Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Rachel Cotey
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:43:00 -
[1]
Ever since the Mom buff we have seen Them being used as they were Intended; To be a dominating capital force on the battlefield. But In recent times we have seen the numbers of supercaps grow an enormous amount. On todays modern battlefield we can expect muliple moms being dropped along with some titans and mostly bs support. The issue is not with the Mom itself but with the number of them on the battlefeild vs other caps. 20 billion to a 0.0 alliance is chump change. Because of this Moms have almost completely phased out a whole class of ship; The dreadnaught. Now people are gonna say, " oh well you can field many more dreads than moms yadda yadda." The fact of the matter is 9 times out of ten the amount of dreads does not make up for the amount of moms on the field. Not to mention they have rediculous usefull dps, and do not have to enter seige, not to mention they are immune to ewar and can be repped. Dreads have to sit themselves in one spot for 10 mins and prey they do not get primaried first. The Huge issue is tracking. Dreads cannon deal damage to moving targets in any usefull manner. Somtimes even carriers can speed tank a dread fleet. There is a multitude of other problems, but the main one is deads are useless. COLD HARD FACT a whole ship class. Why use dreads to seige a tower when u can use supers etc...
I Think CCP should address this problem by either reducing the number of supers somehow, or Buffing dreads ( remove seige mod- bs size tracking ) somthing of that manner to make them somwhat usefull again.
let me know what you guys think, obviously you arnt all going to have the same opinions.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:50:00 -
[2]
I think the only logical solution is that capital ship warfare be a separate game element entirely.
First, they should be completely inapplicable in engagements versus non-capitals and vice versa. (one rifter or one hundred rifters won't make a dent to a capital ship. Capital ships would not be able to RR, SB, neut or do anything else to non-capital ships.)
Second, and more importantly, there should be a clear application for them in game that is not able to be accomplished with non-capitals.
Yeah it would be a radical change and if I was reading it instead of typing it I'd probably initially want to say no.... but it makes sense.
--- Players are losing faith and loyalty in CCP due previous expansions not living up to player expectations. The CSM and CCP agreed that expectation management can be improved |
Koragoni SkyKnight
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:55:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Koragoni SkyKnight on 08/03/2011 18:57:19 The question is do dreads need an adjustment or do SCs?
I've always wondered why the Titan requires Cap Ships V, and the SC needs only Cap Ships I. I barely consider myself useful in an Archon, but I can fly an Aeon short of being able to use the fighter bombers.
My knee jerk solution is to either boost the skill reqs of the Super Carrier to require Capital Ships V. Or, remove the ewar immunity.
This is a game design issue I've spent a considerable amount of time thinking about, and yet don't really have any solid ideas that will fix it. It is likely that CCP is in the same boat. The MOM just didn't fit in, so they gave it some new toys and shined it up... and it became the FOTM. They aren't invulnerable by any stretch.
Dreads VS SC? Why skill up for a dread at all anymore? Get a holding alt, cake to do with a SC. Skill up to be a good carrier pilot and have an SC on the side. Who needs dreads? Which, is the obvious issue.
|
Ahz
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 19:27:00 -
[4]
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Supercaps (ships that cannot doc) should require regular resupply with large amounts of water, stront, workers, spare parts, etc... Without which they suffer increasing losses in function.
With correct balancing, the overhead associated with supporting a standing army of Titans and Moms will necessarily limit the number that any large alliance can field at any given time.
|
Rodrigo Milani
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 19:37:00 -
[5]
HaZ StuFF CaN I your?
|
randomname4me
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 20:04:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ahz I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Supercaps (ships that cannot doc) should require regular resupply with large amounts of water, stront, workers, spare parts, etc... Without which they suffer increasing losses in function.
With correct balancing, the overhead associated with supporting a standing army of Titans and Moms will necessarily limit the number that any large alliance can field at any given time.
The change in sov mechanics have already shown that this type of mechanic will do nothing to mitigate the power of large sov holders. If anything they will just keep large stockpiles of the necessary goods around and top up the necessary ships before each engagement. Remember the ships were initially designed to cost ridiculous amount if isk and resources to build as a way of controlling their numbers... see how well that worked. Increasing the skill requirements is also pointless as even making them equal to titans only adds a few weeks worth of time sinks to the equation. The only way to discourage the use of a certain ship type is to nerf them or to add a counter to them.
Petition|Successful|Reimbursement|Lag Pick 3 |
Dorian Wylde
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 20:17:00 -
[7]
Originally by: randomname4me
Originally by: Ahz I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Supercaps (ships that cannot doc) should require regular resupply with large amounts of water, stront, workers, spare parts, etc... Without which they suffer increasing losses in function.
With correct balancing, the overhead associated with supporting a standing army of Titans and Moms will necessarily limit the number that any large alliance can field at any given time.
The change in sov mechanics have already shown that this type of mechanic will do nothing to mitigate the power of large sov holders. If anything they will just keep large stockpiles of the necessary goods around and top up the necessary ships before each engagement. Remember the ships were initially designed to cost ridiculous amount if isk and resources to build as a way of controlling their numbers... see how well that worked. Increasing the skill requirements is also pointless as even making them equal to titans only adds a few weeks worth of time sinks to the equation. The only way to discourage the use of a certain ship type is to nerf them or to add a counter to them.
While I agree it isn't the perfect solution, I think it is a rather elegant one, and would be a good start in alleviating some of the issues. It would also have the added benefit of buffing Industry rather well, particularly PI.
And the initial cost design worked well, until the game population rose higher and higher. Cost can't be a controlling factor anymore, because it hurts smaller groups and individuals too much. Introducing a supply mechanic to supercaps similar to starbases would work well, because the small groups with 1 or 2 ships could still handle it easily, but the larger alliances trying to field dozens at once would get burned out having to do so much PI. Or, low sec pirates would get a nice payday with the increase in supply runs from high sec. Either way, the entire game economy would benefit, which is a good thing. |
Cydori
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 20:26:00 -
[8]
The "problem" of supercaps is vastly overstated. There are several hundred of them in a game of several hundred thousand people. Three quarters of the EVE playerbase have never even seen a supercap.
Working as intended. |
Banechild
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 20:38:00 -
[9]
Well they could change tracking penalty for siege to increase gun signature instead, this would allow them to hit moving targets and dreads would still be next to useless against BS sized targets.
|
jedi883
Velik Dohodki
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 20:44:00 -
[10]
One way to counter them whould be for ccp to introduce a sub captial anti cap ship because if fighter bombers can do it and there relatively a small ship. Why cant we have a player piloted ship thats sub cap to do that as well. |
|
Dalek Commander
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:01:00 -
[11]
Fighter Bombers can not attack an online Tower. For those you need the dreads.
|
Ahz
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:05:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Dorian Wylde Either way, the entire game economy would benefit, which is a good thing.
You and I are on the same page here.
I also think player outposts should require regular resupply for the same reason. Ideally with materials that can only come from temperate planets and / or certain locations in Empire or some other region.
Putting more of an economic burden on maintaining these large space ornaments does a number of things: - It limits their expansion in a way that increased cost or skill points do not - Gives production and manufacturing a huge boost - Gives pirates more activity as people have to transport more materials - Makes SOV warfare more complex as constraining resupply lines becomes a key strategy to starve out opponents - Makes certain Eve space more valuable than others because of the native resources (reason to fight for prime real estate) - Makes ship and outpost choice much more interesting as different Titans require different fuel and spare parts But the key problems is one that CCP didn't seem to anticipate when they first created the game: Players come to Eve and stick with it for years. Eventually anyone who plays long enough will have both the skills and the ISK for a Titan (or whatever giant e-peen CCP dreams up next).
The only way to constrain their use is with some overhead cost mechanic.
|
Night Epoch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:14:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Night Epoch on 08/03/2011 21:14:43
Originally by: Cydori The "problem" of supercaps is vastly overstated. There are several hundred of them in a game of several hundred thousand people. Three quarters of the EVE playerbase have never even seen a supercap.
Working as intended.
No it's not.
When a Nyx blob cynos in, the fight is over.
You cannot counter a Nyx blob with a bigger Nyx blob, as the resulting lag would render the game unplayable, and the fight is over anyway.
A supercapital blob cannot be effectively countered by any viable fleet besides a bigger supercapital blob. The class is therefore unbalanced.
Solution: nerf Supercarriers or buff dreads. I like the idea of making supercarrier fleets logistically more difficult to maintain, rather than nerfing their power outright (as the class itself really is pretty freaking awesome).
The Dread is made utterly useless thanks to SC blobs. Buffing the class as a whole could make them viable as an effective counter.
|
randomname4me
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:36:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Ahz
Originally by: Dorian Wylde Either way, the entire game economy would benefit, which is a good thing.
You and I are on the same page here.
I also think player outposts should require regular resupply for the same reason. Ideally with materials that can only come from temperate planets and / or certain locations in Empire or some other region.
Putting more of an economic burden on maintaining these large space ornaments does a number of things: - It limits their expansion in a way that increased cost or skill points do not - Gives production and manufacturing a huge boost - Gives pirates more activity as people have to transport more materials - Makes SOV warfare more complex as constraining resupply lines becomes a key strategy to starve out opponents - Makes certain Eve space more valuable than others because of the native resources (reason to fight for prime real estate) - Makes ship and outpost choice much more interesting as different Titans require different fuel and spare parts But the key problems is one that CCP didn't seem to anticipate when they first created the game: Players come to Eve and stick with it for years. Eventually anyone who plays long enough will have both the skills and the ISK for a Titan (or whatever giant e-peen CCP dreams up next).
The only way to constrain their use is with some overhead cost mechanic.
Don't get me wrong. I think massive mom blobs are an issue that needs to be dealt with. I also think adding a continued need for resupply (other then jump fuel) is a good idea that boosts the games economy but it will not have the detrimental effect on large sov holders you think it will. Remember large sov holders are such not because thy have moms or titans or whatever. They are large sov holders because they have numbers IE plenty of peeons to collect and transport the supplies for them. Using a resupply mechanic on supercaps makes life harder for smaller entities wile only slightly inconveniencing larger entities. To truly fix unbalanced supercaps they need a nerf or a counter.
Petition|Successful|Reimbursement|Lag Pick 3 |
Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 22:13:00 -
[15]
How about this change for SC's (and maybe carriers)?
Fighter bombers flying off an SC has collision avoidance to other FB's off the same SC. They do NOT have collision avoidance to FB's from other SC. If two FB's collide, they each suffer 20% damage.
In effect, this would reduce the number of SB's that are useful.
CCP would have to have collision detection for FB's (something which may not be cheap, but hey...), and when two FB's flying off different SC's collide, there goes 20% of each of their HP. After 5 collisions.... Kaboom!
The other idea (which someone else also mentioned and which is probably more useful), is to make sure that neither SC's, NOR Titans can target sub-capital ships at all (smartbombs would still work).
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Buster Awesomo
Maximillion Bigglesworth Holdings
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 22:58:00 -
[16]
This is just an idea and not thought out properly, but i'll throw it out there for the debate.
'Seiged Dreads should be able to be repped by triaged carriers'
I'm not sure what the implications of this are, yes carriers will be near insta-popped by the SC/titan death ray, but then you leave the dread DPS on field ... so how to balance it?
|
Hecatonis
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 23:01:00 -
[17]
i have always been a big fan of the sub cap ship made to kill caps. and the smaller the better. a frig made that could be used to swarm and pop the floating wall of death.
it would force more tactics in fleet engagements
__________________________________________________ stop acting like tw*ts and use your brain |
Ahz
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 23:15:00 -
[18]
Originally by: randomname4me I also think adding a continued need for resupply (other then jump fuel) is a good idea that boosts the games economy but it will not have the detrimental effect on large sov holders you think it will. Remember large sov holders are such not because thy have moms or titans or whatever. They are large sov holders because they have numbers IE plenty of peeons to collect and transport the supplies for them. Using a resupply mechanic on supercaps makes life harder for smaller entities wile only slightly inconveniencing larger entities...
I see your point, but I don't think that's a bad thing.
Assume CCP implements this resupply mechanic, and sets the amount of resupply necessary to support any super-cap to an extremely high value.
Immediately, players would start to see fewer solo pwnmobile super carriers in low sec. You would also see fewer Titans and Moms overall as smaller alliances could no longer afford to field them.
Maybe the largest alliances could still bring them into combat but, at some point, even they would have to think about whether or not they would want to invest in bringing the next one online. Not because of the upfront cost, but because of the ongoing costs.
Continue raising the amount of resources required to keep a Titan running and you will eventually run into a limit that even the largest alliances can maintain.
Over time CCP could twiddle with that resource requirement until a reasonable balance of active supercaps is maintained.
|
Stu Pendisdick
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 23:16:00 -
[19]
Simple fix that will make many classes happy:
Require the 2 supercaps to demand goodly amounts of a new planetary material that can ONLY be found in systems with a sec status of .8 and higher.
Cause this new material to behave in such a way as to render unuseable the jump drive system in any ship which tries to carry or contain it other than a supercapital.
No applause, please. Just throw ISK.
|
ivar R'dhak
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 00:52:00 -
[20]
Edited by: ivar R''dhak on 09/03/2011 00:56:24 How about for a change NOT nerfing a ship but instead fixing this ridiculous Supercap hot drop mechanic? Isn¦t the main problem with Supercaps that there¦s always a fricken blob of them instantly materializing?
I propose either introducing a wormhole like mechanic to the whole Supercap jumping, or make it so that a Supercap jump collapses the cyno and it needs to be recharged for the next one. I¦ll leave the "recharge timer" tuning to others.
Leave the current system for normal caps and subcaps, thus giving them back their logistical bonus.
Moms and Titans get a new dedicated BC or BS type Cyno generator, able to cope with the humongous mass of those ships. But then every Supercap will just have their own Supercap cyno ship you say? Then give the fricken things a temporary cynojammer ability during recharge, make them use stupid amounts of ice products so that Supercaps finally become the isk sinks they¦re supposed to be.
Like the maintenance idea for them too. I¦d introduce the heat damage mechanic as a mandatory daily 1 hitpoint damage on the modules, or something similar. ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦ |
|
Cambarus
Thunderfury Blessed Blade of the Windseeker
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 00:54:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Buster Awesomo This is just an idea and not thought out properly, but i'll throw it out there for the debate.
'Seiged Dreads should be able to be repped by triaged carriers'
I'm not sure what the implications of this are, yes carriers will be near insta-popped by the SC/titan death ray, but then you leave the dread DPS on field ... so how to balance it?
I rather like this idea. That said, I think it is worth noting that when CCP buffed SCs, they did so specifically to make them anti-capital ships. Claiming that they're broken because blobs of regular caps can't kill them, when they're explicitly designed to be the counter to regular caps, is a tad silly
Ths issue lies with the fact that there really isn't any counter to super capitals. Were they to introduce a third type of supercap, one that omnoms titans and SCs but is vulnerable to regular caps (or even some sort of tier 2 dread for anti-SC work) then the problem would sort itself out without having to nerf or buff anything to absurd levels or come up with maintenance that would be a massive PITA for anyone not in a massive alliance.
Scissors beating the crap out of paper is not a problem, CCP just forgot to design a rock. |
Ephemeron
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 00:56:00 -
[22]
Hot drops are in serious need nerfing, and not just cause of supercaps.
Tho supercaps could have extra time penalty for jumping. Perhaps the speed of teleportation should be inversely proportional to mass. So lighter things come faster (20-25 seconds) and cap sized things needing 1 minute, with supercaps needing 2 minutes.
|
ivar R'dhak
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 01:06:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Cambarus Scissors beating the crap out of paper is not a problem, CCP just forgot to design a rock.
I disagree. Apart from having not much faith in CCP¦s ability to design a proper ROCK (sup CCP ), I don¦t see much sense in adding even more complexity to the damned complex rock, paper, scissors in space we already have.
This problem needs to be attacked from a different angle. Simply taking away the current ridiculously easy way to swamp a battlefield with overpowered opponents would change the whole ballgame enough, I think ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦ |
Desert Ice78
Gryphon River Industries R-I-P
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 01:48:00 -
[24]
Why aren't dreads used as an anti-super caps ship? I'm thinking that this is the direction the buff should take; you drop a blob of nyx's, I drop a counter blob of dreads.
|
m3rr
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 03:31:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Stu Pendis**** Simple fix that will make many classes happy:
Require the 2 supercaps to demand goodly amounts of a new planetary material that can ONLY be found in systems with a sec status of .8 and higher.
Cause this new material to behave in such a way as to render unuseable the jump drive system in any ship which tries to carry or contain it other than a supercapital.
No applause, please. Just throw ISK.
This is a terrible idea and you deserve no isk. Why should things that can only be used in 0.0 require anything whatsoever from highsec?
Highsec needs a nerf as it is... too easy to make good isk risk free.
|
Acac Sunflyier
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 03:53:00 -
[26]
Originally by: randomname4me The only way to discourage the use of a certain ship type is to nerf them or to add a counter to them.
Adding a counter won't do anything. You will just end up with more than one fleet of super carriers and you have a blob again.
|
Cambarus
Thunderfury Blessed Blade of the Windseeker
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 04:08:00 -
[27]
Originally by: ivar R'dhak
Originally by: Cambarus Scissors beating the crap out of paper is not a problem, CCP just forgot to design a rock.
I disagree. Apart from having not much faith in CCP¦s ability to design a proper ROCK (sup CCP ), I don¦t see much sense in adding even more complexity to the damned complex rock, paper, scissors in space we already have.
I terms of adding new types of ships, if they fill a realistic niche that is not already occupied IMO it's a good thing. Eve is complicated, it's one of the things some of us happen to like about it, and the 90 degree learning curve that keeps (most of) the idiots out being extended just a little bit is always welcome. And really, saying you don't have faith in CCP to design something kind of invalidates the whole argument you're making doesn't it? If you've no faith in CCP to properly balance a new counter to SCs, wtf makes you think them doing anything else to fix them is going to work?
Originally by: ivar R'dhak
This problem needs to be attacked from a different angle. Simply taking away the current ridiculously easy way to swamp a battlefield with overpowered opponents would change the whole ballgame enough, I think
I could go for a nerf to alliance logistics. Jump bridges/cyno networks and even plain old cynos make moving large fleets around way too easy.
Originally by: Desert Ice78 Why aren't dreads used as an anti-super caps ship? I'm thinking that this is the direction the buff should take; you drop a blob of nyx's, I drop a counter blob of dreads.
SCs and titans were specifically changed to counter dreads, which were quickly becoming the mainstay of most nullsec fleets. The new battleships, if you will. Buffing dreads or carriers to the point of them being a counter to supercaps would be "counter"-productive *badumtss* |
Ocih
Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 04:15:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Ocih on 09/03/2011 04:16:54 Killing Super Carriers can be done. It just isn't because null alliances are gun shy right now. Drop half a dozen titans on the field, Doomsday nuke a supercap it dies. Of course before that happens the server dies and then people are stuck trying to figure out how to get thier titans out of hostile space without getting it nuked.
And that is actually the function of Dread fleets. To kill titans. But again because they are a node crasher, they don't get seen and with no titans, no need for dreads. |
Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 04:33:00 -
[29]
The function of Dreads was designed and determined before CCP even finished redesigning the concept of a Titan. And Carriers weren't even an itch in TomB's pantaloons.
So bascially, Dreads are out moded.
~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~
Tiericide |
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar Cloakers
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 04:44:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ocih Edited by: Ocih on 09/03/2011 04:16:54 Killing Super Carriers can be done. It just isn't because null alliances are gun shy right now. Drop half a dozen titans on the field, Doomsday nuke a supercap it dies. Of course before that happens the server dies and then people are stuck trying to figure out how to get thier titans out of hostile space without getting it nuked.
Thats not a very good argument.
Supercarriers break one of the oldest rules of EvE - there should be no solopwnmobile.
A supercarrier can be killed but only if you blob it to hell. A single supercarrier requires at least 20 subcapitals to kill it and further requires specific fleet composition or it escapes or kills everything aka solopwnage).
Supercarriers also break established capital ship rules, where the awesome power of the capital is offset by somewhat crippling penalties when those powers are used.
SC simply need to be put back in their place, so they fit in line with the dps / ehp / special ability gradient that is supposed to be present with each jump up through the ship classes.
--------------------------------------------- I AM BETTER THAN YOU. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |