Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Fozziesov counters carrier packs. You don't need to force them off a point or try to break them since hitpoints no longer matter. You can sit out to 250km and force the carriers to either move or force them into a bad fit to even have a chance to hit out to that far.

Funny thing is with this nerfage of capitals the game will have less subs. There are a lot of people that are interested in the large stuff. It is cool and neat, but it has to have its uses. Ive already noticed less subs since 2 years ago. It will continue to dimish under all these stupid updates. And yes, im here for the long hall. After 11 years, hell might as well ride it to the end.

OK. A few words.

I was uncomfortable with the 'Modes' that Manny posted at the start of this thread as it seemed too directly lifted from the Tactical Destroyers, until it occurred to me you could achieve a similar outcome by creating new variations on the existing siege/triage modules (and from skimming the rest of this thread, others have had similar thoughts). This has the added bonus of tying into the 'commit to field' aspect of dreads which is a large part of what makes them balanced (unlike Supers).

So, say in the case of dreads, as well as the existing Siege Module there would be other alternatives for other roles you may wish the ship to carry out - for example, perhaps a module which boosts tracking and locktime whilst giving a more modest damage bonus, to provide improved utility against subcaps. Perhaps more exotic roles too - how about a Boarding Module which consumes Marines instead of strontium and allows you to capture and flip the ownership of vulnerable sov structures instead of destroying them! Either way, the point is to retain the commitment to battle of Siege/Triage Mode whilst giving these ships a purpose in an era where massive EHP bricks no longer need grinding to take sov.

Speaking of massive EHP bricks, I would also advise to have these new and existing modules apply to the supercaps. As front-line combat hulls they're simply too good at too many things at once in their current iteration, and forcing their pilots into making commitments and compromises in their fitting like everybody else is long overdue. So for example, tie the Doomsday and massive damage bonuses of Titans into a siege module, and the supercarrier's damage bonuses and fighter-bombers to a 'Drone-siege' module (better name pending confirmation). In return, give them boosts to the support role that have been talked about for so long - supercarriers getting racial remote ewar bursts, and/or clone vat bays which actually work along with truly massive ship maintenance arrays would make for a spectacular strategic asset, and the idea mentioned earlier of Titans getting the ability to implement wormhole-type effects on the system opens up a massive range of possibilities.

I definitely like the idea of 'commit to the field to be really badass', since it means that you should actually see more pitched battles (there will be a concrete advantage to going balls-out, which means each side is under some pressure to push that big fat red button as soon as they see it could be decisive). It's also part of why I want to neuter capital remote repair outside of Triage, and to change up the roles of Supercarriers and Titans to some degree.

I don't think that Dreads should have an anti-subcap role (I think Carriers can fulfill this role once their Logi role is nerfed outside of Triage), but I do feel a capital ship with an anti-subcap role is viable - IF AND ONLY IF it is a Triage / Siege style mode that prevents remote assistance. Ideally, it would have significantly less self-repping power than a current Triaged carrier / dread, to make it able to be countered by subcap gangs - otherwise we get back into a situation where large blobs of only capital ships are viable again.

Cause everyones said it was bloody op against subcap. And lovely moros lost drone bay for a reason

Man, the AoE DD was the only thing good about the whole capital ship concept.

Plated Everything! DD thru cynos, too. I remember Evil Thug doing drive-bys on whole gangs.

Found this gem - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usv8qi48FcY and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zqkJAxgnaA

Salute to pioneers! o77

If you reread my proposal for Carriers and Dreads here, I basically propose making Carriers into oversized Dominixes, with Fighers and short range BS guns being their armament. Like Domis, you can do an RR ball if you choose, but my proposal would remove the range bonus on their RR making them far far more limited than they currently are. Give them their traditional Triage role, as they are very vulnerable in Triage especially in large fleets.

If you do that at the same time you move Dreads to a dedicated anti-capital role, with significantly increased DPS in siege mode, you create a dynamic where you bring Carriers to blap subcaps, Dreads to kill Carriers, and subcaps to murder Dreads. A nice rock - paper - scissors dynamic that should produce more dynamic fights.

My random rant for the day...

I don't agree with this sentiment of nerfing capital remote reps (or local cap reps in general) to boost the chances of sub caps killing capitals or supers. The concept of "commit stuff to the field" also needs to be looked at, because, you know, isk isn't a balancing factor. Therefore, something that costs 30 bil shouldn't need to be "committed" any further than being on grid to begin with (you know, fly what you can afford to lose), because that just locks ships down into a get killed role should a nerf like this ever come to pass. Capital ships are basically over-sized Guardians or Marauders (that hardly move) with bastion that have been allowed to stagnate for over a decade because of a lack of hull options.... If we had to reset eve online and relaunch it with guardians as the only cruiser ships in the game and marauders as the only battleships in the game.... you'd see the same old capital blob tactics replay themselves out far beyond null sec space. Nerfing remote reps or bastion won't change that....

In fact, I'd prefer that we dump siege, triage and bastion modules all together. Build those abilities / roles / bonuses into teh ship roles and then expand the hull ranges to accommodate roles / niches that the current cap ship meta doesn't account for. Give it modes for bastion / siege / triage that do the same effect but allow the players to switch between them given an appropriate time frame...

Forcing capital ships to sit in siege or triage to be of "improved use" is allot like asking sub cap ships to light cyno's before they try to speed off to "point" something small for the sake of allowing that something small a fighting chance... and i think we can all agree this is a PvP game that thrives on combat and destruction to drive its economy.... Preventing 1 class of ship from destroying (or in this case, being less effective) against other classes based solely on the dimensions of "new bros" or "space hobos" or "i like small stuff" is bad meta game manipulation at its finest. Sure, the capitals actually get an advantage in my comparison, but the sub caps start to feel what it's like to be a capital the moment they get forced to sit still on the grid and pray nothing faster comes along....

Further more, I believe the current carrier designs are fine as is outside of triage (Sure, I consider them the logi variants of what carriers are supposed to be in rl, so they could lose some bite if we get other carrier types that have more bite and less logi powers) and do not require a nerf bat... yet again. What we need are capital ships (YES, CAPITAL SHIPS - sub caps are supposed to support CAPITAL SHIPs, not dominate them or Supers because they are cheap, small, faster and quick to get into) that break the remote rep cycle.... we have anti-structure dreads in siege that can do that, supers with bombers and Titans etc, sure... but no capital e-war that has a more immediate effect on carrier spider tanks and cap chains compared to the dimension of "we needz moar dreads to break these guys in the next hour".

That being said, yes, Capital remote reps is slightly on the over powered side in big groups. But again, thats just because we don't have ship types in the capital line that can withstand such a group and break it's effectiveness on the grid without a 12 hour tidi escalation fest.

And everything in eve needs a counter. If sub caps can kill carriers and dreads... then we need anti-sub cap dreads and anti-sub cap carriers than can return the favor in kind... Where I am in agreement with your sentiment, is with supers. Supers (Capital killers and anti super role) should not be allowed to gank sub caps (support fleets and capital support fleets only).... but then this rule must be also applied to sub caps as well. Extend the invalid targeting mechanic Titans enjoy to everything smaller than a BS and give us Capital HICs & e-war to lock down supers and break this e-war immunity wall....

sub capital ships cannot (and should not) be allowed to agress every hull class in Eve.... while preventing larger classes from doing the same..... There must be a balance across the 3, or we will forever be stuck with this argument.

PS. If you want to (by role design), lessen impact on bigger and smaller hulls based on hull size, then sure.....

So your idea of balance is based off a random players ignorance of game mechanics? And how balanced is it when players who don't accidentally become flagged in a level 4 mission get a hold of these?

You can't be serious.

They'd just allow them in when they have the new mooring stations etc maybe? No lore skullbuggery required...