These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Citadels] Carriers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#861 - 2016-05-30 23:36:18 UTC
Blood ofGODS wrote:
And additional note with, for example, 2 omnidirectionals. You can expect both a 30% increase in explosion velocity, and a 30% reduction in radius. This makes the beam attack 168 radius, and velocity 156 m/s. This bumps the beam attack application, using the previous formula, to 56% from 46%, assuming new target velocity is 250m/s because no web. Now the Missile attack, with 2 omnis, will do 98.74% damage applied, instead of 100.

So yes, I can ignore velocity of a cruiser or dessie if you are using either ONE web OR TWO omnidirectionals.

Also, fighter base speed with 1 navi comp on T2 templars is 2.16k m/s. With MWD, it goes around 13k m/s, optimal range (beam attack) 11km + 12 km. Good luck avoiding that. By the time the web effectively slows the squad down you've been instablapped. And yes, I have done this and been on receiving end. Like I said before, learn game mechanics before posting.

This discussion has nothing to do with game mechanics as you are describing them (which I do understand and use) - Your limited scenario "best outcome" reply has nothing to do with the scenario the discussion is about.

Try responding (and showing how OP fighters are) in the scenario being discussed - One lone carrier sitting thousands of K's off an undock, insta popping undocking frigates.

FYI; One Griffin is capable of shutting down 3 squads of fighters, removing all their dps ability - Are they OP, or just performing their role?

And honestly, pointing out that light fighters work as intended against their intended targets is like saying any ship capable of performing in its designed for role is OP - Simply because it is capable of carrying out its role.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Blood ofGODS
Relentless Destruction
Immediate Destruction
#862 - 2016-05-31 02:20:56 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Blood ofGODS wrote:
And additional note with, for example, 2 omnidirectionals. You can expect both a 30% increase in explosion velocity, and a 30% reduction in radius. This makes the beam attack 168 radius, and velocity 156 m/s. This bumps the beam attack application, using the previous formula, to 56% from 46%, assuming new target velocity is 250m/s because no web. Now the Missile attack, with 2 omnis, will do 98.74% damage applied, instead of 100.

So yes, I can ignore velocity of a cruiser or dessie if you are using either ONE web OR TWO omnidirectionals.

Also, fighter base speed with 1 navi comp on T2 templars is 2.16k m/s. With MWD, it goes around 13k m/s, optimal range (beam attack) 11km + 12 km. Good luck avoiding that. By the time the web effectively slows the squad down you've been instablapped. And yes, I have done this and been on receiving end. Like I said before, learn game mechanics before posting.

This discussion has nothing to do with game mechanics as you are describing them (which I do understand and use) - Your limited scenario "best outcome" reply has nothing to do with the scenario the discussion is about.

Try responding (and showing how OP fighters are) in the scenario being discussed - One lone carrier sitting thousands of K's off an undock, insta popping undocking frigates.

FYI; One Griffin is capable of shutting down 3 squads of fighters, removing all their dps ability - Are they OP, or just performing their role?

And honestly, pointing out that light fighters work as intended against their intended targets is like saying any ship capable of performing in its designed for role is OP - Simply because it is capable of carrying out its role.


First off, what scenario? I wasn't talking about that, I was talking in general. The application of fighters is my issue. It's way too good. And no, a single griffin would not be able to hold a carrier down. You know why? Because it cannot stop alpha strikes after a recall. And you know how I know this? Because, unlike you, I actually play this game, and fight against carriers - which you have no knowledge of.

My issue is that you can warp a carrier into any gang without heavy logistics and volley through reps, have near perfect application on nearly every ship you encounter, and the ability to get the fighters there no problem. No capital ship HAS EVER been able to do this. None. And now you can. It doesn't belong in this game. Basically, if one carrier doesn't solve the issue, two will. You can only successfully coordinate one carrier disabling with a griffin - if they know what they're doing. Otherwise, you miss one squadron, and the EWAR ship gets volleyed in half a second.

And this isn't "Adapt or Die" - like I'm the poor fruitcake dying to carriers all the time and too unintelligent to do anything about it. My killboard shows I can slaughter them no problem.

Your killboard shows you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#863 - 2016-05-31 03:23:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
No capital ship has ever had a pure anti sub cap role


and where do you get off saying that two omnis give you a 30% bonus? two faction links don't even give you 24%

and a griffen can protect from alpha so long as you are not parking your ship ontop of the carrier.

oh yeah and if the carrier has no support you can just idk..... warp off the disruption drones are move slow are slow to lock and easily jammed.

as for fighter aplication it is ripped apart by an arbitrator or by simply putting WDs on the ships in your fleet and spreading them out. their penalty is much stronger than the tracking links bonus.

also just because some ons kb shows nothing means nothing not a lot of ppl use mains when on the forums hell i think you are one of the only ppl this toon has actually flown with.


and if you can kill them no problem well then... what's the problem

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#864 - 2016-05-31 06:38:10 UTC
Blood ofGODS wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Blood ofGODS wrote:
And additional note with, for example, 2 omnidirectionals. You can expect both a 30% increase in explosion velocity, and a 30% reduction in radius. This makes the beam attack 168 radius, and velocity 156 m/s. This bumps the beam attack application, using the previous formula, to 56% from 46%, assuming new target velocity is 250m/s because no web. Now the Missile attack, with 2 omnis, will do 98.74% damage applied, instead of 100.

So yes, I can ignore velocity of a cruiser or dessie if you are using either ONE web OR TWO omnidirectionals.

Also, fighter base speed with 1 navi comp on T2 templars is 2.16k m/s. With MWD, it goes around 13k m/s, optimal range (beam attack) 11km + 12 km. Good luck avoiding that. By the time the web effectively slows the squad down you've been instablapped. And yes, I have done this and been on receiving end. Like I said before, learn game mechanics before posting.

This discussion has nothing to do with game mechanics as you are describing them (which I do understand and use) - Your limited scenario "best outcome" reply has nothing to do with the scenario the discussion is about.

Try responding (and showing how OP fighters are) in the scenario being discussed - One lone carrier sitting thousands of K's off an undock, insta popping undocking frigates.

FYI; One Griffin is capable of shutting down 3 squads of fighters, removing all their dps ability - Are they OP, or just performing their role?

And honestly, pointing out that light fighters work as intended against their intended targets is like saying any ship capable of performing in its designed for role is OP - Simply because it is capable of carrying out its role.


First off, what scenario? I wasn't talking about that, I was talking in general. The application of fighters is my issue. It's way too good. And no, a single griffin would not be able to hold a carrier down. You know why? Because it cannot stop alpha strikes after a recall. And you know how I know this? Because, unlike you, I actually play this game, and fight against carriers - which you have no knowledge of.

My issue is that you can warp a carrier into any gang without heavy logistics and volley through reps, have near perfect application on nearly every ship you encounter, and the ability to get the fighters there no problem. No capital ship HAS EVER been able to do this. None. And now you can. It doesn't belong in this game. Basically, if one carrier doesn't solve the issue, two will. You can only successfully coordinate one carrier disabling with a griffin - if they know what they're doing. Otherwise, you miss one squadron, and the EWAR ship gets volleyed in half a second.

And this isn't "Adapt or Die" - like I'm the poor fruitcake dying to carriers all the time and too unintelligent to do anything about it. My killboard shows I can slaughter them no problem.

Your killboard shows you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Ohh the "my killboard shows" line.. I so luv that one.
Get a clue -Very Very few players actually post with their mains.

>"My issue is" - Your one of "that" crowd who wants it all easy - Why should anyone going to fight a carrier have to require a decent fleet comp.

> Most carrier fights I come across are; the carrier is there and gets engaged by a large or small blob - Expecting an easy kill vs a ship specifically designed to counter them.

> Basically, if one carrier - Bring dreads (boy some people are slow)

>Adapt or Die - Maybe not - But you are the one here crying about how OP they are. Which would seem to be quite unfounded looking at how many die each day.
But hey, what would I know - Right?

Seems your nothing but a cry baby "don't change eve" and for that, I feel sorry for you.

NB; Sooo - You decided to high jack an ongoing discussion with your own (I don't like change) biases - Well done.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#865 - 2016-05-31 06:41:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
I have a hard time beliving he is just one of the "change is bad" people. I have flow with him before and i'm pretty sure it's just that he comes from the small gang crowed and to them a carrier can seem very op when trying to fight it like a normal cap.

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#866 - 2016-05-31 07:14:42 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
I have a hard time beliving he is just one of the "change is bad" people. I have flow with him before and i'm pretty sure it's just that he comes from the small gang crowed and to them a carrier can seem very op when trying to fight it like a normal cap.

Everything I've heard about him tells me he isn't But his posting here indicates otherwise.

Carriers were given a whole new role, I was very skeptical about this new role (as seen in early posts in this thread) but have come around after flying and fighting against the new Carriers. (Still think carriers need a dedicated support fighter launch tube)

They can't be compared to the carriers of old, they are a brand new class of ship that got stuck with an old name - Devs let the side down by keeping the old class name, they came up with a new name for capital logistics, why not for the "new" Carriers as well.
This would have removed silly arguments like the one above, simply because no-one would have had preconceptions about them.

Yes new carriers may be a little OP when trying to fight them with small ships but this IS intended - The other, more important side of this coin - A Carrier will just die as soon as a super or even a dread lands on grid as they just aren't designed to fight other capital ships. Pretty big trade off for a capital ship, yes?

If you can't kill carriers because they just aplha small ships - Bring bigger ships - or USE LOGI or both.
A poor fleet comp does not make Carriers/Light Fighters OP.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#867 - 2016-05-31 07:28:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
well the chimera can survive against two supers even without logistics ^.^ i have pulled that off (no other carrier can don't try it). but yeah dreads melt them and they are helpless against well flown sub caps.

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#868 - 2016-05-31 07:40:54 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
as for fighter aplication it is ripped apart by an arbitrator or by simply putting WDs on the ships in your fleet and spreading them out. their penalty is much stronger than the tracking links bonus.


They don't actually work. Immune. Likewise the remote versions also do not work.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#869 - 2016-05-31 07:55:27 UTC
they should be immune to the remote(helpfull) ones not the offensive ones though... that has to be a bug and i thought they fixed it

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#870 - 2016-05-31 08:22:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
Nah, it is currently working as intended, but they are considering it. I don't mind a two way street, but if you're able to ewar it, remote assistance as a counter should be an option imo.


________


Here's a great video showing fighter lag/lock times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfzZZ0olP3Y&feature=youtu.be
Lugh Crow-Slave
#871 - 2016-05-31 08:28:11 UTC
i know the remote assistance is working as intended as it says so in their attributes but ccp repeatedly commented on them being effected by e-war and they even built it into the UI. E-war also affects all other drones and ecm works so where did you hear that it was working as intended?

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#872 - 2016-05-31 08:39:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
i know the remote assistance is working as intended as it says so in their attributes but ccp repeatedly commented on them being effected by e-war and they even built it into the UI. E-war also affects all other drones and ecm works so where did you hear that it was working as intended?

Well quite some time ago Larrikin told me to make a bug report on tracking disruptors and range damps not affecting fighters. It's still open, so I'm not sure what's going on. Tracking disruptors definitely don't work as of 2 days ago though.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#873 - 2016-05-31 08:51:16 UTC
remember when ccp said the moved to a faster release scheduled because it made it easier to delay things that were to buggy and quickly fix the ones that were kinda buggy? it seems like they just use it now to rush things out and maybe get around to fixing them...

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#874 - 2016-05-31 09:12:25 UTC
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
i know the remote assistance is working as intended as it says so in their attributes but ccp repeatedly commented on them being effected by e-war and they even built it into the UI. E-war also affects all other drones and ecm works so where did you hear that it was working as intended?

Well quite some time ago Larrikin told me to make a bug report on tracking disruptors and range damps not affecting fighters. It's still open, so I'm not sure what's going on. Tracking disruptors definitely don't work as of 2 days ago though.


Yeah my recollection was they were looking into making it work on them. I may have misinterpreted, I took that to mean it was currently working as intended and they may look to change.
Blood ofGODS
Relentless Destruction
Immediate Destruction
#875 - 2016-05-31 13:49:31 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:

Ohh the "my killboard shows" line.. I so luv that one.
Get a clue -Very Very few players actually post with their mains.

>"My issue is" - Your one of "that" crowd who wants it all easy - Why should anyone going to fight a carrier have to require a decent fleet comp.

> Most carrier fights I come across are; the carrier is there and gets engaged by a large or small blob - Expecting an easy kill vs a ship specifically designed to counter them.

> Basically, if one carrier - Bring dreads (boy some people are slow)

>Adapt or Die - Maybe not - But you are the one here crying about how OP they are. Which would seem to be quite unfounded looking at how many die each day.
But hey, what would I know - Right?

Seems your nothing but a cry baby "don't change eve" and for that, I feel sorry for you.

NB; Sooo - You decided to high jack an ongoing discussion with your own (I don't like change) biases - Well done.


Are you really that daft? My issue with the new carriers is that it makes it way too easy for people to kill others. Many die each day because morons, like yourself, fly them into people, like me.
The change to the new carrier role is good. The change to having fighters instablapping small ships with impunity DOES NOT belong in this game. Literally some mongoloid sits there and kills frigs with a carrier and thinks they are 1337 or something.
All I want CCP to do is move the DPS application of the rocket salvo to somewhere where the current turret attack is (240m) and possibly reduce the weapon attack to around 200m radius. Nothing needs to change with the damage, alpha, or projection. That would make sense. My entire issue with the carriers is the application is way too good for a ship of their size class.
Blood ofGODS
Relentless Destruction
Immediate Destruction
#876 - 2016-05-31 13:58:18 UTC
Also, this is the general consensus on why carriers are broken (application and instalocking) summed up in a reddit post.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4lt53t/psa_if_you_think_instalock_svipul_are_cancer/

You guys fall under the: "this is completely balanced because I am a carrier pilot and feel it should be after all I trained the skills and spend mad isk" category.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#877 - 2016-05-31 14:13:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
Blood ofGODS wrote:
Also, this is the general consensus on why carriers are broken (application and instalocking) summed up in a reddit post.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4lt53t/psa_if_you_think_instalock_svipul_are_cancer/

You guys fall under the: "this is completely balanced because I am a carrier pilot and feel it should be after all I trained the skills and spend mad isk" category.




I take it you didn't get as far as the post completely debunking that set of images? He's just buttmad about carriers.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4lt53t/psa_if_you_think_instalock_svipul_are_cancer/d3q5bz3

TLDR: Fighters do not instantly lock, they have a lock time and a very noticeable delay between activating their weapons and damage being applied. I made a video and short explanation below and why I think the in-game logs are not accurate to the second.
This is something you can actually test, and I have done many tests when it comes to carriers and fighters. I have even gone as far as making a horrible training video for our Alliance M8ts. I have many kills with insta-locking carriers, these are all post-expansion kills. I have participated in many station carrier fleets AND been in combat with my fighters. People who do this will tell you there is a delay.
I've even gone as far as recording myself doing this with my alt on Sisi (https://youtu.be/hfzZZ0olP3Y) and there is a very noticeable delay from activating the skill and the weapons starting. This is a carrier with over 3k scan res. The carrier does in fact insta lock the abbadon but upon activating the guns, you can see on the other client that there is a delay as the fighter must lock and then fire.
EFT IS AN HAS NEVER BEEN A GOOD TOOL FOR BALANCE DISCUSSIONS as it always shows you best case scenario and doesn't always account for everything.
What is most likely happening is the client is only receiving a log notification when the server reports it. In that case, things may be happening faster than your client is being updated, lag or whatever, so your client receives multiple messages during the same tick. It's also possible that the events aren't even server time stamped and are only time stamped by the client when it receives and processes the log events. If you want to see how many log messages the client actually receives, play around the the LogServer in your game install directory tree, it is (or used to) be there.
SO, I give you....experience using the system and actual video evidence showing the delay, your move.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#878 - 2016-05-31 14:21:33 UTC
Blood ofGODS wrote:
Also, this is the general consensus on why carriers are broken (application and instalocking) summed up in a reddit post.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4lt53t/psa_if_you_think_instalock_svipul_are_cancer/

You guys fall under the: "this is completely balanced because I am a carrier pilot and feel it should be after all I trained the skills and spend mad isk" category.



way to cherry pick there


also i'm not a carrier pilot. well not all that much i have flown them a few times but i mainly fly logi and e-war

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Lugh Crow-Slave
#879 - 2016-05-31 14:26:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Blood ofGODS wrote:
My entire issue with the carriers is the application is way too good for a ship of their size class.



its just like rapid lights or rapid heavies they are built not to hit their weight class but under it.


if e-war is bugged then yes they are broken right now. But that is failed implementation not failed ballance

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Longdrinks
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#880 - 2016-05-31 14:51:19 UTC
Is this the sub 1k kills noobs arguing with experienced players central?

why yes it looks like it is