These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Supercap balancing, strategic assets, and commitment levels
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kharylien
Masked Rider Project
#1 - 2011-10-26 01:53:48 UTC
So, I think there's probably a general consensus (certainly there is the appearance of one) that fleet combat and so on would be improved if committing supercaps and titans to the field of battle constituted a decision with the potential for serious consequences. In an ideal New Eden, deploying these behemoths would be a significant commitment to the battle at hand - if your supers are on the field, you're out to show your dominance of your enemy, or else you're throwing everything you've got into a must-win strategy, balls to the wall and nothing left in reserve.

The upcoming balances are good, I think, but I also think that perhaps the mindset of supercapital operation in general might need more incentive towards taking these ships seriously. Price alone won't do it - money is too easy to come by, and people will get it if they want the ships, and they do.

However, there are some things that hurt more than just our wallets. They hurt our pride and our wallets. Things like waking up in a clone vat.

I propose that sliding your pod into something the size of a supercapital ship should perhaps mean that you're going to be too deep in the machine to get out fast enough if the thing explodes. If you're in a supercap and it's destroyed, your pod goes with it.

This will also, I think, help balance the issue people have suggested regarding slave sets and the like, without having to remove implant effects from the ships entirely. Like this, you *can* take that slave set into battle, but if you lose the ship, you lose those implants with it.

If you're committing supercapitals to battle, you're going to want to be sure it's worth it.
Kazia Fey
Perkone
Caldari State
#2 - 2011-10-26 03:48:12 UTC
Kharylien wrote:

I propose that sliding your pod into something the size of a supercapital ship should perhaps mean that you're going to be too deep in the machine to get out fast enough if the thing explodes. If you're in a supercap and it's destroyed, your pod goes with it.




I fully support this idea and would love to see it implemented.


But, go look at the market value of a fully fit avatar and compare it to a slave set.



Not really a big deal to loose your pod.

Bozeman video production and Bozeman wedding video
Kharylien
Masked Rider Project
#3 - 2011-10-26 04:50:12 UTC
Not in financial terms, no, although if a titan pilot lost their pod and hadn't updated their clone it would be kind of hilarious. However, I do suspect it would make it *feel* like a bigger loss.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#4 - 2011-10-26 04:56:34 UTC
Kharylien wrote:
Not in financial terms, no, although if a titan pilot lost their pod and hadn't updated their clone it would be kind of hilarious. However, I do suspect it would make it *feel* like a bigger loss.


90% of a titan's crew survives due to shielded and armored compartments and alot of redundancy that allows them to be rescued and or get to the pods or jettisoned as a whole.

Though I have to agree this idea its a bit stark that it may cause breaking super capitol commitment at all.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
bartos200
Living Ghost
#5 - 2011-10-26 08:06:16 UTC
seeing as most of the suppers that die die in a big fleet battle they are usualy bubbled to hell
i think that most of the pilots already get podded when they lose their supper so i don't think it will change that mutch for the pilots