These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Crucis Cassiopeiae
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#501 - 2011-10-10 21:13:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Crucis Cassiopeiae
please dont nerf regular carriers with fighters nerf... they cant do their role then...


and... if you can... a little boost to dread tracking so that they can shoot capitals...

Vote Issler Dainze for CSM7! http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=470 
Hartzenen
Rise.
#502 - 2011-10-10 21:17:16 UTC
Please, remove slave set fot supercaps, this will balance shield SC vs armor SC.
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
#503 - 2011-10-10 21:18:28 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Aurora Egnald wrote:
What we have going on here is
…balancing. It's a good thing for everyone involved.





So why we are it why dont we just empty everyones isk and then evenly divide it between the players.. Since your such a great fan of balancing!!!!!!


Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the isk poor and the envious.
Tokino Kaalakiota
Kaalakiota Logistical Serivces
#504 - 2011-10-10 21:18:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tokino Kaalakiota
David Carel wrote:

Challenge accepted, enjoy the deconstruction of your post.

So wait, Welpfleet is not an existing tactic against supercap blobs? I guess our definitions of tactic differ.

IDC about "our lack of ability to deploy supers", this is about subcaps countering supercaps.

It's a pretty good counter as it severely impedes supers by neuting their cap off and thus shutting down their hardeners, allowing them to be killed pretty quickly. Even with passive hardeners, they can't jump until they have restored cap to 70%.


http://rooksandkings.com/killboard/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=25860 has been the only SC kill on FA or WIdot by RnK I could find on their killboard. Now, let's see what we've got there:
60-70 BS shooting 6 supers, 2 dreads, 10 carriers. Nothing more than a variation of "dish out enough DPS to kill them in 15 minutes"
Hm, where's FA? No FA on related kills and no FA super has died by RnK hands either... I'm puzzled.
Oh wait, there's no advantage in numbers of the capital fielding side. Sure nice memory you've got there. Or nice naive mind, believing everything people tell you.

Yeah, I guess a person owning SEVERAL PERSONAL SUPERCAPS should have more of a clue. Unlike common folks like me who don't want to live in a space tomb, right?

(CCP, that quote limit/BBCode could not be parsed thingy is awful. Also, your forums ate my first draft :()


1. I have briefly owned/flew a nyx on the character Lord's Servant. I owned and flew extensively 2 wyverns on separate occasion on the character Servant's Lord.

2. While Welpfleet -IS- an existing tactic, it is not the tactic I am referring to...I believe I specifically stated that it was in fact a tactic. I'm not sure where I said it wasn't a tactic.....

3. I count 36 BS on the wyvern km, not "60-70"...but simple math is too difficult for you I suppose. There are a total of 41 battleships on the ENTIRE battle report.

18 Capitals/Supers appear on the WIdawt side in that fight. I am fairly certain there were more actually there, but seeing as they killed very little, and logoffski'd not many showed up on the BR. 18, however stands as the only number able to be proved as there, so I stand corrected.

Irregardless, if 36 BS + mixed support can engage 6 supers with 12 capitals as backup and win without a significant loss (hictors/support don't really count....but 15 losses totalling about 700m for almost 30b isk killed) how can goons not lrn2eve and win with similar odds?

The tactics I refer to are dedicated neuting and smartbombing BS. RnK did a similar thing later with 3 triage carriers(2 for most of the fight) utilizing an understanding of game mechanics to force 4 SC + mixed support to logoff/die. Oh yeah..they also had around 11BS + a handful of support in this fight. BR can be found here http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?229-Low-Sec-Empire/page4 9 posts down, or the first post by Lord Maldoror on that page with all the pictures.

That is only a simple 2:1 numbers advantage. On certain, *alternative* forums, a number I see getting tossed around is 500 v 100. If goons can bring a 5:1 advantage to the table, outside of the broken logoffski mechanic, why aren't you utterly dominating eve?

4. The whelpfleet is designed around cheap, high dps, easy to train for ships. You would be flying Tempests if you wanted any sort of actual neuting power/more dps(oh hey PL has done this), however, those cost quite a bit more and are less noobie-friendly. Hurricanes do all that you say, but the main point is their price/ease of training.

Everything I say is backed up by facts. As to goonswarm's ability to field supers, I have not seen nor heard of goonswarm fielding more than a dozen or at any one time. Even assuming you CAN field "dozens of supers at the drop of a hat" those supers are most likely inexperienced and lack confidence, unlike individuals who have used them on a regular basis.

Alas, I am not a current super owner, but I'm fairly certain that my understanding of game mechanics in relation to supers is quite a bit above your own.

-Tokino/Lords

PS-That BBCcode thing is driving me nuts too..as always the victor is :CCP: lol ;)
CMUX
Rim Collection Productions
#505 - 2011-10-10 21:18:53 UTC
Quote:
Of all the dreadnoughts currently in existence, the versatile Moros possesses perhaps the greatest capacity to fend off smaller hostiles by itself while concentrating on its primary capital target


Nope!

Also, are you going to remove the Capital Drone Bay requirement from Dreads and Titans manufacturing?
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#506 - 2011-10-10 21:19:13 UTC
What should have been done, imho:

- Make supercarriers immune to cap boosting and RR. They simply don't need it. Any supercarrier can have by itself a massive active tank and enough EHP to make a big subcap fleet take a lot of time chewing them down. We're still speaking about multiple millions of EHP, and that should be enough for any ship, regardless of cost. Ships with more than than a large POS are ridiculous. That immunity might also be extended to cap drain, if you fear they'd come down too fast.

- Nerf titan tracking by one hell of a lot, enough that they can't hit a BS with a 100m/s transversal at 50km, even when tracking boosted.

- If supercarriers are supposed to be good only against capitals and structures, as it seems to be the intend, then go all the way and make them carry only bombers. That way you can lower the 400 sig res on fighters so carriers aren't hit that hard.

- Dreds need a real boost, not something that just hurt their already extremely limited polyvalence. If they aren't used now, those changes aren't going to make them used more. They need some way to fight back if they get jumped by a supercap blob and be able to inflict at least some losses, if they severely outnumber the supercaps. Right now there's to much EHP and spider-tanking on the supercap's side for it to be practical. If first suggestion is applied, just boosting the tracking in siege mod a bit should be enough.
August Hayek
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#507 - 2011-10-10 21:20:23 UTC
good nerf, but please:

1. buff dreads --> 20% more tank, better tracking
2. buff carriers --> 20% more tank, more fuel bay
3. let fighters as they are now, with the nerf they get somewhat useless
Dirk Tungsten
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#508 - 2011-10-10 21:20:46 UTC
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
Ok heres the bread and the butter of things.

Thers are by all means alot of pros that will mean fleet fights could be more Ballz deep coming from the patch, but alot of crutial badly influenced cons.
The loggoff timer relooping, yes a good idea, but why introduce 20% decrease in shield/armor/structure aswell. This is giving supers/titans relatively no chance. with the aggro relooping, should keep the stats tank wise for supers/titans, but maybe balance out what currently is there. For instance Aeon should have less HP as has an isaine tank, wyvern and Nyx should tank wise be relatively unchanged. The Poor Hel should get a buff. Make it competitive.

DDs on titans should be able to hit BSs if not give them a slight tracking bonus so they are at least able to hit BSs well and have some sort of a tank lol

It seems ccp are carebearing up eve for newer players or alot of the subcap players. What they are failing to realise is that this patch will be a tradgedy for a few of those crutial points. Alot of other vets are thinking of hanging up there boots when this patch is released.

It seems heirachy has been too influenced by certain GMs CSMs that revolve around fountian region,we all know who they are. What this patch allows is certain entities that live in fountian (cough cough) to use mass blob fleets of 2000+ again and lagg out systems. There will be no counter to this after the patch. What this patch is going to allow is lagg tactics and mass 2000+ man fleets to rule eve over better organised,structured & skilled alliances. Its basically allowing a bunch of noobs with no structure in there fleet to be successful. Carebearing it down. If you want to kill a titan/super then an aggressing fleet should at least have a well thought through structure an plan to there fleet, they do not deserve and should not expect to kill any supers/titans unless that is implemented.

When alot of the narrow minded people out there eventually realise what this patch will do, the pros from this patch will be massively overlooked, as this will not balance things, its only going to be putting the weight on the other end of the scales.


Mark my words im right almost all the time =)


How is CCP going to ensure if some1 DC's that this looping aggro timer doesnt unjustly kill there super/titan?
Tokino Kaalakiota
Kaalakiota Logistical Serivces
#509 - 2011-10-10 21:21:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Tokino Kaalakiota
1. I have briefly owned/flew a nyx on the character Lord's Servant. I owned and flew extensively 2 wyverns on separate occasion on the character Servant's Lord.

2. While Welpfleet -IS- an existing tactic, it is not the tactic I am referring to...I believe I specifically stated that it was in fact a tactic. I'm not sure where I said it wasn't a tactic.....

3. I count 36 BS on the wyvern km, not "60-70"...but simple math is too difficult for you I suppose. There are a total of 41 battleships on the ENTIRE battle report.

18 Capitals/Supers appear on the WIdawt side in that fight. I am fairly certain there were more actually there, but seeing as they killed very little, and logoffski'd not many showed up on the BR. 18, however stands as the only number able to be proved as there, so I stand corrected.

Irregardless, if 36 BS + mixed support can engage 6 supers with 12 capitals as backup and win without a significant loss (hictors/support don't really count....but 15 losses totalling about 700m for almost 30b isk killed) how can goons not lrn2eve and win with similar odds?

The tactics I refer to are dedicated neuting and smartbombing BS. RnK did a similar thing later with 3 triage carriers(2 for most of the fight) utilizing an understanding of game mechanics to force 4 SC + mixed support to logoff/die. Oh yeah..they also had around 11BS + a handful of support in this fight. BR can be found here http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?229-Low-Sec-Empire/page4 9 posts down, or the first post by Lord Maldoror on that page with all the pictures.

That is only a simple 2:1 numbers advantage. On certain, *alternative* forums, a number I see getting tossed around is 500 v 100. If goons can bring a 5:1 advantage to the table, outside of the broken logoffski mechanic, why aren't you utterly dominating eve?

4. The whelpfleet is designed around cheap, high dps, easy to train for ships. You would be flying Tempests if you wanted any sort of actual neuting power/more dps(oh hey PL has done this), however, those cost quite a bit more and are less noobie-friendly. Hurricanes do all that you say, but the main point is their price/ease of training.

Everything I say is backed up by facts. As to goonswarm's ability to field supers, I have not seen nor heard of goonswarm fielding more than a dozen or at any one time. Even assuming you CAN field "dozens of supers at the drop of a hat" those supers are most likely inexperienced and lack confidence, unlike individuals who have used them on a regular basis.

Alas, I am not a current super owner, but I'm fairly certain that my understanding of game mechanics in relation to supers is quite a bit above your own.

-Tokino/Lords

PS-That BBCcode thing is driving me nuts too..as always the victor is :CCP: lol ;)
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers
#510 - 2011-10-10 21:23:15 UTC
Arkady Sadik wrote:
Has anyone run the numbers on the fighter change? Einherjis orbit with 300m/s at 1km. With a tracking speed of 0.125, the new sig res means they now do zero damage against even a stationary BS. Is this intentional?


as a carrier pilot myself i feel the fighter nerf has just screwed me over royaly , and fighters dont do that much against caps anyway. that and the SC's have bombers which would do the job 10X more effectively than fighters so it looks like fighters have become the new defenders.
Jetro Grissom
Global Dynamics Production
#511 - 2011-10-10 21:23:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jetro Grissom
In my humble opinion, CCP killing best game whih i ever saw...
titans for example... they making second nerf... aoe dd - ok it was imba weapon, but now they making it bin of trash on battlefield... same thing with supercarriers... as a supercarrier pilot i can say they i see really close look brain at person who decided to approve such nerf.. Nothing personal, but with Incursion you killed nullsec balance and now you do same thing again.
I will sell my supercarrier. In current way i don't need it anymore.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#512 - 2011-10-10 21:23:37 UTC
Aurora Egnald wrote:
So why we are it why dont we just empty everyones isk and then evenly divide it between the players.. Since your such a great fan of balancing!!!!!!
One has nothing to do with the other.
Quote:
Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the isk poor and the envious.
No.
Dinta Zembo
Tea. Earl Grey. Cold.
#513 - 2011-10-10 21:25:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Dinta Zembo
Quote:
We are changing the logoff mechanics in such a way that as long as your enemies are actively engaged in fighting you, logging off is not going to save your ship.



Twisted


Quote:
Fighters

• Increase signature resolution to 400


How about giving carriers a -...% sig resolution bonus to fighters so that fighters still have some use? Carriers are much easier to take out, and with these changes fighters will be completely useless.
Captain Byte
RingWorld Engineering
#514 - 2011-10-10 21:27:43 UTC
I'd like to see Dreads be useful for something other than POS bashing. They should have the ability to take down SCs and Titans without having to go into siege. After all, they should be to a BS what a SC is to a carrier. That would make for some great capital ship engagements.

Also, why should supercaps be impervious to ECM effects. How about creating a SC with supercap ECM capabilities, similar to the Scorpion in the BS class.

On the fighter issue, I agree with the critique of nerfing fighters and reducing carriers to useless in combat. Fighters by definition should be able to hit anything down to a BC at least. And any carrier should be able to carry a full complement of fighters and/or lesser drones for self-protection. If you want to use them to balance SC's, don't let SC's carry fighters!
Aurora Egnald
Doomheim
#515 - 2011-10-10 21:29:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Aurora Egnald
Tippia wrote:
Aurora Egnald wrote:
So why we are it why dont we just empty everyones isk and then evenly divide it between the players.. Since your such a great fan of balancing!!!!!!
One has nothing to do with the other.
Quote:
Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the isk poor and the envious.
No.




Actually it is the same principle. You spend billions of isk on a ship and have just limited its capability and usefulness by half. Therefore taking half of the value out of it. balancing is just that. Taking isk form someones wallet and puttign it somewhere else.. Once again punishing the producers of eve at the behest of the poor and envious. All they needed to do was to make the smaller ships more capable not nerf the supers.
Klytior Am'jarhs
Amarrian Retribution
#516 - 2011-10-10 21:32:46 UTC
Fighters
Increase signature resolution to 400

-Might be a bit to much for carriers but fighters need some nerf atleast for the SC.
-Titan jumpbridge in lowsec is just to powerfull and feels just strange.

Really like these changes so far.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#517 - 2011-10-10 21:33:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Aurora Egnald wrote:
Actually it is the same principle.
Actually, no, it's not.

The principle is simple: bigger is not better and money does not buy you success. The SCs have broken these fundamental design rules for quite some time now, and are being pulled back into a more balanced state. This benefits everyone because it allows for more variety, more fun, and more stuff getting blown up.

No-one is being punished. In fact, the producers of EVE are being outright rewarded.
Quote:
All they needed to do was to make the smaller ships more capable not nerf the supers.
No, that is the exact opposite of what needs to happen. Buffing “everything else” is an idiotic solution because it solves absolutely nothing and only makes things worse. Fortunately, they didn't go for something that moronic here and instead did the right thing: nerfed the things that were overpowered.
Saki Sintora
Doomheim
#518 - 2011-10-10 21:34:43 UTC
Measures taken r too simply to deploy full effects in intended direction.
The changes appear hastily and thoughtlessly.
As they would have incurred in the canteen on the napkin.

Poor EVE
Sorran Tor
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#519 - 2011-10-10 21:40:09 UTC
The Moros, being a capital ship with a weapon system that sucks down capacitor at record speeds and can't recieve cap transfers in siege mode, previously only had one redeeming feature: Its drone bay and damage bonus.

So naturally, CCP has removed this one redeeming feature and replaced it with a bonus that makes the Moros' cap problems even worse.

I'll want to see what you're doing to fix hybrids across the board before I pass judgement on this change. As it stands, this makes the Moros actually THE worst dread.
Daiys Erkkinen
Doomheim
#520 - 2011-10-10 21:40:35 UTC
Anybody wtb a wyvern ? ccp, can i have my skilltime back ?

......not even destroyed by some powergoons in defence of our space
..... just made useless by it's own creators.... Cry

spend so much time to get my dreamship for "producing" salvage on mass in sanctums Sad

This is nonsense, i dont by the car i ever wanted for my hard owned money and after a few
months the company cuts it in half for "balancing issues" ....... and for sure I'm paying money for eve.