Because supers being everywhere is such a problem, I propose that we add in more supers, each more broken than the ones we already have.

Yeah, no, supers need a nerf, we don't need even more of the buggers running all over (especially not in the even-more-op state that you've proposed).

How about making titans modular and customizable like tech 3 cruisers?

Titans should stay in the game when the pilot logs off, left floating in space inside POS shields.

I don't see a problem with a ship with many roles. It is after all a titan, a capital of capitals, flagship of the armada.
What is wrong with multiple roles with a 50 billion ship?

Easy way to balance Titans is to remove their turrets.

Dreads have turrets for Capital and POS bashing and the Titan will still have it's DD for the near instapopping of other capitals.

Will solve the Titan problem and make Dreads useful again.

Titans may need fine tuning but the problem is that many more are being made than destroyed. What needs balancing is how to ensure that the growth in *numbers* of titans that can be fielded in combat is limited. A proposal for a mechanic to enable this was made in this post.

Counter proposal:

(1) Admit Titans were a huge mistake, even though they sounded :awesome: at the time

I fully support expanding capitals and super capital hull ranges.

But I flat out reject this proposal.

Titans are not broken. They were designed to be giant dicks and they are working exactly as intended.

Blobbing Rifter pilots crying about blobbing supers and...........

Titan balancing has been an issue for some time, and from reading the recent CSM meeting notes with CCP, it seems that there still isn't a good resolution in sight. I have a suggestion that may help with that, but I want to make a few observations first.


#1 Just fixing the Titan tracking problem will not fix Titans as a whole.

#2 Each ship has a role that it was designed for/excels at, with the exception of the Titan and Tech 3 cruisers.

#3 The Titan currently has the capabilities to perform up to 4 different roles: Logistics(Bridging/Clone Vat), Combat(Capital Weapons), Command(Gang Links/Titan Fleet Bonus), and Super-weapon platform.


My proposal to the the CSM is that the Titan be broken down into 3 different ships, each flying away with some of the capabilities of the original ship.

The Titan would retain its super-weapon, and the fleet bonuses. (Titan mkII)

The first new hull would get the clone vat bay and bridging capabilities. (Mothership)

That leaves the combat capabilities for the last new hull. (Superdreadnought)

Each of these hulls would need a little fleshing out to make them fully realized as a ship of their own, but this breakdown puts us well on the way towards that goal. The Superdreadnaught could have 6 gun slots, the ability to siege, plus some/all of the titan's bonus to capital weapon damage. The Mothership could have bi-directional bridging to a cyno in addition to its clone vat bay, but force it to deploy or enter a "triage" like mode to use its bridges. The Titan mkII would probably require a rework of the super-weapon. Possibly something along the lines of a focused beam weapon that ramps up the damage based on the time spent firing at a single target. And while I think that it shouldn't be able to fire at sub caps, I do think that ships that make the mistake of flying through the path of a beam in progress should be affected in some way shape of form. The amount of havoc that the doomsday causes on the target ship should also cause some kind of warp scrambling effect or energy neutralization as well. (This may also solve the current lack of a dedicated capital class heavy tackler)

In all, this would bring us to having:
Carriers, Dreads, Supercarriers, Superdreads, and Titan mkII's for combat.
Freighters, Jump Freighters, Rorquals, and Motherships for logistics and industry.

The biggest drawback to this plan that I can see is figuring out what would happen to current titan pilot's ships, and getting the new ships out there to be used without much downtime. I have a few ideas for resolving this, but it would turn this post into more of a wall O' text than it is already.

Let me know what you think, and I can go into more detail as needed.

I would add to motherships that they do not have drones (fighters, or fighter bombers) but have a huge ship maintenance array that can hold a large number of sub caps including battleship hulls. like a super super carrier only without the drones. the drones would be the other pilots ships docking in the maintenance array.

This could even be expanded where players can actually dock inside the mothership and sit in a pilots lounge while the mothership jumps to the staging area. so they go with there ship for the ride rather than the current mechanics of docking your ship and being left outside in your pod.

Giant, unstoppable, pwnmobiles are not fun. Turn Titans into something resembling mobile outposts, and remove the bulk of their combat capabilities entirely. The OP's idea is terrible.

This is not really possible, as we would effectively removing a ship that some people have invested a lot of time and money to train into. We need to find a way to adjust, change, and re-balance them, without making them not worth flying, otherwise we might as well just remove them from the game, at which point we would still have a lot of upset titan pilots.

Supercarriers - giant corp hangars, capable of replacing losses on the fly.

Need to change from your T3 fleet to your BS fleet on the fly?

Titans - Jump bridges and doomsdays. Buff the doomsdays up to be a reasonable counter to the new style of supercarrier. Remove the turrets.

And get rid of the EWar immunity on both.

This goes beyond the scope of my proposal as it would affect fights between subcap fleets more than capitals.
(Either way, I am not sure I like the implications of this idea.)

I always thought the objective should be more about fleet synergy, versus; 1k bs's vs. 300 caps, 500hacs, vs. 100 titans or some other random as number / fleet combo. Shouldn't the objective be giving every ship a role to fit the perfect fleet? Utilizing different race techniques to give variations and changes of, instead of MOAR DEEPS! or MOAR EHP! speed etc etc. shouldn't we be encouraging 'flanking' with say gallente ships, holding the line with amarr ships, coming around and firing cars up their asses with minmatar, while providing ewar, ranged support via caldari?

I would honestly like to see some kind of diminishing return for having a shitload of the same exact ship in a fleet engagement. Instead of giving bs's / caps or whatever ship a myriad of roles draw it down a bit. Hell a rock paper scissors balance should be in order. I kind of hope that weird random general discussion thread about diminishing returns on focus firing is added, give some ship list, give a job description institute officers, change channel priority and turn this into all those awsome fleet fights we see on the videos, hell that empyrean banner on the website was a nice rendition of what i would love to see. Can we work this way?

There is nothing wrong with titans as they are -- the problem is that the majority of people are too stupid to counter them.


This is a worse idea than the OP

I always thought the objective should be more about fleet synergy, versus; 1k bs's vs. 300 caps, 500hacs, vs. 100 titans or some other random as number / fleet combo. Shouldn't the objective be giving every ship a role to fit the perfect fleet? Utilizing different race techniques to give variations and changes of, instead of MOAR DEEPS! or MOAR EHP! speed etc etc. shouldn't we be encouraging 'flanking' with say gallente ships, holding the line with amarr ships, coming around and firing cars up their asses with minmatar, while providing ewar, ranged support via caldari?

I would honestly like to see some kind of diminishing return for having a shitload of the same exact ship in a fleet engagement. Instead of giving bs's / caps or whatever ship a myriad of roles draw it down a bit. Hell a rock paper scissors balance should be in order. I kind of hope that weird random general discussion thread about diminishing returns on focus firing is added, give some ship list, give a job description institute officers, change channel priority and turn this into all those awsome fleet fights we see on the videos, hell that empyrean banner on the website was a nice rendition of what i would love to see. Can we work this way?

Oh really?

The only counter at the moment to Titans and Super Carrier blobs is more Titans and Super Carriers.

You are right in that the only alliances that will bring their Cap fleets to fights in any significant numbers are PL and Raiden so no-one else is countering them at the moment.

At the moment Super Carriers and Titan's are an 'IWIN' button for these alliances. However, that will change as the other alliances catch up with their own Capital fleets and can out blob them.

Let's see who whines about them needing nerfed then.

I do think Titans are fine as they are with exception to the turrets. They really shouldn't have them.

Titans are not broken.

A Alliance/Corporation spend that much time(a few weeks) and ISK (About 60Bill) + the buildingtime.
I really think that the Titan platform should be more then a mobile outpost or oversized jumpbridge.

They are titans for christ sake.

They are tha largest ships and most expencive to by ingame.
Naturally they should be awsome ships.

Titan neft Proposals we see after the last change is only an attempt to make them useless like the old Motherships.
Seems like some "Super Haters" is set on getting them nerfed so badly that none wants fo fly/build them.
The whole idea behind the titans was to be a Giant in the playground.

Look at the current war.
You have a Large Coalition CFC against the smaller Tech Team. (4:1 ration nornally)

What we see is only way for the smaller Coalition to win is to Field as many Supers are they can.
we also see the Large coalition thinks this is unfair cause they feel they should win since they got more numbers.
By nerfing Titans we would see that the only way to win a war is to have twise the numbers then the other and Viol+í.

Then we have the argumant that a good FC can counter a larger fleet and win. This is true if the fleet is a little bigger thent the other. This is not the truth if one side has 800 and other has 350.
Dosent matter hos you "Counter" the other fleet, you will loose, unless you have something to even out the odds.

The much debated Titan Tracking Nerf would mean Titans wold not hit anything smaller then a Cap or possibly a BS sitting still. Yay that would be great.
Then we have two Super Cap Classes that only can Dish out there proper damage on capitals.
What a Huge waste of ISK thouse ships will be then.

I say the Titan Are just fine as they are now. Only need a sliglty larger Dronebay on SC's for bombers and Fighters.
Then we are Golden.

My point is that supercaps (all caps, really) ought to be there to provide extremely heavy duty support to a much larger subcap fleet.

Titans are supposed to be the Giants in the playground, but they are balanced around being rare.
Oh, and super carriers? Yeah, they probably got nerfed enough.

Since your idea is not about "nerf nerf nerf" but structured idea so that supers/titans are diversified enough to counters to themselves I think it's a good idea.

It's always better to evolve than nerf just for the sake of nerfing, except ridiculous dread/titan tracking that should be reworked so they can't hit sub caps by any mean other than static targets.

+1 good idea for a start

This will never happen with regular capitals as easy to get and field as they are. Supers are there to supply heavy support to fleets of carriers and dreads.

I've yet to understand how anyone can say, "fleets of capital ships" ... or "capfleet" ... without realizing how stupid that sounds. Sure, maybe it works with the current game mechanics, but it sounds dumb as ****. I really don't think that having entire fleets of them is a good idea, and that they should be changed accordingly.

Thank you, how would you go about improving on the concept?

I really don't think that having entire fleets of them is a good idea, and that they should be changed accordingly.

Problem #1 Titan Tracking
Problem #2 Versatility
Problem #3 Log-out Mechanics
Problem #4 Force Projection
Problem #5 Titan/Super Proliferation

Currently a capfleet(ignoring supers) is set up as a separate fleet to cut down on spies, and other logistical purposes. I usually see 50-100 in a fleet jumping in to support 300+man subcap fleets. While its a BIT top heavy with this distribution, it still falls in the range of reasonable because a 100 man strong fleet of carriers/dreads alone is gonna get eaten by a well built subcap fleet. Each normal cap has the battlefield footprint of 2-3 similar subcaps, tho carriers are alot more versatile than their subcap counterparts(logistics cruisers) because of the drone bay. Amazing how smartbombs make carrier pilots cry tho.

Doesn't change the idea that entire fleets of "capital" ships is a ridiculous notion.

What we can do is make them less desirable to field en-masse, without detracting from how vital they are (in small numbers) to nullsec logistics, structure shooting, and blowing up other caps.

Counter proposal:

(1) Admit Titans were a huge mistake, even though they sounded :awesome: at the time
(2) Remove all Titan BPOs with reimbursement at NPC prices. Delete all BPCs with reimbursement at 10% of NPC BPO price. All construction jobs are cancelled, with construction materials removed to the station hangar of the owner of the job. Remove all Titan and Doomsday skillbooks, with reimbursement at NPC price.
(3) Transport all Titans and their pilot to whichever station has their medical clone
(4) Perfectly reprocess those Titans back to the capital parts, repackage the modules and ammo, and reimburse the rigs
(5) Remove the implants from the Titan pilot's clone and place them in the hanger
(6) Reimburse Titan-specific skillpoints; the Racial Titan and Doomsday Operation skills only.
(7) Delete all references to Player Titans from the database and the Evelopedia
(8) Get on with our lives.

An excellent suggestion, I will add it to additional thoughts rather than expanding the original post.

EDIT: I added it, but after thinking about it some more it occurs to me that this is kind of redundant for a ship with bridging capabilities, were you suggesting this instead of the capability to bridge?

I think it would be good to have both (abilities). currently carriers and super carriers have a good size ship maintenance bay. Mother ship would seem to me to be a super super carrier and have an even bigger maintenance array. although the jump portal would cover most of the needs of a fleet to move ships and pilots. It would add the benefit of taking ships and pilots that logged off inside the mothership with the fleet so that if they do not get on in time they will still be with the fleet when they do log on. Simply undock and join the fight. This would really make the mothership like a portable outpost. the alliance would have to choose between taking the mom to the staging area, bringing all ships and pilots inside with it. or hold it back in safe territory and portal the active fleet from there. Bringing the whole mothership would give the added benefit of extra ships in the maintenance array for when pilots lose there ships.

This would also have the down side of any ships and pilots docked inside a mothership when it gets destroyed would also be destroyed. Dock in the mothership, log off. and log back in to a fresh clone.

...nerf all capitals...

It doesn't really solve anything, it just shuffles problems around and makes it more diverse without actually fixing anything.

Cap ships, of any size, should not be able to hit moving subcaps, with the possible exception of dreads landing glancing blows to battleships (which would still be pretty devastating, much like when a battleship lands a glancing blow on a cruiser.)

In short ... the game has been getting more and more out of whack as the years have rolled by. I really hope that this new direction CCP is taking will once again bring balance to the fleet.

However, these fleets would need to be made up of more Titans/supers/caps.

Sub-capital ships will no longer matter in capital fights (as is the case now), and once Titans get deployed in a fight, it will be a matter of how many more Titans the other side can deploy to counter this.

Instead, as with the sub-capital system, where smaller ships can be immune to larger vessels and be useful in fighting them, so sub-capitals need to matter in capital fights.

Therefore the answer, in my opinion, would be to make adjustments to the current capital ships to make them less effective against sub-capital ships (remove tracking or damage done to sub-caps) whilst allowing sub-capital ships to have some effectiveness against capital ships (EWAR, tackle, damage?).

or perhaps these ideas in tandem may restore some balance between these two classes.

Why would my proposal require more Titans/supers/caps than we have now? Yes there would be more ship options for capital pilots, but I don't see how that impacts Titan production rates.

My proposal removes over half of a titans capabilities, and the only ones it has left cant harm sub-caps at all.

This is not quite correct; frigates are weak to destroyers, which are weak to cruisers, which are weak to battle-cruisers, which are weak to battleships, which are weak to frigates. To continue the concept, sub-caps are weak to capitals, which are weak to supers, which should be weak to sub-caps. Regular capital fleets should be able to crush a sub-cap fleet, while a super fleet should be terrified of a sub-cap fleet.

I really hope you meant to say supercapitals.... because if not, you would be removing the counter to sub-caps, just as the titan currently has no counter.

Actually, as I've pointed out, there are already 3 classes, sub-caps, capitals, and supers.

Since you split the role of one Titan (current) into 3 different Titans (proposed), it can be a valid assumption that this would lead the current Titan pilots to want all 3 ships to retain their full capabilities.

Yes, your proposal streamlines the current Titan into 3 separate ships but without further clarity around what exactly their capabilities would be, I can only be lead to assume that the Superdreadnaught (3rd Titan suggested) which you mentioned would retain the current Titans combat capabilities - if appropriately fitted and boosted, would still be able to hit and 1-shot sub-capitals.

Except they are not. As soon as Titans get on the field, sub-caps cease to matter. Again, it would seem that at least one of your Titans suggested would still be able to maintain this imbalance.

The current ability of sub-capitals to affect supers in any meaningful way is very limited and in my opinion your proposal unfortunately does not address this problem.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again.
The only thing ccp needs to do, is stop allowing capitals to re-fit in combat.

As it is currently, tracking titans, if primaried, just switch to a tank setup.

i propose a boost!

[able to fit warp disruption field generators]

[50% bonus to focused warp disruption range per level]

This part at least I agree with.



Please do not make a broad assumption about me based on nothing other than the alliance I am in. Check my alliance history if you would like.

I have been tossing this idea around among friends and corp mates for more than a year in various similar incarnations. I was considering proposing this change long, long before we app'ed to test.

Like I have stated before, if you are going to make a negative post in this thread please give me some valid reasons for your disapproval that focus on the topic.

New super weapon could be something along the lines of a focused beam weapon that ramps up the damage based on the time spent firing at a single target. (unable to fire at sub caps)

Please no. No more supercapital size ships. There are to many in EVE already and with the amount of ISK around, the botting, the ability to buy ISK online means those will just get blobbed as well eventually.

Best solution for Titans = Remove them.

I disapprove because:

Breaking down the Titan into multiple 1 trick ponies that are good at PvP against a modest 3 hulls (Carriers, dreads and supers) at the cost of 50 bil isk or so per ship, is nerfing the Titan into a pitiful state similar to what the Black Ops is in now. And that is underwhelming for a ship that costs half a bil to say the least.

Your moaning in this topic because of tracking abilities while being buffed in fleet + Titan fits that allow those ships to shoot at smaller ships. You justify this emotive demand by pointing out its lack of role and the fact that it should be rare as per design.

Last time I checked, Eve has less than 1000 Titans. Out of how many hundred thousand players? Yea, that sounds pretty rare to me.

So your idea of breaking the Titan down will fail in the long term because people will want the underwhelming ship to do more later down the line.

Your justification fails because the ship is already rare, even if allot of them are owned by a small number of alliances within the powerblocks.

Please no. No more supercapital size ships. There are to many in EVE already and with the amount of ISK around, the botting, the ability to buy ISK online means those will just get blobbed as well eventually.

Best solution for Titans = Remove them.

As for the massive ehp titans have just remove their ability to receive remote repairs forcing them to fit a local tank or just a massive buffer.

I always thought the objective should be more about fleet synergy, versus; 1k bs's vs. 300 caps, 500hacs, vs. 100 titans or some other random as number / fleet combo. Shouldn't the objective be giving every ship a role to fit the perfect fleet? Utilizing different race techniques to give variations and changes of, instead of MOAR DEEPS! or MOAR EHP! speed etc etc. shouldn't we be encouraging 'flanking' with say gallente ships, holding the line with amarr ships, coming around and firing cars up their asses with minmatar, while providing ewar, ranged support via caldari?

I would honestly like to see some kind of diminishing return for having a shitload of the same exact ship in a fleet engagement. Instead of giving bs's / caps or whatever ship a myriad of roles draw it down a bit. Hell a rock paper scissors balance should be in order. I kind of hope that weird random general discussion thread about diminishing returns on focus firing is added, give some ship list, give a job description institute officers, change channel priority and turn this into all those awsome fleet fights we see on the videos, hell that empyrean banner on the website was a nice rendition of what i would love to see. Can we work this way?

Too many people have too much isk invested in building/having/flying titans. Removing them from the game would dump trillions upon trillions of isk back into the game, and would massively screw up the economy. As such this is a bad idea.

Still not a very good idea, for exactly the same reasons everyone else and I have already mentioned.

THIS, a thousand times this. There's nothing I hate more than homogeneous fleets.

I don't agree. There aren't that many Titans that it would upset the economy. Most of the ISK that paid for them will ill gotten anyway.

All it would do is upset a tiny minority of players who have amassive sway over the game; we're better off without them anyway.

Deny Titans of Capital Weaponry. Keep them on Dreadnoughts.

A new Super-Support device as a defensive option

(to diminish multiple Titans in area): Being physically/electronicly/somethingly unable to have Titans operate untimely within range of each other. Instead, there'd be sequential activations of, say Super-devices within vicinity of each other requiring communication to discuss your next Titan's next move. Fleets w/ Titan(s) have 'activation priority rights' above solo Titans and multiple Fleets w/ Titan(s) have 'competitive activation rights' against each other. Consider this as a militarized safety protocol.

TECH 1 - STANDARDIZED Titan (1 per Empire)
TECH 2 - SPECIALIZED Titans (3 per Empire)
TECH 3 - GENERALIZED Titan (Only 1)

Interesting suggestion, how would you make that work?

I think the easier and simpler solution would be a re-design of the superweapon.

I don't know but I imagine it'd equalize the mass devastation that their super-destructive weapons(A) bring. Possibly an active forcefield(B) like player-owned structures as one example, which I don't know how they work, or a specious active Cloaking Field(C) similar to those deployables.

But it is applying a new game-rule to using Capital super-weapons. It is a control to the chaos from which sub-ordinate ships have more perseverance in combat without multiple super-devices being activated. It is a control for balance, and where Balance and Control exists produces a Fairer game and satisfied gamers. A fictional militarized safety protocol addressing the need to control 'the Titan problem'. Still, they can be re-designed to target structures with this Control solution in-mind, that's no problem.

P.S. nerf titan turret tracking and increase dps. Dreads pushing out more dps than titans is unacceptable.

Simple: THE TITAN SHOULD NOT BE A COMBAT SHIP

There is just no way to balance it otherwise, without making it either overpowered or obsolete.

both the old and the new doomsday weapons (both very ice-expensive to use so emergency-only)

I disagree.




Expense should not be used for balancing, on a ship that costs as much as a titan. Even if you made a single doomsday cost a Bil to fire, it would still get fired at every single cap ship it faced. Plus, you would have people taking advantage of the cargo space you had to include for that Bil worth of fuel.

Since you don't make any valid arguments i'll just disagree with you disagreeing.

Though the biggest factor limiting projection of power is ALWAYS operational cost.

As for the cargo abuse... a station should have insane cargo-space. And tt's not like there's no easy solution to your posed problem, just turn all the ice into a doomsday bullet first before it can be used.

This Tobiaz guy seems to have a brain on him.

- Remove any bonus to XL guns. They can fit them, but they'll do average DPS.

- Keep the Logistics (clone vats/etc) and Leadership Bonus. This should be the Titan's primary role.

- Have the Doomsday consume ammo. Not just Oxygen - actual ammo that'll take several weeks to research and manufacture.

- Have diminish returns on Doomsday depending on how many Titans are in fleet. Prevent more than one doomsday per 5 minutes from being fired in the grid.

- Add Drone Bandwith to field Fighters.

Wouldn't it be a better idea to install a sub cap ship that can deal with such things, maybe a variation of a super cap, or a dread type ship that can take em on in the field..

Nerf tracking
Increase average dps to 15000
Limit the amount of titans that can be ongrid.

Dps increase needed because titans should ALWAYS be able to do more dps than anything else in the game. I like the idea of titans having to log on to something in system, but maybe make it more like a SBU that anchors and onlines at the TCU in 1 minute. In low it oils go around the control bunker.

I disagree on the siege. Titans shouldn't become a tech two dread.

The titan is a mobile outpost with the abilities to destroy other mobile outpost (titans), it shouldn't be able to hit a subcap even if said subcap were in the barrel or silo of the titans main weapon. Moving an XL weapon barrel should be extremly slow, otherwise the barrels would bend from inertia and stress due to their immense size. Shooting a battle ship with a titan should be like shooting a bumble bee at 5 miles with a 120mm cannon.


Dreads are made for combat, titans are made for support.

A titan is not a mobile outpost. It is a fleet boosting, force projecting, superweapon equipped, capital weapon combat machine. Which in my opinion is too much, hence the proposal to divide up its capabilities into separate ships.

Yes I agree it should not be able to hit subcaps, but like ive already said, CCP is working on a fix for that.

As ive already pointed out, the titan is not a support ship. They are made for combat, even more so in fact since they have multiple combat roles that synergize together than dreads do.

It isn't but it should be, an can in fact be turned into one. Titans are conceptually incompatible with Eve. You can't make them a powerful enough combat ship to be worthy of what they are supposed to be without unbalancing the whole game. They should never have existed, but they do now. Best approach is to redo them completely in a non-combat role, since just deleting them is not a viable option.

But u can. Limit the amount of ingame titans, then u can make them very powerful without breaking the game.

A titan is not a mobile outpost. It is a fleet boosting, force projecting, superweapon equipped, capital weapon combat machine. Which in my opinion is too much, hence the proposal to divide up its capabilities into separate ships.

Yes I agree it should not be able to hit subcaps, but like ive already said, CCP is working on a fix for that.

As ive already pointed out, the titan is not a support ship. They are made for combat, even more so in fact since they have multiple combat roles that synergize together than dreads do.

You can't make them a powerful enough combat ship to be worthy of what they are supposed to be without unbalancing the whole game.

But u can. Limit the amount of ingame titans, then u can make them very powerful without breaking the game.

As long as it's a combat ship we will continue to see fleets with dozens of titans.

Titans should be mobile stations with full docking, logging on/off capability for docked players, (upgradable) station-services, and corporation-owned and operated in the same way POS are.

Who get to keep their titans? Are you suggesting CCP take titans away from anyone who has to many? How exactly would you propose to do this with out creating a potential situation where one side has an overwhelming number of titans?

If you limit it to say, 10, at least 7 of those 10 will end up joining the same alliance because titans are much safer with other titans around. Do you understand why this would be a problem?

Limit Titan pilots can only join corps that are in alliances, and these corps can only have one player with one of the Titan skill books injected in corp. A alliance could only have one tiatn capable corp at a time. all exsisting titans would be kept, however it you owned a Titan u would be forced to drop corp.

I would go with two ships, actually. Split the bridging, clones, and fleet bonuses off the titan for a mothership hull. Titans in a pure combat role makes sense though.

The titan is a mobile outpost with the abilities to destroy other mobile outpost (titans), it shouldn't be able to hit a subcap even if said subcap were in the barrel or silo of the titans main weapon. Moving an XL weapon barrel should be extremly slow, otherwise the barrels would bend from inertia and stress due to their immense size. Shooting a battle ship with a titan should be like shooting a bumble bee at 5 miles with a 120mm cannon.


Dreads are made for combat, titans are made for support capital overkill.

I agree. Supers should not be anti-sub cap platforms.

In the same breath, shooting at a super with anything smaller than a XL gun /bombers should result in absolutely no damage to shields captain.

Puny munitions worthless munitions, regardless of how big your BS blob is...

After all, the lack of force generated by those small arms against its massive hull is just insignificant enough to do nothing worth caring about. Otherwise, it would be like flies hitting your windshield on the highway, going through the window, through your brain, flip the car and come out the other side unharmed....