These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Ilarra
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#101 - 2011-10-10 17:25:19 UTC
Are there any plans to bring the leviathan up to speed with the turret dreads for anything other than shooting structures? The explosion radius/velocity of the citadel cruises/torps missiles is so large that it doesn't do full damage against anything smaller than a structure, and there are no remote booster modules for missiles like there are for tracking on the turret titans.

With the DD no longer being able to be fired against sub-capitals that further nerfs its usefulness in fleet battles, making it clearly an inferior choice compared to the other three. This is not even considering the fact that the shield bonus isn't instant, thus requiring a ton of remote rep capability every single time the ship jumps in order to get the benefit of the bonus.

(oh god, such a dumb decision settling on a lev expecting the titans to be brought roughly in line with each other)
Kabaos
Fulgur lumene
#102 - 2011-10-10 17:25:30 UTC
You are crazy?Big smile

Mothership without small,medium and large drones.. Yes , eve goes down..
David Carel
SWAT Team Sales Consultants
#103 - 2011-10-10 17:25:33 UTC
Misanth wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Misanth wrote:
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.


I'm in a smaller alliance. We're pretty happy about these changes. The DD change is the big deal, with the log-off change close behind. We already have doctrine to deal with supercarriers, and the drone bay changes will only make that easier. Likewise, we have doctrine prepared to deal with titans that can't DD subcaps.

if CCP actually deploy changes, we anticipate a merry winter of boat-violence amongst our neighbours.


I know alot of people from your alliance since the short time I was in Pure. I considering your alliance another blobby powerbloc, fyi. Most of your "roams" is dozens/tens of people, alot of the people that used to fly ceptors now fly supers, etc. Your alliance is a perfect example of people who used to be good small scale (5-10 man) roaming pvpers, who now turned into a super-blob.

Even tho yes, you're not big compared to the biggest blobs, but compared to young alliance who wants to move out to nullsec, alliance like your own will be boosted by these changes and even less likely to lose their space to younger competition. It's not like when Triumvirate used smaller blobs and harrassed Pure in their homeland, or when Pure roaming gangs did it against whoever. Nowadays smaller alliance just can't roam like we used to, and you guys, and your supers, are part of the problem. And these changes did nothing at all, to help.


You're the problem, not the blobs.
More exactly, your lack of ingenuity.
Mekia Buelle
Doomheim
#104 - 2011-10-10 17:26:07 UTC
You better post them "DAMN" FAST YOU HEAR ME? Shocked

CCP Soundwave wrote:
If you enjoyed these changes and things happening to spaceships IN SPACE I guerantee you'll love the rest of the stuff we have lined up for winter Big smile

Keep an eye out for the blogs.
Sakaali
Perkone
Caldari State
#105 - 2011-10-10 17:26:10 UTC
Do you at all feel that the 20% reduction in shields/armor may be too much when considered in addition to the logoff mechanic change? This seems a bit harsh for titans at least.
Mekhana
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#106 - 2011-10-10 17:27:03 UTC
If you can't afford losing a ship, you should not be flying it.

Vide longe er eros di Luminaire VII, uni canse pra krage e determiniex! Sange por Sange! Descanse bravex eros, mie freires. Mortir por vostre Liberete, farmilie, ide e amis. lons Proviste sen mort! Luminaire liber mas! 
Crias Taylor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2011-10-10 17:27:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Crias Taylor
You need to extend that all remote ewar does not work for them as well like tracking links and sensor boosters. If you don't do this you can still vaporize sub capital fleets with your titans. 

For example, you can drop armor tanked triage carriers that remote sensor boost and tracking link an Erebus or Rag and one shot sub caps as fast as the turrets cycle.
ToXicPaIN
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#108 - 2011-10-10 17:27:21 UTC
Ilarra wrote:
Are there any plans to bring the leviathan up to speed with the turret dreads for anything other than shooting structures? The explosion radius/velocity of the citadel cruises/torps missiles is so large that it doesn't do full damage against anything smaller than a structure, and there are no remote booster modules for missiles like there are for tracking on the turret titans.

With the DD no longer being able to be fired against sub-capitals that further nerfs its usefulness in fleet battles, making it clearly an inferior choice compared to the other three. This is not even considering the fact that the shield bonus isn't instant, thus requiring a ton of remote rep capability every single time the ship jumps in order to get the benefit of the bonus.

(oh god, such a dumb decision settling on a lev expecting the titans to be brought roughly in line with each other)


Signed
Tokino Kaalakiota
Kaalakiota Logistical Serivces
#109 - 2011-10-10 17:28:06 UTC
David Carel wrote:
Tokino Kaalakiota wrote:
Mittani and the rest of the "supercap blob" whiners can go cry themselves to sleep while smart individuals can make use of existing tactics to counter supercap blobs


I recommend you to look up "Welpfleet" and the distribution of supers; it would be nice if you had a clue before posting.



I am not referring to "welpfleet" and I am quite aware that your alliance currently (appears to) lack the ability to deploy any sort of supercap force.

As a previous/current owner of MULTIPLE personal supercaps, I would encourage you to take your own advice, and get a clue before posting.

Welpfleet is no counter; it's just a way for goons to leverage their numbers majority in cheap ships to apply dps. If you look at some of the tactics RnK have used in the past to destroy supercarrier/carrier fleets in the past you'd maybe understand what I'm saying. (They beat a FA/WIdawt supercarrier/carrier gang that more than outnumbered them in supercarriers/carriers alone, killing 1 SC and several carriers, without ANY caps/scaps of their own.)

tl;dr - Learn more about game mechanics before you go all bitter.

-Tokino/Lords
chunorris
Jabonosos.
#110 - 2011-10-10 17:28:37 UTC
In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance.

Quote:
Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers


Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.
SloMoJoe
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2011-10-10 17:29:28 UTC
Nerfing the Moros drone bay and applying that bonus to a rate of fire bonus without adjusting the cap usage of hybrid guns isn't such a great trade. Here's hoping the rumored hybrid re-balance straitens this out.
Joshua Samson
Doomheim
#112 - 2011-10-10 17:29:44 UTC
So your supercarrier can get tackled by a single HIC and its hard to get out. Well tough **** cupcake, how about you bring that support that should go with your massive capital?

Awesome changes. Only thing i would also like to see is titan gun tracking nerf and a cyno spin-up timer thingy.
Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#113 - 2011-10-10 17:29:52 UTC
I like the changes overall; I think giving carriers a sig buff to fighters as a role bonus might be the best option to balance them out.


Out of the changes that remain to be made, two in particular stand out:
1: tracking links on supercapitals (and dreads) make them very powerful agains the very things that this rebalance was intended to make them impotent against. It's a loophole, and one that will be abused.

2: Shield-tanking ships in general (and especially pronounced on supercapitals) have gang bonuses unfairly applied to them. Armor gang bonuses are applied immediately and allow for jumping without concern. Shield tankers have to regenerate their gang bonuses and need to do so every single time they jump through a gate or cyno. This means the effective HP of shield tankers is far less than their armor brethern--which is compounded even further by the slave implant set. Change the bonus application behavior.
Chee
hirr
Pandemic Horde
#114 - 2011-10-10 17:29:58 UTC
Please fix slavesets to no longer give bonus to supercaps. In an EHP game this buff cannot be overlooked in a patch.

Jump distance would be 7.876 lightyears but your jump drive only allows for jumps within 7.875 lightyears.
Wen Jaibao
Perkone
Caldari State
#115 - 2011-10-10 17:30:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Wen Jaibao
So now fighters are even more useless for normal carriers. Are you planning on removing the dronebay from normal carriers too, or are they staying as is?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#116 - 2011-10-10 17:30:44 UTC
chunorris wrote:
In 6 months, when this game will be ruined and goonswarm trololol CCP with his 150 dread fleet, you will rememer this devblog. Now, any 180 man hurricane fleet will kill a supercarrier fleet. That is not balance.

Quote:
Personally as a carrier owner I'd prefer to see the fighter nerf applied specifically on SCs and not on all carriers


Lol. Personally, i prefer dont touch anything about drones in supers but you know, start crying with 6000 friends and put a csm in your life and ccp will do everyting you want.




actually balance is precisely that, that the counter to a supercarrier fleet is something other than "a bigger supercarrier fleet"

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Florestan Bronstein
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#117 - 2011-10-10 17:30:44 UTC
Quote:
We are increasing the signature resolution on fighters so that they deal less damage to smaller targets.

Sanctum stealth nerf PPP
Lord Okinaba
Aliastra
#118 - 2011-10-10 17:31:03 UTC
Lovely stuff. Smile
Emmerik
NED-Clan
Goonswarm Federation
#119 - 2011-10-10 17:31:06 UTC
Fuujin wrote:


2: Shield-tanking ships in general (and especially pronounced on supercapitals) have gang bonuses unfairly applied to them. Armor gang bonuses are applied immediately and allow for jumping without concern. Shield tankers have to regenerate their gang bonuses and need to do so every single time they jump through a gate or cyno. This means the effective HP of shield tankers is far less than their armor brethern--which is compounded even further by the slave implant set. Change the bonus application behavior.


Or give us something like a Shield/Cap implant set, so boost it a little
Helothane
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#120 - 2011-10-10 17:31:12 UTC
400m is the resolution of all 'Large' turret weapons. Those appear to work just fine on BS and even BC-sized NPC ships, so I don't see why fighters should not still be effective in running sanctums. Not as effective as they have been, but still effective.