These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Capital ship balancing

First post First post First post
Author
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#381 - 2011-10-10 19:47:54 UTC
Needa3 wrote:
i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.

blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities
small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered

their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win

the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game


I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac.

Superb!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#382 - 2011-10-10 19:48:00 UTC
David Carel wrote:
0.008 with 4x Serpentis Tracking Link, 0.009 with 2x Serpentis TC, both with Tracking Speed.

But you can't always cynoout (cap <70%), and you have reduced neut resistance. Hell yeah.


you'd use an officer tracking computer, but the point is the tracking links are a much better idea than filling your mids with more officer tracking computers

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Ugleb
Jotunn Risi
#383 - 2011-10-10 19:48:10 UTC
Anile8er wrote:

You really didn't do anything for dreads. What is the logic behind the timer reduction? To benefit large alliance in sov warfare? Are you going to drastically reduce POS hit points? At current in EVE if you have enough dreads to down a large tower in 5 minutes, no one is going to want to "hot drop' that gang, or at least 99.99% of the time wouldn't have the force put together in the 10 minutes the dreads are sat there for. So I ask what does the 5 minute timer do for a small group of dreads when they will have to sit on the tower for 20 to 30 minutes anyway?


Reducing the cycle time by half means that your dread is stuck in one place only 5 minutes instead of 10. That improves your options for running the hell away or leaving siege to receive remote reps. Cutting the fuel usage by half means that you use the same amount of fuel for the time spent in siege (2 cycles of 5 mins using the same stront as 1 cycle of 10mins).

Your current abilities are not affected, but you are now more flexible in deployment.

http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/

The Jotunn Risi are now recruiting, Brutor ancestry required in order to best represent the Brutor interest.  Join channel JORIS to learn more!

Malzra
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#384 - 2011-10-10 19:48:49 UTC
This just means when supers are deployed they'll be used in overwhelming numbers with massive support fleets, which does nothing to fix the superblob problem. It goes on to reduce the likelyhood that smaller alliances/groups will bring supers to a fleet fight (and pretty much negates the setting of traps for those who like to hotdrop with solo/few supercarreirs). Furthermore, those who choose (stupidly) to rat/anom in supercarriers won't be able to do so with the fighter/drone changes, thus depriving roaming gangs of potential ganks. Dreads will still generally sit in hangers unused.

Supers being too hard to kill: That all depends on what the opponent brings. With the logoff change, the EHP nerf isn't really needed, as if your fleet has the numbers and the lockdown capability, you'll get the kills. Supers still die darn quick to other supers and massed BS fleets. The Hel, as others stated, does need some balancing love though. Mass groups of SC's will still spider tank fairly well.

Fighter changes: Fighters have always been intended to chew through battleships and to a lesser extent, bc's depending on fit / target painting, if you don't want them shooting smaller ships, then just make them 'unable to lock anything below battlecruiser.' Current proposed change is just shortsighted and turns carriers into logistic coffins.

Titans: Fair enough with the DD. I still think a script allowing for a smaller range area DD (100 or 150km) would make fleet warfare interesting as potential anti-blob options. Obviously with the same 30 second locked in place timer (and other effects post DD firing) to keep the risk factor there.

Drone bays: Nerfing the drone pay totally of titan/dreads isn't really needed, just make them unable to carry heavy/sentry drones. You could do this for supercarriers too (with limited bandwidth) so they at least have some measure of self defense against solo tacklers (a couple tacklers could easily kill the drones). Thus the veldnaughts can live on.

Dreads: Ref drone changes above. This would at least give owners an excuse to undock them, especially Moros pilots who'd be out of cap in a fight. Only performing a partial fix still equals a broken product (aka post details on hybrid changes). Siege timer change just reduces risk factor for using them.

Logoff change - good. However, at least make it easier to log back in after a crash during a fleet fight. Sitting at a black screen unable to even flip on hardeners sucks.

In summary, you are really just encouraging the massive blob warfare without addressing it effectively at all. The counter to the blob of course being to bring a bigger blob. As Shadoo said, these changes are just putting off the inevitable.

Metis Laxon
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#385 - 2011-10-10 19:48:53 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Draculina Alucardi wrote:
gimme a good reason, to do not stop training a SC pilot, and not canceling the account which i made specially for it, to use it for PVE and sometimes for PVP (i mean superbs);
CCP please take away the drone bay from carriers too, so we could use them only for moving stuff and RR fleet <3




Supercaps will still be incredibly powerful ships, with ten times the tank and more DPS than any other ship class, plus EW immunity. "Normal" capitals will still be chaff in the breeze to supers.

If that's not enough reason, then I don't know what to say.



^ That multiplied by 100

Plus now you get a deeper and more engaging experience with your gangs and large fleets.
Cedric deBouilard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#386 - 2011-10-10 19:50:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Cedric deBouilard
Malzra wrote:
Fighter changes: Fighters have always been intended to chew through battleships and to a lesser extent, bc's depending on fit / target painting, if you don't want them shooting smaller ships, then just make them 'unable to lock anything below battlecruiser.' Current proposed change is just shortsighted and turns carriers into logistic coffins.


so true
Metis Laxon
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#387 - 2011-10-10 19:51:16 UTC
Malzra wrote:
This just means when supers are deployed they'll be used in overwhelming numbers with massive support fleets, which does nothing to fix the superblob problem.


Save for the fact that supers will now die in much larger quantities. Which would end up balancing out not only the market, but the size of these cap blobs. They take plenty of real time to manufacture, and they still take plenty of money to replace. There are physical limitations to the 'overwhelming numbers' you foresee.
Clolo
Perkone
Caldari State
#388 - 2011-10-10 19:51:33 UTC
Sarrgon wrote:
Also what I think a lot are forgetting is the effect this will have on the mineral market. For how many of them are now going for caps and super caps, with a big reduction in the demand for caps of any kind, means a lot more minerals that will remain on the market and prices will crash. Needs to be some sort of balance in there to equal it out. Or Eve's economy will be worse then what it is now.


Removing ore from the low end wormholes will help with this a little.
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#389 - 2011-10-10 19:52:03 UTC
Metis Laxon wrote:
Smoking Blunts wrote:
Metis Laxon wrote:
Smoking Blunts wrote:
while i agree with most of teh changes, why are you screwing the moros again? no drones. your joking right?


Keep in mind: Hybrids are being overhauled. in this same patch.

Wait and see the latter dev blogs on them before complaining that they have broken your Gallente submarine.



yeh i have thought about that, but unless there getting a massive boost to hybrids. blasters are god dam useless at even shooting a pos, much less fleet fights, rails are so meh on damage currently its laughible, you have just made the moros worthless, next to a rev, instant ammo swaps, ammo taht dosnt run out. the same dps.. ok why am i bothering with a moros again?

rest of teh changes make sence, but this one to me dosnt.




Hmm, but you are still just comparing to existing hybrids. The change would have to be relatively drastic for them to 'fix' hybrids in the first place.



well unless they make it insta swap and not take cargo space, rev will come out on top.
anyone wanna buy a max skilled moros pilot, will trade for the same in amarr...lol

OMG when can i get a pic here

Needa3
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#390 - 2011-10-10 19:52:40 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Needa3 wrote:
i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.

blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities
small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered

their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win

the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game


I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac.

Superb!


i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#391 - 2011-10-10 19:54:17 UTC  |  Edited by: EI Digin
Aren't carriers SUPPOSED TO BE a logistics platform?

I mean, the triage module is there for a reason, and most carriers have wonderful buffs for remote repair. And there are capital remote repair modules for them.

They're also awesome for personal logistics, because of the ship bay and gigantic jump range.

If you want to kill things in a capital ship, that's what dreadnaughts, supercaps, and titans are for.
gfldex
#392 - 2011-10-10 19:54:46 UTC
Will the 15 min timer spill over DT? If not we wont be able to sleep in anymore. Lots and lots of siegeing right before DT.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.

Venetian Tar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#393 - 2011-10-10 19:55:02 UTC
Needa3 wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Needa3 wrote:
i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.

blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities
small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered

their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win

the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game


I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac.

Superb!


i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up


Internet tough-guy.

Amazing!

I don't hate you, I'm just not necessarily excited about your existance.

Metis Laxon
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#394 - 2011-10-10 19:55:48 UTC
Needa3 wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Needa3 wrote:
i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.

blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities
small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered

their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win

the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game


I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac.

Superb!


i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up



What does he need to stand up to? The same **** on the other side of that connection? :/ Good one brohime.

"their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win"

Actually that is the way caps contribute right now. And that is what this patch will be changing. Suddenly you have to **** your pants instead of logging off for a powernap.
BeanBagKing
The Order of Atlas
#395 - 2011-10-10 19:57:17 UTC
Second reaction (after reading through some of the responses)
My question regarding log off timer was answered. Several responses to the dread drone bay, it seems to be an even divide with this and I doubt CCP will change it at this point.

It does seem like most people agree with my earlier post regarding fighters and normal carriers though. (CCP just accidently the whole standard carrier...). Any chance we can get a more in depth answer on if this change was intentional (i.e. standard carriers were meant to be nerfed as well) or if it wasn't, will this change be revisited, perhaps changed to something like an idea I saw earlier to give supercaps a negative bonus (penalty) to fighter resolution so that carriers aren't affected?
ToXicPaIN
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#396 - 2011-10-10 19:57:47 UTC
i see the 1000+ Drakeblobb comes back with this nerf

hurray ... FLEET LAG **** FIGHTS
Shtu Lix
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#397 - 2011-10-10 19:58:04 UTC
Nice changes, too bad you just killed normal carriers in the process... Quoting from the blog: "If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier." With fighters nerfed, you won't do much with unbonused drones, you know...

Also please check if dreads in siege can hit moving caps/supercaps.
Daedalus II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#398 - 2011-10-10 19:59:12 UTC
EI Digin wrote:

If you want to kill things in a capital ship, that's what dreadnaughts, supercaps, and titans are for.

Not if you want to kill subcaps. Carriers are obviously too weak to attack other capital ships, but they can defend a capital fleet against subcaps, something no other capital can do. But not any more...
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
#399 - 2011-10-10 19:59:34 UTC
Okay, you've identified the problem but seem to have forgotten to solve it.

-Super blobs are still invincible. Try removing RR from supercarriers.
-Dreads are still completely worthless. Still volleyed by 20 supercarriers or one doomsday.
Metis Laxon
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#400 - 2011-10-10 19:59:35 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Aren't carriers SUPPOSED TO BE a logistics platform?

I mean, the triage module is there for a reason, and most carriers have wonderful buffs for remote repair. And there are capital remote repair modules for them.

They're also awesome for personal logistics, because of the ship bay and gigantic jump range.

If you want to kill things in a capital ship, that's what dreadnaughts, supercaps, and titans are for.


^ That too. People seem to be forgetting that they were not intended to be the be all and end all of warfare as they happen to be treated now.