These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
WarFireV
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2011-10-10 16:55:55 UTC
I think you missed the point with Titans, doomsday was never a major problem. It's the fact that they can be ganked fit(Using officer tracking computers, and officer tracking enhancers) and pretty much kill any ship in two shots no matter what with capital turrets.

Still though this is prertty good, just make sure you look into what I posted above or you will just end up with Titan blobs.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#42 - 2011-10-10 16:56:21 UTC
Excellent.


Let the map burn.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Di Mulle
#43 - 2011-10-10 16:56:33 UTC
ToXicPaIN wrote:
Remove Dronebay from the Titan and Dreadnought sucks
also that the DD dont work on Sub-Caps ... ppff ... F*** O**

with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??



Like other ships of your fleet, you know.
<<Insert some waste of screen space here>>
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#44 - 2011-10-10 16:57:45 UTC
WarFireV wrote:
I think you missed the point with Titans, doomsday was never a major problem. It's the fact that they can be ganked fit(Using officer tracking computers, and officer tracking enhancers) and pretty much kill any ship in two shots no matter what with capital turrets.

Still though this is prertty good, just make sure you look into what I posted above or you will just end up with Titan blobs.


The DD was (still is) a major problem, but yeah I think they should have nerfed tracking somewhat.

That said if he's serious about ongoing balance reviews, then we can see how this plays out on the battlefield. If it turns that that Titans not being able to clear the field of logis in the first 10 minutes of a fight tips the balance, then fair enough.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Amsterdam Conversations
Doomheim
#45 - 2011-10-10 16:58:38 UTC
I really like everything, except for one thing:

Moms will still be overpowered. They will own dreads like they used to. Instead of 70m EHP they'll have 50m EHP, which is still WAY too much.

Moms should not have titan EHP and damage.

You'll see a sudden surge of dreadnought use, which will mostly get owned by moms, then no one will use dreads again.

Also: Nerf fighter speed please? This is the real reason why they're so strong against subcaps.
Kozmic
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2011-10-10 17:00:23 UTC
Good stuff. About time..
Shadoo
North Eastern Swat
#47 - 2011-10-10 17:00:44 UTC
The only change that was needed -- was the logoff timer, now that even the biggest whiners had figured out how to force the enemy to avoid committing supercaps without support fleet.

So, good change with logoff timer.

The ehp reduction will not work the way you intended. It will simply encourage more people to move to Titans and ensure whoever has more titans will always win the engagement since no one will want to risk third of their fleet being wiped by DDs on the first jump in.

There was nothing wrong with supercapital EHP, except it was hard to kill them in a lagged system with the logoff timer. All your EHP reduction now does is make titans even more king than before. Was this your intention?

Dronebays -- fine, but I'd consider allowing every class of a supercarrier to store one flight of BOTH fighters and fighter bombers.

Siege Timer -- good, will make small ninja stuff viable.

ECM Burst -- good, seemed like a bug to begin with tbh.

I would have much rather personally seen a complete redesign of the supercapital shipclass and taken them off the battlefield. This one will simply buy you a bit of time, without really addressing the issue at all. It will stealth boost titans, and make entities who can regularly field 30+ of them more overpowered than before.

The longer you prolong the titan issue, the bigger problem you face when you finally face up to the fact they need a no-combat role and you have to somehow make 2k+ titan accounts worthwile in a non-combat role.
Vicar2008
MCMLXXVI
#48 - 2011-10-10 17:00:45 UTC
"To fix this, we are changing the superweapon so that it cannot fire upon sub-capital ships"

Maybe I picking this up wrong, but no matter the Titans tracking it still wont be able to kill anything unless it huge ass big Capital size and above......
Zhentar
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#49 - 2011-10-10 17:01:04 UTC
2 things to adjust for SC drones:

1) Full flights of both bombers and fighters. If that's all we get, we should at the very least be able to carry a flight of each.

2) Some way for SC's to attack POS's.
jm24
CRICE Corp
#50 - 2011-10-10 17:01:45 UTC
I would like to understand the logic behind ECM Invulnerability on ship as this has been excluded from the changes.

Certain friendly type ECM, notable RSB and Tracking Links work on these ships. Should it not be either to allow ECM at all, or not at all? Allowing a favourable subset of ECM to these ship classes hardly seems to be working as intended. Could there be more light shed on this oversight?
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#51 - 2011-10-10 17:04:01 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Excellent.


Let the map burn.


That's quite short-sighted. Supers will be doing (nearly) same damage as they do today. The only difference is they won't engage subcaps, and those superblobs might be more likely (than they used to) too. What differs is they might carry a subcap fleet with them. Subcap fleet can be cynoed around with the superblob, using bridges.

So in essence, for blobs and powerblocs, this is no nerf. This is a nerf to smaller alliances and/or groups. Especially the removal or regular drones, which is going to make non-blob moving alot more dangerous.

This game just goes more into a blob-game than ever, and looking at the map.. well it might not burn, as you say, it's more likely it'll stay stagnant than before these changes.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

Raquel Smith
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2011-10-10 17:04:17 UTC
I have to echo the thoughts to add fighter and fighter bomber signature resolution as a penalty to the appropriate ships. It seems to impose an unnecessary penalty to carriers.
Mekia Buelle
Doomheim
#53 - 2011-10-10 17:04:25 UTC
So umm no capital buffs? Shocked
ToXicPaIN
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#54 - 2011-10-10 17:04:41 UTC  |  Edited by: ToXicPaIN
I think a normal drone bay for titans and Dreads is mandatory OopsOops

and a tracking or what ever bonus for the normal capital weapons

Turrets and Missles
Fencejumper
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#55 - 2011-10-10 17:06:01 UTC
So with your 20% HP reductions, the hel now gets 21mil ehp, which is nearly 20% less then the nyx.

With your removal of normal drone bays, it makes my hel's logistical uses null, as i wont have any rep drones. so you might as well change the bonus of the hel from 5% remote armor/shield reps to a 5% shield hitpoint bonus. which would bring it closer to a nyx, while still being horribly short.
Hiram Alexander
State Reprisal
#56 - 2011-10-10 17:06:03 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
Great blog. I do have one gripe, and it's fairly significant: Remote tracking links must not be allowed to boost a Titan's tracking.

As it stands now, a Titan can use its guns to take out the very Hictors who are supposed to be tackling it with no impact on its full-tank fit due to tracking links. In Goonswarm, we often fit remote links on our carriers and supercarriers, and use them to turn our Titans into subcap-blenders.

If Titans could not receive remote tracking boosts, should they want to try to shoot subcaps down, they would have to sacrifice some of their tank in order to do so.

Amen
Chruker
Universe 9
#57 - 2011-10-10 17:06:07 UTC
How about renaming the supercarrier's Drone Bay to Fighter Bay
Cronyx Ravage
Caveat Emptorprises
#58 - 2011-10-10 17:07:00 UTC
Can someone explain why, exactly, it makes sense for fighters to have a hard time shooting subcaps? Theyre *fighters*, right? With a pilot inside. It would be like a Viper Mk.2 having a hard time shooting something the size of Colonial One, as far as cruisers go, a heavy raider to relate to frigates, or a frakin Basestar to relate to battleships. Making them only effective against capitals is like saying Vipers are only effective against Hiveships, Resurection hubs, or colony ships. Or a more real world example, F-16s are only effective against.... What? Something the size of an Independence Day city destroyer? (there is no real world exame for this size difference)
Nomad I
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2011-10-10 17:07:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Nomad I
Excellent! But the Moros is getting cap problems with a high rate of fire.
Tiger's Spirit
Perkone
Caldari State
#60 - 2011-10-10 17:07:29 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
ToXicPaIN wrote:


with what weapon can a Titan and a Dread now fight vs. Sub-Caps ??



The awesome weapon of a buddy in a ship that can hit those targets.

Or, you know, you can fit a large or medium gun on your dreadnought, as those were designed to attack those targets. /me hides from the rain of rotten tomatoes.



Very smart idea, nerf something for blob. Muahaha