Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Digital Messiah
Gallente Oregami Ultd
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 03:56:00 -
[1]
An easy to use poll
Please use the rest of this thread to discuss the issue.
Quote: "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"
|
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 06:42:00 -
[2]
I like them just the way they are. Great anti blob machines. Seems like the only folk that want to nerf them are those corps/alliances with a ton of new players who cry about not being king of the hill through numbers alone.
|
Dorian Wylde
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 06:52:00 -
[3]
Not a member of those corps, still want to nerf them.
Not into uselessness, but I do think they need to be accessible to new alliances, but hard to maintain large numbers. Using fuel similar to starbases still seems like the best short term option.
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 06:58:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Windjammer Great anti blob machines.
Fixed. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
|
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 20:39:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Windjammer Great anti blob machines.
Fixed.
Since they've gotten rid of the Titan's ability to fight blobs, what else is there? Do you advocate blob warfare? i.e. conquest through high numbers of cheap ships requiring minimal training?
|
Digital Messiah
Gallente Oregami Ultd
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 21:36:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Windjammer
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Windjammer Great anti blob machines.
Fixed.
Since they've gotten rid of the Titan's ability to fight blobs, what else is there? Do you advocate blob warfare? i.e. conquest through high numbers of cheap ships requiring minimal training?
Because almost every alliance tournament hasn't shown us how smart bombs fair against the bold. I just don't think they should be as powerful. Or without a reasonable counter.
Quote: "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"
|
Ay Liz
Sacred Templars RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 22:32:00 -
[7]
Winter is coming.
|
Estephania
Independent Political Analysts
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 22:35:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Windjammer Since they've gotten rid of the Titan's ability to fight blobs, what else is there? Do you advocate blob warfare? i.e. conquest through high numbers of cheap ships requiring minimal training?
I guess conquest through high numbers of supercapitals requires much more skill or thinking
|
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 22:55:00 -
[9]
were SC so over powered before fighter bombers? remove fighter bombers, let them use another 5 normal fighters at a time.
|
Reldon Gold
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 23:53:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Herping yourDerp were SC so over powered before fighter bombers? remove fighter bombers, let them use another 5 normal fighters at a time.
While being at the cost of 20-25 carriers ? Be reasonable.
|
|
Digital Messiah
Gallente Oregami Ultd
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:01:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Reldon Gold
Originally by: Herping yourDerp were SC so over powered before fighter bombers? remove fighter bombers, let them use another 5 normal fighters at a time.
While being at the cost of 20-25 carriers ? Be reasonable.
Super capital EWAR platforms with capital weapon systems? Carriers fill the role of fight drones?
Quote: "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"
|
Brooks Puuntai
Minmatar Nomadic Asylum
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:01:00 -
[12]
Nerf them across the board and make them Tier 2 Caps. Lower the build cost to 1.5x the amount of Carrier/Dread and reimburse build cost difference to the pilot.
|
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:05:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Estephania
Originally by: Windjammer Since they've gotten rid of the Titan's ability to fight blobs, what else is there? Do you advocate blob warfare? i.e. conquest through high numbers of cheap ships requiring minimal training?
I guess conquest through high numbers of supercapitals requires much more skill or thinking
SuperCapitals are not cheap and they require a ton of skill training. Moreover, they canÆt dock. If you donÆt think it takes more thought to use a SuperCapital than a battleship, please let me know which corp/alliance will let you drive their SuperCaps on the basis of that thinking.
Please try and keep up. Emoticons are no substitute for reading what youÆre responding to.
|
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:12:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Digital Messiah
Originally by: Windjammer
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Windjammer Great anti blob machines.
Fixed.
Since they've gotten rid of the Titan's ability to fight blobs, what else is there? Do you advocate blob warfare? i.e. conquest through high numbers of cheap ships requiring minimal training?
Because almost every alliance tournament hasn't shown us how smart bombs fair against the bold. I just don't think they should be as powerful. Or without a reasonable counter.
Do you find Titans and Dreads to be ineffective against them? I understand that a Dread against a SuperCap is laughable, but surely more Dreads and Carriers can be brought into play than SuperCaps. Carriers doing logistic for a fleet of Dreads in the same way Cruiser size logistic vessels do logistics for Battleships? Throw a supported Titan into that and it should be lights out for a smaller number of SuperCaps.
|
Windjammer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:16:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Herping yourDerp were SC so over powered before fighter bombers? remove fighter bombers, let them use another 5 normal fighters at a time.
Fighter Bombers (FBÆs) initially provided too much dps for the SuperCaps. That was nerfed so that FBÆs were primarily useful against capital ships and regular Fighters were better against sub capital ships than FBÆs.
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:27:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Renan Ruivo on 15/08/2011 00:29:21
Originally by: Windjammer Do you find Titans and Dreads to be ineffective against them? I understand that a Dread against a SuperCap is laughable, but surely more Dreads and Carriers can be brought into play than SuperCaps. Carriers doing logistic for a fleet of Dreads in the same way Cruiser size logistic vessels do logistics for Battleships? Throw a supported Titan into that and it should be lights out for a smaller number of SuperCaps.
Tell that to the DRF. Dropping 5 super carriers to kill a bomber fleet, than 74 super carriers and 24 titans just to reinforce a station is normal these days.. ____________
Originally by: CCP Guard Nobody gets to ruin EVE but us!
|
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:39:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Aloe Cloveris on 15/08/2011 00:42:27
Originally by: Windjammer ... if you donÆt think it takes more thought to use a SuperCapital than a battleship ...
In related videogame news, playing Demoman in TF2 takes skill & finesse. |
DickbeardThePirate
Gallente LODSOFEMONE
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:52:00 -
[18]
Super capitals themselves are fine. The problem is, as always, people.
People horde them, stockpile them, make loads of money and build more supercaps.
Now, one aspect of this - should these people not be allowed to reap the rewards for their time and effort? Saying CCP should nerf the undockable ships just so people who don't work as hard can stand a chance against them is kind of, well, pathetic.
I do believe, however, that something could be done to reduce to longevity of these ships. The first thing that springs to my mind is remove logging off as a workaround for the ships being undockable. If these behemoth ships couldn't magically vanish into thin air but instead remained in the eve world 24/7 then alliances would have work harder to horde and protect them, and would undoubtedly lose a lot more of them.
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 00:59:00 -
[19]
Originally by: ****beardThePirate Super capitals themselves are fine. The problem is, as always, people.
Now, one aspect of this - should these people not be allowed to reap the rewards for their time and effort? Saying CCP should nerf the undockable ships just so people who don't work as hard can stand a chance against them is kind of, well, pathetic.
Cut the crap, the sole people 'work hard' (nice euphemism for farming) to get a supercap is their overpoweredness. I don't see that many of them 'working hard' to, say, pimp out a battleship or to finally start looking for some challenging fights which ineveitably results in heavy losses and in turn the need for a hard work. ---
Originally by: CCP Greyscale Is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?
|
DickbeardThePirate
Gallente LODSOFEMONE
|
Posted - 2011.08.15 01:21:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Fon Revedhort Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 15/08/2011 01:06:48
Originally by: ****beardThePirate Super capitals themselves are fine. The problem is, as always, people.
Now, one aspect of this - should these people not be allowed to reap the rewards for their time and effort? Saying CCP should nerf the undockable ships just so people who don't work as hard can stand a chance against them is kind of, well, pathetic.
Cut the crap, the sole reason people 'work hard' (nice euphemism for farming) to get a supercap is their overpoweredness. I don't see that many of them 'working hard' to, say, pimp out a battleship or to finally start looking for some challenging fights instead of regular blob/gank mentality, which would inevitably result in heavy losses while covering those is the only excuse for any 'hard work' in the first place.
If you don't PvP (getting youself a cap is a nice way of *avoiding* PvP), you don't need isk and thus don't need to work hard. It's pretty simple.
Don't PvP in a ship you can't afford to lose. So they don't PvP as they're clearly unable to cover those losses in any reasonable timeframe.
Yes, people will farm for expensive items if they are good. How is this news?
Well that would also be solved by making them persistent in space. Avoiding PvP in their supercap would be pretty much impossible because sooner or later they're going to find out where your ship is parked and come try to blow it up. More often then not they would be parked around central stations and this would make people take home defence fleets a hell of a lot more seriously as instead of just protecting people's ability to undock they would also be protecting their supercap.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |