Test Server Feedback

Those capital modules are nice, but I have a few suggestions:

1. Capital modules fittable on battleships

As all of you know, it is possbile to fit for example 100MN afterburners in cruisers or 10mn afterburners into destroyers, the same also with shield extenders and armor plates(frigates with medium shield extenders or 400mn plates, cruisers with large extenders and 1600mm plates). In this case, you cant fit these capital modules into battleship, either they have restrictions or they use insane amount of pg(many times more than a battleship has). My suggestion is to divide the powergrid use of capital shield extenders, armor plates and afterburners by 10 to make them fittable into battleships. I don't know why cruisers can fit battleship modules and then battleships cant fit capital modules. I also dont believe that a battleship with a capital shield extender (then using 8000 pg instead of 80000) will be that overpowered, because it triples its signature and uses around 50% of its powerpool. The same is the case on cruisers fitting for example 100mn afterburners, they accelerate slowly and use 30-50% of their pg pool. Also you notice that the EHP battlecruisers and Battleships get from 1600mn plates plus implants and eams are almost similar. Armageddon with 2x T2 1600mn plates, 2x eanm 2 and dcu, 3x T2 armor pumps plus HG slave set gets 26k more ehp than a prophency with the same modules and implants fitted. This is probably the reason why battleships are underwhelming in some cases -> they dont have oversized modules other than frigs and cruisers.

So, please make it possibile to fit capital shield extenders, capital armor plates, 1000mn afterburners(obviously change the AB speed bonus on the Nightmare then to 20%), 5000mn microwarpdrives and capital cap batterys into battleships by reducing theyr PG need, but still make sure that they use around 30-50%(4000 to 7000) of the whole PG pool per module, so that they can't really make use of more than one capital module.

2. Algin of capital ships is horrible:
I tested out a Naglfar that goes 1200m/s or 1700m/s with heat and noticed that the algineffect of that ship is horrible. Even with 14sec algin time, turns really slow, so that it flys backwards or sidewards with full speed. This is also the reason why they often enter warp back or sideway.

Suggeston: make sure that capital ships turn as fast as battleships, so they rotate faster and no longer warp of fly side or backway. This looks really horrible.

Considering titans can't hurt sub caps and supers used to have no abulity to use sib cap drones I don't think it should be an issue if super carriers are only a little or no better at dealing with sub capitals I really hope you take a second look at this ccp. At the moment with Haw as effective as they ate there is very little reason to train carriers do to how much longer the hull and weapons take to train than dreads.


Disadvantage of dreads

Stuck in one place for 5 min

Illusion of shorter range than fighters.

Less application without fleet support

Disadvantage of carriers

DPS can be killed

Significantly longer to reload of not fighting right of the carrier

Monstrously longer training time

Not effective against other capital ships.

Less dps than HAW



Why most of this becomes an issue is carriers can only fight sub caps but atm there is a better option for less sp

Either fighters need to be stronger/faster (to actually give them the range they appear to have) or haw need to have their dps cut 1/3

Or give carriers some heavys this makes them a better options to dreads do to flexibility but dreads become a better option because they can do more dps to either sub cap or capital.


Personally I like they idea of their role being anti sub cap and I think it will lead to better escalation progression but you cant let them be overshadowed by haw just so they don't compete in their specific role woth one of the super carriers roles

Don't get me wrong I do think haw should have a higher damage potential than carriers just not as much as they do now


EDIT

I forgot the carriers biggest weakness


A T1 frig can permanently jam a carrier if you do nothing else ccp please look at the fighters sensor strength light scout drones have a better ecm resistance



Wait I have been wondering are FSU supposed to be stacking penalised because most of the issues go away if that's a bug

2 I doubt it

3 they heal on their own seeing add all their hp is in shield

4 that speed bonus is probably the most powerful put pod all the carriers add it gives the nid much needed range and makes the fighters harder to kill

After flying a mothership in a 5 frames per second view for an hour, I can another idea for the fighter-bay.

When you detach the fighter-bay to move it on your UI you should have an option to pin it in place, so you cannot move it anymore without unpinning it first.

That ancillary IWIN gun for titans is OP. If it is working as intended there will be titan online following the Citadel release.

A short test to get more reliable numbers:

Templar II with an all V Thannatos with 5 FSU II and 5 DDA II is roughly 1445 dps (only main weapon). Tested against a target with ~450k ehp, so the error should be pretty low.

Thats quite sad damage, considering that a tranq thanny with 5 DDA and 5 DCU and all V is about 3214 damage.

The secondary weapon does roughly the same dps as the primary (damage per hit ~2x, and reload time also 2x), so assuming you would constantly spam the missiles, and would magically not need to reload, then you would still be only at ~2900 dps, which is still 10% below tranq values.

This is just too low.
Carriers got quite a nerf with the removal of the drone bay and more importantly with the removal of their logistic abilities. And dps was never the reason to bring a carrier anyway. They need more dps if they are supposed to be useful.

Yes of course, thats why I said ehp and not hp.

honestly, while im trying to get used to capitals and figure them out, i like it much better being somewhere all by my lonesome. ive only recently in the last couple months finally opened up gallente caps. im one of those OCD freaks who felt compelled to open up every non logi / command ship in the gallente tree first. so being able to undock, and no get instantly DD'd on the dock is much more appealing to me lol

a friend of mine told me about the /moveme command just yesterday so next time im on, i plan to use it so i can at least test out the caps in actual battle scenarios.

in regards to abandoning the drones, anytime i selected them, all i got was track, info and i think approach options. there was only 3 options either way. i certainly wasnt gonna approach them in a nyx 700km away lol. im sure its just another small oversight thing thatll be fixed. i just found it amusing my drones were like lost puppies and decided to just run away once launched

Except currently support fighters are about as useful as Ewar drones



Also making carriers powerful enough to make them viable in this role would mean making them more powerful than the Ewar sub caps and I worry thus would quickly become overpowered in large numbers



:/ that said I would like to see the Ewar fighters become more useful than they are now

Not to mention the anti sub cap role the current balance has placed them in its a perfectly good fit it just needs a bit more tweaking to make sure they do it well enough

I noticed this to and I really hope is a bug that a cap reduction is one of the only reasons to spend the time getting tactical logistics V