These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Incoming titan adjustments

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#421 - 2012-03-13 18:26:02 UTC
Organa wrote:
CCP if you havnt gathered it by now from this thread yes titans have issues, but so does the game as a whole. What you are seeing is that older players do like there investments made usless and newer players want to get around older players happens in every game. The question is do you want to change the only effective check on shear numbers and make this game only about who brings more. Bc atm it dosnt really matter what you bring subcap wise as long as you bring more than the other guy. so if you are significantly outnumbered and you want to contest the field your options are bombers and supercaps. bombers either need to be buffed along with this patch or some other mechanics to nerf shear numbers or we will be back to the dark years of eve where it only mattered how many you brought not what they where in or how you used them.

the reason you see so many goon and co posting yea about this patch is you are removing the only effective counter to there doctrine with this patch. which is why these changes in isolation will have a rather detrimental effect on older players.

Cuz PL never wiped out a 200 man welpfleet with 100 tengus?

There are plenty of people out there who can and will beat 2x their own numbers by playing smart and knowing what their enemies fly, and how their doctrines work.

Not to give away any secrets, but the true linchpin of alphafleet is not the maelstrom, or the 1400mm arty, so its pretty easy to neuter if you understand game mechanics.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Endeavour Starfleet
#422 - 2012-03-13 18:26:45 UTC
Organa wrote:
CCP if you havnt gathered it by now from this thread yes titans have issues, but so does the game as a whole. What you are seeing is that older players do like there investments made usless and newer players want to get around older players happens in every game. The question is do you want to change the only effective check on shear numbers and make this game only about who brings more. Bc atm it dosnt really matter what you bring subcap wise as long as you bring more than the other guy. so if you are significantly outnumbered and you want to contest the field your options are bombers and supercaps. bombers either need to be buffed along with this patch or some other mechanics to nerf shear numbers or we will be back to the dark years of eve where it only mattered how many you brought not what they where in or how you used them.

the reason you see so many goon and co posting yea about this patch is you are removing the only effective counter to there doctrine with this patch. which is why these changes in isolation will have a rather detrimental effect on older players.


Sorry but no. A few players should not be able to dominate a field. especially now that we have Tidi.
Mathicluanna
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#423 - 2012-03-13 18:27:09 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
how close to 1000 dudes you can get in fleet.


Go ahead and try this, let me know how it goes.
Vellamo Lyr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#424 - 2012-03-13 18:27:17 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
the general design intent of EVE is that you get diminishing returns for progressively higher investments.


We always turn away the 3rd and 4th fleet of drakes because of diminishing returns.

LMAO.
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#425 - 2012-03-13 18:28:21 UTC  |  Edited by: unimatrix0030
This is more a dread nerf then a titan nerf.
Dreads become useless more then titans are nerfed.
So no more dreads to kill when we cach em pve'ing , because they won't be used in pve because they won't be able to kill pve batleships... .
So basicly we will only see caps used for logistics and structure shooting?

No local in null sec would fix everything!
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#426 - 2012-03-13 18:28:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Promiscuous Female
Grath Telkin wrote:
So is this CCP's signal that they're ready to admit that numbers are thing that matters now in a fight?


I mean, historically, you've gone out of your way to nerf any and everything that gives a smaller force any form of an advantage over the years, so can we get you to make the actual statement that the way to win in EVE is to attract numbers, doesn't matter if they can play or not, if they're 'good' at eve or not, just so long as they have a LOT of dudes.



Second, you're saying that isk shouldn't matter, and then making a balance pass that assumes every titan in the game has 30 billion isk in sensor bossters on their titans. Thats a hypocritical statement in the extreme sense of the word. Taking 40 seconds to lock a capital ship is simply ********, 15 seconds to lock another titan.


Really, 15 seconds to lock another titan?


But hey, none of that matters, the only thing that really matters is how close to 1000 dudes you can get in fleet.

yeah i know, where was the pl csm reps when this was going on

oh yeah, uaxdeath was busy getting him so drunk that he slept through the supercap panel

whoops~
Win Sui
State War Academy
Caldari State
#427 - 2012-03-13 18:28:33 UTC
Pallidum Treponema wrote:
Bashe Zor wrote:
Anyone who thinks titans don't need a balancing pass has never had his pod headshotted by one, after his moving BC was already destroyed by one. Think it's only drakes? Think again. I have lossmails in canes with titans on top as well.


While supercaps do need a balancing pass, specifically regarding proper counters to supercaps, I have to say this: Locking a pod takes me 28 seconds. If you still have a pod on the field after 28 seconds, you are probably not even moving, so you have zero transversal. Zero transversal means that any turret ship will kill you. Stop failing at EVE.

If your moving BC is popped by titans, you're either in a drake (high signature, guess what!) and possibly MWDing (EVEN HIGHER signature!). If you are moving with low transversal, which automatically happens if you orbit an anchor, or if you MWD, you will get killed by titans.

Learn how to fly your ship rather than blindly relying on FCs that also cannot fly their ships. Back when I started playing, all good PVPers knew about how to maximize their transversal so as not to become targets of much larger ships.


When there's 75+ titans on field your transversal is going to be near 0 to some of them no matter how good a pilot you are, which you know. You cannot keep transversal up against every titan, and 1 shot is all it takes.

So, yeah.
Ra Death
Samsara Exploration and Trade
#428 - 2012-03-13 18:28:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Ra Death
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Dreads are mainly antistructure, with a bit of anti-cap. Carriers still do pretty decent damage against subcaps AFAIK. Supers can switch between anti-cap and anti-subcap depending on their choice of fighter drone. Titans are pure anti-cap.

With regard to the cost and effort of getting into a super, the general design intent of EVE is that you get diminishing returns for progressively higher investments. If you look at module progression, from T1 up to high officer, you'll see that how it generally pans out is that you get a roughly linear increase in power for a roughly exponential increase in cost. Similarly with ships, a T1 cruiser is not equivalent to ten T1 frigates, and a T1 battleship is not equivalent to twenty T1 cruisers. This makes stepping into a larger more powerful ship an interesting cost-benefit decision rather than an obvious no-brainer. Supercaps should continue this trend.


Let me touch on a few points here.

Dreads are mainly antistructure. Yes, they certainly are. The change to the tracking in siege will be a welcomed change as they can actually defend themselves.

Carriers can do decent damage but they are very exposed and can only be used in certain scenarios. With the fleets that are fielded these days, you can almost get 1 volleyed. Fighters are terrible to use in fleet combat, once they are released the enemy targets them insanely quickly and if the enemy fleet has a decent logistics fleet, you are not killing anything as the fighters are so slow to move and vulnerable while in light (massive sig due to mwd). Carrier dps is therefore mainly normal drones in fleet combat. (I am assuming we are talking fleet combat scenarios).

The fighter argument carries over to supercarrier. Any supercarrier with a brain has a 20/15 or 20/10 distribution of FB vs. Fighter and your fighters move so slow and become so big that if you attempt to take on subcap fleets, you need a massive coordination of focused fire and for the enemy to be within close proximity to kill something. Even then, going up against the sizes of subcap fleets that exist in EVE currently, those fighters will be gone rapidly and you will at max get 10 targets or so (assuming a very large supercapital fleet where everyone functions together perfectly).

Your entire diminishing returns argument on supercapitals doesn't really work because flying at that level makes the game incredibly complex. The big difference between your 10x argument is that with the current changes, the titan won't even be able to kill a single hictor that plays his cards right, not even mentioning a dictor (if they keep up transversal). At least the cruiser can take down a frig or two when he goes down against their 8-9 friends. You are leaving supercapitals in the state where they are defenseless against enemy fleets, in a state where they cannot even deal with tackle.

But I fundamentally agree that you should not be able to supercapitals to be a default 'I win' button, but leaving them with no role other than killing other capitals is what is the result of the current changes. The supercarriers (as I explained above) have already been reduced to hotdropping tools and structure grinding machines. With this nerf, you are effectively removing titans from normal combat because they are only worth using against other capitals or against supercarriers. The end-ships of EVE become part of a little game in EVE... "watch out for anyone deploying capitals and destroy them if they do, unless they have a sizeable subcap fleet, because we are defenseless against it". Supercapitals without the ability to deal with subcaps means that subcap fights alone will dictate who wins the fight, because the supercapitals cannot make a difference unless you are shooting at that POS over there. At least admit that you can see this is broken.

The proposed changes here could certainly be changed to make them more realistic and in line with REALITY in EVE.

- Tracking nerf remains as it is, 50% is decent and fair tbh. You can still track battleships and large shield extended battlecruisers that do dumb ****.
- Scan resolution of 5 is incredibly beyond the realm of reasonable. Push cut it 50% down to 20 or something and it is more realistic.
- Max 3 targets, interesting approach, maybe buff it up to 4. 3 targets is not a lot, 4 is more realistic and when you consider their use. Else it just doesn't fit with the entire class being "an awesome titan".
- Dread tracking boost in siege is awesome. Brings these bad boys into fun aspects again. Go for it.

If titans get nerfed to the extent proposed, you remove all incentive for doing something worthwhile with these supercapitals. They are just exactly that, 'super' capitals... and with the proposed changes, we'd have to switch around 'super' and apply it to the carrier and the dreadnought. The carrier is already much more versatile than the supercarrier, something that just doesn't make sense.

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my original post, I really hope you will listen to reason to this one.
JuGGeR
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#429 - 2012-03-13 18:29:42 UTC
i for one welcome blob-online and await the server nodes not being abel to handel the numbers and we back 2 square one and have to find another way to screw over players that invested in titans , bpos to build em , and ofc waisted sp into flying em ..

you offcially made 90% of all titans into stargates ...

Sentinel Eeex
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#430 - 2012-03-13 18:29:53 UTC
Organa wrote:
What you are seeing is that older players do like there investments made usless and newer players want to get around older players happens in every game.


No, problem is that 150 years of skill training time is required to eventually kill 4 years of skill training time.

But hey, ISK-wise they could be ahead, so it must be ok.
Sanders RUS
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#431 - 2012-03-13 18:30:05 UTC
Vellamo Lyr wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
the general design intent of EVE is that you get diminishing returns for progressively higher investments.


We always turn away the 3rd and 4th fleet of drakes because of diminishing returns.

LMAO.


Eventually you run out of racial slurs for fleet names, its more an issue with creativity than numbers man
Tolmar
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#432 - 2012-03-13 18:33:01 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tolmar wrote:
That is just all sorts of fail... if you do not know why read up on titans before posting please....
…and yet, none of what I said had anything in it that was specific to titans, so how about you go and read up on the tracking formula instead?


was in response to

Tippia wrote:
Vissor wrote:
Are you re.....d? why should i even try to lock frigate or cruiser after all of these changes? if there like 1% chance to hit cruiser?
Because he's infinipointing your titan buddy 30km away, where the range alleviates the slow tracking and brings that hit chance up to several tens of percents…


<---loves to point titans with Frigs!

Brief search turned up:
http://skilltrainingcomplete.com/questions/what-prevents-super-capitals-from-escaping
Wirox Crotikus
FinFleet
Northern Coalition.
#433 - 2012-03-13 18:33:53 UTC
First off, ill start by stating out this is a very bad fix/nerf whatever you wanna call it.
And, i have done multiple Titan trades, and just in the last couple of months this has just gone up alot.
Seeing that people have been switching from Supercarrier to a Ttian.

You are making a ship that cost atm. 50billion +/- 10-15billion useless.
There have always been counters for Titans and Supercarriers. The problem is not that the Titan can kill subcaps.
The problem is, that an alliance with little numbers but big supercap fleet, will ofc use the force they have.
And an alliance with loads of members, but little to non supercap force will use there own force, beeing numbers they can bring.

Everyone will use the force they have at disposable. But seeing that you are removing peoples force from them. You are litterly removing there defence/offence.
And alliance that can bring 1500 people vs. and alliance that can bring 300 people, whos is going to win?

Stating that the bigger an alliance are, the bigger the chance for survival an conquer of new space is.

Your basicly removing the fact that you stated a while back that, even the smallest alliance in eve will have fun. This fact has hearby been removed.

A friendly ev0ke guy, stated that Dreads can be used against Titans and Supercarriers.
1 Titan = 34 Dreads
1 Supercarrier = 9,5 Dreads

Those numbers, are the price of the minerals, and remember dreads are still easier to build, Subcaps are easier to build. All of this can kill supercapitals.

I do have a Titan myself, and ofc i knew a fix would come soon. But simply making the ship useless EVEN in cap fights is not really that great. The fact is this big that, you cant Hotdrop ANYTHING and Doomsday it before it is safe/warped away.
Simply the fact that it takes and INSANE amount of time to lock the actual ship...

I really hope CCP, will reconsider there ideas. And if they dont, that they will in a timly manner FIX the role for Titans.
Considering people have paid LARGE sums of isk for these ships. Both in training time and isk wise.

-Wirox

►►►Crotikus' Third Party Service◄◄◄

Join In-Game-Channel: "3rd party" or "The Crotikus Hub"
Meno Theaetetus
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#434 - 2012-03-13 18:34:47 UTC
Let's weigh this up in realistic terms that are actually relevant to CCP and the wider player base. Scaled down to an average 0.0 fleet.

PRE NERF

100 happy players in supers
1000 unhappy players in subcaps

customer satisfaction = 100/1100 = 9% happy

POST NERF

100 unhappy players in supers
1000 happy players in subcaps

customer satisfaction = 1000/1100 = 91% happy

Do things make a little more sense now?

If you think CCP are out to appease the minority at the expense of the majority you have a pretty messed up view of how to conduct a business.
Acwron
Meet The Fockers
#435 - 2012-03-13 18:35:09 UTC
Johan Krieger wrote:
Acwron wrote:
Guys,

It's easy to solve this problem : Open a new server for goons. Goonity. Stupidity. The name is up to ze mittani. Will be his server after all.


But TQ is already his server and we like it here.


Here's some more changes to balance this **** : Fleets can have no more than 2 members. Those 2 members are not allowed to be in the same system. No. Same constellation. Will counter goon fleets.
Taurus Aldebaran
Space - The Final Frontier
#436 - 2012-03-13 18:36:11 UTC
Dovinian wrote:
This is a very good change. And I have an Erebus.

Now that I'm more awake, I'm going to elaborate on this a bit.

While I would have liked to see CCP spend more time into an intelligent fix/solid counter this is going to have to do for now.

Yes, Titans are very expensive. This does not mean that they should be an instant win button and a hard counter to every fleet except Armor Hacs.

I also think that Titans are too easy to acquire. Mineral compression is a joke (I do a lot of it) and getting 65 freighter loads of minerals into 12 jump freighter trips (the necessary numbers to build a titan) with 100% lossless compression is broken.

Give Titans a new role, make them harder to build (fix/adjust mineral compression) and I'll be a happy boy.


BEEP BEEP Dovibus Best Bus

Dovi for CSM
Puristaako
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#437 - 2012-03-13 18:38:52 UTC
Best patch ever :bee: :bee: :bee:
Pheusia
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#438 - 2012-03-13 18:39:08 UTC
Wirox Crotikus wrote:

Considering people have paid LARGE sums of isk for these ships. Both in training time and isk wise.

-Wirox



A Vagabond costs as much as 40 Stabbers, therefore it ought to be 40 times more powerful than a Stabber, right?
Lelob
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#439 - 2012-03-13 18:39:18 UTC
Fa lC0n wrote:
They should have kept the old DD Twisted

1. tech nerf = even value of all R64 moon materials, so small alliance can fight each other over Goo aswell
2. blob nerf = make small gangs more attractive, make huge blobbin less attractive (like server perf atm)
3. bot nerf = realy, when r u guys gonna fix this

Top 3 on my list, i dont care about the titans. If u adress these 3 first, in time, titans will die anyways.


1. They tried this with sanctums. It turned out people weren't interested in fighting for space/assets when they had no incentive to do so. All that came out of this was a stagnant map.
2. They've tried this too with no discernible success. Only place this has worked is WH's and even so it's only been a limited success.
3. They have been killing bots. They're just undermanned, and quite frankly having bots in the drf, or as miners isn't such a bad thing. (Cheaper minerals > cheaper pvp > less risk aversive pvp) They need a different approach to killing bots, because as strange as it might seem, the only bots that really have a negative impact on the game are bots farming bounties.
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#440 - 2012-03-13 18:39:27 UTC
Please

 Though All Men Do Despise Us