These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

What exactly is >>>THE<<< problem with SCs?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hellanna
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2012-02-25 19:55:17 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
Hellanna wrote:
How about making cynos like WH's. 1 SC would cause the cyno to collapse so to speak. So if you wanted to blob SC's it would take a **** ton of cynos instead of just 1. Remove ability for supers to fit cynos

then attacking a system would be impossible.

you attack our home system, we have 500 super caps, we got them there last night
you take your cyno alts in, you have a few options
cyno all in one spot, cyno all in random spots either way your screwed.



Wouldn't be a very bright idea to go in then, huh? Defense is supposed to be easier then offense if you are set up for it.

So, you now have 500 SC's in a system looking pretty when absolutely nothing is going to come in. The hostile SC's are now free to hit another system and now you have to re-position to counter it. If you're all holed up in you very last system, it shouldn't be easy to take it.

If that's you're only nit pick....lol...move along and troll elsewhere.
Sephiroth Clone VII
Brothers of Tyr
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2012-02-26 23:55:35 UTC
I think others have clearly stated what is wrong.

In past wars it was, it was not rock paper scissors, but gold rock (supers) beating everything else.

The inability for the death ray targeting subcaps is a step in the right direction (personal I thought it would be better if it could still be used, just upping the miss chance for how small the ship is, half miss on BS, quarter hit cruiser, 1/10 hit frig).

1. A clear issue is the ability for titans to hit anything smaller then capitals and BS.
2. another is liberal use of fitting, a titanic war machine should not be refit on the fly.
3. flat immunity to warp disruption and ewar, it should be a tenfold better then a carrier but not a absolute. Same with warp strength, 50 for titan, 10 for super carrier.
Lord Drokoth
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#23 - 2012-02-27 06:20:01 UTC
Sephiroth CloneIIV wrote:
I think others have clearly stated what is wrong.

In past wars it was, it was not rock paper scissors, but gold rock (supers) beating everything else.

The inability for the death ray targeting subcaps is a step in the right direction (personal I thought it would be better if it could still be used, just upping the miss chance for how small the ship is, half miss on BS, quarter hit cruiser, 1/10 hit frig).

1. A clear issue is the ability for titans to hit anything smaller then capitals and BS.
2. another is liberal use of fitting, a titanic war machine should not be refit on the fly.
3. flat immunity to warp disruption and ewar, it should be a tenfold better then a carrier but not a absolute. Same with warp strength, 50 for titan, 10 for super carrier.


QFT!

The only problem with supers and titans is that they can OMGWTFBBQ sub capitals. Both types are designed to fill an anti capital and support/command/bonus and doomsday role. Because they are immune to ewar means they can't be stopped even by an overwhelming sub capital fleet.

I would say..
Remove immunity
Remove rr from sc (meaning they need carrier support)
Add 15 warp strngh to sc
Add 50 warp strength to Titan
Remove fighters from sc
Add signature resolution to Titan to prevent it blapping sub caps.

Problem solved.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#24 - 2012-02-27 07:31:56 UTC
Har Harrison wrote:
I'll say it again - give Electronic Attack Frigates the ability to apply their EWAR to supers.


Supercaps should not have EWAR immunity. It's a broken design from the outset. EAS have their role, if it is a teensy niche in the EVE landscape. Just because you don't see everybody using them doesn't mean they aren't used or useful.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2012-02-27 22:24:07 UTC
3 years ago, they were alliance-level assets, and seeing one was awesome. Today, they are individual assets, and seeing one is meh. Hell, even seeing killmails of one is meh.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#26 - 2012-03-05 08:12:24 UTC
I think when talking about super caps we need to address super carriers and titans separately.

Super carriers are getting a lot better. But titans are still waaaaaaaay too overpowered.


As far as game design goes I think that dreads should be reworked to be the counter to titans. Mainly because all they are used for now is structure bashing.

First dreads need to be able to survive one titan doomsday zap. That either means more EHP or a damage reduction into doomsdays.

Second Titans need to be more vulnerable. I'd vote against boosting dread DPS too much for fear of creating another overpowered ship. I'd reduce the EHP of titans (by a lot).


Oh yeah fix titan tracking, and get rid of the ewar immunity.

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-03-05 13:53:39 UTC
Lord Drokoth wrote:

Add 15 warp strngh to sc
Add 50 warp strength to Titan


Why should combat ships have built-in, penalty-free WCS? That's restricted to non-combat ships such as transports and that funny Skiff thing.

If supercaps want to keep their infini-stabs, then their combat capabilities should be removed, leaving them as giant logistics or on-grid gang-link vessels.
The Vastator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-03-07 05:41:47 UTC
The tracking of a blaster erebus with 3 tracking links fitted with tracking scripts is pretty much the same as that of a maelstrom using 1400 howitzers so I don't see how a ship moving at a higher transversal velocity would get hit. I also don't see anything bad with this given it scales properly with turrets of other sizes.
Omega Flames
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#29 - 2012-03-12 06:26:57 UTC
Cyprus Black wrote:
Lets not forget the massive bot mining problem thats running rampant and unchecked by CCP.

They mine 23-7-365 and those minerals are flooding the market. Mass producing supercaps is now cheaper and easier to do than ever.

Stopping the bots = Stopping the mineral flood in the market = increased cost of minerals / decreased minerals available = increases the price to produce supercaps = supercap mass production slows to a steady crawl.

As to whom caused what I'm not sure.
Did the demand for mass producing supercaps drive the mining bot activity up?
Or is the mass production of supercaps merely a result of mining bots flooding the market with minerals?

curious but exactly what do you consider "flood" to be? just how many minerals are on the market due to bots? 10%? 30%? 60%? 0.5%? before you accuse bots of being the reason for something you might want to actually figure out how much responsibility bots are contributing
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#30 - 2012-03-12 12:47:11 UTC
Headerman wrote:

One thing i have noticed though is that very few people are defining exactly what that problem is. So what is THE problem with super caps?
.


There was supposed to be just a few of them but now alliances give them away, certain alliances blob them and there is no answer to that.

They've ruined SOV warfare. If you don't have them and a couple of Titans to back it up you cannot hold SOV.
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-03-12 13:04:57 UTC
It's like a pissing match. Doesn't matter how much **** you have...in the end nobody wins and **** is all over the place. The problem is the proliferation of supercaps (and titans). These are supposed to be the best of the best and very hard to obtain and maintain. Rare...instead...they are all over the place in blob numbers. The only answer I see to this other than completely changing the mechanics behind them is to make Dreads the supercap destroyers that they should be.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#32 - 2012-03-12 14:11:38 UTC
Sephiroth CloneIIV wrote:
I think others have clearly stated what is wrong.

In past wars it was, it was not rock paper scissors, but gold rock (supers) beating everything else.

The inability for the death ray targeting subcaps is a step in the right direction (personal I thought it would be better if it could still be used, just upping the miss chance for how small the ship is, half miss on BS, quarter hit cruiser, 1/10 hit frig).

1. A clear issue is the ability for titans to hit anything smaller then capitals and BS.
2. another is liberal use of fitting, a titanic war machine should not be refit on the fly.
3. flat immunity to warp disruption and ewar, it should be a tenfold better then a carrier but not a absolute. Same with warp strength, 50 for titan, 10 for super carrier.

I actually think they should lose turret slots entirely, and get the their DD able to target subcaps again. One kill every 10 minutes per titan isn't huge, but their blapping power is just silly.

Let them keep their ability to refit on the fly, they have hundreds of thousands of crew member able to recalibrate parts/bring entire systems online.

EWAR immunity has to go.

And Is till think titans should be tied to a fleet command role to activate any systems other than warp/jump drives.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Hellanna
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2012-03-17 17:38:35 UTC
EWAR immunity was a good mechanic back when there were < 5 in game. Now with thousands of them it's not a good mechanic and yes, should be removed by either complete removal or letting a specialized ship project EWAR against them.
Previous page12