These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Kronos: Welcome back, unkillable supercarriers.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jamuro
Perkone
Caldari State
#61 - 2014-06-05 09:41:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Jamuro
OK i bite ...


Fighters got a realy nice buff ... that's for sure, but it was a very much needed one.


Before the changes, a Super was basically always ******, as soon as a competend hictor pilot layed eyes on it.
Fighters couldn't hit em for **** and good luck trying to cap em out with booster charges or even a few noses (because let's face it who the hell needs all his guns on a hic that's designed to TACKLE.
Basically once you had a point on you you just could hope to ecm bust it and run and in case of a bubble (null, yeah still a thing)
you are done for.

Hics still have a ton of ehp, fighter still can be shot down easily by support (and the supers doen't even have many of em any more), cycle time of the point/bubble got reduced so much, that logi and hic pilot both have to be asleep to **** things up and your cap is a nonissue, if you prepare to do you job (which is tackling and not dealing laughable dps)

Now the reason why you never will see a dedicated fighter only super fleet as a means to all ends ... it's EXPENSIVE and still risky.
Why risk a Super fleet, if a cheapass subcap fleet can do a hell of a lot more and can gtfo if **** goes south?

To people thinking that assigned fighter will be a thing ... THEY LOSE ALL THEIR BONI ... which means you have 10 assigned fighters, with no speed, no tracking and not even the damage buff.
Thanks to the role bonus assigning fighters just doesn't work any more.

Carriers on the other hand ... well only time will tell, but i would bet that insta applied dps from sentries is still prevered.
Servanda
Liga Freier Terraner
Northern Coalition.
#62 - 2014-06-05 09:53:54 UTC
Jamuro wrote:


To people thinking that assigned fighter will be a thing ... THEY LOSE ALL THEIR BONI ...


Nope. They keep them
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#63 - 2014-06-05 10:05:30 UTC
Arronicus wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
So basically you point is that a super carrier can kill a tech 2 cruiser.

Very interesting.....


My point is that supercarriers recieved an effective 140% increase to fighter damage, 100%+ increase to fighter hp, and with a couple omnis and nav computers, a significant increase to not only how fast fighters get in position to apply their dps, but how accurately and effectively they can do so, WHEN fit for full fighter use.



Considerign no one used normal fighters anymore was needed.

The thing is.. the trackign of the fighters shoudl be ajusted to not be so effective on anything smaller than a battleship or fat BC.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2014-06-05 10:09:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Bill Lane wrote:
It's a super-carrier for pete's sake. IT SHOULD BE OP!

By very definition, no.



By definitions it shoudl be Super something only. If it is super expensive its enough to fullfil the SUPER prefix.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Shade Millith
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#65 - 2014-06-05 10:22:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Shade Millith
Jamuro wrote:
To people thinking that assigned fighter will be a thing ... THEY LOSE ALL THEIR BONI ... which means you have 10 assigned fighters, with no speed, no tracking and not even the damage buff.
Thanks to the role bonus assigning fighters just doesn't work any more.



Nope. As far as I can tell they keep them.

I tested it myself. First target I saw in system, went and stuck fighters on him with an alt from my carrier fitted with a bunch of DDA's, Omnitracking Links and a Navigation Computer.

*snip* Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited. ISD Ezwal.

EDIT: *Insert KM of a Slicer being murdered by fighters here.*

He pretty much vaporized. And that was just from a Chimera. It would have been even worse if I was flying a Thanatos. Heaven forbid if it was a Nyx.

Heck, I wouldn't even be so upset if they did lose their bonuses when delegated. But right now they turn an interceptor into a murder machine.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#66 - 2014-06-05 10:28:01 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Bill Lane wrote:
It's a super-carrier for pete's sake. IT SHOULD BE OP!

By very definition, no.

By definitions it shoudl be Super something only. If it is super expensive its enough to fullfil the SUPER prefix.

Well, yes. That too. Lol
I was thinking more about the definition of over-powered — nothing ”should” ever be OP because that means the design has failed monumentally.
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#67 - 2014-06-05 10:31:07 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Bill Lane wrote:
It's a super-carrier for pete's sake. IT SHOULD BE OP!

By very definition, no.

By definitions it shoudl be Super something only. If it is super expensive its enough to fullfil the SUPER prefix.

Well, yes. That too. Lol
I was thinking more about the definition of over-powered — nothing ”should” ever be OP because that means the design has failed monumentally.


but it should be able to overpower some enemy vessels on a 1-to-1/small roaming basis, especially if such a craft is "only" a cruiser.

"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
#68 - 2014-06-05 10:33:35 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Arronicus wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
So basically you point is that a super carrier can kill a tech 2 cruiser.

Very interesting.....


My point is that supercarriers recieved an effective 140% increase to fighter damage, 100%+ increase to fighter hp, and with a couple omnis and nav computers, a significant increase to not only how fast fighters get in position to apply their dps, but how accurately and effectively they can do so, WHEN fit for full fighter use.



Considerign no one used normal fighters anymore was needed.

The thing is.. the trackign of the fighters shoudl be ajusted to not be so effective on anything smaller than a battleship or fat BC.

And why is that? Fighters are smaller than frigates, so I find it laughable that anyone would believe that a fighter should have problems hitting them. Imagine playing Valkyrie and for some :reason: you can't hit anything smaller than a battlecruiser which dwarfs you in size.*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Shade Millith
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#69 - 2014-06-05 11:02:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Shade Millith
Money Makin Mitch wrote:
And why is that? Fighters are smaller than frigates, so I find it laughable that anyone would believe that a fighter should have problems hitting them. Imagine playing Valkyrie and for some :reason: you can't hit anything smaller than a battlecruiser which dwarfs you in size. I think people crying about supercaps just need to stop being poor and HTFU. When I started playing I was poor as any noob - my solution was to put some work in, not cry about nerfing ships I couldn't afford.


Because the balance of the game should never be 'To beat X you need more X'. It was the entire reason Titans and Supercarriers got such a massive nerf in the first place. Because to beat a Titan fleet, you either brought a bigger Titan fleet or go home.

That wasn't good game balance.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2014-06-05 11:05:53 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Money Makin Mitch wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Arronicus wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
So basically you point is that a super carrier can kill a tech 2 cruiser.

Very interesting.....


My point is that supercarriers recieved an effective 140% increase to fighter damage, 100%+ increase to fighter hp, and with a couple omnis and nav computers, a significant increase to not only how fast fighters get in position to apply their dps, but how accurately and effectively they can do so, WHEN fit for full fighter use.



Considerign no one used normal fighters anymore was needed.

The thing is.. the trackign of the fighters shoudl be ajusted to not be so effective on anything smaller than a battleship or fat BC.

And why is that? Fighters are smaller than frigates, so I find it laughable that anyone would believe that a fighter should have problems hitting them. Imagine playing Valkyrie and for some :reason: you can't hit anything smaller than a battlecruiser which dwarfs you in size. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.



Because of a great concept called game balance, that if you ignore would make ONLY carriers and super carriers and nothing else ever be used.

It is not about isk, many of us have money to buy several super cariers if we wanted. But the game should not be limited int way that a single class is utterly dominant. THat is bad game design, uninstersting and not fun.


Nanophoons were far more interesting than capital ships when they were overopered even even so they were nerfed because they were the only thing people flew. Anythign that make several other classes of ships unusable must not be sustained.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Jamuro
Perkone
Caldari State
#71 - 2014-06-05 11:10:16 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Shade Millith wrote:
Jamuro wrote:
To people thinking that assigned fighter will be a thing ... THEY LOSE ALL THEIR BONI ... which means you have 10 assigned fighters, with no speed, no tracking and not even the damage buff.
Thanks to the role bonus assigning fighters just doesn't work any more.



Nope. As far as I can tell they keep them.

I tested it myself. First target I saw in system, went and stuck fighters on him with an alt from my carrier fitted with a bunch of DDA's, Omnitracking Links and a Navigation Computer.

*snip* Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited. ISD Ezwal.

He pretty much vaporized. And that was just from a Chimera. It would have been even worse if I was flying a Thanatos. Heaven forbid if it was a Nyx.

Heck, I wouldn't even be so upset if they did lose their bonuses when delegated. But right now they turn an interceptor into a murder machine.


Ok if that's the case then is should be fixed ... i assumed the boni work the same way as role boni on a thanna or nyx did so far.
Pretty sure that keeping the boni when assigning fighter, wasn't intended.

And while i agree that there may be the possibility that the fighters can cause issues with big carrier fleets ...
Supers realy realy needed a defense against the lonesome hero hic.
Basically supers were left behind with all the changes to hic's and the modules they use.

It was absurd that a super wasn't even able to fend off a single HIC (again a fit made for tackling and a not total noobish pilot, which is probably the most important thing when it comes to hic's)

I still think the fighter changes are a step in the right direction, maybe some fine tuning is needed.
I don't think any of the super pilots feel the need for their fighters to hit interceptors, but at least the bloated sig of a hic with point on should allow for serious damage.
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
#72 - 2014-06-05 11:13:31 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Shade Millith wrote:
Money Makin Mitch wrote:
And why is that? Fighters are smaller than frigates, so I find it laughable that anyone would believe that a fighter should have problems hitting them. Imagine playing Valkyrie and for some :reason: you can't hit anything smaller than a battlecruiser which dwarfs you in size.*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.


Because the balance of the game should never be 'To beat X you need more X'. It was the entire reason Titans and Supercarriers got such a massive nerf in the first place. Because to beat a Titan fleet, you either brought a bigger Titan fleet or go home.

That wasn't good game balance.

'game balance' can be maintained without doing ridiculous **** like having a 300m be able to indefinitely point a 30b ship.
Django Askulf
Black Rebel Death Squad
#73 - 2014-06-05 11:14:34 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Shade Millith wrote:

Because to beat a Titan fleet, you either brought a bigger Titan fleet or go home.

That wasn't good game balance.


Sounds like balance of normal war to me.*Snip* Removed off topic part of the post. ISD Ezwal.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#74 - 2014-06-05 12:09:40 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.


This thread has also been moved to Ships & Modules.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Servanda
Liga Freier Terraner
Northern Coalition.
#75 - 2014-06-05 12:15:45 UTC
The problem is not the tracking. The Fighters only hit small targets well if they are mwd'ing away from them so they start following and hit the target with a very smal transversal speed. you could nerf tracking to **** as long as they fly straight behind you they will always hit.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#76 - 2014-06-05 14:33:35 UTC
Servanda wrote:
The problem is not the tracking. The Fighters only hit small targets well if they are mwd'ing away from them so they start following and hit the target with a very smal transversal speed. you could nerf tracking to **** as long as they fly straight behind you they will always hit.


QFT.

Any good frigate pilot knows that you never fly directly towards or away from a battleship (or, really, anything if you can help it). Near zero transversal = instapop waiting to happen. This is the same with fighters, heavy drones, etc. If they're orbiting a frigate, even a relatively slow one, they generally can't hit it all that well, but if the frigate is trying to burn away and they're just following right behind it, there is very little transversal and that frigate is going to die very quickly.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#77 - 2014-06-05 15:21:46 UTC
*Reads OP*
*Checks maths*
*Math is correct, Fighters ARE better at killing smaller ships now.*
*Wonders when Supers became immune to fighters killing them*
*Envision carrier blobs killing supers and laughing off support fleets with no need for triage*

The time of the "Orbit at 500m carrier" has returned. CAPITALS BEWARE.
Athraws
Rising Thunder
#78 - 2014-06-05 17:00:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Athraws
Only two things to say:

First, this was already mentioned in test server feedback, but of course no one looked at it...
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348932&find=unread

And second, for those who say that supercarriers are SUPPOSED to be nigh-invincible subcap blapping machines with no need for anything as silly as a support fleet:
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/capital-ship-balancing/
"If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier"

I suggest you read this, and be enlightened.
Ginger Barbarella
#79 - 2014-06-05 17:22:46 UTC
Posting in a capital whine thread... *yay*

What I think would be a great change and one that would guarantee the "multi-player" part of MMORPG would be if capitals actually required two (2) pilots to actually fly them! Different roles for operating the single ship for each pilot!

It *is* a multiplayer game, after all, no?

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#80 - 2014-06-05 18:11:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Arronicus
Athraws wrote:
Only two things to say:

First, this was already mentioned in test server feedback, but of course no one looked at it...
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348932&find=unread

And second, for those who say that supercarriers are SUPPOSED to be nigh-invincible subcap blapping machines with no need for anything as silly as a support fleet:
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/capital-ship-balancing/
"If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier"

I suggest you read this, and be enlightened.


People are all too happy to forget that part. CCP included, apparently.

Ginger Barbarella wrote:
Posting in a balance supercarriers thread... *yay*

What I think would be a great change and one that would guarantee the "multi-player" part of MMORPG would be if capitals actually required two (2) pilots to actually fly them! Different roles for operating the single ship for each pilot!

It *is* a multiplayer game, after all, no?


They already do in a sense. You need two players to move them around unless you use cyno beacons.