These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

CCP: How is the Supercap change coming along?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#21 - 2012-07-22 22:45:38 UTC
bartos100 wrote:
what if ccp was to remove the abilety to copy suppercap BPO's ??

that would force builders to put a BPO in the CSAA and thus at risk of being destroyed and increase the prise for production without increasing mineral amounts needed :)


just fyi you don't actually need to have the blueprint in the CSAA in order to install a build job there

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#22 - 2012-07-22 23:11:33 UTC
Shad0wsFury wrote:
During the AT, some of the developers have indicated that they're still toying with making supercarriers dockable.


If you are refering to Greyscale, he never said "dock", but rather "mooring". That is very different, because space would be limited and the ship would be visible.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#23 - 2012-07-23 00:54:11 UTC
Why not just act in the way king of the hill works, let them give a base boost to 'capturing' w/e sov mechanic make surei t doesn't stack with other titans and voila

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?
the plague
Anthraxus Defense Laboratories
#24 - 2012-07-23 01:05:30 UTC  |  Edited by: the plague
This is the natural extension of the mindset that insists every single aspect of EVE Online has to be dumbed down to rock-paper-scissors in a misguided effort to "balance" combat. The end result is a bunch of ridiculously unbelievable ships that do one thing and nothing else, which of course leads to a bunch of predictable strategies, predictable situations, and predictable behavior. Booorrring.

Too bad. EVE could be so much more than rock-paper-scissors, but that's the way small-minded people want it. Oh well.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2012-07-23 03:15:21 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
If you are refering to Greyscale, he never said "dock", but rather "mooring". That is very different, because space would be limited and the ship would be visible.


Ahahahaha just tie it to a station with a piece of string it'll be there when you get back
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-07-23 03:22:20 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
CCP has waited, and allowed bots (and uber-blocs = peace) to exist in large numbers, for far too long to do anything with supers that will not make half their revenue rage-quit.
Only option they have to to design null 'around' supers so that they are indirectly nerfed (ie. make majority of null stuff be decided by sub-caps/vanilla caps) thus avoiding the rage-quit .. once people have come to terms with the new world they can set about changing them to perhaps fit in.

In short #1: Supers were from the outset designed based on the premise of being in very limited numbers, since that is not the case, any changes would have to be staggering. Postpone until a long-term solution for them can be hashed out.

Or they could just nerf them into the ground and announce that any complaints will result in account of complainer being audited by Screegs .. pretty sure most supers are can be traced back to one bot/RMT'er or another. Will cause the rage-quit though so equally sure they are not willing to do that Smile
Erm, one recent "audit" by Screegs resulted in the PLEX being awarded to the 'perps.' Soz...

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-07-23 04:31:05 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
bartos100 wrote:
what if ccp was to remove the abilety to copy suppercap BPO's ??

that would force builders to put a BPO in the CSAA and thus at risk of being destroyed and increase the prise for production without increasing mineral amounts needed :)


just fyi you don't actually need to have the blueprint in the CSAA in order to install a build job there


The idea would only hurt the smaller alliances that are trying to build up anyway. Alliances with an already large foothold in 0.0 would not be affected by this at all.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2012-07-23 04:34:15 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Shad0wsFury wrote:
During the AT, some of the developers have indicated that they're still toying with making supercarriers dockable.


If you are refering to Greyscale, he never said "dock", but rather "mooring". That is very different, because space would be limited and the ship would be visible.

In my opinion this is a good idea, because it at least partially eliminates the need for sitter alts (which is a rather pointless consequence of the mechanic).

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Samanta Raiolaser
SPTC-IC
#29 - 2012-07-23 11:19:36 UTC
Would be nice to be able to dock my dread errr I meant supercarrier (dreads can hit towers and blap subcaps)
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#30 - 2012-07-23 11:25:08 UTC
They are working on the SC issue, but first they will introduce a new shield tanking module that is also a nanofiber and a neut, and increases your sensor strenght.

.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#31 - 2012-07-23 13:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
Super Capitals and Captials are not the problem.
They should always be required or should I say they should be the most practical way to take SOV.

Now if you take SOV out of the picture that leaves other targets.

That means Moon mining and Stations should be a sub captial targets.
Mooning mining should be locked down to small POS's or given a different mechanic.
Stations should attackable without capitals.

They game needs more ways to for player to raid a system or alliance and have an impact.

The more ways player can get by without using captials the more those options will be used.

EVERYBODY KNOWS
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-07-23 13:43:53 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Shad0wsFury wrote:
During the AT, some of the developers have indicated that they're still toying with making supercarriers dockable.


If you are refering to Greyscale, he never said "dock", but rather "mooring". That is very different, because space would be limited and the ship would be visible.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/3831/greyscalesupers.png

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
L Salander
All Web Investigations
#33 - 2012-07-23 14:25:19 UTC
Oscasre wrote:
The problems not the ships but the numbers.

Increase the build cost x 10 on all capitals and let natrual wastage sort out the problem.


And then people go from rarely getting into super/titan fights unless there's a guaranteed win to never getting into a super/titan fight
Pharon Reichter
R.I.P. Legion
Fanatic Legion.
#34 - 2012-07-23 14:54:28 UTC
Well how can it be ?

Unexpected ( :shock: ) we are back to a pure numbers game , supers & titans shoot only structures ( when they do shoot something ). Usually they don't shoot anything and aren't shot by anything.

A big chunk of players are happy about this change on the short term ( again :shock: as to which chunk - might be the same chunk that found out earlier about the tech changes ? ) but overall eve is more boring than before.

Meanwhile in CCP HQ developers are having INTENSE brainstorming sessions as to weather to change harpy's bonuses or not. Of course , inventing a MINING FRIGATE is presented as a complete victory over balancing issues in eve. Sure it only took 4-5 months since the team was appointed to it but it god damn worth it. Eve players are holding their breath waiting for the destroyer balancing witch should ONLY take another 5-6 months.

Honestly my only question is what the 'big group' of players will next cry to happen more ? nerf supers more ( just because the average 1 year noob cant buy one ) or buff them because they just realized now they can build enough but cant to anything with them ?
FU10011101
Doomheim
#35 - 2012-07-23 15:00:43 UTC
all supercapitals deseve to get nuked.
Pharon Reichter
R.I.P. Legion
Fanatic Legion.
#36 - 2012-07-23 15:14:11 UTC
FU10011101 wrote:
all supercapitals deseve to get nuked.


Well it's clear that you wont be able to do that if they aren't fielded do we agree on that ? And they wont be fielded if there is no incentive to do that.

Or maybe you are referring to nuking by CCP ? I'd agree with you only they'd be reimbursed. Still i'd personally prefer the much more fun first option ;)
FU10011101
Doomheim
#37 - 2012-07-23 15:19:14 UTC
Pharon Reichter wrote:
FU10011101 wrote:
all supercapitals deseve to get nuked.


Well it's clear that you wont be able to do that if they aren't fielded do we agree on that ? And they wont be fielded if there is no incentive to do that.

Or maybe you are referring to nuking by CCP ? I'd agree with you only they'd be reimbursed. Still i'd personally prefer the much more fun first option ;)



actually i would be happy if CCP would make it so that no more supers can be built and those that allready are in game can stay in game but when u lose em thats it.

or just remove em all by CCP and give invested isk and skillpoints back but that is never going to happen.
Pharon Reichter
R.I.P. Legion
Fanatic Legion.
#38 - 2012-07-23 15:31:30 UTC
FU10011101 wrote:
Pharon Reichter wrote:
FU10011101 wrote:
all supercapitals deseve to get nuked.


Well it's clear that you wont be able to do that if they aren't fielded do we agree on that ? And they wont be fielded if there is no incentive to do that.

Or maybe you are referring to nuking by CCP ? I'd agree with you only they'd be reimbursed. Still i'd personally prefer the much more fun first option ;)



actually i would be happy if CCP would make it so that no more supers can be built and those that allready are in game can stay in game but when u lose em thats it.

or just remove em all by CCP and give invested isk and skillpoints back but that is never going to happen.


Since we both agree reimbursement will never happen , nor that ccp will stop their build we can look at other options. If you take a look on eve-kill.net on "big kills" you will find out that since January supercap kills have slowly decreased in number to an standstill these last months.

I don't have any facts but i'm sure production haven't slowed however. So ... what did the nerf accomplish aside for making them really useless ? ( i will agree here that for 'certain alliance' that used to grind structures with drakes being able to shoot posses and stations with titans is a BIG improvement , but the novelty will wear off soon. So ... what next ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2012-07-23 15:46:14 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Supercapitals don't need to be nerfed further. They need to have a role redefinition that gives them unique niches to fill and create incentives for their use that justify them being fielded and risked, while not trampling on the role of regular capital ships and subcaps.

As of right now the only real combat advantages I see for supercarriers are their ability to structure grind with their massive dps while still having the ability to warp out at any time, and for titans their ability to alpha capital ships and when used en-mass take down other supercaps very rapidly.
I don't fly supers myself so I could be missing a few things here, but these are pretty niche advantages.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
L Salander
All Web Investigations
#40 - 2012-07-23 15:50:21 UTC
Pharon Reichter wrote:
Well how can it be ?

Unexpected ( :shock: ) we are back to a pure numbers game , supers & titans shoot only structures ( when they do shoot something ). Usually they don't shoot anything and aren't shot by anything.

A big chunk of players are happy about this change on the short term ( again :shock: as to which chunk - might be the same chunk that found out earlier about the tech changes ? ) but overall eve is more boring than before.

Meanwhile in CCP HQ developers are having INTENSE brainstorming sessions as to weather to change harpy's bonuses or not. Of course , inventing a MINING FRIGATE is presented as a complete victory over balancing issues in eve. Sure it only took 4-5 months since the team was appointed to it but it god damn worth it. Eve players are holding their breath waiting for the destroyer balancing witch should ONLY take another 5-6 months.

Honestly my only question is what the 'big group' of players will next cry to happen more ? nerf supers more ( just because the average 1 year noob cant buy one ) or buff them because they just realized now they can build enough but cant to anything with them ?


why fix the higher levels of gameplay that only affects players who've already shown they're willing to sub and play for years when you can change frigates and destroyers to try and win over newbies who may be a bit more on the fence
Previous page123Next page