open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Supercapital Shipyards
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.04.22 08:05:00 - [1]
 

The Change

My idea is to raise the price of the "Supercapital Construction Facilities" to 30,000,000 per day and require 2 weeks for "onlining" after it is put into the I-hub; this would have a threefold effect.

#1 It would raise the price of supercaps (slightly)
#2 It would provide a much needed isk sink
#3 It would focus an alliance's supercapital construction in one or two places like a shipyard.

The two week "onlining" period is so, when you pull a Monac Shipyards on your opponents capital shipyards you know they wont be rolling out any new super carriers for at least 4 weeks, and if you really want to make it tough, the onlining process could broadcast itself across the system like onlining a TCU does, or make it mutually exclusive with the "Cynosural Suppression" module.

The Reason for this Change

Cost is not a limiting factor for these ships, to large alliances who are able to pay hundreds of billions on a single campaign, cost will not be an issue; difficulty in building is an issue, and I think this would go a long way to curbing the "supercapital proliferation" that we see in the game now.

Fielding supercaps should be a rare thing and a big deal, otherwise they just become the next battleship; I think this would assist that effect.

Thoughts?

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.04.22 08:50:00 - [2]
 

Have you seen the numbers involved in the two previous QEN?

Less than twenty (think it was 15-16) super-capitals have been aborted by CSAA destruction since the beginning of time .. drop meet bucket.
Super-capitals are being launched four times faster than they are destroyed in combat .. drop meet bucket.

In short: You are not taking it nearly far enough.

Due to the massive power requirements of CSAA operation, the POS to which it is attached is unable to sustain a forcefield while array is active.
- Increase CSAA hitpoints some to compensate.

Result:
We will no longer have super-capitals popping out like kids in a trailer park and producing the things means constant vigilance.
Hopefully changes to capitals in general will assist with destruction of surplus through normal combat.

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.04.22 10:10:00 - [3]
 

Just not allow the tower to be able to go in reinforce mode if there is a super cap in the cooker.

CSAA = No strontium bay

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.04.22 11:33:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Marconus Orion
CSAA = No strontium bay

That will work too but not as well.
You'll still need a blob which are unwieldy beasts when you need to traverse the endless cyno-jammers.

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.04.22 21:49:00 - [5]
 

wow and here I thought people would flame me for going too far

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.04.23 09:15:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Sigras
wow and here I thought people would flame me for going too far

Give it time, the rabid dogs haven't found the thread yet Very Happy

On the whole I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who does not recognize that something drastic has to be done to 'make things right'.

bartos100
DARK ADAMA
Terra Axiom
Posted - 2011.04.23 09:40:00 - [7]
 

i think the construction phase of a supper is the time it is most vulnerable to attack

and i like the idea of no cyno jammers in a sys with a CSAA

it would be fun to see how many suppers would be killed before they are finished when you can just hotdrop the production POS and kill it without having to bother with the cynojamms :)

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.23 10:07:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Marconus Orion
Just not allow the tower to be able to go in reinforce mode if there is a super cap in the cooker.

CSAA = No strontium bay


So a euro TZ alliance logs off at 2300-0000 and wakes up in the morning to find that a US TZ alliance has rolled through and aborted all of their supercaps while they were asleep. Genius.

EnderCapitalG
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.23 13:05:00 - [9]
 

No.

bartos100
DARK ADAMA
Terra Axiom
Posted - 2011.04.23 20:30:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Marconus Orion
Just not allow the tower to be able to go in reinforce mode if there is a super cap in the cooker.

CSAA = No strontium bay


So a euro TZ alliance logs off at 2300-0000 and wakes up in the morning to find that a US TZ alliance has rolled through and aborted all of their supercaps while they were asleep. Genius.


i agree with this but the idea of no cynojamm would make killing a CSAA a lot easier as 90% of the sys with a CSAA are cynojammed

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.04.25 10:14:00 - [11]
 

I think making the Supercapital Construction Facilities far more expensive along with making that upgrade mutually exclusive with the cynosural suppression upgrade would go a long way to curbing the supercapital proliferation that is currently plaguing the game.

Shiroi Kiba
Posted - 2011.04.25 11:27:00 - [12]
 

Increase the fitting requirments for CSAA's so the POS cannot fit any defensive modules.

CSAA's should require an industry index similar to the index required for pirate detection arrays. A CSAA would require level 5 industry index that would be acheived through mining/ manufacturing in system (through a pos or in station). Once the index drops the CSAA goes offline and can only be re-onlined once the index reaches 5 again.

This creates a few ways to slow/destroy the rate of production of super capitals in the game. You can either blow up the POS (no defences) or limit the manufacturing / mining through roaming gangs through hostile space (afk cloakers) .


bartos100
DARK ADAMA
Terra Axiom
Posted - 2011.04.25 18:55:00 - [13]
 

do you have any idea how much work it is to get a sys at lvl 5 ??

it takes 10+ miners with normal gametime and almost non stop mining during the time they are online to get it to lvl 3 and even then if there is a 2 day break in mining it drops

there is a reason why there are only like 5 sys in eve at indy lv 5

but if your idea is to make supper production only possible if you can field 50+ miners around the clock then it would be good :)

but that would mean only big powerblocks would be able to

James Moroci
Posted - 2011.04.25 21:29:00 - [14]
 

i agree thou something has to be done towards sc. today sc is the new batlleship. perhaps make it so u have to anchor titans in space for em to use there superweapon. say a 10 min anchor delay and 5 min power up delay.. and then increese its damage output. and when it comes to super carriers make em use stront to field bombers if normal fighters nothing, but the fb needs stront. also make em have more roles. so they are usefull. atm they are just masiv tankers in fleet batlles. ******ed and fun spoilers :P

make the titans able to let people dock in em. remove the bridge but let em dock. a titan can only let so many dock that u need more titans. atm they send off 500+ into fleet batlles only to cause lag lag lag. if they were to jump the system alone and then let people undock now that would remove some lag and maybe only let em be able to have 50 persons docked pr titan. that wouyld be an interesting change!

SXmasteraccount
Posted - 2011.04.26 03:12:00 - [15]
 

Hate the idea making stront go bye bye, the goon said it right, means Timezones get exploited more than they already are..


Shiroi Kiba
Posted - 2011.04.26 06:16:00 - [16]
 

Well if not level 5, link it to level 3.

Zan Shiro
Posted - 2011.04.26 07:21:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Zan Shiro on 26/04/2011 07:29:03
Originally by: Shiroi Kiba
Well if not level 5, link it to level 3.


some alliances and corps actually pvp in this game. They go to war or war comes to them....indices go to crap all around as people are pew pewing. If in 0.0 and you got gf's lined up, belts....you aren't in them (well shouldn't be anyway lol). You switch from mining rocks to mining for corpses. this happens over weeks to months consistently...indices shrivel up like crazy.


Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.04.26 09:14:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: James Moroci
i agree thou something has to be done towards sc. today sc is the new batlleship[SIC]. perhaps make it so u have to anchor titans in space for em to use there superweapon. say a 10 min anchor delay and 5 min power up delay.. and then increese[SIC] its damage output. and when it comes to super carriers make em use stront to field bombers if normal fighters nothing, but the fb needs stront. also make em have more roles. so they are usefull[SIC]. atm they are just masiv[SIC] tankers in fleet batlles[SIC]. ******ed and fun spoilers :P


Well this thread is not really about that, but even so, stront is not the way to fix the SC, there are WAY too many questions that need to be answered, like how often does how much stront need to be consumed and what is the rationale behind using stront anyway.

My only comment on the way to balance supercarriers is to remove their ability to field fighters. A simple and easy solution, now they have very few options of getting rid of a pair of heavy dictors, and a homogenous SC fleet could be destroyed by hellcat abaddons, granted they'd still be hotdrop JF kings, but at least they'd be vulnerable to . . . something.

Originally by: James Moroci
make the titans able to let people dock in em. remove the bridge but let em dock. a titan can only let so many dock that u need more titans. atm they send off 500+ into fleet batlles[SIC] only to cause lag lag lag. if they were to jump the system alone and then let people undock[SIC] now that would remove some lag and maybe only let em be able to have 50 persons docked pr titan. that wouyld[SIC] be an interesting change!


Making titans the new dreadnaught is a terrible idea, they are not currently underpowered, theyre just overshadowed by the totally OP supercarrier atm.

Also CCP already stated that their code does not allow more than one character per ship . . . what happens if that ship logs off and the person inside it logs on? answer: it breaks their code.

Originally by: SXmasteraccount
Hate the idea making stront go bye bye, the goon said it right, means Timezones get exploited more than they already are..


I agree, I think the best idea is to make them mutually exclusive with a cynojammer, meaning you either have a cynojammer or a CSAA, also raising them to 30 mil a day would mean you have incentive to group all your CSAAs together, and without a cynojammer to defend them, they'd make a pretty juicy target.

Originally by: Shiroi Kiba
Well if not level 5, link it to level 3.


While thats an interesting idea, Im not sure thats quite right what if you gave them an onlining time like 2 weeks, so if your only supercapital shipyard gets destroyed and you want to put up another one, it takes 2 weeks to online, that way you cant get griefed by having a few people harassing you to take out all of your CSAAs


 

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