open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Capital Ships in Dominion 1.1
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (34)

Author Topic

Arakidias
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.12.25 22:30:00 - [421]
 

Originally by: Arra Lith
Edited by: Arra Lith on 24/12/2009 09:06:01

Missile-based capital ship (Phoenix) really needs some serious overhaul. Or there will be only 3 dreads worth using.

Main disadvantage of missiles is delayed damage. Delayed damage means that missile-ship starts doing damage after ~ 20 seconds (depends on range to target) - thats usually 1 less volley than gunnery-ships. If enemy ship is killed by gunnery alpha than missile ships will always do 0 damage.
On conventional ships this is compensated by two things. First is ability to adjust damage type (same as gunnery ships can adjust damage/range by switching ammo - projectiles can adjust both damage type dealt and range now). Second is that base missile damage is at least same as closest range gunnery ammo. Here is some comparision - proof:

1) Cruise missile launcher II vs 425mm Railgun II
Cruise DMG = 300 / RoF = 17.6
Base DPS (unmodified by skills and ship bonuses) = 17.045

425mm Railgun + Antimatter L DMG = 48 * DmgMod = 3.3 / RoF = 9.563
Base DPS = 16.56

Cruise / 425mm ratio = 102.93% (almost 3 % higher base dps)


2) Siege torpedo II vs Neutron Blaster II
Torpedo DMG = 450 / RoF = 14.4
Base DPS = 31.25

Neutron Blaster + Antimatter L DMG = 48 * DmgMod = 4.2 / RoF = 7.875
Base DPS = 25.6

Torpedo / Neutron ratio = 122.07% (almost 22 % higher base dps)


3) Heavy Missile II vs Railgun 250mm II
HM DMG = 150 / RoF = 12
Base DPS = 12.5

Railgun 250mm + Antimatter M DMG = 24 * DmgMod = 3.3 / RoF = 6.375
Base DPS = 12.42

HM / Railgun = 100.6% (almost same base dps)


That is why missiles work at conventional ships, despite disadvantages (lower bonuses from skills / delayed damage) - they work especially well in PvE. Higher base DPS is KEY.

As for capital ships. Citadel missiles keep all their disadvantages but DO NOT KEEP THEIR ADVANTAGES !!!


Proof:

4) Citadel Cruise vs Dual 1000mm
CC DMG = 1500 / RoF = 44
Base DPS = 34.09

Dual 1000mm + Antimatter XL DMG = 96 * DmgMod = 5.8 (new) / RoF = 14.345
Base DPS = 38.81

CitadelCruise / Rail1000mm ratio = 87.8 % (13% lower dps)
Delayed damage = equal to first 2 missed volleys (30 seconds missile travel time)


5) Citadel Torpedo vs Ion Siege Blaster
CT DMG = 2000 / RoF = 34
Base DPS = 58.82

Ion Siege + Antimatter XL DMG = 96 * DmgMod = 7.92 / RoF = 6.375
Base DPS = 119.26

Torpedo / Ion Siege ratio = 49.32 % (almost 2x lower dps)
Delayed damage = equal to first 3 missed volleys (22.5 seconds missile travel time)



Phoenix can't switch damage dealt, like Raven (or Golem) - without losing its damage bonus. Phoenix deal much less DPS than other dreads with highest-damage ammo - making higher DPS as trade off for delayed damage no longer valid. Phoenix still deal delayed damage (thats always min 2 volley hits less than other dreads - 3 less with close range).

When you see those numbers at capitals - Im sure first though is - something is broken here ?
Especially with close range weapons - torpedos dealing 2x less damage than Blasters AND Torpedos "missing" first 3 cycles (damage kicks in after blasters succesfully shoot 3 times) AND torpedos cant switch damage type (always kinetic or no bonus..).
As for long-range weapons - difference is much less, but still - advantage of bigger damage as trade of for delayed damage is no longer exist at capital ships - and that hurts.



So welcome new era - Revelation & Moros (well and Naglfar too, since it get rid off that missile thingie). Phoenixes will be for funny suicidal stuff only...


QFT! With the previous changes the Phoenix atleast had the bonus of being able to lay down some damage if you pinned its target, or used it vs. structures. With the current ones you have almost no advantages vs. other dreads whatsoever.

Cpt AngelNova
Amarr
Licentia Ex Vereor
Posted - 2009.12.25 22:39:00 - [422]
 

Edited by: Cpt AngelNova on 25/12/2009 22:40:29
Originally by: Seishi Maru
Originally by: Kalissa
I own a mothership with has been in mothballs since Dominion and wil be until 1.1 comes out, I know atm and for the forseeable future MS's will not be dockable, and I accept this in a trade off with the advantages this ship will gain in Dominion 1.1

But seriously, the biggest arguement people seem to have about MS's not being able to dock is "docking games"? I mean thats about the weakest arguement for something I've heard in a long time. Locking times on these ships even with SB's isnt exactly instant you know. You'd have to foul up pretty bad to get yourself locked and blown up by a MS in low sec. And if you're in a partiularly big ship that it could lock, then may I suggest the age old tactic of an alt making an insta warp out spot.

It just bugs me that the best arguement that some can make against is the docking games one, it's just pure BS


let me illustrate to you. New sov mechanics requite to take station to take system. Imagine motherships that can dock. Any big alliance can field 10 of them.... they keep undocking repairing station killing some ships and redocking repairing for free (since station is owned by the alliance) undock repeat. With their ridiculous HP would be impossible to kill them before they redock. Result.. stations become 100% impossible to conquer.

Dockign for motherships... only if it was a 30 minutes operation where the ship was completely vulnerable...


and again we get back to the point made a few posts above (and quoted by me)
give them a special docking time, lest for arguments sake make it 1 hour.... a mom can undock at any given moment even directly after a dock once scotty is ready, HOWEVER, the mother ship (after undocking)CANNOT redock unless 1 hour has passed. no docking games will be played under these conditions with a mothership aka Supercarrier, because (and even in lowsec) you will be screwed, so if you just undocked but wish to dock again you have to either log.. cloak at a safe spot or sit at a pos till you can dock again (ie. wait one hour).

Aggression timer should not affect this, it will be a pain if it keeps resetting to 1 hour in a fight, so simply change the docking timer for these ships. and if for some reason a mom pilot stays on the station right after undocking..... well.... X for mom gank !!YARRRR!!

Keria Nue
Posted - 2009.12.25 22:51:00 - [423]
 

Edited by: Keria Nue on 25/12/2009 23:00:36
For those of you who just complained about the whole, docking will allow them to play docking games in low sec, blah blah blah. Read my post again and then realize that docking in low sec is impossible by what I said.

Simple, YOU CAN ONLY DOCK IF THE STATION HAS A UPGRADE FOR IT.

  • Mothership docking can only be done in a station that has the upgrade for it.

  • Upgrade can only be put on a station that has Strategic Level 5. Same as JBs and what not.

  • Mostherships have a limited docking capability. Can't undock/redock 1 hour after the prior action.


This right here takes care of docking games. Trust me when I say I hate them just as much as everyone else, but this would help with many things. And if the repairing a MS in station is an issue, fine, make it where it can't repair, just docking would be nice.

Lets just make this very clear, this proposed change would only allow 0.0 alliances to have Moms docking. Low Sec would still be just as dangerous as ever. And, 0.0 alliances would be required to have to pay for this right to dock their ships. If they spend all that ISK to upgrade a system and maintain it, then by all means they should have the ability to actually put some of it to good use. And if you all think that your ok with Moms sitting out in space or on an alt all the time, wouldn't you like the ability to say, have 2 Moms and be able to use them on the 2 accounts you have trained them on?

Xing Fey
Posted - 2009.12.25 23:04:00 - [424]
 

Edited by: Xing Fey on 25/12/2009 23:04:00
I'd agree to the previous post, but adding the restriction of only 1 SC docked per upgrades station, or something, to prevent mad proliferation...

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.12.25 23:40:00 - [425]
 

Am against motherships docking for the reason that they are *super* caps and should require dedication to fly.

Ardetia
Caldari
Killer Koalas
Posted - 2009.12.26 00:06:00 - [426]
 

+1 to carrier 5 -> supercarrier 1
+1 to fix shield tanks for the love of god
+1 to great overall changes elsewhere


7.5km orbit for fighters and fighter bombers
they will succumb to smartbombs and smaller ships faster than an eyeblink anyways
some other fix might make them useful
like suicide bombers! <- no thanks


Keria Nue
Posted - 2009.12.26 00:09:00 - [427]
 

Originally by: Sokratesz
Am against motherships docking for the reason that they are *super* caps and should require dedication to fly.


One thing though, the amount of time to skill for it and the amount of ISK required to buy it should be dedication enough. To require a dedicated pilot to stay in it 23/7 is stupid. And, to add to this, they have hinted that the reason for the name change is because Suppercarriers are just that while Motherships are something expected to be more, and as such they want the name open for later when they might come out with something worthy of the name. So, let that be the one that can't undock when it comes out, and give this one the ability to dock.

And about one per station, while this may be an idea, I think it might be a little too extreme, maybe 5 per station? This way you limit the amount one alliance can pour out of a station but allows them to actually have more pilots flying Supercarriers.

Kersh Marelor
Amarr
Posted - 2009.12.26 00:17:00 - [428]
 

The only reason I think Suppah-Carriers (yet again: please change the name, kthnxbai) should dock is to allow a pilot to quickly swap ships and enjoy some other aspects of the game than flying 4km long (yet again: please inrease the size of these things, kthnxbai) e-peen. Now, obviously to do that you do NOT need to dock them in a station. How about CCP agrees there is a problem with metagaming used to steal these things, as well as flawed game mechanics which offers no protection from theft when it comes to super caps? Change the mechanics of CSMA or introduce new mechanics (anchoring those ships was suggested as well as password protection) that let pilots get out of their ships with relative safety of their property. Also make it dependant on internal corporate trust (changes to role management at last maybe?) to keep the limitation on number of SCs. No docking games, no changes to SC population, no artificial $ grind for CCP (yeah, we all know that is the real reason, but hell ... docking games... right).

ovenproofjet
Caldari
Therapy.
Posted - 2009.12.26 00:43:00 - [429]
 

ABATHUR IS FREEEE!!!!!! \o/

Kudos on beating Nozh into wherever he locked you up and pushing out these frankly F*CKING AWESOME changes Very Happy


Seth Ruin
Minmatar
Ominous Corp
Circle-Of-Two
Posted - 2009.12.26 00:50:00 - [430]
 

Originally by: Ardetia
+1 to carrier 5 -> supercarrier 1

I'd absolutely agree with this, but as CCP Abathur said, the "genie is already out of the bottle." You can't really introduce a new skill requirement (or alter the skill requirement) for an item that already exists in-game. How would something like that be handled? If you own a Supercarrier, you get free skillpoints? Or you're suddenly ejected from your ship when you log in until you can train up the new pre-reqs to fly it? There's simply no graceful way to handle a change like that.

Ardetia
Caldari
Killer Koalas
Posted - 2009.12.26 00:57:00 - [431]
 

Edited by: Ardetia on 26/12/2009 00:57:52
Originally by: Seth Ruin
Originally by: Ardetia
+1 to carrier 5 -> supercarrier 1

I'd absolutely agree with this, but as CCP Abathur said, the "genie is already out of the bottle." You can't really introduce a new skill requirement (or alter the skill requirement) for an item that already exists in-game. How would something like that be handled? If you own a Supercarrier, you get free skillpoints? Or you're suddenly ejected from your ship when you log in until you can train up the new pre-reqs to fly it? There's simply no graceful way to handle a change like that.


you can, simple, those who sit in them better not leave, which they wont anyways? :P

as for the guy saying something about stealing etc. ive made threads about passwording supercaps before
guess noone likes the idea that the most high-tech eletronic wonders of eve could have passwords
+1 tldr passwords on supercaps.. give your password out or set it to '123' and you might as well be self destructing
at least then you can leave the things (although making it potentially vulnerable)

IMPORTANT:
+1 to make fighters more reliable when setting them to attack
the mwd range compared to optimal range is laughable, most of the time they will sloooowly never actually get to their target(such as a BS with decent speed)
yes, im exaggerating, but im fed up with it.. they're pilots right?

+1 to fix sideways warping

Saralle Zhukov
Minmatar
Lucian Alliance
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2009.12.26 04:13:00 - [432]
 

WB Abathur!!! Merry Christmas!! Nice to see the supercarrier coming again.

Hrmmm, I think you should let them dock with some kind of limitation to it.
I agree with the model resize request.
Please, give the Hel either the previously proposed Fighter Bomber damage bonus or Fighter Bomber speed bonus/Signature reduction bonus.

And to everyone a Happy New Year.

Cool



Serena Ku
Gallente
Posted - 2009.12.26 04:56:00 - [433]
 

No docking supercarriers please

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.12.26 09:16:00 - [434]
 

Edited by: Sokratesz on 26/12/2009 09:18:08

Originally by: Keria Nue
Originally by: Sokratesz
Am against motherships docking for the reason that they are *super* caps and should require dedication to fly.


One thing though, the amount of time to skill for it and the amount of ISK required to buy it should be dedication enough.


CCP initially thought no more than three titans would be in-game total because of the ISk cost..boy, did they find that out the hard way.

I think the dedicated character is just the right measure for it really, and besides, Abathur already said a few times that they will not be able to dock in the forseeable future.

Igor 77
Posted - 2009.12.26 09:23:00 - [435]
 

About FB's and SmartBombs, If a Large Smart does +350 damage every 10 seconds and a FB has 20k+resists HP then how long will you need to run that smart bomb before the FB really dies... Just to kill 20k HP (no resists) its 57 Runs, thats 9,5minutes in a row. Anybody seen 3-4 officer smarts on other ships than a titan?
I think smarts are not an issue, Stealthbombers+bombs are.

Abathur: Whats the current DPS on FB's?

About docking:
Let the SC's dock once a day (DT resets timer) to only alliance owned outposts. If it is wanted to tide a pilot to the ship make leave ship inside station impossible. I see docking more of a way to maintain the ship (fuel, drones, mods, ships etc etc.)

RoCkEt X
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
Posted - 2009.12.26 10:04:00 - [436]
 

supercarrier skill = bad. many MS pilots have carrier 5, the addition of a new skill is stupid considering those pilots are already flying the ships. not to mention you're screwing the hundreds of pilots who have sitting alts without carrier 5.

if you want to introduce a new skill, it must give the ship bonuses, but not be a pre-requisite. you cant increase pre-requisites on a ship already ingame.

-rock

mean candy
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2009.12.26 11:07:00 - [437]
 

Edited by: mean candy on 26/12/2009 11:08:53
Edited by: mean candy on 26/12/2009 11:07:57
Originally by: Igor 77
About FB's and SmartBombs, If a Large Smart does +350 damage every 10 seconds and a FB has 20k+resists HP then how long will you need to run that smart bomb before the FB really dies... Just to kill 20k HP (no resists) its 57 Runs, thats 9,5minutes in a row. Anybody seen 3-4 officer smarts on other ships than a titan?
I think smarts are not an issue, Stealthbombers+bombs are.


Again as many people wrote before, its not about 1 smartbomb (or 2..3..4) from ONE carrier but its about all the carriers sitting close together so the area of smartbomb-cover becomes a lot bigger.

$me likes orbiting sentry-FB. could even implement that you have to carry around their missiles with you in your hold, and they dock for reloading and undock on you automatically again and keep on firing.

besides can we have "reload and reengage" for all the non-crystal-guns as well plz
edit: as well as for the missile-guys ofc Shocked

Nemtar Nataal
Demonic Retribution
Posted - 2009.12.26 12:02:00 - [438]
 

Edited by: Nemtar Nataal on 26/12/2009 12:04:11
Originally by: RoCkEt X
supercarrier skill = bad. many MS pilots have carrier 5, the addition of a new skill is stupid considering those pilots are already flying the ships. not to mention you're screwing the hundreds of pilots who have sitting alts without carrier 5.

if you want to introduce a new skill, it must give the ship bonuses, but not be a pre-requisite. you cant increase pre-requisites on a ship already ingame.

-rock


Totally do not agree here, MS and Titans are not suppose to be solo ships as such you need to really sacrofise something to get in them to justefy them as a whole - and with holding alts you are not really doing that.

I really miss a statement from CCP saying that MS and Titans was and are not suppose to be solo ships as such no bonuses for offence or defence can be added to the ship if the intention of the bonus is to make the ship more self sufficient.

MS was not suppose to be used as solo or low sec gang ships, and THIS is the problem with the current implementation of the MS - and it will not get bether with the Dominion 1.1 changes.

And no i do not think that people that pay 25+ bill for a ship should have more previliges and benefits then some one paying 100mill - they should have others/specials but not 25x bether then something with the price tag of 1bill like some one previously suggested.

Arrow on the subject of the Hel, i personally think it have the most awesome bonus of all of the MS's - the RR bonus makes it a real fleet ship where as all the other MS's are more minded on personal defence.
Imo the other MS's shoud have there bonuses changed to reflect a fleet combat role rather then a personal defensive role like the Aeon and Wyvern have today.

Mitsune Konno
Posted - 2009.12.26 14:34:00 - [439]
 

In regards to FB's SB teams dropping bombs on them/smartbombing; how about being able to "fit" compact citadel siege launchers on FB's (as planned) and also introducing compact citadel cruise launchers for FB's. Using your SC's fitting service, you drag and drop said mods on each fighter (or have some sort of presets), before deploying them. Once a torp launcher is added, its damage is increased, but orbit is reduced. If a cruise launcher is added, then its damage is reduced, but orbit is increased (maybe also an increase to orbit velocity, so it's more survivable).

Just a suggestion.

ByFstugan
Big Shadows
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.12.26 16:45:00 - [440]
 

Edited by: ByFstugan on 26/12/2009 17:52:49
Originally by: Nemtar Nataal
Arrow on the subject of the Hel, i personally think it have the most awesome bonus of all of the MS's - the RR bonus makes it a real fleet ship where as all the other MS's are more minded on personal defence.
Imo the other MS's shoud have there bonuses changed to reflect a fleet combat role rather then a personal defensive role like the Aeon and Wyvern have today.


Excuse me, but did U miss something?
1) The MS's is going to be transformed to ships for capital fights, an offensive role
2) They will loose their ability to fit Triage, hence loose defensive specialization
3) 25% as a maximum HP-transfer boost is not really as much as the smaller brother the Nidhoggur get with it's 25% + double effect in boost and half cycle time (400% effect)
4) Noone will use the Hel as a Logistics ship, and even if they do it will add MUCH less than a carrier in traige.

I would personally if I had a Hel (I'm concidering getting one if it wont suck to much compared to the other SC's) in a heartbeat trade the logistics bonus for only half of the bonus the Wyvern got. But that's not what I think it should have.

The Hel should get a bonus to Fighter Bombers torpedos explosion radius per level - hence hitting smaller/moving objects a little better. All other suggestions I've heard is pretty much what CCP said we might think of the present logistics bonus, and that's "MEH!"

EDIT:
And yes, besides that the Fighter Bombers should be made as a XL Sentry drone in order to avoid them being useless in large fleetfights. Just make sure they don't make the SC's unmobilized, and that's solved by giving Sentry FB's a thruster so they either:
1) Always orbit the SC, and also fire orbiting (imagine the awesome graphical effect)
2) Or give it a "Return to ship" engine, and perhaps also an "Follow" command option.

Kraken Kill
Menace ll Society
Posted - 2009.12.26 17:01:00 - [441]
 

i quickly worked out that at 3k per torp damage- x20 bombers = 60,000damage.
over 15 seconds ROF (what the bombers ROF used to be at least) = 4000 dps.
taking into account the skill lvl, @ 20% per fighter bomber level, lvl 5 would be 8000dps.
Thats my assumption. seems fine if so.

NedFromAssembly
Gallente
GoonFleet
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2009.12.26 20:11:00 - [442]
 

WTB Sisi patch

Joabinanias
Posted - 2009.12.26 20:17:00 - [443]
 

Edited by: Joabinanias on 26/12/2009 20:18:09
Originally by: Sokratesz


You're gonna want 1 or 2 BCU's to get a decent DPS out of your torps, and wtb volunteers to fly carriers with the sole purpose of providing cap for a titan.


I hear ya about the cap reps, and I agree, but we will face the same issue with just having carriers there with triage or regular reps to keep us alive because we can't rep ourselves (not a fan of it though, I want to see a self-rep bonus). I look at it that as long as they're there and repping us already, have them fit an extra cap rep and it shouldn't be too big of an issue.

And I agree with the other poster, doing a little less damage but getting a lot of extra tank on a titan will be more beneficial imho.

I'm just saying, it's a fit that gives the option of having that big buffer...wether that's the pilots preference or not is up to the individual

RoCkEt X
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
Posted - 2009.12.26 20:41:00 - [444]
 

Edited by: RoCkEt X on 26/12/2009 20:49:58
Originally by: Nemtar Nataal

I really miss a statement from CCP saying that MS and Titans was and are not suppose to be solo ships.


Dunno how you worked out that holdings alt dosent need investment, one of my other chars who is a fully skilled MS pilot sits on the same account and does not train (i have a non-cap functioning alt that is training). its EXACTLY the same thing, except it took more time to train. that was a very ignorant statement my friend.

furthermore - approx time to get to
*carrier lvl 3 and board a MS = 130 days.
*carrier lvl 5 and a hypothetical SC skill to lvl 1 = add about 55 days. (185 days)

i.e. theres jack all difference. all you'd be changing is that it takes another 2 months to do. your point is completely invalid. all this would change is it'd make people ****ed off.

and as for the problem you linked, thats not just with MS's, its hotdropping. which happens anyway. carriers do the same every day.

as i said before, increasing the pre-reqs of a ship already ingame is F*cking stupid. as for MS being 25x as good as a carrier, well. 10 carriers would kill a MS easy if they had 2-3 HIC's with them. when i last spoke with you, you werent an MS pilot; assuming that hasnt changed - you've no idea of the investments/sacrifice/planning that goes into becoming a supercap pilot whilst not being part of a huge 0.0 alliance.

plz gtfo, you're clearly clueless and i cba to write an essay.

-rock

Arzal
Animosity.
Posted - 2009.12.27 00:24:00 - [445]
 

Oh, forgot to say thanks for the changes <3 arbathur

but please make the models slightly bigger, thats all. They are not far off normal carrier models, and I think the Archon is longer then my Aeon... though not totally sure.

just 1 more question, hadn't seen it here yet, but what are the stats of the fighter bombers at the moment? the pre "nerf" values? (aka the original values)

cheers again sel

row
Posted - 2009.12.27 04:43:00 - [446]
 

I too would like the models bigger. Please while you guys/gals are at it, work on this one as well Very Happy

Cassius Hawkeye
Minmatar
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.12.27 17:51:00 - [447]
 

+1 for bigger models
+1 for NO docking - i'm very happy to dedicate a character (+ a backup) to fly a ship like that - like Sok said - it takes dedication to fly.


CCP Abathur


C C P
C C P Alliance
Posted - 2009.12.27 19:21:00 - [448]
 

Edited by: CCP Abathur on 27/12/2009 19:22:16

Docking Supercaps - No. If this ever happens it would likely be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade and would only be allowed in player built outposts in 0.0. This would also need to be done in tandem with changes in docking / aggression mechanics. Even then, don't take this as any commitment that it may ever be allowed.

DD in lo sec - There are no plans to allow this for 1.1.

Naglfar- There are no further changes planned for 1.1. It's not getting a third turret and it's not going to lose its missile hardpoints.

Self-repair bonuses on supercaps - Not going to happen for 1.1 and possibly ever. The HP buff is intended to improve these ship's survivability and make them viable combatants on the modern EVE capital battlefield. Scaling their self-repair capabilities along with the HP boost would just make them more capable of solo-work which is not desired. Fielding a supercap should require some planning and teamwork.

Size of Supercarriers - Not changing for 1.1 but I'm going to talk some more about this to Art because e-peens should look like e-peens.

Fighter Bomber damage - with max skills, 20 Fighter Bombers will do 8000 DPS; 10000 DPS with the Nyx.

Litel Gril
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.12.27 19:53:00 - [449]
 

Edited by: Litel Gril on 27/12/2009 19:53:31
Originally by: CCP Abathur
Edited by: CCP Abathur on 27/12/2009 19:22:16

Docking Supercaps - No. If this ever happens it would likely be the result of a very expensive infrastructure or outpost upgrade and would only be allowed in player built outposts in 0.0. This would also need to be done in tandem with changes in docking / aggression mechanics. Even then, don't take this as any commitment that it may ever be allowed.

DD in lo sec - There are no plans to allow this for 1.1.

Naglfar- There are no further changes planned for 1.1. It's not getting a third turret and it's not going to lose its missile hardpoints.

Self-repair bonuses on supercaps - Not going to happen for 1.1 and possibly ever. The HP buff is intended to improve these ship's survivability and make them viable combatants on the modern EVE capital battlefield. Scaling their self-repair capabilities along with the HP boost would just make them more capable of solo-work which is not desired. Fielding a supercap should require some planning and teamwork.

Size of Supercarriers - Not changing for 1.1 but I'm going to talk some more about this to Art because e-peens should look like e-peens.

Fighter Bomber damage - with max skills, 20 Fighter Bombers will do 8000 DPS; 10000 DPS with the Nyx.


you're starting to sound like nozhugh
moms should be able to do at least 15k dps
dd's should allso be alowed in low sec

seriously.. you even said on fanfest that you made the new DD SO IT CAN BE USED IN LOW SEC... dont take your words back and feed us with crap like 'There are no plans to allow this for 1.1'... i know you guys support carebears but this is something that should be alowed from the day 1 of dominion.Mad

Jade Kitana
Posted - 2009.12.27 20:29:00 - [450]
 

Edited by: Jade Kitana on 27/12/2009 20:30:39
Originally by: Litel Gril

you're starting to sound like nozhugh
moms should be able to do at least 15k dps
dd's should allso be alowed in low sec

seriously.. you even said on fanfest that you made the new DD SO IT CAN BE USED IN LOW SEC... dont take your words back and feed us with crap like 'There are no plans to allow this for 1.1'... i know you guys support carebears but this is something that should be alowed from the day 1 of dominion.Mad



Silly Gril, regardless of how one feels, they need to talk the company line for the most part. Rolling Eyes

One of the reasons Devs don't like sharing persoanl opinions is because of what you just did. You assume that an idea for a feature can't evolve over time.

When you are getting most of what you are asking for, you shouldn't cry over the details.

It seems you didn't learn anything from the last time they floated Super Carrier ideas, they killed it because of all the silly crying going on.


Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (34)

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