Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Furb Killer
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 11:09:00 -
[31]
In other words: alts online, since super caps pretty much forces you to use alts.
Dont think this is perfect solution, but something needs to be done.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 12:33:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Furb Killer In other words: alts online, since super caps pretty much forces you to use alts.
Dont think this is perfect solution, but something needs to be done.
If you think something needs to be done but do not agree with this proposal - then why are you supporting it?
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 13:02:00 -
[33]
Something is better than nothing.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 14:36:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 23/03/2010 14:37:37
Originally by: Furb Killer Something is better than nothing.
In before godwin.
that's what germany thought when it voted ****** in during the economical crisis of the thirties
In after godwin.
If you want something to be done about it, write up a proposal that you agree with rather than supporting some ****ty rant like this.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
Marlona Sky
D00M. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 16:04:00 -
[35]
I would be for this:
A players ship can NOT be remote repaired if they are not logged in.
Carriers RRing titans till they disapear is total bull****.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 16:15:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Marlona Sky I would be for this:
A players ship can NOT be remote repaired if they are not logged in.
Carriers RRing titans till they disapear is total bull****.
Now that is something I could be in favour of.
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
Scerolikk Teromni
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 18:55:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Marlona Sky I would be for this:
A players ship can NOT be remote repaired if they are not logged in.
Carriers RRing titans till they disapear is total bull****.
Now that is something I could be in favour of.
Bull****, why shouldn't I be able to remote rep a ship sitting in space? It doesn't matter if it has a pilot. What we need is to make a ship that's tackled NOT disappear. Then while you have the titan tackled, you shoot at the RRing carrier until he pops or goes away and then go back to killing the titan. Also, the way I understand cynos is that you can still jump when you're tackled.... maybe make it so that you can't jump when you're being pointed by a scrambler. These two mechanics would greatly reduce the use of supercapitals, and we wouldn't need these stupid upkeep cost rules put forth by people who don't like having their carriers and battleships one-shotted by a roaming titan.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 19:02:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Scerolikk Teromni
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Marlona Sky I would be for this:
A players ship can NOT be remote repaired if they are not logged in.
Carriers RRing titans till they disapear is total bull****.
Now that is something I could be in favour of.
Bull****, why shouldn't I be able to remote rep a ship sitting in space? It doesn't matter if it has a pilot. What we need is to make a ship that's tackled NOT disappear. Then while you have the titan tackled, you shoot at the RRing carrier until he pops or goes away and then go back to killing the titan. Also, the way I understand cynos is that you can still jump when you're tackled.... maybe make it so that you can't jump when you're being pointed by a scrambler. These two mechanics would greatly reduce the use of supercapitals, and we wouldn't need these stupid upkeep cost rules put forth by people who don't like having their carriers and battleships one-shotted by a roaming titan.
well any counter you put in shouldnt mean "less use of the ship" those ships had been pos blingbling for long enough. one could argue about tackled ships not disappearing. (sounds like a fair deal aswell), but jumping to a cyno should be only blocked by bubbles. (you cant point supercaps anyway)
about headshotted carriers and battleships .... with the locking time of a titan, you should atleast be able to get your battleship out. and most carriers that got one shot did either do station games or were travel without support. no sorry for them. :)
|
Orb Lati
Minmatar ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 21:07:00 -
[39]
Some would say that all capital ships already have a maintenance cost attached to their use in the form of ice products consumed through out their use. A titan that never jumps and never uses it jump portal or doomsday, doesnt cost money to maintain, but then isnt really a huge threat to anybody either.
I would only support a maintenance cost for a titan if there was a maintenance cost for all ships. Provisions and reactor fuel built from NPC/planetary resources that are consumed per hour at various rates dependent on ship class.
"We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible" |
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 22:49:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Orb Lati Some would say that all capital ships already have a maintenance cost attached to their use in the form of ice products consumed through out their use. A titan that never jumps and never uses it jump portal or doomsday, doesnt cost money to maintain, but then isnt really a huge threat to anybody either.
I would only support a maintenance cost for a titan if there was a maintenance cost for all ships. Provisions and reactor fuel built from NPC/planetary resources that are consumed per hour at various rates dependent on ship class.
I am all for maintnance cost for all capitals and super-caps.
|
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.03.24 08:08:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Orb Lati Some would say that all capital ships already have a maintenance cost attached to their use in the form of ice products consumed through out their use.
If isotope cost and/or volume was increased substantially then perhaps that would apply We see an approximation with dreads and the stront they use (expensive+cargo hungry).
Maintenance cost does not necessarily have to be ISK based, making it a time sink by requiring more logistics to move stuff makes for a similar drawback. Benefit is that a volume/isk increase, rather than just isk, incorporates a sort of scaling on its own since the fuel needed to move 20-30 Titans/Moms would require loads of hauling = man-power .. might actually be a better solution altogether since moving stuff can not be bought or printed in Empire.
|
Trader Jen
|
Posted - 2010.03.24 11:30:00 -
[42]
I find it funny sok has zero reply for my well thought out argument. |
Crim D'Gual
|
Posted - 2010.03.25 01:58:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Crim D''Gual on 25/03/2010 02:06:03 im never gonna fly one of these or pretend to know all the mechanics....
but to me it only seems logical that Titans are sorta like the real world equivalent of SUV's. At a certain point gas is gonna be more expensive and smart cars and hybrids become a viable option to get to where you want to go.
A titan is bigger than a pos, and for some alliance members pos upkeep is a full time occupation in EVE, not to mention that it does cost a pretty penny every month to own and keep a pos network online. I DONT GIVE A FLYING F IF A TITAN USES WEAPONS OR NOT, IT IS AN IMPORTANT FLEET ASSET TO THOSE THAT HAVE THEM - even if it just sits in a pos like a rorqual all day.. and bridges fleets across space (the majority do just this).
This aspect is being ignored to a large extent in this discussion, a ship that is as big as an outpost, and in the vast majority of cases more important in a battle (EVEN WITHOUT FIRING A SINGLE SHOT!!!!), should cost a considerable amount to crew and maintain on a monthly basis.
*edit - to argue otherwise is like saying the light dictor's bubble didnt affect the outcome of a gate fight when the guy decided not to try warp off after seeing it pop up
|
Mahke
Aeon Of Strife Discord.
|
Posted - 2010.03.25 05:58:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Jack bubu To "reduce" number of titans ingame, simply fix the logoff timer on them. happened countless times that a titan was tackled but could logoff before enough firepower could arive to kill him in time, thanks to the HP buff.
Bring more friends?
THIS is why titan (and supercapitals in general, really) proliferation is a bad thing.
It forces people to blob up to kill them. For people who can't/won't blob up, it makes it untenable for them to deploy capitals against a corp or alliance with a supercapital pilot online, which makes committing to major subcapital battles in the presence of a threat to capital escalation untenable, purely on the basis of that single supercapital pilot. Which, since no one likes constantly losing and/or being denied fights, encourages people to attempt to blob up. Furthermore, they create an insurmountable barrier between the old rich and the new and/or poor (unless the latter join a massive blob).
That you somehow seem to think this is okay is why you don't "get" the problem and the thread.
Oh, supported.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |