open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal]Supercapital balancing without NERFBAT
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Furb Killer
Posted - 2011.05.26 10:19:00 - [31]

Originally by: Rented
Honestly, simply leaving things imbalanced and broken with the hopes that a mechanic change like this would make supercaps too obnoxious to use... seems like a bad idea. This 'fix' is like smearing crap on a public restroom stall that's out of order, it doesn't fix anything, just discourages the use of what's broken.

Supercaps would still be imbalanced/uncounterable, and 'even more expensive' doesn't really fix that.

This pretty much. I do think the idea has some merit, but only as part of a larger package since this does not actually fix that SCs are simply overpowered in combat.

Posted - 2011.05.27 12:39:00 - [32]

SCs are uberweapons, and the check in logistics would really bring them under better control. Likewise, have jump or non-jump freighters capable of directly resupplying them.

Make them persistant in game, too. If you can't log them, why be able to vanish with them? Put a key on the lock so only the owner can get in.

Enclave Community
Posted - 2011.06.03 18:12:00 - [33]

Edited by: LetItbee on 03/06/2011 18:53:44

Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.06.04 17:52:00 - [34]

Scarriers do need something done to them, or however (and probably alraedy proposed) Make dreadnaughts XLarge weapnons far more devestating when used against SCAPs

This has two effects, revives the currently underused dreadnaught and brings down the I win button effect of super carriers.

But supported as somethign needs doing.

The Treehugger
The Treehugger Corp
Posted - 2011.06.04 18:52:00 - [35]

Not down the same path as your ideas, but a way to counter the Super Carrier blobs could be a capital size smart bomb, or, give dreads 50% added damage / range pr level on smart bombs when sieged.

Also a capital ship warp disruptor to fit on carriers that can hold down super carriers / titans would solve a lot of the issues.

Posted - 2011.06.10 08:57:00 - [36]

Edited by: Tinky-Winky on 10/06/2011 08:59:25

Drunk GanG
Reckless Chavs
Posted - 2011.06.10 08:58:00 - [37]


Dissonance Corp
Posted - 2011.07.20 03:17:00 - [38]

Increase the cost of SC to 40bil... case solved. Dreads already deal titan dps, so you can't ask for more and SC were made to wtfpwn dreads and co.

Omara Otawan
Posted - 2011.07.20 05:22:00 - [39]

Originally by: Hermosa Diosas

Interesting idea but for alliances that make billions in moon gold this will have no effect on their pockets - why cant ppl realise that!

Having to organize refueling after a long-distance jump will effectively reduce their power projection capabilties considerably.

Given the amount of fuel that would be needed for a moderately sized supercarrier fleet going by the OP proposal, that would leave that fleet in a very vulnerable position after deployment at maximum jump range.

And yes, it will have a huge effect on their pockets. Look at the numbers on typical killmails with supercarriers involved, you'll see 20+ regularly.

To jump a fleet of 20 to their maximum range, it would cost the respective alliance 6 billion.

Now imagine a larger engagement with 60 supers on each side. And keep in mind the loser might not only find his supers pulling the emergency logoff, but also stranded with the need to bring in massive quantities of fuel to hostile space.

Good idea, not sure if it needs to be that extreme, but the fuel cost definitely should be increased a whole lot and the fuel logistics made more important.

Ominous Corp
Posted - 2011.07.20 08:39:00 - [40]

/signed awesome idea

Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.20 11:03:00 - [41]

Seeing so many supports to this idea is extremely depressing, and demonstrates exactly how these imbalances arise in the first place. Ship balance cannot be achieved through cost-based nerfs, and this is especially true when the ships are so prevalent ingame already. The reason titans were so imbalanced the first time around is because CCP assumed that their cost would keep numbers low, with occasional ship deaths to keep balance.
In fact it just served to enable the rich to buy more and keep maintain the status quo by never losing titans.

The logistical aspect of this change becomes more of an annoyance than a nerf. Established groups and alliances already have plenty of suitable logistics support, and there is no real risk as the underlying balance issues of supercaps versus everything else is not addressed.

The overall effect of a change like this would be:

1) Established and well-funded groups with many supercaps will be unaffected. They will cover the fuel costs with an alliance wallet and use their numbers to dominate nearby territory - further increasing their strength by taking high value moons and similar assets.
2) Smaller groups with less cash will find themselves struggling even more to use their prized flagships. Many will simply opt to sell them onto the richer groups mentioned above.
3) Null-sec space in general will become more stagnant, as alliances leave their supercap fleets at home due to cost of movement. Wars are then degraded to attacking sub-caps and capitals versus defending supercaps - which is still as broken as ever.

Fix the underlying balance issues, don't just slap a new price tag on and call it fixed

Rexthor Hammerfists
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.07.20 12:21:00 - [42]

Supported, this as a part to make the use of SCs more expensive is a good way to decrease ridicolous usage of them. Include a much increased cost of fighters and fighterbomber, doomsday fuel cost and maybe even remote ecm cost.

Scroobius Pip
Posted - 2011.07.20 12:23:00 - [43]

Edited by: Scroobius Pip on 20/07/2011 12:49:18
Edited by: Scroobius Pip on 20/07/2011 12:44:29
Edited by: Scroobius Pip on 20/07/2011 12:25:03
Originally by: The Treehugger

Also a capital ship warp disruptor to fit on carriers that can hold down super carriers / titans would solve a lot of the issues.

This, its ******ed that one capital ship cant tackle another one, also change the triage module to effect only the repair/hit points of the ship itself not for remote repair.

RP hat, carrier points SC (maybe not titan?), pushes the triage button and survives at least long enough to do some good. HP buff to the carrier itself would need to be significant (I don't know what that would be, 400% off of the top of my head). Add into that a massive boost to self rep and all of a sudden you have the chance of a fleet of 20 1bil ships at least holding there own against a handful of 20bil ones.

With an eye on the longevity of EVE it's much easier for the "little guy" to aspire to a carrier (I'm talking players less than a year) and to feel like they have a chance against the big boys. No aspiring alliance is going to risk to go and take a foothold in nullsec if they don't feel they compete at any level.

Come up with a counter over a nerf any day, guaranteed to **** less people off and add more interest to the game. You can add but you cant take away as they say....

Pages: 1 [2]

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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only