EVE Search - 50+ supercap blobs are overpowered

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

50+ supercap blobs are overpowered

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kash Nirukhi O.W.N. Corp OWN Alliance	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:12:00 - [1] These days there's no use to subcaps anymore. The mothership has taken over the role of virtually any other ship. There is no way of countering these fleets except of a bigger blob of motherships. Is eve online becoming a mothership-only game? So any suggestions? should ccp nerf the cyno? (f.e. it needs 50 l.o. per ship jumping in, or it takes 10s per ship to jump in?) Should ccp nerf the mothership? (f.e. give it a bomber-only role, increase the locking time, reduce the jump range, put a maximum on cap ships allowed in system? make the sig on fighters and bombers so big that they have no use to subcaps? like bs guns have no use to frigs? ) Feel free to discuss!
Riddick Liddell	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:20:00 - [2] My prediction, bombers will be nerfed.
Apocryphal Noise	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:21:00 - [3] Hmm, as a member of OWN alliance shouldn't you know that RUS Legion is currently fielding well over 200 supercaps?
Iku	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:25:00 - [4] what about -making cyno not instantly but something that has to build up first? like load for 30 sec before ppl can jump to it? -make the l.o. requirement for the cyno depending on the amount and type of ships jumping to it, kinda like a jumpbridge?
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:31:00 - [5] Well this is certainly good to know, I will swap from roaming in frigs and dessies to using my Aeon solo. I will now sell all my subcap junk. Thanks for this valuable infoGTFO
Kash Nirukhi O.W.N. Corp OWN Alliance	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:34:00 - [6] @ Apocryphal Noise, any blob of supers, whether it is 50 or 200. i.m.h.o. is overpowered. more suggestions, opinions plz! also if you feel this is not true, plz elaborate!
Barkaial Starfinder Minmatar The Kairos Syndicate Transmission Lost	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:38:00 - [7] It has been like that for years now. I don't think it will change much..
Blacksquirrel	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:44:00 - [8] Increase dreadnought range and give them a bonus against super caps. Give them another high slot. Essentially create an anti super cap ship thats not so great against smaller ships.
Martha Stewardess	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:45:00 - [9] Wants HICs to be able to carry a scrip that erects a 300km "no cynos here *****" bubble. Would be amazing.
Ludacrys	Posted - 2011.05.17 00:49:00 - [10] IMO a way to balance supercaps is have them only be able to deploy fighter bombers and not other types of drones, not even regular fighters, that way they would be only good against other caps and would require some support
Straight Edged	Posted - 2011.05.17 01:24:00 - [11] Please dont expect to win against 1 trillion isk worth of ships with only a billion. Bring 1 trillion worth of battleships or 1 trillion isk worth of super caps or 1 trillion isk worth of carriers or 1 trillion isk worth of dreadnaughts. or 1 trillion isk worth of bc's.
Ghoest	Posted - 2011.05.17 01:54:00 - [12] Originally by: Ludacrys IMO a way to balance supercaps is have them only be able to deploy fighter bombers and not other types of drones, not even regular fighters, that way they would be only good against other caps and would require some support ding ding ding Wherever you went - Here you are.
Ghoest	Posted - 2011.05.17 01:56:00 - [13] Originally by: Straight Edged Please dont expect to win against 1 trillion isk worth of ships with only a billion. Bring 1 trillion worth of battleships or 1 trillion isk worth of super caps or 1 trillion isk worth of carriers or 1 trillion isk worth of dreadnaughts. or 1 trillion isk worth of bc's. Why? IRL If you put all you money into super carriers you would get owned in a big war. Wherever you went - Here you are.
Herrring Amarr National Quality Breaker Vicious OuTLaW	Posted - 2011.05.17 02:07:00 - [14] Originally by: Straight Edged Please dont expect to win against 1 trillion isk worth of ships with only a billion. Bring 1 trillion worth of battleships or 1 trillion isk worth of super caps or 1 trillion isk worth of carriers or 1 trillion isk worth of dreadnaughts. or 1 trillion isk worth of bc's. I doubt a fleet of 1000 T2 fit machs would be able to win against a sc blob that is worth 1 tril.
Fish Hunter	Posted - 2011.05.17 02:20:00 - [15] Originally by: Herrring Originally by: Straight Edged Please dont expect to win against 1 trillion isk worth of ships with only a billion. Bring 1 trillion worth of battleships or 1 trillion isk worth of super caps or 1 trillion isk worth of carriers or 1 trillion isk worth of dreadnaughts. or 1 trillion isk worth of bc's. I doubt a fleet of 1000 T2 fit machs would be able to win against a sc blob that is worth 1 tril. I bet they would win, able to POP a SC in under 30 sec and disengage whenever they feel like it.
Naomi Wildfire Amarr Spricer WE FORM VOLTRON	Posted - 2011.05.17 02:30:00 - [16] Originally by: Fish Hunter I bet they would win, able to POP a SC in under 30 sec and disengage whenever they feel like it. But only the shield ones :P
King Rothgar Path of the Fallen	Posted - 2011.05.17 02:36:00 - [17] I predict fish hunter is somewhat right, 1000 machs (though it could be any BS with enough range) doing we'll say 1000 dps is 1M dps total. That's 12s to kill a hel, 25s to kill a nyx, 55-60s to kill an aeon. Of course the problem is the server dies if you actually try to do that. The server's limits are about 100 people on field, after that the game lags so hopelessly that it becomes a total craps shoot as to whether or not your mods will activate within a few seconds or a few minutes of when you tell them to. So from a practical standpoint, that just doesn't work. The other and far more important aspect is getting 1000 people who can field a properly fitted BS is next to impossible. Getting 50 SC's isn't that hard for most null sec alliances however. Thus far you shall read, but no further; for this is my sig.
Herrring Amarr National Quality Breaker Vicious OuTLaW	Posted - 2011.05.17 03:14:00 - [18] I don't know how fighterbombers would do against machs, but wouldn't just fighters kill machs so fast it wouldn't matter? or even just wardens. if 50 supercaps fielded wardens, it would alpha a mach every 4 sec. but i guess the caps wouldn't lock them fast enough hm....
Straight Edged	Posted - 2011.05.17 03:41:00 - [19] machs arent cost effective. a trillion worth of machs will fall to 50% of that value of abaddons. Now bring a trillion worth of armageddons and see if the supercaps gonna last long
Corina's Bodyguard	Posted - 2011.05.17 03:52:00 - [20] A trillion worth of Rifters... Well there would go CCP's precious server.
Herrring Amarr National Quality Breaker Vicious OuTLaW	Posted - 2011.05.17 03:59:00 - [21] Originally by: Straight Edged machs arent cost effective. a trillion worth of machs will fall to 50% of that value of abaddons. Now bring a trillion worth of armageddons and see if the supercaps gonna last long Yeah I was just trying to prove a point, since he was saying that if the price is equal than the strength will be the same.
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.05.17 04:08:00 - [22] Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard A trillion worth of Rifters... Well there would go CCP's precious server. The killmail generating server would be down for months from generating all the Rifter losses to officer smarties... -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2011.05.17 05:55:00 - [23] With 1 trillion isk you can get maybe 60 supercarriers or 6.666 battleships (16 bil per SC, 150 mil per BS). The BS would MELT the supercarriers in absolutely no time. If you assume 600 dps on each BS, you get in total around 4 mil dps for the whole blob. Thus, you can kill a supercap every 10-15 seconds. After 5 minutes you have killed half the supercaps. The supercaps though can't kill you that fast. The fighterbombers are not that useful against fast BS, fighters are too slow to kill the BS efficiently (remember, every 10 seconds a supercap gets killed), supercaps can't switch targets fast enough. Even if the SC's would kill 2 BS per second, you would still have 90% of the BS left after 5 minutes while only 50% of the SC would have survived until then. No, the BS-blob would absolutely smash the SC's and is completely superior. There are only two problems: 1) You don't get 6000+ people together for that. 2) The server would die horribly.
Kuronaga Kantian Principle	Posted - 2011.05.17 06:04:00 - [24] Originally by: Straight Edged machs arent cost effective. a trillion worth of machs will fall to 50% of that value of abaddons. Now bring a trillion worth of armageddons and see if the supercaps gonna last long Good luck fielding enough battleship accounts to make it a realistic fight.
Kogh Ayon	Posted - 2011.05.17 06:13:00 - [25] Edited by: Kogh Ayon on 17/05/2011 06:14:57 **** don't your people need to pay the 6000 accounts? versus 60 accounts? 6000350M versus 60350m? 2.1 trillion VS 21 billion
MaiLina KaTar	Posted - 2011.05.17 06:18:00 - [26] Restrict number of supercaps to number of people in alliance divided by thousand. Done. It's why Protoss only fields one Mothership in SC2. Six of em would be kinda ridiculous.
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.05.17 06:35:00 - [27] Originally by: MaiLina KaTar Restrict number of supercaps to number of people in alliance divided by thousand. Done. It's why Protoss only fields one Mothership in SC2. Six of em would be kinda ridiculous. Alt alliances would simply be made to house the supercaps. If you're already spending 20-80bil on your ship what's another 1bil for an alt alliance? Also 6 motherships in sc2 would be useless, 2 might have a practical use (one moves the cloaked army out and the other warps em back if things go bad) but more than that would be a massive waste of rescources (as if its not already a waste fielding one :D )
Blacksquirrel	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:11:00 - [28] Oh how the discussion changes so easily...
Shawna Gray Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:20:00 - [29] Originally by: Kash Nirukhi Should ccp nerf the mothership? Yes there will be a supercarrier nerf. The question is just when and how they will nerf it.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:28:00 - [30] Quote: (as if its not already a waste fielding one :D ) Even with the nerf to archon toilet, still it is very effective with also for example colossi. Try PvP, use mothership vortex on protos army, in the time of mothership spread your colossi out arround the vortex (you have colossi since PvP is war of the worlds), proceed to decimate his army without losses. Originally by: Straight Edged Please dont expect to win against 1 trillion isk worth of ships with only a billion. Bring 1 trillion worth of battleships or 1 trillion isk worth of super caps or 1 trillion isk worth of carriers or 1 trillion isk worth of dreadnaughts. or 1 trillion isk worth of bc's. Sp what you are saying is that rookie ships are overpowered? Balance by ISK cost is beyond ******ed. If I fit an estamel invuln field on my drake, should i be able to beat 100 t2 drakes? Balance primarily needs to be on a per ship base, not per ISK. ISK isnt really a factor and very expensive very good ships only promote botting. If you spend more ISK on a ship you should be more effective, but you should not be without counters on a per ship base, contrary what you have now with supers.
The R00k	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:28:00 - [31] Originally by: Blacksquirrel Increase dreadnought range and give them a bonus against super caps. Give them another high slot. Essentially create an anti super cap ship thats not so great against smaller ships. Because that will work........ So well that no one will use super caps and dreads will be the new flotm. How about they fix travel systems and tackling and give fleets formations that make it negative for the entire fleet to shoot one target unless it is small ships shooting 1 big ship. God forbid 1000 people shooting 1 ever get fixed.
Jaari Val'Dara Caldari Atomic Zeppelins	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:32:00 - [32] Originally by: Gnulpie With 1 trillion isk you can get maybe 60 supercarriers or 6.666 battleships (16 bil per SC, 150 mil per BS). The BS would MELT the supercarriers in absolutely no time. If you assume 600 dps on each BS, you get in total around 4 mil dps for the whole blob. Thus, you can kill a supercap every 10-15 seconds. After 5 minutes you have killed half the supercaps. The supercaps though can't kill you that fast. The fighterbombers are not that useful against fast BS, fighters are too slow to kill the BS efficiently (remember, every 10 seconds a supercap gets killed), supercaps can't switch targets fast enough. Even if the SC's would kill 2 BS per second, you would still have 90% of the BS left after 5 minutes while only 50% of the SC would have survived until then. No, the BS-blob would absolutely smash the SC's and is completely superior. There are only two problems: 1) You don't get 6000+ people together for that. 2) The server would die horribly. That is considering a perfect lagless battle. Even without any lag, there's no way you could command 6k people with perfect synchrony, that would decease efficiency even further.
JC Anderson Caldari Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:33:00 - [33] Ahem... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_Hb6I-_mq8
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:35:00 - [34] Originally by: Gnulpie With 1 trillion isk you can get maybe 60 supercarriers or 6.666 battleships (16 bil per SC, 150 mil per BS). The BS would MELT the supercarriers in absolutely no time. If you assume 600 dps on each BS, you get in total around 4 mil dps for the whole blob. Thus, you can kill a supercap every 10-15 seconds. After 5 minutes you have killed half the supercaps. The supercaps though can't kill you that fast. The fighterbombers are not that useful against fast BS, fighters are too slow to kill the BS efficiently (remember, every 10 seconds a supercap gets killed), supercaps can't switch targets fast enough. Even if the SC's would kill 2 BS per second, you would still have 90% of the BS left after 5 minutes while only 50% of the SC would have survived until then. No, the BS-blob would absolutely smash the SC's and is completely superior. There are only two problems: 1) You don't get 6000+ people together for that. 2) The server would die horribly. The problem isnt so much that it is impossible to get 6k people (okay it is a major problem), but it is also that it is ridiculous that the only counter besides more of the same, is outnumbering your opponents 20 to 1 (roughly what you need if you want to kill a supercap with subcaps, with caps you need arround 10 to 1 or so). I think that pretty much fills the definition of overpowered.
KHAN SUNE	Posted - 2011.05.17 15:43:00 - [35] Guys for gods sake go and get laid!!
Damien McCandless Caldari Baden's Army	Posted - 2011.05.17 15:47:00 - [36] Originally by: Kash Nirukhi These days there's no ships. Is eve online becoming a mothers-only game? So any suggestions? nerf jumpers? the motherbomber, the locking jump, maximum bs Feel ! Ah someone talking sense as always -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally by: Joe Phoenix -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sigh
Damien McCandless Caldari Baden's Army	Posted - 2011.05.17 15:50:00 - [37] Originally by: Furb Killer There are only two problems: 1) You don't get 6000+ people together for that. 2) The server would die horribly. The problem isnt so much that it is impossible to get 6k people (okay it is a major problem), but it is also that it is ridiculous that the only counter besides more of the same, is outnumbering your opponents 20 to 1 (roughly what you need if you want to kill a supercap with subcaps, with caps you need arround 10 to 1 or so). I think that pretty much fills the definition of overpowered. I cant begin to describe how competely moronic your statement is. Please leave existance immeadiately. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally by: Joe Phoenix -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sigh
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.05.17 15:53:00 - [38] Is it really a problem that some entity can field xxx supers in one spot? What would you say if that blob would not be able to jump faster than 2 lightyears per minute? Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
MaiLina KaTar	Posted - 2011.05.17 16:13:00 - [39] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: MaiLina KaTar Restrict number of supercaps to number of people in alliance divided by thousand. Done. It's why Protoss only fields one Mothership in SC2. Six of em would be kinda ridiculous. Alt alliances would simply be made to house the supercaps. If you're already spending 20-80bil on your ship what's another 1bil for an alt alliance? Also 6 motherships in sc2 would be useless, 2 might have a practical use (one moves the cloaked army out and the other warps em back if things go bad) but more than that would be a massive waste of rescources (as if its not already a waste fielding one :D ) I'm talking about restricting based on amount of people in the alliance ie accounts, not characters. And I firmly believe that 6 Vortex & Recalls would be a little bit overpowered :p
Blacksquirrel	Posted - 2011.05.17 16:24:00 - [40] Originally by: The R00k Originally by: Blacksquirrel Increase dreadnought range and give them a bonus against super caps. Give them another high slot. Essentially create an anti super cap ship thats not so great against smaller ships. Because that will work........ So well that no one will use super caps and dreads will be the new flotm. How about they fix travel systems and tackling and give fleets formations that make it negative for the entire fleet to shoot one target unless it is small ships shooting 1 big ship. God forbid 1000 people shooting 1 ever get fixed. 1. makes dreads more useful 2. If they're only good against POS's and bonus against supers...not really an issue. Considering supers are good against well... most everything. How is the tactic of selecting a single a target an issue?... Die to quickly? Well thank math for that one....What the hell do you expect?
Hacra Minmatar Cosmodynamics Joint Venture Conglomerate	Posted - 2011.05.17 16:39:00 - [41] CCP should definately change motherships. Currently some motherships can build better tank than titans and only with 1/5th of the price of titan, it's the ultimate end game vessel that ccp so hates to see. (So only use for titan is to bridge fleets around, perioid. Silly way to spend 60-100b+) With the old Mothership HPs you could still tank 2-4 doomsdays just fine if you knew how to fit the damn thing. So imho, there's massive imbalance with motherships currently. What'd be nice is to keep the mothership DPS the same, but remove the stupendous amount of hitpoints to the previous levels.
Mithrasith	Posted - 2011.05.17 16:39:00 - [42] Edited by: Mithrasith on 17/05/2011 16:42:10 Most of you are missing the simple question: "Why would CCP make SC's so buff? What incentive is there for them to do that?" Simple answer: "durr, cause they are dumbest 4ever!" Internet Answer: "They derped" Real Answer:"To reduce Lag" Making the answer super explicit: "It was done on purpose with the full knowledge that SC's would be over-powered and they would become the primary ship class for combat in 0.0" The explanation: Someone brought up the point earlier: "You have to bring 1 trillion isk worth of battleships to beat 1 trillion isk worth of Super Carriers". Do you know how much lag that would cause? CCP's marketing flagship is 0.0 conquerable space, super huge fleet fights on a single server. That's the bread and butter. In an age of lots of available ISK, and lots of billionaires, and a lengthy expensive fight against lag to keep this concept alive, how do you put in a temporary fix so that you dont have to announce to the MMO world that the single server idea is not scaling well? SuperCarriers. Further Obvious Explanation For some additional explanation is required. My apologies. Super Carriers are expensive, and they also take a lot of training time. At the time of introduction, the number of players that could afford, and pilot SC's was small. Buffing SC's caused the "Rush to SC's" which would buy CCP some time. They knew that everyone and their brother would migrate to SC's. they knew there would be 50 SC blobs, but that works well for them because if you have a 100vs100 Capital fight, its not a big deal, or a 200vs200 Capital fight, that's no problem. But you cant have a 600vs600 fight anymore (and most players in EVE can afford nice sub-caps now). They will nerf SuperCarriers eventually one they have a more permanent solution in place to combat the lag issue (which oddly enough was introduced by the Drake - which was an incentive ship to allow new players to feel like they were making a contribution) Now on to the High sec buff explanation: Same as the SC explanation. They want 0.0 to be a viable, more hardcore place. They have moved more income opportunities to High sec to get a lot of the Bears out of low sec in order to keep their flagship bread and butter marketing/feature alive. So there you have it. A SC nerf will come, but not until they have changed 0.0 mechanics a bit more, removed some of the chaff (bears), and altered it such that they can keep the fleet fights manage-able.
Aqriue	Posted - 2011.05.17 17:04:00 - [43] Originally by: Furb Killer Balance by ISK cost is beyond ****ed. If I fit an estamel invuln field on my drake, should i be able to beat 100 t2 drakes? Balance primarily needs to be on a per ship base, not per ISK. ISK isnt really a factor and very expensive very good ships only promote botting. If you spend more ISK on a ship you should be more effective, but you should not be without counters on a per ship base, contrary what you have now with supers. Isk is a deciding factor when you can throw it around, better and more expensive functional gear will top poor quality control gear to the cheapest contract. The problem with your example is that the estamel is not really worth the 25 billion price (on contracts, no even sure if thats accurarte), it does one thing and raises all resists. It will give your drake a huge advantage in 1 on 1 or maybe a very small gang. The mineral cost alone is probably less then a T2 Invulnerability, its only more expensive because of its rarity and +20% resist over it. Super Carriers on the otherhand, do alot of things (tank, DPS, remote rep, command modules) and each is probably worth at least 5 battleship pilots. If you had 100vs100 battleships and each had a value of 1 point, then the two fleets are equal. If a SC is worth at least 5 pilots for each ship in the fight and 10 people in 1 fleet bring an SC your, the side then becomes 140vs100 (90BS+(10SCx5)=140 points). SC are worth more in mineral costs and SP requirements then a random rare drop NPC item. The problem is the fact that one side can produce more and more SC, to the point if 1 side brings 100 SC and the other brings 100 BS your basicly looking at a 500 to 100 fight. Yeah, you will loose when out number and outgunned. Capitals are essential end game gear, not everyone wants to always fly a disposable battleship. There are many ways to counter an SC: Bring your own. Steal them by Corp Infiltration. Or just bring your cheap fleets and go all GoonWars on them for 6 months like back in early 2009, even attrition will takes it toll because you if you cannot destroy the SC, then you can waste their time, disrupt logistics, and just cause the alliance to fold in on itself because human nature will take its course and they will tire of the constant disruptions. If you cannot stand up against an SC for one battle then stop asking CCP to bring the Nerf Bat to bring it down to managble levels for you, because some alliances can already manage to put out dozens of them making it a hassle for you is just about as pointless for me to ask to make highsec 100% safe because I cannot manage to deal with the hassel of highsec basement rats looking for one sided fights that will guarantee them a marauder kill to their tier 2 piece of ** disposable BC because thats all they can afford to bring. Remember, fly what you can afford to loose and if one side is bringing in sports cars to your Scooter Puff jrs then you have lost the race already.
Fix Lag	Posted - 2011.05.17 17:04:00 - [44] If you have never seen a supercarrier before in your life, get out. You have nothing to contribute that is of any value. Take your empire-pubbie-theory-crafting crap and stuff it in your pimped mission ship's aft thruster nozzle. Supercapitals (titans and supercarriers, not just supercarriers) are both going to get hit with a nerfbat, presumably very hard. I myself am cheering for it, because they have ruined sovereignty warfare for anyone not flying one. Your posts, however, are not going to change diddly-squat for the better. Particularly considering almost all of them have been so utterly stupid I don't know how you find the undock button. Limiting supercarriers (or anything, for that matter) by number of alliance members? Right, pretty sure it's been covered a thousand times how people will simply create shell alliances to get around any kind of requirement like that. Supercarriers cause less lag? Get out, you've never been in-system when one deploys fighter bombers. Stop posting, all of you. You have no idea what you're talking about, and it ****es me and every other nullsec player who's going to have to deal with the changes CCP makes off. Fix Lag!
Mithrasith	Posted - 2011.05.17 17:18:00 - [45] Originally by: Fix Lag If you have never seen a supercarrier before in your life, get out. You have nothing to contribute that is of any value. Take your empire-pubbie-theory-crafting crap and stuff it in your pimped mission ship's aft thruster nozzle. Supercarriers cause less lag? Get out, you've never been in-system when one deploys fighter bombers. Actually yes I have seen many super carriers, and yes I have been in system when numerous SC's dropped their fighter bombers, and its still less lag than 800 vs 800 sub capital fights (which yes I have actually participated in).
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2011.05.17 17:53:00 - [46] Nerf is so a strong word, what you really need is a counter. And IMHO just buffing the dreads is a bad idea. Why not something like a buff for destroyers or a new type in that segment that is really good at shredding fighter and bomber drones while it remains relatively immune to their damage. -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.
davet517 Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.05.17 18:28:00 - [47] I'm involved in sov warfare every day, and there are far more sub-caps out there being used on a daily basis than SCs and Titans, so no, they aren't completely making everything else obsolete. The problem isn't that super-capitals are overpowered. They should be overpowered compared to everything else. They are SUPER CAPITALS. They should be the principal ship that decides the outcome of sov warfare. The problem is that they are far too cheap, both isk wise and pain in the ass factor wise, to use, which has lead to their proliferation. These should be the ultimate strategic weapons in the game, not something that is used as an "I win" button to decide the outcome of sub-cap engagements, or to hot-drop on every un-wary hulk. The answer is pretty simple. Make them really expensive to use. If it cost 50 million in fuel to jump a SC, and 100 million to jump a Titan, they stop being tactical weapons. Who wants to spend billions to jump Titans and SCs in to "I win" a BS fight, not to mention having to haul freighters full of fuel around for the privilege? If this was done, these could remain the awesome ships that they are, while being used to decide major, strategic engagements. When you saw them on the field, it would be "shock and awe" time again, as it should be.
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2011.05.17 18:49:00 - [48] Originally by: davet517 I'm involved in sov warfare every day, and there are far more sub-caps out there being used on a daily basis than SCs and Titans, so no, they aren't completely making everything else obsolete. The problem isn't that super-capitals are overpowered. They should be overpowered compared to everything else. They are SUPER CAPITALS. They should be the principal ship that decides the outcome of sov warfare. The problem is that they are far too cheap, both isk wise and pain in the ass factor wise, to use, which has lead to their proliferation. These should be the ultimate strategic weapons in the game, not something that is used as an "I win" button to decide the outcome of sub-cap engagements, or to hot-drop on every un-wary hulk. The answer is pretty simple. Make them really expensive to use. If it cost 50 million in fuel to jump a SC, and 100 million to jump a Titan, they stop being tactical weapons. Who wants to spend billions to jump Titans and SCs in to "I win" a BS fight, not to mention having to haul freighters full of fuel around for the privilege? If this was done, these could remain the awesome ships that they are, while being used to decide major, strategic engagements. When you saw them on the field, it would be "shock and awe" time again, as it should be. They were fine when they cost 30-40bil to buy, when 30-40bil was a crapload and not everyone had gazillions of dreads. Then they got pretty much ** when dreads got cheap and people could spam them. Now they're powerful as they come in blobs, cuz, just as you say "it is cheap". But I don't agree that the cost of moving them should go up, NC and other blob loving entities who loves to farm up their homeland would just spam a gazillion of them and be happy with whatever, while the more offensive entities gets bit in the ass. It would make alot more sense to up the price of actually building them. That would make Dreads cost effective again and potentially more useful. Either case; the price. And personally, I feel it's quite **ed that people can just buy minerals in Jita and jump it out to spam-build supercaps. I know I worked my ass off to get my first, and I have participated in the defence ops of moving regular Freighters through low-/null to build just one of them. With current prices and easy-to-build I could just a few whenever I felt like it. Prices. Has. To. Go. Up. loads. And preferably it'd be alot harder to build them in null as well. Not as in time/CSAA defence, it'd be interesting to make parts of the building material something that was forced to mine** in null. That'd be a nice "boost" to mining as well. -
davet517 Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.05.17 19:01:00 - [49] Originally by: Misanth It would make alot more sense to up the price of actually building them. That would make Dreads cost effective again and potentially more useful. The problem with that is that they'd hardly ever get used. Even now, there's an extremely strong incentive for their pilots to bail out to NPC space or low-sec and sit out any war that they even think might not go their way. It's why we've seen entities who have a lot of them fold without ever using them. Making the ships themselves far more expensive to buy would just make that worse. We want them to get built, and used, and destroyed, and built again. We just don't want them to be the ultimate tactic in every situation.
Monty D	Posted - 2011.05.17 20:45:00 - [50] A reasonable discussion for once, the removal of caps using jump bridges will help reduce their use somewhat and though it will affect all caps it will stop supers jumpbridging in to overwhelm sub cap attacks and that must be good
Alty McExpendable	Posted - 2011.05.17 20:49:00 - [51] Figures PL would say their abilities are just fine and the trick is to make them more expensive. 8/10 because several people clearly bought it.
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2011.05.17 21:44:00 - [52] Originally by: davet517 Originally by: Misanth It would make alot more sense to up the price of actually building them. That would make Dreads cost effective again and potentially more useful. The problem with that is that they'd hardly ever get used. Even now, there's an extremely strong incentive for their pilots to bail out to NPC space or low-sec and sit out any war that they even think might not go their way. It's why we've seen entities who have a lot of them fold without ever using them. Making the ships themselves far more expensive to buy would just make that worse. We want them to get built, and used, and destroyed, and built again. We just don't want them to be the ultimate tactic in every situation. Fair enough. But shoehorning them into one role (like damage) would be pretty damn awkward as well. Then it gets a tool for certain players only. I'm probably one of few mom-pilots who really hate the damage role they got (which has a logic ofc, having things used is more cool than not). But the supercaps have also their logistic and support roles, which was there from the beginning and still is something I personally would never want to see lost. I love that my mom is a huge carrier. I want the drone bay. I want the remote repping. I want the bigger corp hangar/ship bay. Without those things it's not a huge carrier, and with purely FB's for example it's just another blob tool for 0.0 fleet warfare. Then again, I'm biased for small scale warfare and using my motherships as logistic tools. A few years of blobfest has put me quite disgusted with that whole thing. -
Sealiah Minmatar Coffee Lovers Brewing Club ROMANIAN-LEGION	Posted - 2011.05.17 21:54:00 - [53] SC are fine at the moment... We need some bigger ships that are even less cost effective to kill the SC to make them the uber-ship. Make the new ship like the old titan, a few dozens in the game and when you hear about one, people shiver. Base price - 300b.
Speaker4 theDead	Posted - 2011.05.18 00:38:00 - [54] Discussion is over when you talk about 2000+ people in one system. You then assume you can focus fire in an enviroment where your ship can take 10 to 20 minutes to respond. (Assuming they respond at all)
Fitz VonHeise Eye Bee Em Stellar Defense Alliance	Posted - 2011.05.18 01:10:00 - [55] If you want pure smaller ship pvp then come fight in worm holes.
IsoMetricanTaliac 2 Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2011.05.18 02:49:00 - [56] Yes the current way these ships are being used & the amount of them being built should be setting off alarm bells in every area of CCP that has anything to do with balancing... It's like they have come full circle only now they have more power due to FB's & they are very hard to counter unless your able to field 50 of the damn things as well. Maybe FB's need to have limits put on them on what they are able to be used against? Make it that when they are attacking anything other than a capital ship they suffer penalties/drawbacks which make them as effective as using normal fighters. Basically SuperCarriers get 0 penalties whether used in 0.0 or Lowsec & have very little that is able to counter them effectively. Especially when a blob of them can wipe the floor with just about anything in the game & be on their way to safety before a defense can be mounted. CCP have created a situation where SC's are being used like normal carriers in bigger numbers & there are many many more being built each & every day. Is the day of super capitals online in 0.0/lowsec coming? Well current trends might say that it is very nearly already here! In a Time When Many Will Seek Death, There Will Always Be Those Like Me Who Won't Mind Helping Them Along Their Way!?!
Adophnil Amarr Dark Reality Unified	Posted - 2011.05.18 06:02:00 - [57] Supercap proliferation in lowsec is especially rough, but if you start showing up with your unsupported SC and essentially doing stupid nonsense with it (aka not keeping it in a blob of other supers) you risk blowing your billions of ISK the second anyone with a slightly bigger gankfleet decides to put some energy into ruining your day. And when that ruination comes with the thrill, excitement, and joy of getting an SC killmail - there is a lot of motivation to do so. And the people who do so are quite good at what they do. So right there you already have a basic understanding of why you start to see blob mentality with SCs. It's the same with many faction or faction fit expensive subcaps. Are you more or less willing to engage your Bhaalgorn when you have a 3man fleet or a 20 man fleet? In nullsec it is the same, but also a question of power projection. And although I'd love to believe the PL guys perspective in theory, it's hilarious, because existing supercaps (in large numbers : I'm looking at you PL) would be ridiculously overpowered/grandfathered in against the ever-increasing slope of gaining even a remotely similar amount of "power". I'm personally of the opinion that whatever happens needs to include a sizable Dread buff, and perhaps even bonus's them against supers. It won't decrease the SC blobs, in fact it'll just add more dreads into the mix - but it'll increase SC deaths - and that is a very very good thing. Perhaps the solution is just to make them slightly more killable?
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.18 06:07:00 - [58] Originally by: Damien McCandless Originally by: Furb Killer There are only two problems: 1) You don't get 6000+ people together for that. 2) The server would die horribly. The problem isnt so much that it is impossible to get 6k people (okay it is a major problem), but it is also that it is ridiculous that the only counter besides more of the same, is outnumbering your opponents 20 to 1 (roughly what you need if you want to kill a supercap with subcaps, with caps you need arround 10 to 1 or so). I think that pretty much fills the definition of overpowered. I cant begin to describe how competely moronic your statement is. Please leave existance immeadiately. So you think requiring 20 to 1 odds to kill a ship is balanced? I would advice you to follow your own advice.
Miso Hawnee	Posted - 2011.05.18 06:54:00 - [59] Originally by: KHAN SUNE Guys for gods sake go and get laid!! hey sailor, looking for a good time?
ichi Tekitsu	Posted - 2011.05.18 07:47:00 - [60] Originally by: Kash Nirukhi These days there's no use to subcaps anymore. The mothership has taken over the role of virtually any other ship. There is no way of countering these fleets except of a bigger blob of motherships. Is eve online becoming a mothership-only game? So any suggestions? should ccp nerf the cyno? (f.e. it needs 50 l.o. per ship jumping in, or it takes 10s per ship to jump in?) Should ccp nerf the mothership? (f.e. give it a bomber-only role, increase the locking time, reduce the jump range, put a maximum on cap ships allowed in system? make the sig on fighters and bombers so big that they have no use to subcaps? like bs guns have no use to frigs? ) Feel free to discuss! I think the reason you wrote this is because you're getting " Owned ".... So you're being a poor sport in playing eve.... If say you're alliance was capable of using " Alot " supercarriers you wouldn't have write what you have said.... so either you're alliance get the ability to fly them n own others with or stfu n suck on you thumb while you're getting own by supercarriers.... Folks that are able to fly them are at risk of losing up to 25.5 Billion isk in one go... Do bare that in mind before you write something that has to do with " nerf " Oh another thing is they ( the ones that has the skill to fly SC ) spend a good year + just to be able to fly one, plus cost the of just items ( 15 - 20 billion ) . So it's rather crude or just plan poor sport to say " nerf " so easily just because you're getting " Owned " by an SC pilot.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.05.18 07:54:00 - [61] - Bombers have already been hit with the bat with no noticeable effect as it came after sub-caps stopped being used in super bouts for anything other than clearing bubblers .. so that won't happen and won't work. - Cyno's are probably being nerfed (spool-up time), not to limit super capabilities but rather capitals in general. What I would like to see: - Removal of all but one or two highs on SC's, Carriers are the capital logistics platform. Would make all SC blobs non-starters and provide a weaker link to exploit. - Downward tweak of SC EHP to half that of Titan's. - Removal of eWar immunity when in Empire. - Higher CSAA vulnerability (ex. prohibitive online requirement to make POS toothless or gimped shields) -or- hard limit on CSAA numbers (1-2 per iHub w. expensive upgrade to have more). - Boost to dreads. Originally by: Straight Edged Please dont... Please don't think ISK value is a balancing metric, you only make yourself look like a fool.
KHAN SUNE	Posted - 2011.05.18 08:12:00 - [62] Originally by: Miso Hawnee Originally by: KHAN SUNE Guys for gods sake go and get laid!! hey sailor, looking for a good time? Now how the hell did you know i'm in the navy?
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2011.05.18 09:00:00 - [63] Edited by: Gnulpie on 18/05/2011 09:03:51 Originally by: Furb Killer Originally by: Gnulpie With 1 trillion isk you can get maybe 60 supercarriers or 6.666 battleships (16 bil per SC, 150 mil per BS). The BS would MELT the supercarriers in absolutely no time. [...] There are only two problems: 1) You don't get 6000+ people together for that. 2) The server would die horribly. The problem isnt so much that it is impossible to get 6k people (okay it is a major problem), but it is also that it is ridiculous that the only counter besides more of the same, is outnumbering your opponents 20 to 1 (roughly what you need if you want to kill a supercap with subcaps, with caps you need arround 10 to 1 or so). I think that pretty much fills the definition of overpowered. Why is that ridiculous? Can you kill 60 BS (which good fit and knowing what they are doing) with the same amount of frigs? Hardly. Why do you think that fleetbattles often consist of BS vs BS or at least BS vs ships that are equally or more expensive (as in HAC or T3) and not BS vs frigs? The argument that you can kill a shipblob with only another shipblob of the same pricetag is pretty valid for everything shiptype in EVE I think. No, that is not what makes SC so special. The special thing is that they create a lot of lag and that the servers can cope with them. That is the real problem, together with their high mobility from one area to another. Edit: Would it help if the mobility of SC would be reduced? Maybe only once every xx hours? Or 0 lightyears directly after the jump and then every hour the jumprange is increased by 0.1 lightyears until the max range is reached?
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.18 09:57:00 - [64] So the problem is not highest DPS, or the EHP of a POS, or the ewar immunity with ****load of utility slots and enormous drone bay, but the lag? So if they double FB and fighter DPS and half the ammount of drones they can have out they are balanced? Lol no, they are horribly overpowered, completely regardless of lag. Being forced to outnumber an opponent 20 to 1 or bringing more of the same = overpowered, simple as that. Regarding your BS example, first the BS dont promote botting so much, so that is one difference. But more important, what BS type are you talking about? Ahacs can do pretty good against some (that they are as expensive doesnt matter, it means they got a counter, and also one that doesnt encourage botting), against others BCs can be very effective. If you want to use frig sized ships there is definately not the need to outnumber them 20 to 1 to win, with equal numbers you might even beat quite some BS setups, largest issue will be breaking logistics. Last, but most definately not least, ever considered bombers? Cheaper, smaller, and can absolutely devastate BS fleets if used correctly. You can also go larger, like carriers, which then are countered by dreads, which are countered by BS. So not one type to pwn them all.
El'Niaga Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2011.05.18 10:11:00 - [65] The main problem I see with Supercarriers is after their buff there is a huge leap in power between level 1 and level 3 in racial carrier. Probably the Supercarriers should of been t2 or something more at their current level of power. At the same time I see the problem being there is no equivalent superdreadnought. Titan doesn't qualify as it costs twice as much as the Supercarrier. Need something about equal in firepower, cost and construction time. What the game really needs is some sort of Drone Interdiction (A Drone Screening Vessel). Where the ship has tremendous bonus to damage, tracking etc vs drones/fighters/fighter-bombers. Might be a level 3 Interdictor based off of Destroyer Hulls (though be nice to see a new original hull for it) and a Level 3 Heavy Interdictor off of Cruiser Hulls (would be nice to see a new hull used though). You can then approach one of two ways. It can have an effect similar to the warp bubbles but instead of preventing warp it deals damage to just drones (incl fighters and fighter bombers) or you can have another weapon mod like anti-drone/anti-fighter weapon that can only be fitted on that hull and deals extroardinary damage to drones, fighters and fighter bombers. Both types would only attack/damage enemy drones not friendly ones.
Ticarus Hellbrandt	Posted - 2011.05.18 10:45:00 - [66] bombers should just be removed then dreadnoughts will have more purpose.
Pheleus Habitual Euthanasia	Posted - 2011.05.18 10:52:00 - [67] I like the only bomber no drone idea. But tbh the truth is 50sc's worth of other ships would be a fair fight so not sure what ccp can do that wont make them completely useless to the point were 5bil in ships beats 15bil ship which just makes no sense. It would be like a rifter soloing a mach wouldnt it. And they are not OP if you consider training time cost unless you are a sad *got getting killed by a blob of them. titans are way more overpowered. My idea is simple make titans and SC worht 4x there current build price so people care when they lose them at present 10-15bil to replace a super for high SP characters is ** all. stupid filter
bartos100 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2011.05.18 11:43:00 - [68] Originally by: Gnulpie Edited by: Gnulpie on 18/05/2011 09:03:51 Originally by: Furb Killer Originally by: Gnulpie With 1 trillion isk you can get maybe 60 supercarriers or 6.666 battleships (16 bil per SC, 150 mil per BS). The BS would MELT the supercarriers in absolutely no time. [...] There are only two problems: 1) You don't get 6000+ people together for that. 2) The server would die horribly. The problem isnt so much that it is impossible to get 6k people (okay it is a major problem), but it is also that it is ridiculous that the only counter besides more of the same, is outnumbering your opponents 20 to 1 (roughly what you need if you want to kill a supercap with subcaps, with caps you need arround 10 to 1 or so). I think that pretty much fills the definition of overpowered. Why is that ridiculous? Can you kill 60 BS (which good fit and knowing what they are doing) with the same amount of frigs? Hardly. Why do you think that fleetbattles often consist of BS vs BS or at least BS vs ships that are equally or more expensive (as in HAC or T3) and not BS vs frigs? The argument that you can kill a shipblob with only another shipblob of the same pricetag is pretty valid for everything shiptype in EVE I think. No, that is not what makes SC so special. The special thing is that they create a lot of lag and that the servers can cope with them. That is the real problem, together with their high mobility from one area to another. Edit: Would it help if the mobility of SC would be reduced? Maybe only once every xx hours? Or 0 lightyears directly after the jump and then every hour the jumprange is increased by 0.1 lightyears until the max range is reached? i would love to see your 60 man BS gang meet a well skilled 10 man bomber squad with bombs :) if they manage 1 good bombrun all your 60 BS are gone or very badly hurt and ready to die with the next bomb run or a few torps total value of he SB gang 200 mil ? total value of the BS gang 6 bil ?
Millie Clode Amarr Insert Cool Name Here	Posted - 2011.05.18 11:51:00 - [69] I fully agree. 49 is a perfectly sensible number of supercaps to field at once. Anything more than that and it's SUPER LAME. ---------- Who, me?
Soi Mala Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen	Posted - 2011.05.18 11:55:00 - [70] Originally by: Sealiah SC are fine at the moment... We need some bigger ships that are even less cost effective to kill the SC to make them the uber-ship. Make the new ship like the old titan, a few dozens in the game and when you hear about one, people shiver. Base price - 300b. BOOM! This guy has cracked it for us! CCP HIRE THIS MAN! jesus christ.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.18 12:38:00 - [71] Originally by: Pheleus I like the only bomber no drone idea. But tbh the truth is 50sc's worth of other ships would be a fair fight so not sure what ccp can do that wont make them completely useless to the point were 5bil in ships beats 15bil ship which just makes no sense. It would be like a rifter soloing a mach wouldnt it. And they are not OP if you consider training time cost unless you are a sad *got getting killed by a blob of them. titans are way more overpowered. My idea is simple make titans and SC worht 4x there current build price so people care when they lose them at present 10-15bil to replace a super for high SP characters is ** all. stupid filter If I buy for 2B rifters (yeah i am poor), will CCP give me pilots for all those rifters? Ship balance needs to be on a per ship base, not per ISK. Why would it be a problem if 5B worth of ships can beat 15B worth of ships? Get for 15B worth of dreads and I show you what BS worth 5B will do to those dreads, and no one is complaining dreads need to be better against BS.
Hakkar'al Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.18 14:09:00 - [72] Originally by: Kash Nirukhi These days there's no use to subcaps anymore. The mothership has taken over the role of virtually any other ship. As Lady Spank hinted, I feel roaming supercaps would be hilarious. That said, RMT-alliances are fielding quite a few these days. Not on roams unfortunately.
Mithrasith	Posted - 2011.05.18 15:02:00 - [73] Maybe have CCP make destroyers=Bomber killing machines. Of course they would need to also make them more immune to smart-bombing or something, but that might actually give destroyers a freaking role.
Shawna Gray Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.18 15:26:00 - [74] Originally by: Hakkar'al Gallente Originally by: Kash Nirukhi These days there's no use to subcaps anymore. The mothership has taken over the role of virtually any other ship. As Lady Spank hinted, I feel roaming supercaps would be hilarious. That said, RMT-alliances are fielding quite a few these days. Not on roams unfortunately. Roams are irrelevant for sov warfare, and if you really wanted to you could roam with one small ship and hotdrop the supers when needed. Supers have to be nerfed.
Blacksquirrel	Posted - 2011.05.18 15:34:00 - [75] I've said they need to implement flak cannons that are awesome against drones and fighters. People for some reason dont like the notion of AOE damage in eve...unless it has to do with smart bombs for some reason. I'm guessing lag? But with that argument we'd never have missiles either.
Silas Vitalia Khanid Provincial Vanguard Vanguard Imperium	Posted - 2011.05.18 16:20:00 - [76] Originally by: Blacksquirrel I've said they need to implement flak cannons that are awesome against drones and fighters. People for some reason dont like the notion of AOE damage in eve...unless it has to do with smart bombs for some reason. I'm guessing lag? But with that argument we'd never have missiles either. I could see a potential actual use for some sort of retooled defender missiles. Give them huge bonus to damage fighter / bombers and have them auto-target and hit those types of drones. You could then have viable screens of 'flak' ships walling off anything the supers were going after. Silas Vitalia CEO Khanid Provincial Vanguard Open for Recruitment!
Silas Vitalia Khanid Provincial Vanguard Vanguard Imperium	Posted - 2011.05.18 16:32:00 - [77] I think the point is that something that is elite, extremely powerful, and 'relatively' expensive needs to have balanced restrictions on it. As it currently stands there are no disincentives to deploy massive supercap blobs. You cannot blame the players for exploiting assets that are available to them under the current system. Deploying a super carrier or titan for battle should be expensive, more difficult, more risky (all-in), and a tide-turner, not the defacto standard ship of use. Since isk and expenses have lost all meaning for the larger groups, changing the costs will effect nothing, it needs to be balance/game mechanics that change this. 1. Cyno range / cost / spool-up should be directly proportional to what is being cynod onto the field. I would even suggest at best battleships required to cyno capitals and capitals required to cyno supercapitals. Hot drops are stupid, you know they are. Having a lenghty spoolup and giving people a chance to leave would cut this tactic right out of the game, while leaving it just fine for larger sov fights that last longer anyway. Silas Vitalia CEO Khanid Provincial Vanguard Open for Recruitment!
Martyr Theos The NecroMonger Faith	Posted - 2011.05.18 16:46:00 - [78] Edited by: Martyr Theos on 18/05/2011 16:50:29 I have advocated for a "Nova Bomb" weapon for frigate pilots... but nobody seemed to like the idea. Nevermind that it would be a massive hoot for every pilot to be able to wield a "field clearing" daisy-cutter... nevermind that it would instantly make blobs obsolete.... nevermind that such dynamite is the obvious solution to breaking the cement molded empires in zero into fluid fun. Just no support from the forum for big bombs in the hands of solo anarcho-terrorists I guess. (and this I don't understand given the communities' worship of griefing...) "Got License?" - TNMF
Xtreem Gallente Fire Mandrill	Posted - 2011.05.18 17:02:00 - [79] Originally by: Blacksquirrel Increase dreadnought range and give them a bonus against super caps. Give them another high slot. Essentially create an anti super cap ship thats not so great against smaller ships.
Epsilon Artiste	Posted - 2011.05.18 17:03:00 - [80] What if supers could only jump once per 24 hours? Committing supers means a bit more now since they're stuck in that system for the next 24 hours and can't hop back to staging/home system all safe and sound once they're brought the pain. Want to gank that ratting carrier? Okay, now you're stuck in that system for the day and can't head home or be used for another day. Would add another element like baiting hostile supers into jumping to one system then attack another system.
Silas Vitalia Khanid Provincial Vanguard Vanguard Imperium	Posted - 2011.05.18 19:07:00 - [81] Originally by: Epsilon Artiste What if supers could only jump once per 24 hours? Committing supers means a bit more now since they're stuck in that system for the next 24 hours and can't hop back to staging/home system all safe and sound once they're brought the pain. Want to gank that ratting carrier? Okay, now you're stuck in that system for the day and can't head home or be used for another day. Would add another element like baiting hostile supers into jumping to one system then attack another system. +1 Fantastic idea Silas Vitalia CEO Khanid Provincial Vanguard Open for Recruitment!
Kerfira Kerfira Corp	Posted - 2011.05.18 20:03:00 - [82] A very simple change would make things a lot better: "Super Capitals can not target non-capital ships." Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.05.18 20:04:00 - [83] Originally by: Kerfira A very simple change would make things a lot better: "Super Capitals can not target non-capital ships." Which will result in some comical kills
Velicitia Open Designs	Posted - 2011.05.18 20:08:00 - [84] Originally by: Silas Vitalia Originally by: Epsilon Artiste What if supers could only jump once per 24 hours? Committing supers means a bit more now since they're stuck in that system for the next 24 hours and can't hop back to staging/home system all safe and sound once they're brought the pain. Want to gank that ratting carrier? Okay, now you're stuck in that system for the day and can't head home or be used for another day. Would add another element like baiting hostile supers into jumping to one system then attack another system. +1 Fantastic idea 24 hours might be a bit much -- but yes, something that keeps them committed for a good long while. Downside to this is that the guys owning them will "turtle" in their corners of space, rather than jump up for a weekend of crushing their enemies...
Speaker4 theDead	Posted - 2011.05.18 20:28:00 - [85] Wow, so many things could be said about all the whining in this thread, but I think i'll just stick with.... "Learn to adapt, or learn to die quietly"
Silas Vitalia Khanid Provincial Vanguard Vanguard Imperium	Posted - 2011.05.18 21:19:00 - [86] Originally by: Velicitia Originally by: Silas Vitalia Originally by: Epsilon Artiste What if supers could only jump once per 24 hours? Committing supers means a bit more now since they're stuck in that system for the next 24 hours and can't hop back to staging/home system all safe and sound once they're brought the pain. Want to gank that ratting carrier? Okay, now you're stuck in that system for the day and can't head home or be used for another day. Would add another element like baiting hostile supers into jumping to one system then attack another system. +1 Fantastic idea 24 hours might be a bit much -- but yes, something that keeps them committed for a good long while. Downside to this is that the guys owning them will "turtle" in their corners of space, rather than jump up for a weekend of crushing their enemies... 'Turtling' would be a decision to make. Real Empires have to make decisions to keep their armies for home defense or to go conquering and leave the back door open and vulnerable. In eve you can do both, instantly, with no penalties and no need for strategic long term planning. You can travel halfway across the map from your home systems, drop fleets, and be home in time for dinner. No risk, no consequences, no 'front lines'. Silas Vitalia CEO Khanid Provincial Vanguard Open for Recruitment!
Iku	Posted - 2011.05.19 01:45:00 - [87] we could also improve the doomsday to a real doomsday that also instapops motherships? or we could disable the hit and run tactics b disabling the jumpdrive for an hour, maybe two after the ship aggro's?
Arnakoz	Posted - 2011.05.19 01:52:00 - [88] why is this a topic? of course they are overpowered. they take years to train for and cost 20billion ISK.... are we really whining that newb BC gangs can't compete with seasoned/rich alliances? and if they were actually overpowered then you wouldn't see them dieing so often. get in an alliance that has cap support and make sure they don;t pick fights with bigger fish. its really that simple.
Soi Mala Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen	Posted - 2011.05.19 16:23:00 - [89] Originally by: Speaker4 theDead Wow, so many things could be said about all the whining in this thread, but I think i'll just stick with.... "Learn to adapt, or learn to die quietly" Jesus you can't even meme correctly.. Originally by: Arnakoz why is this a topic? of course they are overpowered. they take years to train for and cost 20billion ISK.... are we really whining that newb BC gangs can't compete with seasoned/rich alliances? and if they were actually overpowered then you wouldn't see them dieing so often. get in an alliance that has cap support and make sure they don;t pick fights with bigger fish. its really that simple. They don't take years. 20billion is not much. Nobody is whining about BC's being underpowered against them, gangs of subcaps take down lone SC's all the time. They are complaining that there is literally no counter to the 50+ blobs of supercaps (not even another 50+ blob of supercaps, thanks to the lag that would ensue). Your comments lead me to believe that you have never fought outnumbered, never used maneuvers or tactics to gain an advantage, and never flown your ship manually. Are you mad because you've never had a good fight? We should all join forces, into a giant red vs blue, select one target at a time while all 4000 of us click "orbitlol" and press f1 once in a while, is that what you're saying? Sounds a lot like missioning to me...
Mithrasith	Posted - 2011.05.19 16:44:00 - [90] Originally by: Iku we could also improve the doomsday to a real doomsday that also instapops motherships? or we could disable the hit and run tactics b disabling the jumpdrive for an hour, maybe two after the ship aggro's? Some interesting idea's. I wonder if this is what CCP is talking about when they reference disabling or destroying specific modules (aka jump drive). Also I always thought that the DoomsDay device should wang your own fleet ships too. That would have balanced it out.
Calfis Amarr Fukushima Industries Dirt Nap Squad.	Posted - 2011.05.19 17:10:00 - [91] Originally by: Silas Vitalia Hot drops are stupid, you know they are. Your views wouldn't have anything to do with what happened recently in your neck of the woods would it?
Gogela Freeport Exploration	Posted - 2011.05.19 17:17:00 - [92] I would like to see convoys of freighters make a comeback. Convoys at all really. Teleportation is lame. That's all.
Diomedes Calypso	Posted - 2011.05.19 17:51:00 - [93] They seem to have a protocol/policy to re-balance everything at once, rather than adjusting ships little by little till they're comfortable with a balance. In some questions in the answer everylittle thing developer thread , developers seperately aknoledged need to rebalance a number of ships including the Dramiel, the Gallente/hybrid situation, and super carriers. What they haven't yet had time to answer is why they need to do them all at once... which of course makes it a huge job that will take months of vetting and more work in deployement. Also, as balance is the key, if you change everything at once (say both sides of an old fassion scale) it seems to me much harder than just adding or subtracting bit at a time to only one side till it balances. A bit less speed for a drameil, a bit higher tracking for a rail gun etc would be a improvement even if not an solution . I've asked in the thread if the actual changes like that require a lot of technical work or if the effort is all on the conceptual "what is balance' department. Also, it could be that other players really hate bit by bit changes and that they want to get it done all at once to minimize tin-foil hat time (I could see that approach necessary with any possible drake nerf.. but the consensus on the need for an incrmental change on others is pretty high and would make an announced stop-gap step pretty understandable) The super-carriers might be a bit tougher and might eventually want a more sweeping change, but certainly reducing bomber damage 10% or resistances a few percent would be a start that would bring things closer till something bigger that might introduce new game mechanics could be implemented.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [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.