EVE Search - Supercarriers are Fine.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Supercarriers are Fine.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
DarkSchneider666	Posted - 2011.02.20 06:46:00 - [1] No matter how much you want to nerf SC's and Titans, nothing will change. Infact the alliance that has the resources and organization to be able to field these things deserve their advantage. Nerfing SC will make them as useless as before and people will just simply jump to build more titans. The notion of being nerfing Supercarriers so that small Dreadnought and Carriers can defeat it easily is ridiculous. There simply would be no point of having a SC if that were the case. If you want to beat a supercarrier use your brains instead of mindlessly blobbing. Don't expect that kills should come easy just because you can lock target and press F1-F8. Know the strengths and weakness of supercaps if you want to defeat them! Supercaps should remain the way they are, those who don't have super caps should use their brains and formulate strategies and tactics to defeat a super cap. Super Caps are not invincible to smaller ships, but expect to work for your kills, which is the way things should be.
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.02.20 06:48:00 - [2] 11/10 -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
Frau Klaps Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.02.20 06:48:00 - [3] Thanks for sharing. ---
Batolemaeus Caldari Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.02.20 06:53:00 - [4] Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Super Caps are not invincible to smaller ships Wrong. -1/10, try harder.
DarkSchneider666	Posted - 2011.02.20 06:59:00 - [5] Edited by: DarkSchneider666 on 20/02/2011 07:01:14 Originally by: Frau Klaps Thanks for sharing. You're welcome, someone who appreciates what I am saying. Super Carriers are simply ships done right. Effort, skill, costs, and logistics to field a supercarrier yield use that makes it worth it. This one of the reasons why Battleships are failing, they simply don't yield use enough to justify their costs and weaknesses. Originally by: Batolemaeus Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Super Caps are not invincible to smaller ships Wrong. -1/10, try harder. Bring more ships next time. Don't be angry just because you didn't have the manpower and tactics to defeat something.
Batolemaeus Caldari Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.02.20 07:02:00 - [6] Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Bring more ships next time. Don't be angry just because you didn't have the manpower and tactics to defeat something. Going to frame this.
Ocih Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.02.20 07:04:00 - [7] In EvE "Work for your kill" translates to take more losses. Even if you have 1000 capsuleers with resources to replace ships, they are out of the battle on death of thier ship. "Take more losses" means they win and not you. Super Carriers are fine. They reflect thier cost. That makes them out of place in EvE. Most ships don't reflect thier cost. They insta pop when under assault in the modern EvE battle field.
Lord Viziam	Posted - 2011.02.20 07:14:00 - [8] I think all unpackaged ships should require maintenance costs, with the costs spiraling based on ship mass. Owning and maintaining supercaps should be prohibitively expensive..
DarkSchneider666	Posted - 2011.02.20 07:14:00 - [9] Originally by: Ocih In EvE "Work for your kill" translates to take more losses. Even if you have 1000 capsuleers with resources to replace ships, they are out of the battle on death of thier ship. "Take more losses" means they win and not you. Super Carriers are fine. They reflect thier cost. That makes them out of place in EvE. Most ships don't reflect thier cost. They insta pop when under assault in the modern EvE battle field. Exactly, its not that super carriers are overpowered but the reveals the striking issues that other ships have. T2 command ships and T2 HAC's are simply not worth their price when Tier 2 Battlecruisers are simply more cost effective and bring what they are worth. T2 Assault Ships, and Electronic Attack Frigates have little cost effective worth in the battlefield. Battleships are too slow, their modules too expensive, their weapons only works for Battleships and bigger, their tanks are not so much better when factoring the loss of ability to mitigate damage. Dreads are cheap alternatives for anti-cap and pos siege and carriers are for logistic purposes. It is only natural for a supercarrier to be able to wipe them out.
Hell'sAngel	Posted - 2011.02.20 07:41:00 - [10] Y bring this up again? 6.5/10 to OP inb4 blobs of replies

Worzel Gummage	Posted - 2011.02.20 08:09:00 - [11] A word on strategy. Killing supercaps is easier if you group your weapons, only F1 to press then :)
Vespa Milz	Posted - 2011.02.20 08:38:00 - [12] Edited by: Vespa Milz on 20/02/2011 08:38:42 nerfing supercarriers would be the dumbest thing ccp could do right now. theyre slowly making it easier to kill supercaps. such as normal dictors being able to bubble them, and cyno placement at 15km. leave them the way they are. oh and...plenty of supercarriers die every week. so stfu you butthurt subcap fa.ggots.
DarkSchneider666	Posted - 2011.02.20 08:50:00 - [13] Originally by: Vespa Milz Edited by: Vespa Milz on 20/02/2011 08:38:42 nerfing supercarriers would be the dumbest thing ccp could do right now. theyre slowly making it easier to kill supercaps. such as normal dictors being able to bubble them, and cyno placement at 15km. leave them the way they are. oh and...plenty of supercarriers die every week. so stfu you butthurt subcap fa.ggots. Exactly those would never fly supercaps or got killed by supercaps whine and cry like little babies. Don't have one? Too bad.
Di Mulle	Posted - 2011.02.20 09:09:00 - [14] Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Exactly those would never fly supercaps or got killed by supercaps whine and cry like little babies. Don't have one? Too bad. Basically translates to "get a supercap or leave the game". Extremely shortsighted, but not unexpected.
El'Niaga Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2011.02.20 09:13:00 - [15] While I don't agree with nerfing the SC. In fact nerfing never really works. In Real world if you have a weapon that proves a game breaker, you invent something to counter it. What the game is lacking is a Superdreadnought that can counter the Supercarrier. With a level 3 dreadnought along the same lines you could easily counter the Supercarrier. Another Option would be to invent a Heavy Bomber (Like level 3 covert ops, bomber has capacity to carry citadel torpedoes and heavy bomb launcher and of course heavy bombs).
DarkSchneider666	Posted - 2011.02.20 09:21:00 - [16] Originally by: El'Niaga While I don't agree with nerfing the SC. In fact nerfing never really works. In Real world if you have a weapon that proves a game breaker, you invent something to counter it. What the game is lacking is a Superdreadnought that can counter the Supercarrier. With a level 3 dreadnought along the same lines you could easily counter the Supercarrier. Another Option would be to invent a Heavy Bomber (Like level 3 covert ops, bomber has capacity to carry citadel torpedoes and heavy bomb launcher and of course heavy bombs). Titans.
Kengutsi Akira	Posted - 2011.02.20 09:24:00 - [17] Originally by: DarkSchneider666 No matter how much you want to nerf SC's and Titans, nothing will change. Infact the alliance that has the Bot mining farms to be able to field these things deserve their advantage. Nerfing SC will make them as useless as before and people will just simply jump to build more titans. Fixt
GeekAlot	Posted - 2011.02.20 09:45:00 - [18] well the ones who gets butthurt about SC`s is the people who cant fly them or cant afford them. That said, supers are realy fine atm, when you look at the cost of one, infact eve is ok atm, CCP should use more effort at fixing the Eve code, alot of stuf isnt as it should be.
El'Niaga Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2011.02.20 09:45:00 - [19] Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Originally by: El'Niaga While I don't agree with nerfing the SC. In fact nerfing never really works. In Real world if you have a weapon that proves a game breaker, you invent something to counter it. What the game is lacking is a Superdreadnought that can counter the Supercarrier. With a level 3 dreadnought along the same lines you could easily counter the Supercarrier. Another Option would be to invent a Heavy Bomber (Like level 3 covert ops, bomber has capacity to carry citadel torpedoes and heavy bomb launcher and of course heavy bombs). Titans. Titan doesn't fit the role really. Notice how many supercarriers die to titans....oh that's right.... Need an Anti Supercapital Ship ship which we don't have. The Level 1 Dreadnought was originally designed to be an anti POS ship. A role for which its not used very often now. They are mostly used to attack Carriers. There is no parallel ship to attack Supercarriers. A level 3 one could be set up to deal that damage without significantly nerfing the supercarrier.
Ocih Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.02.20 10:16:00 - [20] Titans don't have the stand alone versatility of a super carrier. As soon as a ship requires its own logistics followed by those ships needing thier own sub logistics blobbing occurs. Blobbing is what is hurting EvE most right now. Any attemnpt at making a fleet that is formidable gets blobbed down in logistics.

James Tiberius Kirk	Posted - 2011.02.20 10:19:00 - [21] Originally by: El'Niaga While I don't agree with nerfing the SC. In fact nerfing never really works. In Real world if you have a weapon that proves a game breaker, you invent something to counter it. What the game is lacking is a Superdreadnought that can counter the Supercarrier. With a level 3 dreadnought along the same lines you could easily counter the Supercarrier. Another Option would be to invent a Heavy Bomber (Like level 3 covert ops, bomber has capacity to carry citadel torpedoes and heavy bomb launcher and of course heavy bombs). Heavy bombers are a good idea. Super dreadnoughts aren't necessary, they should buff the normal ones instead. We shouldn't get any more capital ships, we have more than enough already.
mkmin	Posted - 2011.02.20 10:21:00 - [22] lol @ op's inability to troll successfully. First he says you can beat SCs with tactics. Then he says "bring more people." So which is it smart guy? I know, your bots worked hard to buy you 347 super carriers and you want to keep being on top of the pile. And you're right, the best part about EVE is that PVP is based on who can insta-jump in 3 billion people to crash the server so you don't have to defend your systems. And just in case the server doesn't crash, you need to bring big enough piles of hitpoints to make sure you have time to jump in another 3 billionty more people. I mean, hotdropping a 1,000 man SC gang on a random rookie ship wandering through unclaimed space is the very definition of a quality experience for all involved. But really OP, you forgot to really beef up your argument with a call to buff SCs. I mean, they shouldn't need a cyno to be able to jump. And they shouldn't use jump fuel. And they should be able to jump anywhere in the game, k-space, w-space, hell, even empire. And they should make it so only you are allowed to have them. And that all of them must be immediately transferred to your account. After all, you've put in the most time botting, you deserve to have all the SCs, right? Oh, and your SC should be able to use SCs as drones, so that each SC pilot can launch 25 other SCs and then you'd really be uber. I mean really, you should post some real quality ideas like these because of course you're the only person in the game who's account really matters. I mean, your bots pay for your accounts, but that's just a sign of how important you really are! Ok I'm bored of talking to you.

CCP Spitfire C C P C C P Alliance	Posted - 2011.02.20 10:24:00 - [23] Moved from 'EVE General Discussion'. Spitfire Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online

Kn1v3s 999 Gallente Gung-Ho Guns	Posted - 2011.02.20 10:29:00 - [24] Edited by: Kn1v3s 999 on 20/02/2011 10:30:33 Originally by: Batolemaeus Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Super Caps are not invincible to smaller ships Wrong. -1/10, try harder. Bring more ships next time. Don't be angry just because you didn't have the manpower and tactics to defeat something. Quote: If you want to beat a supercarrier use your brains instead of mindlessly blobbing. you re failing so hard, even at trolling
Crabs Collector	Posted - 2011.02.20 10:46:00 - [25] Edited by: Crabs Collector on 20/02/2011 10:47:14 Just 2 things to fix this: -Make dreadnaughts more effective vs SC's and titans, that should be their primary function anyway. -Change insurance payout in low-sec so pvp becomes a better isk-sink and that way SC's become harder to build.
Meridith Akesia Tempest Legion	Posted - 2011.02.20 10:57:00 - [26] Originally by: Crabs Collector -Change insurance payout in low-sec so pvp becomes a better isk-sink and that way SC's become harder to build.
Mister Normal Metanoia. Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.02.20 11:06:00 - [27] Originally by: Crabs Collector Edited by: Crabs Collector on 20/02/2011 10:47:14 Just 2 things to fix this: -Make dreadnaughts more effective vs SC's and titans, that should be their primary function anyway. -Change insurance payout in low-sec so pvp becomes a better isk-sink and that way SC's become harder to build. Oh boy... - Dreads are fine. There needs to be something between a dread and a titan to effectively counter a SC. Something cheaper than both, has the same DPS, but less HP's (so easier to build) - SCs are not insured. At all. Ever.
Ocih Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.02.20 11:22:00 - [28] Insurance isn't a factor in making super caps but it does condense this to what everything gets condensed to in EvE. ISK grind and it will either happen in the form of buying ISK from CCP, another source, grinding hrs of game time or macro farming it. Super Caps are the pinnacle of ISK grind. If you have the magic formula to grind ISK without much impact on your real life you don't care if it gets blown up. You make another one. It's just too bad EvE is reduced to its ISK value this way and nerfing Super carriers doesnt change that. Not nerfing Super Carriers doesnt really change that. ISK sinks don't really change that. ISK distribution is the problem and I don't see what CCP can do about it.
McFly Peanut Factory Good Sax	Posted - 2011.02.20 14:37:00 - [29] Originally by: Lord Viziam I think all unpackaged ships should require maintenance costs, with the costs spiraling based on ship mass. Owning and maintaining supercaps should be prohibitively expensive.. They already are, My nyx pilot trained for 24 months straight to max every skill that could possibly effect the nyx. Then I trained another account for 6 months to be a holding alt so 30 months worth of game time to train is basically $450.00. Not to mention the 8 months of ice mining with 6 accounts it to took to buy and fit the nyx, and inject the skillbooks and slaves. So yah 30 billion isk, 20,000+ hours in an ice field, 2 years and a couple hundred bucks later I have a nyx. Think it was expensive enough m8.
Lili Lu	Posted - 2011.02.20 14:53:00 - [30] I agree. They should be further buffed. They should spew a veritable cloud of fighterbombers. Fighterbombers that can hit everything, even light drones and pods. There should be a sea of wrecks and corpses around every supercarrier. And then the SC pilot should be able to create beautiful art with his cloud of fighterbombers and sea of wrecks and corpses. Mountain range scenes, or stilllife flowers . . . In return for this ability they should become fixed in space. Yep, never to move again, anywhere. So they become museums for everyone to come and admire the fighterbomber art creations of these incredibly talented and gifted pilots who sacrificed so much of their lives to program the bo . . I mean sat active at their computers having fun mining ice or whatever. And we should all have to pay rl money to admire the art created, like going to a rl museum. And this will result in CCP getting more awards. Which will make the game healthier. Oh, and death to all supercaps

TimMc Brutal Deliverance Gypsy Band	Posted - 2011.02.20 16:11:00 - [31] Originally by: McFly Originally by: Lord Viziam I think all unpackaged ships should require maintenance costs, with the costs spiraling based on ship mass. Owning and maintaining supercaps should be prohibitively expensive.. They already are, My nyx pilot trained for 24 months straight to max every skill that could possibly effect the nyx. Then I trained another account for 6 months to be a holding alt so 30 months worth of game time to train is basically $450.00. Not to mention the 8 months of ice mining with 6 accounts it to took to buy and fit the nyx, and inject the skillbooks and slaves. So yah 30 billion isk, 20,000+ hours in an ice field, 2 years and a couple hundred bucks later I have a nyx. Think it was expensive enough m8. You are insane or macroing. Join a sov holder, do some plexing and buy a nyx at cost. Won't take long that way and you don't need half a dozen accounts.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.02.20 16:23:00 - [32] Edited by: Tippia on 20/02/2011 16:23:38 Originally by: El'Niaga While I don't agree with nerfing the SC. In fact nerfing never really works. In Real world if you have a weapon that proves a game breaker, you invent something to counter it. This isn't the real world and nerfing is usually the best solution. Originally by: GeekAlot well the ones who gets butthurt about SC`s is the people who cant fly them or cant afford them. That sounds an awful lot like a "get one yourself" which is pretty much the ultimate proof that something is thoroughly broken in terms of balanceà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Ace Echo Gallente The Shadow Raiders	Posted - 2011.02.20 17:59:00 - [33] Originally by: McFly Originally by: Lord Viziam I think all unpackaged ships should require maintenance costs, with the costs spiraling based on ship mass. Owning and maintaining supercaps should be prohibitively expensive.. They already are, My nyx pilot trained for 24 months straight to max every skill that could possibly effect the nyx. Then I trained another account for 6 months to be a holding alt so 30 months worth of game time to train is basically $450.00. Not to mention the 8 months of ice mining with 6 accounts it to took to buy and fit the nyx, and inject the skillbooks and slaves. So yah 30 billion isk, 20,000+ hours in an ice field, 2 years and a couple hundred bucks later I have a nyx. Think it was expensive enough m8. Made me lol. Well if you're gonna complain about that and how I spent 5 years and about 50,000 hours in highsec veldspar farming (on one account and char) so I could fly a Titan with almost no support skills so I could (in my carebear thoughts) be the god of lowsec in my solo Titan. Seriously dude... I don't think supercaps were ever dreamed by ccp to be something a single person would ever spend the time on. I hope that nyx was worth it.
Baneken Gallente The New Knighthood	Posted - 2011.02.20 19:13:00 - [34] SC's are fine until your lone BC in low sec gets hot dropped by 3 moms and 2 carriers which is pretty much an epitome of being lame. http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.02.20 20:58:00 - [35] Originally by: Baneken SC's are fine until your lone BC in low sec gets hot dropped by 3 moms and 2 carriers which is pretty much an epitome of being lame. If, "IT CAN GANK A SMALLER, LESS CAPABLE SHIP TOO EASILY!" is the standard by which things are nerfed, sensor boosted and nano'ed arty-Hurricanes would have long been nerfed into deep green Gallente oblivion.
Headerman Minmatar Metanoia. Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.02.20 21:14:00 - [36] Originally by: McFly Originally by: Lord Viziam I think all unpackaged ships should require maintenance costs, with the costs spiraling based on ship mass. Owning and maintaining supercaps should be prohibitively expensive.. They already are, My nyx pilot trained for 24 months straight to max every skill that could possibly effect the nyx. Then I trained another account for 6 months to be a holding alt so 30 months worth of game time to train is basically $450.00. Not to mention the 8 months of ice mining with 6 accounts it to took to buy and fit the nyx, and inject the skillbooks and slaves. So yah 30 billion isk, 20,000+ hours in an ice field, 2 years and a couple hundred bucks later I have a nyx. Think it was expensive enough m8. +1
oldmanst4r Minmatar oldmanst4r's Corporation	Posted - 2011.02.20 21:42:00 - [37] Originally by: McFly Originally by: Lord Viziam I think all unpackaged ships should require maintenance costs, with the costs spiraling based on ship mass. Owning and maintaining supercaps should be prohibitively expensive.. They already are, My nyx pilot trained for 24 months straight to max every skill that could possibly effect the nyx. Then I trained another account for 6 months to be a holding alt so 30 months worth of game time to train is basically $450.00. Not to mention the 8 months of ice mining with 6 accounts it to took to buy and fit the nyx, and inject the skillbooks and slaves. So yah 30 billion isk, 20,000+ hours in an ice field, 2 years and a couple hundred bucks later I have a nyx. Think it was expensive enough m8. You dumbass, macro ratting is WAY faster at getting a Nyx than macro ice mining. 30m/hr x 6 accounts =180m x 23 =4140m 30000m/4140 ~ 8 days to Nyx and skill books give or take a day or two. Probably would take you a bit longer to purchase both the pilot and the alt but not more than a couple of weeks. Originally by: CCP Shadow snip Castration successful. Shadow.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.02.20 22:27:00 - [38] Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Infact the alliance that has the resources and organization to be able to field these things deserve their advantage. OH yeh, takes a lot of resources and organisation to download a bunch of ratting bots Originally by: DarkSchneider666 ...lock target and press F1-F8. Know the strengths and weakness of supercaps if you want to defeat them! What you never heard of weapon grouping nub? Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Headerman Minmatar Metanoia. Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.02.20 23:14:00 - [39] Although now days i can dual box an Archon and a maelstrom to run 3-4 Sanctums each night, nets me about 150 mil a day. keep it up for a few weeks and i am half way to an Aeon
Airborne Ninja Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.21 00:24:00 - [40] Originally by: Lili Lu death to all supercaps

Allaera Caldari Avatar Dynasty Intergalactic Exports Group	Posted - 2011.02.21 06:08:00 - [41] Originally by: McFly Originally by: Lord Viziam I think all unpackaged ships should require maintenance costs, with the costs spiraling based on ship mass. Owning and maintaining supercaps should be prohibitively expensive.. They already are, My nyx pilot trained for 24 months straight to max every skill that could possibly effect the nyx. Then I trained another account for 6 months to be a holding alt so 30 months worth of game time to train is basically $450.00. Not to mention the 8 months of ice mining with 6 accounts it to took to buy and fit the nyx, and inject the skillbooks and slaves. So yah 30 billion isk, 20,000+ hours in an ice field, 2 years and a couple hundred bucks later I have a nyx. Think it was expensive enough m8. Hmm...too bad you took that route. I ran Sanctums with a Thanny killing the BS/BC and a L5 Rorqual handling everything else plus looting/salvaging on the fly. Add in the faction spawns and escalations and it took me 2 months to afford a Nyx without even trying very hard. Originally by: Tippia [That sounds an awful lot like a "get one yourself" which is pretty much the ultimate proof that something is thoroughly broken in terms of balanceà OMG OMG MY IBIS KEEPS GETTING OWNED BY RIFTERS!!11ELEVENTYONE11....what's that you say? get myself a Rifter as well?! OMG OMG RIFTER IS BROKEN AND UNBALANCED!!11ELEVENTYONE11 TL;DR Get a clue m8, comparing balance between different ship classes is bad mkay
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.02.21 06:25:00 - [42] All supercarriers except mine need nerfed. :) -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
Pod Amarr	Posted - 2011.02.21 06:43:00 - [43] Originally by: Kengutsi Akira Originally by: DarkSchneider666 No matter how much you want to nerf SC's and Titans, nothing will change. Infact the alliance that has the Bot mining farms to be able to field these things deserve their advantage. Nerfing SC will make them as useless as before and people will just simply jump to build more titans. Fixt Sad but trues and the sad part it goes for all of the major alliances Pod
Soul Nommer	Posted - 2011.02.21 08:38:00 - [44] Super carriers arent the main problem. the problem stems from two things: Massive numbers and player available to fly them Sure, you dont need to "mindlessly" blob to kill a single super carrier but thats only if they are being reckless with it. IE, solo hotdropping or caught during travel. During a war, they are not alone, but have dozens sometimes close to 100 friends with super carriers. (I think it was the russians that had like 85 during that NC stomping in Uemon?) Now, even with the "massive" numbers of super caps they are still the minority. 85 of any sup cap. (and even 85 of carriers/dreadnoughts) isnt that scary to some people, or is it frustrating. Both of these due to the fact that a larger majority of players can pilot (skill and isk wise) similarly powered ships. Now im not saying everyone needs to be balanced out so a podling can kill a 03' vet. But I am saying that alot of the whining has a bit more ship-envy (in regards to being powerless against) than people want to let on. Aside from that ^, super carriers are cool, I'm hoping to fly one some day. I've always thought of them like Flagships. but they've become common enough to become a main force, deployable at nearly anytime, but not common enough to let everyone else get in on teh fun.
Scyth Darkhope Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2011.02.21 09:46:00 - [45] Edited by: Scyth Darkhope on 21/02/2011 09:47:57 Forget for one moment my inability to comment on SCs vs non-capital fleets. However, to those who argue cost vs risk, etc... I would like to propose some proper reasoning in order to strengthen or refute or argument: What is the total cost to field a non-capital ship fleet designed to kill a super carrier? This total cost, of course, should take into account the cost of skill points needed to fly the designated ships. Moreover, I would also propose to estimate how does this cost increase with numbers. How does the ratio of costs increase with more SC fielded? If a SC vs non capital fleet involves equal numbers of ISKies, and the probability the SC wins the battle is larger than one half, then obviously they need nerfing. Of course, I won't be able to do the maths, because of my lack of knowledge of the proposed ship composition.
Redigar Darkcloak	Posted - 2011.02.21 13:50:00 - [46] Originally by: Kengutsi Akira Originally by: DarkSchneider666 No matter how much you want to nerf SC's and Titans, nothing will change. Infact the alliance that has the Bot mining farms to be able to field these things deserve their advantage. Nerfing SC will make them as useless as before and people will just simply jump to build more titans. Fixt Quoted for truth. Supercarriers do way too much for their cost. They need their bomber dps (they currently have Titan/Dread dps) OR ehp cut in half, (currently x 8 the buffer of its respective carrier)
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.02.21 14:09:00 - [47] Edited by: Furb Killer on 21/02/2011 14:14:07 Edited by: Furb Killer on 21/02/2011 14:09:29 Cost should never be more than a small factor for balance. If paying alot means you get a solo pwnmobile then eventually due to inflation everyone will only fly those ships. Or to increase the speed at which that happens people could start botting at a massive scale, and we wouldnt want that, oh wait... Btw TS needs Iraqi minister of information pic. Edit: Since people are too lazy anyway i decided to use my pro paint skills:
Sjugar	Posted - 2011.02.21 15:00:00 - [48] The problem with supercaps is the same as with drakes. Bring 100 drakes vs 100 hellcats, hellcats win any time. Make that 500 vs 500 and drakes win. You can kill 2 supers with a mix of 20-30 dreads no problem. Now bring a gang of 50 supers and there's no mix of carriers and dreads that can take that on. Both supers and drakes are ships that increase lag more then any other ships and also start to outperform other ships in very high lag conditions. Drakes do this by spamming missiles, get more objects on the field and supers do this by spamming fighterbombers which themselves spam missiles, even more objects on the field. First thing to see whether supercarriers are too powerfull is to fix the conditions where they increase lag.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.02.21 15:39:00 - [49] Edited by: Tippia on 21/02/2011 15:41:12 Originally by: Allaera OMG OMG MY IBIS KEEPS GETTING OWNED BY RIFTERS!!11ELEVENTYONE11....what's that you say? get myself a Rifter as well?! OMG OMG RIFTER IS BROKEN AND UNBALANCED!!11ELEVENTYONE11 TL;DR Get a clue m8, comparing balance between different ship classes is bad mkay No it's not. It's in fact the only way to decide if the ship class is balanced or not. That rifter can quite easily be beaten by a rather small amount of Ibises ù even one will do. How many non-SCs does it take to beat an SC? How many do you need to beat 5? 10? 20? And more to the point: if you don't need an SC to beat an SC why would anyone be butthurt because they couldn't fly one? Again: by pulling that kind of argument, you are the one claiming there are balancing issuesà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Redigar Darkcloak	Posted - 2011.02.21 16:09:00 - [50] 1 SC vs many is hard enough to kill, especially with them using smartbombs to blow bubbles and remote ecm burst to break tackles. (Better have it neuted below jump cap or bumped to heck) Multiple SC's RR'ing each other with each fielding 20+ drone/fighters) with no way to jam it other than neuts which work too slow vs them, is downright frustrating. Give Dreadnaughts capital neuts and the SC problem will fix it self without anyone crying nerf.

Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.02.21 16:31:00 - [51] Originally by: Redigar Darkcloak 1 SC vs many is hard enough to kill, especially with them using smartbombs to blow bubbles and remote ecm burst to break tackles. (Better have it neuted below jump cap or bumped to heck) Multiple SC's RR'ing each other with each fielding 20+ drone/fighters) with no way to jam it other than neuts which work too slow vs them, is downright frustrating. Give Dreadnaughts capital neuts and the SC problem will fix it self without anyone crying nerf. I'll still be crying nerf, because supercarriers are more powerful in low sec than in 0.0. That is something that needs to be fixed. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
Noisrevbus Caldari Breams Gone Wild	Posted - 2011.02.21 16:48:00 - [52] While the OP is likely an elaborate troll, the topic itself is quite interesting... See, from a strictly mechanical standpoint Supercaps are far too powerful. The interesting bit however is how that fits into the overall game. When the nano nerf came about, nano was well deserved the nerf from the same strict balance perspective, and i myself was quite in favour of the changes. Later on i've come to regret that and changed my standpoint, because the change have not enriched the game over time, instead, it did what many pro-nano players back in the day argued then - it gave further weight to inflation of numbers, a quality that has always been powerful in EVE. Don't get me wrong, numbers is and should be a measure of competition in an MMO and especially an open sandbox (or true-) MMO as EVE. It's just that with alot of the good and fair changes to balance that has been made over the recent years, numbers have become an overtly dominant factor. When the Recon nerfs, most importantly the Falcon nerf, were under debate i had already changed camp for that reason. Like some other people i predicted the changes to Recons and the further post-nano changes to mobility (ie., the agility nerfs) to blow more air under the wings of the elusive 'blob' - turning Recons into tools that serve the side with numerical advantage better than the side fighting undermanned. Looking at the popularity of BC-oriented gangs with massive Logistics support and the odd Arazu and Rapier that force smaller gangs to commit or pass up opportunities due to a massively undercut chance of survival against numerical odds, those predictions feel pretty assured today. That's where SC come in as well, as they too (not too much unlike what the OP bring up) offer smaller, rich and well organised alliances at least some way to put a dent into a larger group's infrastructure, in the continued endless grind of post-dominion SOV life. Where numbers are not only encouraged as a value on the field, but where numbers and volume still also dictate structural warfare and where alot of alliances do not have an incentive or urge to react unless their infrastructure is under direct threat. In such a gameworld the current state of SC lend itself to at least give some hotdrop-esque alliances a chance to threaten reaction (unlikely ever to sustain themselves in SOV, but at least to provoke a reaction that result in gameplay and thus content in EVE). So yeah, interesting topic with SC's as negative in terms of game mechanics but likely a very positive wedge in the stagnant political game environment.
Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.02.21 16:50:00 - [53] Originally by: Liang Nuren I'll still be crying nerf, because supercarriers are more powerful in low sec than in 0.0. That is something that needs to be fixed. -Liang I favor allowing bubbles in lowsec.
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.02.21 16:55:00 - [54] Originally by: Target Painter Originally by: Liang Nuren I'll still be crying nerf, because supercarriers are more powerful in low sec than in 0.0. That is something that needs to be fixed. -Liang I favor allowing bubbles in lowsec. I favor revoking your posting privileges. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.02.21 22:58:00 - [55] Originally by: Liang Nuren I favor revoking your posting privileges. -Liang I'm actually being serious. How many supercap pilots do you know who'd be willing drop into a situation where they could be permanently tackled by a single hero dictor, just for the lolz?
Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.02.22 00:42:00 - [56] Edited by: Target Painter on 22/02/2011 00:42:34 Actually, the reason I say that is because I wrote a huge seriouspost about how there should be some AoE warp jamming effect usable against lowsec caps/supers, carried by a ship or at a POS. Then one of my corpmates pointed out that I was basically talking hictors and anchorable bubbles.
Valea Silpha Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.02.22 08:38:00 - [57] Moms have problems, but its not in an obious way. It's a combination of factors. They have epic EHP, so they will always survive until reps are on them. They have immunity to ewar, so that you can't break their rep chains that way. They have awesome dps, and can smash through any other rep chains, even carriers. Now, I think moms should be powerful. But I think that they need to be toned down. All the other caps have to sit still and be a huge target when they deploy their full awesome (siege mode, triage or DDD). Moms should have to do that too. Personally, I think that they should have to fit a super-carrier mod that lets them use fighterbombers, and having the mod active gives them their ewar mmunity. While that module is active, they get their awesome dps, but have to sit still, and they also sacrifice lock speed. They can still be repped, they can still give reps. They just have to sit still and can't jump while its active. When its not, they still get 20 fighters, and are still an awesome souped up carrier. Thats my idea.
Grateful Soldier	Posted - 2011.02.23 09:04:00 - [58] So by your justification for not nerfing SC's, the inference is that you still should be able to have this ''EVE WIN'' like button? How then are you Dark, not whining yourself about the threat of nerfing SC's.This unbalanced mechanic needs balancing or eve will become as cheap and nasty as other MMO's in the marketplace.
AstarothPrime	Posted - 2011.02.23 10:06:00 - [59] Make bombers and figters have sensor strength of ~10 or less. Then ppl would actually use kitsune as perfect counter to SC... 5 kitsune would render a SC unable to use its fighters... I.
Evil Aye	Posted - 2011.02.23 10:12:00 - [60] Originally by: Airborne Ninja Originally by: Lili Lu death to all supercaps

Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.02.23 10:21:00 - [61] Originally by: Grateful Soldier So by your justification for not nerfing SC's, the inference is that you still should be able to have this ''EVE WIN'' like button? How then are you Dark, not whining yourself about the threat of nerfing SC's.This unbalanced mechanic needs balancing or eve will become as cheap and nasty as other MMO's in the marketplace. Something in EVE being ******edly broken and unbalanced is pretty much par the course. At least with SCs, they are relatively limited by SPs and the fact that some (a majority?) don't want to lock their mains into them.
Kendon Riddick	Posted - 2011.02.23 11:02:00 - [62] SC are broken not in EHO dps bla bla bla, but the way they require an account to never leave it, since only high sp chars can afford them and or are in trusted positions to obtain them etc then cant use 70% of their sp. just broken, ive no btter ideas, just as a game mechanic and progress it totally blows and makes no sense.
Megan Maynard Minmatar Out of Order	Posted - 2011.02.23 12:02:00 - [63] Originally by: El'Niaga Originally by: DarkSchneider666 Originally by: El'Niaga While I don't agree with nerfing the SC. In fact nerfing never really works. In Real world if you have a weapon that proves a game breaker, you invent something to counter it. What the game is lacking is a Superdreadnought that can counter the Supercarrier. With a level 3 dreadnought along the same lines you could easily counter the Supercarrier. Another Option would be to invent a Heavy Bomber (Like level 3 covert ops, bomber has capacity to carry citadel torpedoes and heavy bomb launcher and of course heavy bombs). Titans. Titan doesn't fit the role really. Notice how many supercarriers die to titans....oh that's right.... Need an Anti Supercapital Ship ship which we don't have. The Level 1 Dreadnought was originally designed to be an anti POS ship. A role for which its not used very often now. They are mostly used to attack Carriers. There is no parallel ship to attack Supercarriers. A level 3 one could be set up to deal that damage without significantly nerfing the supercarrier. Your drugs, they must be potent stuff.... Originally by: F'nog Originally by: Stareatthesun No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down. Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S
Valea Silpha Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.02.23 13:49:00 - [64] Edited by: Valea Silpha on 23/02/2011 13:50:19 Originally by: Target Painter Originally by: Grateful Soldier So by your justification for not nerfing SC's, the inference is that you still should be able to have this ''EVE WIN'' like button? How then are you Dark, not whining yourself about the threat of nerfing SC's.This unbalanced mechanic needs balancing or eve will become as cheap and nasty as other MMO's in the marketplace. Something in EVE being ******edly broken and unbalanced is pretty much par the course. At least with SCs, they are relatively limited by SPs and the fact that some (a majority?) don't want to lock their mains into them. Agreed on both counts actually. Although I think Momma's do need to be looked at, they are not broken to the point that they are disrupting the vast majority of PvP. Yeah, some people are using them in a pretty ridiculous fashion, mostly they are ganking other caps so I can't really care THAT much. Some people are using them against subcaps and stuff, but its no-where near as bad as the old doomsdays and such. If someone jumps supers into a subcap fight, they only get as many kills as they can tackle and at that point they might as well just have portaled in a big subcap fleet or something. When they are used to kill capitals, they are pretty much doing their job. I think they should be less effective in that context, or at least easier to kill. On the other hand, you make a good point about supers being locked to an alt. It's already prohibitively expensive to get a supercap, and the SP requirments are VAST, so making it that you can't even use your main (ie the character with the best SP) to fly it is a pretty effective deterrent. It takes like two years to skill an alt up to there, and then you gotta pay the sub for it while its almost always logged off. Basically it puts off all but the power blocks who have the backbone to fund the upkeep. That's why we aren't seeing every character with the isk and sp flying them all the time.
Stygian Knight Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.02.23 14:10:00 - [65] tl.dr. you will stop hating it when you buy one ;)
Valea Silpha Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.02.23 14:18:00 - [66] Edited by: Valea Silpha on 23/02/2011 14:21:57 Originally by: Stygian Knight tl.dr. you will stop hating it when you buy one ;) I'm sure you love your broken pwnmobile. Who wouldn't ? Thats exactly the problem tho... If you can only win by having more of the same, it needs a nerf. Its been the same for every notable nerf. Look particularly at the nano-nerf. The only effective counter was having a bigger nano-gang. Same with supers. Not even regular caps can realistically kill them, and certainly not in the numbers that people are bringing them out in these days. Moms should be awesome, but they shouldn't be so awesome that nothing else can beat them. Nothing else is... Carriers are easy kills these days for a well composed sub-cap gang. Dreads and titans can't apply any dps to a subcap gang and get eventually pulled down... Moms on the other hand need fear nothing bar other bigger gangs of moms.
Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.02.23 14:19:00 - [67] Edited by: Target Painter on 23/02/2011 14:22:31 Originally by: Stygian Knight tl.dr. you will stop hating it when you buy one ;) At risk of stepping into what may be CAOD territory, what happens when it's the blob that has hundreds of them online at any one time and drops them in absolutely every conceivable situation? Also, anyone asking for an anti-supercapital ship for use against SCs is dumb as hell. People asking for a counter to massed capital fleets was what got us supercarriers instead of motherships in the first place. CCP would probably **** it up and make some crazy-ass pwnboat that would set 90% of EVE on fire. And: WTB 2008/2009 cap fight.
Lord Drokoth Amarr The Army of The Ori	Posted - 2011.02.25 00:15:00 - [68] Originally by: Valea Silpha Edited by: Valea Silpha on 23/02/2011 14:21:57 Originally by: Stygian Knight tl.dr. you will stop hating it when you buy one ;) Nothing else is... Carriers are easy kills these days for a well composed sub-cap gang. Dreads and titans can't apply any dps to a subcap gang and get eventually pulled down... Moms on the other hand need fear nothing bar other bigger gangs of moms. From what I can see this is the main problem with supercarriers as they are now. although most ships in EVE at the moment are good vs one thing and weak vs another.. the supercarriers are strong against everything and not weak against anything at all (especially large gangs). I have seen quite a few interesting ideas to help solve the issue in varius related posts on the forums. Those ideas include the nerfing of various properties I.E number of drones, ehp nerf, reduction in damage from fighter bombers, removal of regular drones from the ship and the creation of a counter vessel class to combat them directly. My personal opinions on the matter are as follows. Its true the ship class of supercarrier does need some kind of counter, Its true that they are out of balance at the present compared to regular caps and titans. (dispite them being anti capital caps). Supercarrier fighterbombers should be the only drone type that it can use.. Its sopposed to be an anti capital capital not an anti everything capital. I think that the creation of another ship class (such as a heavy or super dreadnought) setup to directly fill the counter role of fighting against supercarriers could be an option worth exploring. this would mean that there would be a way to fight supers and it would also have its own weakness against sub capitals themselves because sutch a ship would not be able to hit a subcap ship. Having said this it would further devalue the titan themselves because a super dread would need to be able to deal a truely immense ammount of damage to be able to fight supercarriers. this is going on a rough assumption that they would be balanced in a similar way that dreads and carriers are balanced vs eachother now. A good friend of mine also suggested another interesting idea. combining this issue with the issue involving black-ops battleships. Playing with the idea of giving them some kind of capability of causing damage to super capitals such as a nyx or an aeon, maybe via the use of some kind of targetted or unguided bomb that would deal a small ammount of damage to regular ships but far more damage against super caps.. this would mean that people would need to co-ordinate an attack well against supercaps fot it to be of any effect. this mechanic from what i can see would be balancable aswell because bombs etc can have a cost and a skill associated with them etc. Sig removed, only one graphic per sig please. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Lord Haur Amarr Star Frontiers	Posted - 2011.02.25 14:56:00 - [69] IMO main problem is not supercarriers per se, more that they only reasonable counter is "more supercaps". Dreads may seem like a good counter on paper, being cheap high-DPS ships, but suffer from the 10 minute siege cycle where they are unable to recieve reps/move, and a lack of EHP against supercarrier blobs. Something like doubling the hitpoints on dreads, coupled with a siege cycle time reduction and possibly increasing tracking vs supercapital targets would make dreads much more likeable for stuff other than bashing pos's.
Theodoric Darkwind Gallente	Posted - 2011.02.25 21:38:00 - [70] Originally by: Baneken SC's are fine until your lone BC in low sec gets hot dropped by 3 moms and 2 carriers which is pretty much an epitome of being lame. and I thought it was bad when our 12 man cruiser/frigate gang got a carrier dropped on it in lowsec the other night.

Kaoru LENKEN	Posted - 2011.02.26 14:17:00 - [71] It's just too bad EvE is reduced to its ISK value this way Reducing EVE to ISK valus is just give the game real life size no more. This is not a reduction this is an upgrade
Gibbo5771	Posted - 2011.02.26 14:35:00 - [72] Limit the amount allowed per alliance, esp titans. I am sick of NC dropping super caps on my rifter but they are just so stupid I have to go back for more
Straight Edged	Posted - 2011.02.26 14:44:00 - [73] I dont see how a hundred super capital dropped on your lone Battlecruiser , and winning with no casualities, makes it overpowered Your lone battlecruiser would have died no matter what 100 ship that was dropped anyways. be it ibis or battleships
Nicolai Copernicus	Posted - 2011.02.26 16:18:00 - [74] Edited by: Nicolai Copernicus on 26/02/2011 16:18:36 I think the idea of a heavy bomber would work out well. Have the ex rad something high like 7.5km so that smaller caps take a decent amount of damage and supers take full. Ex vel could be around 75m/s so that it would still be possible to mitigate some of the damage through speed tanking if your fit for such.
Valea Silpha Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.02.26 18:26:00 - [75] Originally by: Straight Edged I dont see how a hundred super capital dropped on your lone Battlecruiser , and winning with no casualities, makes it overpowered Your lone battlecruiser would have died no matter what 100 ship that was dropped anyways. be it ibis or battleships That is again, exactly the point. You COULD use anything. But more and more people are just tossing supercaps at anything that comes their way. Sure, 100 supercaps against 1 bc is a silly example and it makes the issues sound lolable. As it stands, supercaps will kill anything they drop on. If you don't have a bigger fleet of supercaps ready BEFORE the fight starts, there isn't a damn thing you can do to stop them. If you try to fight them with anything else, you will lose. That's what people are upset about. If you do anything anywhere with any less than a vast supercap force on standby, there is a very real chance that you get your whole fleet nuked. That happens on a much smaller scale too. Anytime you go looking for any kind of fight anywhere, if you don't have the resources to immediately make a fight of it against supercaps, then sometimes you get ****ed on. It's happening more and more and to smaller and smaller goups. Eventually, it's going to end up as Supercaps or Go Home. Anytime anyone fights anywhere, one side or the other, or both, is going to have a bunch of mommas ready to go. That sets the bar for PvP WAAAAAAY too high. Ignoring super caps, pvp is in a good place right now, and 10mil Sp guys flying their first BC shouldn't have to even consider that some bored douche will drop of supercap on them just because they can and there is no risk.
Deitre Cibrus Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2011.02.26 19:42:00 - [76] Originally by: Evil Aye Originally by: Airborne Ninja Originally by: Lili Lu death to all supercaps ----------- Originally by: Santiago Cortes Please don't derail your own thread. What is this sig missing? Pretty colours? -Conuion Not true! Has plenty -Deitre


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.