|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 27 post(s) |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance
192
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 11:10:06 -
[1] - Quote
ccplease! NO CAPITAL SCRAMS! Seriously, are you insane? Who has even came up with this idea? Do you understand why HICs cannot receive reps, and dictors have like 10k EHP? This design is done on purpose - do you understand this purpose? Because to me it seems that you dont. You suggest a ~capital hic~ that thas millions of EHP, can be repped, has a huge sensor strength and a jump-drive on top of that. Freaking genius!
Alright, I'll give you a clue about that old design purpose. Fielding a super-capital fleet is a big risk. Especially for an underdog. That risk becomes manageable if you have a support fleet that can clear tackle if something goes wrong. So people take that risk and then something goes wrong, and than it goes hugely wrong - and titans die.
With ~capital hics~ 1. The risk becomes overwhelming, unless you're in PL/NCdot or CFC. Means less groups will use their capships. Means more rifter gangs! (I guess it was your design goal, right?) 2. Support fleets become mostly irrelevant in capital fight. Oh wait, those fights will not happen anyway. |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance
192
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 12:00:57 -
[2] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:Another way would be to make officer scrams, points and webs affect supers. This would be balanced not only due to their high cost but also due to their high powergrid requirements, making the choice of ships that can fit them very limited... Limited to capships. Chessur freaking rice! How can you people be so short-sighted? If only you allow capships to tackle other supers - everything goes nuts. Support fleets will mean nothing. The biggest blob will dominate without a single chance for a little guy. Eve will become even more polarized. Capital fights will not happen. Do you want to be a part of that game? I dont. |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance
192
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 12:08:30 -
[3] - Quote
Sexy Cakes wrote:Not a chance in hell these changes make into a spring release. You forget: this is Team Fozzie. These changes go live no matter what. |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance
199
|
Posted - 2015.10.28 09:02:48 -
[4] - Quote
Firvain wrote:Mr Floydy wrote:Having seen a few people mention it now.... I too am now concerned by the idea of Capital points/scrams. These need to be balanced extremely carefully to not just favour the biggest group of capitals. As others have stated, if you get bubbled/pointed by a HIC you can kill it and escape. If you have 10s of supers pointing you? Well you're stuffed.
As it should be? Why should it? To make sure the side that has more capships always win? |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance
201
|
Posted - 2015.10.28 14:19:54 -
[5] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Why should supercapital ships be fundamentally different from subcapital ships when it comes to tackling ability? Serious question. Serious answer - because they are strategic assets. In case you lose them, reimbursing takes a lot of time and efforts (isk-wise or whatever). Most probably, your current war campaign will be finished before they are fully replaced. On the other hand, losing subcap fleet is merely a tactical defeat, and most probably all pilots will have new ships for the next timer. Or even reship during the fight! This is a meaningful difference, I like the way it works, and I prefer it remains like that.
FT Diomedes wrote:Why shouldn't all Eve ships follow the same principles when it comes to tackling? Maybe they should. But this must be a well-considered decision, made after a thorough discussion. Not a gimmick like it is presented in the devblog. |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance
201
|
Posted - 2015.10.29 14:24:25 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:nospet wrote:One big issue I am concerned about is:
With new scramble strengths and Capital Warp Disruptors & Scramblers where does this leave heavy interdictors?
Heavy interdictors were newly re-balanced and this seems like it is going to take them out of use almost entirely.
We've talked about Super-Carriers and Titans having 20 to 50 Warp Strength. Capital Warp Disruptors and Scramblers would have simmilar warp disruption and scramble strength to the existing officer modules (-2 for warp disruptors and -3 for scramblers). We're not locked to these numbers, so tell us what you think! No, you tell us - what is wrong with the current tackle mechanics? It works, it's fine, no one is complaining. Yet you take it and you break it.
Nerf slowcats? Good one. Make flying Titans more entertaining? Go for it. Split the swiss army knife in two parts? Sounds fair.
But why are you destroying the link between subcaps and capships? What would be the role of support fleet if I can tackle and energy-neutralize with capships?
Tackling mechanics must remain as it is. Capital neuts only create problems. Cap-boosters are a pure cancer. Capacitor management is a great gameplay... that will only available in PVE. 5GN MWD? Dafaq are you smoking? You dont see enough of kiting in subcap fights? |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance
202
|
Posted - 2015.10.30 09:59:44 -
[7] - Quote
Sayod Physulem wrote:peaSTAR wrote:coming soon: TIMERS ONLINE Actually that is another issue with combat refitting I didn't even think of - but true: CCP tries to solve way too many problems with timers lately. But if you dont make a timer - players will find some weird workaround. They should've set a timer for dropping ore out of cargohold. Would've put an end to that sick jetcan mining that broke the game. :sarcasm: |
|
|
|