These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
xxxak
Perkone
Caldari State
#401 - 2011-11-18 19:52:44 UTC
Charles Edisson wrote:
Getting slightly better with 30 and 35 but untill it's back to 40 and 45 fighter/bombers the nerf has gone too far.

You do realise just how simple it is for stealth bombers to totaly defang SC.

The corp hangers arent even big enough to carry the second type of fighter/bomber so we cant re suply on the move.

I think CCP should offer a one time offer to put the ship in a highsec outpost with refining that you have best standings with so they can be reprocessed at the very least.


This really.

[u]The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run.[/u]
xxxak
Perkone
Caldari State
#402 - 2011-11-18 19:53:37 UTC
Charles Edisson wrote:
Getting slightly better with 30 and 35 but untill it's back to 40 and 45 fighter/bombers the nerf has gone too far.

You do realise just how simple it is for stealth bombers to totaly defang SC.

The corp hangers arent even big enough to carry the second type of fighter/bomber so we cant re suply on the move.

I think CCP should offer a one time offer to put the ship in a highsec outpost with refining that you have best standings with so they can be reprocessed at the very least.


This really.

[u]The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run.[/u]
Charles Edisson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#403 - 2011-11-18 20:03:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Charles Edisson
xxxak wrote:
Charles Edisson wrote:
Getting slightly better with 30 and 35 but untill it's back to 40 and 45 fighter/bombers the nerf has gone too far.

You do realise just how simple it is for stealth bombers to totaly defang SC.

The corp hangers arent even big enough to carry the second type of fighter/bomber so we cant re suply on the move.

I think CCP should offer a one time offer to put the ship in a highsec outpost with refining that you have best standings with so they can be reprocessed at the very least.


This really.



To prove the point about just how many people thing the change has gone too far look to see how many SC BPOs are up on contract and the prices they are being sold for, most prices are at cost at best. I'd even be prepaired to loose another 10% HP to get the drone bay size back.



This patch feels very knee jerk, I imagine CCPs designers/Balancers are suffering with unrealistic delines that are being forced on them
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#404 - 2011-11-18 20:18:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
SC bpos have been glutted for ages ever since nyx bpcs were going for 2b+ and EVERYONE bought a bpo

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#405 - 2011-11-18 20:18:35 UTC
an ME2 nyx bpo couldn't be sold for NPC cost well before this was announced

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Charles Edisson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#406 - 2011-11-18 20:20:09 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
an ME2 nyx bpo couldn't be sold for NPC cost well before this was announced


Possibly but were they going for 2/3 NPC price ?
Phunnestyle
Doomheim
#407 - 2011-11-18 20:28:38 UTC
Charles Edisson wrote:
Getting slightly better with 30 and 35 but untill it's back to 40 and 45 fighter/bombers the nerf has gone too far.

You do realise just how simple it is for stealth bombers to totaly defang SC. AT the ABSOLUTE VERY least can you alter the tracking/optimal range of fighters having them orbit their target so closely just makes it far to easy to bombers to get a perfect strike.

The corp hangers arent even big enough to carry the second type of fighter/bomber so we cant re suply on the move.

I think CCP should offer a one time offer to put the ship in a highsec outpost with refining that you have best standings with so they can be reprocessed at the very least.


Here here give us a full compliment of Fighters & fighter bombers, this winter patch is insulting.CCP plz reply
Phunnestyle
Doomheim
#408 - 2011-11-18 20:31:40 UTC
Roboticus420 wrote:
Phunnestyle wrote:
[quote=Phunnestyle]Ok heres what CCP have done right & you should be commended for it:

+ Pinging aggro timers,yes commit to the fight.
+ Limit Supercarrier to Fighters/Fighter Bombers

This is what CCP have done wrong, but never the less it is a small price to pay in consideration to other mistakes & is there by aggreable to accept:

+/- Reduction of HP on suppercarriers is basically for the haters, all that needed changing for at least the time being was the above 2 + points.

Now this is what CCP have done drastically wrong & needs changing immediately:

-Drone bays on suppercarriers need to be able to carry an optimal amount of both Fighters & Fighter Bombers. So in other words at least 20 Fighters & 20 Fighterbombers.
This is common sence & logical to all but the most stubborn of fools. While reducing Supers flexibility, you have overstepped your mark & made Supers limited in offencive ploys. For with this rediculious implimentation Supers will as has been said again & again, only be used after the winter patch with Fighters & target painters in the Mids. They will only use Fighters for the most obvious of reasons.
If they are to be intercepted by a Subcap fleet, it is primary among all else that they be at least able to give a fight back. So Fighter Bombers take & indeffinate back seat due to this patch failure. CCP need to acknowledge this failure as soon as possible & as stubborn as we know you are,you need to sort it out & inform us that you wish to sort this stupidity out. This you MUST do as you obviously don't want to give back the skill points intwined with the learning of the Fighter Bombers skill.




CCP PLZ READ ABOVE, LISTEN TO ABOVE & DO ABOVE
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#409 - 2011-11-18 20:34:56 UTC
Charles Edisson wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
an ME2 nyx bpo couldn't be sold for NPC cost well before this was announced


Possibly but were they going for 2/3 NPC price ?


Probably. They were hideously overbought to satisfy a temporary surge in demand (from when they went to useless -> useful) that ended when the tons of people who could fly an SC and could afford one pre-dominion but wasn't going to waste their money on the pre-dominion piece of crap, got theirs. Now, there's a much lower level of demand as you've only got new people skilling into one rather than a huge amount of people trying to get one at once. Since people bought bpos to deal with the surge, there's now a huge glut.

Goonwaffe focused solely on SCs for a long time for our corp building program to catch up but we went all-titan a while ago because that's where the demand was once the SC surge was over.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Innominate
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#410 - 2011-11-18 20:35:34 UTC
Quote:

New drone bay capacities will be: 30 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern; 35 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Nyx and Hel.


So, take as a given that all supercarriers will carry 20 bombers. This leaves the Aeon/Wyvern room to carry 10 fighters, and the Nyx/Hel room for 15. The nyx gets a 25% damage bonus to fighters on top of that, fielding effectively 18.75 fighters. Under these changes the nyx is able to do 87.5% more damage with fighters than the Aeon/Wyvern, this is more fighter damage than the Aeon/Wyvern generally do currently.

It makes sense for the lower EHP Nyx/Hel to do more damage than the Aeon/Wyvern. The 50% effective fighter damage bonus from the drone bay size seems more than enough for fighters. The Nyx doing nearly double the fighter damage of the Aeon/Wyvern is ridiculous.

Perhaps modify the nyxes damage bonus to apply to fighter bombers only?
Minmatar Citizen 20120210
Doomheim
#411 - 2011-11-18 20:39:15 UTC
Innominate wrote:
Quote:

New drone bay capacities will be: 30 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern; 35 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Nyx and Hel.


So, take as a given that all supercarriers will carry 20 bombers. This leaves the Aeon/Wyvern room to carry 10 fighters, and the Nyx/Hel room for 15. The nyx gets a 25% damage bonus to fighters on top of that, fielding effectively 18.75 fighters. Under these changes the nyx is able to do 87.5% more damage with fighters than the Aeon/Wyvern, this is more fighter damage than the Aeon/Wyvern generally do currently.

It makes sense for the lower EHP Nyx/Hel to do more damage than the Aeon/Wyvern. The 50% effective fighter damage bonus from the drone bay size seems more than enough for fighters. The Nyx doing nearly double the fighter damage of the Aeon/Wyvern is ridiculous.

Perhaps modify the nyxes damage bonus to apply to fighter bombers only?



I fully agree with this suggestion. The Nyx is ridiculously overpowered in its current rendition at this time.
Venustas Blue
Spartan Industries
#412 - 2011-11-18 20:43:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Venustas Blue
Innominate wrote:
Quote:

New drone bay capacities will be: 30 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern; 35 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Nyx and Hel.


So, take as a given that all supercarriers will carry 20 bombers. This leaves the Aeon/Wyvern room to carry 10 fighters, and the Nyx/Hel room for 15. The nyx gets a 25% damage bonus to fighters on top of that, fielding effectively 18.75 fighters. Under these changes the nyx is able to do 87.5% more damage with fighters than the Aeon/Wyvern, this is more fighter damage than the Aeon/Wyvern generally do currently.

It makes sense for the lower EHP Nyx/Hel to do more damage than the Aeon/Wyvern. The 50% effective fighter damage bonus from the drone bay size seems more than enough for fighters. The Nyx doing nearly double the fighter damage of the Aeon/Wyvern is ridiculous.

Perhaps modify the nyxes damage bonus to apply to fighter bombers only?


Not intended to be offensive to you Goony,but CCP you cannot expect to calm peoples anger by eventually making room for a few more Fighters/fighter Bombers when you know your in the wrong,every Super Pilot out there knows your in the wrong, there should be a full compliment of 20 Fighters & 20 Fighter bombers anyway, do not think you can mess us about by thinking that this insult will sufice. Phunnestyle is right, listen to him and damn well do it,stop making such a hash of this.
Terrorina
#413 - 2011-11-18 20:44:17 UTC
Innominate wrote:
Quote:

New drone bay capacities will be: 30 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern; 35 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Nyx and Hel.


So, take as a given that all supercarriers will carry 20 bombers. This leaves the Aeon/Wyvern room to carry 10 fighters, and the Nyx/Hel room for 15. The nyx gets a 25% damage bonus to fighters on top of that, fielding effectively 18.75 fighters. Under these changes the nyx is able to do 87.5% more damage with fighters than the Aeon/Wyvern, this is more fighter damage than the Aeon/Wyvern generally do currently.

It makes sense for the lower EHP Nyx/Hel to do more damage than the Aeon/Wyvern. The 50% effective fighter damage bonus from the drone bay size seems more than enough for fighters. The Nyx doing nearly double the fighter damage of the Aeon/Wyvern is ridiculous.

Perhaps modify the nyxes damage bonus to apply to fighter bombers only?


Too lazy to do the math but if you're numbers are right, I very much agree that the difference in DPS is way too high. If Nyx's weren't already the super-carrier of choice they certainly will be now.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#414 - 2011-11-18 20:47:42 UTC
Venustas Blue wrote:

Not intended to be offensive to you Goony,but CCP you cannot expect to calm peoples anger by eventually making room for a few more Fighters/fighter Bombers when you know your in the wrong,every Super Pilot out there knows your in the wrong, there should be a full compliment of 20 Fighters & 20 Fighter bombers anyway, do not think you can mess us about by thinking that this insult will sufice. Phunnestyle is right, listen to him and damn well do it,stop making such a hash of this.


we're interested in fixing an actual problem rather than listen to this bad whining please don't involve our point in your temper tantrum

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
pmchem
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#415 - 2011-11-18 20:50:42 UTC
Innominate wrote:
Quote:

New drone bay capacities will be: 30 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern; 35 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Nyx and Hel.


So, take as a given that all supercarriers will carry 20 bombers. This leaves the Aeon/Wyvern room to carry 10 fighters, and the Nyx/Hel room for 15. The nyx gets a 25% damage bonus to fighters on top of that, fielding effectively 18.75 fighters. Under these changes the nyx is able to do 87.5% more damage with fighters than the Aeon/Wyvern, this is more fighter damage than the Aeon/Wyvern generally do currently.

It makes sense for the lower EHP Nyx/Hel to do more damage than the Aeon/Wyvern. The 50% effective fighter damage bonus from the drone bay size seems more than enough for fighters. The Nyx doing nearly double the fighter damage of the Aeon/Wyvern is ridiculous.

Perhaps modify the nyxes damage bonus to apply to fighter bombers only?


Looks like a CCP oversight, this imbalance is so bad. Nyx already gets a damagebonus and is most popular SC and will be even more imba if this change goes through.

https://twitter.com/pmchem/ || http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/community-spotlight-garpa/ || Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Phunnestyle
Doomheim
#416 - 2011-11-18 20:57:41 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Venustas Blue wrote:

Not intended to be offensive to you Goony,but CCP you cannot expect to calm peoples anger by eventually making room for a few more Fighters/fighter Bombers when you know your in the wrong,every Super Pilot out there knows your in the wrong, there should be a full compliment of 20 Fighters & 20 Fighter bombers anyway, do not think you can mess us about by thinking that this insult will sufice. Phunnestyle is right, listen to him and damn well do it,stop making such a hash of this.


we're interested in fixing an actual problem rather than listen to this bad whining please don't involve our point in your temper tantrum



This would be a signifficant change, Goons actually saying something constructive & not nonscence WOW FACTOR.
People whine for a reason,Goons whined for ages & ages that Supers where OP & they couldn't effectively rule through lagg tactics & mass blobs,whine whine whine all the time,and yes they where right to whine about many of the aspects involved, every1 knows and agrees with that, so really you should stum your gob & stop telling others to stop whining about something that is clearly,totally & utterly wrong, you have no right. It seems to me to be lets say, slightly Ironic. (sarcasm)
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#417 - 2011-11-18 21:18:50 UTC
Phunnestyle wrote:

This would be a signifficant change, Goons actually saying something constructive & not nonscence WOW FACTOR.
People whine for a reason,Goons whined for ages & ages that Supers where OP & they couldn't effectively rule through lagg tactics & mass blobs,whine whine whine all the time,and yes they where right to whine about many of the aspects involved, every1 knows and agrees with that, so really you should stum your gob & stop telling others to stop whining about something that is clearly,totally & utterly wrong, you have no right. It seems to me to be lets say, slightly Ironic. (sarcasm)


yes, but our complaints are legible and well thought out rather than being something a third grader would be embarassed to have typed

i mean look at this man

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Charles Edisson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#418 - 2011-11-18 21:50:11 UTC
I'm baffled as to why the drone bay has been increased by 5.

There were two possible oppinions on the drone bay, either 25 was enough to have a flight and some spares and it should have been left as was OR the drone bay was too small for the purpose of the ship and it should have been increased to accomodate a flight of each type of fighter/Bomber.

To increase the drone bay by enough to accomodate 5 more drones acnowledges that the drone bay was too small for the purpose of the ship but does not resolve the problem.

Fighters/Bombers need a massive buff so they cant be all killed in 15 seconds by half a dozen stealth bombers.
Phunnestyle
Doomheim
#419 - 2011-11-18 21:50:54 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Phunnestyle wrote:

This would be a signifficant change, Goons actually saying something constructive & not nonscence WOW FACTOR.
People whine for a reason,Goons whined for ages & ages that Supers where OP & they couldn't effectively rule through lagg tactics & mass blobs,whine whine whine all the time,and yes they where right to whine about many of the aspects involved, every1 knows and agrees with that, so really you should stum your gob & stop telling others to stop whining about something that is clearly,totally & utterly wrong, you have no right. It seems to me to be lets say, slightly Ironic. (sarcasm)


yes, but our complaints are legible and well thought out rather than being something a third grader would be embarassed to have typed

i mean look at this man


I assumed you would have nothing that held water to say back, was correct ofc,but it surprised me that you tried to respond anyway. Yes some of what you had to say was legit,but an aweful lot & I mean soo much of what Goons cooked up was total and utter nonescence, Goons are well known for chatting absolute rubbish, never gets old.
That quote is 100% true it astounds you to see facts infront of your very nose I know.
Innominate
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#420 - 2011-11-18 22:01:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Innominate
Innominate wrote:
Quote:

New drone bay capacities will be: 30 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Aeon, Revenant and Wyvern; 35 Fighters and/or Fighter Bombers for the Nyx and Hel.


So, take as a given that all supercarriers will carry 20 bombers. This leaves the Aeon/Wyvern room to carry 10 fighters, and the Nyx/Hel room for 15. The nyx gets a 25% damage bonus to fighters on top of that, fielding effectively 18.75 fighters. Under these changes the nyx is able to do 87.5% more damage with fighters than the Aeon/Wyvern, this is more fighter damage than the Aeon/Wyvern generally do currently.

It makes sense for the lower EHP Nyx/Hel to do more damage than the Aeon/Wyvern. The 50% effective fighter damage bonus from the drone bay size seems more than enough for fighters. The Nyx doing nearly double the fighter damage of the Aeon/Wyvern is ridiculous.

Perhaps modify the nyxes damage bonus to apply to fighter bombers only?


lol self quoting.

I feel the need to elaborate and point out that the nyx's doing 90% more fighter damage than the wyvern/aeon is not an issue of supercaps vs subcaps, or whether they're being nerfed too hard or not hard enough. This is purely an issue of the supercarriers balance among themselves.

The 5/10 fighters situation that existed prior to the current numbers is even worse, with the nyx getting 125% the fighter dps of the aeon/wyvern.

Whatever the nerf ends up being, the nyx doing 90%(or more) more fighter damage than the aeon/wyvern is broken.