open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Massive Supercarrier nerf intentional?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 ... : last (52)

Author Topic

Soleil Fournier
StarFleet Enterprises
Systematic-Chaos
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:01:00 - [991]
 

Edited by: Soleil Fournier on 13/11/2009 20:16:44
Originally by: Impolite Andevil
First, why did you guys feel the need to change the supercap modifications introduced by Abathur and extensively tested to near universal approval? I have yet to see any kind of reason given for why these well thought-out, balanced, and well-recieved changes were axed in the first place. Please at least give us your logic on that before continuing to try to change the ships. It's possible that there was some underlying issue that everyone involved with testing Abathur's proposal missed, but I rather doubt it. If there is one, tell us.

Second, I applaud the fact that you are willing to look at the feedback and try to work out a compromise. I especially applaud the commitment to reimburse owners for the incredible loss they are taking - although you really need to include BPO owners too. However, the changes you propose do little to solve the real problems. For a dedicated anti-cap ship, we still have the fact that their primary weapons system doesn't hit caps for anywhere near full damage due to the ridiculous explosion radius. That's especially horrible given that sieged dreads, arguably the most important target for the supercarrier, are immune to target painters, the one remedy for targets with low signature radii. Futhermore, introducing docking while at the same time lowering the build costs so dramatically means that these will proliferate like mad, and at the same time makes the station-game issue you just nerfed the Moros to solve far, far worse with this ship!

The solution is fairly straightforward. Return the MS and Titans to the state proposed by Abathur and approved by the testers on Sisi. Don't try to fix what isn't broken. Add a new model for a true supercap that is a size that makes sense (1/2 the size of a titan or so). Next, add a new carrier class that is exactly what you propose above (2 fighters per level, dockable, 5-6 bil build cost, can use fighter-bombers) but take the EHP way down from what the supercarrier has and remove EW immunity. Use the current MS models for these ships.

If the changes you propose are left in place, I will be buying at least one supercarrier, and probably 2. That price point is such that I can afford a couple of them by selling some of my faction ships and items, selling my carriers (no need for them anymore), possibly selling my dreads, and combining that with what I have now. My corp could probably have 5-6 members in a supercarrier by the end of 2010 without too much trouble - and we are a SMALL corp. That will mean that we can run around with our very own little RR supercap blob that will be damn near impossible to kill without the dread resources of a major alliance. And if we can do it, so can LOTS of other little corps and all big corps. I fully expect to see these become nearly as common as dreads with the proposed changes.


/support. The abathur changes were balanced and everyone seemed to be in consensus that he had it right (although I had a few issues such as lack of a gang bonus to encentivize group play everything else was perfect)

I do applaud that you listened to the feedback on this current change and hope that you restore the build cost to TQ levels and keep the docking, but limited to upgradable outposts.

Dratic
Muppet Ninja's
Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:02:00 - [992]
 

Don't let them dock and keep their original cost.
Slap in a drone + fighter damage/ bonus modifier to get them up to +3 per level damage/bonus. +2 fighter bombers is more than enough.
Hopefully this should address the number of drones issue.

Making them dock will only obsolete carriers for end game combat given enough time.

After that make a new model for the intermediate carrier you pretty much have tried to create the change after all that play testing.


Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:03:00 - [993]
 

Question

If Super carrier is to carrier what destroyer is to frig, how would you change super-carriers from what they are now?


Also, shouldn't you be looking to double dread dps with all things considered?

DarkAngel
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:04:00 - [994]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh


  • Can deploy 2 additional Fighter or Drone per level

  • Can dock at stations





I hope you mean by docking, that you will be able to dock them at a POS??? Isn't this available already?? Forgive my noobness on this subject, but it sounds the most logical.. Embarassed

Other than that minor clarification, i say the pre nerfed version that was on sisi for us to play with was a good ship to fly. I also agree with missiles not doing 100% damage to capitals needing to be fixed.

That is all.

DA

John Zorg
Caldari
The Damned Legion
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:04:00 - [995]
 

Lets be positive here. CCP Nozh, what happens to the DPS of the other 5 drones that I can no longer launch? I am also tired of all the hate talk here. I think this is due to these discussions being very one sided, players only talking. Maybe the devs can get a litle more involved and work with the community?

I liked the idea of not being able to dock and the ship being so expensive, this means it still has a level of honour and status. Why drop the price of the "Super carrier"?

We looking at proper Motherships soon?

Uzume Ame
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:08:00 - [996]
 

Originally by: Impolite Andevil
First, why did you guys feel the need to change the supercap modifications introduced by Abathur and extensively tested to near universal approval? I have yet to see any kind of reason given for why these well thought-out, balanced, and well-recieved changes were axed in the first place. Please at least give us your logic on that before continuing to try to change the ships. It's possible that there was some underlying issue that everyone involved with testing Abathur's proposal missed, but I rather doubt it. If there is one, tell us.

Second, I applaud the fact that you are willing to look at the feedback and try to work out a compromise. I especially applaud the commitment to reimburse owners for the incredible loss they are taking - although you really need to include BPO owners too. However, the changes you propose do little to solve the real problems. For a dedicated anti-cap ship, we still have the fact that their primary weapons system doesn't hit caps for anywhere near full damage due to the ridiculous explosion radius. That's especially horrible given that sieged dreads, arguably the most important target for the supercarrier, are immune to target painters, the one remedy for targets with low signature radii. Futhermore, introducing docking while at the same time lowering the build costs so dramatically means that these will proliferate like mad, and at the same time makes the station-game issue you just nerfed the Moros to solve far, far worse with this ship!

The solution is fairly straightforward. Return the MS and Titans to the state proposed by Abathur and approved by the testers on Sisi. Don't try to fix what isn't broken. Add a new model for a true supercap that is a size that makes sense (1/2 the size of a titan or so). Next, add a new carrier class that is exactly what you propose above (2 fighters per level, dockable, 5-6 bil build cost, can use fighter-bombers) but take the EHP way down from what the supercarrier has and remove EW immunity. Use the current MS models for these ships.

If the changes you propose are left in place, I will be buying at least one supercarrier, and probably 2. That price point is such that I can afford a couple of them by selling some of my faction ships and items, selling my carriers (no need for them anymore), possibly selling my dreads, and combining that with what I have now. My corp could probably have 5-6 members in a supercarrier by the end of 2010 without too much trouble - and we are a SMALL corp. That will mean that we can run around with our very own little RR supercap blob that will be damn near impossible to kill without the dread resources of a major alliance. And if we can do it, so can LOTS of other little corps and all big corps. I fully expect to see these become nearly as common as dreads with the proposed changes.


A very reasonable post. PLEASE, listen.

fairimear
Gallente
The Sp00Ks
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:10:00 - [997]
 

Originally by: Impolite Andevil
First, why did you guys feel the need to change the supercap modifications introduced by Abathur and extensively tested to near universal approval? I have yet to see any kind of reason given for why these well thought-out, balanced, and well-recieved changes were axed in the first place. Please at least give us your logic on that before continuing to try to change the ships. It's possible that there was some underlying issue that everyone involved with testing Abathur's proposal missed, but I rather doubt it. If there is one, tell us.

Second, I applaud the fact that you are willing to look at the feedback and try to work out a compromise. I especially applaud the commitment to reimburse owners for the incredible loss they are taking - although you really need to include BPO owners too. However, the changes you propose do little to solve the real problems. For a dedicated anti-cap ship, we still have the fact that their primary weapons system doesn't hit caps for anywhere near full damage due to the ridiculous explosion radius. That's especially horrible given that sieged dreads, arguably the most important target for the supercarrier, are immune to target painters, the one remedy for targets with low signature radii. Futhermore, introducing docking while at the same time lowering the build costs so dramatically means that these will proliferate like mad, and at the same time makes the station-game issue you just nerfed the Moros to solve far, far worse with this ship!

The solution is fairly straightforward. Return the MS and Titans to the state proposed by Abathur and approved by the testers on Sisi. Don't try to fix what isn't broken. Add a new model for a true supercap that is a size that makes sense (1/2 the size of a titan or so). Next, add a new carrier class that is exactly what you propose above (2 fighters per level, dockable, 5-6 bil build cost, can use fighter-bombers) but take the EHP way down from what the supercarrier has and remove EW immunity. Use the current MS models for these ships.

If the changes you propose are left in place, I will be buying at least one supercarrier, and probably 2. That price point is such that I can afford a couple of them by selling some of my faction ships and items, selling my carriers (no need for them anymore), possibly selling my dreads, and combining that with what I have now. My corp could probably have 5-6 members in a supercarrier by the end of 2010 without too much trouble - and we are a SMALL corp. That will mean that we can run around with our very own little RR supercap blob that will be damn near impossible to kill without the dread resources of a major alliance. And if we can do it, so can LOTS of other little corps and all big corps. I fully expect to see these become nearly as common as dreads with the proposed changes.


this is all fine and good but there is no way a new ship will be modeled and implimented within 3 weeks.
wnt happen.

it would have to be reverting back to abathur's stats then a scale up of current model or swap for new model later on motherships.

then for the 6bill carriers either a new model or a reskin t2 carrier.




So to sum up.. NO to either of the current nerfs on super carriers. back to Abather's version.
at later date introduce 6bill t2/strik carrier with the suggested stats but less ehp.
Possible change in scale of the super carrier and or new model for either.

Fogy
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:10:00 - [998]
 

Originally by: Agmar
Originally by: The Mittani
Seriouspost: someone make us some "Free Abathur" sigs.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Nozh, You are uniting ALL of 0.0 against you!
Goons, PL, NC and IT, AAA, Atlas quoting AND AGREEING with each other! WHAT THE **** ARE YOU DOING!?!? LOL
Sworn enemies, for several years now.

starliight
Reliables Inc
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:11:00 - [999]
 

This is what ccp wants, they want to see super carriers hit the field and they want to see them in bulk, thats why they are making these changes so for everyone out their saying their are going to be blobs of them you are telling ccp exactly what they want to hear.

Now its painfull obvious that their is going to be some type of new capital ship released in the future, as to what it is i have no clue but you cant go from 10B super carrier that can dock to 60B titan that is 5x bigger than anything ingame and cannot dock.

Basically what we have is a t2 carrier of sorts now, with the ability to launch 5 extra drones and use fighter bombers with a much bigger tank.

I do agree however that this ship is a bit to powerfull to play station games but do also agree that at the new price point it should be allowed to dock. so a simple solution to the issue is after a super carrier has engaged in any time of agression to lock their dock timer for at least an hour. this fixes the station hugging issue and also allows docking right for inceased versatility.

Graalum
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:12:00 - [1000]
 

Originally by: Le Skunk
Edited by: Le Skunk on 13/11/2009 19:37:48
Take one rebalance. Add 300 whining MOM pilots. Result:

1) HP boosted, ewar immune, unkillable Dock/Undock MOMs.....
2) Reimbursement president set.


SKUNK




i don't think that this is the solution that anyone had in mind

Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:13:00 - [1001]
 

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/Droewa/feemomsig.jpg

FREE ABATHUR

Image changed to URL. Zymurgist

skye orionis
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:14:00 - [1002]
 

I'm secretly hoping that this mom => supercarrier thing is just a ruse to hide that fact that they're actually releasing T2 Carriers and that a couple of days before Dominion's release we'll see changes to sisi with mom's restored to undockable monsters while we'll be able to run invention jobs against carrier blueprints.

That would be one way for CCP to turn this from epic fail to epic win.

Avoida
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:14:00 - [1003]
 

Now I'm really jealous of all the pilots who won motherships in Chribba's lotteries. Not only did they get a mom for as little as 10M isk, they will now be handed several billion more ISK just because they have that MS. Y'all just made out like bandits.

Agmar
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:15:00 - [1004]
 

Originally by: Manfred Sideous
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/Droewa/feemomsig.jpg

FREE ABATHUR

Image changed to URL. Zymurgist
too serious looking

H Zebra
Zebra Corp
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:16:00 - [1005]
 

nice work ccp. at least most peopel have forgotten about the god awfal sov changes

Merces Mercedis
Minmatar
Lunitic Fringe
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:16:00 - [1006]
 

CCP Nozh,
I have a simple question. How will a corp/allinace ever be able to take any 0.0 space after the newest perposed changes? what I mean is now we will have ships that can sit out side of a station happly repping it when there is nothing in Eve that can do anything about it. Oh and for some reason one of these new cap carriers do take to much damage while repping the station it can just happly dock.

My my I can sure see how that will open up 0.0 to new players. Way to go m8.

Please please let someone who plays Eve make changes to ships that can totaly change the way it is played as we can all tell you have never played a moment of Eve.

RoCkEt X
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:17:00 - [1007]
 

Originally by: Impolite Andevil
First, why did you guys feel the need to change the supercap modifications introduced by Abathur and extensively tested to near universal approval? I have yet to see any kind of reason given for why these well thought-out, balanced, and well-recieved changes were axed in the first place. Please at least give us your logic on that before continuing to try to change the ships. It's possible that there was some underlying issue that everyone involved with testing Abathur's proposal missed, but I rather doubt it. If there is one, tell us.

Second, I applaud the fact that you are willing to look at the feedback and try to work out a compromise. I especially applaud the commitment to reimburse owners for the incredible loss they are taking - although you really need to include BPO owners too. However, the changes you propose do little to solve the real problems. For a dedicated anti-cap ship, we still have the fact that their primary weapons system doesn't hit caps for anywhere near full damage due to the ridiculous explosion radius. That's especially horrible given that sieged dreads, arguably the most important target for the supercarrier, are immune to target painters, the one remedy for targets with low signature radii. Futhermore, introducing docking while at the same time lowering the build costs so dramatically means that these will proliferate like mad, and at the same time makes the station-game issue you just nerfed the Moros to solve far, far worse with this ship!

The solution is fairly straightforward. Return the MS and Titans to the state proposed by Abathur and approved by the testers on Sisi. Don't try to fix what isn't broken. Add a new model for a true supercap that is a size that makes sense (1/2 the size of a titan or so). Next, add a new carrier class that is exactly what you propose above (2 fighters per level, dockable, 5-6 bil build cost, can use fighter-bombers) but take the EHP way down from what the supercarrier has and remove EW immunity. Use the current MS models for these ships.

If the changes you propose are left in place, I will be buying at least one supercarrier, and probably 2. That price point is such that I can afford a couple of them by selling some of my faction ships and items, selling my carriers (no need for them anymore), possibly selling my dreads, and combining that with what I have now. My corp could probably have 5-6 members in a supercarrier by the end of 2010 without too much trouble - and we are a SMALL corp. That will mean that we can run around with our very own little RR supercap blob that will be damn near impossible to kill without the dread resources of a major alliance. And if we can do it, so can LOTS of other little corps and all big corps. I fully expect to see these become nearly as common as dreads with the proposed changes.


Excellent post right there.

Jack Gates
Gallente
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:18:00 - [1008]
 

Edited by: Jack Gates on 13/11/2009 20:18:57
ccp nozh has never played eve online itt

Dred Tather
Caldari
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:18:00 - [1009]
 

Originally by: Fogy
Originally by: Agmar
Originally by: The Mittani
Seriouspost: someone make us some "Free Abathur" sigs.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Nozh, You are uniting ALL of 0.0 against you!
Goons, PL, NC and IT, AAA, Atlas quoting AND AGREEING with each other! WHAT THE **** ARE YOU DOING!?!? LOL
Sworn enemies, for several years now.


this too,

did I mention the whole thing about your ****ing up the (tried and tested) software development model? this close to launch you shouldn't be looking at the implementation phase, not a drastic redesign (in the design phase). Sure we all moaned about sov for so long, but the basic mechanic has been down for about the last three months since fanfest. The design got iterated and refined, implemented and been through a (albiet small) testing period. The proposed changes this close to launch, before even getting them implemented or even tested is crazy. Abathur's changes have been on the table for as long as if not longer than the sovereignty mechanics, and got refined and perfected using a tried and tested development method.

Don't think you can re-write the software engineering manual just because you want something "cool" to be in "your game". This has been proven to be stupid on many well documented occasions. Software that follows the more accepted development models (Even AGILE methods) end up being robust and solid. Major changes not adhering to a "feature freeze" is bonkers.

to reiterate, Free CCP Abathur.

Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:19:00 - [1010]
 

Someone PMed this to me:

http://i33.tinypic.com/ta1rte.jpg

For anyone who doesn't understand what the above image means, tracking on dreads got hugely nerfed.

It effectively means that pulse will now track as bad as beams, ACs as bad as arties, blasters as bad as rails. And don't even think about how this affects long-range guns. They won't be able to hit a moving capital even at moderate ranges now.

All Capital guns took a 75% hit to tracking.

Is this CCP Nozh doing too?

Image changed to URL. Zymurgist

Karlemgne
Tides Of War
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:19:00 - [1011]
 

Originally by: Darknesss
CCP continue to astonish me at how out of touch they are with the common player.




The common player? Seriously? The common player doesn't give two ****s about changes to supercarriers. The common player has never, nor will they ever fly one. They might encounter these ships in combat once or twice, ever.

No, its YOU LOT who is totally out of touch with the "common player.?

Kate Pole
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:20:00 - [1012]
 

Docking=bad

Why not just give us 20 F/FBs and no docking and call it even?

HP buff= nice
Jump Range increase= nice

Any word on Slaves? There is a rumor on nerfing them when it comes to SC

Merces Mercedis
Minmatar
Lunitic Fringe
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:22:00 - [1013]
 

Originally by: Karlemgne
Originally by: Darknesss
CCP continue to astonish me at how out of touch they are with the common player.




The common player? Seriously? The common player doesn't give two ****s about changes to supercarriers. The common player has never, nor will they ever fly one. They might encounter these ships in combat once or twice, ever.

No, its YOU LOT who is totally out of touch with the "common player.?


You my friend have no clue as to how much this will effect the common players.

Darius JOHNSON
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:22:00 - [1014]
 

Originally by: Fogy
Originally by: Agmar
Originally by: The Mittani
Seriouspost: someone make us some "Free Abathur" sigs.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Nozh, You are uniting ALL of 0.0 against you!
Goons, PL, NC and IT, AAA, Atlas quoting AND AGREEING with each other! WHAT THE **** ARE YOU DOING!?!? LOL
Sworn enemies, for several years now.


To be fair AAA is a newish enemy.

Sinc
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:23:00 - [1015]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh


Furthermore we're looking into solutions to reimburse current mothership pilots for the drop in construction cost.

That's all for now.

-Nozh





Does this also mean reimbushment for those who have one in production ?

Jack Gates
Gallente
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:23:00 - [1016]
 

Originally by: Fogy
Originally by: Agmar
Originally by: The Mittani
Seriouspost: someone make us some "Free Abathur" sigs.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Nozh, You are uniting ALL of 0.0 against you!
Goons, PL, NC and IT, AAA, Atlas quoting AND AGREEING with each other! WHAT THE **** ARE YOU DOING!?!? LOL
Sworn enemies, for several years now.


Just because we're opponents in a video game doesn't change the fact that you're right and nozh apparently thinks that even if he doesn't understand something, he still ought to try messing with it so that it at least looks like he's doing his job.

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:24:00 - [1017]
 

Originally by: Pallidum Treponema

Is this CCP Nozh doing too?

See: no longer getting a a tracking penalty whilst in seige.

Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:24:00 - [1018]
 

Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
Originally by: Fogy
Originally by: Agmar
Originally by: The Mittani
Seriouspost: someone make us some "Free Abathur" sigs.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Nozh, You are uniting ALL of 0.0 against you!
Goons, PL, NC and IT, AAA, Atlas quoting AND AGREEING with each other! WHAT THE **** ARE YOU DOING!?!? LOL
Sworn enemies, for several years now.


To be fair AAA is a newish enemy.


To be even fairer goons are pcool but someone has to be the badguy

Bigpimping
Pimp Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:28:00 - [1019]
 

Edited by: Bigpimping on 13/11/2009 20:28:56
yeah next thing we know, Nozh will get called a jackass by Obama

Babel
Utopian Research I.E.L.
Hedonistic Imperative
Posted - 2009.11.13 20:30:00 - [1020]
 

Presuming the 'docking everywhere' gonna be knocked back .. here's an idea:

'Sovereign MoMpool Outpost Upgrade' - Yes you can 'dock yr supercap' at an outpost with this sexy new hypothetical upgrade integrated into the OP, the ship is invulnerable while yr 'docked' [you appear in station as a pod and ship is outside for all to see] whether yr online or not .. unless ----

--- the outpost changes hands :P

Then the new owners have the 'parked' supercaps all to themselves.

Essentially - Yes, you can dock your supercap [at an outpost owned by your corp] BUT there is always the risk that OP will change hands and someone else gets yr big shiney toy .....


Pages: first : previous : ... 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 ... : last (52)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only