EVE Information Portal

A lot of people say that but I've never seen a slippery slope in EVE, unless you want to suggest that Incarna was a slippery slope that led to ship skins. But if anything, most if not all of these "slippery slopes" are things that were in the works a long time ago, and some percentage of the playerbase was merely unaware of it before.

Happy to see CCP eat up all my ideas from figther blogs and capital reworks.

They don't only nerf it, but sometimes it needs to be put in check. A lot of this is unexplored territory as so many other game companies have been extremely averse to allowing emergent gameplay, so nobody knows what the playerbase will come up with. It is not surprising then, that the players sometimes find it all too easy to thwart the original intended rules. CCP wants it to be possible--but not easy.

Isn't it a shame that all groups suffer the same consequences when only some groups "thwart" intended mechanics.

Emergent game play will never really be possible due to the risk averse nature of a lot of the PVP in Eve.

Most the changes look fun and engaging. I also think it's great that we keep moving away from the days when my carrier sat just barely outside of POS shields and assigned my fighters to some one.

I always felt like the trade off of triage and siege modules was a well balanced one. Unable to be EWAR'd but not be able to receive remote reps was a simple mechanic that has evolved into fun gameplay for a triage pilot. So... it seems a little unfair to remove our bonus, yet keep our disadvantage. Also, it seems like we wont be able to check to see if ships are in triage any more - so make sure there is a cool animation like siege mode has! It was mentioned that triage might get a high bonus to the new statistics - if its powerful enough this wont be a problem for me at all.

Removing out of triage reps from capitals:
I don't understand this at all. It isn't in line with the other classes of ships and just doesn't make sense. It also absolutely does not solve the N+1 problem. It will just mean capital ships will have no capable logi - so N+1 with dreadnoughts instead. In large enough battles the triage will die. Why create a mechanic that causes capital fleets be unable to tank each other? Will triaged capitals be able to receive reps in this update?

Removing in combat refitting:
This is also an awesome feature unique to capital gameplay that I would be sad to lose, because its fun. Why is there this arbitrary rule that a fleet must be unable to adapt on the fly? Not only can a triage carrier not tank an enemy capital fleet on its own - but now it cant even refit for tank to increase its survivability.


If I go out in a 30 man guardian and battleship fleet and meet another 30 man guardian and battleship fleet, I go out with the confidence that my logi will likely have the ability to save me - or we'll be able to decide to disengage without losses.

If I go out in a 30 man capital fleet under these new rules, and meet another 30 man capital fleet the winner will just be the fleet that pops the others faster - starting with the triage. So bring dreadnoughts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EwkjpzMZVw

So this Video shows the 4 new FAX designs on Duality. That is if it is real and no fake, but I gues its not.

My personal opinion : The Galante one looks nice. The caldari one looks a little like a short Wyvren. These two look like they could actually come from designers of their individual race.

But the Amarr one looks horrible. I cant even tell where the "front" of it is. It looks mutch more like a space station than a ship. With the tendency of ships to twist up to 90° when making a turn, I cant immagine to actually move this beast without crushing my forhead into the table every single time.

Also : Please notice that the FAX have massive hangar bays. Since FAX were announced as capitals that focus on healing, what are those massive bays for? Is it possible that we will see logistics fighters for FAX ?

CCP Do you plane to rewrite fatigue mechanic after capital and super remote rep nerf ?
can we hope to restore old jump drive mechanic for massive capital fights?

I can see you've thought this through ... but I don't entirely agree. I am currently training towards my First Capital, and moving ships (aka a Fleet Hangar) is indeed a major concern. I always *wanted* a dread, but unfortunately, I needed a Carrier for its utility as well. Forcing me to train those pesky drone skills I never intend to use.

So glad I'll finally have the choice between putting my remote rep skills to use (FAX) or maybe get a Subcap blappin' Dread (high angle guns) without having to train drones, without grudgingly having to get an additional carrier just because I kinda need a suitcase. Standing on this crossroad, a fleet hangar is definitely something that factors in to the equation. Back when a Carrier was the only cap with a fleet hangar, there wasn't any real choice at all. Now I can train for those things that really interest me.


That said, on to the issues I'm facing with these changes:


I actually did sit down and compare dreads to carriers. And dreadnoughts do sound like my cup of tea, at first glance. Unfortunately, I'm still not getting a real picture on those high angle guns ... they seem quite underwhelming to be honest -- am I missing something? Dropping a dread almost certainly provokes a nasty response, and I have this gut feeling those brand new high angle guns don't compare well to regular battleships. Combined with no range dictation and a severely gimped lockspeed (siege lockspeed bad. triage target locking good. Why??), it seems to me a Carrier would severely outperform an anti-subcap dread.

While I do feel CCP is on to something here, a Dread at double the price of a Carrier still falls short in comparison; a Fax machine won't be able to defend itself; for EWAR I'd have to look at SUPERcaps, so sadly that's a no-go; and I can't figure out why anyone would ever get a Rorq. Soooo ..... after reading pretty much every post concerning caps I'm still none the wiser.

The way I see it - and I could be a million miles off the mark here - a First Capital ought to be a "light general purpose" kind of ship; something not overly specialised in any role bridging the gap between battleships and caps. The capital ship redesigns don't seem to allow for any options or creativity -- eg: can't fit a spidertank rep on a dread, can't fit any kind of damage on a fax? I can understand some ships are bonussed whereas others are not; but is it really necessary to take away the hardpoints and flat-out prevent fitting certain modules? It does not help deciding on My First Capital in the slightest.

Speaking of which ... is it absolutely necessary to enforce training Advanced Spaceship Command, Capital Ships, Jump Drive Operation etc. to stupidly high levels (IV's, mostly V's) before even being allowed to undock one? I would think a progression in the Capital Ships is recommended if you want to get any kind of bonus out of your hull; but shouldn't I have the choice to take some baby-steps with poor Jump Drive Calibration / Fuel Conservation / hull bonusses then same way you don't insist on training Recons or Logistics to V before even sitting in those cruisers? Besides, when all V's is a prerequisite, "+5% per skill level" is absurd. Can't fly it at level IV, so everyone has +25% by definition am I right?


The general intent to create meaningful choices for that First Cap is there... but from where I stand, you're forced into the same skilltree, forced to make a "choice" without even knowing what you're choosing for (how will she fly? which targets could she conceivably engage?), and forced into certain fits with very few variations or personal flavour. Having one role taken from the carrier and placed into a new ship class, removing all drones below fighter from it, and adding fleet hangars all around sure removed the obvious "starter model" ; but to me, all it did is make me even more wary to go for either of them. Since the most obvious tangible benefit was the fleet hangar, I'm considering simply getting a jump freighter at this point!

Carriers lost a lot of utility, Dreads merely gained "high angle guns" (but are those any good? Look like rubbish by my reckoning) and Fax, well, at least I know what they're supposed to do. Would have been interested in the "occasional logi" but I don't want a ship that can't do anything else, can't receive reps (unlike a Guardian) and will undoubtedly be primary. See the problem here? As a capital newbro, the relatively low cost and versatility made the leap worthwhile. As far as I can tell however, a Dread is still the tower bashing machine of old, a Fax is a nerfed triage carrier and these revamped Carriers .... don't even know what to make of those anymore. They sound like cheap stopgap DPS dealers.

These rigid classes and restrictions are not merely a problem for wanna-be cap pilots either: it also ensures that, whenever a capital lands on grid, you can make a very educated guess as to what it'll be able to do. This unlike, say, battleships which might neut, spidertank, wield a variery of turrets/missiles/drones (some below their size, RHML or dual 800mm ACs anyone?) ; allowing for some very nasty surprises.


As for fleet hangars on JF ... Tech II Bowhead, perhaps?


This, a testimony from one who'd like to like these redesigned new ships but alas ... I cannot help but feel both reluctant and intrigued at the same time. We're losing the default starter's kit -- now what? Where does that leave me?

Capital sized Domis??

Whaaat...

New skills for fighters and ships regarding the new carriers.....where can I find this information to prove this?