EVE General Discussion

Are are assuming that first, the side with most supercaps doesn't blob just as hard as they can afford to, like the side with most numbers. Second, that the side with most numbers is made of low-sp, low-isks characters, and that there is a signifiant difference in combat efficiency between the average goon and the average death/whatever member.

Both assumptions are wrong.

Balance the supercaps, and the side with most numbers (as is, the side that make the biggest effort) get an edge. Why should it be different?

The problem with your argument is that the blob has always been there and has a long history of being defeated. Titans are causeing the very thing you want to avoid.

This is why all of the massive alliances of the past havent fallen...

Yes blobs work but they do get countered and now that nodes dont burst into flames in these massive fights people stand a good chance of winning. The fights we have seen over the past year are dwarfed by ones that happened in the past.

We are faced with a problem. Do we allow around 300 ships to dictate what happens to everyone or do we have a game in which everyone plays their part?

There were talks about redesigning black ops for anti-capital role, and something about anti-capital bombers, both sound badass, and great.

CCP somehow forgot about both.

In PVP, there is usually a 100% correlation between an alliance comprised of purely high skilled characters and an alliance that employs inovative tactics and good strategy. I aplologize for not stating that in big bold letters for you.

The titans is currently the tool of choice for the elite PVP alliances. And no, when i talk of blob I talk about numerical superiority - as in more players. Quantity is better ships, better tactics. Titans are better ships.

I assume you ment quality there.

Titans are blobed. There is no special tactic involved they just arrive and kill everything in front of them in utter safety, elite PVP alliances are just as boned as everyone else because there are no tactics or better ships that can confront them. Just bigger blobs of titans.

Blobs have always happened and always will. What makes it different now is that there is a blob you cannot counter. You continue to say that the CFC would have an unfair advantage if titans got nerfed but would you be saying that if the CFC were the ones with the titan advantage? The argument that titans should not be nerfed because of blobs is abserd. EVE history is full of examples of the blob being beaten by a smaller, better force. Blobs much larger than the CFC.

There are times for making new ships to provide a counter for something and times when it is just best to nerf something to be in line with everything else. Like ECM titans require that nerf, as they have in the past. But it is important to make sure they do have a roll to play in a fleet rather nerf them into the ground. They should be the last word in capital killers, they should provide a fleet with support like a being a fleet wide command ship (flagship if you will). So they need to be both nerfed and buffed to make them right.

Yes Baltec, as the matter of fact I would, because unlike you, I have a game design perspective when I post. I dont belong to any powerblock, and my nullsec characters are in alliances with zero titans.

That said, had the roles been reversed I suspect that the CFC propaganda - and by extension you - would have taken the opposite view of what you hold now. If you had them, titanblobs would be "fine".

Speaking of which - I dont intend to fill another thread with you sperging propaganda like a god damn parrot on autorepeat, so consider this my last answer to any of your posts in this thread. Go sperg somewhere else, preferably start your own thread.

Well there is blob and there is blob. Strategically speaking the CFC has the numerical superiority in players, while team tech has fewer players but are better skilled, trainend and equipped (with among other things titans). Tactically, dropping 40 titans in a battle is certainly a titan blob, but when i refer to blob vs titans or quantity vs quality i speak about the strategic level.

I've seen the Death/XXX bring 700+ members into a solar system, so implying they don't themselves blob is dishonnest. But that's really besides the point.


I missed the part where you said that the temporary and fleeting numbers of one coalition or another was pertinent to discuss ship balancing. But I'd be interested to see you backing up that theory.




You missed what I said.

Is there a SIGNIFIANT difference in combat power between a guy with, say, 30M SP, and another with 100M? Sure, that other guy might do 3% more damage, will use 5% less cap on it's MWD, has a borader choice in racial ship and recycle better. Big deal.

It's not SP amount that define sovereignty. It's willpower, and that willpower translate in large part into the number of pilots you can mobilise.




Don't try to paint the world in only black and white. The two coaltions we discuss have BOTH quality and quantity. The only difference is that one of them has an edge in number (collective willpower), while the other is heavily relying on a flaw of the game design (supercaps when in large numbers).

Those alliances that failed joining supercap arms race can just pack their bags and move to npc space
Dont blame CCP ...
Blame your leaders