| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
1600 RT
   |
Posted - 2010.10.16 19:59:00 -
[31]
just make supercaps uneffective to anything thats not a structure or a supercap.
increase supercaps and structure signature and change the data of compact torpedoes so they damage reduction is very noticeable to anything smaller than a supercap to the point they not worth using
after that a rebalance of supercarriers is needed imho because there is no reason to fly any of them thas not a aeon (or maybe a nyx)
|
Fafnir Drake
Gallente
Universal Ventures Inc.
Necrophiliacs
|
Posted - 2010.10.16 20:20:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Moose Burger
care to tell me why cost shoudnt be taken into account in balance?
Are you saying 10 billion ships should all have 3000 EHP, move at 6000m/s, and do only 200 dps, all of them have damage type, 3 high slots, 3 mids and 3 lows, with one utility/missile slot, with 3 small rig slots?
And Tengu would also have 3000 EHP, move at 6000m/s, and do only 200 dps, all of them have damage type, 3 high slots, 3 mids and 3 lows, with one utility/missile slot, with 3 small rig slots?
And titans would cost billions would have 3000 EHP, move at 6000m/s, and do only 200 dps, all of them have damage type, 3 high slots, 3 mids and 3 lows, with one utility/missile slot, with 3 small rig slots?
Dream on.
Cost IS a balancing factor.
*tsk tsk*
Countering a strawman with another strawman =/= debate.
Side note, I partially agree with him if you interpret his point as "cost is not ENOUGH of a balancing factor" with regards to supercaps.
------
"Tell a man there are 300 billion stars in the universe and he'll believe you. Tell him a bench has wet paint on it and he'll have to touch to be sure." |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.10.16 20:22:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Sigras
So requiring capital ships to counter supercapital ships will reduce the number of capital ships? .... mind explaining this logic to me?
Super-carriers (SC) are broken because the only way to counter them is to use even more SC. They break the rock/paper/scissor system.
Dreads, which have no real function any more now that POS are for auxiliary use and damage is better dealt with SC's, are the logical choice but they do not last long enough to make a difference against multiple SC.
They would provide a "cheap" and readily available (lot more dreads idling than SCs/Titans) counter to a shipclass that currently has no 'natural' counters.
Your question was what counters super-carriers, not how to reduce capital population.
If you want to argue based on data/rules of which only you are aware then I suggest you advise people of it before starting what is a very relevant debate so they do not waste their time.
|
Sigras
|
Posted - 2010.10.16 20:57:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Fafnir Drake
Side note, I partially agree with him if you interpret his point as "cost is not ENOUGH of a balancing factor" with regards to supercaps.
Perhaps I should have said it that way ... QFT
|
Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.10.16 21:16:00 -
[35]
Anser to mom problem -
1) make dreads the capital/supercapital killers - increace damage and tank, fix siege mod to fit this role more appropriatly as well as being decent still for pos'
2) reduce mom dps significantly by nurfing fighte bombers
- the problem with moms is not that they are slippery (they should be), not that they have such large tanks (they should have) but that they to far too much dps. Fix their dps output an make them the front line logistics ships they were intended to be, not the swiss army knife of large scale pvp.
-----------
|
Tusen Takk
Guy Fawkes Trust Fund
31ST Reliables Division
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 08:29:00 -
[36]
pretty sure that in the real world it doesnt really matter if its fair that a carrier ship can blow up a fishing boat, but rather it has the ability to if it decides to
not sure why everyone whines about nerfing big boys like this, esp since if they ever get in one and suddenly it gets nerfed theyll be the first to ***** about it
|
NoNah
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 08:51:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Tusen Takk
pretty sure that in the real world it doesnt really matter if its fair that a carrier ship can blow up a fishing boat, but rather it has the ability to if it decides to
not sure why everyone whines about nerfing big boys like this, esp since if they ever get in one and suddenly it gets nerfed theyll be the first to ***** about it
Pretty sure this ISN'T the real world(albeit a part of it) and that the instant you even consider realism in a game as close to as important as in game balance said game is screwed.
98% of the people that whine over one thing or another do it because they have personal issues of it, lack of experience or quite simply skill. Generally these have no idea what's actually going on. Remaining 2% do complain as they see an imbalance regardless of what side of it they stand.
Parrots, commence!
Postcount: 470719
|
Sigras
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 18:36:00 -
[38]
Exactly, and look at the real world equivalent to the supercarrier, the aptly named supercarrier.
They create a HUGE disperity between the nations who have them and the nations who don't, and the nations who have them use them as a homogeneous force.
My problem with them is that when they become as common as dreadnoughts there will be few reasons to fly anything else.
(Yes I said when not if as cost is not in any way a long term limiting factor)
|
Cousin Tom
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 18:54:00 -
[39]
We need anomalies and moon goo irl. 
|
Scott Ryder
Amarr
art of eve
Gunmen of the Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 19:12:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Scott Ryder on 17/10/2010 19:13:36
Lets factor out the 15b isk cost of a sc, but instead focus on the 3 - 5 years it takes to pilot one well.
Shouldnt that ship be able to kill said 25 zealots?
Edit: It needs boost!
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 19:33:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Scott Ryder
Lets factor out the 15b isk cost of a sc, but instead focus on the 3 - 5 years it takes to pilot one well.
Shouldnt that ship be able to kill said 25 zealots?
Edit: It needs boost!
Pretty much every other ship class in Eve can be killed with 3 of the "basic" versions. 3 Cruisers WTFPWN a HAC, 3 BCs a CS, 3 BS's a Marauder/BOBS, etc. Not the case with Supercaps - certainly not once you consider groups of them.
-Liang
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
Blog
|
Scott Ryder
Amarr
art of eve
Gunmen of the Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 20:42:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Scott Ryder
Lets factor out the 15b isk cost of a sc, but instead focus on the 3 - 5 years it takes to pilot one well.
Shouldnt that ship be able to kill said 25 zealots?
Edit: It needs boost!
Pretty much every other ship class in Eve can be killed with 3 of the "basic" versions. 3 Cruisers WTFPWN a HAC, 3 BCs a CS, 3 BS's a Marauder/BOBS, etc. Not the case with Supercaps - certainly not once you consider groups of them.
-Liang
Youre right. It should be nerfed. Its not fine the way it is, 3 carriers cant kill one.
|
Anyura
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 20:50:00 -
[43]
The solution is straightforward. We clearly need to buff Zealots.
|
Scott Ryder
Amarr
art of eve
Gunmen of the Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 21:00:00 -
[44]
Well a probable fix would be to lower their buildcost to say 2b isk and nerf it so that 3 carriers can kill one solo :)
Then introduce this new mothership that 3 supercarriers can kill. It has to be slightly better then todays SC. But yes, sounds like a good plan. Works for you Liang?
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.10.17 21:08:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Scott Ryder
Well a probable fix would be to lower their buildcost to say 2b isk and nerf it so that 3 carriers can kill one solo :)
Then introduce this new mothership that 3 supercarriers can kill. It has to be slightly better then todays SC. But yes, sounds like a good plan. Works for you Liang?
Implications:
- 3 Carriers can kill one solo => lose disruptor immunity, huge EHP reduction, likely significant DPS reduction
- SCs cost 2B ISK (a bit more than a dread)
The above sounds fine. But the assertion that SCs are somehow underpowered or need a boost is utter BS. Nothing in Eve works as you posited. You could argue that they need a role redefinition (towards logistics?)... and I'd be ok with that.
C/D?
-Liang
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
Blog
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 03:49:00 -
[46]
Buff SC's, they don't do even half the DPS they should. They should eclipse nearly everything in the game except Titans, which also need a massive buff.
|
Lance Fighter
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 04:44:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Anyura
The solution is straightforward. We clearly need to buff Zealots.
while I would never disagree with a zealot buff, the fact that 200 zealots lose 1/8 of their number destroying a target worth more than (1/8)*200*costofzealot doesnt exactly necessitate a buff
|
Kireiina
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 05:35:00 -
[48]
The super-carrier DPS may be a bit too high... but I don't think that's the real problem.
They are balanced somewhat on the basis that they are very expensive to lose. So they should ideally have a 50/50 chance of dying against a fleet of the same value. The problem is:
1) They are powerful offensive, defensive and most importantly logistics ships. This means the more SC's you have on the field the more the power of each is magnified.
2) They magnify the power of a very small number of pilots such that a small number of people can exert a huge amount of power. It is much easier to gather, motivate and find online a small number of supercap pilots (if you are a very high SP alliance) than it is for most of their opponents to find and gather enough pilots to be able to challenge them. This is magnified again by the mobility options when your fleet is entirely jump capable.
The end result is the only counter is more supercaps (if you can't break their logistics you will get 0 kills and lose a lot of ships). The NC pretty much demonstrated this with losing an entire carrier fleet (15bn isk I think) to a relatively small Doom/CH/Evoke super-cap fleet and naturally got no kills. Atlas versus PL/WN was similar (though -AAA- was sub-cap because I assume PL wasn't confident fielding supercaps once IT got involved). Meanwhile sub-caps, the only ships noobies can expect to be flying for years, are really only useful when both sides have sufficient supercaps that they won't deploy them.
Good luck to any new power breaking into 0.0. If you don't have a super-cap fleet, or a strong bond with a neighbor who does, it is very unlikely you'll be holding space if someone who does wants it. And naturally the existing powers are all going to be trying to enlarge their own super-cap fleets (and killing vulnerable CSAA's) because they have to. But this accelerates the progress of the game towards supercaps online while discouraging any new players who plug a super-cap training program into Evemon.
But hey, maybe in 18 months CCP will notice / care.
|
kyrv
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 20:22:00 -
[49]
The Hel looks cool
|
Kail Storm
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 21:11:00 -
[50]
What they really should do is Lower price on Supers, to say 6 Bil and Lower the Aeons EHP to say 20 mil EHP and others to follow suit [15ish]. And Make the Nyx do the DMG of the other 3 now 10k nstead of 12k, and the other 3 `s DMG down accordingly say 7k max.
At the same time make Dreads EHP get a 50% buff, and have a 4 Minute Siege so a Dread could get hit by a DD but barely survive.
This would make 3 Dreads Kill a Super but lose 2 of them, so it would cost 3 bil to destroy 6 bil. It would also make Titan pilots the "Kings" as they should be, right now a Mom does more DPS and has More tank and doesnt get stuck for a few minutes when it attacks. This would also mean Titans wouldnt waste there DD on any old Dread but be forcd to attack the fleets primary, otherwise you wont kill it, right now the support fleet kills 1 Dread and the Titan targets another, the DD should kil la support ship liek a carrier but not a dread in 1 hit.
This also would spread the Mom field out a bit, Smaller Alli`s could afford 6 Bil to lose but 20 is massive loss also Titans now are kinda useless minus the Jump Bridge. I would like to see Mom`s risked more, one of the reasons they arent is they are 20 bil and can kill anything in the game.
So to sum up,
-Nerf EHP of Aeon to 20 Mil EHP others to 15ish they would be able to get killed while logging even without supers killing em like now. If a Mom logged with 17 mil EHP it would Die to a 15 man Dread gang.
-Nerf DPS of Moms to Nyx being 9k as Max DPS, this would make others go down to 7k DPS making them hit like a Overheated Dread. It would also make it not be able to hit 1400 DPS with Heavy`s to kill BS`s, 700 with Med Drones and 440 DPS with lights that maul any small targets. It now can kill any sized target with great effect this would change to 1k to BS, 500 to Med Drones/Cruiser and 340 to Light stuff, all very very good but not game breaking at all levels.
-Nerf Cost of MOM to 6 Bil base cost area. This would make smaller alli`s really have a "MIddle SC" Right now the gap between Dread/Carrier and SC is to great, it would also not be so much for Alli`s to help replace the ship cost.
-Buff Dread EHP by 50% making them not insta Pop`d by DD unless softend up buy its weapons first or unless support fleet is helping, that way Titans haveto help fleets unlike now where they pick a fresh ship who isnt targeted and fires.
-Make dread Cycles 4 minutes, if Hit by DD you will be down to the wire if you can jump out before Dying, also makes for much better gameplay in general, 10 mins in eve is a lifetime a Fleet can jump in that wasnt even formed in that time.
This would make Dreads relavent again, make SC`s still very superior having 7x the EHP and the Same DPS a a overheated Dread, and make the 60 Bil Titan, King again, while letting Smaller Alli`s able to field Supers.
The Idea of the SC is great lots of DPS Lots of Tank but now its to much, basically make them halfed in everything price and all.
--------------------------------------------------
"If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed"
-Me
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 09:32:00 -
[51]
the golden rule of EVE, is that your most valuable commodity is the number of pilots you can field.
It's why a HAC costs loads more than a cruiser, for ... actually if you look at it .. not a great deal more in terms of DPS/tank.
It's because the marginal advantage of 20% more ship, for 100x the cost, is worth it. Because the biggest (hidden) cost is in getting the pilots in space - getting a 100 man gang is exponentially harder than a 10 man gang, or a 2 man gang.
And this is where capitals - and particularly supercapitals - start to fall down. Their price difference is lower, and their performance advantage is larger. They have a drawback - that you can't dock - but ... practically speaking, that doesn't actually alter their combat dynamics. It just means they're hate by both pilots _and_ victims. But not enough to actually give them up or anything.
A carrier can die to an opportunistic threat - it gets pinned down by a small gang, and ... whilst it can tank a reasonable amount, it's not going anywhere, and mustering reinforcements is relatively easy - you only really need 5 BS worth of firepower to kill a carrier.
Supercarriers... well, for starters, there's only a very specific set of ships that can actually pin them down at all. The list gets considerably shorter in lowsec, too.
And then, you need to muster a very large amount of firepower to kill them - both because they're at least fairly good on sustained tank, and because they have a substantial amount of hitpoints, and enough firepower to demolish a small gang in short order.
I think the idea was, that a mothership would be a fight attractor - one gang would get one tackled, and both would muster 'support' to try and kill/defend it.
Unfortunately, that went out the window when people started getting multiple of them.
So it goes. I think the solution would have to be a 'capital warp scrambler' or similar ('jump drive disabler' perhaps?), so you can use carriers/dreads to tackle supercarriers and titan. Problem is, carriers do still melt quite quickly under SC fire - 8000-10000dps will do that - but at least they have a chance of holding the field with suitable logistics support.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 12:29:00 -
[52]
I agree 100% with the OP...
Just because the super capitals are expensive doesn't mean they should be equally powerfull. As if the ability to field fighter bombers aren't enough they can have the twice the amount of fighters as a carrier (before modules) AND being invulnerable to anything but dictors/hictors...
1 super carrier being able to solo 5 normal carriers just isn't right...
I wonder what the effects of the new fighterbombers will be but even for 10-15b isk I don't think supercarriers shold be invulnerable to all EW and if they could suddenly only launch 2 additional drones/fighters/bombers pr skill instead of 3 I wouldn't object.
Ofcourse many people have super carriers and they are boring to sit in all day. These people would get angry to have them nerfed - But maybe we could actually let the things dock in return
-
I'm a nice guy!!
But plz hook me up with some pew pew... |
Elorie Liorden
EFT Warriors
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 13:16:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Tusen Takk
pretty sure that in the real world it doesnt really matter if its fair that a carrier ship can blow up a fishing boat, but rather it has the ability to if it decides to
not sure why everyone whines about nerfing big boys like this, esp since if they ever get in one and suddenly it gets nerfed theyll be the first to ***** about it
Easy. How many aircraft carriers there are in the real world? 22. 11 of them in the US. Cost/maintenance factor...
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 13:36:00 -
[54]
Who cares about real life - I just want to play Eve...
-
I'm a nice guy!!
But plz hook me up with some pew pew... |
Brian Ballsack
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 13:38:00 -
[55]
cost never has been a factor in balance, case closed.
|
Terrance O'Conner
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 14:03:00 -
[56]
I'll adress the first statement of the OP. ISK is not a balacing power. Wrong, it is, problem with SC is that the balancing factor is not balanced.
Every other ship class is balanced out at roughly 2-3 to 10, meaning 10 times the cost is countered with approx 2-3 ships of lower class.
T2 frigs with fitting costs about 10 times that of t1 frigs, but will have serious trouble with dealing with 3 of them.
Same can be said about cruisers<>HAC, HAC<>T3, BC<>CS etc.
Now, SC will equal about 6-8 dreads?, maybe even more, - thats the unbalancing power, plus it's very effective against ALL ship classes. no other ships can say that.
Note... I dont fly either SC or dread (cant afford them) but the above is my understanding of the core problem with SCs.
Fix Fighters to be effective at BC+ and bombers at Supercaps, - should deal with most of the issue?
|
Lost Greybeard
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 14:56:00 -
[57]
ISK cost is not a factor in balance.
Resource, time, and SP investment cost? Definitely a factor in balance.
---
If you outlaw tautologies, only outlaws will have tautologies. ~Anonymous |
Captain Sweatervest
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 18:07:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Terrance O'Conner
the above is my understanding of the core problem with SCs.
Good job, you got it right. 
|
Caldari citizen52145894561
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 21:03:00 -
[59]
you get a minmatar fleet boosting titan with skirmish warfare links with a full snake implant (to reduce sig radius) and unprobe-able T3's sensor boosting it until it becomes unprobe-able
you then get all the HACs you can get (amarr preferred so you dont run out of ammo) and they all have snake implants and afterburners.
with the recent change to fighter-bombers they have trouble they use turret mechanics for hitting things.
which means they cant hit fast moving targets with a small sig
|
Klyst Lysander
|
Posted - 2010.10.23 10:54:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Klyst Lysander on 23/10/2010 11:04:24
Well, if cost isnt a balancing factor... to counter something, just field twice the of the same.
That ought to be funny!
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |