These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Incoming titan adjustments

First post First post
Author
The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1761 - 2012-03-14 19:01:29 UTC
FeLiZk wrote:
On a side note I think it is so funny Goons are complaining about being blobbed, what is not funny is CCP is listening.

Change Titans by all means but don't do it for them. And don't rush it for them.


You yourself are to blame; you and your fellows refuse to accept responsibility for your own misbehavior. Typical.

~hi~

Quest Liem
Doomheim
#1762 - 2012-03-14 19:01:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Quest Liem
Gossamer DT wrote:
Quest Liem wrote:
Scooter McCabe wrote:
Quest Liem wrote:
I believe in it is a definite imbalance if one group can field more people then the other. We play this game to be fair and have fun, how fun is it to be outnumbered 50 to 1? Not very, in the best interest of this game CCP should come up with a way to limit the number of combatants in a signal system. I mean we do need to be fair and give someone s sporting chance.


So you want to penalize alliances that have a better culture in terms of attracting players and getting them to show up for fleet fights. Sorry CCP cannot upgrade your personality.



How is that penalizing any alliance? We are making the game more enjoyable for both. You enjoy the game by out numbering your opponent? Is not that not an I win button? I am bring issues that would make the game more fair to everyone who pays to play the game. A 30 on 30 fight is a lot more enjoyable then something like 300 on 50. Do you not agree?


I think you are looking for hi sec and war dec's we are tearing about titans in this thread, can you go find a lets be even sided fights thread some where else? TIA



Oh im sorry, the other 80 plus pages of worth while post were all about titans. But thank you for proving my point, in your lack of a decent reply. it seems that other people can blob titans and its not fair but its ok if we blob sub capitals in EVE. Nice one side argument
GeneralDisturbed
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1763 - 2012-03-14 19:04:20 UTC  |  Edited by: GeneralDisturbed
Considering most of the people posting in this thread about "blobbing" and those "1600 goons they are going to use to take over everything" and our "Fleets of nothing but maelstroms/drakes".. are either neutral alts, or NPC corps. I'm inclined to believe most of you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Especially when it comes to blobbing. Considering the Pl/Raiden group have consistently matched our numbers during big fights. They just like to drop supers onto those fights when they're losing, so they win. That's why we call them "IWin"buttons. Because you hit the cyno, YOU WIN.
Gossamer DT
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1764 - 2012-03-14 19:05:05 UTC
Quest Liem wrote:
Gossamer DT wrote:
Quest Liem wrote:
Scooter McCabe wrote:
Quest Liem wrote:
I believe in it is a definite imbalance if one group can field more people then the other. We play this game to be fair and have fun, how fun is it to be outnumbered 50 to 1? Not very, in the best interest of this game CCP should come up with a way to limit the number of combatants in a signal system. I mean we do need to be fair and give someone s sporting chance.


So you want to penalize alliances that have a better culture in terms of attracting players and getting them to show up for fleet fights. Sorry CCP cannot upgrade your personality.



How is that penalizing any alliance? We are making the game more enjoyable for both. You enjoy the game by out numbering your opponent? Is not that not an I win button? I am bring issues that would make the game more fair to everyone who pays to play the game. A 30 on 30 fight is a lot more enjoyable then something like 300 on 50. Do you not agree?


I think you are looking for hi sec and war dec's we are tearing about titans in this thread, can you go find a lets be even sided fights thread some where else? TIA



Oh im sorry, the other 80 plus pages of worth while post were all about titans. But thank you for proving my point, in your lack of a decent reply. it seems that other people can blob titans and its not fair but its ok if we blob sub capitals in EVE. Nice one side argument


Who is your main, and what does he do?

who is your main, and what does he do?

FeLiZk
Loot Industries
#1765 - 2012-03-14 19:05:13 UTC
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
It is refreshing to see at least one titan blobber willing to come in and admit that they saw a pretty good subcap fight in progress and thought "Man we should just drop supers all over that". You know, risk/reward or whatever.


If there is a tactical structure we are in defending or attacking, and it looks like there is a chance we will lose it off cause we have. Just like you bring another full fleet.

I don't recall off hand a time where we have not been outnumbered, where we have brought Titans to a straight up fight.
GeneralDisturbed
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1766 - 2012-03-14 19:07:01 UTC
Kyle Myr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1767 - 2012-03-14 19:07:27 UTC
The talk of logistical hassle in this thread is interesting, as it only presents half of the story. This is what we're comparing:

-The difficulty of acquiring super caps, either by building them or buying them, for 25-100 pilots, with the rare loss replacement.

-The difficulty of having a spread of cynos for these super caps to move 5-10 jumps to reach a given fight

-The difficulty of getting 25-100 pilots to log in to form a proper super cap fleett.


Now, for the other side of the coin, you have:

-The difficulty of acquiring hulls for upwards of 200 battleships, or 1000+ battlecruisers, repeatedly, easily once per month

-The difficulty in maintaining a large jump bridge network so that fleets can burn 20 jumps to a battle, or working out routes so fleets can go 30+ jumps to battle without stragglers and reinforcements getting picked off:

-The difficulty of being able to to coordinate, rally, and provide content for 250 - 1500 pilots

So, when it's discussed that acquiring and fielding super capitals involves a lot of logistical effort, it's intellectually dishonest to suggest by omission that fielding a large sub capital fleet able to potentially deter such a fleet is any less difficult.
GeneralDisturbed
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1768 - 2012-03-14 19:08:06 UTC
FeLiZk wrote:
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
It is refreshing to see at least one titan blobber willing to come in and admit that they saw a pretty good subcap fight in progress and thought "Man we should just drop supers all over that". You know, risk/reward or whatever.


If there is a tactical structure we are in defending or attacking, and it looks like there is a chance we will lose it off cause we have. Just like you bring another full fleet.

I don't recall off hand a time where we have not been outnumbered, where we have brought Titans to a straight up fight.


So what you're saying is, if there's a chance you'll lose a strategic objective, you drop titans. So you win. Sort of like an "Iwin" button you might say. Huh.
Daiony
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1769 - 2012-03-14 19:09:12 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
FeLiZk wrote:
On a side note I think it is so funny Goons are complaining about being blobbed, what is not funny is CCP is listening.

Change Titans by all means but don't do it for them. And don't rush it for them.


You yourself are to blame; you and your fellows refuse to accept responsibility for your own misbehavior. Typical.


So you are saying that using titans against subcaps was an exploit then? Otherwise your post makes no sense. Everything that was done was well within the rules CCP implemented. You chose not to use your supercapitals in a scenario where they would be at risk. Thats your choice. It doesn't mean that it was the only right thing to do. Why didn't you use all the tools available to you? Instead you chose not to use them and vote for a nerf so the other evil guys can't use them against you.

People do want titans to be changed, but not like this. This is a half assed ****** patchjob that looks rushed and tailored towards goons playstyle. That is the problem people have with it. Why rush a "surgical fix" (lol) like this out now? It's not like it couldn't wait till CCP thought out a proper solution to the WHOLE problem that are supercaps and sov warfare.

To me it looks like CCP is panicking here for no apparent reason.

CCP should take their time and act like professionals. Do a fix, but do it right, and not some piece of **** rushjob.
Ke'Daar
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1770 - 2012-03-14 19:10:18 UTC
The Mittani wrote:


They may tell themselves that the inarguable imbalance of blapping titans was a sign of their 'skill' or 'superiority' - the same excuses offered forth throughout the history of the Titan, justifying Remote Doomsdays, AoE Doomsdays, etc etc. The same old guard players, the same old guard excuses, the same old-guard entitlement.

Ultimately, the nemesis of titans was the poor impulse control of their own pilots - the inability, when faced with what amounted to a free bar, not to drink themselves into blundering violence and to assault the other guests.


I woul like to add to what The Mittani has said:

The ability to project overwhelming force with Titans in their current state, has the ugly ability to breed Arrogance, and when you look at the definition of that word...

arrogant - having or showing feelings of unwarranted importance out of overbearing pride.

adjective conceited, lordly, assuming, proud, swaggering, pompous, pretentious, stuck up (informal), cocky, contemptuous, blustering, imperious, overbearing, haughty, scornful, puffed up, egotistical, disdainful, self-important, presumptuous, high-handed, insolent, supercilious, high and mighty (informal), overweening, immodest, swollen-headed, bigheaded.

Thus because of these whining Titan owners own Arrogance, they are now faced with this nerf
Hungry Ghost
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1771 - 2012-03-14 19:10:37 UTC
CCP before going forward with that decision - did you actually consider that atm there is 2 major conflicts going on in 0.0. First one is CFC Vs Raiden&Co, second is southern alliances Vs Legion of Death&friends. In both cases one side heavily relied on titans, while the other used them rarely, if at all. As far as i can tell both conflicts currently going in favor of the side, that do not use titans, but can field more ppl.
You are proposing balance change that will further shift balance of power in favor of the winning side. Did you notice, what majority of people praising you for this change got goonswarm or aligned ticker? Must look really strange to someone without interest in 0.0 politics

What even worse, imho, is you really saying something like that: "There is a problem with some ship class. But we dont want to actually deal with it, so we will just make this ship less and less useful, until ppl stop actually fielding it". I dont know, does this sound like a commitment to "spaceships as a focus of EVE" to you?. If the problem is really that pressing - find the resources to address it.

It would be really interesintg to hear CSM representatives opinions on proposed changes.

FeLiZk
Loot Industries
#1772 - 2012-03-14 19:11:32 UTC
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
FeLiZk wrote:
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
It is refreshing to see at least one titan blobber willing to come in and admit that they saw a pretty good subcap fight in progress and thought "Man we should just drop supers all over that". You know, risk/reward or whatever.


If there is a tactical structure we are in defending or attacking, and it looks like there is a chance we will lose it off cause we have. Just like you bring another full fleet.

I don't recall off hand a time where we have not been outnumbered, where we have brought Titans to a straight up fight.


So what you're saying is, if there's a chance you'll lose a strategic objective, you drop titans. So you win. Sort of like an "Iwin" button you might say. Huh.


No more then 250 fleet on top would be.

And no one is preventing you from doing the same, as mittanie stated you have one of the biggest ones.
Blawrf McTaggart
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1773 - 2012-03-14 19:11:35 UTC
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11666499

GUYS WHY IS THIS HAPPENING OH DEAR ME YOU ARE RUINING EVE THERE IS NO JUSTIFIABLE REASON WHY TITANS SHOULD BE NERFED THEY ARE FINE HAVEN'T YOU HEARD OF RISK VS REWARD I WANT TO GO TO FANFEST TO SHOOT THE MITTANI AND PUKE ON HIM AND THIS IS GOONS ONLINE NOW CCP DO YOU WANT 7K GOON PLAYERS OR 60K NORMAL PLAYERS CCP HOW MANY BLOWJOBS DID THE MITTANI GIVE YOU FOR THIS TITAN NERF CCP WE WANT A LIST OF ALL CONTACTS MADE BY THE MITTANI AND VILE RAT BETWEEN CCP MEMBERS WE KNOW THAT THE MITTANI IS VERY GENEROUS COME CHRISTMAS TIME AND YOU KNOW WHAT CCP YOU ARE JUST COMPLETELY RUINING THIS GAME YOU ARE RUINING THE ENDGAME BECAUSE WE WORKED REALLY REALLY REALLY HARD FOR OUR TITANS AND NOW YOU ARE JUST RUINING THEM WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS CCP I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND CAN YOU STOP MAKING THIS GOONS ONLINE AND PLEASE LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYERBASE BECAUSE YOU ARE MAKING A BIG MISTAKE FIRE STOFFER AND SREEGS BECAUSE THEY ARE GOON UNDERCOVER AGENTS AND THEY ARE TRYING THEIR HARDEST TO SUBVERT YOUR COMPANY AND YOUR GAME AND THEY RECEIVE REGULAR ORAL SEX FROM GOON CSM MEMBERS AND WE JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU ARE DOING THIS I MEAN WHY ARE YOU PENALIZING OUR ALLIANCE FOR WORKING HARD ON OUR MILITARY MIGHT YOU HAVE TO STOP THE MITTANI FROM RUNNING FROM CSM HE IS A BLIGHT ON THIS GAME AND IS JUST REALLY BAD AND IS TURNING THIS INTO GOONS ONLINE PLEASE STOP DOING THIS CCP YOU SHOULDN'T CHANGE TITANS LIKE THIS THEY ARE FINE AS THEY ARE AND IF YOU REALLY WANT TO CHANGE TITANS MAYBE YOU SHOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT THEM FIRST RATHER THAN JUST CONFINING THEM TO POSES IN SPACE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE DOING CCP DO YOU REALLY WANT TO SEE A UNIVERSE RULED BY THE DESPOTIC FIST OF THE MITTANI JUST BECAUSE I MEAN IS IT WORTH LOSING 600,000 PLAYERS BECAUSE YOU ARE PANDERING TO GOONS AND THE MITTANI AND I HOPE RABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLE
Gossamer DT
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1774 - 2012-03-14 19:11:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Gossamer DT
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
FeLiZk wrote:
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
It is refreshing to see at least one titan blobber willing to come in and admit that they saw a pretty good subcap fight in progress and thought "Man we should just drop supers all over that". You know, risk/reward or whatever.


If there is a tactical structure we are in defending or attacking, and it looks like there is a chance we will lose it off cause we have. Just like you bring another full fleet.

I don't recall off hand a time where we have not been outnumbered, where we have brought Titans to a straight up fight.


So what you're saying is, if there's a chance you'll lose a strategic objective, you drop titans. So you win. Sort of like an "Iwin" button you might say. Huh.


I think they are getting confused becase of the I, try this "iWin" instead of "Iwin", makes apple look pretty sharp.

who is your main, and what does he do?

Ser Berus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1775 - 2012-03-14 19:13:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Ser Berus
Quest Liem wrote:
Ser Berus wrote:
Quest Liem wrote:
Scooter McCabe wrote:
Quest Liem wrote:
I believe in it is a definite imbalance if one group can field more people then the other. We play this game to be fair and have fun, how fun is it to be outnumbered 50 to 1? Not very, in the best interest of this game CCP should come up with a way to limit the number of combatants in a signal system. I mean we do need to be fair and give someone s sporting chance.


So you want to penalize alliances that have a better culture in terms of attracting players and getting them to show up for fleet fights. Sorry CCP cannot upgrade your personality.



How is that penalizing any alliance? We are making the game more enjoyable for both. You enjoy the game by out numbering your opponent? Is not that not an I win button? I am bring issues that would make the game more fair to everyone who pays to play the game. A 30 on 30 fight is a lot more enjoyable then something like 300 on 50. Do you not agree?


Yes, because you see I signed up to play WOW and furthermore,



Yes a very intelligent reply, we are here trying to fix this game and make in more enjoyable and yet you reply with this, that has nothing to do with EVE. Next time please don't hit the reply button unless you have something to say


only so many ways to point out that this isn't how a multiplayer sandbox game works, and there are fabulous opportunities for cancelling your account and playing something that's better suited for your obsessive need of goodfites.
Mathicluanna
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1776 - 2012-03-14 19:16:31 UTC
FeLiZk wrote:
On a side note I think it is so funny Goons are complaining about being blobbed, what is not funny is CCP is listening.

Change Titans by all means but don't do it for them. And don't rush it for them.


So this is the right thing to do but CCP should knowingly do the wrong thing because waaaa goons?
Zeerover
TunDraGon
The Initiative.
#1777 - 2012-03-14 19:16:58 UTC
Short term: A decisive win for an alliance unable to take what they want under current game mechanics.

Long term: After 1½-2 years of eve being solely a numbers game (unlike the current combined wealth driven mechanics) we'll get another nerf to the blobs - like we did in December 2009 - i.e. the roots to "wtf why do you want introduce instanced pvp" will be found in this thread. You be smug now I'll be smug then Blink

[img]http://i.imgur.com/Qrwa2.png[/img]

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1778 - 2012-03-14 19:18:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11666499

Just gonna... leave this here.

hey man how else were they supposed to counter the CCP blob?
nerf titans and there's no way for alliances to have a defense against CCP roaming gangs
Sentinel Eeex
Perkone
Caldari State
#1779 - 2012-03-14 19:18:10 UTC
FeLiZk wrote:


Better to restart the server, would that be fair enough for you.

Risk / Reward anyone ever heard this concept, thought it was what this game was suppose to be based on.


Of course.

Problem is that you're not risking anything.
GeneralDisturbed
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1780 - 2012-03-14 19:20:26 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
GeneralDisturbed wrote:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11666499

Just gonna... leave this here.

hey man how else were they supposed to counter the CCP blob?
nerf titans and there's no way for alliances to have a defense against CCP roaming gangs


I am curious what CCP thought about it. Going out on a roam to have some fun with the playerbase, when suddenly a supercap fleet is dropped on their heads to blap them all. Clearly that dishonoureable blobbing CCP fleet was about to blob PL out of some space or something strategic like that.