Player Features and Ideas Discussion

yo bro, he never mentioned smaller alliances in his startpost. so why do you come up with that **** all day long??


@tib: u mad bro?

I doubt CCP will ever just remove Titans and Supercarriers, but they do need a very comprehensive rebalance pass.

And then when PL have all eight of them...

I think the game needs fleet jump hull such as titan. But perhaps titans could be repurposed just as that make tham normal capitals lower their size less EHP than dreads but still capable to jump fleet and use DD. Also reduce the requirements and cost of course.

I think such oversized hull idea as titan cant really go any other way than wrong. Any MMO should have anything that just one can have. Few perhaps but how the titan concept is now its not really working out.

The key really is in the nature of the deployment - currently they can hit and run at will more or less and one super/titan can die all on its own unsupported to a sub capital fleet (quite often what happens the odd times one does die). When a super/titan is deployed it should stimulate gameplay - be a catalyst for further warfare.

On a related note, somewhat prompted by EVR - I do miss the whole "launching fighters" aspect of many movies, etc. when it comes to super deployment.

I've got a rough, completely off the wall concept in my head of facilities dotted around highsec that you can dock at as an NPC corp player, buy what is essentially a "fighter frig" wait in a queue to be bridged out to support a super in waves as though launched from it (obviously the idea would need a lot more development than that - none the least you'd be waiting quite awhile at the moment)

I'm not a fan of specialised ships designed purely to take out high end ships that people have spent a long time training and getting into unless they also take as much investment.

I think the main balancing factor should be that they can't be evacuated off the field as quickly and easily as they are now and using one in a fight is somewhat a proper commitment. Personally I think they should go into a reinforced mode once they've taken a certain amount of damage so that it is a catalyst for further fighting - I die a little inside when I see a capital die all on its own unsupported to a gank fleet.

I'm sort of in the mindset that mega-large supercap fleets (like the ones PL is fond of dropping) does hurt the overall gameplay, especially considering the effect TiDi has on Capital movements into a fight. (Shadoo is quoted as saying that with TiDi, no fight is too far away to bring the full cap fleet to bear.)

I don't think the solution would be to remove Supercaps, though. It wouldn't fit Eve. And although the power creep associated with Alliances having fleets of supers to drop into a battle is horrendous, the best solution--the one that gives smaller alliances at least some sort of chance would be to install some sort of mass limits on ships that cyno into the system per time period.

Not an overall mass, mind you, since that'd just lead to supers being deployed like drones when one goes down. It'd have to be an overarching "mass limit" on the cyno jumps into the system per time period. Once the cyno limit is reached (either through traditional bridging of subcaps or by cap or supercap jumps, the system is unable to take more mass via cynos for a given cooldown period.

I think another way to redistribute some of the supers' power is to require a titan on both ends to bridge a fleet in. This would mean that titan pilots would have to commit their ships to the fray or the support fleet couldn't just be magically "beamed" into battle.

Yes, this is a very "wormhole" way of looking at the ever-increasing supercap buildup problem, but the only way for fights to happen is to have some semblance of order. I know in a wormhole fight, for example, that the amount of Dreads that can come through that hole--indeed the amount of anything--is limited, so I can somewhat forecast what we may face even in the worst of times. Simply put, a small-to-medium alliance with moderate combat assets won't commit to a fight where they think "yeah we can probably take those two titans or supers" if there is a constant threat of PL dumping 70 supers in the battle and utterly obliterating them. It's not worth the whelp, especially considering that a supercarrier can deploy 12500 dps without having to commit to a siege timer or anything. If they going gets tough, they can cyno out. If the going gets tough for a dread or carrier, too bad. They're stuck there for 5 minutes.

I think there needs to be a balance though. Wealthy alliances and coalitions should also be able to put massive amounts of resources behind an operation to move ships quickly. The problem right now is that there is little risk associated with Titan bridges.

Limiting something like titans would not be too difficult... but it would be impossible to insure they stay distributed without some very funky rules on how they are limited.

For instance, you could tie them to SOV, and allow x amount per whatever metric you like--moons mined, systems owned, etc... but sooner or later someone would gain the upper hand and own them all.

Something I like better is to actually buff them more, but give them an absolutely ruinous fuel cost to move them--- you get them where you want them, and they park there until another couple freighter loads of fuel arrive to allow them to move again. They become reinforced positions in space, and seeing one jump in would be headline news as you know it took the total fuel production of the alliance a week or more to get it there, and now it cannot even move from it's current location without more fuel.

Combined with a similar fuel cost for opening bridges, or only allowing Titans to be the end point of a bridge and making it a structure that opens them would limit those shenanigans. Alternatively, add a module with high fitting costs to allow jumps on regular hulls to keep the strategic mobility but force a trade off for it.

"Remove Titans & Supercarrier"