not exist either).

Basically, like with EVERY OTHER MODULE IN EVE.
And like every Medium sized deadspace module, they will drop from 4/10, 5/10 and 6/10 plex overseer rats.

And he already wrote that this could also mean the introduction of armor crystals.

Quote:
But deciding to add new things to the mix, particularly Shield Slaves, could change the balance of power between different races and fleet compositions forever.
Oh my, oh my, RUN FOR THE HILLS.
And negligible compared to the gangbonus reload change. Shield fleets not losing massive HP amounts to travel and jumps during fluid engagements will have a much bigger impact. Oh, and a positive at that.

@CCP Tallest: btw, isn't it time for high-grade secondary faction sets? HG Nomad, Centurion, Harvest, Edge etc
Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#177 - 2011-11-10 23:51:03 UTC
And all this wankerizing about Motherships getting nerfed... get a grip.

Motherships will still be the equivalent of high-DPS dreads, with excellent damage projection (that even follows its targets in warp for Pete's sake), Remote ECM Burst, no siege mode to worry about, and 10-30x the EHP of a Dread (can't be DD'd in one shot by Titans) with massively improved resists.

Seriously. How is that in any way bad.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

Amsterdam Conversations
Doomheim
#178 - 2011-11-10 23:58:51 UTC
How can you even compare EANMs to invuls? They give the same bonus, but they differ in one very obvious thing: One of them is active, the other one is passive. One of them gets high bonuses from skills, the other one doesn't.

Just to make myself clear: While the A-Type EANM says it gives a 28% bonus to all resists, it actually gives a 35% bonus after skills. And that is being a passive module.
A faction invulnerability field gives either +37.5% bonus, or it gives the +15% standard bonus when offline. Read: Neuted out, and neuting out a super isn't terribly hard considering you need a couple ten thousand DPS to kill it.

This is, implants aside, the one major reason for imbalance between shield and armor supers: Shield supers do not have a passive invulnerability field. They're factually required to run 7 active hardeners at once (invuls needing 2x the cap of the damage specifics too), while an armor super only needs to run 4 damage specific armor hardeners.

Add to this that shield supers have to sacrifice tank to fit shinies like sensor boosters and warp disruptors (which should not at all be shinies but required).

All we really need are passive invulnerability fields, balanced to not replace their active counterparts obviously.
bornaa
GRiD.
#179 - 2011-11-11 00:02:07 UTC
Amsterdam Conversations wrote:
How can you even compare EANMs to invuls? They give the same bonus, but they differ in one very obvious thing: One of them is active, the other one is passive. One of them gets high bonuses from skills, the other one doesn't.

Just to make myself clear: While the A-Type EANM says it gives a 28% bonus to all resists, it actually gives a 35% bonus after skills. And that is being a passive module.
A faction invulnerability field gives either +37.5% bonus, or it gives the +15% standard bonus when offline. Read: Neuted out, and neuting out a super isn't terribly hard considering you need a couple ten thousand DPS to kill it.

This is, implants aside, the one major reason for imbalance between shield and armor supers: Shield supers do not have a passive invulnerability field. They're factually required to run 7 active hardeners at once (invuls needing 2x the cap of the damage specifics too), while an armor super only needs to run 4 damage specific armor hardeners.

Add to this that shield supers have to sacrifice tank to fit shinies like sensor boosters and warp disruptors (which should not at all be shinies but required).

All we really need are passive invulnerability fields, balanced to not replace their active counterparts obviously.


I like you man...
[Yes, I'm an Amateur](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRa-69uBmIw&feature=relmfu)
Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#180 - 2011-11-11 00:03:54 UTC
Mioelnir wrote:
Iam Widdershins wrote:
What will the effect on current Faction Invulnerability Fields be? Will they be nerfed, will they become cheaper? As it is now (and has been for ages), they are a wildly powerful improvement over standard invulns, meriting costs in the half-billion-isk range. Will they nerf them down to 33-35 percent and decrease the price? What will be the drop rate on deadspace invulns? They could concievably drive the price down on, or even obsolete, Caldari Navy Invulns if the existing modules are not changed.

Why would that incorporate any nerf? Did you not read what he wrote?
C-Type Invuls = Kaikka's
B-Type Invuls = Thon's
A-Type Invuls = Vepas'
(X-Type Invuls = Estamel's ... they do not exist, similar to X-Type EANMs which would correspond to Chelm/Draclira/Cormack EANMs and do not exist either).

Basically, like with EVERY OTHER MODULE IN EVE.
And like every Medium sized deadspace module, they will drop from 4/10, 5/10 and 6/10 plex overseer rats.

And he already wrote that this could also mean the introduction of armor crystals.

Quote:
But deciding to add new things to the mix, particularly Shield Slaves, could change the balance of power between different races and fleet compositions forever.
Oh my, oh my, RUN FOR THE HILLS.
And negligible compared to the gangbonus reload change. Shield fleets not losing massive HP amounts to travel and jumps during fluid engagements will have a much bigger impact. Oh, and a positive at that.

False. In after you are a ragey wanker and you don't even think things through before posting them.

Take note that active hardeners are Gist, Pith, etc. (large size) while passive hardeners are Gistum, Pithum etc. (medium size). Therefore they will obviously drop from 7-10/10 sites. Also, X-Types would exist, because as they are Large size they have four tiers of deadspace. I don't know if you noticed this, but the reason only Large modules (like Heavy Nos and X-Large Shield Boosters) have X-Type variations is because Smalls drop from 1, 2, and 3/10, Mediums drop from 4, 5, and 6/10, while Larges drop from 7, 8, 9, and 10/10 sites: thus, having one more meta level available.

And, no, the gang bonus change doesn't make that huge a difference; unless you are bringing a Leviathan with you every single jump (I wouldn't be surprised lolol) it's 15% at most, which isn't THAT huge of a difference. (It's nice, but it isn't world-changing.) The big change will be in where Drakes, Vultures, Tengus, and more importantly Caldari capital and super-capital ships will be able to have 30 to 50 percent greater buffer tank. In conjunction with the leadership bonus change, the Wyvern would become the uncontested Number-1 largest tank in the game, while Tengus, Broadswords, Onyxes, and Vultures would gain even more ridiculous buffer/recharge tanks than ever before.

Next time please think before you post.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature