These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Reworking Capital Ships: And thus it begins!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#621 - 2015-10-31 15:37:46 UTC
Sepheria O'Mally wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Querns wrote:
Quote:

Many groups can field 20 or 30 dreads and as many carriers but most won't without having a group who can field a hundred of each on standby because that is what your enemy is doing. When supers and titans come into play, a group who only has 2 or 3 titans and a few supers is loathe to field them because there is always the very real threat you will get 3rd partied by one of the elite groups (who oddly enough won't fight each other, because they want the guaranteed "We Win" of superior numbers and firepower) and get dunked. So where in this plan is the part where smaller groups can compete, without having to rely on someone else to fight for them?
As long as that is how Eve fights (subcap and capital) are fought - It will never be a place for small (<1000) unaligned groups.

I think the current plan is to introduce some sort of "jump fatigue" to limit the ability for folks to "third party" on fights in whose game they have no skin.



It created a smaller threat range radius, but really mostly it just changed the names on the overviews. The point remains valid, it is STILL all about the batphones, just now different people have different speed dial settings than they used to.


Dude, do you even have a capital. With the fatigue as it is, you are often lucky you can call on your neighbor, when even your core alliance guys are too fatigued cause they just had something they jumped to 45 min ago. Batphones only work in places like Provi, where the groups only work together when needed, and stick to their little corners when not. When you have pilots living in an entire region, you can barely handle moving around just that.



The tears about fatigue are getting old.

Not all of us have neighbours who are dropping titans on mining barges.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#622 - 2015-10-31 15:45:25 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Rowells wrote:
So, how effective will HAWB be at reprocessing packs of cruisers?


This is one of the best questions in this thread. If Dreadnoughts follow the current "prey on ships one size down, prey for ships one size up, less effective against two sizes down, and etc." then it stands to reason that unsupported Dreadnoughts should have a tough time with Cruisers, but should be somewhat capable with full web, target painter support.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Luanda Hunter
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#623 - 2015-10-31 18:09:36 UTC
congratulation for making carriers completely obsolete, good job.

-carrier is called "carrier" because it was able to carry ships and fighters and had only support roles next to their rubbish damage output
-dreads were oversized battleships with huge damage output

now you take the support abilities, they are already obsolete as ship transports (cheap industrial capitals are far better), make the fighters rubbish UI only game, removing the other drones and create a capital logi WITH CARRIER abilities. WTF?

yes, I WANT MY CARRIER SHILLPOINTS BACK FOR FREE!!!!!!!
not with real cash cost items, you ruined the carriers completely so give back the skillpoints ive spent on them
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#624 - 2015-10-31 18:49:50 UTC
Sepheria O'Mally wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Destoya wrote:
Are you going to give titans a reason to use their guns? You commonly quote titans as having a role of a supercapital version of a dreadnought, but currently the guns are incredibly underwhelming. Against subcaps you might as well be shooting wet paper towels unless it's a battleship MWDing at zero speed, and against caps the effective range just isn't enough to do any significant amount of damage compared to the doomsday.

In the future with new doomsdays as well as capital tackle mods and neuts, I struggle even more to find reason to dedicate 6H/2-3M/3+L slots to use guns that do, in a best case scenario, barely more damage than a dreadnought. I'd really rather you just remove the guns altogether and focus the role of titans to their doomsday, ganglink, and bridging capabilities. This would give space for a supercarrier-priced superdreadnought that I feel could really make use of the guns.


Titans will be able to use the HA anti-sub-capital guns that dreads can use, without going into siege. This, combined with the new DDs, we think will give a unique place for Titans on the battlefield.
While dreads have an upper level on the amount they can tank, Titans, while they have Force Auxiliary support (which admittedly can be killed) don't.


What FAX support? Those heaping piles of junk are going to be torn to shreds before the real fighting starts. Unless the FAX has the tank of a super and can self rep at least 4x the amount that triage carriers do now. Which I don't see happening at all. You are basing your answers on something that will die in next to no time, leaving all the combat ships completely vulnerable.

So your answer that Titans won't have an upper limit to their tank is faulty in 2 major ways. The first being that all FAX will likely be off field before they see incoming fire. The second being that the ship has a max EHP and no amount of reps will save it from a fixed number of DDs. B-R had more reps available, on both sides of the fight, to counter all the DDs fired at any of the Titans that died, but being that most of those deaths happened with properly timed shots, none of those reps mattered.

I am so tired of hearing this same piece of tripe. Every ship, no matter how many reps you bring can die. It is just a matter of proper numbers, good FCing and pilots reacting to the calls. So unless you give ships the ability to absorb incoming reps and build an extra buffer, then nothing in this game has an unlimited tank.

It is down right shameful for Devs to recite this false statement time and again. Either you don't know your own game or you are pandering falsehoods, in hopes the masses are too stupid to know the truth.


As I said above, "how is a Fleet Auxiliary ship any different from a Triage Carrier?"

Also, Eve ships are made to die. So, it is okay if they do that from time to time. If you do not want them to die, feel free to avoid undocking.

If you cannot think of ways to keep your Fleet Auxiliary ships alive (maybe by having a proper support fleet and using electronic warfare to mitigate incoming damage and/or shooting enemy ships faster than they shoot you), then maybe you should stick to smaller ships? Or maybe Eve is not the game for you?

Maybe it is just horrible to you that you can no longer be one of two hundred identical Archons with sentries deployed, but I do not miss that at all.

PS - if the enemy brings out a Titan to kill your Fleet Auxiliary ship, feel free to tackle it and kill it. That will be much easier in the new meta.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#625 - 2015-10-31 22:55:05 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Sepheria O'Mally wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Destoya wrote:
Are you going to give titans a reason to use their guns? You commonly quote titans as having a role of a supercapital version of a dreadnought, but currently the guns are incredibly underwhelming. Against subcaps you might as well be shooting wet paper towels unless it's a battleship MWDing at zero speed, and against caps the effective range just isn't enough to do any significant amount of damage compared to the doomsday.

In the future with new doomsdays as well as capital tackle mods and neuts, I struggle even more to find reason to dedicate 6H/2-3M/3+L slots to use guns that do, in a best case scenario, barely more damage than a dreadnought. I'd really rather you just remove the guns altogether and focus the role of titans to their doomsday, ganglink, and bridging capabilities. This would give space for a supercarrier-priced superdreadnought that I feel could really make use of the guns.


Titans will be able to use the HA anti-sub-capital guns that dreads can use, without going into siege. This, combined with the new DDs, we think will give a unique place for Titans on the battlefield.
While dreads have an upper level on the amount they can tank, Titans, while they have Force Auxiliary support (which admittedly can be killed) don't.


What FAX support? Those heaping piles of junk are going to be torn to shreds before the real fighting starts. Unless the FAX has the tank of a super and can self rep at least 4x the amount that triage carriers do now. Which I don't see happening at all. You are basing your answers on something that will die in next to no time, leaving all the combat ships completely vulnerable.

So your answer that Titans won't have an upper limit to their tank is faulty in 2 major ways. The first being that all FAX will likely be off field before they see incoming fire. The second being that the ship has a max EHP and no amount of reps will save it from a fixed number of DDs. B-R had more reps available, on both sides of the fight, to counter all the DDs fired at any of the Titans that died, but being that most of those deaths happened with properly timed shots, none of those reps mattered.

I am so tired of hearing this same piece of tripe. Every ship, no matter how many reps you bring can die. It is just a matter of proper numbers, good FCing and pilots reacting to the calls. So unless you give ships the ability to absorb incoming reps and build an extra buffer, then nothing in this game has an unlimited tank.

It is down right shameful for Devs to recite this false statement time and again. Either you don't know your own game or you are pandering falsehoods, in hopes the masses are too stupid to know the truth.


As I said above, "how is a Fleet Auxiliary ship any different from a Triage Carrier?"

Also, Eve ships are made to die. So, it is okay if they do that from time to time. If you do not want them to die, feel free to avoid undocking.

If you cannot think of ways to keep your Fleet Auxiliary ships alive (maybe by having a proper support fleet and using electronic warfare to mitigate incoming damage and/or shooting enemy ships faster than they shoot you), then maybe you should stick to smaller ships? Or maybe Eve is not the game for you?

Maybe it is just horrible to you that you can no longer be one of two hundred identical Archons with sentries deployed, but I do not miss that at all.

PS - if the enemy brings out a Titan to kill your Fleet Auxiliary ship, feel free to tackle it and kill it. That will be much easier in the new meta.
Blob F1 moron mentality - Duh just bring more than them.
If "A Titan" can kill a Fax, they really have no place in the game.


Sadly though, you are right in part. CCP has once again designed a meta to suit X+X blob fleets - The more of X you bring the faster you win.
Fuk the smaller groups - Who the hell are they to think they deserve a place in capital warfare - Everyone should be in a mega group.
Particularly - Everyone should be in the biggest one on TQ, problem solved. They've stated over and over in this thread how good this new meta will be for them - Why not just join them and be done with it.

The biggest group dominates every time they decide to deploy, has worked so well for Eve up till now, why change it.

-- - -- - -- - --
One thing has me thinking though - A carrier and dread can dock in any citadel but supers and titans can't - The new FAX is as big as a titan, so presumably will only be able to dock in the same place as a titan - Would this in any way restrict who could own a FAX considering the cost of the Xlarge Citadel will restrict its use to only the largest richest groups.



- -- - -- - -- - -- -
CCP Larrikin - Curious too, earlier in this thread I asked a question which you didn't so much answer as sidestep. Think you might have an answer or is it too early in development to know.

How many ships will ONE Fax be able to rep - Or to make it easier for you.
Will the meta now be, titans, supers, dreads (maybe) and Fax.
If one Fax is unable to protect X amount of ships on its own - All your doing is removing carriers and replacing them with a less desirable option.
If titan X is called primary by opposing titans (using DD's)
Quote:
CCP Larrakin said - Titans, while they have Force Auxiliary support
- How many Fax will be needed to keep it alive, is it one, ten, 50, (or my guess - we don't know, yet)

Have Devs considered, this will only benefit the larger rich groups while at the same time hurt smaller groups?

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#626 - 2015-10-31 23:22:50 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Blob F1 moron mentality - Duh just bring more than them.
If "A Titan" can kill a Fax, they really have no place in the game.


Sadly though, you are right in part. CCP has once again designed a meta to suit X+X blob fleets - The more of X you bring the faster you win.
Fuk the smaller groups - Who the hell are they to think they deserve a place in capital warfare - Everyone should be in a mega group.
Particularly - Everyone should be in the biggest one on TQ, problem solved. They've stated over and over in this thread how good this new meta will be for them - Why not just join them and be done with it.

The biggest group dominates every time they decide to deploy, has worked so well for Eve up till now, why change it.

-- - -- - -- - --
One thing has me thinking though - A carrier and dread can dock in any citadel but supers and titans can't - The new FAX is as big as a titan, so presumably will only be able to dock in the same place as a titan - Would this in any way restrict who could own a FAX considering the cost of the Xlarge Citadel will restrict its use to only the largest richest groups.



- -- - -- - -- - -- -
CCP Larrikin - Curious too, earlier in this thread I asked a question which you didn't so much answer as sidestep. Think you might have an answer or is it too early in development to know.

How many ships will ONE Fax be able to rep - Or to make it easier for you.
Will the meta now be, titans, supers, dreads (maybe) and Fax.
If one Fax is unable to protect X amount of ships on its own - All your doing is removing carriers and replacing them with a less desirable option.
If titan X is called primary by opposing titans (using DD's)
Quote:
CCP Larrakin said - Titans, while they have Force Auxiliary support
- How many Fax will be needed to keep it alive, is it one, ten, 50, (or my guess - we don't know, yet)

Have Devs considered, this will only benefit the larger rich groups while at the same time hurt smaller groups?

Your reality sounds terrifying. I can't imagine what it'd be like to live in constant fear of F1 BLOBER bogeymen, despite jump fatigue and aegis sov making it largely impossible for the bogeymen to actually hurt you in a meaningful way.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#627 - 2015-11-01 00:33:02 UTC
In regards to the new FAX Capital: "Easily Destroyable" does not equal 'Disposable'.

The FAX will more than likely cost the same as a current carrier as regard build costs, if not more. Putting the price anywhere as low as 750M ISK to as potentially high as 1.8B ISK.

Anything over 1B ISK and the word 'disposable' exits my vocabulary.

The real question is will insurance on standard Capitals still pay out 100% for Platinum insurance? And will FAX be included in that as well?


CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#628 - 2015-11-01 00:36:27 UTC
Can we get the ship hangars sooner? Pretty please?
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#629 - 2015-11-01 01:32:30 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Blob F1 moron mentality - Duh just bring more than them.
If "A Titan" can kill a Fax, they really have no place in the game.


Sadly though, you are right in part. CCP has once again designed a meta to suit X+X blob fleets - The more of X you bring the faster you win.
Fuk the smaller groups - Who the hell are they to think they deserve a place in capital warfare - Everyone should be in a mega group.
Particularly - Everyone should be in the biggest one on TQ, problem solved. They've stated over and over in this thread how good this new meta will be for them - Why not just join them and be done with it.

The biggest group dominates every time they decide to deploy, has worked so well for Eve up till now, why change it.

-- - -- - -- - --
One thing has me thinking though - A carrier and dread can dock in any citadel but supers and titans can't - The new FAX is as big as a titan, so presumably will only be able to dock in the same place as a titan - Would this in any way restrict who could own a FAX considering the cost of the Xlarge Citadel will restrict its use to only the largest richest groups.



- -- - -- - -- - -- -
CCP Larrikin - Curious too, earlier in this thread I asked a question which you didn't so much answer as sidestep. Think you might have an answer or is it too early in development to know.

How many ships will ONE Fax be able to rep - Or to make it easier for you.
Will the meta now be, titans, supers, dreads (maybe) and Fax.
If one Fax is unable to protect X amount of ships on its own - All your doing is removing carriers and replacing them with a less desirable option.
If titan X is called primary by opposing titans (using DD's)
Quote:
CCP Larrakin said - Titans, while they have Force Auxiliary support
- How many Fax will be needed to keep it alive, is it one, ten, 50, (or my guess - we don't know, yet)

Have Devs considered, this will only benefit the larger rich groups while at the same time hurt smaller groups?


How is a Fleet Auxiliary any different than a Triage Carrier? Unless you can answer that question, you seriously have no business getting worked up about these changes.

Where has anyone said that a Fleet Auxiliary will only be able to dock in an XL Citadel? You are literally just making stuff up now.

Thank you for the complement, by the way. I forgot that Blob F1 mentality was to bring a balanced fleet composition, rather than 250 identical Boot Archons and delegate control to one dude while we look at pr0n links in fleet.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Garett Rootarian
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#630 - 2015-11-01 04:27:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Garett Rootarian
Too bad Titan and Mother Ships could tether outside the Large Citadels for a set time of no more than 6-12 hours in null/wormhole and low sec. Just a thought.Big smile

We've had cloning in the South for years. It's called cousins. Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and it's better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring
Mai Ling Ravencroft
Duragon Pioneer Group
#631 - 2015-11-01 04:45:12 UTC
Alexander McKeon wrote:


CCP Larrikin wrote:
Heh :) So your argument is that if we make carrier gameplay too engaging that's bad?
I think you have an interesting point. I don't think making carrier gameplay less engaging is the answer though. Do you have any suggestions?
When you put it like that it does sound like an odd objection to make, but valid nonetheless. Some possibilities to alleviate this might include:

  • Re-introducing fighter assignment / assist options. (Probably not the best answer)
  • Allowing FCs to put up rally points in 3D space, so players can send their fighters to a location by clicking on a glowy beacon thingy instead of putting in coordinates by hand. This still requires player participation, but lessen the workload slightly. Actually, putting up glowy marker points in 3D space with the new coordinate interface would generally be rather awesome for a lot of other purposes too.
  • Add behaviour options like Homeworld had to guard / patrol / etc. around a particular area / ship. For example, ordering your light fighters to engage tackle near a particular friendly target, setup a pre-defined bombing run formation relative to a beacon / target (like you can position probes relative to a scan area) or fly anti-bomber defense patterns on that wing of battleships. Looking at Supreme Commander's unit control system might also be worthwhile, or how RPGs like Dragon Age let you set a bunch of pre-defined tactics.

The goal here is to require player agency and punish stupid decisions, but make the player's will easy to carry out and require as little micro as is feasible.




The idea of being able to assign squadrons with some pre-defined roles is a good idea. I think that the system will be engaging, but possibly a bit too much. Making it so that we can pre-set a bit of commands, means that we have to make choices, do something ourselves and still be able to switch focus on other things, as needed. Currently it seems carrier/super pilots are going to be massively pressured to keep track of 5 squadrons, each of which possibly doing a unique job and at the same time trying to adjust for positioning (of allies and hostiles), keep track of misc effects like bubbles and sub-cap tackle, and waiting for that key moment of impending doom when you get primaried.

That is a lot of crap to keep up with, and while some of that seems easy currently, we are talking about new cap mods, with a lot more interplay and speed. Cariers will possibly moving up to 500 x's the speeds we are use to, and doing things like tackle and local cap boosting, or even using more local reps. This is a ton of changes, with a large amount of variables, having the fighters be able to do a small amount of autonomous effects, relieves a portion of the strain, but still needing to activate the special abilities of the squads, means that the uniqueness of each squad is still up to the pilot to control.
Garett Rootarian
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#632 - 2015-11-01 04:59:26 UTC
Commander Liger wrote:
Would it be possible to give the Rorqual a Capital mining laser that acts like the "Sickle" Doomsday? Also, give it the ability to do potential damage to ships in LoS? I am not saying DD LoS damage, but a fair amount to use it as a deterrent.




They need to give the Rorqual the ability to moon mine, or double the current boost max if done outside a POS shield since the POS are going away. Double the reward for the risk.

We've had cloning in the South for years. It's called cousins. Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and it's better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#633 - 2015-11-01 06:42:23 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Blob F1 moron mentality - Duh just bring more than them.
If "A Titan" can kill a Fax, they really have no place in the game.


Sadly though, you are right in part. CCP has once again designed a meta to suit X+X blob fleets - The more of X you bring the faster you win.
Fuk the smaller groups - Who the hell are they to think they deserve a place in capital warfare - Everyone should be in a mega group.
Particularly - Everyone should be in the biggest one on TQ, problem solved. They've stated over and over in this thread how good this new meta will be for them - Why not just join them and be done with it.

The biggest group dominates every time they decide to deploy, has worked so well for Eve up till now, why change it.

-- - -- - -- - --
One thing has me thinking though - A carrier and dread can dock in any citadel but supers and titans can't - The new FAX is as big as a titan, so presumably will only be able to dock in the same place as a titan - Would this in any way restrict who could own a FAX considering the cost of the Xlarge Citadel will restrict its use to only the largest richest groups.



- -- - -- - -- - -- -
CCP Larrikin - Curious too, earlier in this thread I asked a question which you didn't so much answer as sidestep. Think you might have an answer or is it too early in development to know.

How many ships will ONE Fax be able to rep - Or to make it easier for you.
Will the meta now be, titans, supers, dreads (maybe) and Fax.
If one Fax is unable to protect X amount of ships on its own - All your doing is removing carriers and replacing them with a less desirable option.
If titan X is called primary by opposing titans (using DD's)
Quote:
CCP Larrakin said - Titans, while they have Force Auxiliary support
- How many Fax will be needed to keep it alive, is it one, ten, 50, (or my guess - we don't know, yet)

Have Devs considered, this will only benefit the larger rich groups while at the same time hurt smaller groups?


How is a Fleet Auxiliary any different than a Triage Carrier? Unless you can answer that question, you seriously have no business getting worked up about these changes.

Where has anyone said that a Fleet Auxiliary will only be able to dock in an XL Citadel? You are literally just making stuff up now.

Thank you for the complement, by the way. I forgot that Blob F1 mentality was to bring a balanced fleet composition, rather than 250 identical Boot Archons and delegate control to one dude while we look at pr0n links in fleet.

Compliment LOL - You really have no idea.. Your trying to say your coalition has never had 250 Archons or any other type of ship in fleet? Blob mentality = won't undock without far superior numbers = CFC + Pets.

Well lets see. Slowcats do NOT use triage yet are the favoured meta, because they work. They are not wholly mobile but are not stuck in one place for 5 mins at a time.
We are not comparing Triage to Fax - We are comparing Fax to the current meta which has little to nothing to do with triage.


Differences, just for argument sake - When a triage carrier exits triage, it can receive remote reps. When a Fax exits triage, it is likely, dead.
If you don't know the difference between the fits used on carriers and a triage carrier - You have absolutely no right to be posting on the subject.


It was a question about docking Fax - can't tell the difference between a statement and a question ? Do you know the answer, you did make a point of showing how big they are, am I to presume you know something the rest of us haven't been told, or like everyone else are you guessing and trying to find out..

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#634 - 2015-11-01 09:43:42 UTC
Why are you hell bent on comparing things to the meta which CCP are firmly on record as wanting to nuke from orbit? That's like holding a candle for AoE doomsdays.
ilammy
Amarr Empire
#635 - 2015-11-01 10:35:56 UTC  |  Edited by: ilammy
<stupidity got removed, I learned to RTFM>
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#636 - 2015-11-01 10:44:03 UTC
Would you all stop crying about the Nidhoggur, the king of capitals. Everyone wants a Niddy in fleet, because they can rest assured they won't be primed.

Also, a properly pimped Triage Nid is a pretty amazeballs bait tank, as long as you don't have to rep anything and blow your capacitor.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#637 - 2015-11-01 11:37:48 UTC
Querns wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Querns wrote:

Carriers aren't suitcases any more. (Thank goodness.) You may want to look up the new Jump Fatigue feature that was added recently.

Its remote repping role is being divorced and put into a new hull. This isn't the first time carriers have had this happen to them; they used to do everything they did pre-Phoebe AND had the roles of Jump Freighters too. Really, carriers would hardly be carriers if they weren't having their former abilities spun off into new ship lines.

And, as far as the carrier becoming a dedicated drone ship, what exactly is the problem?

Damn you mean the week I just spent moving ships to Khanid, in a SUITCASE carrier - Isn't what I was doing?
Some of us have no choice but to live with fatigue and do things the old fashioned way.
Can't afford to fire sale everything when moving so have to do it the only other way I can. Of course it means not actually playing the game for a week.
Fatigue is just plain bad as is the extent of jump range nerfs but CCP don't care about the individual or smaller group, it is all about the game breaking blobs.

Again, CCP not considering the smaller groups - removing the RR role from carriers simply makes smaller groups less effective in battle.

No problem with it being nothing more than a drone boat, except it removes a lot of its usefulness for anyone not in Goons or PL..

When ignoring and boring your enemy to death is your only option to get them to leave (or be forced to pay them as PL tried to inflict on at least one small alliance in Querious recently) It doesn't make for interesting game play. CCP is handing the elitists a win win with these changes.

and judging by some of the Dev responses here - They know that is what they are doing.. CCP Larrikin is no true Aussie, his forefathers would hang their heads in shame. (if your not an Aussie you will not understand my last comment - Hopefully he will)

Your problem is that you move. Don't do that. Or, do it much less often. Adding fatigue to carriers makes it more punishing to live as a vulture bent only on destruction. This is something which the game cannot support, in the long term. Sure, we in Goonswarm Federation and our allies are known for our capacity for destruction, but we balance this with a healthy ecosystem at home that exports as much as it imports.

You are aware that Force Auxiliaries can still be used to do triage and general-purpose remote repair, yes? If your argument is that you can't bring a single carrier as a jack-of-all-trades force multiplier, then I have little sympathy. Just like choking back the ability to refit during combat, forcing proper strategic decisions by asking one to choose between different levels of capital-based damage and capital-based remote repair is good for Eve.

It's not 2012 any more. We've moved on. So should you.

No, some of us have moved on.. The biggest hold outs are still not even trying.
You as a member of this group should be aware of the implications your group poses to the health of the game but insist on ignoring them. The over sized coalition meta did die out a few years ago. Time to get up to date.


Your capacity for destruction is only available because you still live in 2012 - Biggest blob wins.
If Goons were ever to man up and let their pets fend for themselves Eve would be a very different / Better game. You won't, simply because you would actually have to play the game then and god forbid, Goons ever risk anything.

Your economy is based solely on market denial - You put nothing into the game you can't profit from - What are the stockpiles of ice, ore, goo, etc worth today? I can tell you what they were worth in 2012 if you like, I'd imagine it is quite a bit more now.

And yes, I am unable to move to a new alliance or play the way I choose because a few mega groups abuse game mechanics to suit themselves. So CCP changes things - That end up affecting smaller groups more than the ones who created the problems to start with.

So what your saying is - Goons and pets can do whatever wherever they like but the rest of us just have to stay put. Roger got it.

PS; Goons don't have allies - They have pets and without the Goon network and isk to prop them up most would lose their space in a matter of weeks, if not months. (well maybe not now we have sov lasers, they just suck)

On topic - CCP is making changes that specifically suit the large dominating groups, again to the detriment of smaller groups.

NB; Don't bother trying to talk Goons + pets up, I spent my time in that shitfight and left, having learned the worst aspects of online gaming can all be in one place.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#638 - 2015-11-01 11:48:17 UTC
Can we start contemplating expanding the existing capital hull ranges as well while we are rethinking existing capital roles?

Here's an example of what I'd like to see (Adapted from the first my capital diagram provided in the Dev blog):

http://imgur.com/kjX68uM

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#639 - 2015-11-01 11:48:56 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Why are you hell bent on comparing things to the meta which CCP are firmly on record as wanting to nuke from orbit? That's like holding a candle for AoE doomsdays.

These changes will do nothing but strengthen the position of those who created this situation.

BTW, AoE doomsdays (in slightly different form) are coming back.

I agree the current meta is bad but it is not the ships fault it is the large dominating groups who use them to extreme. These changes only give them more choices on how they drop their unassailable force, on the same groups who can't defend against them now.

I'm not against change, I'm against change that further increases the divide between the blobs and everyone else.
There are options that could make capital warfare a thing for the average sized group - None of this fits that requirement.

Look at the goals of the sov changes - Smaller groups would be able to take and hold sov.. Sure they can - As long as they have blues out the wazoo.
Capital balancing is another, here we go again, what part of the game am I removed from this time, because I don't want to join one of the few large blobs.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#640 - 2015-11-01 12:06:23 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
No, some of us have moved on.. The biggest hold outs are still not even trying.
You as a member of this group should be aware of the implications your group poses to the health of the game but insist on ignoring them. The over sized coalition meta did die out a few years ago. Time to get up to date.


Your capacity for destruction is only available because you still live in 2012 - Biggest blob wins.
If Goons were ever to man up and let their pets fend for themselves Eve would be a very different / Better game. You won't, simply because you would actually have to play the game then and god forbid, Goons ever risk anything.

Your economy is based solely on market denial - You put nothing into the game you can't profit from - What are the stockpiles of ice, ore, goo, etc worth today? I can tell you what they were worth in 2012 if you like, I'd imagine it is quite a bit more now.

And yes, I am unable to move to a new alliance or play the way I choose because a few mega groups abuse game mechanics to suit themselves. So CCP changes things - That end up affecting smaller groups more than the ones who created the problems to start with.

So what your saying is - Goons and pets can do whatever wherever they like but the rest of us just have to stay put. Roger got it.

PS; Goons don't have allies - They have pets and without the Goon network and isk to prop them up most would lose their space in a matter of weeks, if not months. (well maybe not now we have sov lasers, they just suck)

On topic - CCP is making changes that specifically suit the large dominating groups, again to the detriment of smaller groups.

NB; Don't bother trying to talk Goons + pets up, I spent my time in that shitfight and left, having learned the worst aspects of online gaming can all be in one place.

How is "my group" bad for the health of the game? Also, how is banding groups of people together for mutual defense and prosperity bad?

Last time I checked, the double whammy of Phoebe and Aegis forced us to cede five regions and consolidate our holdings. This is definitive proof that CCP has taken measures to "beat back the blob," as it were. Hell, half of Delve is sitting ownerless; why not take a chunk and try to build something?

I also don't get the whole "goons should reset their allies" meme. How does that help the game?

No one has been able to give me a sane answer for any of this. Goodness knows I've been asking. My current theory is that folks who play Eve can't get off unless they own sov in Pure Blind or something.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.