They literally last for a minute. I’ve watched fortizars fail to kill cruisers in that time. Why even have defensible structures at all. Half the game is moving back to POS at this point for actually defended structures.
5 Likes
One guy in a structure should not be able to stop a determined force from reffing it. Structures should be fought over by fleets, not one guy in the gunner chair vs. a fleet.
If one guy in a Med structure can drive off a squad then the attackers haven’t fit their ships right.
If it’s larger structures then they really need to have the right numbers for the task … not an issue in Null, nor lo nor even Hi sec … just look at all the structures that are already getting easily killed !
I’ve defended in Med structures against attackers and the fitting is so CR*P already that you are very limited in what you can even fit. Astrahus is basically just ok as you potentially have fighters also (even tho CCP nerfed them also not long). The Athanor and Raitaru are just a big joke ! You can fit mods to them but they only give a defence fleet some basic backup.
Structure missile(s if you’re really lucky as only Asty can fit 2) don’t really have that much in DPS:
Cruise (Med Structure) 1100 dps *
Heavy (Med Structure) 550 dps *
Light (Med Structure) 186 dps *
- using a t2 Multirole missile launcher with no BCU (GL fitting one half the time with any other decent mods!) And then most of this damage won’t apply if the targets are actually moving.
In lo sec you can use a Bomb launcher … tho as these are targeted and so slow then any target that isn’t stupid would just ping off and there goes that wasted bomb off into the void of space !
If ppl let bombs hit them then they really don’t care about whatever damage they can do : 51.3 dps with a light guided bombs or 176 dps with Heavy … again IF that manages to apply. And these cost around 2 mill each to build so expensive ammo that is usually ineffective.
If anything Structure Guided bombs should have their flight speed increased as they are always counted as travelling from the launcher which maybe 20odd km further from the target even if the target is showing 0km from the structure!
So if you can even manage to kill an Attacking BC on a med structure then they aren’t paying attention!
Structures need more variation like POSes had … ability to choose whether you fit them for tank or fleet support or go more DPS focussed.
They should also be able to let you tweak the fit while the shield is being attacked so that there’s an option to try and have some counter to what’s being brought (null or Lo sec anyway as Hi sec you’re only going to face subcaps).
a Med POS has more defensive capability that a Med Structure and costs way less - especially now with the added costs of Cores that cost more than the structure itself .
And I mean why shouldn’t one guy in a chair focused on what few tools he has in the structure be able to defend the corp’s strategic asset against one other guy in his chair with his 4 to 12 alts in ships attacking it? 
7 Likes
ALRIGHT! FORTIZAR MATH.
We’ll do both anti-capital changes TQ and SiSi, as well as bomb launcher specific math as well, but for now, going to do two separate ones for the anti-cap and bomb launcher builds. To mix it up a bit, we’ll start with current SiSi numbers, instead of TQ.
So, starting off, we have an anti-capital fortizar, legitimately, purpose built to do very little else but deter, or break, dreadnought escalation, using current SiSi math
Alright, sacrificing a small goat, getting our anti-capital DPS, assuming perfect application stats because dread’s sieged and unmoving, and twin painted with superheavy torps AND full set of t2 anti-capital heavy, and light fighters… 31,238.5 dps, with an alpha strike of 210199, not including fighter alpha strike… okay, that’s, not terrible, still run into the issues of that being, effectively halved or more due to high resist profiles, but, that’s still respectable, given circumstance, right? okay, let’s put in the additional bit of the neuts, 36k GJ every thirty seconds, a lot more pressure to break structure attack dreads there, not amazing, still can be countered by a very good cap booster eater, but a lot less margin for error for them… could reasonably get away with a solo armageddon to break someone crazy enough to field a solo dread against the structure.
No real math on how much this would cost, specifically, but hey, test server numbers!
Alright, let’s transfer this fit to TQ exactly!
alright, same exact considerations, superheavy torps, double paint, the works. DPS including fighters is 41k, 300k alpha strike not factoring fighter salvo damage, same 36k GJ drain every 30 seconds from neuts… A lot more pressure on potential dread drops, and particularly FAXes it looks like, most siege dreads sans the most blinged out examples would have trouble against this, which is kinda the point, I thought. But, considering cost… why don’t we look at that actually.
this fit estimates about 16.3B, in the fitting window, including core, but let’s look at EVEpraisal… alright if you’re buying straight from market for this fit… EVEpraisal says 13.4B, BUT the neut feedback control, Cyclops II standup heavy fighters, and the Missile Flight Processor do not have market values due to no listed volume… that’s… problematic, so… basing off the value of t2 salvage… we’re back up in the 16B+ range, without including the missing fighters.
That’s… a lot, but you know what, for what’s there, it makes some sense. And, after the nerf, for the FORTIZAR, the anti-capital fit is still viable, even if heavily curtailed… I’d prefer to see it remain very high pressure, but… eh, I haven’t owned a lowsec fortizar in years so, its not a change that will hurt me too much, but still needs considering. Which, you know what, I think it has been considered at the L-Set level to some degree. This curtailing isn’t going to completely destroy fortizar defenses against caps, but will make it much dicier.
6 Likes
anticipating CCP merely getting good vibes from all the ‘excitement’ (okay, it’s not exactly in the 1000 replies category of 'wow, eve players love this idea we shat out. weee snort ') and working up a lather to give a keynote about how they’d always intended upwells to be ephemeral and more content drivers than long term assets valuable to actual gameplay in their own rights.
in that vein, throwing my $0.02 into the ring, high sec wardeccers routinely task their structure bashing to multiboxing autistics. Do you really think it’s fair to gimp a carebear’s chances in hell against such a force - seeing as how upwell gunnery isn’t exactly for the faint of heart - it takes a hell of a lot of button mashing and is as far removed from “f1 monkey” as you can get.
we can only field one upwell on grid, whereas a multiboxer simply has to drag us down to his level and beat us with experience. you want to make their job easier?
oh wait, CCP loves ‘destruction’ cuz it means whales will fork out their parent’s CC yet again. weee
2 Likes
LOL. You were always krabbing in null my guy.
Good job Brisc 
1 Like
Current changes don’t really nerf highsec defenses when it gets down to it, in fact, they buff them, with the across the board missile velocity bonuses.
And, as has been stated, this is the first of a few change sets anyway.
Yeah, CCP is well known for being the AGILE company and iterating on stuff, as every FW player will surely attest.
3 Likes
Let’s hope they’re still reading.
1 Like
I’m sure they are, and I’m sure more citadel nerfs are incoming because how dare one guy in a revelation not be able to easily solo an entire structure on his own. That is what the 12 FCs who signed the letter want, after all. Drop one dread on each and be done in an afternoon.
2 Likes
meanwhile they want to keep capitols able to tether to astras and raitarus so that they keep perfect safety — only the big N+1 groups are allowed to deny content with citadels, but woe to the little guy for even attempting to do anything remotely close to them.
1 Like
way to ignore my opening sentence
Let me get this straight, you dont like the idea of knowing the exact time a single dread wiill be sitting all alone in the universe in seige on your structure? Why not just kill it…
I can aleady see your arguement of o but they can just cyno in more and if that is the case then what is the difference you are only prolonging the inevitable.
Sweet summer child.
Don’t get me wrong I would gladly be happy with people’s citadels having massive anti cap weapons in exchange for removing all tackle from citadels so people have to actually lock down ships themselves allowing solo pvpers a way out after warping to a citadel and being locked up compared to now where the structure just deletes all content and you are just dead if you warp there.
But they need to be anti cap weapons then with horrible tracking. like the good old days where signature actually meant something, compared to this watered down eve where everything tracks so damn well. (Looking at you fighter’s who can easily track frigs.)
I’m an old dog, from an era when you calculated how many dreads you needed to one cycle reinforce a tower because the moment that notification email got sent out cyno chains would start lighting from all over to drop on a group of dreads. One cycling a structure isn’t the concern.
Arguing that ‘one person in a gunner seat shouldn’t be able to deter a “determined” attack force’ and then nerfing these things so one guy in a dread can pretty well reliably REF them and you can just keep the rest of your fleet sitting at home on a titan bridge(insert bridge of choice) is hilariously bad. That’s the kind of thing that kills content. At least when you have to move your fleet around, even if it’s only a couple of systems to the next bridge, your ships are out in space to be bombed, stragglers picked off, an opportunity for a at least a skirmish, happen upon another random roaming group, whatever.
5 Likes
Great adding the cores was not enough for you,now your making them even more of a loot pinata.
1 Like
Heck i saw my Azbel in HS die to 4 Leshaks and one logi, guns/fighters did beyond ■■■■ damage to them as it was, and this was in like 2020, not sure if this proposed change would make it even worse or somewhat maybe perhaps better.
2 Likes
That sounds good about the ammo. Here are my beer coaster thoughts
1.) Introduce shield/armor repper and energy transfers to the station to support friendly ships in combat (another choice to fit a station purely on DPS or logistics
2.) More DPS for close-range defense - but less DPS output over 30km (as it is with ships’ weapons)
3.) in high sec nothing may drop from stations and ships - not even the guaranteed core (benefits small corps and is the best remedy against gangs) Eve could be so much more fun for new players and not just a core of 5,000 players with an average of 5 alts.
Well… I took the liberty to check your fitting, and I think I understand why you couldn’t break the group of leshaks. The fitting was only partial, and I did not see any fighter losses in-space… though perhaps you could clarify this.
Regarding the fitting, if I may offer suggestions for the future, that may be more beneficial…
[Azbel, *Simulated Azbel Fitting]
Standup Ballistic Control System II
Standup Ballistic Control System IIStandup Variable Spectrum ECM I
Standup Variable Spectrum ECM I
Standup Target Painter IIStandup Multirole Missile Launcher II
Standup Multirole Missile Launcher II
Standup Heavy Energy Neutralizer II
Standup Heavy Energy Neutralizer IIStandup Manufacturing Plant I
Standup Radar ECM Script x2
Standup Cruise Missile x132Standup Firbolg II x27
This fit, while its not quite able to do everything on its own, would have been much more successful against the listed attackers and logi, being more actively disruptive, and giving opportunities for a small group to assist in forcing them off.
1 Like
To be honest i am not 100% sure myself but i might have used the fighters and noticed they did not do much of anything and just recalled them, i do see one Templar killed when i look in my corp loss history, and something tells me the Leshaks was not T1 fitted exactly 