These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Citadels] Capital Q&A

First post
Author
unimatrix0030
Mass Collapse
It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
#101 - 2015-11-14 14:30:38 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:


***** Siege/Dreadnoughts *****
Q) 1-2k dps from a seiged dread dps is too low/Why would you use subcap siege dread over battleships? #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11
A) Sieged dreads have several advantages.
  • Superior range (50km from High Angle guns)
  • Resistance to EWar
  • Higher base HP
  • Provides refitting services to fleet
  • Dependant on your battleship fit, potentially cheaper to replace after loss when including insurance.
  • A jumpdrive
We want players to have interesting choices. Dreads shouldn't always be the best choice.

First of all didn't you forget an advantage for dreads namely a fleet hanger to put ships in?

Lets compare a moros with these new angle guns to lets say 3 bs ( example : cheap mega )
Still looks bad comparing to battleships. In this example the bs do 3600dps.
The bether range doesn't matter since bs are more mobile then dreads and logi will be able to keep those bs up untill they are on target(dread fight without logi is unlikely).
Using 3 ships is 3 times less likely to get affected by Ewar.
The EHP of a moros is bether indeed.
Refitting services are always nice but not that handy for subcaps in you fleet since mostly the capitals change fitting in a fight.
Most dreads are about 3 bil with fitting so is generaly more then 3 battleships(in this example bs kost 900 mil).
The 3 bs will have more utility slots.

And now for some wh stuff, wich you probaby have not though about.
A dread has over 1 bil of mass. the average bs 150mil.
So an FC in wh-space will need to choose between 1 dread with 1-2k dps at 1 bil of mass or 3 bs with 450mil of mass with 3k6dps when the wh only takes 3 bil of mass to collaps.
If you bring in the dread you need to keep an eye on the wh-mass if you want to get back. If you need to bring in more capitals then you will have to scan your way out.
If you bring bs you can get back easy or later decide to bring in anti-capital dread for support and still get back.
Wich means case no dread will be chosen to go and kill subcaps. Only for anti-cap or anti-structure will the dread be used in wh-space.
And without changes to pve content i don't see them even being used in that.

Even with these it would be bether to use bs : apo

But some things are not clear, will these subcapguns need support to hit subcaps? What kind of tracking are you aiming to give them?
Can the dreads refit of them selfs? And if so will the cargohold be large engough to fit both types of guns and their ammo?
Are there changes planned on the price range of dreads and carriers?

No local in null sec would fix everything!

M1k3y Koontz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2015-11-14 15:12:13 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:

Q) Will subcap ships rendered immobile (such as those with active cyno fields or in Bastion mode) be affected by Hand of God?#1
A) You won't be able to move a ship with a Cyno up with the 'Hand of God' (or 'Hand of Bob'?) super-weapon. We're unsure about tackled ships (for example hic points) or ships in Bastion mode. Its something we will be discussing with the Capital Focus Group.


If we can have that Doomsday officially called the "Hand of Bob" I will be so happy.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#103 - 2015-11-14 23:03:34 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Soleil Fournier wrote:
I have some observations and questions in regards to the roles of capitals. In the Dominion capital meta, capitals stepped all over one another's roles (supers replacing dreads, dreads doing what supers do but cheaper, etc). This was very problematic with the capital meta.

In the new design, titans/supers will be focused around their special abilities making them unique, and force auxiliaries have a completely unique role as well.

But things get murky when it comes to carriers and dreads. Consider they both now get:

Fleet hangers to move ships.
Refitting services.
Weapons to kill smaller ships (fighters/High angle weapons)
Weapons to do damage to structures and other ships (Heavy fighters/Regular Dread Guns)

...they seem to be accomplishing the same role on the battlefield. Yes, they do it differently: carriers get support squadrons, don't need siege and have longer range....but I don't really see that as enough separation given that they're still both capable of accomplishing the same tasks.

So the question is do you think dreads and carriers are stepping on each other too much in the proposed design?


Not to be rude, but your concern is a non-factor.
Sure, there's not much difference between carriers and dreads in the fact that their damage dealers, but the same can be said for the majority of the ships in each class.

Take tech 1 battleships as an example.
Most of them are damage dealers, with only slight variations in the hulls, but the ultimate difference being how they deal damage.
Be it missiles, drones, long range, short range, and so on.

Having said that, carriers and dreads actually have more significant differences than damage dealing BSs.

The dread is a direct attack vessel, and also has siege.
With the new guns they're being given, they'll be able to effectively counter a sub cap fleet.
2k dps with BS application is no joke, especially when you consider the vast tanking capacity.
It's a good way to counter a sub cap fleet without simply bringing more numbers, yet it can easily be countered with 1 dread fitting capital guns.

Carriers, on the other hand, will be more mobile, and has indirect damage, allowing it to stay further from the fight, essentially making it a support vessel.
It will be able to launch a set of drones the fits the situation on the fly, where as a dread has to dedicate itself to the situation it is fitted for.
Also, carriers will not be that great at assaulting structures, as the new citadels will have the option for a smart bomb.

To recap, the dread is a siege vehicle with the ability to counter a small sub cap fleet, while carriers are a support vessel with the ability to bash structures in niche situations.

Carriers are going to be something that you want close by and readily available, while dreads will be relied upon of the "oh sh|t" moments or for sieges.

Just 1 comment on your "subcap" dread guns - Go read the blog again, then read Larrikins comments at the beginning of this thread. I think he made it pretty clear, Dreads are going to be the ship of choice, in very rare situations.

""Carriers will be more mobile?"" How do you get that? Carriers will need to sit as close to a FAX as possible or die very fast.

With FAX triage becoming the only viable source of reps - Capital ships will (more often than not) land on grid and not move again until the fight is over.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#104 - 2015-11-15 00:13:58 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Soleil Fournier wrote:
I have some observations and questions in regards to the roles of capitals. In the Dominion capital meta, capitals stepped all over one another's roles (supers replacing dreads, dreads doing what supers do but cheaper, etc). This was very problematic with the capital meta.

In the new design, titans/supers will be focused around their special abilities making them unique, and force auxiliaries have a completely unique role as well.

But things get murky when it comes to carriers and dreads. Consider they both now get:

Fleet hangers to move ships.
Refitting services.
Weapons to kill smaller ships (fighters/High angle weapons)
Weapons to do damage to structures and other ships (Heavy fighters/Regular Dread Guns)

...they seem to be accomplishing the same role on the battlefield. Yes, they do it differently: carriers get support squadrons, don't need siege and have longer range....but I don't really see that as enough separation given that they're still both capable of accomplishing the same tasks.

So the question is do you think dreads and carriers are stepping on each other too much in the proposed design?


Not to be rude, but your concern is a non-factor.
Sure, there's not much difference between carriers and dreads in the fact that their damage dealers, but the same can be said for the majority of the ships in each class.

Take tech 1 battleships as an example.
Most of them are damage dealers, with only slight variations in the hulls, but the ultimate difference being how they deal damage.
Be it missiles, drones, long range, short range, and so on.

Having said that, carriers and dreads actually have more significant differences than damage dealing BSs.

The dread is a direct attack vessel, and also has siege.
With the new guns they're being given, they'll be able to effectively counter a sub cap fleet.
2k dps with BS application is no joke, especially when you consider the vast tanking capacity.
It's a good way to counter a sub cap fleet without simply bringing more numbers, yet it can easily be countered with 1 dread fitting capital guns.

Carriers, on the other hand, will be more mobile, and has indirect damage, allowing it to stay further from the fight, essentially making it a support vessel.
It will be able to launch a set of drones the fits the situation on the fly, where as a dread has to dedicate itself to the situation it is fitted for.
Also, carriers will not be that great at assaulting structures, as the new citadels will have the option for a smart bomb.

To recap, the dread is a siege vehicle with the ability to counter a small sub cap fleet, while carriers are a support vessel with the ability to bash structures in niche situations.

Carriers are going to be something that you want close by and readily available, while dreads will be relied upon of the "oh sh|t" moments or for sieges.

Just 1 comment on your "subcap" dread guns - Go read the blog again, then read Larrikins comments at the beginning of this thread. I think he made it pretty clear, Dreads are going to be the ship of choice, in very rare situations.

""Carriers will be more mobile?"" How do you get that? Carriers will need to sit as close to a FAX as possible or die very fast.

With FAX triage becoming the only viable source of reps - Capital ships will (more often than not) land on grid and not move again until the fight is over.

Considering you can move and use the fighters without lock and set them up while on the move, trying to constantly drop close range guns on them will be a factor determined by subcaps. They will remain as the ships that tackle and protect from the very same. The Fax will be handy, but if you do it properly, you won't need it much.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#105 - 2015-11-15 02:00:02 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:

Just 1 comment on your "subcap" dread guns - Go read the blog again, then read Larrikins comments at the beginning of this thread. I think he made it pretty clear, Dreads are going to be the ship of choice, in very rare situations.

""Carriers will be more mobile?"" How do you get that? Carriers will need to sit as close to a FAX as possible or die very fast.

With FAX triage becoming the only viable source of reps - Capital ships will (more often than not) land on grid and not move again until the fight is over.


I think you're putting too much thought into the carrier/dread variation..

My concern is more on dread vs Titan and carrier vs super carrier.

Will Titans be more powerful than dreads at taking down other caps and structures, as well as sub cap fleets since they have new doomsday tools?

Will super carriers have as much drone capability as carriers, despite also having some upcoming special abilities as well?

I'm worried that supers and Titans may overshadow dreads and carriers.
Putting it to the point where the only reason to get a dread or a carrier is because you don't have the ISO and/or skills to properly pilot a super/Titan.

CCP needs to make sure they're done right.
I wont pretend to know the best way to go about the balancing, but I don't see it as easy either...

Personally, I'd rather they just do away with capitals all together and make these ships variations of BS died hulls.

2 new t1 BS class hulls.
Carriers and dreads. (Dreads possibly using the tier 3 BS hulls.)
2 new t2 class BS hulls.
Super carriers and Titans.

But, people do like seeing their massive ships and I don't see CCP dumping them down into the BS category....
Hound Halfhand
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#106 - 2015-11-15 02:42:57 UTC
Quote:
Any thoughts about the Capital Remote Armor/Shield/Energy transfer skills? Considering the logistics role is being stripped from carriers entirely, most carrier pilots (those that didn't intend on flying triage) could have up to 7.5 million SP locked into effectively useless skills.


I am hoping CCP does not go reimbursement crazy. What they need to do instead is to release all the new skills ASAP and make a decision on what they intend to do regarding FAX ship skills.
Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#107 - 2015-11-15 05:06:10 UTC
How are fighter related BPOs going to work post-change?
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#108 - 2015-11-15 06:35:10 UTC
Why don't you allow the FAX hull to allow remote reps from other FAX ships in triage, but at 50% effectiveness?

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#109 - 2015-11-15 07:31:20 UTC
Querns wrote:
Doomchinchilla wrote:
Crtl + F: "Rorqual": 0 results found. RIP Rorqual

I'd say it's pretty obvious at this point that the Rorqual changes are gated behind the overarching overhaul of fleet bonuses and Leadership. This thread addresses nothing in this space.

I am hopeful that the new Command Destroyers will be packaged in part with this overhaul, but I have no evidence to support this.

I Think that the Rorqual is in dire more need of changes than leadership skills and boosting in general.

Booster pilots these days are like Blops jump bridge pilots. either either have one or you don't. Or its both.
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#110 - 2015-11-15 13:05:42 UTC
The smaller entities in lowsec were glad to get a break from constant hotdrops. Unfortunately we ran into a drawback caused by jump fatigue.

In the past we could fit up a ton of ships, and then move them elsewhere pretty easily with multiple carriers. The only real option now is to use jump freighters. It's quite a bit slower, which is fine, but only being able to move packaged ships is a pretty big hassle.

Are there any plans for any of these cap changes that might make the logistics of moving ships easier? A bowhead with a jump drive and fatigue reduction would suit the purpose just fine. The ship needs no combat ability, just a large ship hangar to move rigged ships and a pretty good jump range.

Addendum


My fw corp used to be nomadic. We would fit ships, tagged with our names to identify the owner, and then move them en masse to the system we were going to attack/defend. The last big campaign we did we moved thousands of ships. Doing that now we'd have to strictly rely on JFs and have to strip all the rigs when we were done.
drunklies
Imperial Guardians
Tactical Narcotics Team
#111 - 2015-11-15 18:18:04 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:



***** Siege/Dreadnoughts *****
Q) 1-2k dps from a seiged dread dps is too low/Why would you use subcap siege dread over battleships? #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11
A) Sieged dreads have several advantages.
  • Superior range (50km from High Angle guns)
  • Resistance to EWar
  • Higher base HP
  • Provides refitting services to fleet
  • Dependant on your battleship fit, potentially cheaper to replace after loss when including insurance.
  • A jumpdrive
We want players to have interesting choices. Dreads shouldn't always be the best choice.


  • Is the 50km range quoted high angle blasters with void? If not, I can already reach out to that range very comfortably with current subcap weaponry.

  • Resistance to the same ewar that I am currently immune to? While in a state whereby I cannot take any real action to counter the same Ewar. I cannot fly to reduce transversal, I cannot close the range, I cannot be remote sebo'd.

  • Higher base hp is nice and all, but meaningless when compared to a battleship that can catch reps. Their tank is effectively infinite provided they can survive the alpha. That is one of the prime purposes of blap dreads now, to provide the alpha needed to break logi.

  • Refitting in battle is dead without waiting for 60 seconds. This is only really useful in poses (where it will be much appreciated) and some other egde cases. In normal usage, you would not drop a dread to gain access to a fleet hanger, where a nestor can fill that role, with potentially infinite tank, at less then half the cost of a dread.

  • Comparing a blap dread to a deadspace fit battleship is madness of the highest order. One is a disposable tool used to break reps and die when primed. The other is designed to hold grid, and catch reps when primed while filling a dps/tackle/ewar role. Whilst the dread might be cheaper, it is also going to die far far more often. Also, a 700 mil macharial can do 1/3rd of the dps, apply that out the 50km, 2 midslots for ewar, move 1.5km/s+ and has 160ehp. For return on investment, the proposed dreads will be awful.

  • Woohoo, space aids. Also, with the prevalence of titan bridges this doesn't represent any real advantage over a battleship.

I agree, dreads shouldn't always be the best choice, but with what you have proposed, they will never be even a good choice.

1. Not enough dps to break the reps (3 additional battleships aren't going to make the difference in the majority of circumstances)

2. Lack of ewar immunity means that they become prime targets to shut down, and even with 50% resistance, unbonused ewar will have devastating consequences (even with stacking penalties) that the dread pilot can do nothing to counter.

3. Hitting siege now is effectively betting that you can dps down the enemy before they can chew through your buffer. If the proposed changes, as dreads will be losing lots of base dps, and the fitting slots to improve that, this is a race they will never win. It is always a losing bet, with the added insult that you might not even be able to kill anything, as the dps is so anemic that the target will simply be repped through it. The loss of refitting is also a major factor, as preivously dreads could drop their damage and application for more buffer. Now they have to completely stop all damage and then wait 60 seconds, by the end of which the dread will be dead regardless.

A dread will never be even a considerable option in the current format. Increasing the dps is a must, as is revisting the plans to remove combat refitting for ships locked in siege/triage. The ewar resistance has to be exceptionally high, or even 100%.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#112 - 2015-11-15 21:48:08 UTC
Well you just killed supercitals...

They must retain their wear resistance against web/damp/painter/etc.

And if able to point them, their native warp core strength needs to be quite high.

Otherwise... Why should we pay 30 BILLION isk for a fitted super an close to 90 for a Titan.....

Makes no sense.

Been around since the beginning.

Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#113 - 2015-11-15 21:57:39 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Well you just killed supercitals...

They must retain their wear resistance against web/damp/painter/etc.

And if able to point them, their native warp core strength needs to be quite high.

Otherwise... Why should we pay 30 BILLION isk for a fitted super an close to 90 for a Titan.....

Makes no sense.


You bought it for the extreme low risk. Now it has a smidge of risk attached. Welcome to the world of risk vs reward.
Lt Shard
Team Pizza
Good at this Game
#114 - 2015-11-15 22:43:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Lt Shard
Quote:
Q) 1-2k dps from a seiged dread dps is too low/Why would you use subcap siege dread over battleships? #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11
A) Sieged dreads have several advantages.

Superior range (50km from High Angle guns)
Resistance to EWar
Higher base HP
Provides refitting services to fleet
Dependant on your battleship fit, potentially cheaper to replace after loss when including insurance.
A jumpdrive


Easily balanced by cons ccp. Dreads are 1.1 to 1.3 billion in mass, cant receive RR in siege, Immobile. In addition, with changes, you cant refit without not shooting for a whole minute, you could also just take a nestor, or a more valuable ship, like triage. Jumpdrives play no role in w-space, and you can just bridge in subs with a titan anyway. Ewar resistance is pretty ******* irrelevant when you can drop ten vindicators for the same mass, have upwards of 20 90% webs and 14000 mobile dps.

They just wont see use. If you drop them in k-, subs will either just soak up the damage with logistics or triage because they do NONE or they will just **** off because massed dreads cant hold anything. In w-space you wont see them because committing just under half of a wormholes mass to just drop a dread that does nothing if the target has more than one logistic on the field.

Consider 4k or more, and stop deflecting a clear issue.
Quote:
Literally 11 question quotes


Also as always, please consider w-space. Because you don't.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#115 - 2015-11-16 02:16:09 UTC
Esteban Dragonovic wrote:
Any thoughts about the Capital Remote Armor/Shield/Energy transfer skills? Considering the logistics role is being stripped from carriers entirely, most carrier pilots (those that didn't intend on flying triage) could have up to 7.5 million SP locked into effectively useless skills.

Those skills are not required for the carrier skills, so anyone who has trained them has actually used remote reps deliberately or trained to be able to. This means there is no need in the slightest for any reimbursement. Since the skills will still exist and do exactly what they used to do.
159Pinky
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#116 - 2015-11-16 04:57:37 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Esteban Dragonovic wrote:
Any thoughts about the Capital Remote Armor/Shield/Energy transfer skills? Considering the logistics role is being stripped from carriers entirely, most carrier pilots (those that didn't intend on flying triage) could have up to 7.5 million SP locked into effectively useless skills.

Those skills are not required for the carrier skills, so anyone who has trained them has actually used remote reps deliberately or trained to be able to. This means there is no need in the slightest for any reimbursement. Since the skills will still exist and do exactly what they used to do.


Here is the solution: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/exploring-the-character-bazaar-skill-trading/?_ga=1.233019163.401580728.1412185802

No need to give reimbursement anymore Cool
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#117 - 2015-11-16 07:14:05 UTC
159Pinky wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Esteban Dragonovic wrote:
Any thoughts about the Capital Remote Armor/Shield/Energy transfer skills? Considering the logistics role is being stripped from carriers entirely, most carrier pilots (those that didn't intend on flying triage) could have up to 7.5 million SP locked into effectively useless skills.

Those skills are not required for the carrier skills, so anyone who has trained them has actually used remote reps deliberately or trained to be able to. This means there is no need in the slightest for any reimbursement. Since the skills will still exist and do exactly what they used to do.


Here is the solution: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/exploring-the-character-bazaar-skill-trading/?_ga=1.233019163.401580728.1412185802

No need to give reimbursement anymore Cool
Not really a solution at all - Having useful SP is far more beneficial than a bit of isk.

Nevyn - Large projectile turrets isn't required to fly a Mach but how useful would the ship be without them - That is the worst argument for not reimbursing kills ever.
Carriers, which right now have bonuses to remote reps will no longer have them - CCP should give players the option to have those skills reimbursed - Not all carrier pilots will want to switch to a disposable logistics ship.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#118 - 2015-11-16 19:00:23 UTC
Templar Dane wrote:
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Well you just killed supercitals...

They must retain their wear resistance against web/damp/painter/etc.

And if able to point them, their native warp core strength needs to be quite high.

Otherwise... Why should we pay 30 BILLION isk for a fitted super an close to 90 for a Titan.....

Makes no sense.


You bought it for the extreme low risk. Now it has a smidge of risk attached. Welcome to the world of risk vs reward.


Actually, we paid hundreds of billions for e-war immunity.

Now if you'd be so kind as to point out where's the reward to the risk of fielding it...... if every new bro out there can bring it down?

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#119 - 2015-11-16 21:22:15 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Sgt Ocker wrote:
159Pinky wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Esteban Dragonovic wrote:
Any thoughts about the Capital Remote Armor/Shield/Energy transfer skills? Considering the logistics role is being stripped from carriers entirely, most carrier pilots (those that didn't intend on flying triage) could have up to 7.5 million SP locked into effectively useless skills.

Those skills are not required for the carrier skills, so anyone who has trained them has actually used remote reps deliberately or trained to be able to. This means there is no need in the slightest for any reimbursement. Since the skills will still exist and do exactly what they used to do.


Here is the solution: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/exploring-the-character-bazaar-skill-trading/?_ga=1.233019163.401580728.1412185802

No need to give reimbursement anymore Cool
Not really a solution at all - Having useful SP is far more beneficial than a bit of isk.

Nevyn - Large projectile turrets isn't required to fly a Mach but how useful would the ship be without them - That is the worst argument for not reimbursing kills ever.
Carriers, which right now have bonuses to remote reps will no longer have them - CCP should give players the option to have those skills reimbursed - Not all carrier pilots will want to switch to a disposable logistics ship.



By this line of reasoning, my Supercarrier and Moros pilot should have been reimbursed a bunch of skills when they lost the ability to field normal/any drones. I currently have a Titan/Supercarrier pilot with 13 million SP in drones -none of which can be used in his Avatar. It's part of the game.

CCP should give every pilot a straw this Christmas. The item description should simply say, "Suck it up."

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Moneta Curran
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2015-11-17 10:03:40 UTC
Random suggestion on offering players with existing carriers the choice to swap them out for force auxiliaries:

Why not strip these carriers, remove them from the account and offer the option to redeem either a carrier or a force auxiliary?
As I recall such a mechanic was in place to choose a preferred gift.

Seems a lot more sensible to me than leaving it down to whoever has a triage module fitted at patch time.