These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[118.6] Capital Balancing

First post First post First post
Author
Cade Windstalker
#601 - 2016-06-25 21:51:27 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Really?? Fighters were approaching and poof. And on which obituary would you look for ships that died?


Just trying to figure out the circumstances. A large sig Cruiser that's not moving very fast is a pretty understandable alpha-strike. A sig-tanking Vigilant less so.

Marranar Amatin wrote:
I like the idea with a dedicated support fighter tube. But this was already suggested quite often when the great capital changes were first on the testserver, and never got any feedback from ccp.

Another option would be to increase the number of charges of the rocket salvo to about 30 -40, reduce the reloading to 1-2 seconds per charge, and allow auto repeat.


If something doesn't get direct feedback you can pretty safely assume the answer is "nope".

Auto-repeat on the ability kind of defeats the point of it, as does increasing the charge count to a ridiculous degree. The secondary missiles are supposed to be something you use tactically, not just a flat increase to your DPS.

Marranar Amatin wrote:
With the current changes, the rocket salvo is not a burst ability anyway. It does next to no damage against small targets, and so few damage against large targets (which have a lot of ehp), that the alpha is mostly irrelevant.

It's just a "spam this against large targets, to increase your damage from horrible to mediocre" ability.


It's not supposed to just nuke small targets off the grid, that's *the* point of these nerfs. If you want to use it like that you still *can* but it needs support fleet members with TPs and Webs to make it viable. That doesn't make the ability itself worthless.

With Capitals more than probably any other hull class how the ship interacts with the fleet its in needs to be considered for balance.

Marranar Amatin wrote:
Considering that the total dps with spamming rocket salvo is now below the dps of old the carrier that could fire indefinitely, and there is no serious alpha as an advantage, there is no reason to keep the disadvantage of having to reload often.
A large number of charges that can be quickly reloaded might be ok, as a drawback when the fighters are used a long distance away, but otherwise there is no reason for this drawback.


The old Carrier is not the baseline to be hit here, balance is. Just because the sustained DPS is lower doesn't mean the ship is bad.
Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#602 - 2016-06-25 22:25:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Marranar Amatin
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Auto-repeat on the ability kind of defeats the point of it, as does increasing the charge count to a ridiculous degree. The secondary missiles are supposed to be something you use tactically, not just a flat increase to your DPS.


The purpose already is defeated. There is hardly a reason to use it for anything else besides just spaming it for more dps on larger targets (fun fact: I was already critizing this when the capital changes were first announced, when the ability had a low alpha and short cooldown. then they made a long cooldown and high alpha, so it fulfilled the purpose. now its long cooldown and low alpha, so it does not fulfil that purpose again)

Cade Windstalker wrote:
It's not supposed to just nuke small targets off the grid, that's *the* point of these nerfs. If you want to use it like that you still *can* but it needs support fleet members with TPs and Webs to make it viable.


No number of TPs and webs can change the fact that the raw alpha damage was reduced by 40%. And of course this was the point of the nerf, to remove the ability to nuke small targets instantly. That was clearly communicated. I am just acknowledging that this happend.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
That doesn't make the ability itself worthless.


I did not say that its worthless, I said its not a burst ability anymore. Just a "spam for more dps" ability. Thats still useful, but the small number of charges, the long reload time, and the manual activation are unnecessary drawbacks for an ability like this, especially when the dps even with spamming is still quite low.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
The old Carrier is not the baseline to be hit here, balance is. Just because the sustained DPS is lower doesn't mean the ship is bad.


And the old carrier dps is a good baseline for balance. If the old carrier dps was not a good reason to bring a fighter carrier then an even lower dps is probably not too strong either. Unless there is a different advantage like good alpha or application. Which just got mostly removed.
You are welcome to provide a better baseline.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#603 - 2016-06-25 23:17:52 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Typed a load of shite in such a way you can't respond properly.

I've never seen a levi boosting a titan (or any fleet really) fleet - They like Rag owners are generally left to their own devices because providing logistics for both armor and shield, when Armor is the most common doctrine just doesn't happen.

Shield reps - Yes applied at the beginning of a cycle, for a reason. Armor you have more time to prepare for incoming damage - Once you get yellow boxed you call for reps and if you call right, your small shield will buffer the first cycle of reps (3 seconds).
Shield you get yellow boxed and of course call for reps. You need those reps to hit THEN because your shield IS your buffer, wait a cycle, your dead.
CCP do know shield caps get little to no use in fleets and are still neutering shield capitals.
I recently lost a dual extender nag - to 43 Machs - Where my dual plate Moros, which was being shot by other Dreads actually survived its siege cycle, the nag died less than 30 seconds into siege. Of course shield is too strong.



3 armor dreads in the game, 1 dedicated shield (poor old Caldari) = Balanced?
-- - -- - --
If a Devs starts a thread and is not smart enough to contribute without causing issues, they should not be starting threads that ask for feedback. "Feedback" implies a 2 way conversation - At least the acknowledgement it is being seen.
This thread was put up as a waste of time and effort for the groups most effected by theses changes - The decision had already been made - All the Dev did was follow CCP protocol of seeking player feedback but with no intention of hearing or taking into consideration what players said.
Simply, he and his reasoning for the nerf - Is wrong and based on half a concept, he hasn't taken into consideration how players use ships or how capital fights usually go down. "Oh damn it, shield gets it first rep cycle 3 seconds before armor - need to nerf shields". Such awesome reasoning, how could it be questioned?



Nags are already being refit to Armor - I've received my "don't jump the Rag" message from leadership - Shield doctrines are already once again not to be used (and the patch hasn't even hit yet).

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.

Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#604 - 2016-06-26 01:24:24 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:

If something doesn't get direct feedback you can pretty safely assume the answer is "nope".


Not really true considering they never reply anymore in the affirmative or negative. As far as the specified tube that was also when they decided upon the high alpha rocket salvo, now that it's being removed it opens the floor to debate for proper rebalance. While they may decide not to, it doesn't mean they aren't possibly open to the idea.
Cade Windstalker
#605 - 2016-06-26 01:55:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Marranar Amatin wrote:
The purpose already is defeated. There is hardly a reason to use it for anything else besides just spaming it for more dps on larger targets (fun fact: I was already critizing this when the capital changes were first announced, when the ability had a low alpha and short cooldown. then they made a long cooldown and high alpha, so it fulfilled the purpose. now its long cooldown and low alpha, so it does not fulfil that purpose again)


IMO it's still fulfilling purpose just fine. Just spamming them for extra DPS won't really get you anywhere against anyone with Logi, so you need to use the ability tactically to either burst past someone's tank or in concert with others to remove a troublesome target. What it won't do is let you solo-blap a lot of small targets off the field, which is perfectly fine.

Marranar Amatin wrote:
No number of TPs and webs can change the fact that the raw alpha damage was reduced by 40%. And of course this was the point of the nerf, to remove the ability to nuke small targets instantly. That was clearly communicated. I am just acknowledging that this happend.


I did not say that its worthless, I said its not a burst ability anymore. Just a "spam for more dps" ability. Thats still useful, but the small number of charges, the long reload time, and the manual activation are unnecessary drawbacks for an ability like this, especially when the dps even with spamming is still quite low.


That 40% drop doesn't mean you can't blap small stuff, and it certainly doesn't mean you can't remove a target that the enemy is even remotely slow about getting reps on. In fact the 4 second re-fire time is 2 seconds faster than a fully bonused Large Remote Armor Repper, so your ability to nuke someone before reps land actually *increased* rather than decreasing (at least against an armor fleet).

Personally I think you and I just disagree about how this ability is going to be used post-patch. IMO if you're right and it doesn't add much after these changes it'll get some of its alpha back, but personally I'm looking at the numbers and still seeing plenty of room for doing more than just mashing "F2" until I have to recall the fighters to reload.

Marranar Amatin wrote:
And the old carrier dps is a good baseline for balance. If the old carrier dps was not a good reason to bring a fighter carrier then an even lower dps is probably not too strong either. Unless there is a different advantage like good alpha or application. Which just got mostly removed.
You are welcome to provide a better baseline.


There are so many things missing from this. Old Carrier Fighter DPS had nothing to do with why people didn't use them. Old Fighters had terrible application (far far worse than the current iteration of Fighters) against anything that wasn't a Battleship, which reduced their effective DPS far below what's on Sisi right now. On top of that they had about the HP of a poorly tanked Frigate and were much slower as well, which made them more vulnerable to enemy Frigates, Destroyers, and Cruisers which they couldn't really apply damage to.

Probably the biggest problem though was that a decently fitted Carrier could carry about *one* full flight of Fighters and maybe a couple of spares. This made Carriers absolutely painful to use logistically if you were fielding Fighters because you quickly became useless if your Fighters got bombed or just carefully picked apart.

Even then they still saw use though, and they could tear up Battleship sized targets, but their general unwieldiness over regular Drones was what really did them in.

Basically, why bring Fighters when you could just bring Sentries, have similar application, but never run out of them.
Cade Windstalker
#606 - 2016-06-26 02:16:11 UTC
Please leave the insults out of it, thanks. If you don't like how I format posts then that's your problem.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
I've never seen a levi boosting a titan (or any fleet really) fleet - They like Rag owners are generally left to their own devices because providing logistics for both armor and shield, when Armor is the most common doctrine just doesn't happen.


There seems to be a small hole in your logic here. You're willing to give the Armor Titans the benefit of boosts but not the Shield, just because Armor is the more commonly used doctrine, but for this to be a really fair comparison we should assume shield fleet vs armor fleet.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Shield reps - Yes applied at the beginning of a cycle, for a reason. Armor you have more time to prepare for incoming damage - Once you get yellow boxed you call for reps and if you call right, your small shield will buffer the first cycle of reps (3 seconds).
Shield you get yellow boxed and of course call for reps. You need those reps to hit THEN because your shield IS your buffer, wait a cycle, your dead.
CCP do know shield caps get little to no use in fleets and are still neutering shield capitals.
I recently lost a dual extender nag - to 43 Machs - Where my dual plate Moros, which was being shot by other Dreads actually survived its siege cycle, the nag died less than 30 seconds into siege. Of course shield is too strong.

3 armor dreads in the game, 1 dedicated shield (poor old Caldari) = Balanced?


Shield as buffer works all of once, if that, and rarely against any kind of decent DPS because an un-tanked shield buffer is going to have a tiny fraction of the HP of a tanked armor buffer. I can see how this might work for Cap engagements up to a certain scale, but it doesn't really factor for sub-caps. When the armor/shield distinction was decided that's all there was in the game.

No idea what happened to your nag, you gave numbers for the Machs but not the dreads and didn't post a fit, so it's impossible to say whether this is a valid comparison or not.

Also there aren't 3 armor dreads in the game, there is 1 Shield Dread (Phoenix), 1 Armor Dread (Revelation), and 2 that can effectively tank Shield or Armor (Nag and Moros).

Sgt Ocker wrote:

If a Devs starts a thread and is not smart enough to contribute without causing issues, they should not be starting threads that ask for feedback. "Feedback" implies a 2 way conversation - At least the acknowledgement it is being seen.
This thread was put up as a waste of time and effort for the groups most effected by theses changes - The decision had already been made - All the Dev did was follow CCP protocol of seeking player feedback but with no intention of hearing or taking into consideration what players said.
Simply, he and his reasoning for the nerf - Is wrong and based on half a concept, he hasn't taken into consideration how players use ships or how capital fights usually go down. "Oh damn it, shield gets it first rep cycle 3 seconds before armor - need to nerf shields". Such awesome reasoning, how could it be questioned?

Nags are already being refit to Armor - I've received my "don't jump the Rag" message from leadership - Shield doctrines are already once again not to be used (and the patch hasn't even hit yet).


They are smart enough to do just that, that's why you see them post so infrequently and when they do it's addressing either common concerns, things that weren't originally addressed, and almost never the excessively angry people or the people who can't string together a coherent argument.

The only reason you're assuming no feedback was considered was because nothing you cared about changed and you didn't get your way. That doesn't mean it wasn't considered, that just means you failed to present a compelling argument.

His 'reasoning' is pretty clearly a brief summary of what was probably a 2 hour meeting the design team had over just that issue and decision. I'm sorry you feel entitled to hearing, and no doubt arguing against, that entire discussion and the eventual decision, but personally I don't feel they need to post a huge reasoning for every change they make. If it's a bad change that will be obvious and will be easily backed up by numbers and solid reasoning, not the sort of gut-flinch reaction arguments you're presenting about how it affects your corner of the game without taking anything else into consideration.
Cade Windstalker
#607 - 2016-06-26 02:18:36 UTC
Nasar Vyron wrote:
Not really true considering they never reply anymore in the affirmative or negative. As far as the specified tube that was also when they decided upon the high alpha rocket salvo, now that it's being removed it opens the floor to debate for proper rebalance. While they may decide not to, it doesn't mean they aren't possibly open to the idea.


Fair points, but until I see a response from CCP about something a player has said I assume the answer is somewhere on the spectrum between (and including) "we'll consider it" to "Nope, no way!"

It's not like CCP is ever going to respond to every terrible argument or suggestion posted on these forums, they'd need a dozen people just to do that.
C-137
C3 Corporation
#608 - 2016-06-26 06:38:34 UTC  |  Edited by: C-137
Evelgrivion wrote:
C-137 wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Given the current state of the changes I wouldn't worry about Light Fighters being a solo I-Win button. If you get nuked by a single carrier's fighters, in a decently tanked Cruiser, it will be because you've been webbed, painted, and EWar'd to Jita and back.

As for the last bit, I don't really see that happening. Big fights are, in general, good for the game and 3 players are never going to have a chance against 1000. Not that people really form up fleets like that unless they expect major resistance so... not sure what the actual example case for your issue is. Seems like you may have obscured your point a bit with hyperbole.


I have logs a few pages back showing carrier applying 600+ dps to a cruiser size ship (175m sig) going 900-950m/s, without webs or TPs. That seems a tad high to me.


Didn't you have a Thanatos fit with Tech 2 fighters, four Fighter Support Units, quad DDAs, two Omnidirectional Tracking Computers with tracking speed scripts, and two more omnidirectional tracking enhancers in the lows?


No, reading is hard. Standard ratting fit can over 600 dps to 100mn AB cruiser. Stop being so dense.

Oynx 43k EHP Explosive, 98 Passive Tank Explosive, 900 m/s, 175sig, 35km
Thanny 4x DDA, 1x OTE, 1x FSU (no rigs)
0:01:15 2x Einherji, 1x Dromi

Oynx 43k EHP Explosive, 98 Passive Tank Explosive, 900 m/s, 175sig, 35km
Thanny 4x DDA, 1x OTE, 1x FSU (no rigs)
0:01:19 3x Einherji

Makes we wonder if half the people in this thread even know what they are talking about... The inties we were told were lasing over 3 mins or whatever, was actually under 30s... Battleship level DPS on a speed tanked cruiser, instant damage projection in 30km sphere... Oh, and also 800 scan res...
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#609 - 2016-06-26 10:17:35 UTC
You realise the problem is many are unhappy at the fleet level where such a fit will never exist. At the same time small gangs can still be dunked by a handful of **** fit carriers. Hence my position that these changes don't affect the real issues very well.

And why would a hic only have 43k ehp?!
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#610 - 2016-06-26 12:07:37 UTC
C-137 wrote:
Evelgrivion wrote:
C-137 wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Given the current state of the changes I wouldn't worry about Light Fighters being a solo I-Win button. If you get nuked by a single carrier's fighters, in a decently tanked Cruiser, it will be because you've been webbed, painted, and EWar'd to Jita and back.

As for the last bit, I don't really see that happening. Big fights are, in general, good for the game and 3 players are never going to have a chance against 1000. Not that people really form up fleets like that unless they expect major resistance so... not sure what the actual example case for your issue is. Seems like you may have obscured your point a bit with hyperbole.


I have logs a few pages back showing carrier applying 600+ dps to a cruiser size ship (175m sig) going 900-950m/s, without webs or TPs. That seems a tad high to me.


Didn't you have a Thanatos fit with Tech 2 fighters, four Fighter Support Units, quad DDAs, two Omnidirectional Tracking Computers with tracking speed scripts, and two more omnidirectional tracking enhancers in the lows?


No, reading is hard. Standard ratting fit can over 600 dps to 100mn AB cruiser. Stop being so dense.

Oynx 43k EHP Explosive, 98 Passive Tank Explosive, 900 m/s, 175sig, 35km
Thanny 4x DDA, 1x OTE, 1x FSU (no rigs)
0:01:15 2x Einherji, 1x Dromi

Oynx 43k EHP Explosive, 98 Passive Tank Explosive, 900 m/s, 175sig, 35km
Thanny 4x DDA, 1x OTE, 1x FSU (no rigs)
0:01:19 3x Einherji

Makes we wonder if half the people in this thread even know what they are talking about... The inties we were told were lasing over 3 mins or whatever, was actually under 30s... Battleship level DPS on a speed tanked cruiser, instant damage projection in 30km sphere... Oh, and also 800 scan res...

So if I'm reading your pastebin right. It took 3 squads of Einherji light fighters just over 1 minute to kill a fairly low tanked cruiser that had no logi.
I think that shows pretty well Light, Fighters need buffing.

Your niche use Thany fit took too long to kill the Onyx, which would indicate an armor fit combat Thany is likely to take much longer than that.

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.

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#611 - 2016-06-26 12:19:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Marranar Amatin
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Marranar Amatin wrote:
The purpose already is defeated. There is hardly a reason to use it for anything else besides just spaming it for more dps on larger targets (fun fact: I was already critizing this when the capital changes were first announced, when the ability had a low alpha and short cooldown. then they made a long cooldown and high alpha, so it fulfilled the purpose. now its long cooldown and low alpha, so it does not fulfil that purpose again)


IMO it's still fulfilling purpose just fine. Just spamming them for extra DPS won't really get you anywhere against anyone with Logi, so you need to use the ability tactically to either burst past someone's tank or in concert with others to remove a troublesome target. What it won't do is let you solo-blap a lot of small targets off the field, which is perfectly fine.


That is just not possible anymore, its as much a burst ability as autocannons are a burst weapon.

Just check the damage numbers.
Against most targets it will do less alpha than the main gun. Even double webbed and double painted armor cruisers (ignoring the stacking penalty of these, and using max bonus on TP) will take less damge from "burst". And you still need double web and double painters (ignoring the penalty) to get more alpha out of the "burst" against a shield cruiser.
Even armor battleship needs to be painted and webbed (but only once, hooray, only one web and painter required so the "burst" ability has more alpha then the main gun against a freaking battleship).

Please explain to me what qualifies this as a burst ability, and what kind of tactical use you are thinking of.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
Marranar Amatin wrote:
No number of TPs and webs can change the fact that the raw alpha damage was reduced by 40%. And of course this was the point of the nerf, to remove the ability to nuke small targets instantly. That was clearly communicated. I am just acknowledging that this happend.


I did not say that its worthless, I said its not a burst ability anymore. Just a "spam for more dps" ability. Thats still useful, but the small number of charges, the long reload time, and the manual activation are unnecessary drawbacks for an ability like this, especially when the dps even with spamming is still quite low.


That 40% drop doesn't mean you can't blap small stuff, and it certainly doesn't mean you can't remove a target that the enemy is even remotely slow about getting reps on. In fact the 4 second re-fire time is 2 seconds faster than a fully bonused Large Remote Armor Repper, so your ability to nuke someone before reps land actually *increased* rather than decreasing (at least against an armor fleet).

Personally I think you and I just disagree about how this ability is going to be used post-patch. IMO if you're right and it doesn't add much after these changes it'll get some of its alpha back, but personally I'm looking at the numbers and still seeing plenty of room for doing more than just mashing "F2" until I have to recall the fighters to reload.


The mentioned double webbed and double painted cruiser will take about 5.5k or 11k alpha from the salvo (armor/shield). While having about 60k ehp. How are you going to blap this from the field?
You can use a lot of carrier for this, then at some point you can alpha them... but you can do this with basically any ship.
Also what do you mean with 4 seconds refire time? The rocket salvo has 14 seconds, not 4.

Btw. I am not saying that it is necessarily a bad thing that the burst got removed. I can understand the complaints, and the reason for changing this. Since they removed the alpha, I just want to treat the abilities as if it got removed (since it did), and treat it as what it is: an ability to activate for a dps increase. And since the dps is very low without that ability, there is no good reason for the low amout of charge, long reload time and missing auto repeat.

edit:
the numbers are for afterburner fit, but ignoring links. in a serious engagement everyone will have links which would reduce sig and increase speed further.
C-137
C3 Corporation
#612 - 2016-06-26 12:51:09 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
You realise the problem is many are unhappy at the fleet level where such a fit will never exist. At the same time small gangs can still be dunked by a handful of **** fit carriers. Hence my position that these changes don't affect the real issues very well.

And why would a hic only have 43k ehp?!


Why do I have to keep pointing out that it's not about the fit. If that oynx had 300,000 ehp, it would still be taking 600+ dps from a capital ship while moving at 900+ m/s.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
So if I'm reading your pastebin right. It took 3 squads of Einherji light fighters just over 1 minute to kill a fairly low tanked cruiser that had no logi.
I think that shows pretty well Light, Fighters need buffing.

Your niche use Thany fit took too long to kill the Onyx, which would indicate an armor fit combat Thany is likely to take much longer than that.


The light fighters are doing 600+ dps to a speed tanked cruiser, with a PVE RATTING CARRIER FIT. If you think this is a 'niche' fit, you have obviously never ******* used a carrier in-game.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#613 - 2016-06-26 13:07:20 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Really?? Fighters were approaching and poof. And on which obituary would you look for ships that died?


Just trying to figure out the circumstances. A large sig Cruiser that's not moving very fast is a pretty understandable alpha-strike. A sig-tanking Vigilant less so..


Let's see, that migy dude whom I repeatedly defeated for many years on SiSi every time he tried baited in a Prophecy. When he went into half armor he called in his 17 friends to show me that the combined "length" of his buddies almost makes 4 inches- errm that he and his 17 buddies can kill ONE ship with a carrier.

The keyboards some folks are so fond of are public. The signature radius of my Phantasm was 135m and my speed was 1535m/s.

While we are at is, CCP Larrikin, can you decrease the signature radius of light fighter to .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001fm so they only take 35 decades to get a lock?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#614 - 2016-06-26 13:33:11 UTC
C-137 wrote:
The light fighters are doing 600+ dps to a speed tanked cruiser, with a PVE RATTING CARRIER FIT.


So what is the problem with that? You think its too much? Not enough? Why?

600 dps does not seem much too me, considering we are talking about a capital that is pure crap against other capitals and only useful against subcaps.

I agree with Ocker, if a carrier that has a pve fit still needs one minute to kill a badly tanked cruiser without logi, then the damage is too low. Its a capital that is only useful against subcaps, at least against them it should pose a serious threat.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#615 - 2016-06-26 13:56:48 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Please leave the insults out of it, thanks. If you don't like how I format posts then that's your problem.

All I can suggest is, you train into these ships and use them.. Your "this is how it works" is clearly coming from someone who has no idea how capital logi works and is applied since the changes.

You broadcast when yellow boxed (wait till your red boxed, no amount of reps will save you) - If logi is on the ball, your first rep cycle hits as you lose your small shield buffer (or, as you hit armor if it is easier for you to understand). Remote armor rep cycle on an Apostle, is 3 seconds. So 5 seconds after you broadcast you get your first and most important rep cycle.
With shield, you broadcast when you get yellow boxed, if logi is on the ball, 2 or 3 seconds to lock you (with good server tics) and apply reps, you have lost the same amount of shield as an armor boat BUT your shield is your buffer so you are behind the 8 ball from the first cycle having lost a portion of your shield buffer.

Shield remote rep cycle time is 4 seconds with max skills (compared to 3 seconds for Armor) - Who has the advantage when it comes to reps? Yes Armor rep hits at the end of the cycle but after the first cycle, when reps hit becomes irrelevant.

As I said, Devs did not take all things into account when deciding on this nerf, they looked at one next to useless attribute, disregarded how remote reps apply and decided to remove shield capitals from combat fleets.

That buffer on a shield carrier is now going to be 10% lower, overall making armor the first and best choice.

Really though, the bottom line with this, regardless of what you or I think. Those who design doctrines for actual use in the game, aren't including anything shield.

PS; If you think my previous opening statement was insulting - You should probably not be on these forums. You might be too soft and thin skinned. It is a comment I have made many times because multi quoting is lazy posting often used to take things out of context (no-one has ever taken my simple bland comment as an insult) - Maybe you should take a look at - Ahh forget it, if a general comment directed at no-one in particular offends you, that's your problem.
PPS; If I were to insult you intentionally, you'd know it.

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.

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#616 - 2016-06-26 14:03:36 UTC
C-137 wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
You realise the problem is many are unhappy at the fleet level where such a fit will never exist. At the same time small gangs can still be dunked by a handful of **** fit carriers. Hence my position that these changes don't affect the real issues very well.

And why would a hic only have 43k ehp?!


Why do I have to keep pointing out that it's not about the fit. If that oynx had 300,000 ehp, it would still be taking 600+ dps from a capital ship while moving at 900+ m/s.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
So if I'm reading your pastebin right. It took 3 squads of Einherji light fighters just over 1 minute to kill a fairly low tanked cruiser that had no logi.
I think that shows pretty well Light, Fighters need buffing.

Your niche use Thany fit took too long to kill the Onyx, which would indicate an armor fit combat Thany is likely to take much longer than that.


The light fighters are doing 600+ dps to a speed tanked cruiser, with a PVE RATTING CARRIER FIT. If you think this is a 'niche' fit, you have obviously never ******* used a carrier in-game.


Because with a realistic fit, that dps value is unattainable. A realistic fit has 2 DDAs in a pinch. No one runs fleet thanatos at 4 DDAs.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#617 - 2016-06-26 14:36:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
C-137 wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
You realise the problem is many are unhappy at the fleet level where such a fit will never exist. At the same time small gangs can still be dunked by a handful of **** fit carriers. Hence my position that these changes don't affect the real issues very well.

And why would a hic only have 43k ehp?!


Why do I have to keep pointing out that it's not about the fit. If that oynx had 300,000 ehp, it would still be taking 600+ dps from a capital ship while moving at 900+ m/s.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
So if I'm reading your pastebin right. It took 3 squads of Einherji light fighters just over 1 minute to kill a fairly low tanked cruiser that had no logi.
I think that shows pretty well Light, Fighters need buffing.

Your niche use Thany fit took too long to kill the Onyx, which would indicate an armor fit combat Thany is likely to take much longer than that.


The light fighters are doing 600+ dps to a speed tanked cruiser, with a PVE RATTING CARRIER FIT. If you think this is a 'niche' fit, you have obviously never ******* used a carrier in-game.

Can you post the fit you were using because for a speed tanked cruiser it is pretty slow and has a pretty big sig and very very low EHP for any other use.
Was the cruiser orbiting the carrier (it wouldn't be doing 900m/s) or was it burning in a straight line making it a nice big target?

And sorry but if the cruiser had 300K ehp, it would not have died in just over 1 minute.
Regardless of it being hit for 1/3rd of the potential DPS of the carrier, you can't blame light fighters for poor fitting skills.

Tell me where you do your tests and when, I'll bring my speed tanked Onyx and a tank fit Devoter. With either I can guarantee your carrier will die to the dreads I drop on you before either of my Hics.

Hics are used to catch something and drop a fleet on it - Fit them accordingly and they are very good at their job. Although a HK is far more effective if you want to roam and be a bit stealthy.

Niche fit - Do you honestly believe a majority of carriers are fit the way you describe? It is niche, only used in certain situations, ratting for instance (and all ratting carriers deserve to die).

I suppose I do lack experience in carriers, I've only flown and lost them for 4 or 5 years.

Oh and please remember, a ratting fit carrier as you describe - Is fit to kill npc's ranging in size from frigate to battleship, so should have killed your Onyx much faster.

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.

C-137
C3 Corporation
#618 - 2016-06-26 15:26:22 UTC  |  Edited by: C-137
Sgt Ocker wrote:

Can you post the fit you were using because for a speed tanked cruiser it is pretty slow and has a pretty big sig and very very low EHP for any other use.
Was the cruiser orbiting the carrier (it wouldn't be doing 900m/s) or was it burning in a straight line making it a nice big target?

And sorry but if the cruiser had 300K ehp, it would not have died in just over 1 minute.
Regardless of it being hit for 1/3rd of the potential DPS of the carrier, you can't blame light fighters for poor fitting skills.

Tell me where you do your tests and when, I'll bring my speed tanked Onyx and a tank fit Devoter. With either I can guarantee your carrier will die to the dreads I drop on you before either of my Hics.

Hics are used to catch something and drop a fleet on it - Fit them accordingly and they are very good at their job. Although a HK is far more effective if you want to roam and be a bit stealthy.

Niche fit - Do you honestly believe a majority of carriers are fit the way you describe? It is niche, only used in certain situations, ratting for instance (and all ratting carriers deserve to die).

I suppose I do lack experience in carriers, I've only flown and lost them for 4 or 5 years.

Oh and please remember, a ratting fit carrier as you describe - Is fit to kill npc's ranging in size from frigate to battleship, so should have killed your Onyx much faster.


Onyx Fit (100% Explosive DMG in EFT for EHP vs drones tested) - Inb4 clueless people calling it a shitfit (it is, and the only relevant mods for the test are the prop mod and the extender for the sig bloom)

Onyx was orbiting at 35km for Scripted Point range, ship/pilot agility caused actual speed to be around 920m/s (gg AB inertia) and actual distance around 36.5 km. Obviously if it had 3mill EHP it would take longer to die, congrats on being able to do grade 3 math. This has nothing to do with the fit of the Onyx, it can be any ******* cruiser that will take 600+ dps.

Its not about the ' THIS X FIT DIED IN Y SECONDS', that is a function of the Weapon DPS and target EHP. What we are talking about here is the Weapon DPS, not the target fit's utility...

Show me a Ratting Carrier that doesn't fit 4xDDA. I would hazard that the majority of carriers ingame right now have 4xDDA on them. How is it a niche fit carrier when its the most likely carrier you will encounter? The only people who don't understand this are people who are using carriers as solo-pvp mobiles.

You seriously want a PVE carrier to do more than 600 dps to a speed tanked cruiser? wow I don't even...

This Carrier Fit Is more DPS and better application than I could test on SiSi (no faction seeded). This is a pretty simple fit that could probably reach 700 dps on a speed tanked cruiser. It is also better than all those shitfit armor thanatos you will see (and probably try defending for some reason).
Morgaine Mighthammer
Rational Chaos Inc.
Brave Collective
#619 - 2016-06-26 15:43:18 UTC
C-137 wrote:
You seriously want a PVE carrier to do more than 600 dps to a speed tanked cruiser? wow I don't even...


yes, a carrier setup for ratting, eg hitting everything from battleships through frigates, should EASILY surpass 600dps on a cruiser sized target. that's the entire point of a ratting carrier, killing things quickly to make isk; if it cant do that, then you pick a different ship. my ishtar does 760dps, why on earth is it such a crazy idea to you that i should expect to be able to surpass that in a bloody ratting fit carrier?
Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#620 - 2016-06-26 15:43:29 UTC
Btw. here are some other dps numbers to compare against that Onyx (assuming a perfect transversal speed for the Onyx), for other ship classes (all ships get 3 damage mods and 2 application mods):

Phönix: ~650
Nagl: 800 (depending on range, 824 on 35km)
Sentry Domi: ~500 (depending on range, 498 on 35 km)
Harbringer: ~500 (depending on range, 425 on 35 km)
Caracal: ~300 dps.

How the **** are 600 dps from a RATTING carrier too much compared to this?
Ratting carrier are fit for max dps, and its still only marginally better than a BS or a BC which is not even fit for max dps.

How bad do you think the dps should be? Do you seriously think that a capital that is crap against caps should also be much worse then subcaps against subcaps? What is the purpose of a carrier then? I can only assume that you never fly carrier yourself, and just think that their only purpose is a nice killmail that can be obtained without risk.

Comparing these numbers, it seems that the dps is clearly too low. The dreads do a little more dps, but simply devestate carrier in a capital fight. And the subcaps are only slightly worse than the carrier