These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Capital Q&A

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Milostiev
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#321 - 2016-06-05 08:26:43 UTC
I wrote more than that, feel free to test it yourself.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#322 - 2016-06-05 08:30:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
i have


now i do think fighters could lose some Expl vel to help with this issue.

it would make it harder on unsupported carriers but have little effect on carriers with support

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Milostiev
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#323 - 2016-06-05 12:27:55 UTC
Expl velocity is part of the issue, but it's not gamebreaking by far, and in the age of AB everything, it is actually needed.

At this point i can only go with 2 suppositions, you are either one of the ppl who likes to use this to hell so is happy with this 'balance', or you have no idea about the mechanics of the game you play.
I tend to go with first, because of your avoidance of facts and figures.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#324 - 2016-06-05 21:50:55 UTC
Casandra Elise McIntire wrote:
I waited for Citadels to go live and see if there was gonna be any changes to capitals, as they are all massively broken in one way or another.

Hands down shield caps are by far superior in just about every way to armor. Only the Phoenix lags behind, and that is only due to it being missile based. Shield caps have stronger tanks, better fitting options and more potential DPS. Even with Caldari having fitting issues, they still are easily superior.

The cap mods themselves are vastly over priced in fittings. Mods like the cap batteries, armor plates and flex hardeners are completely skewed, with much better options available from the subcap lineup.

Yet again, CCP has zero clue in how ships are fit, and why some moduals are completely ignored.

Cap batteries in particular could be massively effective, but do to extremely high fittings, options like flux coils and cap rechargers far exceed them in function and fitting needs.

Armor plates offer much lower HP bonuses for much higher costs than shield extenders, which have no passive regen vs the latter. Shield fits also gain bonus tank low slots via PDU's, dmg controls, and regen mods. Yet armor still gains none of these advantages.

Then we get into cap mod sizes, all of which are massively larger than basic variants, for no real reason. In a subcap, you can carry nearly a full change of ship fittings, plus a mobile depot for refits. In a cap, you can barely carry any options, much less cap charges.

This entire "rebalance" seems to be more of a complete imbalance to me.

Change can be good, but when it is bad, then get off your duffs and fix it. You've had 3 weeks, yet the only changes have been fixing things that should have never made it to TQ, just like these caps changes shouldn't have, until they had been fully looked at.

Completely agree. It seems that whilst there is a lot of good ideas with the capitals themselves, the actual modules were poorly thought out and balanced. Speaks volumes that in the majority of cases fitting a sub capital module is preferable and cheaper than fitting the capital variant. And the whole armour / shield imbalance is glaringly obvious even upon an initial glance and so I have no idea how this could have passed testing.