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 : last (13)

Author Topic

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.25 23:12:00 - [301]
 

Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 25/04/2011 23:14:25

Originally by: rcs619
Honestly, any kind of nerf should be a last resort, or a counter to a truly game-breaking mechanic.

Im more in favor of buffing the underpowered than I am of nerfing something that may be a bit overpowered.....Another solution to the supercarrier issue though, could be to buff standard capital ships, dreadnoughts in particular.


Dreadnoughts aren't underpowered though. The only major issue with dreads is simply that post-Dominion supercarriers vastly outperform them (and everything else) in most useful roles, and that the one areas where dreads work better than supercarriers (POS shooting) has greatly diminished in importance thanks to the new dominion structures. Like I've said elsewhere, if every supercarrier was deleted from the game tomorrow nearly all of the problems with dreadnoughts would be removed as well, and buffing dreadnoughts to compete with overpowered supercaps has knock-on effects - for example their performance against subcapitals or carriers or titans.

The major balance issue is with supercarriers, and not just against dreads but against the rest of the capital and subcapital ranges too, so that's where re-balancing should occur - otherwise, are you going to propose a raft of buffs for titans, carriers, battleships, dictors and hictors to bring them up to scratch as well? Using the newly-overpowered supercarriers as a baseline and then changing everything else in the game to fit around that is a pointlessly time consuming and inefficient exercise for CCP.

rcs619
Element 115.
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.04.26 05:52:00 - [302]
 

Edited by: rcs619 on 26/04/2011 05:59:38
Edited by: rcs619 on 26/04/2011 05:58:14
Edited by: rcs619 on 26/04/2011 05:57:32
Quote:
Dreadnoughts aren't underpowered though.


They are underpowered in relation to supercarriers though, which is why they should be buffed to take this new ship class into account. That is what you do when you add in new features, you first try to buff the older features to bring them up to snuff. You don't go to nerfing down the new feature unless you have no other choice.

Quote:
and that the one areas where dreads work better than supercarriers (POS shooting) has greatly diminished in importance thanks to the new dominion structures.


Ehh, that's semi-debatable. POS bashing is still probably the most important aspect of sov warfare, since it is the only way to gain control over the tech moons that drive big-alliance sov warfare. The IHubs are just an extra annoyance that needs to be taken into account during the process. When it comes down to POS bashing, Dreads are still king. The main issue with dreadnoughts bashing POS's is that their long seige timers make them sitting ducks if they get hotdropped. A shorter cycle time would help with that some, and a buff to their total HP would give them a greater chance to hold out in a fight or get out of dodge if things go badly.

Quote:
and buffing dreadnoughts to compete with overpowered supercaps has knock-on effects - for example their performance against subcapitals or carriers or titans.


That depends. If we just give them a broad damage increase, then yes, it will affect carriers as well (which deserve a HP buff anyway, in my opinion). But, if we go with a more limited option, such as giving them a damage boost agaisnt objects with over, say, a 10-12km sig radius, then you would only see the impact on supercarriers and titans. Titans got a huge HP bonus after dominion and only get killed by large fleets anyway, so dreads doing a bit more damage to them doesn't really make a huge different.

Quote:
The major balance issue is with supercarriers, and not just against dreads but against the rest of the capital and subcapital ranges too


I honestly don't think them being able to take on sub-caps is that big of an issue. They're the most powerful PvP ships in EVE. They SHOULD be able to hold their own against multiple players in different ship-types. If you buff dreads to the point where a dread fleet has a change to drop and kill a supercarrier, then you're going to see them drop on sub-capital targets a whole lot less. The only reason they drop a 25billion isk ship on sub-caps now is because they really don't have anything to fear besides other supers coming down on their heads.

Right now, supers have no fear. The enemy's supercarrier pilots are all watch-listed, so they know when they can, and cannot engage a target in their own supers. If you give a much cheaper, and easily fielded ship, like the dreadnoughts (which also have the same jump range as supers) the ability to pounce on them in groups and take them down, then you add a whole lot of fear and uncertainty to the equation. People will be a lot less loose with their supers if they have that uncertainty.

I just think its time to give Carriers and Dreadnoughts some love. They have been around for years, and haven't changed much. Capital warfare in EVE has changed with Dominion, and I just think Dreads and Carriers need to be buffed a little to help bring them into the modern age of capital warfare. Supercarriers will probably need to be nerfed, but nerfs should never be your first option. Buff up the older capitals, and then pepper in a couple nerfs to supers to bridge the gap and bring both sides into a better balance.

Shiroi Kiba
Posted - 2011.04.26 06:30:00 - [303]
 

Dread buff:

Reduced seige timer to 5 min, in line with triage.

Increase damage for larger targets, eg against super capitals.


Super carrier:

Remove the ability of super carriers to lock structures. If you want to shoot a structure bring dreads. (I do own a super and find it ridiculous that my Aeon out dps's a seiged dread on a control tower)

rcs619
Element 115.
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.04.26 15:00:00 - [304]
 

Edited by: rcs619 on 26/04/2011 15:01:20
Edited by: rcs619 on 26/04/2011 15:01:01
Originally by: Shiroi Kiba
Dread buff:

Reduced seige timer to 5 min, in line with triage.

Increase damage for larger targets, eg against super capitals.


Super carrier:

Remove the ability of super carriers to lock structures. If you want to shoot a structure bring dreads. (I do own a super and find it ridiculous that my Aeon out dps's a seiged dread on a control tower)


Ehh, I don't really mind them being able to target structures. Ihubs and stations are a drag to tear down as it is, plus fighter-bombers can't hit POS's, which are what sov warfare is really about.

Also, I had an idea today.

Capital Interdictor vessels

One of the main issues brought up in this thread is the supers' ability to either neut down, or outright kill Heavy Interdictors, one of only two ships in the game capable of pinning a supercarrier down. The only other option then is dictor bubbles, but they are only temporary, and the ships that lay down more of them die if you look at them funny. Buffing Hictors to the point where they can hang with a supercarrier just seems absurd to me, it'd be like trying to get a chihuahua to hang onto Mike Tyson's ankle without being killed.

That line of thought lead me to this idea. I honestly doubt its going to be a complete solution, but I haven't seen anyone else propose something like this yet, and doing a little thinking outside the box never hurt anyone.

Basically, Im proposing a capital-class interdictor vessel. It would have terrible DPS, but its tank would be superior to a dreadnought's, and it would be able to equip a capital warp jamming module (basically, a bigger, meaner version of the hictor's infinite point). I imagine it would need to have an ECM immunity (either naturally, or when its point is activated) so that a couple falcons don't render it useless.

What this would do is add more risk to supercarrier hotdrops, which is something a lot of supers don't currently have.

Imagine this scenario

- Group A decides to drop some carriers repping a POS/Ihub/Station with a super or two.
- Group B manages to pin the supers with hictors.
- The hictors hold on for dear life until Group B lights a cyno, and jumps in a couple Capital Interdictors along with a capital kill-team of carriers, dreads and maybe a couple supers.
- At this point, Group A has two choices. Either let their hotdropping super(s) die, or escalate the situation.
- Group A escalates, as does Group B, and what started as a small hotdrop turns into a full-on brawl between two capital fleets.

Basically, this would force supercarriers into more life or death situations, and would lead to them actually dying. It would force them to choose their targets carefully, and weed out pilots who are sloppy with their supers. It would add a threat to supers that they couldn't just neut out, or shred in seconds.

Of course, supercarrier hotdrops would still happen, since not every group could assemble a kill-team quick enough to catch the super...but the threat of it would still there. Hictors would still have their place in sub-cap fleets, and to get the initial tackle on a super-cap, but they would no longer have to die in droves to keep a super pinned down.

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.04.26 15:02:00 - [305]
 

Is it me, or are we seeing the same suggestions over and over and over from people who never bothered to read the thread?

de4deye
Quovis
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.04.26 15:11:00 - [306]
 

Edited by: de4deye on 26/04/2011 15:33:47
A lot of people like to complain too much, methinks. Dreads shouldn't be dropping on towers without capital support ready to back them up, eh? However, I think due to the recent Supercarrier buff, it would be reasonable to reduce siege cycle time to 5 minutes rather than 10; this makes it so dreads aren't so much of a helpless target anymore. Stop wanting to hit **** with the nerf bat already lol.

Edit: Supercarries don't need a nerf, quit crying. Just because NCDot has more supercaps than you doesn't mean you MUST nerf them. If you can't tackle all of them, bring more Dictors.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.26 15:58:00 - [307]
 

Originally by: Marconus Orion
Is it me, or are we seeing the same suggestions over and over and over from people who never bothered to read the thread?


Yes.

To be fair, its a long thread.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.26 20:43:00 - [308]
 

Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 26/04/2011 20:44:07
Originally by: rcs619
Quote:
Dreadnoughts aren't underpowered though.


They are underpowered in relation to supercarriers though, which is why they should be buffed to take this new ship class into account. That is what you do when you add in new features, you first try to buff the older features to bring them up to snuff. You don't go to nerfing down the new feature unless you have no other choice.

That's silly. Supercarriers were overbuffed in Dominion, and you're saying that mistake shouldn't be corrected, but that its set in stone and the rest of the game has to adjust to fit them in.

If you put some new chairs in your lounge and decide you don't like where they're positioned, do you leave the chairs in place and demolish your entire house and rebuild it so that they fit, or do you correct your mistake and move the furniture?

Quote:
Quote:
and that the one areas where dreads work better than supercarriers (POS shooting) has greatly diminished in importance thanks to the new dominion structures.


Ehh, that's semi-debatable. POS bashing is still probably the most important aspect of sov warfare, since it is the only way to gain control over the tech moons that drive big-alliance sov warfare. The IHubs are just an extra annoyance that needs to be taken into account during the process. When it comes down to POS bashing, Dreads are still king. The main issue with dreadnoughts bashing POS's is that their long seige timers make them sitting ducks if they get hotdropped. A shorter cycle time would help with that some, and a buff to their total HP would give them a greater chance to hold out in a fight or get out of dodge if things go badly.


Here's how POS sieges with dreads go these days:
1)Form up capfleet.
2)Count your supercarriers.
3)Count the hostile supercarriers.
4)If you have more supercarriers, its safe to send the dreads in.

Quote:
Quote:
and buffing dreadnoughts to compete with overpowered supercaps has knock-on effects - for example their performance against subcapitals or carriers or titans.


That depends. If we just give them a broad damage increase, then yes, it will affect carriers as well (which deserve a HP buff anyway, in my opinion).

A HP buff to carriers will vastly decrease their vulnerability against subcaps. They don't need that.

Quote:
But, if we go with a more limited option, such as giving them a damage boost agaisnt objects with over, say, a 10-12km sig radius, then you would only see the impact on supercarriers and titans. Titans got a huge HP bonus after dominion and only get killed by large fleets anyway, so dreads doing a bit more damage to them doesn't really make a huge different.

I actually don't think Titan's are anywhere near as overpowered as supercarriers, as I stated way back in this thread their primary weapon systems actually take up fitting slots, and don't have the same versatility against tacklers and other sub-caps. You've responded to the overpowering of supercarriers with what is effectively a nerf to titans.

The supercarriers are the hull that's out of sync, so fix the supercarrier. Don't demolish the house just to make the furniture fit.

That aside, you've missed the whole point of the original suggestion, which is to make supercarriers less effective against sub-cap fleets. I've no problem with supercaps killing other caps and supercaps, that's the role CCP gave them in dominion. The issue is their ability to destroy subcapitals, including the dictors and hictors required to tackle them, just as easily because of their wealth of utility slots and effectively infinite waves of drones.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.26 21:07:00 - [309]
 

Originally by: rcs619
Quote:
The major balance issue is with supercarriers, and not just against dreads but against the rest of the capital and subcapital ranges too


I honestly don't think them being able to take on sub-caps is that big of an issue. They're the most powerful PvP ships in EVE. They SHOULD be able to hold their own against multiple players in different ship-types.

One of the attractive things about EVE has always been the idea that there was no 'endgame' ubermensch, and that unlike say, WoW's PVP where you have to grind up to Level 80 to join in with the big boys, in EVE even the most experienced player can be vulnerable to relative newbies. If you make dreads the anti-supercap vessel of choice and tolerate supercaps being largely immune to anyone not in another capship, you've removed this distinction and implemented a 'you must grind this much XP to compete' mindset seen in other more mainstream MMOs.

Quote:
If you buff dreads to the point where a dread fleet has a change to drop and kill a supercarrier, then you're going to see them drop on sub-capital targets a whole lot less. The only reason they drop a 25billion isk ship on sub-caps now is because they really don't have anything to fear besides other supers coming down on their heads.

If you maintain the existing versatility of supercarriers, you'll still see them dropped on anything and everything because they can swat away dictors and hictors with points, neuts, smartbombs, and endless waves of warrior IIs. If you reduce this ability so that a supercarrier needs support (and by support I don't just mean 'more supercarriers') to break a tackle and escape the bubbles and infinipoints, you see a more well-rounded fleet and more interesting combat.

Quote:
Right now, supers have no fear. The enemy's supercarrier pilots are all watch-listed, so they know when they can, and cannot engage a target in their own supers. If you give a much cheaper, and easily fielded ship, like the dreadnoughts (which also have the same jump range as supers) the ability to pounce on them in groups and take them down, then you add a whole lot of fear and uncertainty to the equation. People will be a lot less loose with their supers if they have that uncertainty.

You know what's even harder to watchlist and track than dreadfleets? Battleships and dictors.

Quote:
I just think its time to give Carriers and Dreadnoughts some love. They have been around for years, and haven't changed much.

They haven't changed much because they are essentially pretty well balanced, and were universally desirable until Dominion introduced an overbuff to supercarriers so that dreads could be murdered with impunity.

rcs619
Element 115.
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.04.26 23:09:00 - [310]
 

Quote:
That aside, you've missed the whole point of the original suggestion, which is to make supercarriers less effective against sub-cap fleets. I've no problem with supercaps killing other caps and supercaps, that's the role CCP gave them in dominion. The issue is their ability to destroy subcapitals, including the dictors and hictors required to tackle them, just as easily because of their wealth of utility slots and effectively infinite waves of drones.


They're still carriers though, they should be versitile. You shouldn't be able to just lob subcaps at them and have success. As for hictors and dictors, it kind of makes sense that they'd get demolished. They are punching too high above their weight-class. You can't really buff them up to the point where they'd be able to keep up with supers, or they'd just end up being too overpowered in sub-cap fleets, and you can't nerf down supers without making them totally helpless to sub-caps.

That's why I put forward that Capital Interdictor idea a couple posts ago. It creates a ship who's job it is to pin down supers. You'd still need hictors for the intitial tackle, but once the capital dictors roll onto the field, they would take over, and you wouldn't need waves of hictors and dictors to die in droves to lock down the supercarrier.

Give dreads a slight buff so that they can travel alongside the capital dictors to act as a kill-team, and a lotof the issue with supercarriers gets solved. If they get pinned down by a capital dictor, they HAVE to fight their way out of it, and the situation will likely escalate into a full-on capital engatement where even more supers are put at risk.

Tyrophant
Posted - 2011.04.27 14:38:00 - [311]
 

Originally by: rcs619
It creates a ship who's job it is to pin down supers.


Hictors *are* the ship whose job it is to pin down supers: they were introduced (at least partially) to tackle otherwise invulnerable moms in lowsec.

rcs619
Element 115.
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.04.27 18:20:00 - [312]
 

Originally by: Tyrophant
Originally by: rcs619
It creates a ship who's job it is to pin down supers.


Hictors *are* the ship whose job it is to pin down supers: they were introduced (at least partially) to tackle otherwise invulnerable moms in lowsec.


That was their original purpose, yes. Capital warfare has changed though.

Titan doomsdays are no longer laughably weak and tankable, and the former Motherships have grown teeth, claws and a bad attitude to match.

You can't really buff up Hictors to be able to compete with that, or they become overpowered in their primary role, sub-cap fleet warfare...and you can't beat supercarriers too badly over the head with the nerf bat, or they return to the useless ships they used to be.

That's why I tried to propose a third option. Don't try to discourage people from flying a ship they want to fly, instead, give out some buffs and add some more variety to try and encourage people to fly different ships (while bringing a little more balance to the equation in the process).

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.04.27 18:26:00 - [313]
 

Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: Mara Rinn
Why would moving the +drone bonus from the hull to the modules boost SC DPS?



I believe he is talking about the Sansha mothership, it can fit 6x drone control units.


On the one hand, that can be addressed through bandwidth limitation or the existing game mechanic of "can fit X of module Y."

On the other hand, Revenant BPCs aren't exactly falling like rain, son why wouldn't a rare ship be allowed to have some perks? Twisted Evil

I support the call to render SCs "vulnerable" to all EWAR. Adjust the EWAR resistance numbers to make sense. "Focussed Warp Disruption" script thus gets a value of eg 10000 warp disruption strength, SC gets a base warp stability of 500. You could conceivably warp disrupt it with a fleet of 100 ships, or just use 1 HIC.

Set the sensor strength really high (like say the 150-odd it is right now) and let the SC pilot determine whether they wish to use ECCM or not. Target dampeners (using resolution scripts) used in conjunction with jammers will make every successful jam important to the outcome of the fight.

I agree with Ed that we need fewer special game mechanics, in order for the game to be more fluid. Removing EWAR immunity will encourage more diverse fittings for SCs.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Posted - 2011.04.27 22:09:00 - [314]
 

Originally by: rcs619

You can't really buff up Hictors to be able to compete with that, or they become overpowered in their primary role, sub-cap fleet warfare...


Big ships are traditionally vulnerable to small ships in EvE.... Its what makes the game great, as it enables a low sp character to play an important function in PvP.

Most battleships are vulnerable to tackling frigates and Inties...
Most Titans and SC's were vulnerable to tackling hictors...

Since you can't buff hictors to actually tackle supercarriers, perhaps supercarriers aught to be nerfed....

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.04.28 08:26:00 - [315]
 

This link, from 02:44 to 02:55, should apply to small ships vs. super capitals. The ONLY way to make that a reality without over buffing the small ships and screwing up their balance vs. other non-super capitals is for it to be IMPOSSIBLE for super capitals to be able to lock onto non-capital ships.

I am not advocating that this change should be the only one but it is definitely a right step.

Also, R.I.P. Porkins Sad

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.28 09:43:00 - [316]
 

Quote:
They're still carriers though, they should be versitile. You shouldn't be able to just lob subcaps at them and have success.

Yes you should, or if that doesnt work they should be hard countered by another ship, like dreads. But then you would pretty much need to remove fighter bombers. That or make them fire AOE weapons against subcaps, which tbh could be quite interesting.

But ships needs to be balanced on a per ship base, not per ISK. Otherwise there is never a reason not to bring a supercap, since they are just the best per pilot.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.04.28 10:48:00 - [317]
 

Dreadnoughts are well balanced because they have a specific role, they have to commit to a fight and can't just teleport out when Things Go Bad, and because they're very vulnerable to subcapitals and hence require a support fleet. Supercarriers have none of these attribute. They don't have a specific role, they don't need to commit to a fight and they're not exactly vulnerable to subcapitals. All three of these need changing.

Proposing new ships as a supercapital counter is absurd - the counter should be subcapitals. So to make them vulnerable to subcapitals, supercarriers should be able to launch FBs only - not fighters or drones - with FBs tweaked so that they're close to useless against BS and smaller, and are easier to kill, defining supercarriers' role as anti-capitals only. Supercarriers should not be immune to normal disruptors/scramblers, and the other-ewar immunity might go too. The 15 min disappear-with-aggro-upon-logoff timer should be increased to an hour for supercapitals.

Making them commit to a fight is trickier. Requiring some sort of siege mode to be active to be able to control FBs is a possibility. It wouldn't prevent movement, only warping or jumping. They could still receive RR. Short cycle time, maybe as short as 2-3 mins, so they could GTFO semi-quickly, but not immediately. FBs would return automatically upon deactivation. This might have problems with lag though.

rcs619
Element 115.
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.04.28 15:26:00 - [318]
 

Edited by: rcs619 on 28/04/2011 15:43:15
Edited by: rcs619 on 28/04/2011 15:40:20
Quote:
Big ships are traditionally vulnerable to small ships in EvE.... Its what makes the game great, as it enables a low sp character to play an important function in PvP.

Most battleships are vulnerable to tackling frigates and Inties...


Battleships are only really vulnerable to them if they are stupid and go out alone. Large smartbombs kill most frigs in one or two vollies, and if they don't, the battleships' drones tear them apart. Frigates are usually just initial tackle, and are only expected to hold onto the BS until bigger ships with more tank can get there to tighten the noose and make sure the BS has no chance of escape.

Change "battleships" to supercarriers and "large smartbombs" to neuts and you have the same situation. Hictors can hold a super down, but they die in droves to do it. Only difference between the battleship and supercarrier examples is that, with a supercarrier, you have no larger type of tackling ship to come in and tighten the noose. There's always the risk that the super will burn down all of the hictors and slip out of the trap.

That's only really talking about one super too. This issue gets exponetially worse the more supers there are. I mean, to hold down a 4-man supercarrier fleet, you'd need over 20 hictors to have any chance of catching them all, and you're probably going to lose a lot of them in the process...and then on top of those hictors, you need to assemble ships to actually do the DPS to kill 4 supers. That's why hit and run attacks with supers are so hard to punish now. Unless you know beforehand, or the super pilot does something stupid, its hard to organize a proper defense in time.

With a dedicated capital interdictor vessel, you have less pilots forced to fly sacrificial hictors. It would let more people get into combat ships to help get DPS on the supers and actually kill them. It would also lead to more supercarrier deaths, since they can't just burn down a capital dictor in a few seconds and run away.

bartos100
DARK ADAMA
Terra Axiom
Posted - 2011.04.28 16:16:00 - [319]
 

you forget that the one thing SC do best is killing capital ships damn fast

so you will need to have one hell of a tank on those capital dictors

else they will just become like dreads (dinnertime :)

rcs619
Element 115.
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.04.28 16:26:00 - [320]
 

Edited by: rcs619 on 28/04/2011 16:27:19
Originally by: bartos100
you forget that the one thing SC do best is killing capital ships damn fast

so you will need to have one hell of a tank on those capital dictors

else they will just become like dreads (dinnertime :)


Pretty much, yeah. I figured they would either be T2 Dreadnoughts (imagine a phoenix with the Onyx's color scheme :D ) or their own ship class. But yeah, they'd need a heavy tank to not die horribly like a dreadnought.

To kind of balance the huge tank, they'd basically be useless against subcaps. Their warp jammer would be a focused weapon, instead of a bubble. Maybe only let them equip two capital guns (they wouldn't be siege capable though, so the damage would be terrible), or no guns at all. They aren't there for their damage, their one job to be a huge weight to tie around a capital or supercap's neck.

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.04.28 16:58:00 - [321]
 

I strongly suggest you guys read the entire thread. Yes it is long but it is well worth it.

PhantomTrojan
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.28 19:32:00 - [322]
 

/agreed sc need a nerf or every ship in eveneed a buff, make it happend.

Mauryce
Posted - 2011.04.28 22:00:00 - [323]
 

Yesss, nerf Hel asap.

Nerf hull, armor and fantastic shield tank;
Nerf fabulous Dps wiht fighters and f.bomber;
Nerf that ridicolous amount of Cap;
Less high, middle and low slots inmediatly;
and specialy that unbeatable Rep bonus (logistic role???????awesome...)


PD: Spetial thank to google-traducto....r

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.30 13:32:00 - [324]
 

Originally by: Mauryce
Yesss, nerf Hel asap.

Nerf hull, armor and fantastic shield tank;
Nerf fabulous Dps wiht fighters and f.bomber;
Nerf that ridicolous amount of Cap;
Less high, middle and low slots inmediatly;
and specialy that unbeatable Rep bonus (logistic role???????awesome...)



Er, yes, thanks. I think.

If the other three supercarriers were nerfed down to the level of the Hel there'd probably be much less of a problem.

Mauryce
Posted - 2011.04.30 16:09:00 - [325]
 

The real problem is the Sov. based in massive HP structures easy to deploy and timers. All they do necessary blobs of the supercapitals to make war in a reasonable time of game.

You can nerf Sc -the only efficient solution against Titans blobs-, but the real solution is a new sov. system based in a solar occupation for players that really live 0.0. -perhaps a new PI with Sov. effects- and not for nomads players in supercaps.

Katsura Kotonoha
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.30 17:27:00 - [326]
 

Edited by: Katsura Kotonoha on 30/04/2011 17:28:36
Originally by: Mauryce
The real problem is the Sov. based in massive HP structures easy to deploy and timers. All they do necessary blobs of the supercapitals to make war in a reasonable time of game.

You can nerf Sc -the only efficient solution against Titans blobs-, but the real solution is a new sov. system based in a solar occupation for players that really live 0.0. -perhaps a new PI with Sov. effects- and not for nomads players in supercaps.


I'd just like to point out that dreadnaughts can effectively take down sov structures as well. Dreads can easily put out 6-7k dps which is not too far behind a supercarrier. Why don't Dominion sov structures have shields like POS? Simply adding a shield to online IHUBs and TCUs and SBUs would make dreadnoughts a necessary part of sovereignty.

Vocal players wanted a way for relatively small groups to be able to significantly pose a threat to large alliances. They got their answer, with supercarriers. Of course, they were thinking of having a gang of 20 HACs instead. But lets face it, there is a fundamental reason why 100 cruisers is better than 20 cruisers that will not change.

The greatest problem with supercarriers lies most in that they can complete nearly all warfare objectives in the game. That's a greater problem than being overpowered because of having too much capacitor or too large of a drone bay or too many slots. If CCP wishes to fulfill the desires of the roving band style players to disrupt alliances and simultaneously eliminate the ubiquitous nature of supercarriers, then they should consider putting forcefields on sovereignty structures.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.30 18:12:00 - [327]
 

Originally by: Katsura Kotonoha
The greatest problem with supercarriers lies most in that they can complete nearly all warfare objectives in the game. That's a greater problem than being overpowered because of having too much capacitor or too large of a drone bay or too many slots.


Well, these are more or less the same thing. Two of the reasons that supercarriers are able to carry out nearly any objective is because they have an abundance of utility slots, and a primary weapon system (drones) which effectively never runs out and can near-instantly switch between types as battlefield circumstances develop.

Every other shiptype in the game needs to make decisions at the fitting screen, and are punished if they decide incorrectly. Supercarriers just shrug, activate the correct utility module from their omni-fit and pop out a different type of drone cloud.

Mauryce
Posted - 2011.04.30 19:04:00 - [328]
 

You really cares on SC´drones in a fleetbattle? Its imposible try to deploy waves of drones in massive engangements. You´ll be very lucky if you can deploy FBs and make regulars attacks in a laggystyle Sc-fight. In real fights, if you are not in a SC, you´ll be worried about your targeting time with multiples ECM burts than a wave off drones.

I insist, change sov-mecs and nobody cares abouts sc, fbs, sbus and all that expensive toys.

grumpyguts1
Posted - 2011.05.05 19:33:00 - [329]
 

Why nerf it?? why not give the smaller capitals a chance, bring in a Capital neut. This way SC pilots will have to plan a little better, and a small fleet of carriers who plan well will have a fighting chance, something like setting a curse on a BS except BIGGER.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.05.06 12:48:00 - [330]
 

Originally by: grumpyguts1
Why nerf it?? why not give the smaller capitals a chance, bring in a Capital neut. This way SC pilots will have to plan a little better, and a small fleet of carriers who plan well will have a fighting chance, something like setting a curse on a BS except BIGGER.


Except that a supercarrier's primary weapon system doesn't require cap, and in the case of the Nyx and Aeon their EHP buffer doesn't necessarily require it either.

All you do with this proposal is bump the neuting caps way up the target priority list from 'free easy killmail' to 'mild irritant' while doing little to rebalance fleet combat and further cementing 'Capitals Online' by obsoleting one of the few semi-useful roles smaller hulls have remaining against caps.


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