EVE Information Portal

+1, deacrse cap conso for XL gun.

CCP Tallest,

As you add comments here, could you also update the devblog to help those just arriving.

Thanks
AG

Titans don't shoot the HICs. They DD them. Then they train their guns on your battleship fleet and obliterate them. You can look on any killboard and find numerous examples of single titans doing 75-100% of damage on BS kills.

wouldnt take 15mins no, so after say disconnection from lagg it will take a good few minutes at least to reboot an relogg. Then will take some time to load grid aswell.By that time after this patch you could of been dropped 2-3 times, its for these eventuallitys im talking about.

heavys and sentrys do minimal damage against a bs. where as fighters will damage a bs.

if you change fighters that much, you may as well just turn carriers into big haulers.

im aslo fine with sc's being able to defend themselves to soem extent v bs's. thsi stil allows that.

fighters currently are balanced. why do you want to change that?

Pure stupidness.

Maybe not a Super Destroyer, but along that path.

But maybe to increase Dreadnaught usage, have the ability to fit a Carrier scram... Here me out.

Yes, it is ridiculous that a HIC should be able to tie a SC/Titan down. Even normal carriers.

The power to hold down the ship, could be directional proportional to the size of ship.

A HIC shouldn't have power to hold that size of ship, without some major draw back (Dont know right now).

So making SC/Titan immune to normal Scrams and HIC Bubbles, but susceptible to a new Capital scrammer. Specific to Dreadnaughts, or other Capital class ship.

Balance, SC/Titan would have a get out clause for sub-cap engagements. But could still be held down by a specific setup.

The minute you let motherships dock, the arguments is going to go about to remove the ewar immunity, and suddenly the motherships is not a supercap anymore. Supers should never be able to dock, and should be ewar immune. However, ewar immunity currently doesn't work the way the name suggests it does. Supers should be unable to benefit from friendly remote abilities (including remote reps), but they should be immune against all ewar (including neuts).

The problem wasnt so much that dreads were a bad ship, it was more that titans can one shot them and a super can drop a dread within 2 mins.

If you have 100 dreads and the enemy cynos in 25 titans and 75 SC, those dreads are dead and the Supers probably wont get killed. Reason being that the 25 titans DD 25 dreads in the first few seconds and then the SC get remote repps while beating the poo out of the remaining 75 dreads who are stuck still and cant recieve reps. Those dreads will still be lucky to kill a single SC, probably even after this nerf.

1- The Titan DD needs to really make more sense as a single shot like that really messes it up. Having the titan rooted stop still to the spot for 10 mins after the DD is a step forward.
2- The problem is that fighter bombers should be reduced to just shooting structures for high damage. Against capitals, the DPS total of all 20 bombers to be about 25% of a single sieged dread's DPS so they CAN kill capitals, but not as the primary anti-capital ship they are currently.
3- The SC is a CARRIER. Removing the drones it can carry is just dumb. Yes they can engage subcaps atm, but then so can every other ship in game. Now, changing the mechanics of carriers to have a Drone bay AND a Fighter bay would be more sense. Carriers get Fighter bay space for say 10 fighters and then say 2000M³ Drone bay. SC get a Fighter bay to hold 25 Fighter/FB mix but only a 250M³ Drone bay.
4- Removing drones from Dreads is an ok idea, but still kinda stupid as the dreads should have some sort of defence, even if its just a 25m³ drone bay for 5 scout drones. Not enough to defend against a BS fleet but enough to just get rid of that little annoying noob ship that keeps turning up.
5- Changing the Siege and Triage module to allow the capitals to move REALLY slowly ie 10M/s and cannot warp to change them from being static so that reduces the damage of FBs would be a start/ possible solution so the tracking of FBs could be solved.
6- The lag the fighter bombers produce should be countered by increasing DPS of FBs but reducing no. of FBs that can be deployed from say 20 to 5, turning them into heavy fighters if you will. The Hp of the FB should be quite low as theyre all about DPS not armour, so a small ship can slap them about if needed.
7- Fighters shouldnt be touched. TBH, theyre just right for what they are.
8- I'd have left the log off as it was, but reducing the EHP of the SCs was a good idea. Having such a large buffer is why the log off was used so easily. If the log off is being increased, then 30 mins should be the max since the usual CCP trick is to nerf something or increase it so much that it has to be nerfed AGAIN by the next patch. Small increments instead of big **** ups.

Just a couple of ideas for people to tear to pieces.

Removing drones period from Supercarriers just made them a huge hunk of scrap metal...I guess the next thing to do would be to remove the ability to have ammo in your cargohold...just load guns and when ur done ur done.