|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
Excellent.
Let the map burn. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 16:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
WarFireV wrote:I think you missed the point with Titans, doomsday was never a major problem. It's the fact that they can be ganked fit(Using officer tracking computers, and officer tracking enhancers) and pretty much kill any ship in two shots no matter what with capital turrets.
Still though this is prertty good, just make sure you look into what I posted above or you will just end up with Titan blobs.
The DD was (still is) a major problem, but yeah I think they should have nerfed tracking somewhat.
That said if he's serious about ongoing balance reviews, then we can see how this plays out on the battlefield. If it turns that that Titans not being able to clear the field of logis in the first 10 minutes of a fight tips the balance, then fair enough. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Malcanis wrote:Excellent.
Let the map burn. That's quite short-sighted. Supers will be doing (nearly) same damage as they do today. The only difference is they won't engage subcaps, and those superblobs might be more likely (than they used to) too. What differs is they might carry a subcap fleet with them. Subcap fleet can be cynoed around with the superblob, using bridges. So in essence, for blobs and powerblocs, this is no nerf. This is a nerf to smaller alliances and/or groups. Especially the removal or regular drones, which is going to make non-blob moving alot more dangerous. This game just goes more into a blob-game than ever, and looking at the map.. well it might not burn, as you say, it's more likely it'll stay stagnant than before these changes.
I'm in a smaller alliance. We're pretty happy about these changes. The DD change is the big deal, with the log-off change close behind. We already have doctrine to deal with supercarriers, and the drone bay changes will only make that easier. Likewise, we have doctrine prepared to deal with titans that can't DD subcaps.
if CCP actually deploy changes, we anticipate a merry winter of boat-violence amongst our neighbours. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
486
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kel'taith wrote:So a single dic could kill a SC now if it had enough ammo?
Only if the SC is "brave" enough to log off vs a single dictor.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
491
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
Draculina Alucardi wrote:gimme a good reason, to do not stop training a SC pilot, and not canceling the account which i made specially for it, to use it for PVE and sometimes for PVP (i mean superbs); CCP please take away the drone bay from carriers too, so we could use them only for moving stuff and RR fleet <3
Supercaps will still be incredibly powerful ships, with ten times the tank and more DPS than any other ship class, plus EW immunity. "Normal" capitals will still be chaff in the breeze to supers.
If that's not enough reason, then I don't know what to say. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
491
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game
I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac.
Superb!
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
493
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
Needa3 wrote:Malcanis wrote:Needa3 wrote:i like how everything is blamed on supercaps where the real issues is the subcap fleets.
blob alliances blob by nature, if you want to win the fight you need something that can kill their RR abilities small groups cant do anything either cause they need to fight up your face where they can be easily tackled and countered
their is no more tactics involved, just the biggest number = win
the game is so far from being a sandbox .... and CCP fails at seeing it and the CSM gladly keeps CCP blind as their supporters benefit the most out of this ******** nerf. Guess being part of a certain group really helps in this game I just mixed your tears with some fine cognac. Superb! i'm glad some groups never disappoint. glad to see you are just one of those dicks hiding behind the safety of their internet connection but lacking the balls to actually stand up
Yes indeed, I give thanks every day that I don't have to face the incredible rage of ~Internet Hardman~ Needa3 with his amazing power of warping zealots solo into hostile fleets while his alliance mates laugh at his noobitude in local.
Tell me sir, does your girlfriend kickbox by any chance? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
495
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Taedrin wrote:xxxak wrote:Update:
This nerf = Win Subcap battle, Kill all supers on the field.
So with this nerf, supers can no longer defend themselves from subcaps, and supers are committed for 23 hours once they cyno in.
That means that if you have a 15 man super fleet (mid size alliance), plus 120 sub caps (mid size alliance), and if lose the subcap battle, you also just lost all your supers.
Kthxbai. No way a sane super pilot will commit now unless they are 150% sure that they have a winning fleet. EVE is dead.
Other thoughts:
1) Nerfing fighters makes carriers even more crap. This was unnecessary. 2) Supercarriers should at least be able to carry 20 FB + 20 fighters 3) The removal of the drone bay is a nerf to small alliances who are more likely to use a small number of "ninja" supercarrier tactics. Now those supercarriers can get tackled and killed much more easily by even a small/medium gang of subcaps. 4) Huge alliances that can field huge fleets (super cap gang+proper sub cap fleet) will be even more powerful. 5) Supercarriers are no longer good for anything but shooting POS mods and Sov mods. LOL.
The nerf should have been as follows: 1) Fix logoffski timer 2) DD can only hit caps 3) Small EHP reduction for supercarriers
Those three fixes alone would have been enough to start.
Can some Dev explain the decision to not even let SC carry 20 fighters??
Actually, looking more at the fighter nerf.... what can they hit now? POS mods? LOL. Huge stealth carrier nerf. Care to explain this one as well? Exactly how it should be. 5 years ago, flying a capital without proper support made you a laughing stock. Why shouldn't flying supers without proper support ALSO make you a laughing stock? If you want to protect your supers, then bring the proper amount of support. Therefore we have a sort of rock-paper-scissors formula for balance: sub-caps beat supers supers beat caps caps beat sub-caps (could probably use some more work). There is a difference between "proper support" and "losing = loss of 200 billion isk." I agree that supers should not be used to hot drop on a roaming BC gang for ***** and gigs. But I also don't think that a 200 vs 200 subcap battle where one fleet gets lucky in lag means that the losing fleet should also lose 10-20-30 supers, and meanwhile the supers literally don't have a chance to defend themselves.
200v200 fights don't lag any more, even on unreinforced nodes.
So that's OK then!
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
495
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote: Dreadnoughts still look underpowered, while the 5 minute siege mod is good, it basically gives them a higher chance of avoiding a fight, rather than of winning a fight. Their role now seems to be to act as bait to get a hostile supercap force to come out and play so you can counter-drop with a subcap fleet. Random crazy idea - siege mode makes a warp disruptor into a heavy-dictor-style focused infini-point?
A 9k DPS blaster moros seems pretty butch to me. It's essentially a 3 kilometer gank brutix.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
499
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 02:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
Feydryn wrote:This is one of THE worst balancing decisions I've ever seen in a games life cycle.
You have completely removed the counter-balance to "blob" warfare in one fell stroke.
Excuse me sir, but I could not help noticing that your pants are on fire. Were you aware?
Further, your nose appears to be rapidly growing. Should I call for medical assistance as well as a fire engine?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
500
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:41:00 -
[11] - Quote
Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!!
Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
500
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:42:00 -
[12] - Quote
Martinez wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression. Dumb. If you dont log your ship in a safe place it should be at risk. The only reason to keep this in the game is to allow people to avoid combat when they are caught off guard. Lets be honest, 99% of the time its not a person actually crashing, its lame ass pilots trying to save their ships off line.
Hi, let me tell you about probes. There's no such thing as a "safe place" to log off.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
500
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 03:56:00 -
[13] - Quote
I love the idiots going on about "bowing down to goons", as if they were the only ones who wanted a supercap nerf. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:If you blind-cyno to a beacon to jump through a gate and there are hostiles on the other side, and those hostiles are able to aggress you before your enter your ewarp, you should be stuck in space. Period. This business of people jumping places and realizing they made a mistake, then just control-qing as long as you don't have a dictor bubble up is bull.
No no no you see I paid $1800 for my supercap therefore I should get a do-over when I make mistakes with it
(because I am ~elite~ you see)
(paying a lot of money for a ship is elite)
(I paid a lot of money for a ship so I should get special treatment, just in case that wasn't made clear) Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:18:00 -
[15] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:Di Mulle wrote:Simetraz wrote:
Done for the day. Nobody in local, so you log off. 5 minutes later someone comes in knowing that a sitting duck will be around for 15 minutes. Drops a probe and POP. Next time you log in you are in your pod.
Now if CCP could make it so you will stick around for 15 minutes after jumping through a gate. Well then fine, short of that forget it.
Reading comprehension Level I. Search it at the market, like right now. What are you talking about ?
He means that your ship will have disappeared within 1 minute if you log off with no aggro. So that guy who comes in 5 minutes later isn't going to do jack to you. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:23:00 -
[16] - Quote
Vaffel Junior wrote:I guess this is the beginning of the end for EVE.
EVE closing up on WOW.
You need only 6 moths to train up to the largest usefull ship in eve... battleship !!!
Hey everyone, look at this post.
Look at it.
It's a very bad post. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
502
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 04:38:00 -
[17] - Quote
Velin Dhal wrote:Malcanis wrote:Stealthiest wrote:How about a rename and some resizing. A super carrier that is not a carrier, but is the same size as a carrier?
As a 2 titan, 1 mS owner I say bout f**king time for most of this, But no dd on Sub-caps at all? No drones on a Super carrier?
I mean really!!!!! Yes, really. DDing frigates and cruisers is bullshit and you know it. How is it bullshit ? Sorry that my 30+ billion isk ship that I had to wait like half a year to build and took me 4 years of training to get in can instantly destroy your 10 cent frigate. I mean seriously, what am I thinking its so unfair of me. Why would I ever assume that time and money could buy power in a game running on a capitalist economy ? To make me even more of a bad guy, why would I assume that my hard earned money and dedicated skill training would give me the right to fly ships untouchable by someone with less skills and dedication than me ? I'm so ashamed of myself
I can't even tell if you're being sarcastic, since everything you said is true in the literal, face-value sense.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
505
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:03:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ramman K'arojic wrote:CCP: Love your intent; CCP: You will probably fail. You have provided no insentive for anybody to bring CAP to a fight; unless they bring 1 first; which they have no incentive to do so. You need to allow someway to permit CAPS and SUB-CAPS to interact. Wether it fighters on Carries only; where they can not easly shoot small fast ships but could kill a BS with a little effort. Otherwise you will kill the butterfly before it takes off
Yeah I'm sure that not being able to hotdrop battlecruiser gangs with supers any more will "kill the butterfly". Alas, poor EVE. CCP what were you thinking when you nerfed that all-important playstyle of entire regions being empty of anything but bait-cyno Arazus and Drakes. What will happen to the butterflies now
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
505
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:06:00 -
[19] - Quote
Relnala wrote:Draahk Chimera wrote:Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships. It's about fitting into a fleet. Guardians is currently extremely useful ships but you wouldn't go to a fleetfight in only guardians would you? I'm not talking about not bringing support, I'm talking about... exactly what scenario would you say "Hey! Lets deploy supercarriers for that!". I mean.. yeah, sieging a dread might go badly, but you can lose quite a few dreads for the cost of a supercarrier. Where does the SC fit into the fleet? Okay, it has a little bit of RR if fit as such, and dread-like damage vs capitals and Ihubs. But you can bring the same deeps cheaper on a dread, and you bring better RR cheaper on a carrier. The only thing it really has going for it is EHP. But it costs a lot more, and doesnt really bring a lot else to the field. So it went from swiss army to an oversized screwdriver. Who uses oversized screwdrivers except that once a year oversized screw you find?. :-p
And EW immunity. A a larger ship bay. And it does more damage. A LOT more damage even than dreadnaughts. Plus the Remote ECM burst.
But yeah, supers aren't worth flying now, sure, whatever you say buddy. I tell you what, just to help you out, I'll take your "useless" supercarrier - just the hull, no fittings - off your hands for a nice new carrier hull of your choice and 2 bill in cash. Since carriers are better than supercarriers, that's a great deal for you, right?
Send me an EVEmail and I'll arrange the deal tonight, OK? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
505
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:17:00 -
[20] - Quote
Relnala wrote:Malcanis wrote:Relnala wrote:Draahk Chimera wrote:Relnala wrote:My only concern is, with gank fit Moros out-DPSing all the SCs... what niche do SCs have again at 7x the cost?
They can't hit subcaps They can't even carry enough fighters to threaten battleships significantly They cant hit towers They have no personal defensive ability
I was looking forward to the SC nerf somewhat, but true to colors, CCP nerfs too much.
TBH, they kinda sound like bait ships. It's about fitting into a fleet. Guardians is currently extremely useful ships but you wouldn't go to a fleetfight in only guardians would you? I'm not talking about not bringing support, I'm talking about... exactly what scenario would you say "Hey! Lets deploy supercarriers for that!". I mean.. yeah, sieging a dread might go badly, but you can lose quite a few dreads for the cost of a supercarrier. Where does the SC fit into the fleet? Okay, it has a little bit of RR if fit as such, and dread-like damage vs capitals and Ihubs. But you can bring the same deeps cheaper on a dread, and you bring better RR cheaper on a carrier. The only thing it really has going for it is EHP. But it costs a lot more, and doesnt really bring a lot else to the field. So it went from swiss army to an oversized screwdriver. Who uses oversized screwdrivers except that once a year oversized screw you find?. :-p And EW immunity. A a larger ship bay. And it does more damage. A LOT more damage even than dreadnaughts. Plus the Remote ECM burst. Yeah, supers aren't worth flying now, sure. I tell you what, I'll take your "useless" supercarrier off your hands for a nice new carrier hull of your choice and 2 bill in cash. Since carriers are better that supers, that's a bargain, right? Have you looked at the new dread damage? Most dreads can put out about what the SC can. Theoretical, of course. Also, I don't have an SC. Can I still have the carrier + 2bil?
Nyx can do 12.5k DPS. Blaster Moros now tops out at about 9k IIRC, and the other dreads rather less. That's a pretty big delta, especially when you take into account the very limited range and tank of the gank-fit dreads, plus the fact that while they're doing that damage they can't move or be repped or capped. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
522
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 10:26:00 -
[21] - Quote
Kyjaro wrote:I can see 2 problems
- Carriers should remain deadly against sub-capitals, so give them a bonus to fighters to counter the penalty. I'm thinking about carriers ratting and the fact that carriers can be killed easily. They shouldn't have the penalty to fighters
Agreed. Carriers don't need the combat capability nerfed, at least not by that much; they're just not a problem in today's game.
Kyjaro wrote:- There should be a distinction between logging off and getting disconnected (or server down)
There should be but there isn't, because how can you tell the difference between a genuine disconnect and Timmy T. Titanpilot pulling the cord out of his router because he realised that he dun goofed?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 15:43:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kari Kari wrote:Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:I would like my 12 million SP in drones on my Nyx pilot back which are now completely worthless. With subcap nerfs a pilot can switch out into another ship and still get use out of your drone skills. My Nyx pilot will not be able to due so.
It is only fair for CCP to let us change these skills around. They can nerf the ships all they want, and that is totally cool, but the wasted money on subscription fees and time for skills which can't be used at all is pretty crazy.
This is especially true considering most of us bought a 2nd account, paid sub fees for a year or more for our SC pilot accounts, and are now stuck in the ship with skills trained for that specific ship. Pure Epic post here. CCP you better do this.
Yeah or he'll quit for... what is he up to now? the sixth time? The seventh?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:31:00 -
[23] - Quote
Rhaegor Stormborn wrote:Malcanis wrote:[Yeah or he'll quit for... what is he up to now? the sixth time? The seventh?
Cry more noob.
You're producing all the tears I will ever need. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:33:00 -
[24] - Quote
Misanth wrote:iulixxi wrote:Misanth wrote:Already posted here twice, how I killed six Fighters for a Nyx while I was alone in a Nighthawk. Somehow I wish I had frapsed it, would've been awsome to post that as a counter-argument in this thread. It might be because I'm a super-pilot myself, but when you know how Fighters function you can easily kite them around and thus completely neglegt their damage output.
Since people are being stubborn and-/or stupid, I'll give a hint: they're slow and not very agile. If you have enough speed/maneuverability, especially combined with multiple on-grid bookmarks or objects to warp to, it's not even hard to "tank" 20 Fighters in a semi-decent BC. I reccon a BS would have alot more issues tho, unless a Machariel, you'd be too slow and not agile enough. But there's the rock/scissor/paper, and the TL;DR is that my solo BC-hull was tanking a Nyx' Fighters perfectly fine. Obviously I stayed out of neut/pointrange, I could not point him anyway so even less reason to do. I agree with you on this on but you are missing a very important factor. Your example is 1 vs 1 scenario GǪ I wild love to see how you are dogging 5 fighters with another 4.000 FB (200 SC) on grid GǪ Have you tried it? What happens to a lone super after the nerf? GÇô Same thing that is happening now to a lone super: it dies. This changes dramatically when you scale the scenario GǪ My 2 cents ... E Then you bright a few bombers, just a handful will easily do. Edit; Oh and I should add in that I'm not saying game should be balanced around 1v1. I'm just highlighting for stupid people who are whining their 40 subcaps die to a solo mothership (there's quite a few people whining about scenarious in here, and they want fighters nerfed based on that) is frankly - bad players. If one guy easily can dodge 20 fighters, and if two-three hics easily can rotate points to dodge ecm drones/fighters, ecm burst and neuts, then a proper subcap fleet need to get a clue rather than whining because they don't know how to play the game.
So the subcap guys should just "bright a few bombers" but it's too much to ask the supercap guys to do the same?
Should we infer that supercap pilots don't have any friends?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:34:00 -
[25] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:Many years ago, before many of the people whining about supercaps being to powerful started playing this game, CCP's CEO said EVE should be about choices. Clearly with the changes CCP is presenting for supercaps they are giving players a very limited array of choices: stay logged off, join a blob alliance so you can shoot only other cap ships and sov structures.
Hypothetically they could also accept that they should risk losing their ships as well.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 19:42:00 -
[26] - Quote
miningtool wrote:Tippia wrote:Velin Dhal wrote:That option already exists in the game. If you bring the correct fleet you can counter Super Capitals. The problem is that GÇ£the correct fleetGÇ£ is simply N+1 SCs. no the fleet is a nuet fleet turning hardeners off nukes the ehp of all ships
That works really well for 1-4 supercaps.
However there are now several thousand in game. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 21:01:00 -
[27] - Quote
The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:04:00 -
[28] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:The number of supercap pilots with incredibly unreliable connections amazes me. It's a mystery how you ever managed to amass the price of a super, what with your ISP kicking you off the server every 1000 seconds or so. You think they got the ISK to buy a supercap through their in-game actions. heh
Thatsthejoke.jpg Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:12:00 -
[29] - Quote
Ciryath Al'Darion wrote:Demon Azrakel wrote:[quote=Avon
Diminishing returns on investment is how eve works, just because the ship costs 10x as much, it should not be 10x as good. ATM, sc cost 10x what a carrier costs, does 10x dps, has 20x the tank, and is ewar immune. this is far, far more than 10x as good as a carrier.
The supercapital ships are different to other ships in one very important part; you cannot leave the ship and change to a new ship.
Right, because no-one ever has minimum-skilled holding alts for their supercarriers when they want to do other stuff with their main?
Right?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 13:30:00 -
[30] - Quote
pearcy15504 wrote:will CCP remove the Capital Drone Bay from the list of required parts for Titans and Dreads if the remove them from game. it will also help to lower the prices a little.
That's only reasonable. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:08:00 -
[31] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:In this thread, I've read several very good reasons why the fighter change is a bad idea. You are right. Fighters should stay the way they are. The change would be unfair for carriers.
The poor performance of Minmatar capital ships is being looked at and was already being looked at before the blog was posted.
Pointing out flaws and issues with the balancing plan is very much appreciated. I will look into the issues and make changes where they are needed.
Once this hits SISI, I will start a thread in the test server feedback forums. Your concerns will be listened to and acted upon if necessary. Doesn't that simply undermine the whole concept of not allowing Super Carriers to wipe the floor with Sub Cap fleets? Would it not be better to give Carriers a compensatory bonus that offsets the penalty Fighters? That would allow you to have your cake and eat it, so to speak.
Not really. Fighters aren't a huge problem tbh. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 06:09:00 -
[32] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:
Many people: A rookie ship should not be able to maintain a logofskiee timer forever.
What does it matter if it does? Even unpiloted, a supercap has enough natural shield recharge to permatank a rookie ship.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 07:59:00 -
[33] - Quote
Damian Gene wrote:Malcanis wrote:Damian Gene wrote:
Many people: A rookie ship should not be able to maintain a logofskiee timer forever.
What does it matter if it does? Even unpiloted, a supercap has enough natural shield recharge to permatank a rookie ship. Lets use a covert ops for a case example. You are in a super, I am in a buzzard. I happen to know that your safe is close to planet 4 and you are cloaked (I saw you on directional while you were in warp, and narrowed the band down etc.) I cloak up and wait. I have my probes out, and off grid of you, but tuned into, say 1AU. With good skills, the moment you log, i can move the probes over to Planet 4, and scan. Then I warp to you from my SS close to Planet 4. I can get to you in far less then the 1 min before your ship goes away. I then hit you with one gun, or a nuet. Now all i have to do, is love tap you every 10 mins to insure that you do not despawn. I now wait until my corp members come home from work, my alliance form's up, everyone takes a leak, goes out for a smoke, checks Reddit, etc. Then they come in, and we kill your ship. Or, you bump outside the POS shields, same thing, I just wait until you are outside of gun range of the POS, and give you a poke every 10mins. Hell, I could even cloak up for 9 of those 10mins (or 14 of the 15mins if i for some reason wanted to risk it) It doesnt matter that I can not tackle you, but it does prevent you logging, and staying right where you are for as long as I'd like you to. Until downtime. People will soon meta downtime a WHOLE lot more then they already do. Huge fleet fights timed perfectly where the target goes into reinforced, or dies moments before DT. There are a lot of reasons why this is bad, and a lot of ways it can still be fixed. A 30min timer vs a 15 min timer would work for instance.
The trouble is that you seem to think the scenario you describe is a "problem", where as I think it sounds like excellent gameplay. If you, the brave and skillfull covops pilot have managed to determine that I, the lazy and foolish titan pilot, keep using the same safespot to log off in while there's a hostile in local (instead of using a different safe each time or just using a safe POS) then you absolutely deserve a chance to kill my Titan and I absolutely deserve to risk losing it.
15 minutes is easily enough for a smallish gang to kill off any other logged off ship except a supercapital. Your argument seems to be ontological: what is, should be. Supercaps are able to evade destruction by logoffski, therefore they should be able to evade destruction The whole reason for the change is to ensure that any ship who logs off with aggro to an active pilot won't disappear until that pilot has killed it or has given up trying to do so, and that's exactly how it should be. Why should supercaps get any special treatment here?
Leaving aside the implicit assumption that lone covops pilots can spawn an arbitrary number of friends at need, wheras Titan pilots are :foreveralone:, your worry about downtimes is overblown. Fleet battles are determined by pilot availability, which is determined by timezeone. I suppose Australian//NZ supercap pilots will derive some theoretical advantage from this, but that's matched by the real disadvantage of having 20-40 minutes chopped out of their play time every day. I am relaxed about this. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:15:00 -
[34] - Quote
LordSergey wrote:Well... I think CCP trying to reach to only one goal by balancing supercarriers... its reduce the profits!!
Yes, the soaring subscriber numbers and skyrocketing PCU due to the dynamic and diverse strategic situation in sov 0.0 certainly do seem to argue that CCP shouldn't fix what aint broke. Good observation there, sir.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 08:45:00 -
[35] - Quote
LordSergey wrote:I think is coming one day when EVE online will be game only for CCP not for players if they won't listen the players!
You mean that if CCP won't listen to the interests of ~2500 supercap owners instead of the ~347,500 players who don't, they'll go out of business?
Interesting analysis. I look forward to reading the full article in the Wall Street Journal. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 21:06:00 -
[36] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote:The aggressed logging changes makes me hesitate. The simplicy of it is good, but the implications are bad. The 15 min timer was introduced because CCP acknowledged that computer problems happen and you are sometimes unintentionally disconnected in battle. The 15 min timer was there to ensure you'd die if you were going to die. Supercaps have such large EHP that they broke this rule. Now there is the expectation that supers who would not normally have died will die as a result (i.e. a super is aggressed attacking a tower in an empty system, he DCs and warps off aggressed. A lone helios comes in, scans him down, and keeps him aggressed for 4hrs until his friends get home from work to come kill it). This breaks the intention of the original rule in the opposite direction.
The proposed halfway point on this much more closely mimics the original spirit of the rule:
Standard 15 min aggression logoff timers for all ships (can make it 30 for supers if you want), and then only give the infinitely repeating aggression that holds the ship in game if the ship is super-pointed or bubbled. If a super isn't pointed or held down within 15-30 minutes after logging, there is no reasonable assumption that the ship would have normally died otherwise. This is a great point
Yeah no the opposite, because the person you're replying to doesn't understand the change. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 08:19:00 -
[37] - Quote
ITT: people pretended that heavy neuts don't exist and that HICs are DPS machines.
Oh and that it's reasonable to balance the game around people who take 4 hours to log in. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 08:37:00 -
[38] - Quote
Sad but determined, ELITE PVPER Needa3 is dedicated to using his titan as it should be used, as God meant it to be used, right to the end.
The game and everyone who plays it will be poorer when stories - no, let us say legends - like this can no longer be written in it.
Godspeed, sir. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.15 18:51:00 -
[39] - Quote
Anile8er wrote:The 7 titans Red Alliance just lost are a lie. It is not possible. With current supercapital EHP they all would have been able to log off and survive the 15 minute aggression timer.
Also it is not possible for a force to be able field enough supercapitals to counter a member of the DRF. Just cant be done.
Oh wait those titans were dying in under 90 seconds each? How could that be? And oh wait, if another powerhouse alliance just fields supercapitals against supercapitals they don't have to worry about balancing them against subcapitals like hurricanes?
Yeah the problem with supercapitals must be the EHP, log off timers, fighters and bombers not that Goonswarm doesn't want to have to put their own supercapitals and capitals on field.
Supercaps can kill supercaps therefore supercaps aren't overpowered?
OK. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 11:19:00 -
[40] - Quote
Metal Dude wrote:Once again you fkn morons! The problem is the blob, NAPs and numbers instead of skill. The only thing the nurf will bring to the game is bigger blob, since there is no counter to it. CCP and all you ****** can never see the real issue, it has been like this for fkn 5 years and no matter how you balance the ships, it will always be there until the game discourages blobbing instead of encouraging it. But the loudest voice is that of the goons who always whine about nerfing the only counter to their blob that there is and since CCP has been bending over like a little ***** in heat to the goons for years, this game has been **** and it will continue to be ****. No nerf will change that, it will only bring more whines of "CCP, fix your game" when 3K blob cant do **** due to the lag that the nerf will bring. Idiots.
The "We plucky rebels deserve to have super-imba-instapwn ships to FIGHT THE EVIL POWER" argument kind of falls over when the "plucky rebels" are part of a coalition that controls over 60% of sov 0.0
You're not the Luke Skywalkers in this show man. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 11:20:00 -
[41] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:Supercaps can kill supercaps therefore supercaps aren't overpowered?
OK. No you see its perfectly balanced because if you want to do anything outside of highsec you just have to get your own bigger supercap blob. Are you trying to say you can manage a 45000 member coalition. Get 2 people from your own alliance elected to the CSM. However your entire group can muster to produce a supercapital force? CFC milks 60+ tech moons alone not counting other R64's. I would think that you are mismanaging your isk as alliances or spending it unwisely. Don't be hatin because you made bad strategic decisions.
You mean "strategic decisions" like throwing your alliance mates under a bus and joining the winning team? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3133
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 20:53:00 -
[42] - Quote
BRICKS4BALLS wrote:Obvioulsy the cost of losing 2 or 3 supercarriers far outweighs the cost of 100 bs,
Not by all that much, 100 fleet BS @ ~200 mill each cost about the same as a well fitted supercarrier.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
|
|