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 : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

Author Topic

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.20 06:59:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 20/12/2010 06:46:31
Originally by: Jason Edwards
So they buffed motherships... just months ago. Now you want to nerf them. Where were you during testing? Your changes make moms useless as hell. You're absurd.

Why does taking away their ability to counter sub capitals make them useless? They would are anti capital and supercapital platforms and would still curbstomp capfleets with ease.

Also I was *all over* that thread during testing and FB were my ****ing idea so troll disregarded.


Sorry, but the idea of fighters shooting goto/bombs has been around well before your proposal. Anyhow, proceed with your super capital ultra nerf.

By the way, will fighters bombers be allowed to be assigned while these super carriers hug POS shields?

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.20 07:03:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 20/12/2010 07:03:41
Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 20/12/2010 06:46:31
Originally by: Jason Edwards
So they buffed motherships... just months ago. Now you want to nerf them. Where were you during testing? Your changes make moms useless as hell. You're absurd.

Why does taking away their ability to counter sub capitals make them useless? They would are anti capital and supercapital platforms and would still curbstomp capfleets with ease.

Also I was *all over* that thread during testing and FB were my ****ing idea so troll disregarded.


Sorry, but the idea of fighters shooting goto/bombs has been around well before your proposal. Anyhow, proceed with your super capital ultra nerf.

By the way, will fighters bombers be allowed to be assigned while these super carriers hug POS shields?

Sure there was, but during the prospective changes thread my thread as linked, not previous ones.

And nope sorry, I will still be happily taking my supercarrier away from pos shields for combat little NCDOT person. I realize you guys would stand to lose a lot from this nerf, any alliance that's been heavily reliant on their SC performance and nothing else for the past year does. But that doesn't change the fact it's needed.

We know a supercarrier nerf is incoming. That's been confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt. We just don't know what it contains yet.

The question is do you want it to be something like this or ham fisted like a 50% EHP reduction?

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.20 07:50:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: Marlona Sky on 20/12/2010 07:53:25
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
I will still be happily taking my supercarrier away from pos shields for combat little NCDOT person. I realize you guys would stand to lose a lot from this nerf, any alliance that's been heavily reliant on their SC performance and nothing else for the past year does.


So that is what this is about ehh? An alliance that has been using their supercarriers taking giant dukies all over your sandbox and you think its time for a nerf.

I just was simply correcting you and you burst into tears of rage over an alliance I was in before I quit the game. Laughing

Anyways, I am all for cutting back on capital ship projection. Especially super capitals. More sub caps, less super caps. Just so you know I do like some aspects of your idea. The problem is there is so many nerf in it that super caps will be back to POS hugging and the only time they will see combat is when they are dropped on an opposing force when it is going to a slaughter.

Remove the ability to field any non-fighter/bomber drones from super caps. If they want to Leroy around without a proper support fleet to keep the superstitious from being tacked then that is their problem. Can we at least agree on that?

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.20 07:58:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
I will still be happily taking my supercarrier away from pos shields for combat little NCDOT person. I realize you guys would stand to lose a lot from this nerf, any alliance that's been heavily reliant on their SC performance and nothing else for the past year does.


So that is what this is about ehh? An alliance that has been using their supercarrier taking giant dukies all over your sandbox and you think its time for a nerf.

I just was simply correcting you and you burst into tears of rage over an alliance I was in before I quit the game. Laughing

Anyways, I am all for cutting back on capital ship projection. Especially super capitals. More sub caps, less super caps. Just so you know I do like some aspects of your idea. The problem is there is so many nerf in it that super caps will be back to POS hugging and the only time they will see combat is when they are dropped on an opposing force when it is going to a slaughter.

Remove the ability to field any non-fighter/bomber drones from super caps. If they want to Leroy around without a proper support fleet to keep the superstitious from being tacked then that is their problem. Can we at least agree on that?

We can definitely agree on that but I don't think CCP will simply remove all other drones from supercarriers. Simply giving them a small drone only bay forces them to pick and choose what they want to be able to counter and even then they cant simply spit drones endlessly.

As for your tears comment, this isnt about us fighting them. NCdot has clearly relied on its supercaps and still is. That's their primary worth right now. It makes sense that someone who is in the alliance would dislike a nerf to their bread winner.

These nerfs listed wouldnt ruin supercaps. They would remove a supercaps ability to be a highly mobile **** mobile that can counter anything in the game with only 30-40 ships. The only thing that counters 40 supecarriers is more supercaps. That's broken.

The amount of hictors required to tackle that many even if you bring more supercarriers than them is astronomical because of how quickly 40 supercarriers can melt/nuet down anything able to tackle them. That's broken. I dont think even 50 of them would be enough. You may get 3-6 supercarriers before they had time to react and get out but the simple mathematics of it are incredibly in the SC's favor of surviving.

That's assuming they have zero support. Which seems to be happening more and more. If 40 supercarriers have 200 support, then yes, they should be able to curbstomp damn near anything except more support and supercaps.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.20 08:05:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Jason Edwards
So they buffed motherships... just months ago. Now you want to nerf them. Where were you during testing? Your changes make moms useless as hell. You're absurd.


I realise that you're just trolling (and as usual you're not very good at it), but for the benefit of other readers, the problem with Sisi testing is that the circumstances in which supercaps are typically used on TQ aren't easily replicable. Pre-Dominion testing mostly involved people mashing T2 fit supercaps into each other at the capital FFA beacon in FD- and jerking off in local over their damage notifications. There were few if any organised attempts to determine how they performed in particular battlefield scenarios (for example, how a small gang of supercarriers held out against a large subcap fleet).

What we're seeing on tranquility is the Law of Unintended Consequences in action. Everyone was excited at the prospect of seeing supercaps given a useful battlefield role, but what we've seen with supercarriers has been the introduction of zillion hitpoint gankmobiles with enough free utility slots and drones to counter anything that can be thrown at them - except another larger supercap fleet.

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.20 08:17:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
I will still be happily taking my supercarrier away from pos shields for combat little NCDOT person. I realize you guys would stand to lose a lot from this nerf, any alliance that's been heavily reliant on their SC performance and nothing else for the past year does.


So that is what this is about ehh? An alliance that has been using their supercarrier taking giant dukies all over your sandbox and you think its time for a nerf.

I just was simply correcting you and you burst into tears of rage over an alliance I was in before I quit the game. Laughing

Anyways, I am all for cutting back on capital ship projection. Especially super capitals. More sub caps, less super caps. Just so you know I do like some aspects of your idea. The problem is there is so many nerf in it that super caps will be back to POS hugging and the only time they will see combat is when they are dropped on an opposing force when it is going to a slaughter.

Remove the ability to field any non-fighter/bomber drones from super caps. If they want to Leroy around without a proper support fleet to keep the superstitious from being tacked then that is their problem. Can we at least agree on that?

We can definitely agree on that but I don't think CCP will simply remove all other drones from supercarriers. Simply giving them a small drone only bay forces them to pick and choose what they want to be able to counter and even then they cant simply spit drones endlessly.

As for your tears comment, this isnt about us fighting them. NCdot has clearly relied on its supercaps and still is. That's their primary worth right now. It makes sense that someone who is in the alliance would dislike a nerf to their bread winner.

These nerfs listed wouldnt ruin supercaps. They would remove a supercaps ability to be a highly mobile **** mobile that can counter anything in the game with only 30-40 ships. The only thing that counters 40 supecarriers is more supercaps. That's broken.

The amount of hictors required to tackle that many even if you bring more supercarriers than them is astronomical because of how quickly 40 supercarriers can melt/nuet down anything able to tackle them. That's broken. I dont think even 50 of them would be enough. You may get 3-6 supercarriers before they had time to react and get out but the simple mathematics of it are incredibly in the SC's favor of surviving.

That's assuming they have zero support. Which seems to be happening more and more. If 40 supercarriers have 200 support, then yes, they should be able to curbstomp damn near anything except more support and supercaps.


How do you feel about a change where not all super caps are able to make it to a fight, even if they are online?

Also, I hate to break it to you, I'm not in NCDOT.

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.20 08:26:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Marlona Sky

How do you feel about a change where not all super caps are able to make it to a fight, even if they are online?

Also, I hate to break it to you, I'm not in NCDOT.


You means some arbitrary negative they would get for having a certain amount of supercaps in the system? I think it would only hurt the game and be abused even more than the current mechanics.

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.20 08:59:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: Marlona Sky

How do you feel about a change where not all super caps are able to make it to a fight, even if they are online?

Also, I hate to break it to you, I'm not in NCDOT.


You means some arbitrary negative they would get for having a certain amount of supercaps in the system? I think it would only hurt the game and be abused even more than the current mechanics.


No no. Not that at all. What I mean, and I hope this analogy works, is say capital ship jumping is similar to a ships capacitor. Let's say players have a capacitor the size of a battlecruiser. Now let's say an armor rep is a capital ship. The bigger the rep the faster the capacitor drains and you can't activate it anymore. It would take some time recharge a bit before you could use the rep again but if you cap wad full you could use it a lot in a sprint before you capped out.

So if super caps are large reps and normal caps are medium to small, even if your online with a capital, how active you have been over the last few days jumping will dictate if you can do a jump and make it to a fight. You may he on but you might have to take a non-cap to the fight instead because of your jump capacitor. Super capital and your jump capacitor is too low from you hot dropping stuff left and right the last day or two? Too bad, your going to have to sit this one out.

I'm not saying other changes don't need to happen but instead of 100% of the available super caps showing up at every fight it might be only 50% or something. Also will cut back on superstitious groping on a couple battleship for instant "I Win" stuff because it is not with burning jump capacitor for a couple if typhoons or something.

Does any of that make sense?

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.20 09:27:00 - [39]
 

So you want to give an advantage to people who play Eve rarely and punish those who play frequently.

That sounds like a terrible idea.

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.20 09:48:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
So you want to give an advantage to people who play Eve rarely and punish those who play frequently.

That sounds like a terrible idea.


/facepalm

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.20 09:59:00 - [41]
 

I asked a few other people to translate that really really poorly written post and they all got the same thing out of it I did.

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.20 10:13:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
I asked a few other people to translate that really really poorly written post and they all got the same thing out of it I did.


Hang out with different friends that are not narrow minded and not blinded by political agendas? v0v

Anyways, ill let you get back to nerfing super carriers back to POS ornaments. Laughing

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.20 10:20:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
I asked a few other people to translate that really really poorly written post and they all got the same thing out of it I did.


Hang out with different friends that are not narrow minded and not blinded by political agendas? v0v

Anyways, ill let you get back to nerfing super carriers back to POS ornaments. Laughing

Actually I meant they couldnt gather any message out of that but "Lets punish people for playing frequently".

Maybe your poorly worded block of words can be re worded to be more legible?

Alfa225
Invictus Australis
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2010.12.20 10:55:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
I asked a few other people to translate that really really poorly written post and they all got the same thing out of it I did.


Hang out with different friends that are not narrow minded and not blinded by political agendas? v0v

Anyways, ill let you get back to nerfing super carriers back to POS ornaments. Laughing


The way i Read your horrible, horrible wall of text is that If i want to use my Capital and drop it left and right (which i have done in the past) That I am inventually going to be unable to jump because EVE wants to punish me for using my toy?

Ok how about your idea put into a sensible idea, since personaly, i think your a total idiot, not that I think much more of the idea im out to put out.

Capital Jump Drives become a mod similiar to the subsystems on a T3 cruiser.
In which they can be only jumped a certian ammount of lightyears before they have to be repaired in with a station, some super epic huge nanite paste, or mabey some kind of RR mod from a logi or something, who knows.

Actaully for the new RR mod you could use the Rorqual hull and repurpose it from its carebear lolness to something even more awesome by giving it the ability to repair other capital ships jump drives while in deployed mode. You could call it a Fleet Tender or something like that, and change its ore bay to a Fuel bay.

Please refrain from personal attacks. Spitfire

Trygonus
Posted - 2010.12.20 12:05:00 - [45]
 

The tears in this thread are epic. It sounds like everyone wants them nerfed, but not nerfed in how THEY are using titans and super carriers. Anyways, thumbs up from me to put them back to pos control tower modules.

P.S. - Mrs. Sky needs to pass me some of that stuff. Your imagination hurts peoples feelings too much. Time to back off hun.

captain foivos
Posted - 2010.12.20 19:52:00 - [46]
 

Supercarriers are only killable by more supercarriers. They don't need support fleets, even.

In fact, while we're nerfing supercarriers, let's nerf Dominion's epic failwhale of a sovereignty system.

Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
Posted - 2010.12.21 00:40:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Kazuo Ishiguro on 21/12/2010 00:42:34
I'd quite like to see a relatively cheap dedicated subcap anti-cap ship - we don't yet have anything really matching that description. For example, giving bombers a new variety of torp (somewhat like citadel torps):
  • 3000hp per torp (to reduce vulnerability to smartbombs)
  • 3000m explosion radius
  • 100m/s explosion velocity
  • Allows for 5-10k dps per bomber vs. supercaps, a quarter that vs. caps
  • ~0 dps vs. anything else

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.21 01:22:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro
Edited by: Kazuo Ishiguro on 21/12/2010 00:42:34
I'd quite like to see a relatively cheap dedicated subcap anti-cap ship - we don't yet have anything really matching that description. For example, giving bombers a new variety of torp (somewhat like citadel torps):
  • 3000hp per torp (to reduce vulnerability to smartbombs)
  • 3000m explosion radius
  • 100m/s explosion velocity
  • Allows for 5-10k dps per bomber vs. supercaps, a quarter that vs. caps
  • ~0 dps vs. anything else

Long time ago I had similar idea, it was something like this:

a ship similar to Stealth Bomber firing x-large torpedoes in same way as they fire bombs - non targeted, detonates after certain time period. But unlike current bombs, they would have to travel minimum of 50km before exploding, possibly all 100 km. And unlike current bombs, support ships would be able to lock incoming bombs and destroy them without making them detonate.

That way, capitol fleet would be vulnerable to sub caps unless the capitol fleet has dedicated support to destroy incoming bombs.

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.21 01:51:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro
Edited by: Kazuo Ishiguro on 21/12/2010 00:42:34
I'd quite like to see a relatively cheap dedicated subcap anti-cap ship - we don't yet have anything really matching that description. For example, giving bombers a new variety of torp (somewhat like citadel torps):
  • 3000hp per torp (to reduce vulnerability to smartbombs)
  • 3000m explosion radius
  • 100m/s explosion velocity
  • Allows for 5-10k dps per bomber vs. supercaps, a quarter that vs. caps
  • ~0 dps vs. anything else



These would kill conventional capitals far too easily. They would make dreads and carriers completely useless unless you had complete system control. Cap fights would be a thing of the past.

David Carel
Caldari
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.21 02:01:00 - [50]
 

Not supported. SC are end-game WTFPWNBBQMOBILES and should remain as such.

Venetian Tar
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.21 02:05:00 - [51]
 

Supported. It could do with a little revision but I'm terrible with numbers and/or Eve Online.

Originally by: David Carel
Not supported. SC are end-game WTFPWNBBQMOBILES and should remain as such.


Clueless much?

Chih Neu
Posted - 2010.12.21 02:12:00 - [52]
 


FDIC Agent
Posted - 2010.12.21 02:49:00 - [53]
 

Flame me if you wan't but I do like the idea of the more they jump around, the less likely they will be blobbing on your face like mentioned earlier. These changes do very little to keep them from dropping 50+ on a fleet of 50 normal capitals.

Add more nerfs to your proposal so they are only really useful for hugging a pos tower.

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.21 04:43:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: FDIC Agent
Flame me if you wan't but I do like the idea of the more they jump around, the less likely they will be blobbing on your face like mentioned earlier. These changes do very little to keep them from dropping 50+ on a fleet of 50 normal capitals.

Add more nerfs to your proposal so they are only really useful for hugging a pos tower.

This is what we call an obvious troll. But thanks for the bump dude.

Suitonia
Gallente
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2010.12.21 05:26:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Jason Edwards
So they buffed motherships... just months ago. Now you want to nerf them. Where were you during testing? Your changes make moms useless as hell. You're absurd.


Do you actually play this game? Or do you just pay CCP to be able to post terrible suggestions on the Assembly hall?

Rip Minner
Gallente
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
Posted - 2010.12.21 06:24:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
So you want to give an advantage to people who play Eve rarely and punish those who play frequently.

That sounds like a terrible idea.


/facepalm


Well he is right Marlona Sky. If your in a SuperCap your stuck in the thing 24/7. It's the nature of the beast. Now if they let the damn things be Docked then I would be down with a Jump Cap on them. But as is right now they cant get out of the damn things to go play in something alse. I know Make a Alt. But thats lame too.ugh

HolyNerfBatman
Posted - 2010.12.21 10:52:00 - [57]
 

<< Shocked

A bit over the top. Back it off some so they will turn into worthless ships. Then, and only then will you get more support.

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.21 11:02:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: HolyNerfBatman
<< Shocked

A bit over the top. Back it off some so they will turn into worthless ships. Then, and only then will you get more support.

I would be greatly interested in hearing why you think these changes would make them worthless.

They would still
) Demolish capital fleets
) Out DPS anything under them in size
) Be able to outrep entire fleets worth of damage one eachother
) Have the EHP of a POS

HolyNerfBatman
Posted - 2010.12.21 11:54:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: HolyNerfBatman
<< Shocked

A bit over the top. Back it off some so they will turn into worthless ships. Then, and only then will you get more support.

I would be greatly interested in hearing why you think these changes would make them worthless.

They would still
) Demolish capital fleets
) Out DPS anything under them in size
) Be able to outrep entire fleets worth of damage one eachother
) Have the EHP of a POS


All your proposal does is encourage them to only be fielded when it will be an ultra blob on someones face. Come on man, you should know better than with your half ass idea here.

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.21 11:57:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: HolyNerfBatman
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: HolyNerfBatman
<< Shocked

A bit over the top. Back it off some so they will turn into worthless ships. Then, and only then will you get more support.

I would be greatly interested in hearing why you think these changes would make them worthless.

They would still
) Demolish capital fleets
) Out DPS anything under them in size
) Be able to outrep entire fleets worth of damage one eachother
) Have the EHP of a POS


All your proposal does is encourage them to only be fielded when it will be an ultra blob on someones face. Come on man, you should know better than with your half ass idea here.

No it ensures they will be deployed with support of a subcapital fleet. If for IT that means an ultra blob then so be it. That isn't how it is for all alliances though


Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (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