open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked HP Boost for Sub-Super Capitals
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

Author Topic

Irae Ragwan
Posted - 2010.09.28 17:16:00 - [181]
 

Originally by: Phoenix vajaa
Edited by: Phoenix vajaa on 28/09/2010 11:10:16
Edited by: Phoenix vajaa on 28/09/2010 11:09:12
I have said it before and its been said before.
The problem is not the super caps.

ITS THE GOD DAMN BLOB MECHANIC AND TARGET CALLING OF PRIMARYS FOR A ENTIRE BLOB.
15 ON 1 IS NOT FUN GAMEPLAY BE IT IN A SC'S VS DREADS OR BE IT 15 DREADS VS 1 CARRIER.
OR 15 CARRIERS VS 1 DREAD.

BLOBS PRIMARYING 1 SHIP IS BAD MMMMKAY.





The "LOOK AT THE SILLY MONKEY!" defense doesn't really work unless you get in earlier.

Fact is, if 15 dreads are on the field, the SC is going to gtfo unless there are hics and logi to keep him there. If 1 SC is out and finds a couple dreads, lol, those dreads are ****ed.

Risk v. Reward doesn't seem to apply to SCs like it does every other ship. We've shown the price ratio comparison to effectivly tackle them is far beyond that of the ships below. There shouldn't be a magical isk-line-in-the-sand where everything upward requires comparatively much more (based on hull price of the target) risk in tackle and support to just hold it (to say nothing of killing it).

Blobbing is a seperate issue. So if you want to talk about blobs then start your own thread.

dreamingtoday
Posted - 2010.09.28 17:24:00 - [182]
 

To be honest I don't see the problem with the super caps I personally see a problem with the cyno mechanics so you never know if you are going to be hot dropped.
So how about creating a cyno ship so not everyman and his 15 alts can use it without some serious training, on the the flip side make it that the cyno uses more fuel depending on what it's jumping in so lets give it a a max fuel bay that only allows 4 supercaps to jump in before it runs out, this is just a random figure I pulled out of thin air.

I think this would solve some of the issues as you would know when said cyno ship enters the field you got caps incoming. This would make the use of caps a bit more stratigic and give the defending force a chance of stopping the incoming caps but at this moment in time it's too easy to deploy caps

Relena mearfire
Posted - 2010.09.28 19:05:00 - [183]
 

Originally by: Irae Ragwan
Originally by: Phoenix vajaa
Edited by: Phoenix vajaa on 28/09/2010 11:10:16
Edited by: Phoenix vajaa on 28/09/2010 11:09:12
I have said it before and its been said before.
The problem is not the super caps.

ITS THE GOD DAMN BLOB MECHANIC AND TARGET CALLING OF PRIMARYS FOR A ENTIRE BLOB.
15 ON 1 IS NOT FUN GAMEPLAY BE IT IN A SC'S VS DREADS OR BE IT 15 DREADS VS 1 CARRIER.
OR 15 CARRIERS VS 1 DREAD.

BLOBS PRIMARYING 1 SHIP IS BAD MMMMKAY.





The "LOOK AT THE SILLY MONKEY!" defense doesn't really work unless you get in earlier.

Fact is, if 15 dreads are on the field, the SC is going to gtfo unless there are hics and logi to keep him there. If 1 SC is out and finds a couple dreads, lol, those dreads are ****ed.

Risk v. Reward doesn't seem to apply to SCs like it does every other ship. We've shown the price ratio comparison to effectivly tackle them is far beyond that of the ships below. There shouldn't be a magical isk-line-in-the-sand where everything upward requires comparatively much more (based on hull price of the target) risk in tackle and support to just hold it (to say nothing of killing it).

Blobbing is a seperate issue. So if you want to talk about blobs then start your own thread.


Actually i think and so do many others that this is correct. Fixing the SC Vs dread issue is like a band aid to a gunshot. The imbalance is stematic. It manifests in this issue and ones like it. If you fix blobs and the core targeting issue you fix the main issue and allow for a balance to be applied that will not need adjusting later.

If you fail to do this. down the road there will be cries of the next abuse of a shiptype.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.09.28 19:18:00 - [184]
 

Originally by: Relena mearfire

Actually i think and so do many others that this is correct. Fixing the SC Vs dread issue is like a band aid to a gunshot. The imbalance is stematic. It manifests in this issue and ones like it. If you fix blobs and the core targeting issue you fix the main issue and allow for a balance to be applied that will not need adjusting later.



I'm not really sure this follows because the problem isn't "blobbing". It's that 20 supercaps are a superior force to any amount of caps that the grid can reasonably maintain. It's kinda the opposite problem of blobbing, actually....

-Liang

SickSeven
Simplistic Syndicate
Posted - 2010.09.28 19:28:00 - [185]
 

Originally by: dreamingtoday
To be honest I don't see the problem with the super caps I personally see a problem with the cyno mechanics so you never know if you are going to be hot dropped.
So how about creating a cyno ship so not everyman and his 15 alts can use it without some serious training, on the the flip side make it that the cyno uses more fuel depending on what it's jumping in so lets give it a a max fuel bay that only allows 4 supercaps to jump in before it runs out, this is just a random figure I pulled out of thin air.

I think this would solve some of the issues as you would know when said cyno ship enters the field you got caps incoming. This would make the use of caps a bit more stratigic and give the defending force a chance of stopping the incoming caps but at this moment in time it's too easy to deploy caps


I think this is a very good way to slow the use of SC's for quick ganks, and make it more of a commitment to use them. Not to mention it would give defenders an extra step in preparing defense. I still think it is ludicrous that you only have to commit a T1 frigate to bring in even one Super Capital. And in low sec this is even more laughable as the cost to bring SCs in, is infinitesimal to the cost of even holding one down(with no garuantee of a kill)

Example: 1 Probe frig w/ cyno = 2mil(high estimate) to bring in any number of SCs (16-20bil each)
versus
1 HIC(130mil for the HULL of a Broadsword[lowest price on eve central]) for a chance at holding A(as in single) SC for more than a few minutes.

The fully fitted probe is 1.5% the Cost of just your HIC hull.

So you only have to commit 2mil isk, to bring in 20x SC for a quick carrier gank in low-sec. 2mil committed to bring in 320bil of whoopass that is practically unstoppable in low-sec.

To tackle those 20 SC, with ships that cannot recieve RR while tackling, you would need at least 20 HICs(2 points each), cycling points which would require some very savvy coordination, plus a handful or more of logistics ships to rep up the HICs as they cycled out of tackle. Now, just counting for the HIC hulls, that is 2.6bil, just in TACKLE hulls!

So to be more fair, let us say that a Rapier is used for cyno(more realistic). 102mil on Eve Central. So to bring in 320bil isk of whoopass you committed only 3.9% of the isk it costs just to have a chance at tackling all 20 SCs(2.6bil for HIC cost).

Or another way, you only committed 102 million to bring in 3,137 times that in nearly unstoppable wtfpwnmobiles.


And this is totally cool?

(this wasn't directed at anyone specific, "you" could be anybody)

Irae Ragwan
Posted - 2010.09.28 20:13:00 - [186]
 

Originally by: Relena mearfire

If you fail to do this. down the road there will be cries of the next abuse of a shiptype.



That's a tangent. You can blob any kind of ship. Blobs don't create the issues with SCs. SCs requiring an exorbatent amount of isk value in pure tackle, to say nothing of killing one, is the issue at hand.

Kail Storm
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.09.28 21:53:00 - [187]
 

Irae what exact change are you proposing.

Be specific please.

I agree with the fact that SC`s in small ganks perform very well and or ok but in huge numbers can be a problem, just like Titans.

Blobbing to me is what makescombat in Eve unfair and not that fun anymore.

But I agree SC`s are hard as hell to tackle, so What do you think should be done exactly.

Irae Ragwan
Posted - 2010.09.28 23:27:00 - [188]
 

Originally by: Kail Storm
Irae what exact change are you proposing.



I like a combination of things posted.

At minimum, SCs being point-immune should be disabled in lowsec.
More reasonably, they should also either shed ehp.
At best, both of the above and give bombers a harder time hitting sub-caps.

SickSeven
Simplistic Syndicate
Posted - 2010.09.28 23:56:00 - [189]
 

Originally by: Irae Ragwan
Originally by: Kail Storm
Irae what exact change are you proposing.



I like a combination of things posted.

At minimum, SCs being point-immune should be disabled in lowsec.
More reasonably, they should also either shed ehp.
At best, both of the above and give bombers a harder time hitting sub-caps.


I think their restrictions in Low-sec need to be more:
1. No disruption/scram immunity, and NO Fighter Bombers at all in low-sec.
2. I still think they should require a different type of cyno, or something that makes moving them and bringing them to bear on the battlefield a lot more costly.(low sec and 0.0)
3. I think if you do #1 and #2, their EHP is fine.

Cpt Smasher
Posted - 2010.09.29 23:07:00 - [190]
 

Edited by: Cpt Smasher on 29/09/2010 23:08:38
might as well throw my .02 isk in.
Fighter bombers tend to be the crazy badass weapons.
Restrict fighter bombers to nullsec.

To much drastic change is going to make them useless again.

Alot of great ideas here though.

ED: Oh and up the production costs. Seriously.

Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.09.30 12:32:00 - [191]
 

Other then a complete overhaul of fleet mechanics (again) - I don't think its the strength of the mom (you can call it what you like, I prefer the 'old' name) or its massive HP that is the issue, its the Dreads that need help:

1) If we keep the current siege mode mechanic (10 mins, no RR) - then dreads need a massive, and I mean massive HP boost when they go into siege to withstand the dps coming in - dreads are about big tanks, and big guns.

2) We drop seige mode, accept that the dread is the battleship of cap warfare and fix the wepon systems so they can move, shoot and do great damage to larger targets. The problem with low sec dreads was not their guns, it was the Moros' drones anyway.

I don't think moms need a nurf except fighter-bomber dps. Its really a bit too high, and they deploy too many of them. Lower the number of fighter-bombers that can be deployed, and rebalance their dps so they do about 75% of what they do now in terms of dps. Highlight their logistical roles and push for mechanics that restore that role to them. Sure, they are front line ships, but front line logistical ships. . . not the replacement for dreads they have become.


ultimatly, I disagree with the idea of limiting targeting, thats stupid. And really, money is never an object - the only thing you do if you ramp up the price of jumping or whatever is make isotopes more expensive, which makes the ice miners more rich, and so on. . .

what needs to be 'rebalanced' is the dreads, the role of the mom was to have a front line carrier - not in terms of having massive dps, but in terms of having massive HP, e-war immunity, and a lot of staying power in a world where titans would take apart a spider-fleet. What has happened instead is, the moms have become the the gank machines - I think this is the main error.




Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.09.30 12:49:00 - [192]
 

I dont really get all these ideas of only restricting them in low sec. Sure you got some more possibilities of tackling them in 0.0, but still then they are just way too effective compared to caps. That only fixes a small part of the problem.

Similar to special cyno stuff, that might fix super cap hotdropping, but for me also capital hotdropping can use a nerf. An old, but still good imo, idea is to just give all jump capable ships a jump drive warm up timer (black ops for example probably a relative short one). So lets say if cyno is popped you can initiate jump to it, but it will take 30 seconds before the jump actually happens. If you want you make it for super caps longer due to their higher mass or whatever RP reason.

And then you need to completely redesign super caps so they dont make normal caps, especially dreads, redundant.

Jaari Val'Dara
Caldari
Deep Space Nomads Corp
Posted - 2010.09.30 14:07:00 - [193]
 

Originally by: RagnarRox
I think that all the major Blobbing in Eve could be fixed or at least helped alot by a few simple things 1 of those being, Stacking Nerf of targeting the same ships.

Its not a new Idea but a great one, this last year I have seen some of the older "Rocks of Eve" Like Mistress Suffering and alot of the CH guys get bored with the game as it is now being blob or lose it, basically now you need massive numbers of people to hold or take space from a 100 times better group of only a few hundred, this is breaking EVE IMO.

We need to seriously consider "Target Stacking Nerfs" Similiar to Module stacking but less abbrupt, I want a system where the 8th targeter on a ship does .01% DMG. For the RP`ers or others it would be a if all the active Targeting would screw sensors and make targeting in space at such incredible ranges and speed impossible.

For us practical players who dont just want the Majority to take over even if they are stupid and cant play as fight as good as the rest, its as simple as making even huge battles Seem well smaller.

As of Now Blob on Blob or Blob on Gang is very boring and only requires 1 FC to command all 200 Ships to fire on 1 target vaporising him, this isnt skill the target has 0 CHance. By making 8 players only be able to apply DMG it would actually split things up, FC`s would need to call multiples and we actually would have to work in units, you know like the real military. For all those "Eve isnt supposed to be real but fun" guys...Blobs arent fun the way they are now, not even for the blobbers, thy may be happy with the results but the actual motion of it is boring.

Anyways if you did this along with some Movement nerfs to SC`s you would end up with basically a max of * SC`s that are viable on 1 Target, as well as 2 or 3 of them to be better suited hitting another target.

This would also mean for certain scenarios Reppers would need to chose wisely as more than 8 targeting you to rep is also nerfed, this would add more depth to the game and further the "Wheat from the CHaff"

FC`s would need to make choices, do we run 5 man teams and kill with lower DMG or 8 man teams and possibly waste 3 ships. Eve is a game of choice and consequence, right now who has more wins, Look at D00M far and away a better tighter more organised Alli/Corp but they cant hold sov versus the Nap Train of evil with there 50k + Lemmings Wink

Skill should take the day, numbers also matter yes but right now thats all that does. Numbers needs to be 1 Equation, in my system if you had multiple teams of 8 you would still beat the 1 team, but the 1 team might kick 2 teams asses rather than just insta melt from your 10k meta 3 Weapons.


+1

Target stacking nerfs is the best idea ever.
Fleets would become way more fun when squad commanders would need to do something more than provide boosts. For once we would have proper chain of command - FC commanding WC, WC giving orders to SC, which in turn would be commanding the squads.

Morgs44
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams
The KWFL Republic
Posted - 2010.09.30 14:37:00 - [194]
 

Super Carriers are game breakers atm.
Most poeple would rather one of them then a titan (think of how many you could get with the price of a titan)
They are waaaaaaaaaay to powerful in low sec and fleets of them discourage any kind fleet thats not nano or has 20 sc of there own on stand by. Dreads are now billion dollar dust collectors (really who shoots pos's anymore) And carriers are a good haulers and mission runner support ;-)

CCP will have to fix them sooner or later.
Its just they dont give a sh#t about pvp atm, they care more about pve and play with planet.

But i want a nyx, they are sweet as.
YARRRR!!

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2010.09.30 14:55:00 - [195]
 

Random idea:

give cyno fields "mass allowance" similiar to wormholes :)

Mr Peanut420
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.09.30 18:48:00 - [196]
 

Originally by: Atius Tirawa


2) We drop seige mode, accept that the dread is the battleship of cap warfare and fix the wepon systems so they can move, shoot and do great damage to larger targets. The problem with low sec dreads was not their guns, it was the Moros' drones anyway.
to them. Sure, they are front line ships, but front line logistical ships. . . not the replacement for dreads they have become.


Yup! THIS IS THE SOLUTION. REMOVE SIEGE, MAKE CAPITALS FUN AGAIN.

Dreads can't hit small stuff already, what would be the harm in giving them the damage and tracking they currently have in siege, but out of siege. They would still be slow, they would still be easy to point, and it wouldn't be suicide to try and fight SCs with them. Or how about this, make siege module something you can turn on and turn off like a cloaking device. Really, would this break the game?

Vormico
Posted - 2010.09.30 20:54:00 - [197]
 

Originally by: Mr Peanut420
Originally by: Atius Tirawa


2) We drop seige mode, accept that the dread is the battleship of cap warfare and fix the wepon systems so they can move, shoot and do great damage to larger targets. The problem with low sec dreads was not their guns, it was the Moros' drones anyway.
to them. Sure, they are front line ships, but front line logistical ships. . . not the replacement for dreads they have become.


Yup! THIS IS THE SOLUTION. REMOVE SIEGE, MAKE CAPITALS FUN AGAIN.

Dreads can't hit small stuff already, what would be the harm in giving them the damage and tracking they currently have in siege, but out of siege. They would still be slow, they would still be easy to point, and it wouldn't be suicide to try and fight SCs with them. Or how about this, make siege module something you can turn on and turn off like a cloaking device. Really, would this break the game?


Make Siege last 10 seconds or something like that per cycle but give it a 5 minute delay before you able to turn it back on, thus able to get out of it right away but not able to turn it back on right away (so you can't completly abuse the module by dropping out of it, getting repped up by your logistics then popping right back in siege)...and same with triage

Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.10.01 07:35:00 - [198]
 

Originally by: Vormico

Make Siege last 10 seconds or something like that per cycle but give it a 5 minute delay before you able to turn it back on, thus able to get out of it right away but not able to turn it back on right away (so you can't completly abuse the module by dropping out of it, getting repped up by your logistics then popping right back in siege)...and same with triage


honestly, I think we either fix the mechanic of siege, or accept that cap warfare is not as fixed as it was origionally intended. Th reason its more fluid now is:
1) Sov mechanics have changed, the need for a specilized pos killer is not that important anymore. and
2) Moms bring mobility, logistics and dps together in one handsome package.

So back to my post - either we accept that siege warfare is dead as it is imagined now, or, we fix it. This 10 second or 20 second siegee crap will not work in the high lag enviornments - and lag is a major consideration in this stuff mind you.

Ultimatly, moms need a a dps reduction tow here they do less damage then a dread.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2010.10.01 10:10:00 - [199]
 

The problem is there is no real balance for SC. They can do both, bashing big targets as small as well, they are general-purpose ship. You got a problem, drop a blob of SC to that -> solved.
Currently, there is no real counter to that.
So give us a counter in form of boosted dread - boost their DPS and drop the siege duration to 5 min.

Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.10.01 14:42:00 - [200]
 

Originally by: Robert Caldera
The problem is there is no real balance for SC. They can do both, bashing big targets as small as well, they are general-purpose ship. You got a problem, drop a blob of SC to that -> solved.
Currently, there is no real counter to that.
So give us a counter in form of boosted dread - boost their DPS and drop the siege duration to 5 min.


Exactly - when capitals first came out, people complained about carriers because they were the 'swiss army knife' of pvp - SCs are the same thing but much more. I still think the whole siege warfare mod needs to go as long as moms are what they are. Dreads should be the capital killers, not moms.

anyway, I am sure nothing will change since these topics seem to come back over and over again. Capitals were well concived, titans were well concived - moms have always lacked a role - I thought the idea that they would be massive front line 'super-carriers' was a great idea - but honestly - they also inherited the same problems carriers had - namely, they are too damn versitile.

Shade IX
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams
Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
Posted - 2010.10.02 12:52:00 - [201]
 

SC have distroyed Cap warfare, they are totally OP. either get rid of Fighter bombers or get rid of the SC immunities. Please CCP take heed and put some fun back in the game bring back the Dread!

Kail Storm
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.10.02 17:53:00 - [202]
 

Would it be a super bad Idea to make Carriers be able to field say 5-7 Fighter Bombers? This would make them much more gankier while sacraficing alot of there space.

For this to work FB`s need to when deployed have a 1-2 minute "Cooldown" where you cant warp out, call it a "Landing Time" since they are slow and piloted unlike Drones.

Also I would like to see dreads be able to use fighters, while seiged.

Lastly I think FB`s should have the same tracking as a Sieged Rev turret, right now they can hit bS`s and pop em fast, they need to have horrible tracking.

This would make carriers a litte more powerful but mostly make Carriers 4 of them tank a SC and still be able to kill it because the 4 of them would be Same DPS as a MOM, as of now 4 Copuld tank a SC but never kill it unless 5-10 dreads come.

If Mom`s are really super carrirs than they should get all the perks of Mom`s just smaller, So I say give em 1/4 the FB DMG, and this would go along way.IMO IDK it may be stupid but seems to me 4 on 1 Should win or at least be very close, which it would be.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.10.03 01:24:00 - [203]
 

Kail, the right answer when you have a couple of super powerful items is to nerf those items. If you feel that 4 carriers vs a SC should be a close match, then try toning SCs down to that level.

-Liang

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.10.03 07:00:00 - [204]
 

That will be a close fight already. However if you increase the numbers the SCs will just alpha the carriers, making RR useless.

Shade IX
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams
Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
Posted - 2010.10.03 22:54:00 - [205]
 

Edited by: Shade IX on 03/10/2010 23:02:11
Edited by: Shade IX on 03/10/2010 23:01:49
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Kail, the right answer when you have a couple of super powerful items is to nerf those items. If you feel that 4 carriers vs a SC should be a close match, then try toning SCs down to that level.

-Liang


SIGNED/

There are many players out there how have dreads which never undock now and carriers are only being used as jump freighters. cap warfare has been ruined by SC's for that the average player suffers. CCP needs to stop encuraging elitism and nerf the SC asap.

I think Dreads are far more important to the game than SC as they are accessible to more long term players and the right game balance needs to be infavor of the majority gamer not the elite few.

Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.10.07 07:46:00 - [206]
 

I think thats a bad argument, even if I agree with the end result.

the reason moms need to be nurfed - and only their dps needs to be nurfed really, is because dps should be a dread thing because that is their role - not because more people fly them. when you take a ship, any ship, and make it supplant the role of another ship almost entierly - then that previous ship class gathers dust. add to that the prohibative price and the generally ill-concived nature of moms, and you have our current situation.

titans - bridge
mom - front line logsitics and rr
carriers - logistics support and rr
dreads - pos and capital killers

basically - fighter-bombers are too powerful.

Kail Storm
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.10.07 15:42:00 - [207]
 

Edited by: Kail Storm on 07/10/2010 15:43:48
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Kail, the right answer when you have a couple of super powerful items is to nerf those items. If you feel that 4 carriers vs a SC should be a close match, then try toning SCs down to that level.

-Liang


I know except I like the role SC`s have now in small ganks, They are more useful than Titans, you ship em in Gank your target and get them out.

I agree that tackling them is not very fair since a Hictor will be facing20+Warriors or Medium Drones and basically whaling on them fast.

The real problem I see is it takes to many Dreads to kill 1 and since dreads are "Solo" in Siege Mode there is no way of repping it enough.

Adding 1/4 the DMG of SC`s to Carriers IMO would make even the Carebeariest of ALli`s to be able to fight back. If 4 Carriers=1 SC then at least in small numbers they could be killed as 4 Carriers can Tank an SC already.

It will never make SC`s not a problem in large numbers, hell any powerful ship is a problem with huge numbers. Dreads were monsters when they came out.

So Im not saying its a fix but I wouldlike to see a Small Corp/Alli get on more greedy SC pilots KM`s with a small Carrier fleet and support.

Also it goes without saying Dreads need a complete rethink, IMO I dont want any siege mode timers, there just needs to be a counter for each, make tracking horrible all the time.

Kail Storm
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.10.09 05:46:00 - [208]
 

Actually Im suprised no one mentioned one of the most lopsided aspects of SC`s the ability to Field huge amounts of ECM Drones, 22 Heavy ECM`s=a 80% Jamming ratio on almost all BS`s and will jamm Hic`s almost 70% of Jamms. But with 1 SC you can divide Drones and Jamm almost any 5 Targets using 4 Heavys per target.

Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.10.09 11:56:00 - [209]
 

Thats because its their effect on capital warfare that is the problem - not if moms are as effective as a falcon if they want to be. . . quite frankly, if the mom deploys ECM drones, we may have a mom kill incomming.

Bunny4you
Amarr
Posted - 2010.10.09 18:16:00 - [210]
 

Ive seen alot of Moms get out of Gang traps with ECM Drones Where the gang would have been able to hold them with standard drones until help came.

Most gangs dont fly with 3 or more Hics/Dics so deploying 24 Heavy ECM or 24 Med ECM means Assured Jumps.

But I agree Cap Warfare in General is broken.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

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