| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
amarrsuit
   |
Posted - 2009.06.19 19:32:00 -
[1]
I've been told DDs have a cost. Obviously the cost is too low. Now rather than just picking some arbitrarily high number that will be reached yet again and the same problem of overpowered Titans rears its ugly thread head again, I propose the following. A graduated cost scale for using DDs. The first time is it's normal cost, the 2nd time the cost doubles, the third use of a DD by a specific Titan, the cost doubles yet again. Eventually the Titan becomes a mobile jump bridge if abused. This would force Titan pilots to THINK about whether using the DD at any given time is the best tactical/strategic use of the device. Also, It would prevent DDs from being used on a 5 man frigate fleet as one was a few weeks ago. Jealous I wasn't in fleet at the time to see that bright flash ; ( |
Kaaii
Caldari
KaaiiNet Holding Executor Corp
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 19:40:00 -
[2]
No..
You've been told....? Meaning what, never actually been in a corp/alliance with multiple titans? Sorry but you need a bit of game experience...
Its not the DD thats over powered...its the jump range.
Moving a ship that size should be hellish, the kind that makes you strategically commit to the area you are in, knowing that if you are caught out of position you are screwed. Make them horribly slow to charge/short ranged. This will fix them, for a short time, until there's 27 titans in every system and you are swapping pilots. But that's a few years off, so it would buy CCP a bit of time to get there heads outa their collective butts and come up with a real solution...
According to Oveur, existing LSAA's already anchored will stay there.
kieron
Director of Community Relations,
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 19:51:00 -
[3]
First step to fix the whole supercaps lot would be to start from the beginning and define a purpose for them. Then you can add features and abilities to achieve that purpose. Then you can balance to fit it into the game world. Then you implement it and tweak it further depending on the life data from the game.
Right now, the Titan seems to be defined as REALLY BIG SHIP WITH BOOOOOOOM!! and the Mother ship defined as BIG CARRIER FIGHTERSWARM !!! It needs something more thought through than that for them to function.
TLDR; Re-design the Supercapital ships from scratch.
--------
Ideas for: Mining
|
NereSky
Gallente
The Good old Days
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 19:57:00 -
[4]
personnally make the Titan pilot a Alliance role - 1 pilot -> 1 Titan per Alliance
And i dont care abut the flames ive been flamed by worse people than you 
|
Turin
Caldari
Body Count Inc.
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 20:06:00 -
[5]
Range has nothing to do with the problem. The problem with titans is the multiple DD's in a row. I believe that the carrier kill by DD proved that.
So, firstly, I think the only way to really fix it, is to limit systems to X number of DD's per X number of minutes.
Say, 2 DD's every 10 minutes or so. Would still allow for the double DD, and thats it. Furthermore, it would force a side to commit. Whoever wants to lay it out on the table first kinda thing.
Second. When a titan DD's. IT IS STUCK IN PLACE for 10 minutes!!!!!! Just like a siege mod or triage mod. This would force you to deffend the titan.
thirdly. Titans would need a really big HP buff. If they are going to be stuck, they will become a huge focus of fire. They need to be able to withstand that.
Yes. Given my solution, a lot more titans would likely die. I dont see that as a bad thing.
|
Cat o'Ninetails
Rancer Defence League
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 20:07:00 -
[6]
it is easy to kill titans you just fly up their tailpipes lol |
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 20:08:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Crackzilla on 19/06/2009 20:14:01
Edited by: Crackzilla on 19/06/2009 20:08:36
 Originally by: NereSky
personnally make the Titan pilot a Alliance role - 1 pilot -> 1 Titan per Alliance
Just raises the cost of a 50bil ship by 1bil for the new alliance that consists of pilot + a few alts.
The hard part will be working out standings with all of the other "<Alliance Name> #<Titan Number>"'s new alliances.
Originally by: Turin
Range has nothing to do with the problem.
Range is part of the issue. A few titans can cover a large area. With how sov is broken it means that effective sov guerilla warfare isn't possible.
|
|
CCP Zymurgist
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 20:14:00 -
[8]
Moved to Features and Ideas Discussion. |
|
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 22:18:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Crackzilla
Originally by: Turin
Range has nothing to do with the problem.
Range is part of the issue. A few titans can cover a large area. With how sov is broken it means that effective sov guerilla warfare isn't possible.
I would not touch range. A titan should be fun to play with, to restrict movement would be contraproductive.
The problem with titans is, they are boring one trick ponies. There is no reason to stay on the battlefield.
They warp in -> fire dd -> warp out -> cloak -> wait till timer -> log out = boooring.
If you now remove the dd, then nothing is left.
But you also cannot let the dd as is, since soon everybody and his mom will have a prisoner alt trapped inside a titan. Just a question of time when the first titan gets ganked by titans.
What we need is some magic reason why it is really cool, awesome, thrilling and significant for the fleet to stay with the titan on the field. Because of this reason it must be worth to spend any effort to keep that titan alive.
The dd as it is now cannot be the reason - it works in a contra-productive way by destroying all foes and by scaling without limits.
The problem isnt easy to work arround.
Take a look on the other titan threads in F&I, there is work in progress but still no final solution in sight.
|
Cordele
Gemini Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.06.20 00:30:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Crackzilla
Originally by: NereSky
personnally make the Titan pilot a Alliance role - 1 pilot -> 1 Titan per Alliance
Just raises the cost of a 50bil ship by 1bil for the new alliance that consists of pilot + a few alts.
The hard part will be working out standings with all of the other "<Alliance Name> #<Titan Number>"'s new alliances.
It's been suggested that titans could be tied to sovereignty, so each constellation capital could have a single titan as its flagship. That would put a hard limit on the number of titans that could be used in alliance warfare, but a role would have to be found for existing titans without a capital to be assigned to.
I agree that more effort should be put into the logistics of titans. Building them is a big project, but once they're constructed, they theoretically only require the same manpower as any other capital to fly, whereas a POS network of the same value would require hundreds of man hours to set up and maintain. One way to reduce their use would be to make moving and arming them a large scale logistics exercise. |
Trevarre Schuldig
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.06.20 00:38:00 -
[11]
isk is not the problem you can make it 100bil which is the price fast approaching for personal titans and people will still buy. making isk is not hard think 6b per month macro botsx20. 1trillion isk capital market manipulators.
setting titans based on sovereignty is idiotic because people have personal titans, it's a ship a personal item not an alliance or corp controlled item but a personal item like my apoc, you cannot base control on sov cause you'd restrict 75% of eve from this item, no ownership of personal item in the game is based on sov.
|
Marcus Gideon
Gallente
The NightClub
|
Posted - 2009.06.20 00:42:00 -
[12]
The easiest solution is a lingering effect.
Each form of Titan leaves a different "taint" on the grid. For however long (1 hour most likely), any of the same DD have a penalty. Either added fuel consumption, less damage, or outright hindrance.
Then fleet battles have the chance of 4 DD going off, but after that it's up to the rest of the fleet to win the day. |
Trevarre Schuldig
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.06.20 01:19:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Marcus Gideon
The easiest solution is a lingering effect.
Each form of Titan leaves a different "taint" on the grid. For however long (1 hour most likely), any of the same DD have a penalty. Either added fuel consumption, less damage, or outright hindrance.
Then fleet battles have the chance of 4 DD going off, but after that it's up to the rest of the fleet to win the day.
battlefield are constantly moving, the chance of more than 3 dd in 1 grid is extremely rare. and after 1 good dd there's is almost no chance for an attacker to succeed. the problem isnt the doomsday it's that you can doomsday and warpout in less than 30 seconds at 250km nothing can get to that that titan before it warps away. that isnt a battle, it's a slaughter.
|
Cordele
Gemini Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.06.20 01:27:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Trevarre Schuldig
setting titans based on sovereignty is idiotic because people have personal titans, it's a ship a personal item not an alliance or corp controlled item but a personal item like my apoc, you cannot base control on sov cause you'd restrict 75% of eve from this item, no ownership of personal item in the game is based on sov.
I think that's kinda the point of the idea, that titans are unlike normal ships and should be a strategic asset owned by an alliance. They would still require a pilot, but they would be linked to an alliance's space in the same way towers and outposts are.
Some people might think restricting a large percentage of people from owning a titan isn't such a bad idea. There is already a very high cost barrier, and to actually fly one as it's intended requires you to have a special position in the right kind of organisation, which most don't. |
Cordele
Gemini Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.06.20 01:29:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Marcus Gideon
The easiest solution is a lingering effect.
Each form of Titan leaves a different "taint" on the grid. For however long (1 hour most likely), any of the same DD have a penalty. Either added fuel consumption, less damage, or outright hindrance.
Then fleet battles have the chance of 4 DD going off, but after that it's up to the rest of the fleet to win the day.
I agree with this. It'd be a nice way to introduce tactical environments, and the groundwork has already been laid with wormhole anomalies. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |