Test Server Feedback

Yes they speedtank its so ******** I'm at loss of words for it.. Naglfar with Autos will only hit for 50% of its damage against moving supers while being in optimal range. Yeah these -50% tracking on siege are still there so what did you expect.. I'd love to see them gone I mean CCP made the tracking/max target change back in the day against lowsec station camping dreads but with supers in the game nobody is doing that anymore anyways.. Kill the tracking penalty and boost the locking speed a bit cuz even a super takes a long time to log in siege which sucks.. and dreads will do damage against carriers and supers:)

clearly youre having a problem understanding the issues at hand.

The problem is not that supercarriers are able to launch drones . . .
the problem is that supercarriers are able to effectively engage every ship of every size in the game . . .

Now I realize that all drone ships are able to do this, but usually the answer is "just bring a bigger ship" which is absolutely fine for every ship up to and including a carrier, but the issue with the supercarrier is that there is no bigger ship! Its as big as it gets and can even take on Titans at the correct range!

This could have been fixed in a number of ways, but the way they chose to do it was to reduce/eliminate its damage to smaller ships. This was accomplished by removing its drones.

TL;DR
With all other drone ships, you can just escalate and bring a bigger ship, but with the supercarrier you cant because it IS the biggest ship.

I disagree . . . its like forcing battleships to choose between short or long range guns when they undock . . . oh wait . . .

forum ate my beautiful post - not going to write it again.

the short version however is that this is the worst thought through change from a company with a history of rolling out ill thought through changes. this does not address the fundamentals that we need fixed. we want super capitals in space so that pilots can enjoy using them and we can enjoy shooting at them. but we do not want them to be in super blobs the only time we see them. there's 2 sides to this coin - there's the use in low sec and skirmishes and the 0.0 moon goo wars. the proposed changed will completely remove the use of super caps by low resource entities and hence remove them from consideration for small corps/alliances. this also means that they will be removed from the field and not able to be shot at by the opposing forces to these smal corp/alliances. in 0.0 the nerf doesn't do anything. either the resource rich just bring more of them with more support, or they change the resource allocation to the next "best platform" - the net result is status quo except you upset almost every pilot who already has one and force the same players to join the super blobs (or firesale and unsub).

as a low sec player it's going to be sad that the only time i will ever see a super from now on will be when we get lol'd by PL or whoever with 40 supers, or we happen to catch sight of the same blob moving through low sec with travel fits. we'll probably never again be able to shoot one or two and there will be no "dream" of getting one or two for our corp. thanks ccp. btw xmas is coming ccp, so you could shoot down santa just to ruin that too.

Bring a carrier with you to carry the other type of drones. WTF do you think fleet logistics are for?

This isn't WoW, it's a big boy game, you have to think a bit. Try it sometime.

I don't like those bonuses. Not because they aren't good, but because there's already too much remote in Eve. The supercap blob became a huge issue in big part because of too much remote. Soon you'll have fleets comparing their number of logistic cruisers and refusing to engage if they don't have more of them.




There's laways been a trade-off between armor taning and shield tanking: Armor tankers have their passive omni-resist module, shield tankers have their omni-resist module, too, that is more efficient, but use cap.

If you want to release shield EANM mods, then it would only be fair to also release an active armor invulnerability module as well.




The rest I agree with.

We, and every other major alliance have that amount of supercaps several times over, so all your suggestion does is hinder other, newer alliances from building their own supercap fleet to catch up.

Agreed

drop both missile slots and add a turret... the missile bay doesn't even have a bonus applied to it, what's the point of it being there?

If I was gonna make a suggestion I know wouldn't be followed but would be good in general it would be to remove siege altogether. It is a useless mechanic that forces a much larger negative on dreads compared to any other capital ship. Dreads already are missing a role. Since the sov mechanics have changed the chief role of the dread, pos shooting has become more and more unnecessary as its much easier just to bring a fleet of battleships to do it then dreads(mainly due to no one wanting to fly dreads). Shooting other caps with dreads is useless unless that ship is another sieged dread as anything can speed tank them. Even cutting the siege timer is useless as every time you siege up your basically assuming if anyone shows up your dead. There is no requirement of any effort for the opponent to catch a dread either when its sieged. Carriers have other options then triage give dreads the same. Get rid of the siege module and give dreads either more guns or a damage boost. Lower their ehp if you have to but give them more of a use then just taking down a pos a couple minutes faster. This would ensure more mixed fleets imo as you would need tacklers to kill dreads instead of just dropping a super on them.

Please also replace the launcher slots on the Phoenix with turret slots (and its shield tank with an armour tank) to prevent it being the only missile-using dread, making it hated and useless and its pilots told to train a proper dread to simplify dread DPS application, removing the missile flight time issue.