These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Information Portal

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

New dev blog: Capital ship balancing

First post First post First post
#641 - 2011-10-11 01:48:31 UTC
Shadowsword wrote:
I'm going on a roam now, so I'll develop later, but I am very disappointed in these changes.

1/ the biggest issue with motherships wan't their offense, but their near invulnerability when in large groups. Nothing has been done about that.

2/ The dred boost turn out not to be a boost after all. it's not those change that will make them used.

3/ To kill a supercap, a subcap fleet will have to be built around battlecruisers and battleships. Fighters will still be fairly effective against those, so a subcap escort isn't mandatory.

4/ titan tracking: nothing done about that.

This is still Supercap Online.

Need to go, I'll expand later.

You really should stop roaming and get some experience fighting with/against motherships instead.

1) The biggest issue was their offense, not their survivability. Did you even know how horribad they were before they got their hp boost? The reason they're strong in big groups is not the EHP either, it's the damage that big group put out. If you'd field supers to face supers, you'd notice the RR would not be enough. It's a damage gank, not a tank game, so you're completely off here.

2) The 5min timer, and the removal of sentry drones from moms and nerfs to titan is enough of a boost to make them useful against POS. The nerfed hp (that shouldn't be) on supers is another boost to dreads. They're back on track as the damage dealing capital. Do you remember how they used to **** everything before supers were boosted? We're not going fully back to what was back then due to supers retaining damage now, but if we play with the thought: if supers got their current damage nerfed back to what they used to have pre-DD changes and pre-FB's, and if we let them keep their current EHP.. guess what, 5min dreads would be immensely popular.

3) Fighters travel extremely slow, fighters are extremely easy to kill for a supcab blob. A blob of fighters would be a different matter, but if you bring a blob of BS/BC to fight a blob of motherships/carriers you have to suit yourself for using wrong tools. If you bring a blob of BS/BC against one (or a few) mothers/carriers, you could supereasily kite (and if the cap pilot was **** and had his fighters on auto-follow, you could just perma warp out/in and they fighters would be 100% stuck in warp and useless) and kill them. I've used a SOLO Nighthawk to kill six of a Nyx' Fighters before he gave up and warped to a safe to cloak. Fighters are useless, or you are, if you sit still and try tank them.

4) That's the only thing you got right, that needs to be addressed.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

Vegas Watchtower
#642 - 2011-10-11 01:50:52 UTC
This is one of THE worst balancing decisions I've ever seen in a games life cycle.

You have completely removed the counter-balance to "blob" warfare in one fell stroke.

On top of that, you've made these ships worth multiple billions of isk not worth flying at all. CCP, you have truly regressed backwards on this.

I'm fairly disgusted with your thinking process in this regard.

Yet again, you've shown favor to those that can field the most ships without any regard for the people who have spent their entire careers in-game working towards capitals and super capitals.

I can see myself easily cancelling 6 of my 7 accounts, as they are supremely and utterly useless.

Way to stick it to your veteran players CCP.
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#643 - 2011-10-11 01:51:24 UTC
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
Ok so here is a tl;dr of the first 32 pages.

11. Arrow Finally to the devs - BEFORE YOU IMPLEMENT THIS, please post a second dev blog about community suggestions on these changes and talk more with us about what changes will be final and which ones will be left on the floor, or changes we can meet each other half way.

Excellent summary, quoting the most important section.
Chosen Path
#644 - 2011-10-11 01:53:24 UTC
i gave an honest effort to read all the posts before adding my own, got to page 24 before calling it quits, skimmed
to see CCP reps responses

concerns on fighters has been hammered into the ground
as has hostile EWAR compared to friendly EWAR

i have concerns over more the method you used in coming up with these nerfs/changes
understandably you cant get all the EVE pilots opinions before coming out with a release
it would be ridiculous to ask such a thing

but you take and run a few numbers
say... take the number of pilots who even interact with capital class ships
of those
who use them in PvP
anyone who has taken a statistics course could tell you running a couple equations
to find a random sampling of those pilots and get good experienced based input

because after all this is a game, we pay YOU to provide services
sure you hold the intellectual rights to the game and its content...
but its a business
do restaurants give free samples of a new dish before putting it on the menu? yes

i havent seen a whole lot of sincere co-operation between the people coding this game
and the ones paying to play it

i fully understand your position, you are based out of a country most of your players dont live in
and a large part of your player base are willing to accept what you dish out and are happy enough to
pay for PLEX or subscriptions

but maybe you should aim a little higher and try and be a better business and have more adaption in
your customer service
cause thats what we are customers

so when CCP Tallest said

CCP Tallest wrote:
Mekia Buelle wrote:
CCP Tallest wrote:
Regarding Titan gun tracking:

I am well aware of the issue and considered making changes to it. I decided against it for this balancing pass. We are still working on the winter release and this is not completely off the table. There will be public testing of these balancing changes on SISI and we are ready to consider further changes if needed.

That sounds good but will you consider the changes to the fighers and carriers in general or that is a final decision?

Yes I will consider it.

i really expect him to consider it, THAT'S HIS JOB

i do appreciate the fact you have to wade through **** to find some worthwhile posts and ideas
and sincerely hope this release will be something of a turning point from 'ADD NEW CONTENT!'
to just taking a step back and spending whatever time is needed to fix the existing content

with regards,

#645 - 2011-10-11 01:55:04 UTC
Zhade Lezte wrote:
:tinfoil: Developerswarm :tinfoil:. Look up time dilation in the latest blogs, no one likes lag.

You're right that noone likes lag. But :tinfoil: time dilation is a blob boost, a deterrent to small/medium scale PvP, and only a boost to a very small minority of this game (given than 80% lives in high sec, some in low, and far from everyone in null are involved in the massive fleet fights). TL;DR a populist boost with no crucial game or PvP content.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

#646 - 2011-10-11 02:01:14 UTC
It's one small step into the right direction, but all of this doesn't change the major problem of 0.0, which would be the blobs of the few remaining powerblocs controlling all of the space.

Remove jumpbridges and jumpfreighters to make the logistics harder, remove the sovereignity-system that's based on structures and make it based on activity and finally remove the high-end-moons and make the high-ends available through alchemy only.
Cpt Underpants
Caldari State
#647 - 2011-10-11 02:03:27 UTC
gfldex wrote:
Drone tracking links help too, ofc.
The only ship mod that affects fighters or fighter bombers is the Drone Control Unit. Omni-directional Tracking Link, Drone Navigation Computer etc only affect drones, not fighters.

A solution to the fighter nerf may be to allow these mods to have an effect on fighters.

Elisha Starkiller wrote:

they log back in and they will still be in the fight, if the connection is gone..... well bummer its only a game :D and get some decent internet!
Some people are at the mercy of the incumbent telecommunications provider and can't get any better.

I live in an area which can barely get ADSL and occasionally drops out. The telco wont fix it because they have no competition.

Another member of my corp lives in South Africa and has good connections except when the copper phone lines are stolen (happens every few months).

Despite this, I agree on the proposed log off mechanics.

John Hand wrote:
The Drone Bay nerf was not really needed. What should be done (if you want to nerf the bay anyways) is just make it smaller but still allow the the use of normal drones. So say 25 (as that is max with full DCU's) Fighter Bombers, 25 Fighters and 50 heavys which can be split up to allow for either more med, lights ect.
Quite obvious many of the comments like this come from people who don't understand the size of fighters/bombers. Fighters/bombers are 5000m3. You only need to drop one fighter to be able to bring 200 heavies in its place.

I agree that the tracking links should not work on Titans. They shouldn't be a anti-subcap platform.

Lurk more -

Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#648 - 2011-10-11 02:16:15 UTC
kralz wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
People who buy obvioulsy unbalanced stuff because of the unbalanced **** in the stuff should stay quiet. You ought to know that it is going to be balanced sooner or later.

Waah waaaaaaaaaaaah waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

waaaaaaaaah WAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!r.

So... hows that workin out for ya? xD

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.

#649 - 2011-10-11 02:16:30 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
ok so my moros will do 11 k dps with ions and 6k dps with rails? wow Pirate good job ccp...

plus its cap stable for 2min 40 sec;)] with the new bonusPirate

its cap stable with just the guns on or 8 min with just the repper on...

[Moros, high V]
Capital Armor Repairer I
Damage Control II
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Shadow Serpentis Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Shadow Serpentis Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Shadow Serpentis Magnetic Field Stabilizer

Shadow Serpentis Sensor Booster, Targeting Range
Shadow Serpentis Tracking Computer, Optimal Range
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II

Dual 1000mm Railgun I, Guristas Antimatter Charge XL
Dual 1000mm Railgun I, Guristas Antimatter Charge XL
Dual 1000mm Railgun I, Guristas Antimatter Charge XL
Siege Module I

Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Anti-Explosive Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#650 - 2011-10-11 02:24:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Rinn
MezriDax wrote:
As with everything CCP likes to kill, Supercaps are now even more useless than they were before.

Supercaps were hideously overpowered: they could shoot everything. Frigate? Yup, blow that up with my endless supply of light and medium drones (20 warrior II drones against any frigate, where does that make sense). Cruiser? Blow that up too. Titan? Yeah, blow that up. Sovereignty structure? Yup, this ship was designed for blowing that stuff up. It was possible to hot drop a few super carriers on any roaming gang in low sec and wipe them off the field.

There was an interesting idea raised in the comments on Jester's "I need a doctrine" blog post: rather than simply reducing tracking on weapons, also increase the resolution of all weapons and increase the impact that mismatch between weapon resolution and target signature radius has on the damage dealt by that weapon on that target. This would allow DDs to be fired against any target, but due to a multi-kilometre weapon resolution they would do minimal damage against anything smaller than a carrier. Any weapon class should have a limited range of targets that it is effective against, without having specific game mechanics introduced to prevent that weapon class being used against certain targets.

Using tracking links on a titan would thus allow the titan's guns to track frigates, but the gun would still be ineffective against that target without webs and boosted painters thrown into the mix. A super capital turret used against a stationary target should result in significant damage. A super carrier without speed tanking mods or boosts should not be able to speed tank a tracking-boosted super capital turret.

I'm also wondering when CCP will be removing EWAR immunity altogether. It could be replaced with buffs to the appropriate stats, such as sensor strength — but then super caps already have huge sensor strength which can be made even stronger using remote sensor boosters, thus increasing the reliance on a support fleet to provide the EWAR "immunity" rather than simply providing a unique (and stupid) mechanic to that ship class in the first place. Dreadnoughts could gain this immunity through siege mode providing a significant sensor strength increase.

This rebalance is a decent start. It could be better.
Goonswarm Federation
#651 - 2011-10-11 02:24:15 UTC
FHM wrote:
Very nice change's ! Finally small alliances that can field 100 experienced people will be able to take their stand and push
for their own 0.0 I WIN BUTTON REMOVED

The most stupid complaints you hear about these balances answered:

1) We are veterans in this game ( Goons, PL, Raiden... ) we win every fight because we have the hardcore skill of being able to press I WIN button.

1) You are not veterans you only exist because of the I WIN button i am looking forward to High Sec mining corporations
whelping PL, Raiden, Solar, WN, Goon fleets like its no tomorrow. Veterans adapt to changes not cry about them. Saying
that most veterans will quit when having their supers nerfed shows how wrong your idea and meaning of the word: veteran
really is.

If you need to quit because you got BUT HURT and are no longer able to press the I WIN button and call your self a veteran go and do it no one will miss you Q3 2011 reported 1k super capital pilots active in EVE well that's the FAT we can easily trim.

2) Super capitals can no longer defend them selves against sub-capitals.

Another stupid argument that can be made only by a stupid person. Super capitals are slow, big and clumsy logistical
platform whit ability to counter other BIG things and should not be used for melting sub-capitals.
If you field your super your should field it to a purpose knowing full well you can easily use it. Just because you payed 18 billion or 85 billion for your hull does not mean you are granted the I WIN button.

By bye ******** and arrogant corp mates that think they are so important based on the fact they have a SC.

3) I can no longer rat in my Carrier, Super Carrier, Titan.

If you ever did that you deserve to die in it. Titans and Super Carriers are meant to be an alliance investment not a personal investment. So they should not be cost effective or give you a 200 or 360mil/h bonus they are not ratting machines and if
that is what you used them fore you need to go back and start doing L1's and learn a thing or two about the game.

4) 100 Canes can no kill a lone Super Carrier

Well ofc the outcome of that fight had to be reversed. It how it is in real life and whatever imaginary life you imagine.

5) Most common argument from Goons, PL, WN, Raiden, NC... In this topic is:

We can no longer use the I WIN button our super capital blob is dead we are about to loose super capitals on daily basis
that will be caught ratting for our extreme veteran title.

Answer: Just learn to PVP learn to play.

6) Dreads will be OP

How cuss it to hard to put a scram on it when it exits sige? Or based on fact it cant hit anything that moved at 1m/s ?
Or is it 2 hard to light a cyno from your spy alts to drop a SC fleet on them. Only thing this changed is taking the
pace of this game to a new level where you will have to respond to assaults faster.

And even if their will be OP there is a counter CCP gave you and promised to buff them. They are the ships you
so refuse to fly. You will find them under the market tab BLACK OPS finally a use for them. Have em standing by
and you have a fleet ready for rapid deployment in your sov space.

7) I trained for 6 months but SC's are useless now give me back my skills

You were aware of what you were committing to and the fact everything is viable to change in game. So if you think it was
a mistake going for a SC it is only your own problem. Also few years ago i trained for a Dread that are useless ATM
you don't see me crying for years give me back my skills.

If you cry about these changes you are possibly the 13-25 year old kid that has a ton of time to spare and grinds those
anomaly's, L4s and 10/10 DED's and logs off the second someone mentions CTA or Roam.

Holy christ you are developmentally challenged. Kindly remove yourself from the gene pool tia.
Amsterdam Conversations
#652 - 2011-10-11 02:24:34 UTC
iulixxi wrote:
Adapt or die people ... nerfs are needed to balance things around.

Also would love an official answer to this:
@CCP: Will the loss of 20% EHP also come with an adjustment to the respective supercarrier BPO's, thus make them use less components? As it happened with removal of the clone bay + a decrease in Capital Drone Bay requirements? (to be inline with the reduced drone bay)


Just curious, when they boosted them the first time, you didn't ask for them to cost 100b instead of 10b?
Chitsa Jason
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#653 - 2011-10-11 02:28:45 UTC
Awesome changes.

I have few notes though:

Moros will have Cap issues with new bonus. introducing this bonus is actually a nerf for this dread.

Carriers should be able to fight off sub caps with Fighters. Especially in wspace where supers can not be used. Using Carriers in wspace will be just a glorified guardian.

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me

#654 - 2011-10-11 02:30:33 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. 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.

Exactly what I been posting as well. You could also say that the very reason CCP have no real "mission statement" (i.e. no role) for supers or capitals in general, is adding to these issues. If CCP would know what to use them for, they would not be as silly (I'd like to think!) as to paint themselves into a corner like this.

Judging by how time dilation is another blob boost, I think it's pretty safe to assume that CCP want's that very small minority (a generous guess would be 5% of the EVE population) to be dictating the gameplay and future of this game.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

StarFleet Enterprises
#655 - 2011-10-11 02:32:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Fiberton
Actually he is anti semetic. Having planned to and started the oxygen Isotope profit embargo on Rosh Hashanah
( Jewish New Year ) . CCP obviously supports Mittani as he is the highest represenative of its online community.
Which is highly offensive even to me who is not even a religious person of any faith.

The Mittani wrote:
chunorris wrote:

Shut up lier manipulator. Now you have what you wanted last 3 years. Ruin the game. Good luck and long live to the rifter fleets

If death2allsupercaps is wrong, baby, I don't want to be right.

“Out of clutter, find simplicity. From discord, find harmony. In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity.” --  Albert  Einstein  "War is a mere continuation of politics by other means,"

Velin Dhal
Zeonic CG
#656 - 2011-10-11 02:35:41 UTC
You have got to be kidding me ?

What exactly is this supposed to balance ?

The low SP toons crying ?

You already put the nerf to titans when you took away the AOE doomsday. Now you take away the drone bay and can't use your doomsday on non caps ?

You don't let Super carriers have anything but fighters and fighter bombers ?

Dreds lose drone bays too ?

So apparently one guy in a heavy interdictor can point you and your never getting away. You didn't nerf them, you just made them unable to defend themselves. How is that balancing ?

Half the fun of super capitals is knowing you worked your ass off to get in one and it payed off. Now you make them worthless unless you have a huge support fleet surrounding you.

Why does it seem to me that every time there is a serious update to this game now, that low SP toons get the world and High SP toons have to bend over ?
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
#657 - 2011-10-11 02:36:57 UTC
Fiberton wrote:
I too want SP for Titan toons / super toons to be reorganized as I will no longer need them. Is this your plan for SP for PLEX ? This was asked at the last confrence in Iceland. It is all becoming clear now. I will take 16 SP toon reorganizations thanks. ..


This is delicious.

Delicious delicious tears flowing from FOTM chasers~~~


Thor Fredricksen
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#658 - 2011-10-11 02:39:20 UTC
would have been nice to see an increase to what carriers can carry .
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
#659 - 2011-10-11 02:39:24 UTC
Velin Dhal wrote:
Half the fun of super capitals is knowing you worked your ass off to get in one and it payed off. Now you make them worthless unless you have a huge support fleet surrounding you.

Duh, that's what super capitals were always meant to be, lol.


Fyrdung Tyr
State War Academy
Caldari State
#660 - 2011-10-11 02:39:27 UTC
I demand CCP place bottle of lube in the cargo hold of every SC in the game prior to the nerf. Just pretending like you care about easing our pain a bit might help....