Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Remiel Pollard
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
5739
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 12:24:00 -
[91] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Ka'Narlist wrote:If you want caps in high sec NPC corps need to be closed first. So yeah good idea that's cute, you think wardeccing some one with a cap won't result in them folding their corp before the 24hrs has passed to make them a legal target.
Ideally, capital ownership would not apply to anyone in an NPC corp. Anyone dropping to an NPC corp would be unable to use any aspect of any capital they board in highsec.
Personally, I think caps in highsec would be awesome. While I have my reasons, and was thinking about the pros and cons earlier, I am drunk and cannot remember the specifics. All I remember is I liked it.
EDIT: I remember one thing I thought about. Along with NPC corp players being barred from capitals completely, creating more incentive to get people into player corps and keep them there, then given that capitals can use gates, I think caps in high sec would be great provided that cynos continue to be restricted in high sec. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Jin Maci
Synergy Holdings Inc
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 12:36:00 -
[92] - Quote
I AM dd AND SMARTBOMBING IN AMAAR
|
Snucklefruts
Dirty Stinky Pirates
11
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 15:25:00 -
[93] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:Val'Dore wrote:Large POSes were never safe in Hi Sec. Allowing caps in hisec is serious threat against indy Corps with large POSes.
Most POS owners are completely clueless with the defense of their towers. Allowing a small gang of battleships in high sec is a serious threat against indy corps with large POSs.
Capitals in high sec would allow entire systems to be burned in a night. |
Remiel Pollard
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
5740
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 22:59:00 -
[94] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:Val'Dore wrote:Large POSes were never safe in Hi Sec. Allowing caps in hisec is serious threat against indy Corps with large POSes.
Good. It'll be an incentive for them to learn how to defend themselves, cuz if you can't defend what you have, it was never yours to begin with. #DeleteTheWeak GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Hevymetal
Eve Defence Force Cult of War
358
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 23:09:00 -
[95] - Quote
Snucklefruts wrote:Oxide Ammar wrote:Val'Dore wrote:Large POSes were never safe in Hi Sec. Allowing caps in hisec is serious threat against indy Corps with large POSes. Most POS owners are completely clueless with the defense of their towers. Allowing a small gang of battleships in high sec is a serious threat against indy corps with large POSs. Capitals in high sec would allow entire systems to be burned in a night.
Lol, I can't quite decide if that's a bad thing or a good thing.
I mean it would help to have caps available on both sides during the battle but I can foresee more then a few unprepared corps getting decced and 24.5 hours later going, awww man they put 5 or our large towers in reenforced and blew up the 6th we forgot to put stront in already, awww man we had 6 bil in BPOs in the labs there too.
I suppose this furthers the process of Darwinization. I think exposing them to facets of Eve that they may be unfamailar with will force them to learn and adapt or die. This is a betterment in my humble opinion. Learn to protect your assets, especially during war. Take the loot pinatas offline and put some jammers, hardeners and guns online for God's sake :)
EDIT: Dam I type too slow LOL, Remiel Pollard you beat me to it. |
Acac Sunflyier
Control-Space DARKNESS.
673
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 23:16:00 -
[96] - Quote
I, for one, cannot wait to see the afk mining carriers again. |
Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
474
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 23:30:00 -
[97] - Quote
I believe the idea is to break up areas flooded with vets so they can "grow a set" and face each other - not hunt down newbros who won't be able to fly a capital for well over a year.
Like it or not, there has to be areas where new players can operate and not face overwhelming force coming at them or this game won't survive.
Trashing the hell out of it may seem fun to some vets but the account losses wouldn't help the game in any way and would discourage new people from even trying to play. |
Snucklefruts
Dirty Stinky Pirates
12
|
Posted - 2014.10.13 02:18:00 -
[98] - Quote
Hevymetal wrote:Snucklefruts wrote:Oxide Ammar wrote:Val'Dore wrote:Large POSes were never safe in Hi Sec. Allowing caps in hisec is serious threat against indy Corps with large POSes. Most POS owners are completely clueless with the defense of their towers. Allowing a small gang of battleships in high sec is a serious threat against indy corps with large POSs. Capitals in high sec would allow entire systems to be burned in a night. Lol, I can't quite decide if that's a bad thing or a good thing. I mean it would help to have caps available on both sides during the battle but I can foresee more then a few unprepared corps getting decced and 24.5 hours later going, awww man they put 5 or our large towers in reenforced and blew up the 6th we forgot to put stront in already, awww man we had 6 bil in BPOs in the labs there too. I suppose this furthers the process of Darwinization. I think exposing them to facets of Eve that they may be unfamailar with will force them to learn and adapt or die. This is a betterment in my humble opinion. Learn to protect your assets, especially during war. Take the loot pinatas offline and put some jammers, hardeners and guns online for God's sake :) EDIT: Dam I type too slow LOL, Remiel Pollard you beat me to it.
Capitals in High sec with POSs in their current state would be a disaster.
Currently any tower configuration (without active defenders) can be reinforced in a few hours or less by a small dedicated group. This is an extremely narrow window placing the advantage purely for the attacker. After reinforcement the probability of saving a tower becomes very low.
POS owning industrialists only advantage is their numbers, few groups actively siege towers; therefore, the probability that you are that unlucky individual is extremely low.
The industrial changes incentivizes industrialists to assume risk in space in order to be competitive, this is a good thing. However introducing capitals into high sec would make the mightiest towers laughably vulnerable.
Resulting in a disincentive for industrial corps to invest in their space castles. Many will optimize to a skeleton setup that can be packed away in the event of a war.
Industrials that take down their tower in the event of a war is no fun for anybody. |
Kaivar Lancer
KL Commercial and Industrial
556
|
Posted - 2014.10.13 07:28:00 -
[99] - Quote
+1 to the OP.
This is a sandbox. Arbitrary barriers should be lifted wherever possible. |
Maeltstome
Twisted Insanity. The Kadeshi
606
|
Posted - 2014.10.13 12:13:00 -
[100] - Quote
Snucklefruts wrote:
Capitals in High sec with POSs in their current state would be a disaster.
Currently any tower configuration (without active defenders) can be reinforced in a few hours or less by a small dedicated group. This is an extremely narrow window placing the advantage purely for the attacker. After reinforcement the probability of saving a tower becomes very low.
POS owning industrialists only advantage is their numbers, few groups actively siege towers; therefore, the probability that you are that unlucky individual is extremely low.
The industrial changes incentivizes industrialists to assume risk in space in order to be competitive, this is a good thing. However introducing capitals into high sec would make the mightiest towers laughably vulnerable.
Resulting in a disincentive for industrial corps to invest in their space castles. Many will optimize to a skeleton setup that can be packed away in the event of a war.
Industrials that take down their tower in the event of a war is no fun for anybody.
If only there was some mechanic that made it possible for POSes to become invulnerable at low Shield HP for a given amount of time.
What if that amount of time was determined by the player? Like if they could put some sort of fuel into the tower that meant that they could plan how long it would be invulnerable for, in order to organise a defence?
I mean, people might abuse this in order to maximise the invulnerability time so maybe if it used up the same space as the POS fuel bay they would have to balance the ammount of time they spend refuelling the POS each week with the chance that it will be blown up...
|
|
Kaidu Kahn
POT Corp Semper Ardens Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2014.10.13 14:43:07 -
[101] - Quote
Snucklefruts wrote:Hevymetal wrote:Snucklefruts wrote:Oxide Ammar wrote:Val'Dore wrote:Large POSes were never safe in Hi Sec. Allowing caps in hisec is serious threat against indy Corps with large POSes. Most POS owners are completely clueless with the defense of their towers. Allowing a small gang of battleships in high sec is a serious threat against indy corps with large POSs. Capitals in high sec would allow entire systems to be burned in a night. Lol, I can't quite decide if that's a bad thing or a good thing. I mean it would help to have caps available on both sides during the battle but I can foresee more then a few unprepared corps getting decced and 24.5 hours later going, awww man they put 5 or our large towers in reenforced and blew up the 6th we forgot to put stront in already, awww man we had 6 bil in BPOs in the labs there too. I suppose this furthers the process of Darwinization. I think exposing them to facets of Eve that they may be unfamailar with will force them to learn and adapt or die. This is a betterment in my humble opinion. Learn to protect your assets, especially during war. Take the loot pinatas offline and put some jammers, hardeners and guns online for God's sake :) EDIT: Dam I type too slow LOL, Remiel Pollard you beat me to it. Capitals in High sec with POSs in their current state would be a disaster. Currently any tower configuration (without active defenders) can be reinforced in a few hours or less by a small dedicated group. This is an extremely narrow window placing the advantage purely for the attacker. After reinforcement the probability of saving a tower becomes very low. POS owning industrialists only advantage is their numbers, few groups actively siege towers; therefore, the probability that you are that unlucky individual is extremely low. The industrial changes incentivizes industrialists to assume risk in space in order to be competitive, this is a good thing. However introducing capitals into high sec would make the mightiest towers laughably vulnerable. Resulting in a disincentive for industrial corps to invest in their space castles. Many will optimize to a skeleton setup that can be packed away in the event of a war. Industrials that take down their tower in the event of a war is no fun for anybody.
While I understand and agree taking down or having to defend a POS may be "no fun", Welcome to Eve.
Corps should learn how to properly outfit AND defend their POS. If the simple act of planning for an upcoming wardec is too complicatwed for them, then maybe they shouldn't have anchored a POS in the first place. ANY corp with more then 1 active member with half a brain is capable of defending and outfitting a POS. If the battle is futile, plan accordingly, but at least put forth the effort.
Having a POS means taking responsibility for the operations and protection of it. If a corp loses a billion ISK + POS and BPOs due to their laziness or stupidity then I would say it is an invaluable learning experience to them. Hopefully they will learn from it and it won't happen again, but if it does, then they have noone but themselves to blame.
How many lost a ship due to AP - losec laziness before realizing "Hey maybe AP isn't such a good idea"?
|
Snucklefruts
Dirty Stinky Pirates
16
|
Posted - 2014.10.13 16:09:42 -
[102] - Quote
Kaidu Kahn wrote:
While I understand and agree taking down or having to defend a POS may be "no fun", Welcome to Eve.
Corps should learn how to properly outfit AND defend their POS. If the simple act of planning for an upcoming wardec is too complicatwed for them, then maybe they shouldn't have anchored a POS in the first place. ANY corp with more then 1 active member with half a brain is capable of defending and outfitting a POS. If the battle is futile, plan accordingly, but at least put forth the effort.
Having a POS means taking responsibility for the operations and protection of it. If a corp loses a billion ISK + POS and BPOs due to their laziness or stupidity then I would say it is an invaluable learning experience to them. Hopefully they will learn from it and it won't happen again, but if it does, then they have noone but themselves to blame.
How many lost a ship due to AP - losec laziness before realizing "Hey maybe AP isn't such a good idea"?
In our search for the Golden Bar of Soap we have learned that only squeaky clean, best run POS towers have any chance of holding our precious.
To date, only two targets mounted a proper defense. Many old industry corps are just one player and their science/production alts.
From your comment and the one previous, they suggests that the one player industry corporation meta should die off as it is in the best interest of the game to have players keep what they can defend. I agree with this, my concern with capitals entering high sec is the change would make tower hits too easy and remove the incentive for industrialists heavily invest in their space castle. |
Kaidu Kahn
POT Corp Semper Ardens Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 19:34:55 -
[103] - Quote
Anything mentioned in Vegas about capital usage of hisec gates? |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2935
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 22:41:09 -
[104] - Quote
Kaidu Kahn wrote:Anything mentioned in Vegas about capital usage of hisec gates? No, but the fact that caps will be able to use gates AT ALL brings the matter to mind, and hence people are exploring it. One thing to always keep in mind: Allowing Caps into high sec, and allowing Caps to fight in high sec are two different issues. CCP could allow one without allowing the other.
Also, why turn high sec into something like low sec? The game already has low sec. Turning high sec into low sec does not add anything to the game as it is already there. If you want to shoot a POS with a Cap, just go to low and do it.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/
|
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
205
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 03:18:03 -
[105] - Quote
Amonios Zula wrote:Caps in highsec eh, bump bump Gank! and people who have no business flying caps will lose them A half decent fitted cap will require other caps to get ganked.
If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.
|
lord xavier
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
41
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 06:27:25 -
[106] - Quote
With the current state of dreads and carriers, yeah allow them in high sec. LOL At the POS conversation.
Dreads: Seriously, what is the issue with these in high sec? They are not immortal, there is no reason to treat these as immortal. A properly fitted dread, meant to do what dreads are meant for, structure/cap bashing. Will die to 20 cruisers. Stay under its guns, you know that mythical tracking thing that highsec dwellers and null-bears know nothing about. Any small group of scrubs can take out a Moros/Rev by being under its guns and letting it cap out. What about a phoenix/nag? Oh no! I have to remove my salvager for a neut. Sad days.
Carriers: Lul Triage. Ever hear of a curse? What about the changes to the geddon they did some time back? If you are expecting a capital in your wardec fight. Bring neuts, cap out the triage completely. Then go to town on the subcaps. Fighters being used. Thats cool, shoot them if you have ships big enough on field for them to wreck. Not really a hard concept. Though, let us be honest. When I use 10x fighters on a POCO, I do less damage than when I am just in a Talos. Carriers are useful in fights when you are either a triage or guardian/slowcat carrier using a mix of drones to your advantage.
Using the slowcat/guardian carrier doctrine I could see getting out of hand. Though, how many people in high sec could actually run that effectively? Really, how many non-low/null sec entities could run that to the scale where it would actually put carriers into that "immortal" stage in high sec? Sure, it will take 7 days to train an archon to level 4, another 6 or 7 days each for RAR and REE to 4. So, since you wont need the JDC skill (in theory) you are looking at 30 days to train, (to include capital ships). Now you need to get the archon. Now you have 1 person with it. Lets say in theory you actually have 10 guardian/slowcats on field with 10 armor BS, armor links and some HICs.
Lets look at the counter, so you see those ships on field with your neutral eyes. First thought HICs. Just to keep the caps there. You dont have the ability to bring in capitals of your own without these guys running away/docking up but you still want to fight. So lets get some EWAR with a 4 or 5 rooks/falcons/scorpions to make the carriers lose lock. Maybe 2 or 3 wont be jammed so you will be fighting against reps though still breakable. Get some logibros together so you actually have reps of your own. Since you are bringing scorps you will want to bring armor DPS to compliment your (armor) scorps and HICs. Keep your ECM spread and on constant watch on the carriers. This is -not- to shut down their "epic" DPS numbers it is to shut down their RR capability on their subcaps. Now just sort out your damage.
The entire idea of capitals in high sec is not that bad of an idea. I mean you will have to bring in your own capitals via gate. There is not WTFCYNOUP drop in 100 to counterblob. You would have the same war dec profile as a lowsec fight but you have to plan out more and watch less. You will have less in-game mechanics to worry about. Capital ships get taken down by lesser-tier ships often.
Now, in regards to Titans and Supercarriers. yes, leave them out of high sec. A titan has absolutely no use at all in high sec. None at all. Need to get supplies into lowsec? Get a jump freighter like the rest of us. A supercarrier has less use as they are useless for a POS bash. There is no sov-structure to grind in high sec. Without a cyno to jump to a supercarrier would be only beneficial in a capital fight if it was already in system and even then, it would be greatly overpowered given its EHP and spider tanking abilities with EWAR immunity.
Oh they will just jump out after their triage/siege cycle though!! :: Train Heavy Interdiction Cruiser and stop being bad.
You can't break a carrier in triage!! :: You're a horrible player. You can break anything in this game by shipping into ships with certain roles. The only thing you cannot "break" is supercarriers unless you are straight out-damaging their reps, which is damn near impossible with enough of them put together. Hence why supercapitals need to stay out of high sec.
Dreads will 1 shot any battleship that goes against it! :: No. Get under its guns. If you think dreads just 1 volley off BS go ahead and look at my Navy Apoc loss from a few days ago. There were three dreads on field. 2 died, 1 got out. We suffered no Battleship loss from dreads at all. (well maybe one but I am pretty sure he died to the T3s/Mach combined fire and not the dreads)
It will make missions easier than they are with carriers!! :: Carriers cant use acceleration gates.
You can assign fighters! :: Talos would be more effective than fighters, get it banned from HS as well. ****, get all Tech 3 cruisers banned too. They are way too OP. |
lord xavier
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
41
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 06:40:04 -
[107] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:Amonios Zula wrote:Caps in highsec eh, bump bump Gank! and people who have no business flying caps will lose them A half decent fitted cap will require other caps to get ganked. No.
If 21 catalysts can do 145,022 damage to a Charon. Then you will want to do roughly 811,716 fast gank damage to a properly fitted Moros running hits hardeners. If it is being ganked you will want to account for at least half the damage to be in siege with its repper on. So in theory you will want 115-120 catalyst for a dread gank. Obviously for a capital gank you will want to go with the Tornado or Talos. As I do not do anything with ganks other than catalysts I am not sure the math on that but, 115-120 catalyst is still a hell of a lot cheaper than a dread. |
Itrala
Tycoon Innovations Joker's Legion
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 09:55:09 -
[108] - Quote
Why care too much about ganks ? Seriously stop being butthurt about cap in high sec. Supers are OP for their own good and are made for cap killing. Can't kill one unless you get a dread fleet. Fine keep them in low (same for titan)
Carriers dies to BS and even cruiser all the time. Nado will alpha the carrier or dread really quick once they know their tactics. which is just a bit more costly THATS IT. Cost is not a balancing factor and it has to remain that way.
Carrier for missions ? So what ? High sec doesnt pay anyway.
More people in High sec ? Who cares ? You'll go gank them thats all. Most null sec and low sec alliances are under wardec anyway why care if one of the scrub gets a cap in high sec and gets killed by a marmite or forsaken cruiser fleet while travelling Niarja?
I won't mind the NPC corp having no caps for now. But I'd say stop complaining about DD when they just put that possible in lowsec. No cyno in High equal no hotdrop by fleet of carriers, No DD in high sec either. so YES your freighters are safe from titans (can't go there anyway)
There are ways to kill a Cap. Learn them, try them in lowsec on ratting carrier in gallente space (a few of them out there always ratting) |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
26
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 10:07:08 -
[109] - Quote
Just imagine Jita undock if capitals were allowed into highsec.
GòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉ
-áDominique Vasilkovsky
GòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉGòÉ
|
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
208
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 19:00:51 -
[110] - Quote
lord xavier wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:Amonios Zula wrote:Caps in highsec eh, bump bump Gank! and people who have no business flying caps will lose them A half decent fitted cap will require other caps to get ganked. No. If 21 catalysts can do 145,022 damage to a Charon. Then you will want to do roughly 811,716 fast gank damage to a properly fitted Moros running hits hardeners. If it is being ganked you will want to account for at least half the damage to be in siege with its repper on. So in theory you will want 115-120 catalyst for a dread gank. Obviously for a capital gank you will want to go with the Tornado or Talos. As I do not do anything with ganks other than catalysts I am not sure the math on that but, 115-120 catalyst is still a hell of a lot cheaper than a dread.
No.
If 21 catalysts can do 145,022 damage to a Charon. Then you will want to do roughly 811,716 fast gank damage to a properly fitted Moros running hits hardeners. If it is being ganked you will want to account for at least half the damage to be in siege with its repper on. So in theory you will want 700,000 gatling railgun fit ibis' for a dread gank. Obviously for a capital gank you will want to go with the Tornado or Talos. As I do not do anything with ganks other than ibis' I am not sure the math on that but, 700,000 free ibis' is still a hell of a lot cheaper than a dread.
If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.
|
|
Tengu Grib
Happy Fun times Spaceships in Space
574
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 20:08:52 -
[111] - Quote
Mocam wrote:I believe the idea is to break up areas flooded with vets so they can "grow a set" and face each other - not hunt down newbros who won't be able to fly a capital for well over a year.
Like it or not, there has to be areas where new players can operate and not face overwhelming force coming at them or this game won't survive.
Trashing the hell out of it may seem fun to some vets but the account losses wouldn't help the game in any way and would discourage new people from even trying to play.
Which reinforces the idea of if you can't protect it, you shouldn't own it. I'm not sure why you think there's a problem.
Tengu Grib> I read that as "Suddenly Noobships" and it made me want to hot drop someone with noobships.
Buhhdust Princess> You have set us a challenge..We will try and do it!!!!!!!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEeBnYi5bG0&feature=youtu.be
|
Hevymetal
Eve Defence Force Cult of War
375
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:16:54 -
[112] - Quote
Tengu Grib wrote:Mocam wrote:I believe the idea is to break up areas flooded with vets so they can "grow a set" and face each other - not hunt down newbros who won't be able to fly a capital for well over a year.
Like it or not, there has to be areas where new players can operate and not face overwhelming force coming at them or this game won't survive.
Trashing the hell out of it may seem fun to some vets but the account losses wouldn't help the game in any way and would discourage new people from even trying to play. Which reinforces the idea of if you can't protect it, you shouldn't own it. I'm not sure why you think there's a problem.
Exactly, don't fly what you can't afford to lose.
Most new players are in NPC corps to start with anyways so they are protected from war-decs. As for ganks, yeah it's going to happen but not by capitals. You want to lose your 5 Bil + capital to Concord ganking a new player in a cruiser? If they are not in an NPC corp then their corpmates need to educated them on what to do/not do during war time.
Caps themselves are ALMOST gank proof, the logistics getting the number of gankers required and then the ISK lost to Concord's destruction will greatly reduce the odds of it ever happening. Ok maybe a LOL fit, AFK, agressed cap, but not a properly fitted cap with a concious pilot.
If capitals fight in hisec it's gonna be against other caps, POSes and warring corp fleets. There will be the occasional mission runner NPC battles as well.
|
Tengu Grib
Happy Fun times Spaceships in Space
578
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 22:25:14 -
[113] - Quote
Hevymetal wrote:Tengu Grib wrote:Mocam wrote:I believe the idea is to break up areas flooded with vets so they can "grow a set" and face each other - not hunt down newbros who won't be able to fly a capital for well over a year.
Like it or not, there has to be areas where new players can operate and not face overwhelming force coming at them or this game won't survive.
Trashing the hell out of it may seem fun to some vets but the account losses wouldn't help the game in any way and would discourage new people from even trying to play. Which reinforces the idea of if you can't protect it, you shouldn't own it. I'm not sure why you think there's a problem. Exactly, don't fly what you can't afford to lose. Most new players are in NPC corps to start with anyways so they are protected from war-decs. As for ganks, yeah it's going to happen but not by capitals. You want to lose your 5 Bil + capital to Concord ganking a new player in a cruiser? If they are not in an NPC corp then their corpmates need to educated them on what to do/not do during war time. Caps themselves are ALMOST gank proof, the logistics getting the number of gankers required and then the ISK lost to Concord's destruction will greatly reduce the odds of it ever happening. Ok maybe a LOL fit, AFK, aggressed cap, but not a properly fitted cap with a concious pilot. If capitals fight in hisec it's gonna be against other caps, POSes and warring corp fleets. There will be the occasional mission runner NPC battles as well.
Don't forget the odd carebears who know nothing about caps, undock in one during a war, siege, and then complain on the forums about how their dreadnaught was killed by cheap cruisers after it drifted off station cause he didn't know you had to stop before entering siege mode. (or some other equally you-own-fault scenario).
The groups I see benefiting the most from combat caps in high sec (distinguishing from simply allowing them to warp through HS, which would be dumb imo) would be POS bashers (obviously), war deccer's (because carrier logi lol's and also blap dreads), and awoxers. Imo, industrialists would suffer greatly. Either that or the solo industrialist would become a thing of the past and they would be forced to form into massive organizations to protect their assets. Which comes back to awoxers benefiting.
Tengu Grib> I read that as "Suddenly Noobships" and it made me want to hot drop someone with noobships.
Buhhdust Princess> You have set us a challenge..We will try and do it!!!!!!!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEeBnYi5bG0&feature=youtu.be
|
R0mparkin
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 23:46:46 -
[114] - Quote
Eldwinn wrote:Hevymetal wrote:
Do you think it will happen again? (capitals allowed in Hi-sec)
Nope.
never again. dreads and titans in 1.0 systems
|
Destoya
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
339
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 00:20:12 -
[115] - Quote
I was a fan of the idea that upon entering highsec, capitals go suspect and have their offensive/support capabilities disabled., perhaps in a way that gives a LE to alliancemates if they are agressed (allied caps will still be unable to fight back)
This allows caps to take shortcuts through HS to bypass certain lowsec chokepoints with the new jump range with the risk that someone in a ceptor tackles the cap, leaving it helpless without friendly subcap support.
Probably too complex and/or confusing of a system with all the necessary special rules to function, however. |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1167
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 01:00:53 -
[116] - Quote
Destoya wrote:I was a fan of the idea that upon entering highsec, capitals go suspect and have their offensive/support capabilities disabled., perhaps in a way that gives a LE to alliancemates if they are agressed (allied caps will still be unable to fight back)
. \
Unless they get a permit from CODE ????
|
Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
483
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 04:47:22 -
[117] - Quote
Hevymetal wrote:Tengu Grib wrote:Mocam wrote:I believe the idea is to break up areas flooded with vets so they can "grow a set" and face each other - not hunt down newbros who won't be able to fly a capital for well over a year.
Like it or not, there has to be areas where new players can operate and not face overwhelming force coming at them or this game won't survive.
Trashing the hell out of it may seem fun to some vets but the account losses wouldn't help the game in any way and would discourage new people from even trying to play. Which reinforces the idea of if you can't protect it, you shouldn't own it. I'm not sure why you think there's a problem. Exactly, don't fly what you can't afford to lose. Most new players are in NPC corps to start with anyways so they are protected from war-decs. As for ganks, yeah it's going to happen but not by capitals. You want to lose your 5 Bil + capital to Concord ganking a new player in a cruiser? If they are not in an NPC corp then their corpmates need to educated them on what to do/not do during war time. Caps themselves are ALMOST gank proof, the logistics getting the number of gankers required and then the ISK lost to Concord's destruction will greatly reduce the odds of it ever happening. Ok maybe a LOL fit, AFK, agressed cap, but not a properly fitted cap with a concious pilot. If capitals fight in hisec it's gonna be against other caps, POSes and warring corp fleets. There will be the occasional mission runner NPC battles as well.
Try a bit more thought would you?
50 frigates can take 5 cruisers. 50 cruisers can take 5 battleships. 50 battleships are fodder to 5 carriers. 50 carriers will take 5 supercarriers or titans.
Simply put, there is no greater step-up than from sub capitals to capitals and the bulk of highsec is sub capital pilots.
This is an *I WIN* ship scenario and without hot drops, triage is a no brainer against only sub-cap pilots.
The time it takes to train up capital skills... Yet there are 10's of thousands of pilots like me out in this game - capable of flying every last carrier in this game.
Highsec has been the 1 place where 5 100m SP chars *CANNOT* harass 50 newbies who work together simply because those vets cannot use *I WIN* ships against them and 50 newbies will gut 5 vets very quickly.
Back in 2009, I was part of a 36 person newbie fleet, with a 9 month old FC, who chased off and station camped a group of 5 100+ mill SP war targets. The bulk of our fleet (like myself at the time) had ~3m SP - less than 3 months into the game.
That will no longer be possible *WITHOUT* capital pilots of your own meaning the best advice to new players is *DO NOT JOIN PLAYER CORPORATIONS FOR AT LEAST A YEAR* - when the bulk *QUIT* EVE within 9 months sitting in NPC corporations.
There is *NOTHING* in EVE more boring than sitting in an NPC corp - that's where you "park alts" - not where the vast majority of long-term players keep their main characters. |
lord xavier
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
57
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 04:58:36 -
[118] - Quote
Mocam wrote:50 battleships are fodder to 5 carriers. . Uhm, what? No, 5 carriers will die to 50 batteships. Horribly. |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
470
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 06:56:40 -
[119] - Quote
Tyyler DURden wrote:Kettle corn is delicious.
Pikey. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
6322
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 10:20:59 -
[120] - Quote
If it means I can try mission flip a carrier or super carrier in my ishkur I'm all for it.
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |