EVE Search - CCP, any plans on removing supercaps from low sec?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP, any plans on removing supercaps from low sec?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
iiOs	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:16:00 - [1] they dont belong in there Click me and get isk
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:18:00 - [2] I agree with that. ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
Steini OFSI Gallente The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:24:00 - [3] Edited by: Steini OFSI on 18/10/2007 11:24:18 This is the best argument I've ever heard regarding this topic. Arguably it can be questioned if motherships should be allowed in 0.1-0.4 where the measures to bring them down have been severly limited due to the inability to launch interdiction sphere (only thing to keep them from warping away). However it is possible to kill them there and has been done with careful planning and execution, the false security provided by the warp out option might work in favour to those who wish to attack it. Taking into consideration that their cost is nigh over 30 billion, or 300 t2 battleships the least, I think that the risk factor of beeing destroyed by a clever operation rectifies their existence in 0.4.
Alvin Elte	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:25:00 - [4] dont like it? leave. and when you do can i have your stuff?
iiOs	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:27:00 - [5] Originally by: Alvin Elte dont like it? leave. and when you do can i have your stuff? poor fellow Click me and get isk
Riho Magnificent Beavers Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:27:00 - [6] carriers and dreads yes (well they arent super caps anyways) but motherships and titans should NOT be allowed there imo

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:28:00 - [7] So now I'm being forced to mine in 0.0?! rage Jealous of my Mining Drones? I vote to keep them. Secure 3rd party service .

iiOs	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:28:00 - [8] Originally by: Steini OFSI Edited by: Steini OFSI on 18/10/2007 11:24:18 This is the best argument I've ever heard regarding this topic. Arguably it can be questioned if motherships should be allowed in 0.1-0.4 where the measures to bring them down have been severly limited due to the inability to launch interdiction sphere (only thing to keep them from warping away). However it is possible to kill them there and has been done with careful planning and execution, the false security provided by the warp out option might work in favour to those who wish to attack it. Taking into consideration that their cost is nigh over 30 billion, or 300 t2 battleships the least, I think that the risk factor of beeing destroyed by a clever operation rectifies their existence in 0.4. so ones we get t2 Moms and Titans and they gonna cost even more, they should be allowed in high sec? Click me and get isk
iiOs	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:30:00 - [9] Edited by: iiOs on 18/10/2007 11:30:07 Originally by: Chribba So now I'm being forced to mine in 0.0?! rage Jealous of my Mining Drones? I vote to keep them. you, mining and veld was funny for a week, now its just getting lame man thx for eve-files btw:) Click me and get isk
Tao Han Synthetic Frontiers	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:34:00 - [10] Originally by: Alvin Elte dont like it? leave. and when you do can i have your stuff? I dont like them and I'm sure as hell not going to leave. Posting with main ftw btw. Problem with supercaps in lowsec is that most people who live in those areas dont have the hardware or manpower to remove them. I'm talking 20 man corporations, the mothership downed by x13 took 10+ dreads/carriers/whatnot to down. Thats alot of stuff, expensive stuff. For all I care, keep the supercaps. But please gimp them a bit or allow interdiction spheres and bombs in lowsec. Its imo a bit hypocritical to allow motherships in lowsec, but not interdiction spheres/bombs. ------ snip Your signature image is password-protected. -Rauth Kivaro([email protected]) [red]I know, CEO was being a tard. -Tao[red]
Privious Caldari Thundercats RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:35:00 - [11] Imo it would be better if moms and titans keep being allowed in Lowsec. but are unable to deploy fighters or activate doomsday nor should they be able to activate their citadel launcher or capital turrets w/e (only incase of a titan). because if you completely removed supercaps from lowsec that would be unfair for to smaller corporations which prefer lowsec more than 0.0 as they won't be able to have a mothership unless they are in a 0.0 corp/alliance. --------- When the pin is pulled Mr. Grenade is not our friend.
iiOs	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:36:00 - [12] Originally by: Privious Imo it would be better if moms and titans keep being allowed in Lowsec. but are unable to deploy fighters or activate doomsday nor should they be able to activate their citadel launcher or capital turrets w/e (only incase of a titan). because if you completely removed supercaps from lowsec that would be unfair for to smaller corporations which prefer lowsec more than 0.0 as they won't be able to have a mothership unless they are in a 0.0 corp/alliance. thats sounds fair enough if they cant activate ANY modules or release fighters in low sec, that would allow them to go on ops in 0.0 and be able to use them there Click me and get isk
Harmon Illuminati Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:39:00 - [13] Meh, keep things as they are, stop whineing for things to be changed becuase you fail at "adapting" . OMFG!
Kazuma Saruwatari	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:39:00 - [14] Simple: DISCOUNTING THE WORK TO GET THE SHIPS INVOLVED Bringing supercap into lowsec and causing untold amounts of havoc -effortless, just a cyno in and out. Bringing said supercap down properly, with coordination and numbers -lots and lots of effort, planning, and quite a bit of luck. Does anyone see a disparity here? - Odd Pod Out, a blog of EVE Online
Qui Shon	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:46:00 - [15] Originally by: Steini OFSI Edited by: Steini OFSI on 18/10/2007 11:24:18 This is the best argument I've ever heard regarding this topic. Arguably it can be questioned if motherships should be allowed in 0.1-0.4 where the measures to bring them down have been severly limited due to the inability to launch interdiction sphere (only thing to keep them from warping away). However it is possible to kill them there and has been done with careful planning and execution, the false security provided by the warp out option might work in favour to those who wish to attack it. Taking into consideration that their cost is nigh over 30 billion, or 300 t2 battleships the least, I think that the risk factor of beeing destroyed by a clever operation rectifies their existence in 0.4. So what you're saying is that what's good for lowsec is massive fleet operations, and not smaller gangs? That Mom's, which will without a doubt become more and more common, should be at greatly reduced risk in lowsec, nigh invulnerable, and killing them should require a bigger and better planned operation then it does in 0.0. That Moms, in fact, should be I-Win tools for Piracy, effortless too in the case of smartbombing Moms. Allowing bubbles in lowsec would make lowsec into nosec.
Saint Luka The Illuminati. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:51:00 - [16] Apart from the fact motherships can be used to transport around 450K M3 and titans can jump bridge freighters therefore low sec is essential for an alliances industrial operations. If your annoyed that you got killed by a gate camping nyx, go X-13 it. -
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:55:00 - [17] The problem is the smartbombs, that is what really needs looking at. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Steini OFSI Gallente The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.10.18 12:03:00 - [18] Originally by: Qui Shon Originally by: Steini OFSI Edited by: Steini OFSI on 18/10/2007 11:24:18 This is the best argument I've ever heard regarding this topic. Arguably it can be questioned if motherships should be allowed in 0.1-0.4 where the measures to bring them down have been severly limited due to the inability to launch interdiction sphere (only thing to keep them from warping away). However it is possible to kill them there and has been done with careful planning and execution, the false security provided by the warp out option might work in favour to those who wish to attack it. Taking into consideration that their cost is nigh over 30 billion, or 300 t2 battleships the least, I think that the risk factor of beeing destroyed by a clever operation rectifies their existence in 0.4. So what you're saying is that what's good for lowsec is massive fleet operations, and not smaller gangs? That Mom's, which will without a doubt become more and more common, should be at greatly reduced risk in lowsec, nigh invulnerable, and killing them should require a bigger and better planned operation then it does in 0.0. That Moms, in fact, should be I-Win tools for Piracy, effortless too in the case of smartbombing Moms. Allowing bubbles in lowsec would make lowsec into nosec. I doubt mom's will become more and more common due to lack of low sec system that has traffic, it's not I-Win, the effort involved in getting a mothership is worth a proper fleet engagement in it's takedown. Beeing stationed in 0.1-0.4 is alot more high profile attention attracting than flying one in 0.0 so there is a risk, most often problem in 0.0 is locating them (outside a pos that is).
Abrazzar	Posted - 2007.10.18 12:42:00 - [19] I see all caps and supercaps getting removed from lowsec and only jump freighters being allowed. So no more 'misuse' of military vessels for cargo runs and the freighter pilots have a function again for low- to no-sec. Also makes sense that the empires won't allow the presence of unaffiliated capital ships or even supercapitals in their sovereign space. Man, this would solve sooo many issues....
Flowerpot Gallente The Flaming Sideburn's	Posted - 2007.10.18 12:48:00 - [20] Originally by: Steini OFSI Edited by: Steini OFSI on 18/10/2007 11:24:18 Taking into consideration that their cost is nigh over 30 billion, or 300 t2 battleships the least, I think that the risk factor of beeing destroyed by a clever operation rectifies their existence in 0.4. A T2 Battleships costing 100 mill - Man you are gonna be so so so disappointed. Invention costs are likely to be around 300-500 mill per BS then there is build cost and the ludicrous profit to be demanded. Final price will be whatever the producer can get. I would say 2 bill + in first week - maybe more. The poor are going to fantasize , and the rich will be building these for their alliance or people who simply do not need to check prices.
VoYvod Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:01:00 - [21] hmm, smartbombing battleships following motherships around would eventually stop them from going into low sec or atleast make them think twice of who they're shooting at 20+ fighters is around 400 mill
General Apocalypse Amarr Ship Research	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:09:00 - [22] Ignore the OP he's one of the biggest forum troll that you'll see . You can see that by the stupid name , fugly face and stupid sig . Supercapitals are very easy to kill , unfortunately it takes brains and many whiners send their brain to drink***tails in Hawaii instead of using them . Originally by:** CCP Morpheus nerf ccp plz Originally by: CCP Oveur To the gankmobile!
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:13:00 - [23] Any ship that requires bumping to be killed is broken IMVHO (I hate that game mechanic). As such supercaps in low-sec are broken imho.
Steini OFSI Gallente The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:27:00 - [24] Originally by: Flowerpot Originally by: Steini OFSI Edited by: Steini OFSI on 18/10/2007 11:24:18 Taking into consideration that their cost is nigh over 30 billion, or 300 t2 battleships the least, I think that the risk factor of beeing destroyed by a clever operation rectifies their existence in 0.4. A T2 Battleships costing 100 mill - Man you are gonna be so so so disappointed. Invention costs are likely to be around 300-500 mill per BS then there is build cost and the ludicrous profit to be demanded. Final price will be whatever the producer can get. I would say 2 bill + in first week - maybe more. The poor are going to fantasize , and the rich will be building these for their alliance or people who simply do not need to check prices. Should have said tier 2 but I assumed that was general understanding since the tech 2 aren't in game.
iiOs	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:41:00 - [25] Originally by: General Apocalypse Ignore the OP he's one of the biggest forum troll that you'll see . You can see that by the stupid name , fugly face and stupid sig . Supercapitals are very easy to kill , unfortunately it takes brains and many whiners send their brain to drink***tails in Hawaii instead of using them . LMAO Click me and get isk**
Transcendant One	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:46:00 - [26] Titans in low sec: big deal, they can't dd anyway. Motherships: it's open to debate but my opinion is that since its low sec, ie non conquerable, you're free to avoid camped routes and ignore them.
Fester Addams Minmatar	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:46:00 - [27] I think they should be allowed to stay but I think they need to be tweaked in function. One way to fix it in a simple way is to alter the desc to state that the giant ships have huge stabilizing systems that give them their immunity to electronic warfare, next lets say that the empires have deemed thise engines to be a hazard and outlawed them. This would meen when a mothership or titan enters lowsec empire they loose their immunity to electronic warfare. As for the doomsday device, well its aptly named, I would make it as illegal to use it in lowsec empire as it is to use interdictor bubbles (and bombs... or can you use bombs in lowsec?). Anyhow, if thise two simple changes were made then I doubt very much that anyone would feel they are overpowered in low sec and equally I very much doubt we will see many such ships in lowsec even if they are allowed. Problem fixed.
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.18 14:11:00 - [28] Last night I was flying through many a system, when I saw this on local chat, "Can someone please kill xxx, he thinks it's ok to kill newbs, and keeps killing me." To this I replied, "That's perfectly fine - you're in a low security system, move to a higher sec and you won't have this problem", and continued on my way. Ships should be able to go anywhere, and do anything, within the capability of the ship. Stop trying to justify function. Stop trying to ban usage. Stop trying to get YOUR way. This game is/was about free form, what little left of that there is keeps the game interesting. Quit trying to smother that uniqueness.
shinsushi	Posted - 2007.10.18 14:21:00 - [29] Originally by: Christari Zuborov Last night I was flying through many a system, when I saw this on local chat, "Can someone please kill xxx, he thinks it's ok to kill newbs, and keeps killing me." To this I replied, "That's perfectly fine - you're in a low security system, move to a higher sec and you won't have this problem", and continued on my way. Ships should be able to go anywhere, and do anything, within the capability of the ship. Stop trying to justify function. Stop trying to ban usage. Stop trying to get YOUR way. This game is/was about free form, what little left of that there is keeps the game interesting. Quit trying to smother that uniqueness. This game is also about balance, and no such thing as invulnerable ships.
Theo Samaritan Gallente Pheonix Reborn	Posted - 2007.10.18 14:30:00 - [30] Originally by: shinsushi Originally by: Christari Zuborov Last night I was flying through many a system, when I saw this on local chat, "Can someone please kill xxx, he thinks it's ok to kill newbs, and keeps killing me." To this I replied, "That's perfectly fine - you're in a low security system, move to a higher sec and you won't have this problem", and continued on my way. Ships should be able to go anywhere, and do anything, within the capability of the ship. Stop trying to justify function. Stop trying to ban usage. Stop trying to get YOUR way. This game is/was about free form, what little left of that there is keeps the game interesting. Quit trying to smother that uniqueness. This game is also about balance, and no such thing as invulnerable ships. But there is such a thing as planning. ______________________________ A Request About Lag Discussion -- Yet another "Edit my sig devs!" request \o/

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.