These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey 1.1] Command Ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
S1dy
Uplifting Infernal Paradise
#1561 - 2013-08-18 12:02:13 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
If you want an unkillable fleet commander, bring a titan. They give huge fleet boosts and you can't alpha them.

For God's sake guys...





Sry, but you missed the entire Problem, we dont want unkillable Command Ships, we just dont want to die first every time you Warp on Grid.


With respect, a command ship that can survive big-fleet alpha sounds to me like an unkillable ship since as soon as it's yellow-boxed it will call reps on itself.

It is patiently obvious that on some scale, fleet alpha will overwhelm any ship. Whether it's a battleship, command ship or titan.

The question is not, "should it be able to withstand alpha". The question should be, "how much alpha do we want it to be able to withstand?"

If you can put a number on that then you can ask the devs to make it happen.

At the moment, that number for an amarr command ship is something like 250k, and for a caldari one somewhat less (although these numbers are affected positively by faction and deadspace tank).

As it stands, if you want a fleet command ship to withstand 1 million hit points of damage, then it's going to have to be a carrier or titan.

So. Give the devs a number and argue a case for it. Terms such as "big fleets", "huge alpha" are subjective and meaningless to a designer. He needs concrete numbers.



You suck my friend. First you should read the whole thread before spamming with this ****. I would bet there are at least 30 ebtries stating a number: It should be like the Damnation is on TQ right now. And there ar tradeoffs to do, for sure. We never stated we wanna have an overpimped ship that won't die in a fire and does descent DPS. We just want ships that are in every race able to tank as much as the Damnation does right now. See my entry just before yours.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1562 - 2013-08-18 12:03:27 UTC
S1dy wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3438123#post3438123

Just leaving this here. Though a few points get some love now it's still my current point of few how they should balance Command Ships.



mm.. i agree the Vulture should be the shield equivalent of the damnation ... when asked about it fozzie said he was trying to get rid of the HP bonus the damnation has rather than add HP bonuses to others but i think he has to be more fair here either
- remove HP bonus from damnation
- or add HP bonus to vulture add same level as damnation 10% or reduce both ships to 5%
otherwise its just plain favoritism

I would also suggest making the Eos and Sleipnir armour HP ships aswell.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1563 - 2013-08-18 12:26:42 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
...I would also suggest making the Eos and Sleipnir armour HP ships aswell.

Problem with that is it will defeat the purpose of the whole exercise, which is to make all viable with or without links, it is the same reason why the Damnation bonus has to go bye-bye.

Reference: Damnation bricks like a champ but has less damage output than the Sacrilege, a ship that has always been sub-par on damage by the way.

Ask yourself this: If Vulture/Eos/Sleipnir were to get the brick bonus, what sacrifices would you be willing to make?

Remove 75m3 of drones from Eos? Drop both damage bonuses on Sleipnir to 5% and remove a turret? .. end result would be what we have now, CC's that are pointless outside of 'Da Blob' and even in the 'Da Blob' their life expectancy would only be marginally increased or they'd be completely ignored as link bonus drop means that the 1M dps a fleet pushes out is indirectly increased by a large amount.

The ability to survive on-grid is solved by EHP increases on paper only, we have had blanket EHP increases in the past and all they did was prolong solo engagement slightly (active tank changes have done far more!) and enlarge gang sizes. We need a non EHP based answer to the question of on-grid survivability, preferably one that does not make small gangs obsolete.
Florian Kuehne
Tech3 Company
#1564 - 2013-08-18 12:30:52 UTC
The Eos shoud have a bit more hp and dronebay and its fine. If its to high, then u have a better Domi in small.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1565 - 2013-08-18 12:47:13 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
...I would also suggest making the Eos and Sleipnir armour HP ships aswell.

Problem with that is it will defeat the purpose of the whole exercise, which is to make all viable with or without links, it is the same reason why the Damnation bonus has to go bye-bye.

Reference: Damnation bricks like a champ but has less damage output than the Sacrilege, a ship that has always been sub-par on damage by the way.

Ask yourself this: If Vulture/Eos/Sleipnir were to get the brick bonus, what sacrifices would you be willing to make?

Remove 75m3 of drones from Eos? Drop both damage bonuses on Sleipnir to 5% and remove a turret? .. end result would be what we have now, CC's that are pointless outside of 'Da Blob' and even in the 'Da Blob' their life expectancy would only be marginally increased or they'd be completely ignored as link bonus drop means that the 1M dps a fleet pushes out is indirectly increased by a large amount.

The ability to survive on-grid is solved by EHP increases on paper only, we have had blanket EHP increases in the past and all they did was prolong solo engagement slightly (active tank changes have done far more!) and enlarge gang sizes. We need a non EHP based answer to the question of on-grid survivability, preferably one that does not make small gangs obsolete.


Vulture
- trade an optimal range bonus for shield HP
Eos
- trade armour rep for armour HP
Sleipnir
- trade shield boost bonus for armour HP

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1566 - 2013-08-18 12:53:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Mournful Conciousness
S1dy wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
If you want an unkillable fleet commander, bring a titan. They give huge fleet boosts and you can't alpha them.

For God's sake guys...





Sry, but you missed the entire Problem, we dont want unkillable Command Ships, we just dont want to die first every time you Warp on Grid.


With respect, a command ship that can survive big-fleet alpha sounds to me like an unkillable ship since as soon as it's yellow-boxed it will call reps on itself.

It is patiently obvious that on some scale, fleet alpha will overwhelm any ship. Whether it's a battleship, command ship or titan.

The question is not, "should it be able to withstand alpha". The question should be, "how much alpha do we want it to be able to withstand?"

If you can put a number on that then you can ask the devs to make it happen.

At the moment, that number for an amarr command ship is something like 250k, and for a caldari one somewhat less (although these numbers are affected positively by faction and deadspace tank).

As it stands, if you want a fleet command ship to withstand 1 million hit points of damage, then it's going to have to be a carrier or titan.

So. Give the devs a number and argue a case for it. Terms such as "big fleets", "huge alpha" are subjective and meaningless to a designer. He needs concrete numbers.



You suck my friend. First you should read the whole thread before spamming with this ****. I would bet there are at least 30 ebtries stating a number: It should be like the Damnation is on TQ right now. And there ar tradeoffs to do, for sure. We never stated we wanna have an overpimped ship that won't die in a fire and does descent DPS. We just want ships that are in every race able to tank as much as the Damnation does right now. See my entry just before yours.


Forgive me for sucking. I do not see you state a number. "as much as the damnation does now" depends on many factors. Skills, modules etc. So it is not a number by which we can measure performance, otherwise known as a "metric".

For example, have you tried to fit up a caldari command ship and then overheated the invulnerability fields, or fitted navy versions, or deadspace? Presumably in a large fleet engagement, this is what will be fitted.

Do that and check the numbers. I think you might be surprised how much alpha these ships will withstand.

Fearing that I labour my point, please state exactly how much alpha tolerance is "enough". Then measure each ship's performance against that metric. Then decide whether the ships (and I) suck.

/MC

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1567 - 2013-08-18 13:13:54 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:

Forgive me for sucking. I do not see you state a number. "as much as the damnation does now" depends on many factors. Skills, modules etc. So it is not a number by which we can measure performance, otherwise known as a "metric".

For example, have you tried to fit up a caldari command ship and then overheated the invulnerability fields, or fitted navy versions, or deadspace? Presumably in a large fleet engagement, this is what will be fitted.

Do that and check the numbers. I think you might be surprised how much alpha these ships will withstand.

Fearing that I labour my point, please state exactly how much alpha tolerance is "enough". Then measure each ship's performance against that metric. Then decide whether the ships (and I) suck.

/MC


Actually a nighthawk linkbrick has around 200k EHP, it really isn't that terible given that reps land on the start of a cycle.
Serenity Eon
League of Paranoid D-Scanners
#1568 - 2013-08-18 13:33:10 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
...I would also suggest making the Eos and Sleipnir armour HP ships aswell.

Problem with that is it will defeat the purpose of the whole exercise, which is to make all viable with or without links, it is the same reason why the Damnation bonus has to go bye-bye.

Reference: Damnation bricks like a champ but has less damage output than the Sacrilege, a ship that has always been sub-par on damage by the way.

Ask yourself this: If Vulture/Eos/Sleipnir were to get the brick bonus, what sacrifices would you be willing to make?

Remove 75m3 of drones from Eos? Drop both damage bonuses on Sleipnir to 5% and remove a turret? .. end result would be what we have now, CC's that are pointless outside of 'Da Blob' and even in the 'Da Blob' their life expectancy would only be marginally increased or they'd be completely ignored as link bonus drop means that the 1M dps a fleet pushes out is indirectly increased by a large amount.

The ability to survive on-grid is solved by EHP increases on paper only, we have had blanket EHP increases in the past and all they did was prolong solo engagement slightly (active tank changes have done far more!) and enlarge gang sizes. We need a non EHP based answer to the question of on-grid survivability, preferably one that does not make small gangs obsolete.


Why not remove the 10% hitpoint bonus from the damnation (replacing it with a ROF bonus), so it can be PVE viable, then add a 50% hitpoint role bonus to all command ships?
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1569 - 2013-08-18 13:34:46 UTC
Serenity Eon wrote:
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
...I would also suggest making the Eos and Sleipnir armour HP ships aswell.

Problem with that is it will defeat the purpose of the whole exercise, which is to make all viable with or without links, it is the same reason why the Damnation bonus has to go bye-bye.

Reference: Damnation bricks like a champ but has less damage output than the Sacrilege, a ship that has always been sub-par on damage by the way.

Ask yourself this: If Vulture/Eos/Sleipnir were to get the brick bonus, what sacrifices would you be willing to make?

Remove 75m3 of drones from Eos? Drop both damage bonuses on Sleipnir to 5% and remove a turret? .. end result would be what we have now, CC's that are pointless outside of 'Da Blob' and even in the 'Da Blob' their life expectancy would only be marginally increased or they'd be completely ignored as link bonus drop means that the 1M dps a fleet pushes out is indirectly increased by a large amount.

The ability to survive on-grid is solved by EHP increases on paper only, we have had blanket EHP increases in the past and all they did was prolong solo engagement slightly (active tank changes have done far more!) and enlarge gang sizes. We need a non EHP based answer to the question of on-grid survivability, preferably one that does not make small gangs obsolete.


Why not remove the 10% hitpoint bonus from the damnation (replacing it with a ROF bonus), so it can be PVE viable, then add a 50% hitpoint role bonus to all command ships?


Perhaps.... at 25% maybe but i doubt fozzie would go for that

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#1570 - 2013-08-18 13:51:12 UTC
I my opinion the "new" NH is not really better than the old. If I have done the maths right, it loses some DPS (1.75*5 < 1.5*6), is still bonused on kin only (for half of the DPS-boni) and will have issues with PG and now even more with CPU.

it would be great if that could be fixed, esp. with the recent nerf to HML ... I remember there was some discussion around that and one point was "we have to rebalance HML first and then we can rebalance the ships which use it around HML". Where and when will this be done?

When I checked Eve-kill today I saw that *everything* I predicted about the effects of said HML nerf and "buff" of other stuff was true - there is no more Caldari missile PvP in BC or BS class. Before there was the Drake, now there is ... nothing. While the Cane is still there .... nerf Caldari some more please :) People said to me I was too pessimistic about the results of those nerfs, and there will be Drake/HAM now rocking - i was sure there wont be Drake-HAM in numbers, and obviously I was right. CCP, screw us over and over again, I am sure in the long run many people will be too annoyed to carry on.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1571 - 2013-08-18 14:43:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe
Serenity Eon wrote:


Why not remove the 10% hitpoint bonus from the damnation (replacing it with a ROF bonus), so it can be PVE viable, then add a 50% hitpoint role bonus to all command ships?


I can guarantee you, without question, that your suggestion would make some of the most Overpowered ships in the game.

If 10% hp bonuses per lvl are to be applied to more ships than the damnation, these ships must sacrifice dps.
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#1572 - 2013-08-18 14:52:36 UTC
Your clearly right, but i am not interested in some pointless number munch, the Command Ship is intended to Support a a Gang or Fleet, CCP Fozzie make them average Defense but hardhitting BCs that can sacrifie some DPS to get more kinds of Boost Bonuses.

Thats nice really but thats not the Problem, the real Problem is the Value of the Ship on Grid, at some specific Point when a Fleet is able to headshot Good buffered Targets they only survive long enough because they arent dangerous enough.

But Look at the Command Ship, it does have high priority, because of Good damage (which can be ignoried in Fleet fights), average EHP in combination with high value Booster bonuses.

If you can headshot one target and weaken a whole fleet, you can be sure your dead before leaving warp.

You need a Solution? Change the Fleet Boosting Mechanic itself, not only nerfing the numbers Up and Down.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
S1dy
Uplifting Infernal Paradise
#1573 - 2013-08-18 15:07:07 UTC  |  Edited by: S1dy
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Forgive me for sucking. I do not see you state a number. "as much as the damnation does now" depends on many factors. Skills, modules etc. So it is not a number by which we can measure performance, otherwise known as a "metric".

For example, have you tried to fit up a caldari command ship and then overheated the invulnerability fields, or fitted navy versions, or deadspace? Presumably in a large fleet engagement, this is what will be fitted.

Do that and check the numbers. I think you might be surprised how much alpha these ships will withstand.

Fearing that I labour my point, please state exactly how much alpha tolerance is "enough". Then measure each ship's performance against that metric. Then decide whether the ships (and I) suck.

/MC


Ok, so while you asked for numbers, here are 2 reasonable fits - without imps, without links, without drugs, without overheat and with the second balance pass of the Command Ships, but with Damnation still having its 50% HP bonus:

Damnation:

http://i.imgur.com/BcLlyUL.jpg

194.807 EHP, 365 m/s, 265 m signature, 96 DPS

Vulture:

http://i.imgur.com/OjcuerB.jpg

117.968 EHP, 408 m/s, 367 m signature, 96 DPS

The Vulture is just for comparison reasons - to show you that there are right now no shield alternatives to the Damnation's tankability. The Nighthawk got nearly the same tank as the Vulture.

So, the Damnation as seen in the picture is what i call well balanced for what Command Ships are proposed for in large scale fleets. Nearly 200.000 EHP without anything, 245.000 EHP with their own links and 364.000 EHP with Slave-Set is enough to withstand a heavy alpha if there's enough logistics in the background. This is the range I'm talking about - every race should get a ship that's able to get nearly the same EHP values with reasonable fits. And here the weapon bonuses are obsolete, because most pilots won't ever fit turrets/launcher because the slots are needed for other tools that are more important in this scale.

Though Command Ships were and will be used for PvE and solo or small scale, too, it's the reason why i stated here to divide both Command Ships into one for greater medium scale and large scale and one for everything that's smaller.
Take the large scale ship and install a brick tank, take away every weapon bonuses and change them into something that's usefull for large scale fleets/FC's - I made a few examples in my linked post.
Take the small scale ship and install DPS based bonuses on them and give them only medium tank (that's reasonable for the ship size) - thy could even get the active tank bonuses CCP seems to want really bad for some Command Ships.

If CCP does it this way every PvP fleet size (and of course PvE) gets a Command Ship that's well enough to achieve its role as a bonus ship without dying instantly or being useless if used as an ongrid ship (or in anomalies/missions).
Florian Kuehne
Tech3 Company
#1574 - 2013-08-18 15:16:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Florian Kuehne
I dont know why they do the changes like that because if you want damage and a decent buffer, go normal or faction battlecruiser.

A commandship should be something special for the fleet, so like usefull bonuses, better ability to fit into your gang. At this point, ccp want to give us more viable fittings but instead they nerfing it like the damnation (nerfing pg & cpu and giving really dumb bonuses).
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1575 - 2013-08-18 15:29:38 UTC
Harvey James wrote:

Vulture
- trade an optimal range bonus for shield HP
Eos
- trade armour rep for armour HP
Sleipnir
- trade shield boost bonus for armour HP

And where is the sacrifice? Take a long look at the Damnation again and see what the brick bonus costs .. then apply similar hamstringing to the hulls you want the bonus applied, after you are done ask yourself if you would ever fly it outside 'Da Blob'.
Serenity Eon wrote:
Why not remove the 10% hitpoint bonus from the damnation (replacing it with a ROF bonus), so it can be PVE viable, then add a 50% hitpoint role bonus to all command ships?

You are both completely missing the point, EHP will not save you on grid almost regardless of the amount. Weekend fleet size has octupled the past five years so that 1000+ is the norm for the shin-digs .. considering that it takes just ~30 alpha boats to knock down 1/4M HP there is just no way in Hell that you will ever have enough EHP for it to matter.

If you should somehow be successful in convincing the Devs that CC's get to retain their combat prowess and have a brick bonus thrown on top, where does that put everything smaller (hull and fleet size)?
How do you propose one goes about fighting a ship with 800+ dps and 250+k EHP in anything other than a similar or bigger ship .. BC and down would essentially be obsolete for small gang/solo work, just when things got interesting after the tiericide passes (ISK has never been an obstacle for min/maxing FoTM monkeys).

Random alternative #XX:
- CC's have zero align time (insta-warp) and links work in warp. Probably not possible to separate agility from warp but it solves the issue, even if it would be as annoying to be a CC pilot as it is babysitting for the nouveau rich.

Very short: EHP is not answer.
S1dy
Uplifting Infernal Paradise
#1576 - 2013-08-18 15:45:14 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
You are both completely missing the point, EHP will not save you on grid almost regardless of the amount. Weekend fleet size has octupled the past five years so that 1000+ is the norm for the shin-digs .. considering that it takes just ~30 alpha boats to knock down 1/4M HP there is just no way in Hell that you will ever have enough EHP for it to matter.

If you should somehow be successful in convincing the Devs that CC's get to retain their combat prowess and have a brick bonus thrown on top, where does that put everything smaller (hull and fleet size)?
How do you propose one goes about fighting a ship with 800+ dps and 250+k EHP in anything other than a similar or bigger ship .. BC and down would essentially be obsolete for small gang/solo work, just when things got interesting after the tiericide passes (ISK has never been an obstacle for min/maxing FoTM monkeys).

Random alternative #XX:
- CC's have zero align time (insta-warp) and links work in warp. Probably not possible to separate agility from warp but it solves the issue, even if it would be as annoying to be a CC pilot as it is babysitting for the nouveau rich.

Very short: EHP is not answer.


You're wrong, in both ways: EHP is an answer. I was with many large fleets in the past and often realized how hard it is to kill a Damnation. But I've seen a lot of Vultures/Nighthawks dying. It's right, there's a critical point by that every ship will fall whether there are logistics and bonuses or not. But this special cases are still very rare.

On the other hand, like I stated a few times already, DPS on Command Ships is nearly useless in this battle sizes because every pilot that's intelligent enough fits no turrets/launches into the highlots. They are used for more important tools.

You're right saying there should be no ship able to pull off 800 DPS and tank with 250.000 EHP. That's absolutely overpowered and makes no sense for a balance. There should be a tradeoff, in both ways. Though I'm repeating myself, just do a brick tank Command Ship and a second one doing DPS. That would be fair enough.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1577 - 2013-08-18 15:59:56 UTC
S1dy wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Forgive me for sucking. I do not see you state a number. "as much as the damnation does now" depends on many factors. Skills, modules etc. So it is not a number by which we can measure performance, otherwise known as a "metric".

For example, have you tried to fit up a caldari command ship and then overheated the invulnerability fields, or fitted navy versions, or deadspace? Presumably in a large fleet engagement, this is what will be fitted.

Do that and check the numbers. I think you might be surprised how much alpha these ships will withstand.

Fearing that I labour my point, please state exactly how much alpha tolerance is "enough". Then measure each ship's performance against that metric. Then decide whether the ships (and I) suck.

/MC


Ok, so while you asked for numbers, here are 2 reasonable fits - without imps, without links, without drugs, without overheat and with the second balance pass of the Command Ships, but with Damnation still having its 50% HP bonus:

Damnation:

http://i.imgur.com/BcLlyUL.jpg

194.807 EHP, 365 m/s, 265 m signature, 96 DPS

Vulture:

http://i.imgur.com/OjcuerB.jpg

117.968 EHP, 408 m/s, 367 m signature, 96 DPS

The Vulture is just for comparison reasons - to show you that there are right now no shield alternatives to the Damnation's tankability. The Nighthawk got nearly the same tank as the Vulture.

So, the Damnation as seen in the picture is what i call well balanced for what Command Ships are proposed for in large scale fleets. Nearly 200.000 EHP without anything, 245.000 EHP with their own links and 364.000 EHP with Slave-Set is enough to withstand a heavy alpha if there's enough logistics in the background. This is the range I'm talking about - every race should get a ship that's able to get nearly the same EHP values with reasonable fits. And here the weapon bonuses are obsolete, because most pilots won't ever fit turrets/launcher because the slots are needed for other tools that are more important in this scale.

Though Command Ships were and will be used for PvE and solo or small scale, too, it's the reason why i stated here to divide both Command Ships into one for greater medium scale and large scale and one for everything that's smaller.
Take the large scale ship and install a brick tank, take away every weapon bonuses and change them into something that's usefull for large scale fleets/FC's - I made a few examples in my linked post.
Take the small scale ship and install DPS based bonuses on them and give them only medium tank (that's reasonable for the ship size).

If CCP does it this way every PvP fleet size (and of course PvE) gets a Command Ship that's well enough to achieve its role as a bonus ship without dying instantly or being useless if used as an ongrid ship (or in anomalies/missions).


now fit links and overheat the shield hardeners. it's a command ship, not a brawler.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1578 - 2013-08-18 16:03:29 UTC
S1dy wrote:
You're wrong, in both ways: EHP is an answer. I was with many large fleets in the past and often realized how hard it is to kill a Damnation. But I've seen a lot of Vultures/Nighthawks dying. It's right, there's a critical point by that every ship will fall whether there are logistics and bonuses or not. But this special cases are still very rare.

You are assuming the meta stays the same through one of the most extensive mechanic shake-ups in Eve history. What do you think the FC response will be to +25% everything platforms coming on grid? Want to wager that alpha capability, even just a handful of squads, will be added to every fleet alongside the mandatory logistics, bubblers etc.?
So while 1/4M EHP is enough today when the ship merely has to survive to complete a single warp, it will be hopelessly inadequate when it has to stay with its boosting clients.
S1dy wrote:
Though I'm repeating myself, just do a brick tank Command Ship and a second one doing DPS. That would be fair enough.

If we go that route then what is the point of this?

The reason for starting the CC pass was to remove the fleet/field distinction not to deepen it. We should strive towards having something for all ships to do at all levels of play, not create hulls that are either game-breakingly OP or tear-inducingly bad in one situation or another.
S1dy
Uplifting Infernal Paradise
#1579 - 2013-08-18 16:04:44 UTC  |  Edited by: S1dy
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
now fit links and overheat the shield hardeners. it's a command ship, not a brawler.


There are already links fitted, Tech 2 to be exactly... But yeah, we just oversee anything that's important, right? ;)

So, the Vulture gets overheated 133.959 EHP, with her own links 164.389 EHP. Nearly the same goes with the Nighthawk. That's not even slightly the value the Damnation gets without anything.

Tell me: What's your point here?!
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#1580 - 2013-08-18 16:11:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Lephia DeGrande
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
S1dy wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Forgive me for sucking. I do not see you state a number. "as much as the damnation does now" depends on many factors. Skills, modules etc. So it is not a number by which we can measure performance, otherwise known as a "metric".

For example, have you tried to fit up a caldari command ship and then overheated the invulnerability fields, or fitted navy versions, or deadspace? Presumably in a large fleet engagement, this is what will be fitted.

Do that and check the numbers. I think you might be surprised how much alpha these ships will withstand.

Fearing that I labour my point, please state exactly how much alpha tolerance is "enough". Then measure each ship's performance against that metric. Then decide whether the ships (and I) suck.

/MC


Ok, so while you asked for numbers, here are 2 reasonable fits - without imps, without links, without drugs, without overheat and with the second balance pass of the Command Ships, but with Damnation still having its 50% HP bonus:

Damnation:

http://i.imgur.com/BcLlyUL.jpg

194.807 EHP, 365 m/s, 265 m signature, 96 DPS

Vulture:

http://i.imgur.com/OjcuerB.jpg

117.968 EHP, 408 m/s, 367 m signature, 96 DPS

The Vulture is just for comparison reasons - to show you that there are right now no shield alternatives to the Damnation's tankability. The Nighthawk got nearly the same tank as the Vulture.

So, the Damnation as seen in the picture is what i call well balanced for what Command Ships are proposed for in large scale fleets. Nearly 200.000 EHP without anything, 245.000 EHP with their own links and 364.000 EHP with Slave-Set is enough to withstand a heavy alpha if there's enough logistics in the background. This is the range I'm talking about - every race should get a ship that's able to get nearly the same EHP values with reasonable fits. And here the weapon bonuses are obsolete, because most pilots won't ever fit turrets/launcher because the slots are needed for other tools that are more important in this scale.

Though Command Ships were and will be used for PvE and solo or small scale, too, it's the reason why i stated here to divide both Command Ships into one for greater medium scale and large scale and one for everything that's smaller.
Take the large scale ship and install a brick tank, take away every weapon bonuses and change them into something that's usefull for large scale fleets/FC's - I made a few examples in my linked post.
Take the small scale ship and install DPS based bonuses on them and give them only medium tank (that's reasonable for the ship size).

If CCP does it this way every PvP fleet size (and of course PvE) gets a Command Ship that's well enough to achieve its role as a bonus ship without dying instantly or being useless if used as an ongrid ship (or in anomalies/missions).


now fit links and overheat the shield hardeners. it's a command ship, not a brawler.


Still 40k less EHP... Edit: then an unlinked Damnation WITHOUT overheating...

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup