These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[March] Balance Tweaks: Fighters, Supercarriers & Burst Projectors

First post First post First post
Author
Mr Floydy
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#181 - 2017-03-03 14:43:26 UTC
Doctor Tower wrote:
please also nerf networked sensor array for 50% scan resolution, to make BS greate again


I'd more than happily have the Network Sensor array significantly changed. I do feel it's a flawed module in the scheme of things. Whilst I can understand it was added to make anti-fighter carriers viable the net result is that a carrier can often lock and heavily damage a lot of targets before they can do much about it.
Trevize Demerzel
#182 - 2017-03-03 15:13:33 UTC
So I was just reading up on the shadow fighters. Odd.. suddenly I felt like I was reading lore right out of Babylon 5.

-

Cade Windstalker
#183 - 2017-03-03 16:14:09 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:
yeah because due to the way to get solid data being broken for the 3rd month now we're not forced to assume.

....

And while you're at it, update your info. The reactivation thread was permanently closed last year with a post saying that new alpha-omega status doesn't require reactivation. Then, alpha-omega status link between TQ and Sisi was broken and currently the only omegas on it are people who were omega on TQ on new year. There is no service currently that can make alpha into omega on Sisi.


Per CCP Habakuk:

CCP Habakuk wrote:
The omega status of accounts on Singularity has been extended now: All accounts, which were omega last week (when the mirror was deployed) will stay omega on Singularity for the next 3 months.


If your account wasn't Omega on the 18th then it wouldn't be now, if it was then you should still post on the test server because that's an error and CCP will get around to correcting it when they can.

Also, if you'll note the first post from that thread, the sync isn't broken it's not implemented yet, it should be implemented for the next mirror.

Orca Platypus wrote:
This part completely killed your argument.

  • If you have problems killing fighters, which are squishier than practically any ship, then how are you killing anything at all?
  • You're trying to sell us the point of view where A ******* WEB, ECM AND PAINT is "dedicated ship to counter fighters". Those are present in every gang. Get real.
  • If you can't tank a ratting carrier, you're bad and deserve to die.
  • PvP carriers get tankable in a minute it takes to defang them. Are you mad you're not allowed to do that without SOME losses in a fleet that costs like ONE fighter squadron? (and even then, with ECM, you can do that without any loss).


This is largely incorrect.


  • Fighters don't have very much HP but they speed tank quite well, even Cruiser sized guns struggle to apply DPS effectively to them, and Frigates will rarely hit for full damage unless the Fighters are burning straight at the target, which is user error.

  • Having all of those on one ship though is fairly specialized, and ECM is far from present in every gang. Also aggressed fighters can still boost away and dock up to get out of trouble.

  • A ratting Carrier is quite difficult to tank in a Cruiser, and ratting carriers tend to be fit for max DPS as opposed to PvP carrier which may have more tank and fewer DPS mods. A Carrier with support of its own and nuke a Cruiser off the field quite easily because of the burst DPS on its rocket attack.

  • This only applies if the group killing your Carrier is spec'd and specialized to do so and is prioritizing your fighters. Basically this only applies when you get dropped on by a prepared group that's hunting Carriers and came equipped for the job.


Basically you seem to have taken his comments and only applied them to one very specific case, which judging by your other comments you're on the receiving end of more than anything else. His comments are still broadly fairly accurate, though the DPS has at least been toned down since the original Citadel release.
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#184 - 2017-03-03 16:34:06 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Max Trix
Cade Windstalker wrote:


This is largely incorrect.


  • Fighters don't have very much HP but they speed tank quite well, even Cruiser sized guns struggle to apply DPS effectively to them, and Frigates will rarely hit for full damage unless the Fighters are burning straight at the target, which is user error.

  • Having all of those on one ship though is fairly specialized, and ECM is far from present in every gang. Also aggressed fighters can still boost away and dock up to get out of trouble.

  • A ratting Carrier is quite difficult to tank in a Cruiser, and ratting carriers tend to be fit for max DPS as opposed to PvP carrier which may have more tank and fewer DPS mods. A Carrier with support of its own and nuke a Cruiser off the field quite easily because of the burst DPS on its rocket attack.

  • This only applies if the group killing your Carrier is spec'd and specialized to do so and is prioritizing your fighters. Basically this only applies when you get dropped on by a prepared group that's hunting Carriers and came equipped for the job.


Basically you seem to have taken his comments and only applied them to one very specific case, which judging by your other comments you're on the receiving end of more than anything else. His comments are still broadly fairly accurate, though the DPS has at least been toned down since the original Citadel release.


*snip* Keep it Civil. *snip* ISD Max Trix



  • Fighters "speed tank" works till the first web. They can't avoid it as they have to orbit their target at 5km. Nobody needs to apply full DPS to kill such a squishy target.

  • I knew you would be dumb enough to cry about "having all of those", because it's quite apparent that you can defang a carrier having ANY of those, for anyone who actually flew or dunked a carrier at least once this year. Once again, you don't know what you're talking about so please buzz off to hisec thread you came from.

  • Fighters that boost away deal no damage, you have any problem with fighters that deal no damage?

  • A ratting carrier will have a very specific damage type, a no-brainer to prepare for. You're like "baww I'm not allowed to fly stupid anymore, ccpls nerf".

  • Because webs on brawling fleets, and TP/ECM on kiting fleets are totally not a thing any fleet would have? Or you're crying "bawwwww I can't kill a 4 bil capital ship in my 300mil dps only roam"?


For the 5th time, please would you be so kind and gracious to buzz off from a topic you're absolutely clueless in?
Apple129
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#185 - 2017-03-03 17:18:27 UTC
Well as far as I know this change will completely make ratting in carriers not viable anymore. I like to think I'm a pretty decent carrier pilot and have ratted a lot on my Nighoggur so I've got experience. On Tranquility I've never lost a T2 fighter to rats, but I log on to the test server to find out how the sig radius and aggression increase will affect ratting...

I lose 2 fighters the first haven, 1 fighter the second haven, and 3 the third haven I attempted...

It's near impossible to do anything about it... On almost every haven I did (except for the second one) I always had one fighter get completely one shot alpha'd the last wave of the haven. That odds and frequency will completely kill carrier ratting since one T2 fighter cost almost half as the site is worth to finish. Not to mention the down time of having to dock up and get more fighters every hour or so since you're losing so many of them...

Great job CCP... First you made carrier ratting interesting and fun... now you've decided to make it obsolete and a complete waste of time and ISK.
Skosne Oczy
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#186 - 2017-03-03 17:54:27 UTC
I had a dream of flying rorqual and carriers. Of course both were nerfed before Ive managed to complete training characters.
Im glad you guys did it though. I was so close to buying 28 plex and I would feel so stupid afterwards. Now I get to save on the subscriptions as well.
Cade Windstalker
#187 - 2017-03-03 18:14:23 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:

  • Fighters "speed tank" works till the first web. They can't avoid it as they have to orbit their target at 5km. Nobody needs to apply full DPS to kill such a squishy target.

  • I knew you would be dumb enough to cry about "having all of those", because it's quite apparent that you can defang a carrier having ANY of those, for anyone who actually flew or dunked a carrier at least once this year. Once again, you don't know what you're talking about so please buzz off to hisec thread you came from.

  • Fighters that boost away deal no damage, you have any problem with fighters that deal no damage?

  • A ratting carrier will have a very specific damage type, a no-brainer to prepare for. You're like "baww I'm not allowed to fly stupid anymore, ccpls nerf".

  • Because webs on brawling fleets, and TP/ECM on kiting fleets are totally not a thing any fleet would have? Or you're crying "bawwwww I can't kill a 4 bil capital ship in my 300mil dps only roam"?



  1. One web will cut a Fighter's speed down to between 300 and 400m/s, which is still more than enough to beat the tracking on any Battleship guns, most cruisers, and still reduce damage noticeably on Frigates. The experience you're probably speaking from here likely had multiple webs and TPs, which is what any gang specifically hunting unsupported Carriers will bring. In a larger fight with support on both sides this doesn't really work well unless you have a specifically kitted out ship on Fighter duty, and that ship had better pray to heck he isn't nuked off the field before he can kill most of the Fighters.

  2. This is just... yeah no. This is completely wrong. The closest you can come with one out of those three is a full rack of jams but a smart Carrier will just yank his Fighters back and ask his support fleet to primary the squishy ECM ship. Other than that TPs or Webs alone aren't enough to deal with Fighters except in fairly high numbers.

  3. Fighters that boost away don't die either, and you can also boost in a circle around your target for a temporary tank boost without losing any application.

  4. This is just false. Unless the Carrier you're dunking is *terrible* at fitting he'll have other Fighters in his bay to swap to, either as soon as you drop or when he notices he's not doing much damage with his current set. At that point if you've tanked to a specific damage type you're screwed.

  5. Nooo.... if you'd care to read back in the thread I was simply saying that your general points here are inaccurate and extremely narrow. I'm on the fence about these changes as to whether they're going too far or not. Your claim that Carriers are amazingly easy to kill is just ridiculous though, and easily disproven by anyone who knows anything about fielding Carriers outside of a belt or anom.
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks
Requiem Eternal
#188 - 2017-03-03 18:23:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Juvir
Apple129 wrote:
Well as far as I know this change will completely make ratting in carriers not viable anymore. I like to think I'm a pretty decent carrier pilot and have ratted a lot on my Nighoggur so I've got experience. On Tranquility I've never lost a T2 fighter to rats, but I log on to the test server to find out how the sig radius and aggression increase will affect ratting...

I lose 2 fighters the first haven, 1 fighter the second haven, and 3 the third haven I attempted...

It's near impossible to do anything about it... On almost every haven I did (except for the second one) I always had one fighter get completely one shot alpha'd the last wave of the haven. That odds and frequency will completely kill carrier ratting since one T2 fighter cost almost half as the site is worth to finish. Not to mention the down time of having to dock up and get more fighters every hour or so since you're losing so many of them...

Great job CCP... First you made carrier ratting interesting and fun... now you've decided to make it obsolete and a complete waste of time and ISK.


This is taking into effect that the nidhoggur has a velocity bonus on their fighters, so more speed tank. T2 fighters aint cheap. Losing 6 across 3 anoms that bring a max of 30m each, and T2 fighters generally cost ~10m-15m each. That means 2/3 or more of your max income on those anoms went to replacing fighters, that's not including fuel cost if necessary, or replacing the cost of the ship and fittings in the first place. This is what we mean when we say it nullifies carrier ratting entirely CCP. The Risk/reward is being removed from carrier ratting with these changes.

T2 Fighters also on average have about ~250 more hp than T1 fighters. If the fighters are getting hit this often, even switching to T1 fighters (which slows down your ratting speed, and isk per hour) the reward still isn't there when you factor in that they still cost 4-7m each depending on region. That's not even including the velocity difference between T1 and T2, which again works into the sig/speed tank.
Wizzard Ozz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#189 - 2017-03-03 21:32:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Wizzard Ozz
CCP, while you are "correcting" fighters, please adjust that a light fighter squadron consists of 9 fighters yet a single jam landing jams them all. It should take 9 successful jams to render a squadron useless, 1 jam lands, 89% effective, 2 jams, 78% effective and math the rest of the way to 0. Why are squadrons of 9 being treated as a single entity when it comes to ewar? Are their sensor strengths being added together?

I'm not against these changes, just fix their treatment as a single entity when it comes to ewar as it completely cripples their effectiveness. Yes, it should take 21-27 jams landing to render a COMBAT carrier ineffective.

Those people looking for application nerfs because "a cruiser sized drone applies guns to my cruiser sized hull, so unfair", you already had a reasonable nerf, stop tackling capital ships if they are killing you, it's like the definition of insanity.
Prometheus Centuri
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#190 - 2017-03-03 22:24:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Centuri
Is this CCP's new era of generating more KM's so the game actually looks cool on the outside but is actually bitter on the inside?

KM's with mobile warp disruptors (easier to kill also)
KM's with excavator drones (1.5b each, so no need to hunt for carriers anymore)
and even more KM generation assists with increased fighter signatures.... Lets just blap the fighters first so we get 4 KM's in total when we're done with the poor ratting guy... Not only does he loose an asset, lets mess up his killboard too along with his alliance and crop killboard. Throw in a few mobile bubble kills before entering ratting system, there you have it! 7-8 killmails without effort! Op success! Let's return home, no need to hunt for others...

Not only does this change ruin the moral and killboard of the capital pilot even further, it also gives him limited chance to defend against a small gang if the gang decides to remove the fighters off the field (which is what a decent gang would do) before moving on to the carrier. The carrier would just give away more killmails in the process of trying to attack the gang by loosing fighters over and over again. Even now the fighters are rapidly killed by a 8 man jackdaw fleet before you can even pull them in...

Just why?

As a conclusion;
More reasons not to use capitals
More reasons not to use the rorqual (in relation to the coming rorqual changes)
Mpre reasons not to use mobile warp disruptors...

Thnaks CCP, I might as well move to highsec for t1 frig duels...
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#191 - 2017-03-03 23:17:08 UTC
I just realized we're seeing the usual case of CCPL duplicity.

This change accomplishes absolutely nothing in PVP:

0 damage vs Griffin before
0 damage vs Griffin after

Fighters dead to 1 web before
Fighters dead to 1 web after

You can see the pattern. No change whatsoever. A neatly engineered tweak to not affect pvp in the slightest.


The real nerf here is to make carrier ratting dead. They don't want carriers in space. They don't want carriers in sites. They don't want carriers anywhere. Your carrier is now a bad version of jump freighter.

Also, the "bugfix". I bet you hair on my toosh there was no bug - fighter aggro was there all the time, with skill and luck you could avoid losing fighters often, but bad luck would still cost you a fighter here and there. So this is not a bugfix, as there's no bug to fix. This is a nerf camouflaged as bugfix. We're witnessing the already-traditional form of CCPL damage control we've seen countless times. They even removed CCPL Fozzie from the role of announcer as he's the trademark of CCPL duplicity and would be suspected for shenanigans right away.

All this was to avoid making every carrier ratter mad. People that invested in the game, in the capital skills, in injectors, in capital faction modules, wasted $30 of subscription money to train Fighters V, etc. To cowardly avoid telling them to the face that none of them are welcome anymore. To avoid telling them CCPL has decided to run off with their money.

Well here we have it boys. Apparently, carrier content was not worth carrier faucet. So now both are being cowardly purged, sticking knife in the back of both carrier ratters and carrier hunters (no carrier ratting - no carrier hunting). We could've seen another tuning of faucet like we see rorqual being tuned once again (though rorqual was another form of honeytrap to make people invest in them and expect that they stick to them and still be targets since they're now invested).

I find it yet another proof that eve is dying. Nobody would resort to this degree of customerfucking and straight-face lies if he intends to keep them customers paying. This also sheds some light on rorqual nerf - the giant mineral sink that was carrier and supercarrier building for pve needs is getting purged, so need to balance the freed up minerals into shape or the market would drop drastically and insurance scams will faucet what ratting carriers didn't. And even the bubble removal meganerf is now seen in the new light as well, an attempt to create a tremendous mineral and manhours sink for essential layer of protection to counteract complete stopping of carrier production.

Basically, after completing NERF HISEC campaign, the next turn is NERF NULLSEC FOR THE SMALL GUY. Welcome to YC119, #nopoors, only titan ratting is allowed (until HAW nerf because it "applies too well to MWDing cruiser") with a hand on batphone, but hey, at least CSM is happy - now that nobody is ratting they can whelp inty roams to each other's ratting titans and keep their RMT farm going with people who want to join the titan ratting club. Just remember, you cannot sell supers outside "coalition", and "coalition" is buying for 40bil and selling for 200bil, provided you agree to be the part of the mandatory batphone, otherwise you're a renter, your fee is 10bil per month, and your position is occasionally reported to the neighboring NIP coalition to laugh at your tears while blaming you for not joining the compulsory batphone service and not kissing a ring twice a day. Exciting future for everyone who thought CSM is there for anything other than their own mortgage.

/tinfoil hat
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#192 - 2017-03-03 23:46:25 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:


  1. One web will cut a Fighter's speed down to between 300 and 400m/s, which is still more than enough to beat the tracking on any Battleship guns, most cruisers, and still reduce damage noticeably on Frigates. The experience you're probably speaking from here likely had multiple webs and TPs, which is what any gang specifically hunting unsupported Carriers will bring. In a larger fight with support on both sides this doesn't really work well unless you have a specifically kitted out ship on Fighter duty, and that ship had better pray to heck he isn't nuked off the field before he can kill most of the Fighters.

  2. This is just... yeah no. This is completely wrong. The closest you can come with one out of those three is a full rack of jams but a smart Carrier will just yank his Fighters back and ask his support fleet to primary the squishy ECM ship. Other than that TPs or Webs alone aren't enough to deal with Fighters except in fairly high numbers.

  3. Fighters that boost away don't die either, and you can also boost in a circle around your target for a temporary tank boost without losing any application.

  4. This is just false. Unless the Carrier you're dunking is *terrible* at fitting he'll have other Fighters in his bay to swap to, either as soon as you drop or when he notices he's not doing much damage with his current set. At that point if you've tanked to a specific damage type you're screwed.

  5. Nooo.... if you'd care to read back in the thread I was simply saying that your general points here are inaccurate and extremely narrow. I'm on the fence about these changes as to whether they're going too far or not. Your claim that Carriers are amazingly easy to kill is just ridiculous though, and easily disproven by anyone who knows anything about fielding Carriers outside of a belt or anom.


God, please, either enlighten this pretentious but clueless chimp or remove him.

  1. You have clearly no idea how webbing a fighter works. I was piloting a carrier vs Mach fleet last month, so let me enlighten you a bit on the topic. Once fighter gets webbed, Machs start applying to it. Then they deploy drones, drones hit. They have good tracking, so their guns also hit. Fighter are squishy, so they die. At this point, you have 2 choices. One is letting your fighters go down guns blazing. The other is to pull them back... and now they travel in a straight line and probably MWDing too (otherwise you're never shaking that web at 400m/s), with 500% sig bloom... blap, dead. Can you see where I'm getting at? Fighters die regardless of your choice. Always. Doesn't require multiple webs, one is enough. Doesn't require TPs, Machs and drones will hit. Doesn't require ECM, Machs will tank. Please get that through your thick skull - carriers are pretty much good-for-nothing against anything but fat mwding dps-only zero-support cruiser lolroams.

  2. You're down to complete nonsense here or answering not to me because your second point doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Either you never piloted ECM ships to know how they survive, or think that 4bil carrier that "yanked his Fighters" and doing absolutely nothing because you have brought 12mil Blackbird on the field is ok. Both of those assumptions make you look ********.

  3. Already answered above. Fighters that boost away are not only useless but also have bloomed sig and go straight. They die.

  4. This isn't false, you're simply not informed about fighter hangar sizes and replacement time. Short version: a mid-skilled carrier has 2 extra squadrons. That's it. And one is usually to cover PvE losses. With other getting instantly primaried and killed, or at best repeatedly pulled doing absolutely nothing either way. That means that you're only screwed when attempting to headbutt a supercarrier which has spare hangar space. A regular carrier would barely have anything up its sleeve.



tl;dr dear unexperienced jita undock dweller, please, for the 9th time I'm asking you extremely nicely, to buzz off from a discussion of mechanics you clearly do not engage in neither theoretically nor practically, and you're not generally smart enough to provide anything of value either. Stick to the threads that nerf jita undock shenanigans and let actual carrier pilots sort this.
Cade Windstalker
#193 - 2017-03-04 00:22:17 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:

  1. You have clearly no idea how webbing a fighter works. I was piloting a carrier vs Mach fleet last month, so let me enlighten you a bit on the topic. Once fighter gets webbed, Machs start applying to it. Then they deploy drones, drones hit. They have good tracking, so their guns also hit. Fighter are squishy, so they die. At this point, you have 2 choices. One is letting your fighters go down guns blazing. The other is to pull them back... and now they travel in a straight line and probably MWDing too (otherwise you're never shaking that web at 400m/s), with 500% sig bloom... blap, dead. Can you see where I'm getting at? Fighters die regardless of your choice. Always. Doesn't require multiple webs, one is enough. Doesn't require TPs, Machs and drones will hit. Doesn't require ECM, Machs will tank. Please get that through your thick skull - carriers are pretty much good-for-nothing against anything but fat mwding dps-only zero-support cruiser lolroams.

  2. You're down to complete nonsense here or answering not to me because your second point doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Either you never piloted ECM ships to know how they survive, or think that 4bil carrier that "yanked his Fighters" and doing absolutely nothing because you have brought 12mil Blackbird on the field is ok. Both of those assumptions make you look ********.

  3. Already answered above. Fighters that boost away are not only useless but also have bloomed sig and go straight. They die.

  4. This isn't false, you're simply not informed about fighter hangar sizes and replacement time. Short version: a mid-skilled carrier has 2 extra squadrons. That's it. And one is usually to cover PvE losses. With other getting instantly primaried and killed, or at best repeatedly pulled doing absolutely nothing either way. That means that you're only screwed when attempting to headbutt a supercarrier which has spare hangar space. A regular carrier would barely have anything up its sleeve.



Please cease with the personal attacks. Thanks.

As to your points...


  1. Yup, that's how it works. I think I see the problem here now though. The problem is your assumption that your solo Carrier should be able to take on an entire fleet by itself and come out on top. That has never been the intent for these ships, and it would be bad for the game if they worked like that.

  2. See above. If you want your carrier to take on a fleet bring a support fleet of your own and have them deal with the Blackbird. If you want a ROFL solo-pwn mobile go play some other game. Caps need support to be effective, this is intentional and good for the game.

  3. You do not, in fact, *have* to move them back to you in a straight line, though yes it certainly does make them easier to hit generally. Less the case if you're in the middle of the fight though.

  4. Um.... no? An all-5s Thanny can fit 9 full flights of Fighters, that's enough for two full different damage types plus three squads of support fighters if you feel the need for whatever reason, same for the Nidhoggur. The Archon can only fit 8, and the chimera can only fit 7. With 4s only the Nidhoggur loses enough space to lose a full flight, but in all cases you can fit at least 2 full launches of Fighters with level 4 skills.
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#194 - 2017-03-04 00:59:07 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:


Please cease with the personal attacks. Thanks.



Please have an accident that will make you stop lowering the entire forum IQ with your posts. Thanks in advance.

As to your points...

Cade Windstalker wrote:


  1. Yup, that's how it works. I think I see the problem here now though. The problem is your assumption that your solo Carrier should be able to take on an entire fleet by itself and come out on top. That has never been the intent for these ships, and it would be bad for the game if they worked like that.

  2. See above. If you want your carrier to take on a fleet bring a support fleet of your own and have them deal with the Blackbird. If you want a ROFL solo-pwn mobile go play some other game. Caps need support to be effective, this is intentional and good for the game.

  3. You do not, in fact, *have* to move them back to you in a straight line, though yes it certainly does make them easier to hit generally. Less the case if you're in the middle of the fight though.

  4. Um.... no? An all-5s Thanny can fit 9 full flights of Fighters, that's enough for two full different damage types plus three squads of support fighters if you feel the need for whatever reason, same for the Nidhoggur. The Archon can only fit 8, and the chimera can only fit 7. With 4s only the Nidhoggur loses enough space to lose a full flight, but in all cases you can fit at least 2 full launches of Fighters with level 4 skills.



  1. The problem is your assumption that my however greatly supported carrier should be absolutely useless against a single griffin, and countered by anything with a web. About fleets, I agree, carriers should not come out on top against fleets of comparable cost, skill and preparation. However, I believe there is an intent for them to be able to come out on top of people who try to headbutt them with your level of fighter mechanic knowledge and then cry a 4bil carrier dares to apply damage to their supposed-to-be-invincible pvp shitfit 10mil cruiser of doom. Right now you're allowed to completely overpower a 4bil capital ship by means of astonishing web/TP/ECM fitting skill, regardless of how the carrier is fit. This is not right.

  2. Learn to read. I was in a fleet with all the meaningful support. Could it keep my fighters alive any longer, considering shield transfer doesn't work on them? No. Carriers get defanged regardless of any support they have. By a single web. Or TP. Or rendered useless by ECM.

  3. Whether way of pulling them back you prefer, they will be moving straight, and directly away from whatever they were engaging. You can bounce them from something outside web range, but can't make their trajectory any less straight to that point either.

  4. Don't get me started with all-V on capital ships. I'd bet 95% of pilots do not have those, as it is a tremendous time sink for no benefit other than stuffing yourself with more killmails for the enemy who came with anything better than a yolo headbutt fleet.
Cade Windstalker
#195 - 2017-03-04 02:38:52 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:

  1. The problem is your assumption that my however greatly supported carrier should be absolutely useless against a single griffin, and countered by anything with a web. About fleets, I agree, carriers should not come out on top against fleets of comparable cost, skill and preparation. However, I believe there is an intent for them to be able to come out on top of people who try to headbutt them with your level of fighter mechanic knowledge and then cry a 4bil carrier dares to apply damage to their supposed-to-be-invincible pvp shitfit 10mil cruiser of doom. Right now you're allowed to completely overpower a 4bil capital ship by means of astonishing web/TP/ECM fitting skill, regardless of how the carrier is fit. This is not right.

  2. Learn to read. I was in a fleet with all the meaningful support. Could it keep my fighters alive any longer, considering shield transfer doesn't work on them? No. Carriers get defanged regardless of any support they have. By a single web. Or TP. Or rendered useless by ECM.

  3. Whether way of pulling them back you prefer, they will be moving straight, and directly away from whatever they were engaging. You can bounce them from something outside web range, but can't make their trajectory any less straight to that point either.

  4. Don't get me started with all-V on capital ships. I'd bet 95% of pilots do not have those, as it is a tremendous time sink for no benefit other than stuffing yourself with more killmails for the enemy who came with anything better than a yolo headbutt fleet.



  1. Any other ship gets countered pretty much just as hard, but it doesn't take 3+ jams to do it, it takes one. Also if your support is any good that ECM ship is going to be on grid for about the time it takes two people to target lock him. If they've got enough Logi on grid that they can keep a squishy ECM boat on field then the problem is no longer with the Carrier it's that the enemy fleet is better than yours. Also no, it's not just the ability to fit a few modules. As long as you're not playing your carrier from 200km off the fight then you need to be able to lock and deal with all three Fighter squads more or less as they're launched because while there is a delay on loading the fighter tubes there is no such delay on Fighters dealing damage after being launched, and they're very capable of nuking something like a Griffin or Blackbird off the grid.

  2. Kinda sounds to me like you're just not a great Carrier pilot. There are plenty of people out there having success with Carriers, it's just very micro intensive and requires very quick decision making.

  3. This assumes that everything shooting them is in the direction they're burning away from. This will only be the case if your Carrier is outside the actual fight by a decent distance. If you're within about 30-40km then the enemies have about 2-3 ticks to shoot your fighters before they're safe back in your hangar.

  4. This isn't even all 5s, I listed loadout with 4s, which take roughly 1/5th the training time of a Level 5 skill. Even with Fighter Hangar Management *1* a Thanatos can fit 8 Squads of Fighters. Your original claim is just blatantly inaccurate.
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#196 - 2017-03-04 03:20:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Orca Platypus
Cade Windstalker wrote:



  1. Any other ship gets countered pretty much just as hard, but it doesn't take 3+ jams to do it, it takes one. Also if your support is any good that ECM ship is going to be on grid for about the time it takes two people to target lock him. If they've got enough Logi on grid that they can keep a squishy ECM boat on field then the problem is no longer with the Carrier it's that the enemy fleet is better than yours. Also no, it's not just the ability to fit a few modules. As long as you're not playing your carrier from 200km off the fight then you need to be able to lock and deal with all three Fighter squads more or less as they're launched because while there is a delay on loading the fighter tubes there is no such delay on Fighters dealing damage after being launched, and they're very capable of nuking something like a Griffin or Blackbird off the grid.

  2. Kinda sounds to me like you're just not a great Carrier pilot. There are plenty of people out there having success with Carriers, it's just very micro intensive and requires very quick decision making.

  3. This assumes that everything shooting them is in the direction they're burning away from. This will only be the case if your Carrier is outside the actual fight by a decent distance. If you're within about 30-40km then the enemies have about 2-3 ticks to shoot your fighters before they're safe back in your hangar.

  4. This isn't even all 5s, I listed loadout with 4s, which take roughly 1/5th the training time of a Level 5 skill. Even with Fighter Hangar Management *1* a Thanatos can fit 8 Squads of Fighters. Your original claim is just blatantly inaccurate.


Thanks for confirming you have no idea how to fly an ECM ship, and have zero experience flying against one. Logi on ECM ships, what a joke, you're literally a clown. Okay, hisec clown education time. With ECM ships, you don't have to stay within lock range for longer than you have to. You go on a perch. Then you choose the best way to come down, so you are at optimal. And you align back to your perch, or another one if you're too close. Then you attempt a jam, ready to warp out to your perch whenever you're feeling targeted. You don't have to be on grid the whole time, jams last 20 second. And ffs, you're ECM, you don't broadcast for reps unless logi is free, your defense are your perches, not your tank.

Also confirming you've no idea on fighter mechanics either. There is a delay on fighters damage dealing ability - they have scan res and they lock targets before dealing damage to them just like a player ship would. They can be jammed and they can be damped. And if you remember there's also a burst jammer that can be effectively wielded on non-ecm ships...

Finally you're talking your guts out confirming you've no experience on the matter and all you know is based on someone's bragging. There is no skill element involved with webs. They hit your fighters, fighters are dead. It's as easy as fitting webs. Then you are telling me that my support fleet is bad because it has to remove all webbers before carriers are allowed to finally do something without being insta-defanged? You sound like a delusional maggot.

So you're suggesting carriers should be parked within enemy dreads optimal? Daaaaaaaaaaaaam son, you're dopey. Your only excuse is that there are no dreads on jita undock, so you only heard about them and never had to deal with them. Carrier within a few dreads optimal is asking to get alpha'd. Even FAX reps are not instant and not 50k-100k hp that a dread can shave off in a single volley.

No, you can't insta-nuke griffin or blackbird off the field with freshly launched fighters. You have 40+ kilometers to cover before that. Either slowboat and you're jammed before you reach your destination, or fire mwd, blow up your fighters sigs, get them instalocked and still jammed. Where do you think that ECM boat is? Go back to eve uni and ask them to teach you the basics of flying ECM, you obviously missed that class with all the nonsense about reps on ECM and insta-blapping like it's sitting on top of you.

Ok with hangars, my measurements came from piloting underskilled Chimera. You can have extra fighters, though the point is not as clear since someone has killed previous ones if you need those (assuming full hangar you can't unload a tube), and nothing is stopping them from killing it again.

And stop already. You're disgracing yourself and losing credibility with every post. You have no idea about carriers, dreads, or flying ECM boats or using ECM in general. It's clear you're NOT QUALIFIED for this discussion. I'm educating you at my own good will, but since you're not making any progress, my patience is running out. Go back to hisec thread you came from.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#197 - 2017-03-04 03:31:49 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:



  1. The problem is your assumption that my however greatly supported carrier should be absolutely useless against a single griffin, and countered by anything with a web. About fleets, I agree, carriers should not come out on top against fleets of comparable cost, skill and preparation. However, I believe there is an intent for them to be able to come out on top of people who try to headbutt them with your level of fighter mechanic knowledge and then cry a 4bil carrier dares to apply damage to their supposed-to-be-invincible pvp shitfit 10mil cruiser of doom. Right now you're allowed to completely overpower a 4bil capital ship by means of astonishing web/TP/ECM fitting skill, regardless of how the carrier is fit. This is not right.

  2. Learn to read. I was in a fleet with all the meaningful support. Could it keep my fighters alive any longer, considering shield transfer doesn't work on them? No. Carriers get defanged regardless of any support they have. By a single web. Or TP. Or rendered useless by ECM.

  3. Whether way of pulling them back you prefer, they will be moving straight, and directly away from whatever they were engaging. You can bounce them from something outside web range, but can't make their trajectory any less straight to that point either.

  4. Don't get me started with all-V on capital ships. I'd bet 95% of pilots do not have those, as it is a tremendous time sink for no benefit other than stuffing yourself with more killmails for the enemy who came with anything better than a yolo headbutt fleet.


1. HA, Wow you're ignorant of how EVE works. "But muhh 4b carrier should kill everything!!!111". And you want to go around calling people dumb.. and making personal attacks. All the while hiding behind an alt. Lemme guess, your main has carrier losses that go along with your cry baby fest agenda and attacking anyone who doesn't agree with your whining? Can't find any KB records on the character you're posting from. So either, its an alt to hide your main, so you make personal attacks and play an agenda that no one can look information up on, or you are actually a clueless null bear who's just crying cause his isk ticks are going to get hurt by this.

Let me tell you about a ship, its a big a ship with big guns, used to roam space in relative freedom, then everything started getting faster, buffed and smaller ships got lots of the same abilities. Smaller ships were able to get under this larger, much more expensive ships guns and completely disable it. A well equipped gang could incapacitate this ship and take very little damage in return. The ship cost 200x as much as the much smaller ships that could make it a glorified paper weight.

What ship might that be you ask? The battleship, which outside of pirate battleships has fallen into obscurity due to carrier proliferation, HICs, HAW dreads and swarms of small ships.

So your whole idea that your 4B isk carrier should kill an entire gang just because its bigger and costs more is wrong on every level. It is right, it is how EVE is balanced, HTFU.

4. I'd bet you you're just pulling numbers out of your ass to fit your agenda. I am certain most pilots in long standing null blobs who sit in Super's or enjoy tossing around cap's have their favorites capital's to 5. I'm at this moment training Cal dread to 5. Not to mention all the nullbears who want maximum ticks with nothing else to train, i'm sure plenty of them have capital's to 5.
AgentMaster
Heralds of Darkness
White Sky.
#198 - 2017-03-04 05:17:54 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hi m8s,

In March, we're releasing a number of balance tweaks and we would love your feedback.

FIGHTERS
We'd like to increase the potential counter-play options vs fighters. We're going to do this by increasing their signature radius which makes them a little easier to hit. ...


Why?! Whu need this? Whu is that little sh....? He know how much cost a T2 fighter?
Most of answers in that feedback was NO - DO NOT CHANGE FIGTERS SIGNATURE! Do you agree or will do whatever you have decided, despite the desire of the people?

Blessed is the man who has nothing to say and remain silent yet!!

Cade Windstalker
#199 - 2017-03-04 06:28:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Orca Platypus wrote:
Thanks for confirming you have no idea how to fly an ECM ship, and have zero experience flying against one. Logi on ECM ships, what a joke, you're literally a clown. Okay, hisec clown education time. With ECM ships, you don't have to stay within lock range for longer than you have to. You go on a perch. Then you choose the best way to come down, so you are at optimal. And you align back to your perch, or another one if you're too close. Then you attempt a jam, ready to warp out to your perch whenever you're feeling targeted. You don't have to be on grid the whole time, jams last 20 second. And ffs, you're ECM, you don't broadcast for reps unless logi is free, your defense are your perches, not your tank.

Also confirming you've no idea on fighter mechanics either. There is a delay on fighters damage dealing ability - they have scan res and they lock targets before dealing damage to them just like a player ship would. They can be jammed and they can be damped. And if you remember there's also a burst jammer that can be effectively wielded on non-ecm ships...

Finally you're talking your guts out confirming you've no experience on the matter and all you know is based on someone's bragging. There is no skill element involved with webs. They hit your fighters, fighters are dead. It's as easy as fitting webs. Then you are telling me that my support fleet is bad because it has to remove all webbers before carriers are allowed to finally do something without being insta-defanged? You sound like a delusional maggot.

So you're suggesting carriers should be parked within enemy dreads optimal? Daaaaaaaaaaaaam son, you're dopey. Your only excuse is that there are no dreads on jita undock, so you only heard about them and never had to deal with them. Carrier within a few dreads optimal is asking to get alpha'd. Even FAX reps are not instant and not 50k-100k hp that a dread can shave off in a single volley.

No, you can't insta-nuke griffin or blackbird off the field with freshly launched fighters. You have 40+ kilometers to cover before that. Either slowboat and you're jammed before you reach your destination, or fire mwd, blow up your fighters sigs, get them instalocked and still jammed. Where do you think that ECM boat is? Go back to eve uni and ask them to teach you the basics of flying ECM, you obviously missed that class with all the nonsense about reps on ECM and insta-blapping like it's sitting on top of you.

Ok with hangars, my measurements came from piloting underskilled Chimera. You can have extra fighters, though the point is not as clear since someone has killed previous ones if you need those (assuming full hangar you can't unload a tube), and nothing is stopping them from killing it again.


Oh man and you're calling me the High Sec player... rule one of Null, assume bubbles. Even if you didn't bring them someone probably brought a Dictor or a HIC to the party, especially with Carriers on field, so perches are right out. That basically only works in Low and High Sec because in Null good pilots and groups use bubbles for range control, and if you so much as warp towards a bubble you get sucked into it. This only works if you have bookmarks setup well in advance, not if you're dropping someone offensively. This honestly sounds like something you read somewhere, not something you've ever actually tried to implement, and certainly not in a smaller gang drop.

Yup, Fighters do have a lock time, and even if you lock them as fast as physically possible in a stock Griffin and *even with the sig changes* they still get to shoot you once because they get a free tick of lock time before you can try to lock them and their scan res is 800, which means they lock you a tick after you lock them. Throw in the fact that you can't easily jam all three squads in the same tick and you're probably gonna die without logi help.

And yes, Logi will generally not prioritize ECM broadcasts, which makes it even easier to remove them from grid with a competent support fleet.

The idea that webs are on grid and your fighters just die is just... what? Never mind lock times in a big fight someone still has to prioritize your Fighters over other targets, which means those other targets get to play, and this just more or less stops working well with more than 1 or 2 Carriers on grid, never mind a Fleet Fight. At that point it's just Smart Bombs all the way and no one even bothers trying to actually lock fighters except maybe other Carriers with a superiority setup.

As for dreads, nope I'm saying in a small fight you should be up close, in a large one be positioned wherever is good because no one is gonna be locking and popping Fighters individually. Now stop moving the goal posts around by talking about one fight scenario and then jumping as soon as your argument gets refuted for that scenario.

Your measurements are still bad. Those numbers were raw hanger, nothing stored in tubes, and the Chimera only needs Fighter Hangar Management to 3 to fit 7 full squadrons of Light Fighters, which is slightly more than a 1 day train from 0. This also says you're cherry picking rather than actually trying to present accurate information.

At this point you just sound ineffectually mad and you're doing a terrible job of putting together a coherent argument here.
Axhind
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#200 - 2017-03-04 10:21:14 UTC
Mr Floydy wrote:
Doctor Tower wrote:
please also nerf networked sensor array for 50% scan resolution, to make BS greate again


I'd more than happily have the Network Sensor array significantly changed. I do feel it's a flawed module in the scheme of things. Whilst I can understand it was added to make anti-fighter carriers viable the net result is that a carrier can often lock and heavily damage a lot of targets before they can do much about it.



Well, if you guys ever undocked anything other than interceptors and dictors you might be able to kill them just like everyone else, easily.

I'm looking forward to this nerf. I was already getting very worried about actually having interactive ratting and having to pay attention. Engaging game play is one thing we definitely don't want in EVE. Nerf everything until everyone ends up doing L4s in assault frigates. No fun allowed in EVE!