open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Supercarrier Nerf
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13]

Author Topic

Vialle Shadowflame
Posted - 2011.06.22 06:04:00 - [361]
 

Edited by: Vialle Shadowflame on 22/06/2011 06:16:43
Originally by: David Hassan
Edited by: David Hassan on 09/05/2011 00:23:01

I agree with the OP, also here is one of my ideas from another thread regarding Super Capitals.


Currently, Super Capital ships can be used for 'risk free' ganks.

It is not uncommon for a supercarrier to log off with aggro and dissappear before anything but the largest of fleets can dispatch it.


My proposal is this:

Super Capital ships should never disappear from space. A ship that large should require the infrastructure of an empire to support it.

Add a new POS module for 'docking' Supercapitals at a POS. This will keep them safe from bumping.

This will force players to have said infrastructure to actually support these behemoths. It might also slow super capital proliferation, as people will actually have to support them logistically with fuel for the POS.

This is a rough idea, but I think it has merit.


People will just leave them cloaked indefinitely with a PC running 23/7, relog, recloak. Although you could also make them unable to cloak :)

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.07.08 05:35:00 - [362]
 

Edited by: Mara Rinn on 08/07/2011 05:37:43
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Jamming 30-40 supercaps would take at least 100 dedicated ECM boats if not more using all the proper racial jammers and we all know what drones tend to do against those who are jamming their host. This would just result in a lot of dead ECM boats followed by the rest of the subcaps.


"We all know" that drones will keep attacking their assigned target. They only attack aggressors when there are no assigned targets. Even given the assumption that fighters and drones are set to attack the ECM boats, a Scorpion can effectively ECM from ~100km, providing ample opportunity to warp in, jam, warp elsewhere on grid, continue jamming. Tactics can be devised to accomplish the task once the EWAR immunity is removed.

It will take far less than 100 dedicated ECM boats (what's a "dedicated" ECM boat?) to interrupt the repping chain of a supercarrier fleet. Given the sensor strength of an Aeon for example - 150 radar. Using a Scorpion with a nominal 10 sensor strength on each jammer, that's 1/15 chance of jamming, each cycle of each jammer. Thus it is highly likely that a fleet of 8 or so Scorpions operating at maximum range could interrupt the lock of a supercarrier on each attempt. Combine that with some heavy sensor damping (1 module per battleship in the attacking fleet, for example) to slow down the relock, and the ***** in the armour is revealed.

Supercarriers with their current statistics will still be phenomenally powerful, but they will have *****s* in their armour which can be exploited. Your argument about Titans being able to single-shot an ECM boat every 15 seconds is pointless, since the Titans will have plenty of targets to choose from - why would they pick ECM specifically, instead of the heavy interdictors, the Bhaalgorns, the recons, or the other capitals and supercapitals?

In addition to removing EWAR immunity, moving the +2 fighters bonus from the hull to the high slot modules will force supercarriers to choose between fleet boosting, logistics or DPS.

* a crack, cleft or fissure, also a slang perjorative term for Vherokior & Jin Mei.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.07.15 15:14:00 - [363]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 15/07/2011 15:20:13


Quick, dirty and efficient supercapital fixes...

All:
* remove EWAR immunity, or, ALTERNATIVELY, have EWAR modules work at 50% effectiveness against them
* PREFERABLE : add jump drive "spool up" time (not very long, under a minute)
* OPTIONAL : logoff "vanishing" timers doubled (or even tripled)

Supercarriers also:
* bomber-only bay separate from drone bay (which is made too small to fit a fighter)
* change +2 bonus to controlled (now only) bombers from "always on" to a +2 boost for one DCU per level

Harry Eyeball
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:22:00 - [364]
 

Well done ed ! very well thought out ...... kudos !

Sigarni Green
Posted - 2011.09.02 07:49:00 - [365]
 

Taking the shear cost of super carriers in account and the inability to balance things in any likeness to reality(Ie a ship that size ould have so many gun batteries on it to deal with smaller vessels) The current neuting defence against hic's and dics are fairly well balanced imo.
Some people are saying that it is a risk free ganking tool. but that is only if you are reckless. The whole idea of 0.0 is to be high risk, nothing is stopping you from dropping your own supercapital fleet or a fleet of neuting tempests onto a ganker.
Look at the amout of carriers that would be required to take down 1 super carrier. If they are in a remote repping chain then a single sc will be sure of not killing them and dying. Permitted you can get it bubbled, it is not a buff feature it is a balancing feature.
8 carriers to a super carrier, you have a fight and they all die, the carrier pilots get insurance payout of 50% of ship and fit, supercaps don't get to have platinum insurance.
If don't want groups with 50 supercaps floating about and pawning everything in their way. Don't weaken ships that are only able to counter what they are worth but create a game culture where there would be no benefit in controlling half the map for precious moon goo. But rather that you wil have smaller groupsdefending their own small space where they can generate enough income that it is only worth taking if you can populate it heavily and thus get the isk out.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.09.02 08:17:00 - [366]
 

Edited by: Malcanis on 02/09/2011 08:41:56
Originally by: Sigarni Green
Taking the shear cost of super carriers in account and the inability to balance things in any likeness to reality(Ie a ship that size ould have so many gun batteries on it to deal with smaller vessels) The current neuting defence against hic's and dics are fairly well balanced imo.
Some people are saying that it is a risk free ganking tool. but that is only if you are reckless. The whole idea of 0.0 is to be high risk, nothing is stopping you from dropping your own supercapital fleet or a fleet of neuting tempests onto a ganker.
Look at the amout of carriers that would be required to take down 1 super carrier. If they are in a remote repping chain then a single sc will be sure of not killing them and dying. Permitted you can get it bubbled, it is not a buff feature it is a balancing feature.
8 carriers to a super carrier, you have a fight and they all die, the carrier pilots get insurance payout of 50% of ship and fit, supercaps don't get to have platinum insurance.
If don't want groups with 50 supercaps floating about and pawning everything in their way. Don't weaken ships that are only able to counter what they are worth but create a game culture where there would be no benefit in controlling half the map for precious moon goo. But rather that you wil have smaller groupsdefending their own small space where they can generate enough income that it is only worth taking if you can populate it heavily and thus get the isk out.


Balancing on cost alone has been a failed argument since 2006. In an era when a single tech moon provides an income of billions of ISK per week, then arguing that a ship that costs 50 times as much should be able to take on 50 times as many is simply nonsensical. T2 Cruisers cost 50 times as much as a T1 cruiser, but no-one with half a brain thinks that they should be able to take on 50 T1 cruisers and survive.


Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only