These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The Titan issue – a recap and a possible solution

Author
foxnod
Perkone
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-02-15 00:15:48 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
foxnod wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:


"Adding **** to a game is the exact opposite of improving balance."


Actually it did in the example I mentioned.


Indeed it did. The old motherships could be used in lowsec with impunity because of a combination of no bubbles + EWAR immunity. Introducing the HIC added to the game, and stopped this flawed gameplay. That came with Trinity I think, 2007.


All HICs prove is that specialization is how you solve these sorts of problems. It is an extremely risky move to balance a game by introducing new content, however. Just look at the track record of nearly any heavily supported game, from RTSes to MMOs. New things get introduced, or expansions added, and everything is broken for a few months.

CCP got lucky that their solution was so focused. Pushing said luck is not the optimal way to solve said problems, and I have heard CCP devs say much the same in interviews when asked about introducing new ships in the past.


Unfortunatly all the other options I've seen are going to **** off 1000's of players on either side of the debate and probably cause mass ragequits. CCP could've probably smacked supers with the nerfbat really hard 4 or 5 years ago and gotten away with it because they were so rare. The "HIC" option is probably going to be the only one I see that would keep most people happy.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#42 - 2012-02-15 00:15:52 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:


All HICs prove is that specialization is how you solve these sorts of problems.


In this case it solved a problem with a generalized capital ship (the mothership) used in ways never intended, with a specialized counter - the HIC. Not unlike what I propose to to with new specialized capital ships countering generalized titans.


The problem is more elegantly fixed by treating the source, not applying a bandaid to the symptom.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#43 - 2012-02-15 00:17:09 UTC
foxnod wrote:


Unfortunatly all the other options I've seen are going to **** off 1000's of players on either side of the debate and probably cause mass ragequits. CCP could've probably smacked supers with the nerfbat really hard 4 or 5 years ago and gotten away with it because they were so rare. The "HIC" option is probably going to be the only one I see that would keep most people happy.


Valid point. But sometimes tears are necessary if you want to fix your game in the long term.
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#44 - 2012-02-15 00:18:07 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:


The problem is more elegantly fixed by treating the source, not applying a bandaid to the symptom.


That statement is either so deep it would take a lifetime to fully comprehend every particle of its meaning, or it is a load of absolute tosh.

Which is it, I wonder?
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#45 - 2012-02-15 00:20:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Akirei Scytale
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:


The problem is more elegantly fixed by treating the source, not applying a bandaid to the symptom.


That statement is either so deep it would take a lifetime to fully comprehend every particle of its meaning, or it is a load of absolute tosh.

Which is it, I wonder?


Problem: Titans **** everything.

Solution A: Retool titans.

Solution B: Introduce something new in order to **** Titans, then re-balance once the dust settles months down the line.

Tell me, which sounds more elegant to you? The problem here is not far removed from the problems which arise when you introduce a new predator to an ecosystem in order to combat a pest.
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#46 - 2012-02-15 00:22:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Reilly Duvolle
Akirei Scytale wrote:

Problem: Titans **** everything we do with our subcap blob.

Solution A: Retool titans so our blob is free to roam.

Solution B: Introduce something new in order to introduce a true-rock-paper-scissors game at the capital level., then re-balance as required.

Tell me, which sounds more elegant to you?

FYP
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#47 - 2012-02-15 00:25:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Akirei Scytale
Reilly Duvolle wrote:


Solution A: Retool titans so our blob is free to roam.

Solution B: Introduce something new in order to introduce a true-rock-paper-scissors game at the capital level., then re-balance as required.

Tell me, which sounds more elegant to you?


Are you reading my suggestions, or dismissing them offhand because of my alliance?

Genuinely curious, because you're being excessively hostile, while I'm trying to hold a debate here. You also obviously haven't been reading what i have to say, as the "anti subcap" focus would shift from Titans (accessible only to a handful of old alliances) to Carriers (more disposable, accessible to any alliance or even individual, flexible, and capable of both winning or losing against subcaps in an engagement).

I want balance, you seem to want to give everyone omnitools.

I'd also like to point out that your solution doesn't fix the fact that some capitals do nearly nothing, while others do everything, while mine is introducing rock-paper-scissors balance literally by definition.

Please read my posts before commenting on them.
Pink Marshmellow
Caucasian Culture Club
#48 - 2012-02-15 00:26:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Pink Marshmellow
What i'm thinking would be an idea based off what CCP proposed.

A ship that has the ability to affect Supercapitals with ewar.

Each race will have its specialty:

Caldari: ECM that has a high chance of jamming supercapital ships.

Gallente: Sensor Dampening the supercaps to the point where they cannot target above 40km or take 2 minutes to lock a capital ship. Supercapitals unable to warp or jump.

Minmatar: Making Supercaps move very slow and a special target painter than increases the damage dealt to the target.

Amarr: Tracking disruption that totally ruins tracking and turret titans, now you will experience worse than sieged dread tracking or very short range.

To balance it, these ships cannot use their ewar effects on subcapitals with the exception of energy Neutralizers. They also do not have an affect on triage carriers or siege dreads.

Perhaps this ability should be granted to Black ops ships, making them anti-supercaps in a sense.
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#49 - 2012-02-15 00:30:25 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:


Are you reading my suggestions, or dismissing them offhand because of my alliance?

Genuinely curious, because you're being excessively hostile, while I'm trying to hold a debate here. You also obviously haven't been reading what i have to say, as the "anti subcap" focus would shift from Titans (accessible only to a handful of old alliances) to Carriers (more disposable, accessible to any alliance or even individual, flexible, and capable of both winning or losing against subcaps in an engagement).


I am, although you beeing a testie I attribute the typical Goon view to you. Which incidentally, you have said nothing to make me change my mind about.

As for your solutions, no I dont think it will work. I think it will only push titans off the sub-cap field (making your side of this debate very happy), while preserving the titan blobs in the old established alliances as the only ones who have them, and where the only effective counter to a titan blob would be a bigger titan blob.

All of which is pretty much exactly the opposite of what I want to see. I dont belive there should be artificial barriers between ship classes. I dont belive the capital game today is nearly complex enough. And I dont think countering a blob with more of the same blob is very good gameplay.
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#50 - 2012-02-15 00:33:09 UTC
Pink Marshmellow wrote:
What i'm thinking would be an idea based off what CCP proposed.

A ship that has the ability to affect Supercapitals with ewar.


yes, this is basically what I mean when i say I want to see capital sized EWAR ships. because it would be ****** up if a 3 month old player in a t1 frigate could keep a titan out of play. A capital sized verison of said frigate however, I am all for.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#51 - 2012-02-15 00:34:29 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:


I am, although you beeing a testie I attribute the typical Goon view to you. Which incidentally, you have said nothing to make me change my mind about.

As for your solutions, no I dont think it will work. I think it will only push titans off the sub-cap field (making your side of this debate very happy), while preserving the titan blobs in the old established alliances as the only ones who have them, and where the only effective counter to a titan blob would be a bigger titan blob.

All of which is pretty much exactly the opposite of what I want to see. I dont belive there should be artificial barriers between ship classes. I dont belive the capital game today is nearly complex enough. And I dont think countering a blob with more of the same blob is very good gameplay.


The issue here is not "the blob", it is the Titan. And I also brought up the problem of the Supercarrier's overnerf, and the Dreadnought's marginal role.

The titan is not specialized, and capable in any situation with minimal support. In numbers, it is unstoppable. They should not be used as anti-supcap ships, as they themselves are nearly immune to subcaps once a critical mass is reached. That critical mass is extremely low. The counter should be farther down the capital chain - in my suggestion, Carriers. This allows for fights where the better coordinated fleet wins, not the one with Titans.
Pink Marshmellow
Caucasian Culture Club
#52 - 2012-02-15 00:36:08 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Pink Marshmellow wrote:
What i'm thinking would be an idea based off what CCP proposed.

A ship that has the ability to affect Supercapitals with ewar.


yes, this is basically what I mean when i say I want to see capital sized EWAR ships. because it would be ****** up if a 3 month old player in a t1 frigate could keep a titan out of play. A capital sized verison of said frigate however, I am all for.


Exactly, it would be rather ridiculous if you could simply get any ship with a tracking disruptor to ruin a supercap.

This will give Black Ops a real niche.

They would be perfect ships when dealing against stronghold systems that are cynojammed.

Cynojammers have no effect on covert cynos, allow you to bring a bunch of these into the fight with no one noticing.
Keen Fallsword
Skyway Patrol
#53 - 2012-02-15 00:36:28 UTC
The best solution is to just add titan size weapon. And problem solved. Clear and simple ;)
foxnod
Perkone
Caldari State
#54 - 2012-02-15 00:43:46 UTC
Why not capital warp disrupters that can effect supercaps. That way the carriers and dreads can take part in pinning down the supercap fleet.
Pink Marshmellow
Caucasian Culture Club
#55 - 2012-02-15 00:45:30 UTC
foxnod wrote:
Why not capital warp disrupters that can effect supercaps. That way the carriers and dreads can take part in pinning down the supercap fleet.


The problem with that is that it overlaps with the focused point of HIC's.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#56 - 2012-02-15 00:45:34 UTC
foxnod wrote:
Why not capital warp disrupters that can effect supercaps. That way the carriers and dreads can take part in pinning down the supercap fleet.


The problem with that lies in the fact that once supers land, caps evaporate.

capitals aren't as big a problem as the one-sided nature of the subcap vs titan battle. this is also extremely inconsistent with EVE's overarching design philosophy, where a frigate can basically shut down a battleship, but a battleship will stomp a battlecruiser.
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#57 - 2012-02-15 00:56:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Reilly Duvolle
Akirei Scytale wrote:


The issue here is not "the blob", it is the Titan. And I also brought up the problem of the Supercarrier's overnerf, and the Dreadnought's marginal role.

The titan is not specialized, and capable in any situation with minimal support. In numbers, it is unstoppable. They should not be used as anti-supcap ships, as they themselves are nearly immune to subcaps once a critical mass is reached. That critical mass is extremely low. The counter should be farther down the capital chain - in my suggestion, Carriers. This allows for fights where the better coordinated fleet wins, not the one with Titans.


Oh the issue here is definitly about the blob as well as the titans. For years, the subcap blob ruled the north. Due to a combination of cluster limitations and the fact that titans werent nearly as numerous as they are today, the old NC managed to hold the north against several invasion attempts.

Enter the fight on lag with its server improvments, massive titan production and the banding together of "elite PVP" alliances fielding massive amounts of titans. The NC no longer had the numbers to employ nodecrashing tactics with the server improvements, and lost subcap after subcap battle in face of highly trained elite PVP fleets. Geminate fell without supers beeing fielded much at all. By the time of the siege of TVN-FM, NC resolve had been all but spent, but they tried one last massive effort. Which was countered by massive amounts of Titans. Losing Vale, the NC prepared to defend Tribute, the Goons got involved and the outcome once again went up in the air. The Tribute campaign however, saw more and more use of the Titan blob, which effectively countered the massive subcap fleets thrown into the meatgrinder. So, after 4 years, the elite PVP forces had finally found the counter to massive subcap fleets.

And here we are. Massive Titan fleets today represent the quality alternative to nullsec warfare, while the subcap blob still represent the quantity alternative. These two opposing strategies are two sides of the same problem. Now, we both ackowledge that the titan blob is OP compared to the subcap blob - and this is not how it should be. However - I think that a return to the subcap blob as the only viable strategy would remove the quality alternative to nullsec warfare, which I think should be preserved. The issue is to balance the gameplay without breaking it.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#58 - 2012-02-15 01:04:38 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:


The issue here is not "the blob", it is the Titan. And I also brought up the problem of the Supercarrier's overnerf, and the Dreadnought's marginal role.

The titan is not specialized, and capable in any situation with minimal support. In numbers, it is unstoppable. They should not be used as anti-supcap ships, as they themselves are nearly immune to subcaps once a critical mass is reached. That critical mass is extremely low. The counter should be farther down the capital chain - in my suggestion, Carriers. This allows for fights where the better coordinated fleet wins, not the one with Titans.


Oh the issue here is definitly about the blob as well as the titans. For years, the subcap blob ruled the north. Due to a combination of cluster limitations and the fact that titans werent nearly as numerous as they are today, the old NC managed to hold the north against several invasion attempts.

Enter the fight on lag with its server improvments, massive titan production and the banding together of "elite PVP" alliances fielding massive amounts of titans. The NC no longer had the numbers to employ nodecrashing tactics with the server improvements, and lost subcap after subcap battle in face of highly trained elite PVP fleets. Geminate fell without supers beeing fielded much at all. By the time of the siege of TVN-FM, NC resolve had been all but spent, but they tried one last massive effort. Which was countered by massive amounts of Titans. Losing Vale, the NC prepared to defend Tribute, the Goons got involved and the outcome once again went up in the air. The Tribute campaign however, saw more and more use of the Titan blob, which effectively countered the massive subcap fleets thrown into the meatgrinder. So, after 4 years, the elite PVP forces had finally found the counter to massive subcap fleets.

And here we are. Massive Titan fleets today represent the quality alternative to nullsec warfare, while the subcap blob still represent the quantity alternative. These two opposing strategies are two sides of the same problem. Now, we both ackowledge that the titan blob is OP compared to the subcap blob - and this is not how it should be. However - I think that a return to the subcap blob as the only viable strategy would remove the quality alternative to nullsec warfare, which I think should be preserved. The issue is to balance the gameplay without breaking it.


We definately agree on several points. Two things however:

The NC did not die because their tactics were outdated. They died because they refused to cooperate with allies. On multiple occasions, we (we meaning the CFC) fielded fleets to support them with. We'd get to our rendezvous point and wait for word, so we could coordinate. Pretty much every single time, the NC FCs had gotten impatient and welped themselves while we were just a bridge away, without notifying us. They killed themselves through lack of coordination and effort. Its why we (TEST) reset them halfway through that war, and wiped their attempts at sov elsewhere off the map afterwards. Just offering insight, I was there after all.

I don't want either the supcap or supercap fleet to dominate, that is the entire base of my suggestion. Its why I chose carriers as the bridge between subcaps and caps, and the counter to subcaps - it is easy to get a large number of carriers compared to titans, making the counter more accessible. It fixes the titan problem, while maintaining a role for them. And it ensures that the resulting fights are good ones. Well coordinated subcap fleets vs well coordinated carrier-heavy fleets could go either way - subcaps are entirely capable of taking out carriers in a fleet setting, while the thought of attempting to take out a Titan in said setting is pretty much laughable.
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-02-15 01:21:00 UTC
Titans are fine as is.

Origionally they were anti-ship with an AoE DD. Very few in existence is how it was supposed to be, they could never be anti-cap only so you would assume they hit everything on the field.

Then it became single target, repurposing the Titan to anti-cap ships.

Then the single target no longer shoots smaller ships

Then they lost their drones

Then they lost 20% of their hitpoints

And they still whine they are over powered because they are difficult to kill with their rifters cause it was cool since it worked for Luke Skywalker and they fail to bring cap ships of their own to counter the glass cannons fit with multiple tracking enhancers.

NEWSFLASH! You fly sub cap ships, you would win because the giant behemonths can't do **** and can't even become hangar queens since they don't dock making the ship entirely useless (Hello Mothership 2.0). But it wouldn't matter to you, because your lazy ass can't be bothered to train for a titan, your alliance can't bother to build them or make friends with people to obtain your own, you fail to even put the effort forward to try to get into cap ships because you don't liked them. Hey, the longer you don't try to topple these monsters the more they are being built...because you just can't be bothered to attack and only see yourself losing but it has to be the guy driving titan's fault.

I am against anything further being done to a titan, because alone it couldn't hit anything unless the target was webbed multiple times (to counter, get another titan FFS!). Nerf it so it can't hit smaller targets, nerf smaller ships to hit only things in their weight class then to balance it out (since you can't shoot vulnerable 2m thermal vents and its just a giant object with a huge buffer, then one would assume by game mechanics your 250mm auto cannon rounds and 425mm railguns are bouncing off armor plates the size of an american football field while Tachyon lasers are just warming them).

Balance other ships (Dreads!) to take out cap ships, just because you stop and half ass it to fly smaller ships since larger ships take so long to fly doesn't mean you get the advantage to screw over other pilots with more SP that dedicated to fly caps since you choose to half ass your training time for those smaller ships so you take smaller losses.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#60 - 2012-02-15 01:23:25 UTC
Aqriue wrote:
Titans are fine as is.



No, they aren't. Everyone acknowledges this.

One ship that can handle every situation is broken. Omnitools obsolete everything else. Exactly the opposite of what you want in a sandbox MMO.