These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[118.6] Capital Balancing

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
She11by
Big Boys Don't Cry
Kids With Guns Alliance
#781 - 2016-07-02 18:47:13 UTC
Tony Anders wrote:
She11by wrote:
What's the point of getting 9 fighters in 1 squad if u lock all 9 at once? If u want so then make one fighter 9 times stronger \ more durable.

Becouse carrier (A CAPITAL SHIP) having only 3 fighter (a.k.a. drones) would be re_tarded since even frigates can operate 5 drones at once. and super big ship with super stroong computers controling only 3 drones again is stupid.
That's why it having 27 fighter's.

In fact and in practice they got exactly 3 drones right now the only difference is that u call it "squad" instead of just drones.
Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#782 - 2016-07-02 20:23:05 UTC
its actually a lot worse than 3 drones, if it were 3 drones then it would not be possible to reduce their damage by 50% by damaging them to 50%. And it would be possible to repair them back to 100% without buying new ones.
The current system has the negative attributes of a larger number of drones combined with the disadvantages of a small number.
Robertina Palazzo
#783 - 2016-07-02 20:36:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Robertina Palazzo
Marranar Amatin wrote:
its actually a lot worse than 3 drones, if it were 3 drones then it would not be possible to reduce their damage by 50% by damaging them to 50%. And it would be possible to repair them back to 100% without buying new ones.
The current system has the negative attributes of a larger number of drones combined with the disadvantages of a small number.


Nuh haven't you heard the pvpers and gankers? Carrier drones are godmode and unkillable and uncatchable forever even with the nerfs because small ships cant do damage!

I mean, I've never had an experience to make those words true, but.... it's what they claim anyways
She11by
Big Boys Don't Cry
Kids With Guns Alliance
#784 - 2016-07-02 22:13:20 UTC
Marranar Amatin wrote:
its actually a lot worse than 3 drones, if it were 3 drones then it would not be possible to reduce their damage by 50% by damaging them to 50%. And it would be possible to repair them back to 100% without buying new ones.
The current system has the negative attributes of a larger number of drones combined with the disadvantages of a small number.

100% true, looks like x9 drones in 1 big which, for some reason, called "squad" they should rename it to "Brother's grave" or "United we fall" seriously, it's just a worse downgraded version of normal drones.
Sitting Bull Lakota
Poppins and Company
#785 - 2016-07-03 03:23:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Sitting Bull Lakota
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
We will be looking at... Light Fighter application / alpha.
Tread lightly. Carriers can counter the subcaps that are too small/fast for the HAWs to manage, and that's about it. They are a small nerf away from being totally outclassed by dreads.
CCP Larrikin wrote:
As always, we welcome your feedback!
Roll
Sigh.
Wellp, let me login here and see how these changes work. I expect better application and higher dps against big targets and poor effectiveness against kitey bull$#&%.
Let's see how it compares to the dreadnaught.
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#786 - 2016-07-03 05:06:26 UTC
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
We will be looking at... Light Fighter application / alpha.
Tread lightly. Carriers can counter the subcaps that are too small/fast for the HAWs to manage, and that's about it. They are a small nerf away from being totally outclassed by dreads.
CCP Larrikin wrote:
As always, we welcome your feedback!
Roll
Sigh.
Wellp, let me login here and see how these changes work. I expect better application and higher dps against big targets and poor effectiveness against kitey bull$#&%.
Let's see how it compares to the dreadnaught.

They actually have about 11% less DPS against the few things they can hit perfectly and about 20% less DPS against armor battlecruisers and smaller.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#787 - 2016-07-03 07:06:33 UTC
I tried carriers on tq. They made me go back to CV. Why couldn't they give us 3 light fighters and 2 supports? Supers get their own exclusive catagory of weapons they will not be using supports on any normal day anyway.
Gary Webb
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#788 - 2016-07-04 00:55:27 UTC
thanks for crapping on carriers again ccp. and has anyone else notices that the control range bonus to carriers is gone? now i can not send fighters out past 70km, not sure if this is unintended as it isnt on the changelist. why make them grate again only to ruin them a month later
DoingUntoOthers
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#789 - 2016-07-04 21:43:50 UTC
Gary Webb wrote:
thanks for crapping on carriers again ccp. and has anyone else notices that the control range bonus to carriers is gone? now i can not send fighters out past 70km, not sure if this is unintended as it isnt on the changelist. why make them grate again only to ruin them a month later


There seems to be multiple issues with navigating, sometimes the fighters will just sit in space going "you cannot navigate to selected target please get closer" or something even if they're right on top of the target.

But judging from the recent carrier changes, I can only assume carriers are not priority unless it's to nerf them
She11by
Big Boys Don't Cry
Kids With Guns Alliance
#790 - 2016-07-04 22:01:49 UTC
o_O 70km range for fighters wtf
Morgaine Mighthammer
Rational Chaos Inc.
Brave Collective
#791 - 2016-07-04 22:09:54 UTC
haven't had a chance to test a carrier since the changes, can anyone confirm that fighter control range is nerfed?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#792 - 2016-07-05 00:05:15 UTC
Probably best to post in the bugs & issues patch thread as it will get seen faster, and file a bug report if that's true.
Gary Webb
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#793 - 2016-07-05 04:05:41 UTC
it just seems like every attempt CCP makes to "balance", the muck it up even worse. Carriers were great. I can see the need for the stacking penalty and maybe not such a large reduction in NSA scan res but a reduction none the less, but the absolute **** of missile dps from the fighters make them terrible. they excel at nothing now. they can do a couple of things mediocre. CCPlease fix this.
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#794 - 2016-07-05 05:57:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
haven't had a chance to test a carrier since the changes, can anyone confirm that fighter control range is nerfed?

The control range is still as far as you can lock. The fighters just have their own lock ranges enforced now, so they can't attack when they're beyond about 60km anymore. It also means they're now vulnerable to range damps.
Morgaine Mighthammer
Rational Chaos Inc.
Brave Collective
#795 - 2016-07-05 06:45:51 UTC
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
haven't had a chance to test a carrier since the changes, can anyone confirm that fighter control range is nerfed?

The control range is still as far as you can lock. The fighters just have their own lock ranges enforced now, so they can't attack when they're beyond about 60km anymore. It also means they're now vulnerable to range damps.


good lord that's ********; they were already stupid vulnerable, why make them even more so other than to just make carrier pilots' lives hell enough to make them not fly carriers?
Cade Windstalker
#796 - 2016-07-05 14:43:36 UTC
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
haven't had a chance to test a carrier since the changes, can anyone confirm that fighter control range is nerfed?

The control range is still as far as you can lock. The fighters just have their own lock ranges enforced now, so they can't attack when they're beyond about 60km anymore. It also means they're now vulnerable to range damps.


good lord that's ********; they were already stupid vulnerable, why make them even more so other than to just make carrier pilots' lives hell enough to make them not fly carriers?


For some clarification, they're not *that* vulnerable to them. You might be able to make them unable to lock, but it would take more damps to do that than it does ECM currently so I can't say it's really practical outside of some hilariously niche circumstance.
Morgaine Mighthammer
Rational Chaos Inc.
Brave Collective
#797 - 2016-07-05 17:45:08 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
haven't had a chance to test a carrier since the changes, can anyone confirm that fighter control range is nerfed?

The control range is still as far as you can lock. The fighters just have their own lock ranges enforced now, so they can't attack when they're beyond about 60km anymore. It also means they're now vulnerable to range damps.


good lord that's ********; they were already stupid vulnerable, why make them even more so other than to just make carrier pilots' lives hell enough to make them not fly carriers?


For some clarification, they're not *that* vulnerable to them. You might be able to make them unable to lock, but it would take more damps to do that than it does ECM currently so I can't say it's really practical outside of some hilariously niche circumstance.


it's still more **** added to the pile without any notification, and it's honestly ridiculous how much it has happened with these latest patches.
Cade Windstalker
#798 - 2016-07-05 18:31:02 UTC
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
it's still more **** added to the pile without any notification, and it's honestly ridiculous how much it has happened with these latest patches.


.... It's really not. It's a minor change that makes Fighters follow existing mechanics, not more anything on the pile, if anything it sounds like a bug fix or something, since even Drones have a lock range.
Morgaine Mighthammer
Rational Chaos Inc.
Brave Collective
#799 - 2016-07-05 18:40:14 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Morgaine Mighthammer wrote:
it's still more **** added to the pile without any notification, and it's honestly ridiculous how much it has happened with these latest patches.


.... It's really not. It's a minor change that makes Fighters follow existing mechanics, not more anything on the pile, if anything it sounds like a bug fix or something, since even Drones have a lock range.


yes, drones have lock ranges, but you can still order them to attack something well beyond that range and they will fly out there and do it, you cant now with fighters and it's annoying as all hell and makes flying them even more of a micro-managing nightmare.
She11by
Big Boys Don't Cry
Kids With Guns Alliance
#800 - 2016-07-05 18:54:49 UTC
Dat new "squad" fragile as fu*ck just like common drones but much worse