Supercapitals were never designed around being something individuals progressed towards. They were supposed to be alliance level assets - extremely powerful, extremely useful, extremely resource intensive. The idea was that alliances would have a handful of supercarriers and one titan. That model was designed around an Eve that had far fewer sources of income and a lot less money circulating. Even their initial estimates were off pretty spectacularly as major alliances started fielding two, three and even four titans within a few months of their introduction.

Now there's a ton more money in game. At the alliance level you had people who controlled significant portions of the game's raw material (Tech) and the rental empires drawing vast amounts of liquid wealth from their serfs. Not only that, so much more money is available to the individual that an individual can realistically hope to own a supercapital ship if they've played for a year or two and want it. To be fair, that isn't most people - but if I'd felt the twisted desire to really gun for a supercarrier I could have done it within a few months.

Supercapitals were not designed around the idea that a group could put hundreds on the field. The advantage conferred by supercapitals is exponential, not linear. 20 supercarriers can form a remote rep chain that will tank anything but a major call to arms kind of fleet. With Titans you can essentially chose to wipe out as many dreads or carriers as you have titans in one shot. (A while back the problem was "Tracking Titans" - titan guns used to be able to track subcaps with some efficiency, so if you had 2-3 dozen you could set up a death ball that orbited an enemy fleet, ensuring that at least a few of the 5-8K DPS titans have a clean shot on a subcap)

KW- showed that the multiplicative advantage conferred by mass supercapitals is approaching its logical end state: you can now form a fleet that can't realistically be destroyed. It may be mathematically possible, but the node just can't handle it and you have the option of crashing the node when in danger. Hence people's disdain for the things.

Using a fairly standard passive fit fleet aeon (assuming an erebus in system for armor bonus), each aeon tanks 21,515 dps per other aeon. With 20 aeons on field, that's 19 other aeons or 408,785 dps. A triple magstab 425mm megathron shooting javelin and dropping 3 gardes is 921 dps. You need 443 megathrons before you can even start breaking a super, at which point you need to chew through 57 million EHP. If you assume 800 megathrons, that's 328,797 dps, or 173 seconds to kill a single aeon, or half an hour in 10% tidi. To alpha one of those aeons off the field, you need 19534 megathrons, 4844 maelstroms, 1066 moros, or 592 arty naglfar. 31 Moros would be able to break the reps. A fleet of 50 moros would take at least 148 seconds to kill an aeon, and would lose at minimum 11 or 12 moros in doing so.

Super Capital rebalance will go live once GSF has finished polishing off the fine details...

Super Capital rebalance will go live once GSF has finished polishing off the fine details...

Why do ANY supercaps need a rebalance?
Only about 5% of the playerbase will ever even see one, much less use one.

With supers either the node crashes or nobody dies. The only real way for anything to die is in a sufficiently large fight for lots of titans to get dropped, in which case a titan dies to getting DD blapped every 10 minutes. Or rather, every 100 minutes since it'll be in 10% tidi.

I'm gathering that you think that supercapitals should be more expensive to produce?

Why do ANY supercaps need a rebalance?
Only about 5% of the playerbase will ever even see one, much less use one.

sorry about the wait, i've been busy with university work. i'm forwarding CCP the details now :)

I'm gathering that you think that supercapitals should be more expensive to produce?

Ok good...

I was getting worried there...

Don't nerf them, create new tech to deal with them.

EVE thrives on creativity from more, not less options!

the last thing we need is something more powerful to defeat something that was previously too powerful

have you never heard of power creep

"No politics please" is a pretty unrealistic request for this forum tbqh.

No. Because PL and NC. has more of them, they need to be nerfed.

If you have a tool that can only hammer nails, how useful is that tool when building light bulbs?

Other than drone ships in general, there's not many other interesting 'win button' ships out there.

With supers either the node crashes or nobody dies. The only real way for anything to die is in a sufficiently large fight for lots of titans to get dropped, in which case a titan dies to getting DD blapped every 10 minutes. Or rather, every 100 minutes since it'll be in 10% tidi.

This just in, sub capital fleets cause TiDi also.

the last thing we need is something more powerful to defeat something that was previously too powerful

have you never heard of power creep

Other than drone ships in general, there's not many other interesting 'win button' ships out there.

Add a thermal exhaust port that only a T1 frig can attack.

Add a thermal exhaust port that only a T1 frig can attack.

A subcapital fleet has never caused node death..

Even the largest fight ever- 6VDT, 4096 subcapitals didnt kill that node. It was reinforced you say.. the super Jita node, this is true but the current meta is to not reinforce nodes where supercapitals are wont to be used so that the node can be crashed to avoid 'tanking til downtime'.

It's a legit tactic for defender especially when every shite lord in EVE is attacking your space. Also is there a reason why attacker cannot ask for reinforced node?

super/ titan killers = dreads with a small mix of armageddon's,bhaalgrons. for neuting

Well the problem doesnt lie in the node to begin with. The problem is a class of ship with infinite scalability that is nigh invincible when properly supported..

Say that to BL superfleet

You mean the 30 supercarriers that were attacked by over a hundred other supercapitals?

That doesn't sound like "properly supported" to me.

Why don't they add a new (T2) Battleship that can fit XL weapons and has bonuses/slot lay outs that allow it to do massive damage against super capitals while being utterly ineffective and even vulnerable against anything else.
These new T2 should be compared to battleships the way stealth bomber is compared to frigates.

If anything, the counter to Capitals shouldn't come from a bigger size class but from a smaller one.

It's either that or the nerfbat against Super carriers.

Some folks have said more expensive, some have said less expensive. One of the biggest issues is the spider tanking while also doing massive dps, along with being ewar immune.

The current train of thought goes: "Hey theres a supercarrier fleet lets kill it." Dreads get dropped..triage carriers come in or were there already to support the supercarriers, titans come in to doomsday the dreads off the field and on and on.

Escalation ensues and the node crashes

The only and I really mean the only time supercarriers have died in this modern day and age was because of a trap.

Why do ANY supercaps need a rebalance?
Only about 5% of the playerbase will ever even see one, much less use one.

Why don't they add a new (T2) Battleship that can fit XL weapons and has bonuses/slot lay outs that allow it to do massive damage against super capitals while being utterly ineffective and even vulnerable against anything else.
These new T2 should be compared to battleships the way stealth bomber is compared to frigates.

If anything, the counter to Capitals shouldn't come from a bigger size class but from a smaller one.

It's either that or the nerfbat against Super carriers.

You seem confused on the escalation. Side A drops Supers, Side B drops dreads? In order to escalate the fight side B should have dropped a larger number of Supers.....

That's the only real issue in your scenario , one side is afraid to drop Supers, the other is not. Is this a balance issue? Seems more like an issue with intestinal fortitude.

You seem confused on the escalation. Side A drops Supers, Side B drops dreads? In order to escalate the fight side B should have dropped a larger number of Supers.....

That's the only real issue in your scenario , one side is afraid to drop Supers, the other is not. Is this a balance issue? Seems more like an issue with intestinal fortitude.

so much more money is available to the individual that an individual can realistically hope to own a supercapital ship if they've played for a year or two and want it.


???

Please show me a 2year old toon with an effective super and how he grinded the isk for it.

so much more money is available to the individual that an individual can realistically hope to own a supercapital ship if they've played for a year or two and want it.


???

Please show me a 2year old toon with an effective super and how he grinded the isk for it.

Or you can put 9000 homeless peeps in megas and blob de sun.

so much more money is available to the individual that an individual can realistically hope to own a supercapital ship if they've played for a year or two and want it.


???

Please show me a 2year old toon with an effective super and how he grinded the isk for it.

And crash the node, but mynnna is right, T2 battle ships would be to expensive.

We need a cheaper solution.

Supers dont really fight supers do they.. have they ever? I am not sure why this is, help me out.

Currently I am a capital pilot, I can fly a carrier which I understand the role of and its intended use, it does it well as a logistics platform. My logical progression would be to train into a supercarrier but I am confused by its role. It does the same thing a regular carrier does minus drones but adding massive dps..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLqb-m1ZZUA this video says otherwise, skip to 3:51 battle of asakai

Introduce a subcap hull (hell it can even be a frigate) that gets a massive bonus against caps and supers, and massive penalties against subcaps. Think x wing blowing up death star and what have you. Lorewise, you make up something about how the advanced weapon systems target the super's omega 13 tanks or some other bull.

Or alternatively, just nerf supers' stats into the ground directly.

Blops high slot module that screws with warp drive engines.
scales in a non linear manner with mass.
so if it did 40000 dps to a super but 4 dps to a frig (random numbers they are for concept rather than what i think they should be)
activates for say 5 mins at a time and prevents the firing ship from warp, cloak, bridge, jump, using gates or wh's.
also prevents MJD and MWD in the firing ship.
maybe prevents remote assist
just an idea.

I still say and have said many times the easiest way to balance supers it to introduce tech two normal capitals (carriers and Dreads). This would give you a midway pricepoint between capitals and supers and you can give them massive improvements against fighting super capitals.

no.

Very informitive. Prehaps including even the remoteness of a creative response would instill even the slightest ammount of credibility to your response.

I still say and have said many times the easiest way to balance supers it to introduce tech two normal capitals (carriers and Dreads). This would give you a midway pricepoint between capitals and supers and you can give them massive improvements against fighting super capitals.

Supercarriers are well balanced right now. Dreads do a lot more DPS, carriers do a lot more rep. Supercarriers do both roles but less well than the specialized ships, which is how it should be. They are very vulnerable to subcaps and dreads. A lone supercarrier cannot defend itself against tacklers, and a supercarrier fleet will die without support. It's unfortunate that more expensive ships don't die, but this is due to low risk taking by their pilots and not because the ships are too strong.

If you want to balance something, fix titans. They are so weak right now that there is no reason to use them (except for showing off).

Supercarriers are well balanced right now. Dreads do a lot more DPS, carriers do a lot more rep. Supercarriers do both roles but less well than the specialized ships, which is how it should be. They are very vulnerable to subcaps and dreads. A lone supercarrier cannot defend itself against tacklers, and a supercarrier fleet will die without support. It's unfortunate that more expensive ships don't die, but this is due to low risk taking by their pilots and not because the ships are too strong.

If you want to balance something, fix titans. They are so weak right now that there is no reason to use them (except for showing off).

Just wondering what the downside is if you split Supers up into separate parts that can be locked and focused on by sub-caps(maybe even cruisers and below). Knowing which part is the weakest point to hit with sub-caps to take one down requires "creativity". Caps can't lock these "parts" and would have to still kill them like they currently do. This would tip all the power into sub-caps. Making Supers a great anti-cap, sov capturing ship that is vulnerable to a sizeable fleet of sub-caps, even when they batphone. I know this idea of some sort has gone around the block more times than the village bicycle but could someone point out the problem with this (apart from perhaps a bit of difficulty changing the code)?

Try very hard not to slaughter me here.

But why are u only discussing the super cap when that main post clearly stated titans were out of hand too. Steve has been mass produced...

this is buffing blobbers that rely on subcaps

see: recent fight against progodlegend's superfleet

Try very hard not to slaughter me here.

But why are u only discussing the super cap when that main post clearly stated titans were out of hand too. Steve has been mass produced...

, and a supercarrier fleet will die without support. .

care to point out when this last happened?

was it that time pl lost 7 titans or was it the time mosus mihi lost 10ish?

totally see how thats an entire fleet of super caps.

we all know PL can hold on long enough untill downtime and then they just wont log back in...

totally see that as balanced.

You quoted the wrong guy mate.

Remember if you start putting diminishing returns on rr then conversely you will have to do the same for attacking.

So I just glanced at Reddit and saw this which kinda highlights the problem Gizznitt was talking about being no diminishing return for capital remote reps.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/1qna62/pl_slowcats/
After reading the dev blog about the recent live event where CCP said they wanted to lead capsuleers through Curse but were not aware that Doril was a staging system for hundreds of pilots I wonder if they know about this.

200 carriers, all remote repping each other, millions of EHP wadded up into an unbreakable tank and can apply instant DPS via sentry drones. Yeah we are doing this CCP

Titan support for supercarriers.

I had a very long reply and the forums ate it so meh I'll just throw this out.

Titan superweapons need to be limited to ships over 30km sigradius and they need to do about 5-10 times more damage than they do currently. This would not make supcaps obsolete since the Titans wouldn't be able to kill them and it would solve the supercap proliferation issue by actually killing supercaps faster than they're being created.

i knew i should've gotten a titan

progodlegend's victory again

I was reading a discussion about the current state of supercarriers on another board and I think the greater EVE community has a lot of perspective to offer this 'game within a game.' Rather than coloring the discussion with politics and personal interests I would just like to quote a couple posts that really highlight the current problems with supercapital proliferation and then have an intelligent discussion on the matter.





There is also quite a manifesto and ensuing discussion here

Don't nerf them, create new tech to deal with them.

EVE thrives on creativity from more, not less options!

Also Ccp could add back the doomsday device to titans? So they can blapp caps faster?
Kind of like in some Rts games in network games where you had alot of A.i units struggling on the map in large numbers and then you go drop a big area of effect weapon and suddenly less lag

Add a thermal exhaust port that only a T1 frig can attack.

As the OP pointed out the problem is not any lack of subcap counters it's the sheer rediculousness of the dps and tank that they posess. You can't realistically take down 50 supers without an equal number of supers of your own, if you brought dreads you can take out that moron who brought a Wyvern but otherwise youre ******.


Anything but a complete normalisation of the capital and supercapital shipclasses is a waste of time. I could deal with 3-5 million EHP supers at the 4.5 bil pricepoint. Reduce their damage, make them smaller and more useful to individual pilots, let them dock and we're all set.

Carriers would also need a buff, a bigger dronebay and 20 fighters is a good start.

It would be the best mini game since hacking.

Ideas for fixing supers have been around for years. Here's my favorite:

Or create a new EWAR that specifically interrupts remote repairs.. maybe remote boosting as well.

The issue isnt their EHP or DPS, it's their ability to be blobbed on the battlefield instantly or with a few mids.

The game needs to break their power-projection abilities, NOT their EHP/ DPS

Basically: reduce jumping ability by 50% and make it take 90% cap to jump @ max skills.

My suggestion would be to allow destroyers to fit capital torpedo launchers a la WWII destroyers. Not BB (BB = battleship; BS is what you hear on the evening news) like stealth bombers, but CAPITAL torpedos - or the appropriate capital gun module for other factions so as to avoid excessive missile crosstraining. Give them a massive reduction to PG/CPU so they can fit a full rack (very tightly), and maybe a tracking penalty when fitted with such modules so they can't easily insta-gank other ships (although I think the cost of capital guns would prevent excessive use of them anyhow).

Don't otherwise change the destroyer when fit with SMALL guns - leave it alone for that, but they could carry 7 or 8 of the larges. This would allow a large number of small, otherwise easily killed ships, to do much more damage to supercaps that have a hard time shooting them back - requiring other small ships to fend them off.

Destroyers also wouldn't have siege mode, leaving dreads well above them in firepower, and because they rely on mobility for defense. Also, I'd make it short range guns only for the DDs.

If destroyers are too light, maybe T1 cruisers could be used instead, or in addition.

so much more money is available to the individual that an individual can realistically hope to own a supercapital ship if they've played for a year or two and want it.


???

Please show me a 2year old toon with an effective super and how he grinded the isk for it.

I play since less than 4 years and I could afford my fleet of SCs. Making ISK is ~hard~