EVE Information Portal

I think we should split the SCs into 2 groups:

Group 1: (Use existing models)
Can use fighters + fighter bombers, they retain the existing +3 fighters per level of carrier, only with no Remote rep bonuses and no ewar immunity (these ships have teeth, so dont needs gods blessing to get out of trouble) THey also sacrifice ewar immunity for their current dps. They also lose a significant % of their ship maint bays since these ships are less concerned with fleet logistics and more concerned with pew pew. They retain their current HP, retain their current drone bays but cannot use standard drones anymore. Apply logoffski timer nerf. (These ships will be the big boys of the super carrier class, like hyperions, abaddons, maelstroms and rokhs are to battleships). Ship role = pure anti cap/anti infrastructure dps boat with a phat tank. (cannot effectively engage sub caps)

Group 2: (Will require new models)
Can use standard drones and fighters only, no bombers. They are nerfed to only +1 extra drone per carrier level bonus (Thus reducing the # of drones they can field to 10 without DCUs) Has a remote rep bonus with ewar immunity (these ships have no teeth, so will need devine intervention to help them survive). nerf HP with 20%, buff cap with 25% (for dedicated nigh-perma remote repping) and apply logoffski timer nerf. Boost the ship maint bays with 100% These will be the smaller SCs (like Scorps, domis, typhoons and armageddons are to battleships) Ship role = Fleet logistics (moving ships, replacing losses)/capital fleet support/logistics boats for all ship types, with less tank and allot less dps (but can have limited effectiveness against sub caps using normal drones and fighters in much smaller quantities)

Additionally these supercarriers cost billions to maintain.

In real life™, the upfront cost of a military asset is but a small fraction of the total cost of ownership. In EVE, all cost is front-loaded, you can buy a supercarrier and sit in it for a hundred years if you really want to.

This is why even as a cap pilot, I think we should be considering introducing maintenance costs associated with capital ships and larger. Fuel is one way of doing it - to move them costs resources directly, but it doesn't take it far enough.

Logistics becomes extremely important when dealing with large units and although it would make flying a supercap truly miserable, it would also be the most effective (and realistic) way of balancing them out.

This would:

Encourage people who own supercaps to use them, because why bother having them when they cost you to maintain?

Encourage co-operative play and make managing these large ships more challenging at the alliance level, and almost impossible for individuals to run effectively without multiple logistics/production alts behind them.

Simulate wear and tear on large-scale construction. In real life components break and need replacing, hulls corrode and become damaged. The bigger the ship, the harder this maintenance becomes, until it gets to a point where it is no longer cost effective. Regardless of self-repair or autonomous systems - which would absolutely be required for a ship the size of a titan or SC - they would still need steady deliveries of raw materials to keep running.

Make flying capitals less of an endgame choice - because why would you go commanding or flying around in such a huge isk sink without a good reason, when your cruiser is more effective for most tasks and doesn't cost a bean to run?

Group 1 +1

Why are so many people refering to this as a goon patch? I think any who has been on the recieving end of DRF and gang 150 man super cap blob would like to see this pach implemented . Simply put as stated before, the reason they are a problem is because of the number of super carriers in fleet at a given time. Im sure when ccp implemented the fighter bomber thing they didnt expect such a proliferation of super carriers as observed in last economic cycle report. In the 4th quarter alone they were up 150 percent. There is no counter to them unless you bring your own blob of super carriers. And lets be real for just a sec shall we. How many alliances besides DRF have the capability whether legal or illegaly to obtain that many super carriers in such a short peroid of time.

Its not like CCP can just ask folks to play nice and not use the clear adavantage of blobing with the OMGWTFPWN mobiles now can they ? So now what ? Some of you want to complain even though you knew it was a FOTM ( albiet an expensive one) but none the less a FOTM and scream foul play? Its no different when everybody jumped head first into the nano FOTM and cried when they balanced it. But your suppose to be special because you spent 20b isk tough ****.

like they told the nano and falcon pilots get over it , adapt or quit this is EVE and the amount of isk you spend on your ship is not a guarantee of any sorts. And for goodness sake please stop comparing real life military to EVE. you cant make reference to real life ships to a Internet space ship (GAME )!!! only miltary tactics which is failry universal

Question:


Answer:


There is no other alliance in EVE that can gather as many duders as goons & co can.

There is nothing but supercaps to survive alpha from 1000+ dudes, stealth bombers are broken in huge fights so they are no good... The only way would be put some time and isk on it and get supercaps. They did. Now because goons realized that they are in danger, CCP will turn all that time/isk in ships in next to useless space bazingas. Tell me please, who is gonna use anything other than a odd triage carrier in a fleet fight? So why would a group of people pay CCP one extra sub to be stuck in one ship that you might use once i a while if u are lucky to have one dumb dude in range doing something stupid with his own super?

You can ask anyone you know that owns a SC or a Titan if they think its worth having up to 20 years worth of plex/gametime or an huge amount of subcapital ships (like...years worth of ships) + paying one extra sub so you can use it like... never.

Again, why would you need dreads and carriers (the first step for an escalation) if they add nothing and can be killed easily with subs? If one does not escalate, your super fleet doesnt have any weight.


I'm not stupid to think I've got all figured out. I might be wrong. But IMO if you completely remove regular drones from supercarriers, nerf titan tracking to a point that those two would add nothing against subcaps, there isnt going to be any scenario that they would be handy or worth the risk. If it comes to that point, I'll unsub that account. I will not quit eve, but it is a shame that eve is becoming an MMO that you can win through CSM and/or posting hard enough on the forums.

From what I understand the main problem with super caps isn’t that they are individually too powerful, it’s that when they blob up they are effectively unbeatable. It seems to me that decreasing the strength of the individual ships will not address that main problem at all – in fact it will acerbate it.

Someone else already suggested imposing “maintenance” costs on these ships, and I like that idea but I would take it further. I would make it a daily cost imposed on the alliance that the owner is a member of, and have it double for each additional such ship the alliance has. For example, Alliance A has a titan and gets charged 10m isk in maintenance for it. They add an SC and the charge for that ship is now 20m isk, making a total of 30m isk. Adding another Titan would cost 40m isk, for a total of 70m isk And so on. The numbers are representative only, and should be aimed at severely limiting the number of super caps that even the biggest alliances can afford to operate.

To allow alliances to have the ability to maintain some sort of strategic reserve / deterrent I would implement a new feature whereby it was possible to “decommission” and subsequently “re-commission” super caps. The process of decommissioning a super would take 24 hours to complete, during which time the ship would be immobile and unable to activate modules, launch fighters etc, and would be vulnerable to attack. The process could be halted at any point before completion to allow the ship to be used as normal, but the decommissioning process would then have to start from scratch again. Once a super is decommissioned it is stationary, inactive, un-boardable and invulnerable to attack. In this state it does not incur any maintenance fees. The re-commissioning process is the reverse, but takes much longer – I suggest 2 or 3 days. You would need a password (specified during decommissioning) to initiate the re-commissioning process and the alliance would start to incur maintenance fees as soon as the re-commissioning process commenced. The ship would be vulnerable to attack while it was re-commissioning, would be immobile and unable to activate modules, launch fighters etc.

These changes would severely limit the number of super caps in everyday use, whilst still allowing alliances to keep large strategic reserves of these ships. The presence of these reserves would provide some excellent gaming (and meta-gaming) opportunities. To give a quick example:

Alliance A wants to attack Alliance B, but knows that Alliance B has a huge strategic reserve of super caps. Through excellent use of intelligence sources they identify the system where Alliance B has situated its reserve fleet, and launch an all-out attack to capture that system and neutralize the enemy’s reserve fleet. Is their intelligence accurate? Can they punch through and capture the system before the reserves are re-commissioned? Has Alliance B anticipated the attack and started re-commissioning in advance?

Anyway, by making these changes it becomes too expensive for alliances to operate huge numbers of super caps on a continual basis, but they can call up a reserve fleet that they can then afford to operate for a limited period. The super cap blob will cease to exist in most people’s daily lives, but the big alliances can still apply overwhelming power when they need to (and when they can afford to).

The key is to set the super cap maintenance fee high enough that operating more than half a dozen on a permanent basis is only possible for the biggest (richest) alliances, and when that alliance calls up its reserve fleet it can only operate it for days (a week or two at most) before going bankrupt.

If an alliance fails to pay the maintenance bill for one of their super caps the ship immediately starts to decommission. To halt this process the bill must be paid and then the pilot can give the halt command. If the pilot is afk / unavailable the process runs to conclusion (assuming the ship survives), the pilot is ejected and a system generated password for re-commissioning is sent to the pilot via evemail.

For super cap pilots who are not members of an alliance, and cannot afford to operate their ship under the new system, I suggest there should be a limited time option when the changes are implemented for them to reprocess their ship, either back to the base minerals or back to components.

TL:DR Impose an operating cost for super caps. Make it double for each ship after the first. Make it so high that the biggest alliances can only afford to operate half a dozen continuously. Allow for a reserve fleet to be called up, at ruinous cost.

[quote=Samanta] There is no other alliance in EVE that can gather as many duders as goons & co can.

There is nothing but supercaps to survive alpha from 1000+ dudes, stealth bombers are broken in huge fights so they are no good... The only way would be put some time and isk on it and get supercaps. They did. Now because goons realized that they are in danger, CCP will turn all that time/isk in ships in next to useless space bazingas. Tell me please, who is gonna use anything other than a odd triage carrier in a fleet fight? So why would a group of people pay CCP one extra sub to be stuck in one ship that you might use once i a while if u are lucky to have one dumb dude in range doing something stupid with his own super?

You can ask anyone you know that owns a SC or a Titan if they think its worth having up to 20 years worth of plex/gametime or an huge amount of subcapital ships (like...years worth of ships) + paying one extra sub so you can use it like... never.

Again, why would you need dreads and carriers (the first step for an escalation) if they add nothing and can be killed easily with subs? If one does not escalate, your super fleet doesnt have any weight.


I'm not stupid to think I've got all figured out. I might be wrong. But IMO if you completely remove regular drones from supercarriers, nerf titan tracking to a point that those two would add nothing against subcaps, there isnt going to be any scenario that they would be handy or worth the risk. If it comes to that point, I'll unsub that account. I will not quit eve, but it is a shame that eve is becoming an MMO that you can win through CSM and/or posting hard enough on the forums.[quote=Samanta]


your kidding right ? first off this is not the goons of the sec BOB war. second ive seen many different power bloc field incredible amounts of dudes with ease. One thing for sure is a numbers game can be countered. There is no way to counter a un even playing field in the aquisiton of super carriers and such. and please dont say something to the aspects of all those shiny Supers were aquired through good upstanding methods

So it all comes down to boting eh? Why dont you give us some of those pr0 statistics saying that 99,97% of all supercapitals were bought with bot/rmt isk cuz simply there isnt another way. No one can have more than 17mill isk without boting. You can also say that bot only works with russian clients, that could be one of the reasons.....

But what you cant ever say is that group A realized that building an respectable supercap fleet is an expensive/time consuming but effective way to fight, while group B for w/e reason didnt. Now the easiest, most effective way to kill all supers is to make them unsub supercap pilots due to lack of situations that they can be useful.

I dont think I ever stated a percentage ...because I dont know it. I dont know how many Super were aquired through legal and illegal means. And botting in the drone lands produce compounds that produce minerals theres no need to change that into isk. but what I can say like I stated it before is that Group A jumped head first into a FOTM and knew that is was overpowered and reaped the benefits of doing so while group B didnt and suffered for not doing so. Now that The FOTM is being balanced group A shouldnt complain because common F*****G sense would've told them that this was inevitable . They choose to reap the benefits for that given time, they took the gamble for the immediate benefit ! So now dont come crying because its getting balanced. Its no different then group B not being able to complain for loosing countless system because they didnt do it first.

Umm. there was no prediction involved you act like there isnt a TEST SERVER that shows you the changes before they happen. Also there was no new skill to train for motherships besides fighter bomber. How can you say this was hard if u were training be a pro carrier pilot anyway. Immense drone skils...haha like those dont carry over from being a regular carrier pilot. it was harder training for the Naglfar than it was a super carrier. Once again your stating the price of the ship like it should guarantee you something extra cause you spent billions.

And to say that noobs are the ones complaining is really a pro aurgment. But i see you from raiden and would be group A..so i wouldnt expect you to like the change or admitt to the super carrier being overpowered ,just like I've been part of group B and would see the need for a change,and guess what Im no noob.

2nd hardest to train (if not hardest to train due to immense drone skills 20m+) ...had to laugh at this one again