Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
CATPAIN KIRK
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 23:52:00 -
[91] - Quote
Count Austheim wrote:Capital ships cost alot of isk.
How much for a constitution class? |
Sonva Lat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 00:13:00 -
[92] - Quote
Hratli Smirks wrote:
ah yes the more 'elite' alliances are able to hold their own against superior numbers by fielding a superior number of blatantly overpowered ships
how can you tell they are "elite"? well they got two hundred supercaps on the field that is is some sun tzu **** right there
It is clear that you are upset that better alliances than yours have the capacity to produce and field superior ships. Cheer up, it's just a game.
Just a shame you aren't very good at it*
*which is what this all boils down to. The same options are on the table for everyone - some people work to gain that advantage while other cry it is unfair. Human nature. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
286
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 00:27:00 -
[93] - Quote
Sonva Lat wrote:Hratli Smirks wrote:
ah yes the more 'elite' alliances are able to hold their own against superior numbers by fielding a superior number of blatantly overpowered ships
how can you tell they are "elite"? well they got two hundred supercaps on the field that is is some sun tzu **** right there
It is clear that you are upset that better alliances than yours have the capacity to produce and field superior ships. Cheer up, it's just a game. Just a shame you aren't very good at it* *which is what this all boils down to. The same options are on the table for everyone - some people work to gain that advantage while other cry it is unfair. Human nature.
Yeah after all, when you only need to bring 30,000 guys in canes to beat those 200 in supers, then how could that possibly be unbalanced in any way? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Bel Amar
Sudden Buggery
9
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 00:27:00 -
[94] - Quote
Sonva Lat wrote:*which is what this all boils down to. The same options are on the table for everyone
Actually, that's not true. The counter to supers is supers, and supers require sov to manufacture. Lose your sov and you lose your ability to compete and more importantly, the ability to ever make a comeback. So once the equilibrium is lost, it is forever lost, and no longer are "the same options on the table for everyone"
|
Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
47
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 00:28:00 -
[95] - Quote
Sonva Lat wrote:Hratli Smirks wrote:
ah yes the more 'elite' alliances are able to hold their own against superior numbers by fielding a superior number of blatantly overpowered ships
how can you tell they are "elite"? well they got two hundred supercaps on the field that is is some sun tzu **** right there
It is clear that you are upset that better alliances than yours have the capacity to produce and field superior ships. Cheer up, it's just a game. Just a shame you aren't very good at it* *which is what this all boils down to. The same options are on the table for everyone - some people work to gain that advantage while other cry it is unfair. Human nature.
There are two different argument's in this thread, which one are you referring to?
There is the argument that people will automatically try to win a numerical advantage over others no matter what the game mechanics allow or do not allow.
And then there is the argument that the game mechanic should be diverse, and anything that necessitates you meet one force with a like force, i.e. Falcons for Falcons, Super Capitals for Super Capitals, is not conducive to that diversity whatsoever.
CCP nerfed nano and Falcons for this very reason, to bring them more in line with a diverse variety of combat mechanics that were all viable, to the point that neither was ubiquitous anymore, but merely another tool at one's disposal, much like every other.
The former argument is of course true, those with a numerical or tangible advantage gained through hard work and effort are always in the right in the sense that they put in more time and effort to win.
The latter argument is of course false, the game should not be a matter of "Well, they brought a hundred super capitals, too bad we do not have a hundred ourselves or we might be able to play the game we are paying for!"
It should be more like "Well they brought a hundred super capitals, but we can use skill and initiative to bring out 50x [Heavy Assault Bombers] and pop 10-15 of their super capitals and drive them off with the cost of their losses alone."
Right now when there are a hundred super capitals, the only answer, is another hundred, at least for practical purposes.
Why should we have no choice, no diversity?
Someone mentioned, well you can kill a supercap with 150x Hurricanes! ... okay, so what happens when there are 2x supercaps on a grid, and you won't kill even a single one of them with your 150x hurricanes because they'll all be dead long before the primary is in any danger.
It is a problem of scale, and CCP will attempt to fix it, that is all.
...clearly the Ishukone Watch Scorpion is the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse, i.e. the Brown Rider, otherwise known as Poopie. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
286
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 00:50:00 -
[96] - Quote
Bel Amar wrote:Sonva Lat wrote:*which is what this all boils down to. The same options are on the table for everyone Actually, that's not true. The counter to supers is supers, and supers require sov to manufacture. Lose your sov and you lose your ability to compete and more importantly, the ability to ever make a comeback. So once the equilibrium is lost, it is forever lost, and no longer are "the same options on the table for everyone"
More to the point, if a significant Titan fleet is absolutely required to even consider playing the 0.0 sov game in the first place, then you're simply setting the barrier to entry to 50% of the EVE map insanely high.
Titans and motherships should be as efficient against subcaps as Battleships are vs Frigates or as Dreadnaughts are against Cruisers: not very. It's quite reasonable for Titans to be a counter to capital ships; it's not reasonable that they are a counter to HAC gangs.
Nerf Titan turret tracking to be only somewhat better (say 25-33% better) than that of a seiged Dread, and give the Doomsday device an explosion radius of 3000m/explosion velocity of 70 m/s, so that it's just about possible for a highly tanked subcap to survive it, and Titans would still be extremely effective vs capital ships but vulnerable to subcaps, just as a fleet-fitted battleship is vulnerable to frigates.
Similarly, reduce the explosion radius/velocity of FB torps.
And finally, remove the rig slots from supercaps. They're only ever used to increase EHP, so there's no actual ship customization involved, and excessive EHP is the other most ridiculously unbalanced thing about supercaps, even without making it 70% worse. They're also expensive enough as it is without essentially requiring the pilot to spend an extra 1.5B on EHP rigs. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Jita Alt666
280
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 01:10:00 -
[97] - Quote
Sonva Lat wrote:
It is clear that you are upset that better alliances than yours have the capacity to produce and field superior ships. Cheer up, it's just a game.
Just a shame you aren't very good at it*
*which is what this all boils down to. The same options are on the table for everyone - some people work to gain that advantage while other cry it is unfair. Human nature.
#1: The same options are not on the table for everyone. #2: CSM 6 is dominated by 0.0 alliances from every part of the Eve political spectrum. All agree SC's are ridiculously out of balance. This is not a specific alliance issue. #3: Your argument is essentially the same as the argument in support of the old remote doomsday through a cyno. #4: Your reduction of your own argument to personal insults under the guise of an obvious alt is most unbecoming. |
Sonva Lat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 01:41:00 -
[98] - Quote
Bel Amar wrote:Sonva Lat wrote:*which is what this all boils down to. The same options are on the table for everyone Actually, that's not true. The counter to supers is supers, and supers require sov to manufacture. Lose your sov and you lose your ability to compete and more importantly, the ability to ever make a comeback. So once the equilibrium is lost, it is forever lost, and no longer are "the same options on the table for everyone"
Ah, now we get to the crux of it.
What you are saying is, that if people band together and make friends they can dominate those who are unable to forge alliances?
Why do the people will all the sov stick together? Why aren't they all fighting each other?
Enlightened self interest - working together because their good depends on the greater good.
That Mittens person is always saying how great he is at politics, and yet he calls for a reduction to the effectiveness of hostile forces because he is unable to build a space empire.
I get it though, it isn't fair that smaller less powerful groups have to dance to the tune played by superpowers who have massive military advantage. Superpowers who can ride roughshot over those unable to fight back and impose their worldview. In this analogy the CSM is the United Nations, the Russian alliances are the USA, and the goons are burning flags. |
Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
47
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 02:35:00 -
[99] - Quote
No matter how many times you say it Sonva, it doesn't make it 100% true no more than anything we are saying.
There is a kernel of truth to both sides, but the fact of the matter is, super capitals in their present form do not mesh with the way CCP intended for them to be used, period.
CCP has already stated this, end of story.
You can argue your fairly extreme viewpoints that 100% of all points of debate about changes needed to combat in EVE are based solely on the haves versus have nots all you want, but that doesn't make it anymore true than people saying super capitals themselves are the sole reason for the imbalance itself.
CCP would not have to take any action at all if people were not exploiting super capitals to a level of use that CCP felt it had to intervene on as they did not intend for them to play the role they presently do in the game.
i.e. doesn't matter how you spin the player element of the story, the fact remains CCP already stated they view the player use of super capitals in EVE to be contrary to the use they intended for these ships when they revamped them.
/thread.
Give it up already, no one is telling you that you are outright wrong, they are merely saying you are missing the point of why changes are necessary, regardless of the motivations of players asking for those changes, nor players making full use of supercaps in their present form to gain a clear advantage over others, which is at present, a legitimate use of super capitals, by virtue of the present game mechanic, which will change, regardless of what you personally think about the people that use or do not use them, nor those who argue against or for them, or anything related to social dynamics and conflict at all. ...clearly the Ishukone Watch Scorpion is the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse, i.e. the Brown Rider, otherwise known as Poopie. |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
257
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 03:13:00 -
[100] - Quote
Basically, I don't care as I don't fly an SC and I largely agree that an SC blob lagging a system to death with its drones is not in eves best interest, but nerfing titans any more?
I'm fine with nerfing Moms for their built in lag-bomb, but titans?
You can DD any ship every ten minutes but capital turrets killing off a hac gang? I'd call that pretty fail hac pilots then... And yeah - I think 20 titans should be able kill a 20 man hac gang in case the hacs decide to engage...
Just remove titan bridges - any 5 man lowsec corp has a bored titan pilot nowadays - kills small gang pvp.
As for numbers - it's pretty obvious why mittens is promoting numbers > everything.
Whilst I personally like goons, I hate the 'blob > all' mechanics already in place. morons-áare recruiting. We're good at breeding! |
|
Hratli Smirks
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
53
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 03:36:00 -
[101] - Quote
Sonva Lat wrote:[quote=Bel Amar] That Mittens person is always saying how great he is at politics, and yet he calls for a reduction to the effectiveness of hostile forces because he is unable to build a space empire.
but he did
when the DRF is done killing -A- he will be leading one of the two remaining power blocs in 0.0
enjoy the nerfs!
(booyah) |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
257
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 03:44:00 -
[102] - Quote
Hratli Smirks wrote:
but he did
when the DRF is done killing -A- he will be leading one of the two remaining power blocs in 0.0
enjoy the nerfs!
(booyah)
What about Atlas., Morsus Mihi or Prick Squad (the latter being mostly ex R.A.E.G. and ME after all...)? morons-áare recruiting. We're good at breeding! |
Hratli Smirks
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
53
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 03:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:Hratli Smirks wrote:
but he did
when the DRF is done killing -A- he will be leading one of the two remaining power blocs in 0.0
enjoy the nerfs!
(booyah)
What about Atlas., Morsus Mihi or Prick Squad (the latter being mostly ex R.A.E.G. and ME after all...).
what about them? |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
257
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 03:50:00 -
[104] - Quote
Nothing really, just wanted to make sure they're erased from the sov map, but CBA to log in just for that... morons-áare recruiting. We're good at breeding! |
Trolls Troll
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
23
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 03:52:00 -
[105] - Quote
op is right.
Dreads should be buffed, supers should be fighters/bombers only. (with a small drone bay ofc).
OR
a new type of dread should come out, ie to match the supers, make it bigger, or even a smaller type "bomber unit". Let it fit a doomsday type weapon but only shootable at capitals.
I don't think its fair to make a ship worse for one group just to appease another. Make something to combat the supers, and "tweak" them, but don't nerf them. |
Fighter26
Orion's Fist RED.Legion
5
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 03:52:00 -
[106] - Quote
Think it all depends how severe the nerf is. Removing SCaps ability to field regular drones and giving destroyers 150% damage to fighters/fighterbombers sounds like enough. After all, the dessies are worth nearly nothing, can be piloted by a few week old pilot very well, and can be thrown at waves of fb's... that cost ten times as much as the dessies. Why not devalue the supercarriers by giving the little guy the ABILITY to remove their fangs, not just nerfing outright. Oh yes and change the logoff 15 minute rule and self destruct rules if under attack. That sounds like enough to balance a ship and not make it useless. |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
5
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 05:51:00 -
[107] - Quote
Count Austheim wrote:Capital ships cost alot of isk.
Isk isn't a balancing factor anymore when a alliance can make hundreds of billions each month, and the expensive ships have a extremely low loss rate. |
Skunk Gracklaw
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
43
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 09:22:00 -
[108] - Quote
Fighter26 wrote:Think it all depends how severe the nerf is. Removing SCaps ability to field regular drones and giving destroyers 150% damage to fighters/fighterbombers sounds like enough. After all, the dessies are worth nearly nothing, can be piloted by a few week old pilot very well, and can be thrown at waves of fb's... that cost ten times as much as the dessies. Why not devalue the supercarriers by giving the little guy the ABILITY to remove their fangs, not just nerfing outright. Oh yes and change the logoff 15 minute rule and self destruct rules if under attack. That sounds like enough to balance a ship and not make it useless. Not even close. Supers are going to get nerfed so hard you'll be embarrassed to be seen in one.
|
El'Niaga
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
42
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 09:58:00 -
[109] - Quote
If I had my choice, I'd just remove their invulnerability to EW, but their hp buff that Seleene did years ago was over the top and excessive. The jump from level 1 carrier to level 3 is just ridiculous in terms of firepower and tanking changes. It sets a bad precedent and has led to fewer capitals being introduced. The supercarrier buff was to prevent insta popping from titans. So just lower the damage of the titan and the hp of the supercarrier to fix the problem. (Though the Titan does require a different skill than the Dreadnought while the Carrier and Supercarrier use the same skill that could be the problem too).
I'd either do that directly giving them high sensor res to resist a lone blackbird etc, or I'd create a new EW Dreadnought that has capital EW that affects them.
|
Sonva Lat
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 11:52:00 -
[110] - Quote
Mendolus wrote:No matter how many times you say it Sonva, it doesn't make it 100% true no more than anything we are saying.
There is a kernel of truth to both sides, but the fact of the matter is, super capitals in their present form do not mesh with the way CCP intended for them to be used, period.
CCP has already stated this, end of story.
You can argue your fairly extreme viewpoints that 100% of all points of debate about changes needed to combat in EVE are based solely on the haves versus have nots all you want, but that doesn't make it anymore true than people saying super capitals themselves are the sole reason for the imbalance itself.
CCP would not have to take any action at all if people were not exploiting super capitals to a level of use that CCP felt it had to intervene on as they did not intend for them to play the role they presently do in the game.
i.e. doesn't matter how you spin the player element of the story, the fact remains CCP already stated they view the player use of super capitals in EVE to be contrary to the use they intended for these ships when they revamped them.
/thread.
Give it up already, no one is telling you that you are outright wrong, they are merely saying you are missing the point of why changes are necessary, regardless of the motivations of players asking for those changes, nor players making full use of supercaps in their present form to gain a clear advantage over others, which is at present, a legitimate use of super capitals, by virtue of the present game mechanic, which will change, regardless of what you personally think about the people that use or do not use them, nor those who argue against or for them, or anything related to social dynamics and conflict at all.
I'm not saying the state of affairs is as it should be.
The solution to the problem is the introduction of effective counters, rather than "hopeful" nerfing. You see, nerfing the ships will in no way change the numbers or wealth of those who currently field them. It will only be a matter of time before the next thing they use will need to be nerfed to make things "fair" again.
The reason that you see huge supercap blobs is that there is no reason not to use them. Nerfing them without the introduction of effective counters will not change that.
This is a chance for CCP to give other ships meaningful roles which counter the effective strengths of supercapitals. Ships to kill drones, ships to debuff ECM protection, glass cannons ... the list of options for consideration is huge. You make people feel engaged by letting them compete on an uneven footing - rather than just bringing everything to the same level. Balance should be about variety and inclusion. Moisture farmers need deathstars to destroy, it is the law of space battles. |
|
Zey Nadar
Aliastra Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 13:28:00 -
[111] - Quote
If there is something explicitly better than everything else, players will flock to it. Thats a fact. If supers would still be best after the nerf, nothing would change. If there was a counter to them, then at least some people would flock to the counter. Hopefully finding dynamic balance at some point.
As long as there is no counter, the problem will continue developing on a hyperbole. |
Joplin
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 14:17:00 -
[112] - Quote
Supers r not the problem as such,huge blobs of them with rr capability etc is the problem |
Princess Jodi
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 19:48:00 -
[113] - Quote
Either:
Introduce a Monthly Maintenance Fee of a billion ISK per super cap, which if not paid prevents the super from jumping;
Or:
Death2AllSuperCaps
|
pussnheels
Vintage heavy industries
71
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 20:01:00 -
[114] - Quote
CCP hasn't done anything yet and there is the superwhine already; who says they are going to nerf supercarriers ...??
Only problem there is and that has been mentioned a by just about everyone in here tht there is no counter to supercarriers
There has been many suggestions on how to deal with this problem - making dreads better -removing the invulnerability against ewar -removing all drones except fighjter/ firghterbombers etc etc
Sad true is when ccp eventually implements something to counter this problem ,the superwhines of many supercap pilots fill these forums and bore us to death
I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |
Bel Amar
Sudden Buggery
9
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 00:53:00 -
[115] - Quote
Sonva Lat wrote:Ah, now we get to the crux of it.
What you are saying is, that if people band together and make friends they can dominate those who are unable to forge alliances?
Actually, no. What I am saying is that the argument you put forward to argue against a nerf is incorrect at it's core. The same options aren't on the table for everyone, and as time goes by, that problem is only getting larger
You can respond to that by quoting different justifications and putting words in my mouth, but your original argument is still flawed.
Irrelevant of how good or bad any given person, corp or alliance is at any aspect of the game, once the balance is thrown out, it's gone forever with no way to restore it. The next Alexander the Great could start playing tomorrow and band every high sec bear, low sec pirate and evicted nullsec resident in to the largest alliance EVE has ever known. But if he can't make supers, and the coalition controlling nullsec won't sell them to him, he will never be able to compete.
I don't mind that it's possible for someone to "win" nullsec (though I'd prefer if it wasn't), but that winning shouldn't exclude further competition. At the moment, it's not even possible for guerrilla warfare "rebels" to harass a winner, let alone form a serious force capable of contending the winners space.
Owning all of nullsec should be like pushing a boulder uphill. You can do it, but if you slip up, or someone harasses you enough, it all crashes to the ground. At the moment though thanks to supers it's more like a snowball rolling down a hill, the further it rolls, the faster it rolls, and the harder it is to stop
|
Bel Amar
Sudden Buggery
9
|
Posted - 2011.09.18 01:06:00 -
[116] - Quote
Sonva Lat wrote:The solution to the problem is the introduction of effective counters, rather than "hopeful" nerfing. You see, nerfing the ships will in no way change the numbers or wealth of those who currently field them. It will only be a matter of time before the next thing they use will need to be nerfed to make things "fair" again.
That argument is also flawed. Saying that the numbers or wealth of those who field supers won't change is true, but it's true whether a nerf or a distinct counter is introduced. You can't use that argument to favour either option, as it applies to both.
And again, counter or nerf, things will remain unbalanced. No one will ever achieve perfect balance. But that's not what this is about. There is a difference between unbalanced and uncounterable. Drakes are unbalanced, but they can be countered, so in spite of them being a FOTM that everyone flies, they're an annoyance rather than a critical flaw in the game. Supers are unbalanced and uncounterable and the ability to build them depends on already having them. So they're a FOTM that is a critical flaw in the game.
Personally, I could care less how a counter is introduced. Nerf them or introduce a dedicated counter, as long as the result is the ability to form fleets that can stand and fight against supers, it's a good result
|
Dirk Tungsten
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
20
|
Posted - 2011.09.29 10:28:00 -
[117] - Quote
The only other thing Id personally add to my original statement would be that supers if they are going to have reduced HP let it be that the specific races are balanced out, such as the Aeon having less Hitpoints as it has an insane Tank. The Nyx & Wyvern having slightly less tank to what they currently have, also giving the Nyx a slightly bigger drone bay and keep to an extent the added damage bonus to drones over other races as is custom with gallante. Finally give the Hel a buff to Hitpoints to make it less of a liability an make it an affective an worth while ship to train for. |
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
39
|
Posted - 2011.09.29 10:31:00 -
[118] - Quote
Imo the introduction of supers were a mistake anyway. Nerf them to oblivion, the weaker the better! |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
319
|
Posted - 2011.09.29 10:56:00 -
[119] - Quote
In addition to limiting them to fighters/fighter-bombers, they should also be required to use a third type of cyno.
This new cyno should take 2-3 minutes or more to warm up before any jumping can be done, thereby eliminating hot-drops and requiring a fleet to protect the cyno to be able to bring in the big guns. How to make it balanced when attacking a system defended by hundreds of SC is an exercise left up to CCP and the reader. 84,000 AUR ($420) spent on NeX store for Troll and Profit. |
Spectre80
The Knights Templar Cascade Imminent
9
|
Posted - 2011.09.29 10:59:00 -
[120] - Quote
oh look, its NCdot member (part of DRF superblob club) scared yet? i think you are.
KILL ALL SUPERS! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |