These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Incoming titan adjustments

First post First post
Author
Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1461 - 2012-03-14 13:58:25 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Dreads are mainly antistructure, with a bit of anti-cap. Carriers still do pretty decent damage against subcaps AFAIK. Supers can switch between anti-cap and anti-subcap depending on their choice of fighter drone. Titans are pure anti-cap.


Up until now Greyscale, Titans were never "pure anti-cap". Indeed, pre-dominion their primary function was to mass murder subcap fleets with their AOE Doomsdays. In Dominion you replaced the AOE with a directed weapon, capable of hitting any ship, and in addition you enhanced the regular XL weapon bonuses "so that the turret locators actually might get used [to]enable a Titan to make its presence felt on the battalefield" " to quote your own devblog.

Now however, they are suddenly "pure anti-cap" as if they were never intended for anything else.


Realtalk:

Every single titan nerf has been to reduce their effectiveness towards subcaps. Titans on paper are actually not designed to hit subcaps for ****, it's only when you get a bunch that it's nearly impossible to maintain transversal from them all. **** they have dread guns on them and their drones were taken away, what about these things suggest they were designed as anti subcap platforms? I just don't understand this reasoning. Sure you've been taking advantage of their inability to balance these things vs subcaps properly but being an anti blob weapon clearly wasn't their intent by design and now we have them on record confirming this is the case.

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1462 - 2012-03-14 13:58:39 UTC
Acwron wrote:
They develop what we want cos we pay for the game. If it's to be as you want, will be if you have the majority. And probably you have. Still doesn't mean you're right. You are just more than us.


Deal with it.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Gertrud ToD
Terrorists of Dimensions
#1463 - 2012-03-14 13:59:13 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

dooplex wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Titans were supposed to be very expensive but also very effective strategic force multipliers and as such were working as intended. Smaller entities in nullsec could defend their space by relying on a larger supercaptial fleet. However, after this nerf, numbers will again be everything. A short look at http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/memberCount should give us a general idea of who will be the sole beneficary of this "adjustment"..

This has never been a stated balance goal in any discussion I've been party to. In particular, predicating "can survive as a small alliance in nullsec" on "can afford a large supercap fleet" would be extremely silly, because it excludes exactly the type of players who we're most keen on being able to maintain small holdings in nullsec, ie newer, poorer players.


wait, what?
you say your goal is to allow smaller alliance survival?

the people who will be hit by this the most are alliances like PL, Raiden. etc. who themselves arent that large of alliances, but banded together to kill the NC which had 1.4 times the numbers that the coalition against them could field.
The same people that are currently, because they did their long term planning, because they gathered the wealth todo so and because they invested alot in it, able to stand against the largest alliance of them all, goonswarm.

take a simple look at the numbers,
goonswarm has 4 times as many members as raiden. (who they are currently actively fighting),
lets not even look at how many members both sides if you count the whole clusterfuck together.
(it looks even worse for raidens side, with wn gone etc.)

the only thing that keeps small alliances like Raiden. alive is their ability to field supercapitals,
and you are destroying that sole defense.

what you are doing is destroying those that you claim to protect!
WAKE UP.

Dan Massell
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1464 - 2012-03-14 13:59:19 UTC
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
It's amusing the pile of people in this thread who ignore all the well-worded arguments to the contrary, and just immediately yell 'CCP just let blobbers win eve" when it's not the case at all. If you can't hold your space without using a group of overpowered ships with no effective counter in the game, something that is against everything eve has ever been about... maybe you shouldn't be holding any space. Has that thought occurred to you?.



If you can't hold your space without using a group of 1600 zerglings with no effective counter in the game, something that is against everything eve has ever been about... maybe you shouldn't be holding any space. Has that thought occurred to you?
GeneralDisturbed
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1465 - 2012-03-14 14:00:43 UTC
Dan Massell wrote:
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
It's amusing the pile of people in this thread who ignore all the well-worded arguments to the contrary, and just immediately yell 'CCP just let blobbers win eve" when it's not the case at all. If you can't hold your space without using a group of overpowered ships with no effective counter in the game, something that is against everything eve has ever been about... maybe you shouldn't be holding any space. Has that thought occurred to you?.



If you can't hold your space without using a group of 1600 zerglings with no effective counter in the game, something that is against everything eve has ever been about... maybe you shouldn't be holding any space. Has that thought occurred to you?


Ignorance is bliss.
BrokenBC
no tax's are us
#1466 - 2012-03-14 14:04:26 UTC
Dan Massell wrote:
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
It's amusing the pile of people in this thread who ignore all the well-worded arguments to the contrary, and just immediately yell 'CCP just let blobbers win eve" when it's not the case at all. If you can't hold your space without using a group of overpowered ships with no effective counter in the game, something that is against everything eve has ever been about... maybe you shouldn't be holding any space. Has that thought occurred to you?.



If you can't hold your space without using a group of 1600 zerglings with no effective counter in the game, something that is against everything eve has ever been about... maybe you shouldn't be holding any space. Has that thought occurred to you?

actually it was the chance for massive battles and the grand strategy of taking and holding entire solar systems that got me into eve in the first place.What part of MMORPG "Massively multiplayer online role-playing game" Dont you get?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1467 - 2012-03-14 14:04:44 UTC
Hans Roaming wrote:
Thanks for confirming my decision not to train for supercaps was a good one CCP.

Why shouldn't Titans be able to hit MWD'ng drakes with sig's the size of moons?

Technology advantage has always been a counter to pure numbers throughout history. Bringing numbers to a fight in Eve has always been a problem compounded by the fact that ships fire magically pass through any non targets in the way without causing damage.

If fleets in large numbers had to actually manoeuvre in order to bring DPS onto a target then the blob would be less advantageous than it would be now.


Game balance. Maybe you'd understand the need for it if your PvP experience consisted of something other than nopod ~honour~ matches in hisec.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Franklin D Roosevelt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1468 - 2012-03-14 14:05:53 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Kreul Intentions
*snip*

Please stay on topic.

Thank you,
Kreul Intentions
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1469 - 2012-03-14 14:06:02 UTC
Acwron wrote:
Especially drake and maelstrom pilots by any chance ?


and cynabal pilots who die to titans that solocamp gates

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Swearte Widfarend
Ever Vigilant Fountain Defenders
#1470 - 2012-03-14 14:06:18 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Swearte Widfarend wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
This has never been a stated balance goal in any discussion I've been party to. In particular, predicating "can survive as a small alliance in nullsec" on "can afford a large supercap fleet" would be extremely silly, because it excludes exactly the type of players who we're most keen on being able to maintain small holdings in nullsec, ie newer, poorer players.


Now I'm not trying to be a total jerk, but you have never succeeded in this. In addition, if you are actually reading the comments in this thread, you should realize that you are not going to succeed in your newly stated role change for Titans

CCP Greyscale wrote:
For the immediate future and until such time as we have the resources available to do a comprehensive overhaul, we want to ensure that titans perform decently against other capitals, but do not represent a serious threat to sub caps.


Nothing you are doing makes this happen consistently. Signature radius on an MWD Drake or an MWD Maelstrom (the current FOTM fleet ships for the big nullsec alliances fighting Titans right now) is virtually identical to Signature Radius on a Carrier, and the lock time on that ship with your new system is 30+ seconds (not including TiDi). So how is the Titan an anti-Captial ship when a capital can dock/warp/enter shields before a Titan can lock it? Seriously, look at what you are doing and realize that this change does not perform your intended action.

I'm not a game designer. I don't know what the answer is. But your actions do not support what you say you want Titans to be doing.


All that first quote is saying is that it's never been our intention that you need supers to survive as a small alliance in nullsec. There's a lot of people reading into it a lot of things that aren't actually there.

WRT the second point, I would suggest webs (where applicable), dictors/hictors, and not using titans to play docking games.


Sorry, docking games? If I'm repping shields/armor at a POS in my carrier, I can warp and dock in 31 seconds. That's 2 seconds faster than a Titan on grid can target me.

So what you are really saying (and I'm putting words in your mouth) - is that you don't want smaller groups with more ISK and SP than numbers to be able to have a meaningful impact on the battlefield anymore. Because let's look at this in reality.

Alliance X can get, oh, 200-300 folks in fleet, and they want to attack or defend a massive HP structure (Hi failed Dominion). The optimal way for them to do that is to have a significant number of supers and titans, along with a reasonable number of support. Let's play fun and say 50 super carriers and Titans and 150 support. They are attempting to take (or defend) assets from Alliance Y, which can get up to 1200 folks in fleet, but on a bad night it's only 400. If Alliance Y forms up in any form of alpha fleet, once they reach 150+ doctrine ships they can alpha strike a carrier (oh, and these are sub caps, so they can hit basically anything from a frigate on up). So let's take a bad night for alliance Y with only 150-200 alpha ships, 20-30 capitals and supers, and 200 drakes/rifters/whatever. Care to take odds on how long those amazing dictors/hictors and webs will survive for Alliance X? And, of course, you have to have "control" or at least the possibility of control on the battlefield before you commit your heavy weapons, otherwise you might as well just self destruct them and be done.

What you are doing is you are taking the smaller group with more ISK and SP and telling them they can't take or have strategic objectives in nullsec. Now I will say this once more - just so you understand where I'm coming from. Titans aren't balanced now. They aren't working well now. But what you are doing isn't a solution - but come April, when you roll it out, you are giving the largest powerblocs in EVE free reign, because there will be no counter to 1200 ships, except 1300 ships.

You damn well better be fixing how sov works in the summer, if you are going to give it all to them in the spring.

Democracy is only as good as the despot managing the voting booth.

Mathicluanna
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1471 - 2012-03-14 14:09:27 UTC
Swearte Widfarend wrote:

Sorry, docking games? If I'm repping shields/armor at a POS in my carrier, I can warp and dock in 31 seconds. That's 2 seconds faster than a Titan on grid can target me.


God forbid the titan has a single interceptor with a point and a web to back it up.
Tobruk
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1472 - 2012-03-14 14:10:32 UTC
Quote:
CSM Hijinks

The CSM matters. Seleene and Elise fought like lions, but were brought down in the end. Vote, motherfuckers - every vote we get is a tear in the eyes of our enemies. Here's the link: http://www.eveonline.../Vote.asp?c=438

We shot past 10k on the exit poll, but the poll is only a guideline; we cannot assume we have won. Continue to fight to get people to the polls. God forbid we get 20%+ of all votes cast, the howling from the masses will be unforgettable - and it will be a howling we can enjoy for an entire year.



Tell me about Being Objective CCP Grayscale you tool.

I can wait for your next announcement showing us all the brilliantly thought out counter to 800 maelstroms.

John Maynard Keynes
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1473 - 2012-03-14 14:12:40 UTC
Vile rat wrote:
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Dreads are mainly antistructure, with a bit of anti-cap. Carriers still do pretty decent damage against subcaps AFAIK. Supers can switch between anti-cap and anti-subcap depending on their choice of fighter drone. Titans are pure anti-cap.


Up until now Greyscale, Titans were never "pure anti-cap". Indeed, pre-dominion their primary function was to mass murder subcap fleets with their AOE Doomsdays. In Dominion you replaced the AOE with a directed weapon, capable of hitting any ship, and in addition you enhanced the regular XL weapon bonuses "so that the turret locators actually might get used [to]enable a Titan to make its presence felt on the battalefield" " to quote your own devblog.

Now however, they are suddenly "pure anti-cap" as if they were never intended for anything else.


Realtalk:

Every single titan nerf has been to reduce their effectiveness towards subcaps. Titans on paper are actually not designed to hit subcaps for ****, it's only when you get a bunch that it's nearly impossible to maintain transversal from them all. **** they have dread guns on them and their drones were taken away, what about these things suggest they were designed as anti subcap platforms? I just don't understand this reasoning. Sure you've been taking advantage of their inability to balance these things vs subcaps properly but being an anti blob weapon clearly wasn't their intent by design and now we have them on record confirming this is the case.



Dear very important space ship personality,

the main purpose of AE DD was obviously to kill subcaps in large numbers.
The main purpose of focused DD was clearly to be able to kill every ship with one shot (including subcaps).

So as you can see the idea that supercaps should be a pure anti-capital weapon is rather new.

However, I do like that this was changed and do think that supercaps still need balancing. Making them useless is not the solution though.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1474 - 2012-03-14 14:14:54 UTC
John Maynard Keynes wrote:
Dear very important space ship personality,

the main purpose of AE DD was obviously to kill subcaps in large numbers.
The main purpose of focused DD was clearly to be able to kill every ship with one shot (including subcaps).

So as you can see the idea that supercaps should be a pure anti-capital weapon is rather new.

However, I do like that this was changed and do think that supercaps still need balancing. Making them useless is not the solution though.


Yes they should revert titans to the way they were originally added, AoE doomsdays coming through a kestrel cyno

sad lil pubbie

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1475 - 2012-03-14 14:15:22 UTC
Tobruk wrote:



Tell me about Being Objective CCP Grayscale you tool.

I can wait for your next announcement showing us all the brilliantly thought out counter to 800 maelstroms.



A calculator. So you can count the numbers of our enemies and realize this is a red herring since they bring as many on the field as we do.
Sanders RUS
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1476 - 2012-03-14 14:16:08 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
BioZvin wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:

Actually, Greyscale went to Cambridge, and while we haven't IQ tested him yet, I'm pretty sure he'd score high Bear


I am sorry in advance here, but could we get some indication from CCP that we are being heard here. Put a lot of time into this game and really would ratter not be forced to leave because I feel like CCP only listens to Goons. I know they say we are less people then they are, but they don't number 345000 like they would have us believe.


We're absolutely listening.

Titans are an anti-cap/supercap ship and we need to limit their ability to kill subcaps. That's a change that's happening and is unlikely to change. The practical details on how that happens we'd love as much feedback on as possible. We've been talking about the lock timers this morning based on feedback from the playerbase, looking at what adjustments we can possibly make. The changes in the OP are still subject to change if we get feedback on how to achieve our goal better.



So dreads and supercaps are anti structure ships within the current nullsec warring. So titans are just supposed to sit around and wait for someone to shoot structures?

I feel that nerfing supers to uselessness is rather myopic will only lead to less dynamic gameplay. There needs to be an ability to counter titans, but fights should not be reduced to who can field the most subcaps. I think that is a poor direction especially for pilots who have spent years training into these ships and want them to be used. However, CCP seems ok with saying to the 800 or so titan pilots that they would much rather keep their subcap customers happy (even though must of them have no clue about capital combat or why a titan could blap a MWDing drake).

To me this general direction is bad for eve online, tracking probably needed a nerf, but now it'll take 18 seconds to even lock another titan with three cormack sebos's (Who the hell balances around 3 meta 14 sebos?). Base Titan scanres will be a third of a sieged dreadnaught. I feel that taken together with the previous nerfs CCP is driving titan pilots to mothball their ships. Theres really no significant reason to fly a titan and the only thing they have to look forward to is some vague promise of changes down the road. Well Ive seen how long it takes CCP to get back to things like gallente ship balancing or faction warfare and Im not to keen on waiting around that long for titans to be useful again.

This wasnt something so critical that it needed to be addressed outside of a thoughtful look at the ship and its role in fleets.
Magnifikus Erzverwirrer
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#1477 - 2012-03-14 14:17:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Magnifikus Erzverwirrer
Vile rat wrote:
Tobruk wrote:



Tell me about Being Objective CCP Grayscale you tool.

I can wait for your next announcement showing us all the brilliantly thought out counter to 800 maelstroms.



A calculator. So you can count the numbers of our enemies and realize this is a red herring since they bring as many on the field as we do.


think your awesome idea would also work for supers right,
owait you have none because you like to rmt your iskies


i hope next patch is maelstroms cannot hit mwding cruisers...
so3ke
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1478 - 2012-03-14 14:17:34 UTC
Dan Massell wrote:


If you can't hold your space without using a group of 1600 zerglings with no effective counter in the game, something that is against everything eve has ever been about... maybe you shouldn't be holding any space. Has that thought occurred to you?


The question is if 'making friends' is something that should be encouraged by the games mechanics or 'sitting in large ships that **** on everything without taking any real risk'.

I'd personally go for the 'making friends' thing but if you rather look down on everyone else in the game cause you saved up enough ISK to sit in a giant internet space phallus that's fine as well. just don't wack it in my face while I'm just trying to make friends here .. if you know what I mean.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1479 - 2012-03-14 14:17:50 UTC
Sanders RUS wrote:
So dreads and supercaps are anti structure ships within the current nullsec warring. So titans are just supposed to sit around and wait for someone to shoot structures?

I feel that nerfing supers to uselessness is rather myopic will only lead to less dynamic gameplay. There needs to be an ability to counter titans, but fights should not be reduced to who can field the most subcaps. I think that is a poor direction especially for pilots who have spent years training into these ships and want them to be used. However, CCP seems ok with saying to the 800 or so titan pilots that they would much rather keep their subcap customers happy (even though must of them have no clue about capital combat or why a titan could blap a MWDing drake).

To me this general direction is bad for eve online, tracking probably needed a nerf, but now it'll take 18 seconds to even lock another titan with three cormack sebos's (Who the hell balances around 3 meta 14 sebos?). Base Titan scanres will be a third of a sieged dreadnaught. I feel that taken together with the previous nerfs CCP is driving titan pilots to mothball their ships. Theres really no significant reason to fly a titan and the only thing they have to look forward to is some vague promise of changes down the road. Well Ive seen how long it takes CCP to get back to things like gallente ship balancing or faction warfare and Im not to keen on waiting around that long for titans to be useful again.

This wasnt something so critical that it needed to be addressed outside of a thoughtful look at the ship and its role in fleets.


we both know you bought your character with enthusiastically ratted ISK

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1480 - 2012-03-14 14:18:03 UTC
John Maynard Keynes wrote:

Dear very important space ship personality,

the main purpose of AE DD was obviously to kill subcaps in large numbers.


And they realized it was bullshit.

Quote:

The main purpose of focused DD was clearly to be able to kill every ship with one shot (including subcaps).


And they realized it was bullshit.

Quote:

So as you can see the idea that supercaps should be a pure anti-capital weapon is rather new.


Not really, every move has been in this direction. It would have been better had they flat out said what the purpose was ages ago but it's not like we've been quiet about the subject.


Quote:
However, I do like that this was changed and do think that supercaps still need balancing. Making them useless is not the solution though.


Right there in the beginning of Greyscales post he mentions this is a stopgap cause it is too disruptive and not what they intended at all. They will be redesigning the hull to actually be good at its stated role instead of leaving it broken so it can do everything.