EVE Search - Nerfing Super Carriers will change nothing

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Nerfing Super Carriers will change nothing

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Leysritt	Posted - 2011.05.28 23:42:00 - [1] I hear people whining and complaining about how overpowering supercarriers are and how they field swarms of them and weaker alliances have no chance. Tell me, would nerfing super carrier change anything really at all? The bigger and more powerful alliances will always crush the smaller and weaker one regardless of what happens to supercarriers. Nerf supercarriers, what will they field next? Titans? Dreads? Regular Carriers? Even then nothing changes. Supercarriers fit their function completely well. If supercarriers need a weakness then I suggest that Titans should have their DPS and their doomsday damage doubled. Titans need buffing that's what I think. They should be the king of all ships and destroy anything below them with ease. Oh Noes Solo Pwnmobile. For a 50 billion isk ship that take months to build it should be and with much higher skill requirements than supercarriers, it should crush them. Supercarriers maybe nerfed a bit, but they are here to stay are pretty much what they are.
IIIAsharakIII The League of Extraordinary Assholes	Posted - 2011.05.28 23:44:00 - [2] Great point. Terrible presentation.
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services	Posted - 2011.05.28 23:46:00 - [3] umm.... crap post...... ------------------------------------
EPW's Pimp	Posted - 2011.05.28 23:46:00 - [4] The reason they neeed "nerfing" is that there designed to be cap fighters, its mainly the bombers/fighters that need a bit of fiddling that is all...and yea i see carriers comming back into action...then again...supercaps>carrier we will see...as long as they stop being able to engage BS's/bc's i'd be happy
Buzzmong Aliastra	Posted - 2011.05.28 23:55:00 - [5] I see you've not grasped the actual problem, which is two fold: 1) Hotdropping of capitals/supercapitals. This is a problem, but it has been around for a while. It's apparently done quite a bit of damage to solo PvP in general, at the very least, it's one of the reasons why BC's have taken over what BS's used to do. It also has links with point 2. 2) Proliferation. EvE is built and designed so that every ship has more than one counter and isn't a solopwnmobile. The problem with supercaps is that they're that far ahead of regular caps that the only counter is more supercaps. This is broken. Extremely so. Most people wouldn't mind if you could defeat a small number of supercaps with say, double or triple the numbers of normal capitals or subcaps, but as it stands, you can't. A group of supercaps will decimate anything that's not also a supercap due to DPS and EHP and spidertanking, and immunity to EWAR. This also ties into point 1. Hotdropping of capitals isn't new. Previously though it was risky business to do so and wasn't used much, mostly because dreads and normal carriers can and will die to a big enough non cap force and both classes have difficulty dealing with non caps. Supercaps, MOM's especially, don't have that weakness (when not solo). Something does need to change. --------------------------------- Go Web! Go!
Daniela Darr	Posted - 2011.05.29 00:01:00 - [6] CCP just shouldn¦t have invented ships bigger than battleships. Perhaps carriers, but only with player piloted fighters. Would have been a true great opportunity for new players to engage in nulsec stuff. Another missed chance ...
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services	Posted - 2011.05.29 00:03:00 - [7] Originally by: Daniela Darr CCP just shouldn¦t have invented ships bigger than battleships. Perhaps carriers, but only with player piloted fighters. Would have been a true great opportunity for new players to engage in nulsec stuff. Another missed chance ... I don't think super caps should of come into the game.. ------------------------------------
Jacque Cruix	Posted - 2011.05.29 00:06:00 - [8] Increase jump fuel usage by SuperCarriers and Titans by 500x. Then they will only be moved when they really have to, not just to hotdrop an indy and alt scout for lols.
Soon Shin	Posted - 2011.05.29 00:28:00 - [9] I find it rather ridiculous that SC's and titans get dropped for popping a mere bc. I guess perhaps the alliances are bored. Perhaps they should make jumping a SC or titan cause a tear space and form a wormhole that spawn tons of sleeper guardian battleships. But that would cause massive lag and everyone will probably get killed by the sleepers. But it would be funny to see.
xxxak Caldari Infinite Improbability Inc -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2011.05.29 04:07:00 - [10] When super carriers die they cost 25 billion to replace. That is a blob of battleships. SC are fine. / thread
Aeo IV Amarr Xomic OmniCorporation	Posted - 2011.05.29 04:55:00 - [11] I agree, but not necessarily for the reasons the op posted- the problem with the game play in EVE is that it always favors blobs, since blobs equals more dps. The only way to fix this would be to reduce the relationship between blobs vs small fleets into such a fashion where the dps ends up capped at a certain level. For example, if ships and other space objects blocked los and prevented firing (or better, one could fire, but hit your own fleet's ships) suddenly blobs become more harmful than good. Similarly, if forcing fire reduced damaged (due to different weapon systems hitting one another (ie multiple lasers hitting the same point causes interference between them and causes less over-all damage to the target, or missiles colliding with one another), then focus fire (at least on small ships) would be ineffective.
JC Anderson Caldari Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.05.29 05:03:00 - [12] Originally by: Soon Shin I find it rather ridiculous that SC's and titans get dropped for popping a mere bc. I guess perhaps the alliances are bored. Perhaps they should make jumping a SC or titan cause a tear space and form a wormhole that spawn tons of sleeper guardian battleships. But that would cause massive lag and everyone will probably get killed by the sleepers. But it would be funny to see. Had that happen before as well.. Once, when I was in a !!2!! man gang, 3 super carriers decided we were worth the effort of a hot drop. And we weren't even in their sov space. :/
Callimminniss Prdsk Cyrix Ltd. Tamanium	Posted - 2011.05.29 06:17:00 - [13] In the big picture, that's probably about right, but on a smaller-scall play-by-play basis not necessarily so. A 100-man corp can go toe-to-toe with any other 100-man corp and expect to do well. A 100-man corp against a 10-man corp, either the small group just doesn't turn up or they bring their best and maybe punch above their weight and win a well-earned, against-the-odds victory, knowing the bigger group will be lazy and half of them are asleep. With sub-caps this is still a remote possibility, with supercap fleets it pretty much doesn't exist.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2011.05.29 06:17:00 - [14] As others have already said you're not seeing the actual issue with them. The issue isn't that nerfing them would allows smaller entities to defeat larger alliances, but larger alliances would be more affected, since they are the ones who can afford them. You can argue against that line of thinking all you want, but just be aware you aren't arguing against nerfing supercaps when you do that. You're just arguing against the strawmen of people who also don't get what the issue is. The situation with them is basicly the same as it was with the old titans. Having enough of them risked making all other ship classes redundand in fleet battles. The high cost only delayed the inevitable outcome and CCP was forced to change them when titans became common enough. We're now reaching the same point with the new supers. There are now big enough fleets of them, that in practical terms only another super fleet can have any chance against them. That means anyone who can't mass produce supers or afford to buy masses of them, has no chance of opposing any entity who can. Supers break the basic rule of EVE that says: bigger isn't always better. They are simply so much better than anything else and have such rediculous additional immunitites, that nothing can compete against them. This situation of simply bad for the game. It renders most of the ships useless in large scale warfare and makes it more boring and less varied in general. It makes the game worse for the majority of players in order that few thousand supercap capable pilots can run around curb stomping everyone else. In addition to the gameplay concerns changing them also makes sense from a practial business point of view. It's much better for CCP to **** off those few thousand players, some of who don't like the current situation either, than ruin the game for the rest. It will happen and your objections to it only make sure it does. You aren't denying any of the claims people make for nerfing them. Your only defence is that it was expensive and took time, so it's ok to be overpowered to the point of being game breaking. You can't buy victory with any other ship or fit in the game. You can pay billions to fit ships and you gain improved performance, but even a single cheap ship fitted to counter you and piloted by a good pilot can still defeat you. A fleet of those expensive ships are dengerous, but they still fall to fleets of cheaper ships with proper fits or fleet composition. Point being there are loads of realistic and comperatively affordable counters to them. There are no such options for countering super fleets.
Trish Tsero	Posted - 2011.05.29 06:52:00 - [15] Edited by: Trish Tsero on 29/05/2011 06:53:49 CCP already nerfed Titans if you remember they Made the titans DD-Weapon a single target weapon instead of the old massive Grid AOE it used to be. Also if you dont want Super Caps jumping in find their cyno pilot at his cyno and kill him. Cyno goes away no super caps jump in
Jaari Val'Dara Caldari Deep Space Nomads Corp	Posted - 2011.05.29 08:21:00 - [16] SC's are fine, there's just way too many of them. I don't mind them being overpowered, I however have a problem with them being affordable by solo players, instead of taking effort of entire alliances to build.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.05.29 08:27:00 - [17] The other week I had a super hotdrop me in my bomber.
JC Anderson Caldari Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.05.29 08:31:00 - [18] IMHO they need some sort of active mode in order to field fighter bombers... Much like how a standard carrier has to enter triage mode when going all out logistics. Or a dread entering siege mode, etc etc etc. It could easily be explained by saying that effectively fielding fighters bombers requires the total attention of the ships crew and systems. (Lets not argue if there are crews or not. I'm just trying to make a point.) That way even after recalling the fighter bombers there is still a period of time before the cycle finishes and the SC can return to normal operations and mobility. Would prevent the, HOT DROP ON FIVE MAN GANG -> LAUNCH FB's ON SORTIE -> OWN FIVE MAN GANG -> RECALL FB's -> JUMP OUT.
Florestan Bronstein Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.05.29 08:39:00 - [19] Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 29/05/2011 08:40:54 Main criticism with super carriers is not that they are strong (they should be at that pricetag) but that their only counter are other supercarriers. Look at a alphafleet of Maelstroms + support - you can counter that fleet with another alphafleet, you can counter it with AHACs or Tengus (depending on the number of huginns), you can counter it with Hellcats (depending on the quality of your warp-ins), depending on the Maelstrom setup you can hurt it with sniper HACs, ... Nobody would say that the alphafleet doctrine is imbalanced because it cannot be countered by T1 cruisers. But if the only way to fight alphafleet efficiently would be to bring another alphafleet pvp would be very boring...
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.05.29 08:52:00 - [20] Originally by: Florestan Bronstein Main criticism with super carriers is not that they are strong (they should be at that pricetag) but that their only counter are other supercarriers. IMO there are three really valid complaints with Supercarriers: - Tackling them in low sec is possible but pretty ridiculous, for a variety of reasons. IMO, take away tackle immunity at the least in low sec. - Logging off is literally the right answer for a hot drop that went south - primarily because they have absurd hitpoint buffers. - The only counter to supercaps is supercaps. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter
Tobiaz Spacerats	Posted - 2011.05.29 09:35:00 - [21] How about making Dreadnoughts better supercap-killers but worse against battleships? Fielding a good core of those in a fleet should be within the capabilities of small but decent alliance. The larger alliances could still keep their dominance by fielding larger numbers of Carriers and BS, but carelessly using supercaps at every whim and at larger fleets would become more dangerous. I'm no expert on the current shape of 0.0 warfare, but to me it seems that these days it's almost impossible to beat a 0.0 alliance with greater numbers unless you have access to at least a dozen supercaps. If the best counter against a specific shipclass is just having more of that shipclass, then it's not really a counter.
JC Anderson Caldari Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.05.29 09:42:00 - [22] Edited by: JC Anderson on 29/05/2011 09:43:26 Yeah I've wanted them to do something with Dreads for awhile now. I miss the old days where they were essential to large alliances. Now there simply isn't much reason to bother with them. Funny part is that during that time, motherships (original sc name) weren't even worth fielding. They were a very rare sight for that reason.
Tobiaz Spacerats	Posted - 2011.05.29 10:04:00 - [23] An additional problem might be that once a pilot flies a supercap, he hardly flies anything else anymore because there is no good way to store assets like these in a secure way. Bored out of their mind, and scared to lose a multi-billion ship, they resort to hot-dropping individual ships. And every fleet-engagement they join in, thus automatically becomes a super-cap fleet. Allowing pilots to safely store their ships at a pos with a ship-password to prevent others to fly it, might solve this problem a bit. Or perhaps allowing capital ships to be assigned corp-assets with only players with sufficient roles being able to fly them.
Telvani Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber	Posted - 2011.05.29 10:26:00 - [24] The reality in low sec is if you don't have SCs you need a massive dedicated fleet to kill a SC, probably of greater value than the SC itself to actually kill it. (To the tune of the A-Team) IF you have enough HICs to pin it down and IF you have 30+ carrier / BS pilots within 5mins and IF the SC is alone then maybe you can kill a SC! (before it logs off) Seriously I know they might need tweaking in fleets, but they need hitting with a frickin' nerf sledge-hammer in low sec. To make them at all balanced they need one or more of the following; 1- 1hour log off timer so once tackled you can actually kill them 2- no tackle immunity so you actually have a chance of pinning one with a normal fleet 3- A sane amount of HP so they are killable in 15mins 4- DPS that doesnt rival the average small capital gang Best options seem to be things like no FBs in LS + HP reduction, or no tackle immunity + no FBs as the log off timer is a potential issue.
AlleyKat Gallente The Unwanted.	Posted - 2011.05.29 11:23:00 - [25] Nerfing SC's? Good luck in that debate, it'll never end - but I think the main problem is not the SC's, it's the cyno's I think you just nullify the effectiveness of cyno's if there are any other ships on grid. You could: a) make the cyno drop point unpredictable, like anywhere in the solar system b) render it unusable completely if other ships are on grid c) drop the SC at 1 a/u (random) and facing the opposite direction Depending on which option you take, you make the deployment of the cyno harder and this could lead to more non-cap warfare. My thoughts are not that SC's are overpowered, but they shouldn't be a trump-card you can easily slam down onto the table. If it is too easy to escalate - that is what people will do. AK EVE-ONLINE Video-Making Tutorials Vid - New Tricks
San Severina Minmatar Autocannons Anonymous	Posted - 2011.05.29 12:24:00 - [26] Another nervous SC pilot struggles to justify his/her existence. Always the same pathetic/ weak arguments for having a grossly OP ship and playing in what amounts to GOD Mode. Aww, it cost a lot of ISK ok, I had to train for really ages ok! I should be wtf pwnmobile ok! Larrrr whoooooo sirrrrrrrr!""
Zoroa Aulx-Gao Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2011.05.29 12:56:00 - [27] Originally by: Leysritt Titans need buffing that's what I think. They should be the king of all ships and destroy anything below them with ease. It should have a purpose like any other ship, and it's current purpose justifies the cost I.M.O. Also lots of assets/wealth does not secure you a victory, common sense, skill and perseverance helps too, plus a whole other range of variables.
Kyle Brooks	Posted - 2011.05.29 13:01:00 - [28] Originally by: JC Anderson Edited by: JC Anderson on 29/05/2011 09:43:26 Yeah I've wanted them to do something with Dreads for awhile now. I miss the old days where they were essential to large alliances. Funny part is that during that time, motherships (original sc name) weren't even worth fielding. They were a very rare sight for that reason. For a ship that costs 25 bil fitted, that is unacceptable. Grind harder, nubtards.
Naraner	Posted - 2011.05.29 13:06:00 - [29] The only suggestion for nerfing a 20+ billion ISK ship I have seen that makes any sense at all is increasing the jump cost. That would reduce the use of supers for random ganks.
Ghoest	Posted - 2011.05.29 13:07:00 - [30] If you made super carriers ~half as good as they are now(say 25% less durability and 25% less damage) it would help weaker alliances who field less super carriers. This isnt complicated. Wherever you went - Here you are.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.