These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Capital Ships

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ilarra
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#21 - 2011-11-04 21:42:18 UTC
In addition to the issues surrounding shield tanking capitals in general, the leviathan could use some special attention. Not only does the leviathan immediately lose 40% of its primary tanking layer upon entering most engagements, and force the pilot to pay 10s of billions of isk for a comparable tank to an armor tanker that has paid 2-3b, but the primary weapons system on the lev is completely out of whack with the other titans.

Turret titans can be tracking boosted to be useful against battleship class vessels, assuming they are present in a properly outfitted fleet. As there is no tracking boost module for missiles, leviathan pilots are unable to enjoy such benefits. Its true that, on paper, the leviathan can output massive amounts of damage. However, due to the way missile damage is calculated, it is difficult, if not impossible to reach parity with turret titans in actual gameplay scenarios.

It can be argued that titans are primarily intended to be used for shooting structures and capital slugfests, and that the remote tracking boost use case is unintended. Even if we ignore the tracking boost case (even though that is primarily how turret titans are currently used), the leviathan still comes up short compared to its brothers when shooting structures and capitals. Turrets have two variables which are used to determine whether or not a shot will cleanly land: tracking speed and signature resolution. The tracking speed is compared to the transversal of the target, and the ratio of the target sig radius to the turret signature resolution is used as a modifier to this speed comparison to determine whether or not the shot is likely to land. What this means is that having a sufficiently high tracking speed can overcome a deficiency in a sig radius ratio. In other words, if you tracking boost a titan enough, you can still hit targets that are smaller than your guns signature resolution.

The missile damage formula however, is not so forgiving. Missile damage is reduced by three factors - the ratio of the target's velocity to the explosion velocity of the missile, the ratio of the targets sig radius to the explosion radius of the missile, and a constant factor dependent upon missile launcher size. (Damage = D * MIN(1, S/R, (vE/v * S/R)^(log(DRF) / log(5.5)) ) Unlike the turret damage formula, there is no way for the slow speed of a target to make up for the fact that the target is much smaller than what the missile is "intended" to hit. Even stationary POS mods and station services do not take full damage from citadel cruises, as cruises have an explosion radius of 1750 and station services a signature of 1000m. Although the explosion radius may be increased by skills, boosters, implants, and other factors, it is still not possible to deal full damage to these targets in the same way that turret dreads can.

Even if you could somehow overcome the explosion radius problem, the slow explosion velocity means that a ship can drastically reduce the damage they take from a citadel cruise by doing ANY movement at all. Even modified with maximum target navigation prediction skill, the explosion velocity of 36 m/s of citadel cruises ensures that anything moving faster than a freighter (even a carrier or dread, ostensibly what the titan class is intended to be a counter against) can reduce its incoming damage.

But wait, there's more! Why do you suppose I have been using the long range weapon system, cruise missiles, when turret titans regularly fit short range weapons such as pulses, autocannons, and blasters? That's because citadel torpedos travel so slowly that a few smartbombing carriers can almost entirely neuter incoming citadel torpedo damage, as proven out in testing on singularity. Obviously, none of the turret titans have this problem because you can't stop gunshots with smartbombs.

The upshot of all of this is that, unlike the other three titans, there are relatively few situations where you'd want to bring your leviathan out from the POS shields where it's giving gang bonuses and proving a jump bridge. Sure, once every 10 minutes it's useful to insta-pop a carrier or dread, but then it's a sitting duck for another 10 minutes while the other titans can be happily firing away at other capitals and battleships with their primary weapons systems. Of course, as stated above, your leviathan also loses 40% of its EHP on jump-in and requires tens of billions of isk investment in officer modules to achieve parity.

It should be noted that the phoenix has many of these issues as well, due to having a common weapon system with the leviathan. However, the phoenix is closer in parity and function with its brother dreads than the leviathan is with the other titans. Still, a balance pass on one would likely benefit the other.
Headerman
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2011-11-04 21:55:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Headerman
^^^ What about having 6 missile turrets or 6 hybrids, ala the Typhoon?

And in regards to SCs... Maybe if there was an 'Auxiliary' drone bay of 125 meters for storing 'utility' drones? Lights, sentries or RR drones?

Australian Fanfest Event https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=90062
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2011-11-04 22:59:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariner6
Arkady Sadik wrote:
The Moros is completely out of line with the other dreads and needs a look. The last dread rebalance made them all quite similar in damage and range, which is good and bad (it's nice to have variety), but this new change simply makes the Moros "strictly better" than the other dreads in all roles. Not good.

I'd also ask you to have a closer look at carriers - they are completely out of balance:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=15674&


That would be terrible for a Gallente ship to be better than the others. What the hell was CCP thinking? Can't have that now can we. NERF it to obsolesce like the rest of their ships.

To be serious though, why not? sitting and pummeling POS's is boring. The faster that is accomplished the better. If the other races want more DPS on a dread, fine.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#24 - 2011-11-04 23:13:26 UTC
In my opinion Super carriers should have a role bonus to give local reppers a 100% bonus to hitpoints repaired.

This should be done with a major overhaul to active tanking (+50% hitpoints pr cycle for all reps and having crystal implants giving a hitpoint bonus like slaves do to armor. This should make active tanks more viable in pvp and with a equal increase in NPC dps carebearing should remain similar to current status.

Also if we still have a difference between shield and armor CCP should nerf the armor capitals to match...
Also when complaining about lack of EHP plz consider the multiple Triage carriers involved in bigger capital fights - There are lots of them usually. Making resistance the most important attribute to keep a super alive.

Sorry for bringing in the subject of active tanking, however I think it would really suit the game balance.
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2011-11-04 23:30:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Demon Azrakel
Mariner6 wrote:
Arkady Sadik wrote:
The Moros is completely out of line with the other dreads and needs a look. The last dread rebalance made them all quite similar in damage and range, which is good and bad (it's nice to have variety), but this new change simply makes the Moros "strictly better" than the other dreads in all roles. Not good.

I'd also ask you to have a closer look at carriers - they are completely out of balance:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=15674&


That would be terrible for a Gallente ship to be better than the others. What the hell was CCP thinking? Can't have that now can we. NERF it to obsolesce like the rest of their ships.

To be serious though, why not? sitting and pummeling POS's is boring. The faster that is accomplished the better. If the other races want more DPS on a dread, fine.


Its not like the Revelation was the go-to dread for the last, how many years?

My suggestion, remove changes to Moros gun's capacitor usage. Make me, a Moros pilot, pay through the nose for that DPS. (Also, reduce the rail DPS or increase Capacitor usage)

Side note: The blaster Moros will not be OP, the rail Moros will be. (On a different note, up the fallof of ACs by 50%... People who argue that the Nag should have more potential DPS than the Moros are, however, talking out of their collective asses (as shown in the next post))

On the post below, which is short on room as it hit character limit:

Below post assumes no changes to the Capital Guns themselves.

Changes were:
Reduced PG (lol)
Reduced CPU (lol)
Reduced Capacitor <---CCP, do not do this

Post below assumes t1 siege modules. Remember, T2 siege mods ups all dreads by the same damage percentage.
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2011-11-04 23:32:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Demon Azrakel
C/Ped from Min. Capital discussion
Gypsio III wrote:


Leave the Naglfar with the split weapon system
...
but ensure that the Naglfar has a significant DPS advantage over even the Moros in compensation.



No. The shortest range, heaviest cap usage weapon system in the game (already that way for a blaster moros, will get even worse fyi), should have a DPS advantage over a ship that can choose between an armor (matches capital meta-game) or shield (stronger (doubly so) burst active tank) tank easily and uses weapons that do not require capacitor while having good damage type selection. If anything, rework capital missiles because they are **** in general.

Capitals rails are about to be decent in comparison to beams, that may need to be reworked slightly (the beams will do less dps, have shorter range, and still use more capacitor than the rails... the only advantage beams will have is hitting shield em hole, instant range switching, better tracking, and about 20k EHP on the ship).

Copied from dev blog discussion, adding in Naglfar numbers for relevance to topic:
.
.
.
.

The following are comparisons of T2 (T1 Siege) fit Dreads (Moros, Revelation, and Naglfar):

All 5s, 3x damage (Gyros for Naglfar) mods for guns (no tracking mods in atm, using t1 ammo, though it is actually economical to use faction on rev) now:

Moros - 3483 at 60+30, 1451 at 192+30
+Potential 600 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 450 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs
New Moros (1.47x) - 5120 at 50+30, 2132 at 192+30

Moros (Blasters) - 6866 at 19+19, 3123 at 60+19
+Potential 600 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 450 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs
Moros New (Blasters) (1.47x) - 10,093 at 19+19, 4590 at 60+19

Rev (Beam) - 3743 at 50+40, 1560 at 160+40
+Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs
New Rev (Beam) (1.1x) - 4117 at 50+40, 1716 at 160+40

Rev (Pulse) - 6222 DPS at 23+13, 2592 at 75+13
+Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs
New Rev (Pulse) (1.1x) - 6844 at 23+13, 2851 at 75+13

Naglfar (Auto + Torp) - 6232 at 16+24 (<59.1), 3491 at 50+24 (<59.1)
+Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs
New Naglfar (Auto + Torp) (1.1x) - 6876 at 16+24 (<59.1), 3852 at 50+24 (<59.1)

Naglfar (Arty + Cruise) - 3643 at 35+88 (<191.3), 2036 at 144+88 (<191.3)
+Potential 300 DPS from Garde IIs at 30+12 or 225 DPS at 75+30 with Warden IIs
New Naglfar (Arty + Cruise) - 4019 at 35+88 (<191.3), 2246 at 144+88 (<191.3)

Tracking Comparison (Sieged):
Rail - 0.0012
Blaster - 0.00338
Beam - 0.0014
Pulse - 0.00253
Arty - 0.00118
Auto - 0.00319

Capacitor comparison:

Moros Base Cap - +57.5
3 Rails 3 Damage Mods - -77.5
3 Blasters 3 Damage Mods - -92.3
New:
3 Rails 3 Damage Mods - -103.3
3 Blasters 3 Damage Mods - -123.1
UPDATED
3 Rails 3 Damage Mods - -72.3
3 Blasters 3 Damage Mods - -86.2

Revelation Base Cap - +57.5
3 Beams 3 Damage Mods - -105
3 Pulses 3 Damage Mods - -62.7

Naglfar Base Cap - +57.5
2 Arty 2 Cruise 3 Damage Mods - -0
2 Auto 2 Torp 3 Damage Mods - -0

ATM, the blasters use much more cap, and will use any more, the changes to long range weapons, however, put the rails using almost the same cap as the rev's guns use.

Armor EHP comparison(3x trimark Is, 2x EANM IIs, 1x DCU II)
Moros - 2,049,789
Revelation - 2,058,336
Naglfar (remove one EANM because of low slots, you should really be shield tanking this ship anyway) - 1,635,112

Shield EHP (Nag only - 3x Large Core Defence Field Extender, 2x invul IIs, DCU II)
Naglfar - 1,906,907 (Unaffected by compensation skills, does not require 5x lvl 5 skills to reach this level)
Naglfar (+1 invul (3 total) because, lets face it, you should be replacing a TC with a TE if shield fitted...) - 2,112,473
I would say that the new rail Moros is clearly superior to the beam Revelation (which is fine by me, given the number of years in which the opposite was true...)


Other Relevant, not discussed benefits
Lasers - Instant range selection
Hybrids - ...
Projectiles / Missiles - Damage Selection

Range Modifiers (Quick Reference):
1x T2 TC w/ Optimal: (1.15x)+(1.3x)
2x T2 TC w/ Optimal: (1.30x)+(1.64x)

.
.
.
.

Food for thought. Remember, I am in no way saying that capital missiles do not need to be reworked (30% reduction in explosion radius and double explosion velocity would be a good start), but simply saying that the Naglfar HAD BETTER HAVE THE BEST DPS is foolish, given the benefits that the Naglfar has.

On the Shield EHP value, I suggest:

Slaves affect armor, shields, and hull (for all ships).
Crystals affect armor tank, shield tank, and hull tank (for all ships).

(Assuming perfect Titan / T3 boosters): on jump in, shield Supers have ~70% of the EHP of equivalent armor ships (lets assume that the Hel gets a bonus to drone bay or something useful that makes it equivalent to the Nyx). After being repped up, shield supers have 120% of the EHP of equivalent armor ships. This means that shield supers, which are more vulnerable to neuts due to never fitting passive mods, would, unbonused or after reps post bonus, have higher EHP than armor supers. With preparation and coordination, shield supers will be superior, but for moving around the galaxy quickly, armor supers will take the day (the exact opposite of, say, subcaps, but it at least sounds somewhat balanced as compared to, say, the current situation).

The Nid could use an EHP buff in both armor and shields, but should otherwise remain as is. At the moment, it is one of the most interesting of the carriers to use, if only because a remote shield nid must run self armor reps, while a remote armor nid must run self shield reps... EDIT: Referring to fitting triage on it, remember that module when suggesting ways to balance it.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#27 - 2011-11-05 00:57:01 UTC
Vmir Gallahasen wrote:
Err, how are you getting 14K DPS? I think you forgot to take RoF and guns into account because14k is pretty close to the damage volley per blaster (not dps).

Moros:
139.94 damage mod, 4.6695s RoF (all L5, 2 damage mods, t2 Siege Module). 105.6 total damage from Guristas Antimatter XL.

Volley: 139.94 * 105.6 = 14,777 @ max skills per blaster * 3 = 44,333 volley damage every 4.6695s = 9494 dps.
19km optimal 19km falloff

As a comparison:
a revelation with 2 damage mods deals 7892 DPS @ 23+13
Nag deals 9103 @ 16 + 24 [cit torps: <59km]
Phoenix deals 8036 @ < 59km

Gallente "we're the best at close range" Moros does 4% more DPS than a capless-weapon-using damage-type-selecting Minmatar "we pew it at range" Nag at close range? WHOA COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE


yeah sure and how many damage mods have that nag compared to the 2 of your moros?

not to mention the nag is the only dread with 4 weapons so it should be the one that do more damage compared to all the others
SuperBeastie
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#28 - 2011-11-05 01:00:43 UTC
WHY DOES THE AEON HAVE MORE EHP THAN ANY TITAN!!!!! <---- capital letters let you know i'm yelling

[center]SuperBeastie's Third Party Service My in-game Channel is Supers Third Party[/center]
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2011-11-05 01:53:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Demon Azrakel
To mare wrote:
Vmir Gallahasen wrote:
Err, how are you getting 14K DPS? I think you forgot to take RoF and guns into account because14k is pretty close to the damage volley per blaster (not dps).

Moros:
139.94 damage mod, 4.6695s RoF (all L5, 2 damage mods, t2 Siege Module). 105.6 total damage from Guristas Antimatter XL.

Volley: 139.94 * 105.6 = 14,777 @ max skills per blaster * 3 = 44,333 volley damage every 4.6695s = 9494 dps.
19km optimal 19km falloff

As a comparison:
a revelation with 2 damage mods deals 7892 DPS @ 23+13
Nag deals 9103 @ 16 + 24 [cit torps: <59km]
Phoenix deals 8036 @ < 59km

Gallente "we're the best at close range" Moros does 4% more DPS than a capless-weapon-using damage-type-selecting Minmatar "we pew it at range" Nag at close range? WHOA COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE


yeah sure and how many damage mods have that nag compared to the 2 of your moros?

not to mention the nag is the only dread with 4 weapons so it should be the one that do more damage compared to all the others


Yeah...no. Just no.

You are arguing that A dread with more flexibility, ZERO CAPACITOR USAGE, damage selection, and more EHP (see my post) should out-dps a Moros? At any range? Really?

This is the same **** as how a cane can out-dps a Brutix: complete bullshit.

Also, APOC HAS MOAR GUNS THAN A MEGATHRON OR A GEDDON OR A TREMPEST, IT SHOULD DO MOAR DPS!11!!11111!!!!!

Now, this is not to say that Capital Missiles need to be reworked and that capital autocannons do not need a 50%-100% falloff boost; they do.
MastahFR
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2011-11-05 01:58:23 UTC
Woot Woot \o/
Hel is still a pile of ****
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#31 - 2011-11-05 11:16:33 UTC
Demon Azrakel wrote:
C/Ped from Min. Capital discussion
Gypsio III wrote:


Leave the Naglfar with the split weapon system
...
but ensure that the Naglfar has a significant DPS advantage over even the Moros in compensation.



No. The shortest range, heaviest cap usage weapon system in the game (already that way for a blaster moros, will get even worse fyi), should have a DPS advantage over a ship that can choose between an armor (matches capital meta-game) or shield (stronger (doubly so) burst active tank) tank easily and uses weapons that do not require capacitor while having good damage type selection. If anything, rework capital missiles because they are **** in general.


He's right you know. P
Murtific
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#32 - 2011-11-05 13:05:45 UTC
Give the nidhoggur:

8% bonus to armor and shield transfer ammount per carrier level instead of the 5%.

Increase it's agility as well.



Increase the repping transfer ammount to make it more of a viable use for triage operations. It may not be as robust as the Archon, but it will put some reps in before the duct tape melts.

Give it an agility bonus to allow it to be more versatile as a combat support carrier that is able to align with a fleet that may be moving around in system. May give way for more tactical uses of carriers.
SuperBeastie
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#33 - 2011-11-05 14:16:55 UTC
Murtific wrote:
Give the nidhoggur:

8% bonus to armor and shield transfer ammount per carrier level instead of the 5%.

Increase it's agility as well.



Increase the repping transfer ammount to make it more of a viable use for triage operations. It may not be as robust as the Archon, but it will put some reps in before the duct tape melts.

Give it an agility bonus to allow it to be more versatile as a combat support carrier that is able to align with a fleet that may be moving around in system. May give way for more tactical uses of carriers.


The nidhoggur is fine the hel is broken

[center]SuperBeastie's Third Party Service My in-game Channel is Supers Third Party[/center]
True Sight
Deep Freeze Industries
#34 - 2011-11-05 14:28:30 UTC
I dislike that I have invested a lot of time into training drone skills for my character that are now redundant in capital ships.

I would at least appreciate the ability to continue using maintenance drones on carriers.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#35 - 2011-11-05 17:41:22 UTC
I cannot repeat that often enough, the Cimera needs a serious bonus for fitting capital shield transfers and the capital shield booster needs to be looked at.
All the other carriers can be fitted with 2 capital armor reppers + their remote reppers they are supposed to fit.
Even with having the highest amount of cpu of all carriers the cimera can simply not fit what she is supposed to fit in case of logistics.
Go ahead and fit a chimera with the follwing,
High:
2x capital shield transfer I, 2x captial energy transfer I, (triage for some cases)
Med:
1x capital shield booster I, 1x shield boost amp II, 4x cap recharge II
Low:
3x capacitor flux coil II, 1x power diagnostic system II (for the powergrid)
Now 350 cpu for 2 shield modules is somewhat insane in comparison to the 75 cpu a capital armor repper needs, don't you think?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2011-11-05 19:50:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Demon Azrakel
elitatwo wrote:
I cannot repeat that often enough, the Cimera needs a serious bonus for fitting capital shield transfers and the capital shield booster needs to be looked at.
All the other carriers can be fitted with 2 capital armor reppers + their remote reppers they are supposed to fit.
Even with having the highest amount of cpu of all carriers the cimera can simply not fit what she is supposed to fit in case of logistics.
Go ahead and fit a chimera with the follwing,
High:
2x capital shield transfer I, 2x captial energy transfer I, (triage for some cases)
Med:
1x capital shield booster I, 1x shield boost amp II, 4x cap recharge II
Low:
3x capacitor flux coil II, 1x power diagnostic system II (for the powergrid)
Now 350 cpu for 2 shield modules is somewhat insane in comparison to the 75 cpu a capital armor repper needs, don't you think?


Chimera needs significantly more CPU, it can Triage decently (3x shield rr, 1x cap transfer), but CPU makes it a pain in the ass, especially as you fit more expensive, high-cpu shield boost amps (also there is an issue if you do not fit the meta 2 capital modules for reduced CPU usage). Having said that, it fits decently if you throw in a 5% CPU implant, for what its worth. Look at it compared to the Archon + thanny, CPU is never an issue for those two.

Having said that, if you toss some isk in, the Chimera does get a beastly tank out of the deal.

BTW, Nid cannot fit self armor and remote armor decently; it has to have one tank shield and the other armor(self armor and remote shield or self shield and remote armor).

TLDR: Give Chimera more CPU, maybe some PG as well
cpu939
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2011-11-05 21:09:10 UTC
1st i hope when you remove the drones on tq you don't remove all the fighters/bombers like you did with mine on sisi and placed them in high sec 20 odd jumps away

shield capitals need so more love, after all its a bonus not an ohh look i have to rep/be reped the extra hp.

also change crystal implants to work on a hp buff like slave sets do

drone changes super carriers/carriers i would make the 2 bays you talked before fighter/bombers ay able to hold 40 fighters/bombers (20 carriers) that is there main weapon drone bay just over the size of a domi's drone bay. part 2 of this change remove the bonus to drone ammont so only 5 drones can be luanched but replace the bonus with fighter/bomber bonus so the 20 (10 carriers) can be luanched

the other issue i keep hearing is spider tanking supers to fix this i would remove the bonus to remote reps and replace it with a bonus to nuet/nos and add capital nuets/nos modules (meta 2 under the lp store added bonus to incursions runners could also add to fw lp) this would make fleets have to bring logi/triage carriers and the other side could use there supers to cap them out.
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#38 - 2011-11-05 21:57:19 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Demon Azrakel wrote:
C/Ped from Min. Capital discussion
Gypsio III wrote:


Leave the Naglfar with the split weapon system
...
but ensure that the Naglfar has a significant DPS advantage over even the Moros in compensation.



No. The shortest range, heaviest cap usage weapon system in the game (already that way for a blaster moros, will get even worse fyi), should have a DPS advantage over a ship that can choose between an armor (matches capital meta-game) or shield (stronger (doubly so) burst active tank) tank easily and uses weapons that do not require capacitor while having good damage type selection. If anything, rework capital missiles because they are **** in general.


He's right you know. P


So a Nag pilot gets to train Projectile, Cruise skills and Torp skills to cover the required ranges and to be behind in DPS now eh? And to have that "flexible subpar" tanking that was talked about requires the need to train shield and armor skills up.

Given that case you won't see many new Nag pilots. They will just chose to train for the new easy mode Moros since it's the "best" dread now and easier to get in to.
Vaffel Junior
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2011-11-05 22:02:15 UTC
Leave supers as they was.
Aoa Lux
Joel Osteen's Internet Tax Shelter
#40 - 2011-11-05 22:39:35 UTC
On the rare occasion that I actually log online, I typically dual or triple box naglfars for the sole reason that they look cool.

Please remove the "versatile" missile hardpoints.
Versatility has absolutely zero purpose in something designed with singular intent - shooting immobile structures.

In order to fly minmatar capitals, an aspiring pilot must train capital projectiles, capital torpedos, capital cruise, capital armor, capital shield, and for this are rewarded with:
a dread that has substandard tank and mediocre damage
a carrier with a rep bonus that is ironically inferior to the amarr carrier as a triage platform