open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Capital Ships In Dominion
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (62)

Author Topic

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2009.11.19 22:12:00 - [1]

What will happen to capital ships with EVE Online: Dominion? Get the skinny from CCP Nozh's newest dev blog.

Update by CCP Hammer.
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Hi, everyone

We have been carefully watching this thread and I want to set the record straight on a few misconceptions.

First, I’d like to say that a single developer cannot come in and unilaterally change everything with no oversight. People are spewing a lot of hate at CCP Nozh but instead it’s a case of shooting the messenger. He is just doing his job trying to improve the game and explain the reasoning for why changes were made. We work as a team and agree on the direction things are taking. We want the game to be balanced and fun for everyone to play. We also think about the future of the game and how it will be in years to come after our changes weighing the medium- and long-term repercussions.

We weren’t entirely happy with the direction and balancing of MOMs before development of Dominion began. Even during the SISI tests they still weren’t falling into place for us. They were potentially too powerful and that would have resulted in a small minority having a lot of fun at the cost of thousands who would be instapopped in 0.0. So we tried to tune them again to a point we felt was balanced, but then the role of the ships wasn’t clear once we started to lower the damage. Instead, they started to blur with dreads and carriers.

You all made your voices clear with important feedback, we listened and reverted things back to like they are on TQ while we take more time to reassess. We could have tried to put out “something” just because we have been talking about it, but then we would be in a situation where players are getting into ships that might very well change again in a coming patch. Given the amount of work to get one of these we just didn’t feel that was the right thing to do.

The other misconception I want to address is about our public test server. SISI is there so we can have as many people as possible looking for bugs. We think it best to put things out in the public as soon as possible regardless of whether or not it’s final so we get more eyes on it. This just makes sense to us from a QA standpoint because EVE is an extremely complex piece of software. SISI isn’t really meant to be a place to try new fittings, do FFA battles or preview upcoming features, although we know people use it for that and we really don’t mind because more load on our test server helps us find bugs. It’s also not a guarantee as to what will be in the next expansion. There have been plenty of times when we dropped a feature that was partially complete on SISI. Arenas and storefronts are two recent examples. It’s highly probable that we like pulling features from a release even less than you do but sometimes it cannot be helped. So while supercarriers were on the test server and had gone through plenty of testing it still wasn’t guaranteed to end up on TQ in that exact state. Only what lands on TQ on patch day is guaranteed.

Please remember that we are here to make a game that you all love to play. None of us comes to work thinking of ways to enrage the playerbase. As the Lead Game Designer, I take my responsibility seriously and that includes taking responsibility for any decisions made by our team. To me, EVE is much more than a job, it’s something I’m passionate about constantly improving. I promise you I want EVE to thrive just as much as you do.

Thanks for listening
CCP Hammerhead
Lead Game Designer

SiN. Corp
Daisho Syndicate
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:18:00 - [2]

Edited by: Nightbird on 20/11/2009 00:00:21
FIRST (*first time ever!!!!)

And might i say WEAK on the pushback of fighter bombers. If nothing else, keep MS the same, but include the fighter-bomber. Having the MS fill the roll of a cap killer instead of simply a "bigger carrier" is a good idea, and if all it takes is the simple addition of fighter-bombers, then why wait?

Keep MS hitpoints the same, keep the bonuses the same... simply add in MS-only fighter bombers.

People will think twice about dropping a cap fleet on a tower if an army of pilots in intys or noob-ships can fighter-bomb them using a bomber with a citadel torp instead of fighters.

BOOOO on dropping this from Dominion.... I say BOOOO!

Here's an idea: if you're worried about getting this in before Dec 1st... how about you push the patch back to Dec 7th and GET THIS IN!

Otherwise, the changes to things like XL turrets, and the differentiation of Citadel Torp/Cruise is a good idea.


Mashie Saldana
Veto Corp
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:22:00 - [3]

Edited by: Mashie Saldana on 20/11/2009 01:03:43
Target Painters
***Do NOT Work***
on Supercaps, Structures, or Sieged Caps

Undertow Latheus
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:24:00 - [4]

awaiting the ****storm from mom pilots, since you guys are just letting moms and af's sit and rot for another 6 months. nice.

the short range turret changes look good, revelation won't be the only dread able to realistically use short range weapons. One thing im curious about though, what's with the stealth nerf to the naglfar of giving it 5% to turret dmg and 5% to missile RoF instead of its two 7.5% turret dps bonuses?

Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:25:00 - [5]

So those ex-Mom pilots who sold their moms a few days ago for 6 bill per ship... *ouch*

hahahahahhaaha Twisted EvilTwisted EvilTwisted Evil

Anyway, glad they are not being altered.

Posted - 2009.11.19 22:25:00 - [6]


Posted - 2009.11.19 22:30:00 - [7]

Edited by: Shnitz on 20/11/2009 07:50:45
Edited by: Shnitz on 20/11/2009 01:54:05
Cool story bro...


for those who want to skip the next 20 pages...

Originally by: HertfordDear
you can't target paint a sieged dread, mothership or Titan
You now know one thing about capitals. Go you!

Originally by: Terianna Eri

Originally by: CCP Navigator
Hello everyone,

While we all appreciate that this is a very hot topic item we would urge you to be constructive and on topic with your feedback. Personal attacks, flaming and trolling will not be permitted and posts of this nature will be removed by the Community team and may result in a warning or ban. We want you to discuss this issue but it must remain on topic and friendly.

We would also advise you that posting "٩๏̯͡๏)۶" or "Free Abathur" are considered spam and will also be removed.

CCP Navigator;
This wouldn't be as hot a topic if we could get an explanation as to why CCP Abathur's very well received ideas were discarded two and a half weeks before Dominion, without announcement (somebody noticed it on Sisi), and have been replaced by CCP Nozh with very.... different... ideas.

The fact that the ideas that CCP Nozh has presented are as far as I can tell idiotic is only a small part of the problem; the larger problem is that they were introduced with no input from the players and with no explanation as to why CCP Abathur's changes were removed.

This is without even considering the effects that repeated announcements have had on the Mothership/supercarrier market.

Let's break it down:
CCP Abathur and players: extensive testing and balancing on sisi with supercarriers and titans. Result: well-received changes, ships were finally good enough to be worth using for their price. All signs point to these changes going to TQ.
- one week passes -
CCP Nozh: I am changing pretty much everything and giving no shred of an explanation why.
Players: WTF.
CCP Nozh: okay i guess those changes were bad, I'll give them an additional fighter and let them dock.
- threadnaught occurs -
CCP Nozh: Well clearly since those ideas weren't well received we won't be doing anything to motherships at all. Also, you can totally target paint ships that are immune to electronic warfare.

Even as someone without a direct interest in the state of motherships, the way this has panned out is frankly appalling and makes me feel betrayed.
Most of all, though,

Originally by: CCP Nozh
As designers we need to do is take a few steps back, deliberate more (with your help), go through more testing (also with your help) and really perfect the Mothership redesign.

The deliberation and testing was already done. CCP Abathur did it. Please explain why they were undone.

something somethingdark
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:32:00 - [8]

Edited by: something somethingdark on 19/11/2009 22:38:59
Thanks for listening and saving the mom for now

Citadel changes are a just a nerf
hint : small pos signature radius

Titan changes in the current iteration make it a mobile jumpbridge thats it

p.s. undo the changes to the naglfar aswell plz

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:38:00 - [9]

Wow im on the first page o.0?....

Anyway, I'm honestly glad CCP is taking this off the docket for Dominion. IT proves they saw they bit off more than they could chew and instead of destroying a ship class in the game they are only postponing the changes the class needs. Yeah sucks it wont be in this release but i look forward to when you get it right and that is not to say it has to be 6 months from ow in then ext expansion. I mean after all they released the change to rigs in a single down time in between expansions.... whats to say they cant do the same with Moms?

But to get more onto the details pertaining to the mother ship... i head the bonus of launching 3 more fighter per level was getting the axe because of the fighter bombers? I say this is a bad call as if you were going to change Moms to super carriers you should retain the ability to launch more fighters than a carrier but make it so you only get a finite amount of bombers if your concerned about DPS. Super carriers should have the distinct difference in terms of fighter support their small carrier cousins have to justify the x6 price difference.

Don't know if what i said was a groundless rumor but hey... thought id throw my 2 cents in from an aspiring mom pilot myself....heheTwisted Evil

Soleil Fournier
StarFleet Enterprises
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:42:00 - [10]

Thank you for not pushing out the ill-advised change in design on the moms. That is a great decision.

I hope that we don't have to wait another year or two to be fixed.


Aqua Tarkus
IT Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:42:00 - [11]

This was fun actually:

...but history has taught us that balancing by price is never a good idea.

Posted - 2009.11.19 22:43:00 - [12]

my .02 ISK:

Put Motherships into the "logistical backbone of the fleet" role, so you can keep the old name, and give the fighter-bombers to... something else? Or make them remote-assignable but really expensive so it's worthy shooting them on the field.
Give moms the gang bonuses Titans currently give, and take away some of their pure damage potential when introducing the bombers, enlarge ship array, let 'em keep the clone vat bay etc.

Titans should instead be combat juggernauts... especially if you want to see them on the field more often, because if their main job is to be the logistical backbone of a fleet, chances are they won't be warping onto the battlefield.

On another note:

If motherships won't get changed for Dominion, will their HP also not be boosted? Meaning 2 Titans can insta-DD a mothership?

Seth Rock
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:43:00 - [13]

Thanks for at least listening to us and realizing that the changes would have broke them even more.

I can think of an easy solution that has been suggested a few times to fix the issue with fighterbombers.

-reduce the bandwith of them
-keep the 20 fighters and drones
-"maybe" include a type of dcu for fighterbombers to where if the pilot wants more they would have to lose a highslot fitting the dcu.

Dark Knights of Deneb
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:43:00 - [14]

Won't Moms get killed by a single(or maybe 2) titans? Give hp boost at least :/

The Mittani
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:44:00 - [15]

The playerbase tested the new motherships over several weeks on SiSi and found them good.

Some genius put you in charge of Abathur's good work, and now you've not only screwed up all the effort that went into testing those ships, now there's to be no improvement at all.

Where is your credibility on caps? Who are you? Have you fought in a supercapital, lost a supercapital on the field?

Is this the new CCP, or the old CCP rearing its terrible, incompetent head?

Princess Xenia
Scion Innovations
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:47:00 - [16]

How to make better graphs:

Use same colour theme.

Maybe construct 'new values' graphs including BOTH old and the upcoming changes. (dotted / slashed / solid lines?)

Makes for easier interpretation.

Amber Bock
The Hull Miners Union
Gentlemen's Club
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:48:00 - [17]

How about you use the original mothership changes instead of "were looking into it."

Battle Tested
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:49:00 - [18]

So the motherships stay stored away for another year it seems.

Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:49:00 - [19]

"Capital ship fights rarely if ever happen at short distances. "

I don't know what game you're talking about but in the internet spaceship game Eve Online this statement is patently false.

Letifer Deus
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:50:00 - [20]

Edited by: Letifer Deus on 19/11/2009 22:59:17
Oddly, my post saying how much of a FAILURE this is gets deleted. Yet the people posting one-word replies of "cool!" and "sweet!" get to stay.

-Motherships are back to being in the "land of the forgotten" with AFs, deimos, rockets, nag, etc.

-Nag goes back to split weapon suckage, almost immediately after it became worthwhile as a result of MASSIVE player petitions and interaction with YOUR balancing staff.

-titan goes from doing drive-bys on subcap gangs to doing drive-bys on carriers and dreads aggrod on stations. Because let's be honest: in a major cap fight (one that might bring titans), killing a dread every 10 minutes means nothing and doing just over dread dps from regular weapons will never get a titan to stay on the field.

All in all, BRAVO! Rolling Eyes

Kieselguhr Kid
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:50:00 - [21]

Capital ship fights rarely if ever happen at short distances.

next time, please put this in the first sentence of the OP so I can stop reading there

Posted - 2009.11.19 22:50:00 - [22]

i said this one already but-- ccp nozh, in fixing what isnt broken until it is broken and stomping on what is broken until its fragile amber crystals are pulverized into a shimmering power, will accomplish what we failed to do in four years of trying

he will destroy the game

Esna Pitoojee
Knighthood of the Merciful Crown
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:51:00 - [23]

Abathur seemed to have this all worked out and all under control.

Can someone honestly explain to me why this was taken away from Abathur? The delays, redesign after redesign, and general levels of unhappyness displayed by the playerbase should have said something about that choice.

(All fairness to CCP here - putting Abathur on the Sov mechanics project was a good idea, given Abathur's past. Still doesn't explain why he was taken off this, though.)

Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:51:00 - [24]

He's missing the whole damn point about the risk rewards of short range fights, they should be encouraging hot dropping at face love range, stop forcing every fight to sniper ranges and give us more tactical options.

Sertan Deras
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:51:00 - [25]

Did he just say most capital fights don't happen at short range?

For god sake...CCP, get developers that play your game and have even a little bit of a clue. Just a little bit would be nice. Glad I didn't save up any cash for an MS and just sold my capital pilot, because you people wouldn't have a clue what to do with capital ships if a good idea walked up and slapped you in the head.

Seriously, the level of incompetence this takes is astounding.

Sophie Daigneau
CAPITAL Assistance in Destruction Society
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:53:00 - [26]

Edited by: Sophie Daigneau on 19/11/2009 22:52:53
CCP has finally done what Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, and Barrack Obama have all tried to do...united the entire world behind a single cause.

Reblier Innovations
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:54:00 - [27]

The mothership changes were literally the ONLY THING I was looking forward to for this patch. Luckily this blog came out just hours before I threw 5 billion isk worth of minerals into the cooker. I should have known that the CCP that deleted my boot.ini would be equally as incompetent in implementing last minute changes to their patch.

Capital ship fights rarely if ever happen at short distances.

That is a quote from the devblog where you apparently think that people only have capital fights at range 80 or 100 or something. Point blank capital fights happen ALL THE TIME. You need to go back to the days where your developers actually belong to alliances that use these ships and PLAY THE GAME (clearly with tighter controls on who is doing what cause, heh, T20).

Anyway...back to your awesome plan where 15 billion isk motherships can be alpha'd by your new titan doomsdays weapons.

Aprudena Gist
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:55:00 - [28]

man i cant wait to two shot a nyx

Battle Tested
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:55:00 - [29]

Edited by: Battle Tested on 19/11/2009 22:59:43
If a MS is on the field, it WILL get instapopped by least give the hitpoint boost and work on fixing the fighterbombers for another patch.

The Mittani
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.19 22:55:00 - [30]

Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
"Capital ship fights rarely if ever happen at short distances. "

I don't know what game you're talking about but in the internet spaceship game Eve Online this statement is patently false.

This is pretty horrific. We go from a dev who had used supercaps, lost supercaps, killed supercaps - to some guy who doesn't even know how basic capfights in nullsec work.

This is just shameful. Shameful. I thought things were bad for us when you unironically suggested allowing motherships to dock, not a few days ago. Now this? My god.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (62)

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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only