Originally by: King Dave

---

Originally by: Yaay

---

I'd prefer their utility come from assisting a gang, not doing the work themselves.

Larger gang bonuses but only when the titan is on grid. Ability to anchor allowing station like services. Guns are fine with buffs, Secondary dd effect rather than direct damage super weapon. Resource intensive platform where every action actually consumes resources. Make it a living, working station of operation.

Take away a lot of the defensive nature of POS and put deployment in the hands of titans. Force them into the open, but create massive benefits to a fleet defending a titan on grid as a reward for deploying them.

Titans and their bonuses become the strongholds and fortresses, carriers to a lesser extent, rather than idiotic POS designs that have silly bubbles and even sillier guns and effects.

Make carriers, moms and titans the necessities for deploying fleets and supporting fleets logistically rather than jump bridges, POS services, and other idiot features.

Carriers do an ok job... Titans amp it up 100 fold with their extra gun firepower, massive gang bonuses (like on the order of 100-200% bonuses), and secondary DD that can hurt fleets w/o killing them directly.

---

With this your suggesting that titans make entire fleets considerably better. Which I presume if this ever made it into TQ would make a fleet without a titan almost certain to lose to a fleet with a titan. Then 2 fleets each with a titan will just be on equal standing, but with 2 large isk sinks in their fleet.

Quote:

---

Laws of diminishing return. If you can only get at max 4 titan bonuses, why would you deploy more? If titan DD can negatively affect titans, why would you risk multiple DD that can hurt your own players.

CCP is instead rewarding more is better approach. Not only are their ideas bad, they lack any real interest or uniqueness. I mean, how much concept does it take to create something straight out of about every 1980's space adventure movie?

---

I don't understand the first bit of the quote or what it has to do with the law of diminishing returns, I thought that was when; if you keep consuming a product/ service, every time you consume it you get a little less utility, until eventually you are getting negative utility. Titans in no way have law of diminishing returns, infact the more you bring the larger the gain, especially after Dominion hits..

@ the 1980's space movie quote. CCP can't always be super-creative and come up with unique ideas. So what if they "create" (I think the word you were looking for was use) something which has already been done before.

Quote:

---

To date, nobody can even explain why you can get gang bonuses from 150 au away off grid. Nobody can explain what logical reason towers have for reinforcement, especially with sov changes. Nobody can explain why you can take a jump bridge into a cyno jammed system. And best of all, nobody can explain why a titan can get protection from a POS, which is supposed to be a watered down station, yet they can't somehow dock at a station in any sort of capacity.

---

I am pretty sure all this stuff is game mechanics and there because CCP implemented them. There doesn't really need to be an explanation for it.

Quote:

---

Titans have been the single bigest waste of a potentially awesome feature since day 1. And to buy into the emo uber gamers who think cost has to equal the most powerful weapon in game is ridiculous. Make the titan what it was always ment to be, an awesome utility if deployed, but something that creates a strong hold for fleets rather than do the work for them.

---

I happen to be one of those "uber emo gamers" you are talking about. I think it's pretty logical for the ship which requires the most man power to obtain should be damn good at what it does. It was never "ment" to be an "awesome utility if deployed". CCP originally used "Titans are the largest, most fearsome spacefaring vessels ever"

---