| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nofearion
Suppression Inc.
Black Thorne Alliance
0
   |
Posted - 2011.09.09 14:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
First let me start off with giving appreciation to you for taking the time to read my thoughts on the matter of super cap balancing.
I have been playing close attention to discussions on this subject and as one who was overwhelmed on several occasions by supers I have made a study of capabilities uses and tactics ect. While I have not been in the game as long as some I do have a great understanding of game mechanics.
These are proposed changes I believe would help the balance without specific GÇ£NerfsGÇ¥ to existing craft as they are fine as is in stand alone or small fleets as intended. I believe what I have laid out is a balanced approach that does not put an all or nothing fix out there. As they are based on mechanics already used in game it should not be all that difficult or time consuming (man-hour wise) to make the changes.
First Carriers, add race specific bonus to standard carrier drones of 5% to damage and 5% speed. I believe this will also balance out the carriers themselves and you will see more diversity. This is based on the race specific bonuses applied to stealth bombers.
Second Cynos, give them the same mechanics as wormholes, Grid specific that oneGÇÖs a artificial wormhole is generated to a specific grid location in a system after a certain amount of mass passes through it closes and another cyno although lit cannot be connected too for a specific amount of time. The amount of mass can be directly related to the cyno skill of the cyno pilot or and the skill of the pilot creating the jump bridge. This is based on Worm hole mechanics.
Third DreadnoughtsGÇÖ, as the name implies these behemoths should be able to withstand massive punishment. Increase the both the hit points by 15% per level and the resistances across the board by 15%. This along with a race specific drone bonus to damage and warp speed. This will also increase the usefulness of dreads and justify the cost of such. This is a bigger change and likely a little more complex to complete. It is based on both stealth bomber race specifics, and ship balancing.
Thanks again for taking the time to listen to my thoughts. I would appreciate any feedback as to the viability of the options I have given.
|
Richstall10
The Confed Crew
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 14:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
All theses ideas are horrible... these ideas should be taken out back and shot |
Zagam
Dark Fusion Industries
Limitless Inc.
66
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 15:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
So let me get this straight... your solution to supercaps being OP is to buff cap ships.
Yeah, that makes sense. |
Nofearion
Suppression Inc.
Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 15:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
So tell me what is so bad about these Ideas? What is it I am not getting? |
Zagam
Dark Fusion Industries
Limitless Inc.
66
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 16:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
The issue is not supercap vs capital ships. Its supercap ships vs. EVERYTHING else.
Buffing cap ships just makes SC *and* capital ships OP.
Think of it this way:
Item A has 8 items in it
Item B has 8 items in it.
Item C has several hundred items in it.
Item A is vastly more powerful proportionally than B and C. A is on a more grand scale than B, which is more grand than C. A is a more advanced version of B, which is more advanced than C.
Therefore, A is OP.
Since A is OP, your choice is to buff B and C to match in terms of scale, or to nerf A. As C is vastly more complex to adjust (as C has many parts which have to be balanced against each other), it is not realistically feasible to buff it across the board.
If you only buff B... you end up with A and B being OP in relation to C.
A = Supercaps
B = Capital ships
C = Subcaps. |
Nofearion
Suppression Inc.
Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 16:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
gotcha, I see your point. why I called for drone buff and not fighter buffs for both capitals, the drones would be intended to go after fighters and fighter bomber, the dreads need more tank I have not found any suitable argument against it. what are your thoughts about cynos? my thought is the limited the size of fleet potential from jumping in, as you know caps have a significant advantage of bypassing gates, bubbles and what not by jumping in at optimal, this includes sub-caps, with the cyno change a lot more thought would have to go into fleet compilation that just blobbing a large capital fleet.
and keep in mind that if a fleet had 8 supers and 8 caps and a hundred sub-caps we may not be having this conversation. the fleets I have witness had one sub-cap, 20 caps and 80 supers, (PL routinely did this to us in Querious) and from my understanding DF has even larger super fleets. What do you propose to help balance this situation? |
Zagam
Dark Fusion Industries
Limitless Inc.
66
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 18:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
Putting a mass limit on Cyno is good in theory, but hard to execute, since it is player-spawned.
Secondly, hotdropping people at optimal is a bit crazy, since the cyno alt has to park itself on the grid. (that said, I know it happens)
And finally, I'm not familiar enough with the intricacies of flying supercaps to provide a potential solution. I mean, I could toss one out there, but it would likely be so full of holes its not even funny. |
Nofearion
Suppression Inc.
Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 18:48:00 -
[8] - Quote
I can relate to that. Most of where my ideas are founded is on my personal experience in leading fleets and fighting super fleets with a sub cap one and discussion among cap pilots and super cap pilots who's experience dwarfs my own.
as far as execution goes the cyno is just the gravity well point am artificial worm hole is linked two. There are several articles of how this theory works, Adjusting the code to follow the existing point to follow that of natural occurring Worm holes actually makes more sense in that a ship should not be capable of putting up as stable a wormhole as a jump gate.
Keep in mind I am a hardware guy not a software guy. also I know that just cutting and pasting code is not the answer. but if the similarity are there then so are the mechanics. as far as boosting caps to take on super-caps. caps should be common and a reasonably attainable goal for most pilots. but as this is eve no one should underestimate the funds available to any given pilot. under this case causing (your expample) B to be equal too or close op to A than there will be a reduction in A on the field as the expense of loosing A over B is out weighed. Then A will be regulated to were it should be as an added extra in large fleets but not a Win button. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
17
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 20:08:00 -
[9] - Quote
Nofearion wrote:why I called for drone buff and not fighter buffs for both capitals, the drones would be intended to go after fighters and fighter bomber,
The problem with this idea is that it isn't feasible. Supercarriers can launch [with max skills] between 20 to 25 drones/fighters/fighter bombers (10 to 15 for regular carriers)... if facing a small group of 5 supercarriers that's about 100 to 125 drones/fighters/fighter bombers (50 to 75 for regular carriers).
To be able to kill each drone/fighter/fighter bomber you have to target each one separately and kill it. There is simply no way to kill them all before you are dead.
Nofearion wrote:
the dreads need more tank I have not found any suitable argument against it.
Buffing dreds makes them OP against subcapitals and carriers. Also... Dreds are not known of using drones (exception: the Moros).
As far as your HP and resistances idea... I too would like to fly a ship with a 2 million+ EHP buffer that can also tank a buttload of DPS and dish damage at the same time.
Nofearion wrote:
what are your thoughts about cynos?
As someone said above... your idea of mass limited is easily bypassed. Instead of relying on one or two guys (see: alts) to pop a single cyno you'll have multiple guys moving around and popping them. Benefits the "big guys" who can afford all the extra guys/alts and less so for the "smaller entities."
"Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one."
~Unknown |
Nofearion
Suppression Inc.
Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 20:17:00 -
[10] - Quote
points taken. what suggestions to balance out the super blob cap fleets can you suggest? |
|
|
Zagam
Dark Fusion Industries
Limitless Inc.
66
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 20:21:00 -
[11] - Quote
another point about the cyno change you propose...
One of the big differences between a WH and the cyno is that the WH is between two points only.
A cyno can have several origins, and only one destination. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
17
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 21:06:00 -
[12] - Quote
Nofearion wrote:points taken. what suggestions to balance out the super blob cap fleets can you suggest?
This is strictly MY opinion on the matter...
Nerf Supercarriers by...
- forcing them to use a Siege Module in order to launch Fighter Bombers with effects similar to that of a Dred (e.g. scan res penalty, immobility, can't be RRed, cycle of 10 minutes, etc). With this, deploying and using Supercarrier's to their fullest potential becomes risky...
- taking away the ability for Supercarriers to field "normal" drones (i.e. take away Supercarrier's ability to bulldoze through sub-capital fleets).
- (optional) limiting the scope of Ewar "immunity" (i.e. make it so that 'dictors and HICs are not the only things in the game that can lock down a super (i.e. need XX Warp Disruptors/Scramblers to lock down a super, etc)).
"Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one."
~Unknown |
Nofearion
Suppression Inc.
Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 23:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
Those are good points and have been suggested by a few. the other side of the argument is that most who have do not want a nerf. so this discussion is about how to balance without nerfing super caps. this also does not address the problem of Titan blobs. Good discussion so far. keep it coming |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
17
|
Posted - 2011.09.09 23:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
But again... the big issue is that you CAN'T balance out Capitals against Supercapitals WITHOUT making Capitals OP against subcapitals.
At the moment, the disparity is glaringly obvious. Here's some example to illustrate my point...
One on one, a Carrier or Dred will beat just about any battleship/subcapital out there. However, a Carrier or Dred against 4+ battleships/subcapitals and no support will find its survival in question.
One on one, a Supercarrier will beat any Carrier or Dred out there. However, a Supercarrier against 4+ Carriers and Dreads and no support will not even flinch. It'll either wipe them all out or just fly away.
No one who flies a Supercapital WANTS a nerf... true. If I had access to a ship that can WTFBBQ most other ships and be immune to almost everything else I wouldn't want it nerfed either. But the nerf IS happening. What needs to be done is figure out a way to balance the "odd OP ships" against everything else without rendering them "useless."
"Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one."
~Unknown |
Nofearion
Suppression Inc.
Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.11 17:51:00 -
[15] - Quote
So No one can come up with better suggestions on how to balance supers without Nerfing them? |
Amun Khonsu
Royal Order of Security Specialists
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.11 21:16:00 -
[16] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Nofearion wrote:points taken. what suggestions to balance out the super blob cap fleets can you suggest? This is strictly MY opinion on the matter... Nerf Supercarriers by... - forcing them to use a Siege Module in order to launch Fighter Bombers with effects similar to that of a Dred (e.g. scan res penalty, immobility, can't be RRed, cycle of 10 minutes, etc). With this, deploying and using Supercarrier's to their fullest potential becomes risky... - taking away the ability for Supercarriers to field "normal" drones (i.e. take away Supercarrier's ability to bulldoze through sub-capital fleets). - (optional) limiting the scope of Ewar "immunity" (i.e. make it so that 'dictors and HICs are not the only things in the game that can lock down a super (i.e. need XX Warp Disruptors/Scramblers to lock down a super, etc)).
+1 m8 o7
Fight them until turmoil is no more and strike terror into their hearts. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |