These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Easy way to stop Super Capital proliferation

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Prince Kobol
#1 - 2014-04-09 10:44:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
Soon CCP is going to have tackle the thorny issue of rebalancing Supers and Titans.

Supers and Titans have received nothing but nerfs since there inception. I know many players who are on the verge quitting Eve and another nerf to Supers and Titans will be the straw that breaks the camels back.

For me the issue is not that they are too powerful, but they are too easy to build.

This is the reason why there are so many Supers and Titans in game now and why you can replace so many in just a few days.

So the solution for me is not to nerf them yet again but make them harder to build and increasing the minerals content will not work to stop this but a simple change will.

At the moment all you need to anchor a CSAA is the Strategic Index at 1 and the ihub upgrade Supercapital Construction Facilities.

Now if you change the requirement to Strategic Index 5 and Industry Index to 5 you are going to see a lot less Supers and Titans being built.

Not only will this increase the cost of buying a Super + Titan due to far less being built which will increase demand but it will also force Null Sec entities into enticing miners into null to order to get their Industry Index to 5 as well as make sure the system is not flipped in order not to lose the Strategic Index.

For me its a very simple change, something which CCP could do in just a few minutes and it would put a big dent in the ability to produce so many Supers and Titans as well as helping get more Industry people out into null.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#2 - 2014-04-09 10:45:53 UTC
Just release a bigger, more powerful ship to aim for.

That'll stop it.
brinelan
#3 - 2014-04-09 10:53:32 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


Now if you change the requirement to Strategic Index 5 and Industry Index to 5 you are going to see a lot less Supers and Titans being built.


This wont change a thing, itll just move construction to ratting systems.
lanyaie
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
#4 - 2014-04-09 10:53:38 UTC  |  Edited by: lanyaie
And how does this belong in general disccusion?

From what I'm reading here, you want to raise the requirements needed to build supers and titans, so that the people who already have lots of them will get an advantage. Not to mention that most large nullsec alliances would have no problem getting those 2 to 5.
Yeah..I don't see that happening, simply because the idea itself is bad.

Spaceprincess

People who put passwords on char bazaar Eveboards are the worst.
True Sight
Deep Freeze Industries
#5 - 2014-04-09 10:55:06 UTC
I agree with Prince Kobol. I always agree with prince Kobol.
Spurty
#6 - 2014-04-09 10:57:08 UTC
So we need the "Titanaught!"

Ok, I've not had any coffee this morning but whatever it is CCP does to thwart more of something (often introducing a new predator) the guys in the ships it's designed for will be the first to own an impossible to fight army of the bloody things.

You have to sour the wine instead

Make the ship opening cynos have to be of a certain class .. Want to jump
Supers around?

Going to need to move your battleship into place to open the cyno ... Oh nos that's horrible... Shut up and eat your medicine.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Spurty
#7 - 2014-04-09 10:58:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Spurty
Shut up was aimed at the souring "idea" not the op who is actually using their brain. Please carry on :)

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Prince Kobol
#8 - 2014-04-09 11:10:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
lanyaie wrote:
And how does this belong in general disccusion?

From what I'm reading here, you want to raise the requirements needed to build supers and titans, so that the people who already have lots of them will get an advantage. Not to mention that most large nullsec alliances would have no problem getting those 2 to 5.
Yeah..I don't see that happening, simply because the idea itself is bad.



No matter what you do, what changes you make those with more will always have the advantage, this can be said for all situations.

Now saying this, if you make the construction of Supers and Titans more difficult, those who do have the most might, might be less inclined to field them as often as they do because they know they wont be able to replace them in a matter of hours / days.

At the moment you can take Sov and the very same day have a super building. With the requirement of having Strategic Index at 5 you will have to wait a minimum of 100 days before you can even think about building a Super or Titan.

Yes that will not make any difference...
Solecist Project
#9 - 2014-04-09 11:24:29 UTC
Can you explain how a delay makes anything more difficult?

Because that's what you are asking for. A delay. They need to get to V first.

What's the increased difficulty here exactly?

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Solecist Project
#10 - 2014-04-09 11:29:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
And not only that... you think that making it more costly equals making it more difficult!

ISK never has been a balancing factor, ever!

And you are completely forgetting that all the bigger entities are perfectly capable to influence mineral prices across all systems. They can make them go up or dow at will, simply because they have the manpower, influence and money to do so!

So even if it was superuberexpensive to build them and would even be more expensive than what even the goons can afford, all they'd need to do is influence the market enough to make mineral prices drop and then buy them up from the market as usual!

You think they can't do that? Hahahahahahaha okay!

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Yang Aurilen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#11 - 2014-04-09 11:41:25 UTC
How to fix supercap spam:
1. Make them buildable in highsec only Big smile
2. Disable their jump drives for 1 year Shocked
3. Disable all supercap production in nullsec X
4. Ban all supercap pilots Roll

Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
Nyreanya
Serenity Labs
#12 - 2014-04-09 11:43:24 UTC
This would make it pretty easy to spot what systems are construction systems on the map. And all it would take is a handful of cloaky campers harassing the miners for a week or two to drop the index down. Thus, large organized entities could effectively eliminate the ability to produce these ships.

Having a quick glance at the ingame map, I saw 6 systems that have Industry 5. I probably missed some, so lets say there's 10. Each alliance probably wouldn't try to interfere with it's own, or it's allies, so let's say that a given nullsec alliance has 6 of those systems they would like to shut down. How much work would it take to get guys over there to disrupt mining enough to drop the index down? How hard would it be to look at the map and guess where your enemies are building their supers? Everyone would know exactly where to hit their enemies to cripple their super production.

[/sarcasm]
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2014-04-09 11:44:16 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
And not only that... you think that making it more costly equals making it more difficult!

ISK never has been a balancing factor, ever!

And you are completely forgetting that all the bigger entities are perfectly capable to influence mineral prices across all systems. They can make them go up or dow at will, simply because they have the manpower, influence and money to do so!

So even if it was superuberexpensive to build them and would even be more expensive than what even the goons can afford, all they'd need to do is influence the market enough to make mineral prices drop and then buy them up from the market as usual!

You think they can't do that? Hahahahahahaha okay!

"Isk is not a balancing factor" is the stupidest statement one can make regarding EvE. It's the ultimate balancing factor in EvE. Jubus ...

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2014-04-09 11:53:42 UTC
you mean make it relatively harder for everyone but the biggest oldest established groups to build supers?

implementing this'd basically confirm dinsdale's accusation of nullsec cartels running ccp?
Prince Kobol
#15 - 2014-04-09 12:16:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
Benny Ohu wrote:
you mean make it relatively harder for everyone but the biggest oldest established groups to build supers?

implementing this'd basically confirm dinsdale's accusation of nullsec cartels running ccp?


Actually its the opposite.

Doing this actually gives the smaller guys a chance to hurt the big guys for once.

As another poster has stated, it is very easier to see what systems have a Indy Index of 5.

To get the index to 5 requires miners, a lot of miners.

I am not sure how reliable these figures are as they are a couple years old however they are the best I can find.

Index 1
Mined volume to obtain (m3) - 1,500,000
Volume/day to maintain (m3) - 750,000

Index 2

Mined volume to obtain (m3) - 3,000,000
Volume/day to maintain (m3) - 1,500,000

Index 3

Mined volume to obtain (m3) - 6,000,000
Volume/day to maintain (m3) - 3,000,000

Index 4

Mined volume to obtain (m3) - 12,000,000
Volume/day to maintain (m3) - 6,000,000

Index 5

Mined volume to obtain (m3) - 24,000,000
Volume/day to maintain (m3) - 12,000,000

You also have the 25% decay rate as well.

So it means you need a lot of miners out there mining every single day.

So that means as soon as the Indy Index say hits 3 or 4 you move in a few cloaky ships with cyno's and boom you make it a lot harder for them to hit Indy 5.

You do not need to be a 1000 man alliance to do this. Hell you can perma camp a system with a just a few guys.

Sure which ever alliance is wanting that system at Indy 5 will need to keep a force there to defend there miners but that is a good thing because at the moment you don't.

So yes it will be easier to disrupt their mining ops, you will be forcing them to run defence fleets to protect their miners, all of which is currently not needed and you do not have to have 1000's of guys to do this.
Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2014-04-09 12:28:25 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
So the solution for me is not to nerf them yet again but make them harder to build


Which is effectively a nerf.

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots
Percival Rose
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-04-09 12:38:20 UTC
Nolen Cadmar wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
So the solution for me is not to nerf them yet again but make them harder to build


Which is effectively a nerf.

Yes, but it will not affect their combat effectiveness.
The alternative would be to nerf the nukes of New Eden to the level of firecrackers. Nobody wants that.

Do you know who's going to inherit New Eden? Arms dealers. Because everyone else is too busy killing each other.
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#18 - 2014-04-09 12:47:19 UTC
Raising the build time or cost won't help at all. It reinforces established groups who have stashes of these ships on holding characters in anyway.

The only real way to manage them is to make them highly dependent on other ship classes. You don't have battle ship fleets without logistics, interdictors or webbing ships but at the moment you can have a supercap fleet with little need for other ship types because they can do everything in one hull type.
Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#19 - 2014-04-09 12:48:32 UTC
Percival Rose wrote:
Nolen Cadmar wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
So the solution for me is not to nerf them yet again but make them harder to build


Which is effectively a nerf.

Yes, but it will not affect their combat effectiveness.
The alternative would be to nerf the nukes of New Eden to the level of firecrackers. Nobody wants that.


It will not change their combat effectiveness, but do you think that the sov-nullsec groups will support a change that makes supercapitals more difficult to build? To them, it's a nerf whether it effects the combat usage, or the difficulty of obtaining one.

Requiring more upgrades will not change much. There will still be supercapital construction at almost the same rate. It will just cost them a tiny bit more. With moon goo and renting income, they can afford it.

The only thing I can see this proposed change doing is making it MORE difficult for groups outside of sov nullsec to obtain supers. The sov-nullsec groups will still build and use them, but prices will increase, making it more difficult for npc null or lowsec groups to obtain them.

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots
Vaffel Junior
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2014-04-09 13:01:58 UTC
Death to all supers
123Next pageLast page