hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1 of 6 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 112

Thread: [james315] How to Fix Supercaps

  1. #1
    Donor Sponk's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    AU TZ
    Posts
    11,503

    [james315] How to Fix Supercaps

    Contract stuff to Seraphina Amaranth.

    "You give me the awful impression - I hate to have to say - of someone who hasn't read any of the arguments against your position. Ever."


  2. #2
    Donor AmaNutin's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    9,600
    This was already mentioned.

    I hate how he tries to take credit for every idea.

    edit: I want to be able to downvote James 315 articles.
    Audacter calumniare, semper aliquid haeret

    "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt"
    Bertrand Russell - the Triumph of Stupidity (1933)

    "The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity." -Yeats, 1919


    Quote Originally Posted by thebomby View Post
    I find it incredible that a whole country can actually be more retarded than FHC.

  3. #3
    Longdrinks's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 10, 2011
    Location
    CONFEDERATION OF XXPIZZAXX
    Posts
    1,396
    James 315 the manbaby who lived in highsec.

    https://zkillboard.com/character/195872744/ have a look to see all the fun im having in eve. If you arent having fun in eve you`re probably bad at eve. Please better yourself.

  4. #4
    Aliventi's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2012
    Location
    Mouth Trumpet Cavalry.
    Posts
    1,521
    He does have some fair points that the legacy thinking of CCP trying to make them super expensive to restrict their proliferation has failed. Sure you can argue that and EHP nerf so they die combined with a price nerf to make them replaceable would be a good step to removing this thinking. The downside to this argument is why dread or carrier (outside of POS shooting and triage) when a super is only a few billion isk more? It just hands the blob more things to blob with easier and cheaper.

    He thinking that an EHP nerf will allow smaller fleets to kill them also allows capital and other super capital/capital fleets to kill them easier. Kinda goes against his rock-paper-scissors analogy.

    At a certain point a ship should have enough sensor arrays and back up sensor arrays that EWAR just doesn't work on them. While ECM and damps will be useful, TP and TDs won't.

    Dockable would be nice. If only to allow the toon to not be stuck in a space coffin and make it easier to load up ships/refuel. The downside is docking just makes it a bigger better carrier/dread.

    Tbh I think supers should put fear back in to Eve. Your first reaction when a super or a titan appears on field should be "Oh shit. Do I stay and fight, or do I run?" instead of "Oh shiny. TACKLE IT!". I think and EHP nerf (1/3 to 1/2 of their current EHP. All they do is RR blob anyway.) combined with a double or triple DPS buff would be a huge step. Or keep the EHP the same and remove the ability for them to receive RR but add back in their ability to triage. That would make them losable. Nerf the price if you nerf the EHP/RR, but keep the price high enough so they aren't thrown around like a carrier and you really can't feasibly put 500 pilots in supers like you can with BS fleets. If you are able to keep them distinct from carriers/dreads through DPS, EHP, EWAR immunity, etc in a way that they augment but do not replace carriers/dreads then I would be down for docking them. My 2 iskies.

  5. #5
    Donor Sponk's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    AU TZ
    Posts
    11,503
    IMO, the problem with supers is tackling them. If they could be actually tackled, then they'd actually die.
    Contract stuff to Seraphina Amaranth.

    "You give me the awful impression - I hate to have to say - of someone who hasn't read any of the arguments against your position. Ever."


  6. #6
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,492
    Supers would be risked more if they were not all personal assets. Basically requiring far more than just the one guy to operate it.

    -or-

    Simple solution is to just remove supers from the game and return related skill points and minerals to the pilots. Sometimes you just need to cut the cancer out to fix the problem.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Location
    Snigg-PL
    Posts
    1,430
    Most titans I see these days are co-owned.
    I'm sure it's frustrating to be sperging about how someone said "no, not doing that yet" - but we've had 7 years to learn to pace ourselves after killing a block. And I dare say -- we've gotten quite good at it.

    Sorry if it doesn't suit the armchair generals who have never committed to anything for more than 2 months, but by now we've learned that we really don't give a shit about what you think v0v.

  8. #8
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,492
    Quote Originally Posted by LoKiPP View Post
    Most titans I see these days are co-owned.
    Still only takes one pilot to fully operate the titan and super carrier, co-owned or not.

    Imagine if each fighter bomber required one alliance member to be docked at a friendly station/corp office and plug in remotely and pilot it? That means that is 20-25 less pilots out on the battlefield for that one super carrier to fully operate. Who cares if an alliance is super capital heavy, they would reach a point of unbalance between number of super carriers:support ratio and all by themselves too. Not sure how to incorporate that with titans, but whatever, you get the idea.
    Last edited by Marlona Sky; July 25 2013 at 07:28:01 AM.

  9. #9
    ry ry's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    snuff
    Posts
    3,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Longdrinks View Post
    James 315 the manbaby who lived in highsec.

  10. #10
    Super Moderator Global Moderator QuackBot's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 7, 2012
    Posts
    21,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Longdrinks View Post
    James 315 the manbaby who lived in highsec.
    Who the shit wants to play teso.

  11. #11
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    19,036
    God the James 315 article is so full of smug revisionism its painful (the changes he and that other goon asked for were already supported by the general consensus of people like us at the time, yet he speaks like they singlhandedly came up with the idea of removing remote activation and AoE...).

    That said I agree with him re: the problems with supercaps

    - they are designed to only be countered by more supercaps (or being caught hilariously outnumbered);
    - pilots are entombed inside;
    - they are so hilariously expensive and painful to lose that no one likes to risk them;
    - titan pilots spend more time bridging than fighting.

    I agree with some of his solutions:

    - need a new cruiser-sized counter, but I think a (non-cloaky) supercapital torpedo bomber would be better than a super-cap ewar platforml
    - much cheaper supercaps - 5bn supercarrier, 15bn titan plz. ISK refunds (10bn and 30bn respectively) to all current holders.
    - dockable (perhaps only in a specific player deployed station type as-yet-unreleased (introduced the same time as station destruction) and costing enough they wont be everywhere)

    I dont agree with drastic reductions of HP because they would get volleyed off the field by DDs too often. Instead I'd reduce HP by another 20% and reduce some of their other qualities to make them overlap carrier/dread roles even less.

    I'd also remove titan bridging as its boring for all concerned. I'd replace it with a deployable one use structure - think a deployable bubble with a timer - that takes 10 minutes to deploy then is deployed until used once, then dies. It would work like a titan bridge (right click, bridge to: X, jump) and would need to be loaded with fuel. It would add some interesting meta as you could deploy them defensively in advance in your own space, or offensively but would need to get timing right.

    Titans and MS would also lost some of their ship and item hangars. A new supercap ship transporter would be introduced with massive ship maint bay and some kind of bonus to hauling large ships (I wouldnt mind if it could hold 1 - 3 capital ships, plus 4 or 5 BS and assorted smaller ships at the same time, or 20+ BS). The idea would be to give pilots a way to move ALL their ships around together. It would however, have some jump-related limits (to be designed) to make it very vulnerable during transit, and it wouldnt be able to enter highsec at all. My earlier proposed reprocessing nerf would also be needed at the same time to prevent "fill supercap with a million frigs, fly to destination, infinite minerals" syndrome.






    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

  12. #12
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    18,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Simple solution is to just remove supers from the game and return related skill points and minerals to the pilots. Sometimes you just need to cut the cancer out to fix the problem.

  13. #13
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    18,690
    Also his bitter at me was pretty amusing.

  14. #14
    מלך יהודים Zeekar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    15,806
    Either you remove them or there will always be a faggot whining about them. Otherwise current combat capabilities of supers are ok ( they are meant as pinnacle of capital warfare) but their mobility could do with a nerf.


    

  15. #15
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,492
    Every day that goes by where CCP does not remove the remote armor/shield/capacitor range bonus boggles my mind.

  16. #16
    Fara's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,749
    TL;DR ?

    I assume its something about supercaps are evil and subcap blobs are #elite written by a highsec industrialist :S
    Last edited by Fara; July 25 2013 at 09:17:41 AM.

  17. #17
    Donor Mike deVoid's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    6,900
    Here's a suggestion for the rock/paper/scissors of titans, supers/dreads, carriers, subcaps:



      Spoiler:
    (taken from my post in a thread last year: http://failheap-challenge.com/showth...l=1#post419125 )
    Last edited by Mike deVoid; July 25 2013 at 11:15:08 AM.

  18. #18
    David Devant's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 19, 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by Lallante View Post
    - much cheaper supercaps - 5bn supercarrier, 15bn titan plz. ISK refunds (10bn and 30bn respectively) to all current holders.
    - dockable (perhaps only in a specific player deployed station type as-yet-unreleased (introduced the same time as station destruction) and costing enough they wont be everywhere)
    This would be so good.

    One of the things that really saddens me is the inability for smallish entities to move around in this game. Unless you have a titan you're forced to hang out on the corner every fucking night hoping something kicks off. Meanwhile bigger groups are bridging errywhere (usually on your head) at the drop of a hat. No fair.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    February 7, 2012
    Posts
    11
    And after reading and seeing the power i kind of agree with some of it.

    Super Carrier and Titans are stil VERY power full, but also very exspensiv.
    I wouldnt personal change any of them, but look at the Rock, Paper and Sissors..

    If you look at supers and Titans as a Rock i would make paper.

    Make the Black Ops, able to carry super bombs, that only works on capitals and do X% damage of the hull of whats its hitting.

    It will turn the Black Ops to more than just a mini titan, which is more or less useless for anything else, and often to exspensiv to lose in battle, compared to ship size, and class.

    https://forums.eveonline.com/default...84&find=unread

  20. #20
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    18,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Fara View Post
    TL;DR ?

    I assume its something about supercaps are evil and subcap blobs are #elite written by a highsec industrialist :S
    Close enough.

    Also his seething jealousy is hilarious

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •