These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Reworking Capital Ships: And thus it begins!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#601 - 2015-10-31 03:35:03 UTC
Rowells wrote:
So, how effective will HAWB be at reprocessing packs of cruisers?



If I'm translating this right: HAWB = High Angle Weapons Battery, then iirc it will only be effective against Battleships, and 'maybe' highly target painted Cruisers... maybe (?)

Have to hear from CCP about that though.

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#602 - 2015-10-31 04:23:02 UTC
Querns wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
In my estimation, having ships that are only 'temporarily' valuable and as such disposable, is not good for EVE as a game nor for the players - players who one day might get to join a Goonswarm or Pandemic Legion or NCdock and find themselves wanting to fly a Carrier. Each ship should have a unique place among its peers in my opinion.

Funny, this passage accurately describes the Burst and the Scythe. Would you consider the Burst and Scythe to be "not good for EVE as a game nor for the players"?

For the average player there is a huge difference between a 20 mil isk cruiser and a 1.5 billion isk carrier being disposable.

The Fax is designed to be disposable (its main role is to die) so how much are they likely to be?


My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#603 - 2015-10-31 04:35:34 UTC
Querns wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
In my estimation, having ships that are only 'temporarily' valuable and as such disposable, is not good for EVE as a game nor for the players - players who one day might get to join a Goonswarm or Pandemic Legion or NCdock and find themselves wanting to fly a Carrier. Each ship should have a unique place among its peers in my opinion.

Funny, this passage accurately describes the Burst and the Scythe. Would you consider the Burst and Scythe to be "not good for EVE as a game nor for the players"?


I don't know that I can agree with that assessment, Burst and Scythes are perfectly good and viable fleet ships. Would you want to try to 5 man gang in one? Probably not if you could use something else. But they are not invaluable, given the right circumstances and possible counter to another sub-capital fleet.

But the discussion isn't focused on subcapitals, but Capitals.

There are 4 combat Capitals, with one questionable Capital newly proposed, currently each one is unique in one way or another. That uniqueness among peers is being removed.

Instead we will be getting T1 Dread and T2 'Special Snowflake' Dread (Titan), T1 Carrier (gutted) and T2 'Super' Carrier (but a hell of a lot better).

This 'tech tree' progression style is concerning, but again, my main issue is towards how the Carrier is getting shafted, and has nothing that leaves it as a unique and interesting option. Becoming nothing more than a poor mans Super Carrier and a bargain basement 'low cost' alternative.

If you disagree with me Querns, it's cool - but I don't know what benefit having a debate about it in a feedback thread will be?

I don't know how you can say that with a straight face and consider the Burst vs Scalpel and Scythe vs Scimitar to not be the same conversation.

Ok.. NP, give super carriers the same role as carriers, no extras no special effects, just multiple flights of disposable fighters - Then your comparison becomes valid - How much outcry would there be if a Super carrier became nothing more than a glorified drone boat, a T2 carrier.

The current proposal turns what is now a valid (affordable) ship with multiple roles in a fleet, into a drone boat with less ehp and far less chance of survival (disposable) in a fight. While at the same time turning Supers into more of a Super than they are now.
There is no comparison.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#604 - 2015-10-31 04:41:06 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
In my estimation, having ships that are only 'temporarily' valuable and as such disposable, is not good for EVE as a game nor for the players - players who one day might get to join a Goonswarm or Pandemic Legion or NCdock and find themselves wanting to fly a Carrier. Each ship should have a unique place among its peers in my opinion.

Funny, this passage accurately describes the Burst and the Scythe. Would you consider the Burst and Scythe to be "not good for EVE as a game nor for the players"?

For the average player there is a huge difference between a 20 mil isk cruiser and a 1.5 billion isk carrier being disposable.

The Fax is designed to be disposable (its main role is to die) so how much are they likely to be?





Have you seen the image CCP Larrikin showed of the Force Aux.?

The thing is ENORMOUS...

It's not going to be 'disposable' nor 'cheap' - it will be a full carrier, if not even a bit more in build costs.

Image: https://eve.gameheadlines.com/images/d97da336-9bb0-30fc-bcc2-703c90915c20

In the foreground, is a Dominix, for scale. These things will be massive.

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#605 - 2015-10-31 04:43:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kassasis Dakkstromri
Will the new Force Auxiliary have a visibly cool fancy 'transformation' like T3 Destroyers for when it goes in and out of Triage, etc.?


T R A N S F O R M A T I O N


I can't believe I had forgotten to ask about this. And ... just because.


(And yes.. DD "Pike" is the most awesome 'homage' to true Super Beam Weapons ever.)

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#606 - 2015-10-31 09:46:50 UTC
I disagree with this "magic" transition of those carriers to the new ones...

CCP Phantom wrote:


The old N+1 meta of bringing bigger blogs to be more effective will have diminishing returns. Instead, the individual game play will become more interactive and meaningful.

Does this that the N+1 from the sub capital point of view is relevant for you ?
Shouldn't the N+1 be treated as a whole and not only related to sub capitals ?

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#607 - 2015-10-31 09:50:17 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:

I don't know that I can agree with that assessment, Burst and Scythes are perfectly good and viable fleet ships. Would you want to try to 5 man gang in one? Probably not if you could use something else. But they are not invaluable, given the right circumstances and possible counter to another sub-capital fleet.

But the discussion isn't focused on subcapitals, but Capitals.

There are 4 combat Capitals, with one questionable Capital newly proposed, currently each one is unique in one way or another. That uniqueness among peers is being removed.

Instead we will be getting T1 Dread and T2 'Special Snowflake' Dread (Titan), T1 Carrier (gutted) and T2 'Super' Carrier (but a hell of a lot better).

This 'tech tree' progression style is concerning, but again, my main issue is towards how the Carrier is getting shafted, and has nothing that leaves it as a unique and interesting option. Becoming nothing more than a poor mans Super Carrier and a bargain basement 'low cost' alternative.

If you disagree with me Querns, it's cool - but I don't know what benefit having a debate about it in a feedback thread will be?

I don't know how you can say that with a straight face and consider the Burst vs Scalpel and Scythe vs Scimitar to not be the same conversation.

Ok.. NP, give super carriers the same role as carriers, no extras no special effects, just multiple flights of disposable fighters - Then your comparison becomes valid - How much outcry would there be if a Super carrier became nothing more than a glorified drone boat, a T2 carrier.

The current proposal turns what is now a valid (affordable) ship with multiple roles in a fleet, into a drone boat with less ehp and far less chance of survival (disposable) in a fight. While at the same time turning Supers into more of a Super than they are now.
There is no comparison.


I guess you missed the part where supercarriers were losing their RR ability too.

In the scythe vs. scimitar comparison, the scimitar gains its remote tracking link ability in the jump to T2. This doesn't make the scythe useless; it provides slightly less functionality for a lower cost and lower training time. So, too, with carriers vs. supercarriers.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#608 - 2015-10-31 10:29:29 UTC
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
In my estimation, having ships that are only 'temporarily' valuable and as such disposable, is not good for EVE as a game nor for the players - players who one day might get to join a Goonswarm or Pandemic Legion or NCdock and find themselves wanting to fly a Carrier. Each ship should have a unique place among its peers in my opinion.

Funny, this passage accurately describes the Burst and the Scythe. Would you consider the Burst and Scythe to be "not good for EVE as a game nor for the players"?

For the average player there is a huge difference between a 20 mil isk cruiser and a 1.5 billion isk carrier being disposable.

The Fax is designed to be disposable (its main role is to die) so how much are they likely to be?





Have you seen the image CCP Larrikin showed of the Force Aux.?

The thing is ENORMOUS...

It's not going to be 'disposable' nor 'cheap' - it will be a full carrier, if not even a bit more in build costs.

Image: https://eve.gameheadlines.com/images/d97da336-9bb0-30fc-bcc2-703c90915c20

In the foreground, is a Dominix, for scale. These things will be massive.

Ahh so size makes it less disposable? Without the ability to receive remote reps, not being able to quit the field due to only being able to operate in siege, it is going to survive an onslaught from a blob of Dreads or over sized Domis, Titans and or Supers?

I'm losing faith in your not just being a Goon troll Kas.

The bigger the ship the bigger the sig radius the more damage it takes per volley - As per the blog, Fax will be able to be killed and once it is dead you can kill the rest of the fleet. If you can keep it tackled (don't forget the smart ass smile at the end of the sentence).

They will be the primary target in EVERY battle - They need to die before anything else on field can - That makes them disposable.
And yes your probably right, they will cost more than the soon to be disposable 1.5 bil isk ships we use now - So, CCP making change to suit only the richest and biggest groups in the game.

CCP creating new content for the Blobs at the expense of everyone else.

Kas, do yourself a favour - Go read the blog and take in what it says, not what you want it to say.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#609 - 2015-10-31 11:52:43 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
In my estimation, having ships that are only 'temporarily' valuable and as such disposable, is not good for EVE as a game nor for the players - players who one day might get to join a Goonswarm or Pandemic Legion or NCdock and find themselves wanting to fly a Carrier. Each ship should have a unique place among its peers in my opinion.

Funny, this passage accurately describes the Burst and the Scythe. Would you consider the Burst and Scythe to be "not good for EVE as a game nor for the players"?

For the average player there is a huge difference between a 20 mil isk cruiser and a 1.5 billion isk carrier being disposable.

The Fax is designed to be disposable (its main role is to die) so how much are they likely to be?





Have you seen the image CCP Larrikin showed of the Force Aux.?

The thing is ENORMOUS...

It's not going to be 'disposable' nor 'cheap' - it will be a full carrier, if not even a bit more in build costs.

Image: https://eve.gameheadlines.com/images/d97da336-9bb0-30fc-bcc2-703c90915c20

In the foreground, is a Dominix, for scale. These things will be massive.

Ahh so size makes it less disposable? Without the ability to receive remote reps, not being able to quit the field due to only being able to operate in siege, it is going to survive an onslaught from a blob of Dreads or over sized Domis, Titans and or Supers?

I'm losing faith in your not just being a Goon troll Kas.

The bigger the ship the bigger the sig radius the more damage it takes per volley - As per the blog, Fax will be able to be killed and once it is dead you can kill the rest of the fleet. If you can keep it tackled (don't forget the smart ass smile at the end of the sentence).

They will be the primary target in EVERY battle - They need to die before anything else on field can - That makes them disposable.
And yes your probably right, they will cost more than the soon to be disposable 1.5 bil isk ships we use now - So, CCP making change to suit only the richest and biggest groups in the game.

CCP creating new content for the Blobs at the expense of everyone else.

Kas, do yourself a favour - Go read the blog and take in what it says, not what you want it to say.



Or they make them cheap because due to the mechanics, n+1 is never an issue with them.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#610 - 2015-10-31 13:05:23 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
CCP creating new content for the Blobs at the expense of everyone else.

What's stopping you from using the new capital ships? It's not money; money has been trivial to earn in this game for years. The "Blobs" aren't particularly richer than the average player.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Sepheria O'Mally
Infinite Aggression Holdings
#611 - 2015-10-31 13:06:41 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Destoya wrote:
Are you going to give titans a reason to use their guns? You commonly quote titans as having a role of a supercapital version of a dreadnought, but currently the guns are incredibly underwhelming. Against subcaps you might as well be shooting wet paper towels unless it's a battleship MWDing at zero speed, and against caps the effective range just isn't enough to do any significant amount of damage compared to the doomsday.

In the future with new doomsdays as well as capital tackle mods and neuts, I struggle even more to find reason to dedicate 6H/2-3M/3+L slots to use guns that do, in a best case scenario, barely more damage than a dreadnought. I'd really rather you just remove the guns altogether and focus the role of titans to their doomsday, ganglink, and bridging capabilities. This would give space for a supercarrier-priced superdreadnought that I feel could really make use of the guns.


Titans will be able to use the HA anti-sub-capital guns that dreads can use, without going into siege. This, combined with the new DDs, we think will give a unique place for Titans on the battlefield.
While dreads have an upper level on the amount they can tank, Titans, while they have Force Auxiliary support (which admittedly can be killed) don't.


What FAX support? Those heaping piles of junk are going to be torn to shreds before the real fighting starts. Unless the FAX has the tank of a super and can self rep at least 4x the amount that triage carriers do now. Which I don't see happening at all. You are basing your answers on something that will die in next to no time, leaving all the combat ships completely vulnerable.

So your answer that Titans won't have an upper limit to their tank is faulty in 2 major ways. The first being that all FAX will likely be off field before they see incoming fire. The second being that the ship has a max EHP and no amount of reps will save it from a fixed number of DDs. B-R had more reps available, on both sides of the fight, to counter all the DDs fired at any of the Titans that died, but being that most of those deaths happened with properly timed shots, none of those reps mattered.

I am so tired of hearing this same piece of tripe. Every ship, no matter how many reps you bring can die. It is just a matter of proper numbers, good FCing and pilots reacting to the calls. So unless you give ships the ability to absorb incoming reps and build an extra buffer, then nothing in this game has an unlimited tank.

It is down right shameful for Devs to recite this false statement time and again. Either you don't know your own game or you are pandering falsehoods, in hopes the masses are too stupid to know the truth.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#612 - 2015-10-31 13:43:54 UTC
People currently bring Triage Carriers to support small to midsize gangs. This seems to work for them. In the future, they will bring the new Fleet Auxiliaries. What is the difference? As far as I can tell, there is no difference at all.

My Triage Archons and Nidhoggurs are essentially completely different ships from my Boot Archons. Due to the vastly different rigs, it's not like I can swap the two fits out. The Triage Archon is not nearly as strong as the Boot Archon, in terms of buffer tank and resistances, but it repairs an incredible amount. I expect it to die, unless my small gang beats the other small gang first. But it provides enough remote repair ability that it can make all the difference in a small scale fight. How will the Fleet Auxiliaries be any different?

Unless you were using a subpar fit before, you could not really swap back and forth between Triage and Boot fits. You already had essentially two separate ships. Now it is just official.

Embrace the new possibilities from splitting up the Swiss Army knife. Maybe Carriers can get new, unique bonuses, such that bringing a combat fit Nidhoggur is not a sick joke? Carriers can focus on being the next logical progression for Drone skilled pilots. Maybe they gain some unique abilities? If the Thanatos got Fighters with a bonus to warp disruption range? Or the Nidhoggur got a bonus to Fighters' web range? The Archon's Fighters could bonus neutralizer range? The Chimera's Fighters could have a secondary role of ECM. That would be pretty cool.

I will not weep for the demise of the blob of Boot Carriers. Nor should anyone else. The only thing good about them is that no one wanted to fight them, so you almost always won your strategic objectives if you brought them. Well that's terrible game play! Good riddance to them... Oh, and it was very easy to multibox them... Again, not a very big loss (even if I have three characters with years of skill training invested in being able to do exactly that).

Fighter strikes will have a place in the new meta. Dedicated Capital remote repair ships will too. CCP is finally giving us better tools for Aegis Sov's distributed fights.

Stop whining. Start thinking. Figure out how you can have fun with the new toys.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Sepheria O'Mally
Infinite Aggression Holdings
#613 - 2015-10-31 14:17:51 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Many groups can field 20 or 30 dreads and as many carriers but most won't without having a group who can field a hundred of each on standby because that is what your enemy is doing. When supers and titans come into play, a group who only has 2 or 3 titans and a few supers is loathe to field them because there is always the very real threat you will get 3rd partied by one of the elite groups (who oddly enough won't fight each other, because they want the guaranteed "We Win" of superior numbers and firepower) and get dunked. So where in this plan is the part where smaller groups can compete, without having to rely on someone else to fight for them?
As long as that is how Eve fights (subcap and capital) are fought - It will never be a place for small (<1000) unaligned groups.



I love how you keep trying to play the "Big Elite Groups Won't Fight Each Other" card. Did you not get the memo about B-R? The two powerhouses you keep complaining about not fighting each other went head to head. Both sides went all in. The only reason this won't happen again (at least with the game as it is currently) is do to jump fatigue.

If you want to complain about the lack of real fights, either accept the truth that jump fatigue is a game killing disease, or accept that this is what happens when you protect the little guys from being randomly attacked by third parties. There is absolutely no reason to take the multiple days worth of travel, so caps can then get into a fight, and then take even more days of travel, with no purpose.

There is absolutely zero reason to travel across the galaxy for fights. There is no reward in it, unreasonable time reqs to get there and no real reason for the enemy to come out and play even if you ignore the rest of why it sucks.

So explain to me why I would get my guys together for a week long move, for maybe a days worth of fighting, that isn't even likely?

None of the changes being proposed change any of this, so while the changes have some merits, the real issues are still there.

So instead of fixing the real issues, CCP is going to make it to where sub-caps can travel to your space, kill your caps with relative ease and then go back home the same day. Which is rather crappy, if I may say so. I fly caps to kill caps, but instead I only get to go after sub-caps cause no one is willing to risk moving for days to engage an enemy in there home with no way to reinforce if needed.

This has nothing to do with willingness to fight, but rather how many hoops are fleets willing to go through, to get them.

If I wanted to be a capital roaming nomad, I would have gone to PL or BL, but even BL broke apart from the jump changes. It wasn't viable, so they tried to stake a claim and that wasn't for them.
Sepheria O'Mally
Infinite Aggression Holdings
#614 - 2015-10-31 14:23:55 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Querns wrote:
Quote:

Many groups can field 20 or 30 dreads and as many carriers but most won't without having a group who can field a hundred of each on standby because that is what your enemy is doing. When supers and titans come into play, a group who only has 2 or 3 titans and a few supers is loathe to field them because there is always the very real threat you will get 3rd partied by one of the elite groups (who oddly enough won't fight each other, because they want the guaranteed "We Win" of superior numbers and firepower) and get dunked. So where in this plan is the part where smaller groups can compete, without having to rely on someone else to fight for them?
As long as that is how Eve fights (subcap and capital) are fought - It will never be a place for small (<1000) unaligned groups.

I think the current plan is to introduce some sort of "jump fatigue" to limit the ability for folks to "third party" on fights in whose game they have no skin.



It created a smaller threat range radius, but really mostly it just changed the names on the overviews. The point remains valid, it is STILL all about the batphones, just now different people have different speed dial settings than they used to.


Dude, do you even have a capital. With the fatigue as it is, you are often lucky you can call on your neighbor, when even your core alliance guys are too fatigued cause they just had something they jumped to 45 min ago. Batphones only work in places like Provi, where the groups only work together when needed, and stick to their little corners when not. When you have pilots living in an entire region, you can barely handle moving around just that.
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#615 - 2015-10-31 14:25:31 UTC  |  Edited by: DrysonBennington
DJWiggles wrote:
Lair Osen wrote:
What does EWAR debuff mean?
For stasis debuff, do the ships get slowed, get their webs nerfed/buffed, get webs that are affecting them nerfed/buffed?
Please elaborate.


I think it means that any ship that has the debuff applied to them has the Ewar it can project diminished, like you said there webs or nutes get less effective
Lair Osen wrote:


1-2k seiged dread dps is just sad. A pirate BS can do better while still able to get reps.

Remember that is for hitting subcaps, for the Normal guns not much is changing iirc




The Point Defense Guns are meant to effect the enemy Capital by draining its shields and armor at a sustained rate of fire thus putting more stress on the repair systems of the Capital.

A new class of Capital Ship.

The Light Capital Class ship.

The Light Capital Class ship would bridge the gap between High Sector Pilots wanting to pilot a capital but not wanting to venture into Low and Null first.

The Light Capital Class would come in two flavors.

1. Light Dreadnought. 2. Light Carrier

The Light Dreadnought and Light Carrier would have roughly half or fewer EHP than the normal Dred and Carrier. Each would mount one of the new defense modules that auto fires at other capitals. The Light Dread would mount two X-large weapons in the High Slot and the Light Carrier would be able to deploy at most two of any type of the normal fighter classes.

Light Capitals will allow High Sec pilots to learn the ropes of Capital Ships before heading into low and null and will bring fear to the Low and Null with their arrival.
iwannadig
Doomheim
#616 - 2015-10-31 14:27:20 UTC
CCP, do you plan to introduce warp scramble resistance instead on just integers? Because this is the only attribute that have to be countered with large blob, but not specialized modules or ships.
Mai Ling Ravencroft
Duragon Pioneer Group
#617 - 2015-10-31 14:51:35 UTC
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri some of your post is good, some of it is just whining because the winds are changing, but this is just flat out fundamentally wrong:

>>"Sub-Capital anything IS NOT A COUNTER TO CAPITALS"

Then why would I fly anything but a capital ever again? That's appalling game design and CCP have done a damned excellent job (with some exceptions) of keeping all sizes and classes relevant.



That is your opinion, which I disagree with.

And despite inaccurate claims of 'whining', as opposed to providing counter balance feedback, if CCP wants to turn Capital ships into giant Sub-capitals and blow PR smoke about it being a Buff; then I think I've paid my dues to call a 'spade a spade'.

'Escalation' in Null Sec PVP exist for a reason, it has always existed. A 100 man Battleship gang should never EVER be able to take down a 100 man Carrier group. Allowing otherwise, makes the entire existence of Capital ships worthless and redundant. Nothing more than a giant **** waving exercise.

Iterating a 'light touch' toward Capitals that allows a 250 - 500 man Battleship Gang to give a 100 man Carrier group serious pause is absolutely appropriate.

There are ships, and fleet compositions that are simply not counters to an opposing force.

Simply stating the current state of affairs, that Sub-Capital is not a Counter to Capitals, and personally holding that belief as correct does not make it "...just flat out fundamentally wrong:". That with Fleet v. Fleet fighting there is a historic segregation that exists between Sub-Capital and Capitals, and the 'Counter' to Capitals on grid is an escalation of Capitals.

Sorry but your stereo typical 250 man TryHard Alliance of 3 Carriers and 2 Dreads and 245 Sub-Capitals should not be able to control the Grid vs. a 250 man Capital Group.

Just as we have a hierarchy of Skill point capabilities, we have a hierarchy ... a 'pecking order' of things a up and coming group needs to have in order to play in the deep end of the pool.

If you remove this segregation, as seems to be being attempted, then you remove the motivation and incentive to ever develop a organized Capital Group in an Alliance.

I think if we could have simply frigate spammed our adversaries into submission, we wouldn't have the (assumed) largest Capital force in EVE.


But hey, if Developer Socialism is your thing, then by all means - I just happen to fundamentally disagree.


I have to agree here. Explain to me why my 5k man, well organized, long standing, well funded alliance, which has earned each and every system, ship and ISK, should be penalized for working for a common goal of mutual success. Explain to me why the 250 man alliance has an intrinsic right to the space I live in and the deaths of my ships? If they can't build, ally and recruit enough pilots to take my space, do you think they really deserve it?

I am not saying we shouldn't have to defend our home, but each time CCP places more limits on capitals, ship fits and Sov, they make it to where we can do it better and easier. CCP wants 250 pilots to be able to kill 100 caps, cool, we can fly 20 max sub-cap fleets and shred 2000 caps at a time. CCP wants make, moving around harder, we just tighten our borders and make the space that much harder to take. Each time CCP moves to help the little guy, they only improve our options.

So please keep it up, the ISK will still flow and the fights will keep decreasing. As long as artificial limitations are placed on the game, you only serve to reduce its luster and empower the blobs. No matter what happens, just remember, we can pull 30 guys on a bad day, to go on a crap fleet. On a good day we have to turn pilots away cause we just don't have a reason to justify 5 fleets going to "save" a timer that our "elite enemies" have made but won't show up for.

I really do hope that citadels bring in some fights, but honestly, I only see the small groups, which can barely afford them, loosing them.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#618 - 2015-10-31 14:57:06 UTC
iwannadig wrote:
CCP, do you plan to introduce warp scramble resistance instead on just integers? Because this is the only attribute that have to be countered with large blob, but not specialized modules or ships.

Interdictors of both flavors will still be able to tackle things with warp scramble resistance, all on their lonesome.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#619 - 2015-10-31 15:00:54 UTC
Sepheria O'Mally wrote:

If you want to complain about the lack of real fights, either accept the truth that jump fatigue is a game killing disease, or accept that this is what happens when you protect the little guys from being randomly attacked by third parties. There is absolutely no reason to take the multiple days worth of travel, so caps can then get into a fight, and then take even more days of travel, with no purpose.

Jump Fatigue is only a disease if you insist on cargo culting most alliances circa 2012. If you actually try to build something and own a region of space, it's pretty cool. Eve can easily suffer the loss of those who cling to such an outmoded play style.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#620 - 2015-10-31 15:23:57 UTC
Querns wrote:
Sepheria O'Mally wrote:

If you want to complain about the lack of real fights, either accept the truth that jump fatigue is a game killing disease, or accept that this is what happens when you protect the little guys from being randomly attacked by third parties. There is absolutely no reason to take the multiple days worth of travel, so caps can then get into a fight, and then take even more days of travel, with no purpose.

Jump Fatigue is only a disease if you insist on cargo culting most alliances circa 2012. If you actually try to build something and own a region of space, it's pretty cool. Eve can easily suffer the loss of those who cling to such an outmoded play style.

I'd have said it's a disease but not a game killing one.

It's saved us a lot of fuel, too...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?