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


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (19)

Author Topic

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:14:00 - [151]
 

Originally by: DigitalCommunist
Originally by: Weaselior
no, it's the worst dread by far, which was only made up for by having another use; if you take that use away that is papering over the bad decisions you made before then you need to correct those bad decisions


Well, I don't agree on the principle that it does direct damage at long range. Dread fights have only gotten bigger, and will only continue to get bigger. Moros is competitive for the same reason that a Megathron is competitive in fleet battles and a Raven or Typhoon are not.

They pimped the Naglrofl quite well recently, but its still Revelation > Moros >>>> everything else if you get into a big brawl. Maybe at pure POS siege where you don't get jumped does overall DPS mean anything.


the nag does the same damage, then the citadel torpedos hit (the sentry drones never hit)

DigitalCommunist
November Corporation
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:17:00 - [152]
 

But does your Naglrofl have the smile of a gentle grouper fish?

Yes, it seems I'm terrible at steering this thread away from further discussion of the Moros nerf.

ElanMorin6
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:17:00 - [153]
 

Someone go pinch Seleene so he wakes up and realizes that it's no longer 2005.

Karlemgne
Tides Of War
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:21:00 - [154]
 

Edited by: Karlemgne on 16/09/2009 01:35:03
Awesome blog. One complaint from someone with Gallente Dreadnought 5--you have just transformed the Moros quite easily to the worst dread. Its main role as anti-support--at least in the fights I get in--is at an end.

Its now mostly useless to me as I am sure it will be to many others.


-Karlemgne

TYCONDEROGA
Amarr
Method of Destruction
Snatch Victory
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:21:00 - [155]
 

Been here since early 04'

Piloted capitals from every race, and all I can say is:

Awesome

Keep up the good workExclamation

Trenjeska
Chumly Incorporated
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:28:00 - [156]
 

Ah well and I was so looking forward to a moros BECAUSE of it's OOS drone bonus. I like the versatality. This blog saves me the training of Gallente BS V.
It seems a Rorqual is getting better and better (as it will be the only ship fitting the Clone vat now) and hey! it can DOCK :D

And yes up to train Amarr BS now ^^

Korinn
Habitual Euthanasia
Dystopia Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:32:00 - [157]
 

Actually I'm quite happy about the rest of the changes although I do see some of them problematic with implementation, but thats something CCP has to work on not myself. The moros nerf just seems a little out of the blue when I've not really seen anyone complain about it at all since I started playing. I mean, it makes sense in the context of the ship, kinda, but I can bet a deciding factor of which race dread to train for was decided for a lot of people by that base drone bonus. It allows a capital fleet to work with some degree of subcap protection of its own (e.g. You get jumped by subcaps, entire fleet drops out of siege, aligns out and moroses attempt to **** tacklers with drones). I can see why CCP might not want that because "capitals should always be deployed with support" but its pretty gay to just completely remove one aspect of its' use without making up for it in any other way, especially on one of the weaker dreads.

I can tell you for a fact no-one trained for a moros because of siege rails or blasters (thats another thing that needs work, heh)

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:33:00 - [158]
 

Edited by: Yaay on 16/09/2009 01:37:30
Edited by: Yaay on 16/09/2009 01:36:33
I'm currious how does allowing any sort of defined super weapon with direct damage not create a problem in this game. Obviously this refers to the titan.

Any sort of 1 shot kill weapon, whether it's AOE against BS, or single shot kill against virtually any ship is going to be exploited immensely with numbers. If the weapon is at all good enough to want to field a titan, entities are going to want to field 20, 30, or however many might be enough. It's simply the worst form of class warfare in this game, and it's going to benefit older players who have already exploited horrible old systems in this game rather than deal with the new/changing mechanics of 0.0.

The reason I proposed, and Vuk supported an indirect effect weapon is that it combats every issue of stacking large sums of titans on field. It makes them vulnerable but effective without being frustrating 1 shot killers.

So I think the appropriate question is, how can you give titans any sort of direct damage super weapon that won't be exploited and overpowered?

I do want to say that the mothership changes look like a good start, but Remote repping at large ranges on any ship other than a simple logistics ship needs to be looked at. Triage should be for logistics ships, Carriers are vulnerable projections of power, not hospitals on crack.

As for the Moros, Blasters need to be looked at. If they were to receive a 5km optimal boost base, it would fix 90% of the problem with that dread.

Yunii
Gallente
Black Serpent Technologies
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:33:00 - [159]
 

maybe drop the moros drone bonus to 30% or even 20% not take away the whole 50%.
Or up the turret damage to be more inline with the Rev..

Otherwise, thanks for wasting 2 months of my and quite a few other peoples time..Evil or Very Mad




Infinion
Caldari
Awesome Corp
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:33:00 - [160]
 

I think that the warfare link bonus on titans should be removed for something in its place. If what you say is true that guns will be given bonuses that would make not fitting capital guns silly, then that leaves 2 high slots left (in the avatar and Erebus' case) with the other 2 high slots naturally going to their focused doomsday and jump portal generator. It would seem silly even now to fit a warfare link on a titan since they don't have an effectiveness bonus to boost them (and if you're going to use a titan, you sure as hell should have a support fleet with at least 1 command ship utilizing its warfare link bonuses.)

rgreat
Gallente
OEG
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:49:00 - [161]
 

Edited by: rgreat on 16/09/2009 01:57:50

Railgun Moros already have lowest damage dealing rating compared to any other dread in space... Now CCP will nerf its damage output even more.
WTF are you thinking about CCP?

Do not even start about fitting Moros with blasters.... outside of test server these setups fail completely.
15 km range in fleet fight while you are close to stationary is uselless and actually never used in fleet combat.

Fix capital blasters and/or improve capital railguns first.

Casiella Truza
Ecliptic Rift
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:55:00 - [162]
 

Nice concept art on the Titan weapon, think I'll take it.

/me sets new background.

Rake Mizar
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:55:00 - [163]
 

Maybe you should rename it the Lessos...

Gespenst Jager
Pumpkin Scissors
DarkSide.
Posted - 2009.09.16 01:56:00 - [164]
 

Moros never was a problem. Ship bonus only in siege mode - lol.

Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:03:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: Gespenst Jager
Moros never was a problem. Ship bonus only in siege mode - lol.


I think they got the idea it was a problem because in some circles Moros is so popular. Someone forgot that nag was a joke, amarr was gimped for years, and so it left many with getting gallente bs5 first for mega/domi rr gangs.


Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:07:00 - [166]
 

Originally by: Casiella Truza
Nice concept art on the Titan weapon, think I'll take it.

/me sets new background.

It's like seeing photoshopped gore. My thanatos just booked the next month off for vacation; not sure it's coming back. It has been scarred for the rest of it's life.

Why couldnt they have rendered a Hel or something... Nobody flies Hels.

Hyneid Fehlhaishyo
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:24:00 - [167]
 

Originally by: Rake Mizar
Maybe you should rename it the Lessos...


Touche'

All the changes are very interesting and definitely a huge step in the right direction (except of course, the poor Moros, which now needs a little love).

Good Job CCP and CSMs.


Darth Sith
Genbuku.
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:26:00 - [168]
 

My only fear is that the super weapon, as with anything in the game, gets bent into unintented uses.

My case in point, the PL / Goon titan conga line. For giggles they line up over 20 titans and DD a carrier to death simply because they can. Now we are introducing a superweapon that can inflict capital killing damage on a target. What is to stop the same thing where someone comes in with 10+ titans, lock a tower , all fire their siege weapons and reinforce it in 1 shot. The tower would be reinforced and the titans gone before someone sees the first mail from the tower.

Is this (highly probable I might add) scenerio being addressed in the balace testing ?



Haradgrim
Systematic Mercantilism
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:32:00 - [169]
 

I had a long post written out but my browser ate it, tl;dr version;

- changes are crappy

- titans will be too weak even with a massive hp boost.

- Fighter bombers are the only good change. Leave motherships otherwise the way they are

- too much like conventional ships, more "cool" factor required (can't titans have some sort of sustained fortified mode that has a limited duration based on the fleets ability to provide it with ice materials, this would allow it to be effectively invulnerable as long as it has a support fleet with it, or some other feature that would have a similar level of impact without doing direct AE damage??).

- moros changes are like kicking a dead horse, buff all dreads so that they are more effective against conventional fleets, and reasonably equal in terms of sniping dps. also, rethink all capital weapon systems balance based on the fact that their primary role will not be to shoot starbases.....

Korinn
Habitual Euthanasia
Dystopia Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:40:00 - [170]
 

Edited by: Korinn on 16/09/2009 02:40:52
Also add a subcapital ship which can field fighter bombers, but has horrible EHP and is only useful for dealing sick dps to capitals YARRRR!!


(but getting ****d at the same time, glass cannon style)

Justin Cody
Caldari
T.A.L.O.N. Company
B4D W01F
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:42:00 - [171]
 

Originally by: DigitalCommunist
Edited by: DigitalCommunist on 16/09/2009 00:46:31
Titans as super dreads and Motherships as super carriers is utterly, mind-numbingly boring. It takes what we can already do, and puts another spin on it - where the main difference is a "bigger hull" construction tax. What is the point of Dominion if you curb past ambitions and settle for less, without actually addressing where you went wrong?

Supercapitals didn't come out right for three reasons:

  • kept relying on isk/skillpoints as a deterrent to ownership, which obviously does not work in the long run

  • didn't devote enough coding resources to use unique mechanics, and instead recycled crap from the usual ship lineup

  • underestimated how easily players can vaporize any amount of HP


Supercapitals should:

  • NOT BE SHIPS, OR USE ANY OF THEIR MECHANICS GODDAMNIT

  • be fully persistent and not go "poof" when someone decides they don't feel like defending it that day

  • use reinforced/anchoring modes over passive/active tanking for defense

  • require upkeep for operations just like starbases, deterring ownership for the sake of ownership through cost AND logistics

  • require actual teamwork and logistics in their construction, key word: work

  • require actual resources to repair and corporate roles in control

  • require more than the push of a button to cyno out

  • provide limited services/interactivity to allies with or without an active pilot at the helm

  • not have 'normal ship' modules or slots; retrofits involving POS + time + money that leave them vulnerable


Titans should:

  • automatically be reconsidered for balancing if more than a handful exist in the entire game

  • have an even more powerful Doomsday, but one that does damage over time, costs major resources and leaves tactical after-effects on grid/system to screw with both sides

  • not portal fleets, but carry them instead

  • provide limited manufacturing capability

  • scare the crap out of BOTH SIDES' FCs by preventing anything from escaping

  • eat dreadnaughts for breakfast


Motherships should:

  • be a viable offensive mobile base for medium-large sized corporations

  • rely on signature masking, scanner spoofing and environments to "hide" from hostiles

  • provide full clone services, to give fallen allies a chance to rejoin the fleet battle before its over

  • provide ammo, charge, drone construction capability


All capitals should:

  • NOT HAVE ANY INSURANCE, BASIC OR OTHERWISE FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFGLGHRLGHLNRNGHGHGHHGLRRR

  • require jumpdrive spooling that isn't so immediate/instant

  • have racial differences in capital stats (fuel cost, jump range, fighter bay, etc) and not just Tech 1


Alright I'm losing steam and I can't even remember half the stuff I wrote here ages ago (includes Dreadnaughts/Carriers). But the point is..

The quality of capital warfare is directly proportional to the amount of new mechanics and coding resources you throw at them, even if the whole thing is unbalanced and buggy as hell to start with.

It's disappointing that after so much talk and wait, your way of addressing supercapitals is to remove them in all but name. What is this cautious nonsense and how did it get in my CCP? >:E

BE A MAN.



I am in love with you for saying all of these things...it won't happen

Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
Posted - 2009.09.16 02:59:00 - [172]
 

You all need to get back in T1 cruiser hulls and actually have fun.


something somethingdark
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:03:00 - [173]
 

Titans :
Still has the potential of being horribly gamebreaking
like people sayd : Reinforcing poses with a titan driveby...
The other issue would be the lack of survieability once a titan is tackled ... a raise in buffer probably wont help offset that

and i hope the titans "other" weapons will now be actualy usefull

Supercarriers :
Ummmm.... why take away clone vat and triage ?

Are the Fighterbombers going to be significantly more "tanked" than regular Fighters or less ?

Dreads :
What i find currious is that there is so much goon whineage about the moros nerf Confused
Are there so many goons using the Moros to stationcamp ?

Are people(not just goons) complaining that the dps is so low without drones because they only field sniping dreads ?


Personaly i welcome the change (and no i havent been violenced by a stationcamping moros and nor has my sister Razz )
maybe a token boost to something useless like cap or so would help in making people accept the change more easily

Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:04:00 - [174]
 

Edited by: Terranid Meester on 16/09/2009 03:07:56
Edited by: Terranid Meester on 16/09/2009 03:05:14
I don't mind supercarriers as a new name. Names don't really matter anyway.

However their role as an anti-capital capital is flawed if someone brings in two or three titans to target one and then blows it to bits. The fighter bombers should be capable of being like fighters and therefore should be able to be assigned in case some titans pop up.

Personally I think all capital ships (including freighters and jump freighters) should require constant maintenance (you would have to pay isk to maintain them every week or so)when not in use thereby acting as an isk sink and reducing the number of capitals (theoretically) being used. The Moros was fine just the way it was, as it did something different to other dreadnaughts and removing variety like that when it wasn't actually overpowered is a poor decision.

Personally I am also waiting for the time, when a bunch of frigates can target a titan doomsday sub-system and take it out. Having no insurance for capitals sounds like a good idea too.


Jordan Musgrat
Convergent
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:10:00 - [175]
 

Edited by: Jordan Musgrat on 16/09/2009 03:14:06
DC has some good points for once, but regardless, the problem here is that you just turned titans into the new black ops. I doubt you know how effective black ops are, but titans are to carriers what black ops are to ratters. You gather up 5 titans, start spreading cyno recons out, wait till you can get a few carriers to undock and aggro your recon to defend their system, and bam, instant cyno in, 5 carriers instapopped.

You definitely just changed the titan into a big gank dreadnought. That's not the direction you were looking for.

Do not **** up titans and tell us "ya but we'll fix them later," that's like messing with ECM and making us wait a year for it to be fixed, or messing with the Arazu/Pilgrim and then never really giving them their role back. Titans need some sort of area effect, otherwise instead of nerfing their role, you change it.

You should know by now, that completely revamping a shipclass is not usually the best way to nerf it. If you need ideas, ask, please. Also Motherships need something more than what they have, or what you're giving them. I'm not sure what that should be, maybe invulnerability to focused hicktor points? I can see someone bubbling a mothership from 15km away, but not someone sitting with a small cap injector, an afterburner, and a little local tank, and keeping the second most powerful ship in the entire game sitting like a duck as long as it likes from 30km away. Telling Mothership pilots that they should be fitting neuts is not the answer, that's like telling Titans they should be filling their highs with smartbombs, which is not what you want.

edit: Also if the fighter bombers are to have any chance, try giving them a 15km orbit range, and a 1500 m/s speed, launching their torps from there. That's about the only way you'll keep them from being ineffective and eventually obsolete, as people will simply bunch up carriers with smarties and sit there protecting their dreads. Even more range might be good tbh.

Mahke
Aeon Of Strife
Discord.
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:20:00 - [176]
 

I really like that the doomsday is gone.

The moros change though: I was torn between training my alt for a carrier and a moros. I will DEFINITELY be going carrier now. I can see why the status-quo on those was perhaps a little to strong, but, siege-only drone-bonused moros's will be perhaps too weak.

Dskreet
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:27:00 - [177]
 

Originally by: Terranid Meester
Edited by: Terranid Meester on 16/09/2009 03:07:56
Edited by: Terranid Meester on 16/09/2009 03:05:14
I don't mind supercarriers as a new name. Names don't really matter anyway.



Details matter, everything matters, you should always shoot for perfection.

In any case, I agree that the name is lame because it's not descriptive of it's new role, it makes it sound like it's just a bigger carrier.

As an example, I would prefer something like 'Tactical Heavy Carriers', descriptive, plus it opens up all kinds of possibilities for pot jokes as you talk about THC deployments!

Jordan Musgrat
Convergent
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:28:00 - [178]
 

Edited by: Jordan Musgrat on 16/09/2009 05:40:40
edit: not nice.

Once again, do NOT screw up titans now just so you can fix them later. They are too big of a resource for you to make them useless for 6 months or however long it takes to get some decent ideas. It's hilarious that we get CCP devs asking for our input on foucking ECM drones, and all you say about the most important ship in the game is "titan nerf incoming" until you actually tell us what the nerf is, which happens to be an actual removal of the titan role from the game, until you can figure out what to do with it.

Serj Darek
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:33:00 - [179]
 

I am dumbfounded by the proposed changes to super-caps. Taking away the primary functions of them all seems a bit hasty, but I suppose they are making the changes for the "future players" of the game, think Dust. Most of the changes are simple byproducts of whining, which is somewhat depressing to say the least.

The simple fact that Titans are popping almost weekly should suggest that modifications are not needed, but changing things a couple of years after it should have been done seems moronic. Who in their right mind will ever want a ship that is locked into place for ninety seconds after firing a directional attack, while waiting five minutes between cycles? Now instead of having to be able to tank a couple of DD's you are rolling the dice when showing up for a fleet when titans may get involved. Instead of tanking DD's you are making it so there is no defense against the directional firing of a DD, good job on balancing.





jeffb
GoonFleet
Posted - 2009.09.16 03:33:00 - [180]
 

Hard to see how a dread fleet will perform against a titan + carrier fleet with these changes. Will siege mode also have its duration/fuel use halved (or more)?

Will I be able to dock a supercap come Dominion?


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (19)

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