These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Is the Titan nerf announced for April CCP kowtowing to GOONs?

Author
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#101 - 2012-03-14 23:28:25 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Ruthless Erection wrote:

Another Goon trying to make it out like they don't have a titan/supercap blob. I lol so hard


When have we ever denied having our own supercap fleet? We have one of the biggest fleets in the game and we are fine with the nerfs because we see how overpowered they are.

If you want to be mad at somebody blame all the horrible alliances that have been exploiting titans for the last couple years by blowing up frigates with them and bragging about how ~elite~ they are.



I thought you were fine with the change because your real strength is your sheer number of players. Without powerful ships these other alliance will not be able to stand in the way of your herds.

But it is sort of funny to read about how you goons seem so concerned about bc gangs getting ganked. I guess you guys do care after all.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Klown Walk
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2012-03-14 23:46:10 UTC
Still needs to be a cap ship that destroys sub caps or it will just be about numbers.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#103 - 2012-03-15 00:00:47 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:

Are you actually stating that the people who spend the most RL money should always win?


How are you making that silly statement from what I said? You have to be EXTRMEMLY narrow reader & gloss over what I said as a whole Roll
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Endeavour Starfleet
#104 - 2012-03-15 01:22:58 UTC
School Nickname Worldmonkey wrote:

Well then you shouldn't have gone out of your way to constantly hotdrop frigate/BC gangs with titan blobs and then gloat about it. Your continued actions were bound to cause this sort of reprisal, yet you were too arrogant to see the train coming down the tracks. You simply could have limited your hotdrops and actually used titans to bolster subcap fleets, increase force projection, etc. It's your own fault that Titans had to be nerfed and now other pilots who used their titans for the good of their alliance have to deal with the consequences.


Bingo! Exploit things enough and eventually it gets noticed.

Klown Walk wrote:
Still needs to be a cap ship that destroys sub caps or it will just be about numbers.


No you don't. And the #'s argument fails now that Tidi is in place.
Signal11th
#105 - 2012-03-15 09:30:21 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
School Nickname Worldmonkey wrote:

Well then you shouldn't have gone out of your way to constantly hotdrop frigate/BC gangs with titan blobs and then gloat about it. Your continued actions were bound to cause this sort of reprisal, yet you were too arrogant to see the train coming down the tracks. You simply could have limited your hotdrops and actually used titans to bolster subcap fleets, increase force projection, etc. It's your own fault that Titans had to be nerfed and now other pilots who used their titans for the good of their alliance have to deal with the consequences.


Bingo! Exploit things enough and eventually it gets noticed.

Klown Walk wrote:
Still needs to be a cap ship that destroys sub caps or it will just be about numbers.


No you don't. And the #'s argument fails now that Tidi is in place.



Silly reply to be honest, Of course you have to have a cap ship that can kill multiple lower class ships otherwise all those alliances that have 4 or 5 times the number of players that your alliance has just steamroller on in.
TIDI is just a placebo for people to stop complaining about lag, it's still shite being in a large fleet fight. Just another silly little indicator to look at whilst your waiting for you turrets to fire once every 30 mins.

Just seems like people aren't having an easy time of it and aren't happy that having the numbers makes no difference.

Quality over quantity should be your motto.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#106 - 2012-03-15 09:39:47 UTC
Cearain wrote:
I thought you were fine with the change because your real strength is your sheer number of players. Without powerful ships these other alliance will not be able to stand in the way of your herds.

But it is sort of funny to read about how you goons seem so concerned about bc gangs getting ganked. I guess you guys do care after all.


i'm sorry but no sane person can suggest that 20 players should defeat hundreds unopposed

20 guys deciding coalition level engagements is simply ******** and you know it

there is significant logistical and administrative work involved in getting that "sheer number of players" into fleets regularly and getting them back into the fight when they lose ships

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Signal11th
#107 - 2012-03-15 09:49:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Signal11th
Andski wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I thought you were fine with the change because your real strength is your sheer number of players. Without powerful ships these other alliance will not be able to stand in the way of your herds.

But it is sort of funny to read about how you goons seem so concerned about bc gangs getting ganked. I guess you guys do care after all.


i'm sorry but no sane person can suggest that 20 players should defeat hundreds unopposed

20 guys deciding coalition level engagements is simply ******** and you know it

there is significant logistical and administrative work involved in getting that "sheer number of players" into fleets regularly and getting them back into the fight when they lose ships



Why not? happens in Modern warfare every day? I'm sure in the future it would be the same as well. I think what you saying is you don't like the fact that having hundreds upon hundreds of players in your alliance makes no difference?
If anything they should make them easier to kill nothing else.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#108 - 2012-03-15 09:55:23 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
Andski wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I thought you were fine with the change because your real strength is your sheer number of players. Without powerful ships these other alliance will not be able to stand in the way of your herds.

But it is sort of funny to read about how you goons seem so concerned about bc gangs getting ganked. I guess you guys do care after all.


i'm sorry but no sane person can suggest that 20 players should defeat hundreds unopposed

20 guys deciding coalition level engagements is simply ******** and you know it

there is significant logistical and administrative work involved in getting that "sheer number of players" into fleets regularly and getting them back into the fight when they lose ships



Why not? happens in Modern warfare every day? I'm sure in the future it would be the same as well. I think what you saying is you don't like the fact that having hundreds upon hundreds of players in your alliance makes no difference?


ah yes i forgot that titans are dropped in real life warfare and decimate everything

carry on

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
#109 - 2012-03-15 10:18:21 UTC
Klown Walk wrote:
Still needs to be a cap ship that destroys sub caps or it will just be about numbers.


If only there existed capital hulls that could field up to 15 light/medium/heavy/e-war drones and/or sentries and/or fighters at a time ... oh well it would probably break the game so it's probably for the best that there's not.

Cloora wrote:
Even Titan owners were expecting a tracking nerf. The scan res nerf is a bit too much IMO. I mean 15 or 20 but 5?? That's a bit extreme...


10-15B is a pretty negligible amount of isk in this economy. Fitting an officer sebo on your 100B isk hull shouldn't be a thing if you really feel the need to squeeze extra performance out of it.

It's not like Titans actually die in this game so I'd say your investment will remain pretty safe right there in your midslot.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#110 - 2012-03-15 10:20:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Signal11th wrote:
Quality over quantity should be your motto.


i'm glad that your alliance has prepared itself in anticipation of the inevitable rebalance of one shiptype thanks to your abandonment of the policy of your spiritual predecessors based on scooping up all the high-skillpoint players within arm's reach in favor of recruiting new players into the game and helping them develop their skills

glad they followed our example after being steamrolled by bittervet-supported newbies 3 times

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#111 - 2012-03-15 10:38:52 UTC
Signal11th wrote:



Why not? happens in Modern warfare every day? I'm sure in the future it would be the same as well. I think what you saying is you don't like the fact that having hundreds upon hundreds of players in your alliance makes no difference?
If anything they should make them easier to kill nothing else.


You mean the war in which we took out the nation that had 1950 era tanks and one aircraft that didn't work or the other two with decayed 1970s military?
Signal11th
#112 - 2012-03-15 11:07:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Signal11th
baltec1 wrote:
Signal11th wrote:



Why not? happens in Modern warfare every day? I'm sure in the future it would be the same as well. I think what you saying is you don't like the fact that having hundreds upon hundreds of players in your alliance makes no difference?
If anything they should make them easier to kill nothing else.


You mean the war in which we took out the nation that had 1950 era tanks and one aircraft that didn't work or the other two with decayed 1970s military?



And your point being?Would you like the Army to even the odds up just to make it easier for the enemy to have an "nice little fight"
You can assign this logic to any "large" or "overpowered" army piece of kit regardless of age or size.
A carrier is still going to sink a **** load of small boats before it goes down, a tank will always kill shitloads of infrantry etc etc

I'm sure the Somalians in their little rigs would love it if the USA would remove the minigun autodetection routines from their carriers
thus making easier for them to sink the carrier, somehow I don't think it's going to happen.

If anything CCP need to supply people with the tools to bring these ships down not just nerf the ships so they become useless because "it's easier"

All CCP will do will make it as usual quantity over quality, so if you want to hold the SOV you have just managed to get you have to Blue up/Suck off the local "large" alliance because they have taken away/made it pointless the only thing that makes it awkward for a large fleet to engage.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#113 - 2012-03-15 11:21:43 UTC
Klown Walk wrote:
Still needs to be a cap ship that destroys sub caps or it will just be about numbers.


Brilliant mind at work here.

Why are there so many people that think "Gosh if I only had a ship that would let me defeat the blob, I would has a happy," but they can't seem to look one step further and realize, "Gosh, it would sure suck to have to fight off a blob of those anti-blob ships."

It. Will. Always. Be. About. Numbers.

2 > 1

It's one of those fundamental things about the universe that can't be legislated, coded, whined about or persuaded to change.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#114 - 2012-03-15 11:22:48 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
All CCP will do will make it as usual quantity over quality, so if you want to hold the SOV you have just managed to get you have to Blue up/Suck off the local "large" alliance because they have taken away/made it pointless the only thing that makes it awkward for a large fleet to engage.


as opposed to getting mauled by ever-growing titan fleets?

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#115 - 2012-03-15 13:37:45 UTC
War Kitten wrote:

It. Will. Always. Be. About. Numbers.

2 > 1

It's one of those fundamental things about the universe that can't be legislated, coded, whined about or persuaded to change.



At least not until CCP changes combat mechanics in a way where damage / remote reps does not stack infinitely well.

(One theoretical fix might be that as the debris field builds around the ship each tick, incoming damage gets modulated downward in some fashion. But since the server operates on 1-sec ticks that might just make alpha-fleets even more powerful. Especially if they use a mouse/keyboard distribution tool to make all clients on the PC fire their salvos at the exact same instant.)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#116 - 2012-03-15 13:56:37 UTC
Klown Walk wrote:
Still needs to be a cap ship that destroys sub caps or it will just be about numbers.

Close, but not quite.

There needs to be a cap ship that destroys subcaps or caps will have no real use. Numbers is not really a factor — it's just that not allowing for that kind of relationship breaks the paper-scissors-rock cycle. Of course, for the whole thing to work, there also has to be a capship that is supremely weak to subcaps, and this is why the cycle has failed so far.

Since there already are capships that destroy subcaps, what they're trying to do now is that last bit that ties the whole thing together: a capship that dies horribly when faced with subcaps.
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#117 - 2012-03-15 13:59:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Tanya Powers
DarthNefarius wrote:
Rightly or wrongly that is a conclusion almost all in Eve can come to rightfully believe. I actually don't care 1 way or the other since I've never felt particularly threatened by goons & always saw thru their scams & laughed but with the Titan nerf announced the refrain:
" CCP should just make it so titans cant lock maelstroms and drakes and just get this over with. " seems justified
With the current CSM elections going the way they seem to be unless everyone starts voting against MITTENS in a unified fashion Ithink this perception that CCP has a hard on for goons is just going to grow INCREDIBLY!


If you have a numbers problem, better revisit your strategie.
If you don't understand that it's bad for you at the end if you want to grow your alliance populace is not by tax those as a pitch, rent space for astronomic amounts of isk with false promises just to get your beloved minerals.
What for?- to build more caps and titans and then claim your ubber 1000K man fleet can annihilate a 7.5K man fleet?

Now how far is game breaking a 200man fleet of titans is when it can one shot at the exact same time 200 ships with a single shot and without using a single time their DD, more titans to shoot titans...do you really think goons can't align 1K supers/titans? Lol

For those wining about titans tracking nerf all I have to say is: Tell us all too why is normal battleships can't one shot dramiels at 12Km/s nor 200m/s velators orbiting their guns, please go ahead and explain me that, I'd really like to understand why you should be able to hit my cane orbiting your XL guns at 1200m/sec with 800m rad but still 1200m/sec when you're not supposed to hit whatever under capital size?

The point is that this has nothing to do with goons, it's a game breaking problem that had to be solved by someone and seems they get things done some other couldn't.
I don't like some of them more than you do but to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, they're doing some good stuff and this Titan crap is a good thing that I'll support because it's good for the game.

Also:I don't think it's in goons own interest to be blue to everyone just because it can bring numbers, they would get bored and probably collapse (shoot each other they already do that)
Try to fight them in small gangs you'll see, they always come to fights and will always give you a fair and good fight.
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2012-03-15 14:02:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Vertisce Soritenshi
Tippia wrote:
Klown Walk wrote:
Still needs to be a cap ship that destroys sub caps or it will just be about numbers.

Close, but not quite.

There needs to be a cap ship that destroys subcaps or caps will have no real use. Numbers is not really a factor — it's just that not allowing for that kind of relationship breaks the paper-scissors-rock cycle. Of course, for the whole thing to work, there also has to be a capship that is supremely weak to subcaps, and this is why the cycle has failed so far.

Since there already are capships that destroy subcaps, what they're trying to do now is that last bit that ties the whole thing together: a capship that dies horribly when faced with subcaps.

Right. But making the largest, strongest and most dangerous cap ship the one that takes out subcaps is a bad, bad idea.

The way I see it, it should be Carriers that take out sub caps and supers but less effective against supers. Supers take out all caps and subcaps but less effective agains subcaps. Dreads and Titans take out all caps and cannot touch subcaps. Exceptions to both Titans/Dreads and Supers on subcaps being if the subcap is webbed and painted properly.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#119 - 2012-03-15 14:17:05 UTC
Andski wrote:
Signal11th wrote:
Andski wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I thought you were fine with the change because your real strength is your sheer number of players. Without powerful ships these other alliance will not be able to stand in the way of your herds.

But it is sort of funny to read about how you goons seem so concerned about bc gangs getting ganked. I guess you guys do care after all.


i'm sorry but no sane person can suggest that 20 players should defeat hundreds unopposed

20 guys deciding coalition level engagements is simply ******** and you know it

there is significant logistical and administrative work involved in getting that "sheer number of players" into fleets regularly and getting them back into the fight when they lose ships



Why not? happens in Modern warfare every day? I'm sure in the future it would be the same as well. I think what you saying is you don't like the fact that having hundreds upon hundreds of players in your alliance makes no difference?


ah yes i forgot that titans are dropped in real life warfare and decimate everything

carry on



If you are going to ignore the real world than why are you arguing about sanity? It may not happen in the internet spaceship universe you imagine but that doesn't mean I’m insane if it happens in the one I dream of.

Also look at the Spanish versus the indigenous people of South America. There are slews of examples throughout history where better technology means one soldier can be worth hundreds.

Also your difficulties about getting hundreds of people in drakes doesn't mean it should be an automatic I win button if you succeed. The herd mentality of eve is hardly something that should be promoted even more.

Finally why bring battlecruisers to fight titans? Because every noob in your alliance wants to feel they are just as powerful as players who have invested years of time in the game? Why does the game have to be such that a battlecruiser fleet can beat a titan fleet and the titans can do nothing but bring herds of battcruisers themselves?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Pheusia
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#120 - 2012-03-15 14:20:36 UTC
I love the way some people talk as if it were only Goons that wanted the hideously overpowered titan blobs rebalanced.