These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#141 - 2015-11-26 15:49:47 UTC
I agree with you that it is of limited use in that instance. A lot depends on how electronic warfare resistance works.

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

Hiljah
Foo Holdings
AL3XAND3R.
#142 - 2015-11-27 02:20:24 UTC
The more I read about cap changes, the more I feel like I'd just like to be reimbursed for all cap related things: skills, ships, and modules. Will this be an option? T2 triage and siege seems like an incredible waste now.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#143 - 2015-11-27 02:40:29 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
I agree with you that it is of limited use in that instance. A lot depends on how electronic warfare resistance works.

Ewar resistance aside (as not relevant to scrams and webs), it has already been established a normal scram will shut down a capital MWD.
Now if capital ships are given a relevant bonus to scramming - Bonus to warp core strength?

Quote:
CCP Larrikin
Q) Can a capital MWD be shut off by a normal scram, or maybe just capital ones? (#1)
A) The current design has a Capital MWD can be shut off by a normal Scram.

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.

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#144 - 2015-11-27 08:15:55 UTC
So if capital MWD's = 500m/s never-to-be-seen theoretical top speed, an AB capital will go 200m/s.

if you get 50% web resistance, a single 60% web will drop that to 140m/s. Two will drop it to, er, 120m/s (?). Depends on how the stacking works with webs.

ie; first = 0.5 x -60% = -30% penalty
second = (100% - resolution of above) - (0.25 x -60%) ?
third = solution to above, 0.125 x -60%

so the total penalty to speed from
1 web at 50% resistance = -30%
2 webs at 50% resistance = 0.75 x -60% = -45%
3 webs at 50% resistance = 0.875 x -60% = -52.5%

i mean, if you can solo a capital then web resistance will be infuriating. But if you're working in a gang for some unknown reason, and more than one of you has a web for some unknown reason (i mean, who ever dogpiles 20 ships onto a capital?) then the end result of blobbing a capital is the same, regardless of what the capital does.

Caps will need 90% web resistance to really make them mobile. Which is pointless anyway, due to Siege and Triage locking you in place.

I also like the idea of EWAR resistance against res damps. like, you're in a Phoenix with 2 scripted SeBo's and you are in siege, so you have a stonking great scan res of 41mm.

It takes 37s to lock an AHAC or armour T3 (sig rad 80) to flail uselessly at it. I mean, LOL, i was going to say "blap" but it won't. Because that won't happen.

A single -30% damp with 50% EWAR resistance will cut that to 35mm. So, 45s.
Two damps will cut it to 31.5mm. 56s to lock.
Three damps to 27mm. So, about 1.25 mins.

Yeah. Really making a great difference there.

Let's look at tracking. Rev with Dual Giga Pulse gets a base tracking of 0.00481 rad/s
A Sentinel with Scripts puts -85% tracking. With 50% resists, the first TD cuts your tracking to 0.0027. That's pretty hard to see how you'll get to the butter zone of blapping. But remember, CCP in its infinite wisdom is nerfing tracking EVEN MORE from this already sorry level, so who knows? maybe 0.001 is the new normal? Who knows.

We'll be charitable and say the HAW's start with tracking equal to Mega Pulses (we've heard ranges of 50km, so we can presume it's Mega Pulses with Scorch). Base tracking 0.0422. You may as well just consider a Rev to be a couple of Apocs welded together end to end, and we all know how well Apocs do at tracking AHACs, Cruisers and Cerbs.

I mean, it's well documented that Foxcats are dominating nullsec, lowsec and the like. With the new optimal-heavy RR rebalance in favour of Guardians etc, the same rules that apply to subcaps will apply to dreads: get in at 500m, AB on, and orbit the dread.

At 50km even Apoc guns, Cruise missiles, Hybrids (lol, as if) and AC's from BS are completely useless against T3/AHAC/Guardians. No one manages to DPS through that - it's the whole reason blap dreads exist.

no, 50% EWAR resists are fine, if you do small gang combat. it's like fighting in EWAR falloff, basically. You bring a specialist ship to totally teabag the enemy DPS and it's done. Dreads vs EWAR is going to be horrible, even against midslot utility EWAR.

* fix Dread scan res
* keep blap dreads
* Mobility during Siege
* Longer range needed to combat kiting doctrines
* Cap transfer falloff ASAP
Justin Cody
War Firm
#145 - 2015-11-30 06:13:38 UTC
triage needs to keep ewar immunity for the FAX otherwise it is pointless.
Anthar Thebess
#146 - 2015-11-30 09:09:19 UTC
Maybe this anty subcapital guns will not need siege to work.
This can be easily achieved by a simple trick
Make them Large and give fitting requirements so big that only dread can fit them.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#147 - 2015-11-30 19:32:09 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
triage needs to keep ewar immunity for the FAX otherwise it is pointless.


If super capital ewar leaves, then FAX should not get ewar immunity.

It's only fair. Take it away from dreads in siege too. Might as well have everyone get ewared to death.

Been around since the beginning.

Firestorm Delta
Aphotic Machina
#148 - 2015-11-30 20:20:46 UTC
While I do not have any experience in Caps the E-war resistance idea may one day affect Marauders so here I am.

My thought is if you are going to make such massive ships no longer E-war immune in certain ways than the resistance will have to have a big impact.

I'm not sure how hard it would be to do but rather than have the resistance apply to the individual modules like webs and such, have it calculate the total affect of the E-war on the ship and then hit it with the resistance. So if you get webbed by 80% with a 50% resist then you'll only be 40% webbed. This should negate the idea of just blobbing the ships with E-war since one or two heavily bonused ships will do far more to several caps than a dozen unbonused ships will do to one.

Also Triage, Siege, and the Bastion module (should it get the same treatment) should boost the resistances further. Immunity to jamming should be there, at least for FAX but preferably all three cases, and weapon and sensor damps should get further resists since you are sacrificing mobility. This allows the enemy to dictate range against the target to some degree but they'll have to deploy accordingly, rather than just dampen it into the ground and charge.

Supers could get even higher resists than caps so they don't just get perma-jammed and damped into oblivion.

Just random thoughts that I've been kicking around but since I'm hoping to start training into caps in a couple months and it would be nice to know it wouldn't be a waste of my time to do so.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#149 - 2015-11-30 21:40:45 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Maybe this anty subcapital guns will not need siege to work.
This can be easily achieved by a simple trick
Make them Large and give fitting requirements so big that only dread can fit them.

If I understand correctly (listening to a stream and I think a post somewhere), all cap mods will be much to large to use effectively on a sub capital. Same as they are now. Otherwise it would be trivial to exclude angle batteries from seige bonuses and work from there.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#150 - 2015-11-30 21:44:42 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
triage needs to keep ewar immunity for the FAX otherwise it is pointless.

Honestly, with the proposed level of resistances to ewar, sub-cap ewar against FAX shouldn't be an issue. By the time you've blob bed a thousand damps onto the target, stacking has stopped you at a certain point. With non-stacking things like ECM, resistance + natural strength will make it pretty hard to do.

Of course, it's always possible capital ewar will ignore resistance or be strong enough to overcome it (while hopefully not overpowering subcaps).
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#151 - 2015-11-30 21:47:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Sgt Ocker wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
I agree with you that it is of limited use in that instance. A lot depends on how electronic warfare resistance works.

Ewar resistance aside (as not relevant to scrams and webs), it has already been established a normal scram will shut down a capital MWD.
Now if capital ships are given a relevant bonus to scramming - Bonus to warp core strength?

Quote:
CCP Larrikin
Q) Can a capital MWD be shut off by a normal scram, or maybe just capital ones? (#1)
A) The current design has a Capital MWD can be shut off by a normal Scram.

Warp core wouldn't stop scram-shutdowns, unless they change the way it works. (If I understand your question correctly).0
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#152 - 2015-11-30 21:49:45 UTC
Trinkets Friend wrote:
math
is that too speed with or without nanos?
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#153 - 2015-12-01 02:26:28 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
I agree with you that it is of limited use in that instance. A lot depends on how electronic warfare resistance works.

Ewar resistance aside (as not relevant to scrams and webs), it has already been established a normal scram will shut down a capital MWD.
Now if capital ships are given a relevant bonus to scramming - Bonus to warp core strength?

Quote:
CCP Larrikin
Q) Can a capital MWD be shut off by a normal scram, or maybe just capital ones? (#1)
A) The current design has a Capital MWD can be shut off by a normal Scram.

Warp core wouldn't stop scram-shutdowns, unless they change the way it works. (If I understand your question correctly).0

Yes I know that isn't how that bonus works, it was an example of the type of bonus needed.

I don't know what you would call a bonus to not having your mwd insta shut off by a single scram.
Like many of the changes proposed -This one in particular seems so very unbalanced. A normal scram isn't enough to stop a super warping off, or jumping out - But it is enough to stop you in your tracks if you cycle an MWD. Why would anyone fit them?



I wonder how good designing capital warfare around - Jump in, approach FAX - Everyone stop in range of FAX - FAX goes triage - Enemy shoot FAX till it dies - Remainder (try to) jump out. (Biggest fleet on grid wins - Every time)

Large groups = Wins Eve.

NB; Any news on the Capital ship focus group, are they actually doing anything?

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.

Hound Halfhand
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#154 - 2015-12-01 14:46:10 UTC
Hiljah wrote:
The more I read about cap changes, the more I feel like I'd just like to be reimbursed for all cap related things: skills, ships, and modules. Will this be an option? T2 triage and siege seems like an incredible waste now.


I really hope CCP doesn't start reimbursing skill points every time something gets nerfed or changed. Just because it no longer does exactly what it did before is no reason to start allowing mass reallocation of skill points. I also hope they don't start giving out free skill points a la destroyer and battlecrusier changes.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#155 - 2015-12-06 04:45:04 UTC
Hound Halfhand wrote:
Hiljah wrote:
The more I read about cap changes, the more I feel like I'd just like to be reimbursed for all cap related things: skills, ships, and modules. Will this be an option? T2 triage and siege seems like an incredible waste now.


I really hope CCP doesn't start reimbursing skill points every time something gets nerfed or changed. Just because it no longer does exactly what it did before is no reason to start allowing mass reallocation of skill points. I also hope they don't start giving out free skill points a la destroyer and battlecrusier changes.

Capital Logistics modules consume a lot of SP (and time to train) when trained to 5. Why should players be stuck with skills they no longer use and have put many months into training because CCP want to make those skills irrelevant to the ships they were trained for?

I have no plans on ever flying a suicide logistics ship worth several billion isk into a fight. I have no plans on training for a whole new class of ship (especially not one that is by design, disposable).

CCP should give pilots with capital logistics skills the option to have those reimbursed.
200+ days of training is a lot to throw away.

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.

Jezza McWaffle
Epicentre Syndicate
The Singularity.
#156 - 2015-12-06 13:02:08 UTC
You do like to whine don't you. What is it CCP have said before, something along the lines of HTFU?

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#157 - 2015-12-06 20:46:31 UTC
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
You do like to whine don't you. What is it CCP have said before, something along the lines of HTFU?
Actually when they completely changed how skills work they gave players options and months of lead time to prepare.
HTFU - Is an option. CCP certainly has that option, I just don't think, unlike some, they are that narrow minded or stupid.




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.

Hound Halfhand
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#158 - 2015-12-06 22:51:09 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
You do like to whine don't you. What is it CCP have said before, something along the lines of HTFU?
Actually when they completely changed how skills work they gave players options and months of lead time to prepare.
HTFU - Is an option. CCP certainly has that option, I just don't think, unlike some, they are that narrow minded or stupid.






What's worrisome is that this time they don't seem to be giving us any lead time. We had a massive amount of forewarning on battlecruiser and destroyer changes. This is a much larger change, supposedly we are 4 months out and they haven't released any details. So I am sensing a skill point reimbursal which I am against.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#159 - 2015-12-06 23:10:01 UTC
Hound Halfhand wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
You do like to whine don't you. What is it CCP have said before, something along the lines of HTFU?
Actually when they completely changed how skills work they gave players options and months of lead time to prepare.
HTFU - Is an option. CCP certainly has that option, I just don't think, unlike some, they are that narrow minded or stupid.






What's worrisome is that this time they don't seem to be giving us any lead time. We had a massive amount of forewarning on battlecruiser and destroyer changes. This is a much larger change, supposedly we are 4 months out and they haven't released any details. So I am sensing a skill point reimbursal which I am against.

Does not really matter how much lead time they give for these changes. The skills will themselves become irrelevant to the class of ship they were trained for.
Reimbursement may not be the best option but leaving thousands of pilots with skills they can no longer use, without additional training for a new class of ship, is not a good option either.

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.

d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#160 - 2015-12-07 01:57:18 UTC  |  Edited by: d0cTeR9
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
You do like to whine don't you. What is it CCP have said before, something along the lines of HTFU?


He has a point. Some of us have a few capital and super capital pilots that are being turned into uselessness.

Not a happy camper when months/years are investing and then changed into something completly different.


I am also unsure how some people feel it's their business if SP is reimbursed or not.

Been around since the beginning.