These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Incoming titan adjustments

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Castelo Selva
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#1521 - 2012-03-14 14:41:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Castelo Selva
Shadoo wrote:

... I personally btw I've argued for the last 4 years that titans should NOT be a combat ship at all, but rather a massive alliance level asset for logistics/cloning/staging/etc ...


^^^^ THIS!!

Please Greyscale / Soundwave listem this man.
Please CCP listem this man.
Please CSM listem this man.
Please CSM make CCP listem this man.

Really this is the big solution to titans. That are the way it should be at fist. Just thik about a litle bit and you will see it.
Of course that will be a OMG ragequit reaction, but this is the right thing to do to make the game better.

What do you say Soundwave? What do you say Greyscale? Now is the time to put this change in couse, since you alread bloged about change ships and put they by role. That is the right role for a Titan.

Best post ever!
Red Templar
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1522 - 2012-03-14 14:42:29 UTC
Roime wrote:
As a general note an adjustment that benefits a single entity over others isn't probably a "balancing" adjustment at all.

Why only Goonswarm members are gloating happy about this change, and everyone else in null seems to be butthurt as hell?

Maybe needs some more thinking, imo, just by looking at the reactions.


Why are you ignoring other people opinions? I have seen plenty of people in this thread who support this change and who is not in goonswarm. Both from null-sec alliances and not. Even some players who are affected by this change (raiden/pl/whatever) agree that titans are unbalanced and need changes, though they disagree with this specific solution.

If you choose to ignore everyone else and only see goons... well, its your choice, but no amount of thinking will help you in that case.

[b]For Love. For Peace. For Honor.

For None of the Above.

For Pony![/b]
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1523 - 2012-03-14 14:43:01 UTC
Dez Affinity wrote:
Sat on eve-o drinkin' beer, posting on forums

we got a badass over here


hey which titan do you have and how do you feel about being hazed with a pos ornament?????

lmao

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
John Maynard Keynes
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1524 - 2012-03-14 14:44:09 UTC
Vile rat wrote:
[quote=John Maynard Keynes]


Right there in the beginning of Greyscales post he mentions this is a stopgap cause it is too disruptive and not what they intended at all. They will be redesigning the hull to actually be good at its stated role instead of leaving it broken so it can do everything.


Please be honest,

many people consider artillery to be broken (especially people who get ganked in high-sec).
What would be your reaction if CCP says:
"We think artillery doesn't work the way it should, we will thus reduce its falloff by 50% as well as its alpha. This is not the final solution and we don't like it but atm the moment we don't have the ressources to fix it properly. And until we find ressources to deal with it --> go and **** yourselfes"
Valearx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1525 - 2012-03-14 14:44:14 UTC
Franklin D Roosevelt wrote:
Valearx wrote:
Tobruk wrote:


we should just get rid of all spaceship classes and have pods. whoever brings more wins.


Please continue, your high-pitched squeals of indignation are ******* musical.


Goons have no class. They are like kindergarteners that get a chance to be cruel to other nicer little kids just because the other kid peed himself by accident in front of the class.


Hey, I just call them as I see them vOv

And what I see here are some quite clearly very grounded folks getting extremely mad because someone's changing their internet spaceships LolLol
The Mittani
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1526 - 2012-03-14 14:44:17 UTC
Strange bedfellows. I was among the most vocal in criticizing Greyscale for not consulting with the CSM about the anomaly nerf, and yet here I see him slandered by a legion of altposters from RDN and NCdot for 'not consulting' when he actually did.

In this case, the CSM was consulted and the solutions were discussed at length; it just happens that the non-PL representatives who participated in the discussion (most of the CSM) supported these changes to a man. I'm delighted to have all of you point your fingers at me and Vile Rat and howl about ~goon conspiracies~, though.

The hard fact is that Titan pilots are .3% of player population, Titans shouldn't be able to impact subcaps, and everyone - except for PL's reps on the council - agrees that this needs to happen.

Anyway, Greyscale has clearly learned from the Anomaly nerf; not only did Anoms get un-nerfed a bit later in response to criticism, he's consulted fully and at length with the CSM on this issue.

~hi~
Veinnail
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1527 - 2012-03-14 14:44:23 UTC
Franklin D Roosevelt wrote:
Veinnail wrote:
dearest CCP.

it is quite obvious over the past years that you've developed quite the gap in your capital ship trees. we need new capital ship classes. fill the void between dread-titan. I personally agree that titans are imbalanced, this is quite the heavy handed correction though.


make XXL turrets. and these XXL turrets will have the anti-capital attributes that you require without affecting the functionality of dreads. this will leave you plenty of breathing room for expansion in the capital ship trees, and even maybe the introduction of the XL control tower.


I have been giving a lot of thought to the EVE ONLINE game mechanics and I agree 100% with this man. There should be a T2 titan class as well that is able to fit even larger turrets. It also seems like there should be a titan equivalent carrier that fields BS ship sized drones. Also a mining titan.



no, the Current titans would be upped to XXL turrets, with proper specs for the role. and signature resolution to match
Le Cardinal
ECP Rogues
#1528 - 2012-03-14 14:45:23 UTC
Andski wrote:
Dez Affinity wrote:
Sat on eve-o drinkin' beer, posting on forums

we got a badass over here


hey which titan do you have and how do you feel about being hazed with a pos ornament?????

lmao


Seriously. half of the posts in this thread is yours. Do you even have a life?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1529 - 2012-03-14 14:45:35 UTC
John Maynard Keynes wrote:
Vile rat wrote:
[quote=John Maynard Keynes]


Right there in the beginning of Greyscales post he mentions this is a stopgap cause it is too disruptive and not what they intended at all. They will be redesigning the hull to actually be good at its stated role instead of leaving it broken so it can do everything.


Please be honest,

many people consider artillery to be broken (especially people who get ganked in high-sec).
What would be your reaction if CCP says:
"We think artillery doesn't work the way it should, we will thus reduce its falloff by 50% as well as its alpha. This is not the final solution and we don't like it but atm the moment we don't have the ressources to fix it properly. And until we find ressources to deal with it --> go and **** yourselfes"


we'd deal because we're not cripples who rely on a broken game mechanic for relevance

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1530 - 2012-03-14 14:45:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
John Maynard Keynes wrote:
Please be honest,

many people consider artillery to be broken (especially people who get ganked in high-sec).
What would be your reaction if CCP says:
"We think artillery doesn't work the way it should, we will thus reduce its falloff by 50% as well as its alpha. This is not the final solution and we don't like it but atm the moment we don't have the ressources to fix it properly. And until we find ressources to deal with it --> go and **** yourselfes"



oh no our battleships got nerfed we might have to fly one of the other 30 hulls that can take their place

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Dez Affinity
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1531 - 2012-03-14 14:46:55 UTC
Andski wrote:
Dez Affinity wrote:
Sat on eve-o drinkin' beer, posting on forums

we got a badass over here


hey which titan do you have and how do you feel about being hazed with a pos ornament?????

lmao


none

lmao
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1532 - 2012-03-14 14:47:11 UTC
Le Cardinal wrote:
Seriously. half of the posts in this thread is yours. Do you even have a life?


look at you going all ad hominem because you totally have a life mister "i spent months ratting to buy my titan" lmao

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1533 - 2012-03-14 14:49:01 UTC
John Maynard Keynes wrote:


Please be honest,

many people consider artillery to be broken (especially people who get ganked in high-sec).
What would be your reaction if CCP says:
"We think artillery doesn't work the way it should, we will thus reduce its falloff by 50% as well as its alpha. This is not the final solution and we don't like it but atm the moment we don't have the ressources to fix it properly. And until we find ressources to deal with it --> go and **** yourselfes"



I'd say simply "Ok, we'll adapt".


We're not wed to one hull class to be successful in this game.
Le Cardinal
ECP Rogues
#1534 - 2012-03-14 14:51:13 UTC
Andski wrote:
Le Cardinal wrote:
Seriously. half of the posts in this thread is yours. Do you even have a life?


look at you going all ad hominem because you totally have a life mister "i spent months ratting to buy my titan" lmao


I dont have a titan Smile
Franklin D Roosevelt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1535 - 2012-03-14 14:51:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Franklin D Roosevelt
The Mittani wrote:
Strange bedfellows. I was among the most vocal in criticizing Greyscale for not consulting with the CSM about the anomaly nerf, and yet here I see him slandered by a legion of altposters from RDN and NCdot for 'not consulting' when he actually did.

In this case, the CSM was consulted and the solutions were discussed at length; it just happens that the non-PL representatives who participated in the discussion (most of the CSM) supported these changes to a man. I'm delighted to have all of you point your fingers at me and Vile Rat and howl about ~goon conspiracies~, though.

The hard fact is that Titan pilots are .3% of player population, Titans shouldn't be able to impact subcaps, and everyone - except for PL's reps on the council - agrees that this needs to happen.

Anyway, Greyscale has clearly learned from the Anomaly nerf; not only did Anoms get un-nerfed a bit later in response to criticism, he's consulted fully and at length with the CSM on this issue.


Can you please explain to the Eve-O community why you have such a close relationship with so many CCP devs? Do you socialize with them outside of your CSM role? Do you have drinks with them? How many CCP devs personal phone numbers do you have?

Do you receive any compensation from CCP?

Any comment as to why goons have a secret convention planned immediately after the Las Vegas event that has a large number of CCP devs coming to be wined and dined?

Would you be willing to introduce rules that require CSM members to log all interactions they have with CCP devs outside of the CSM summits?
Rachael Tyrelll
Dynatech Intergalactical Trading Ltd.
#1536 - 2012-03-14 14:52:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Rachael Tyrelll
Okok, guys I see what you did there ...

You are just winning eve by successfully infiltrating CCP ... good job goons ... best metagaming I ever saw in my life Cool

So I guess it will get boring soon in the donut :) What will you do then? Take over Jita?
Variable1
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1537 - 2012-03-14 14:52:14 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:


We're absolutely listening.
The changes in the OP are still subject to change if we get feedback on how to achieve our goal better.


Ok. Listen please.

If you want to change the Titan role from subcap blob equaliser to structure bashing cap killers then fine. I can support this. But only if you make other changes that would mean Titans would get to be used in this way.

For example. There is no point in being cap killers if no enemy uses caps. At this time, a 700 bs blob > all, including current Titans and their supposed leetness.

This subcap force can be used against everything, including pos/stations/ihubs - all sov related structure bashing. Why would they use caps in this situation?

My solution would be, sure Titans can't target subcaps at all ! BUT. Subcaps should not be able to target SOV structures. This way people have to balance between subs and caps/supers, and Titans are assured of a place in game.

That seems pretty fair to all?


Tho, I just read that part of your objective is to stop the proliferation of Titans further. If you don't like Titans that much, please just remove them from the game. Give me a break.....Roll
Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1538 - 2012-03-14 14:52:37 UTC
Le Cardinal wrote:
Andski wrote:
Le Cardinal wrote:
Seriously. half of the posts in this thread is yours. Do you even have a life?


look at you going all ad hominem because you totally have a life mister "i spent months ratting to buy my titan" lmao


I dont have a titan Smile


Check the sell forum, there's some great deals there!
Triskian
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1539 - 2012-03-14 14:52:40 UTC
Good morning thread. I see some of you have been busy overnight.

Can someone recap the last 11 pages for me please?
John Maynard Keynes
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1540 - 2012-03-14 14:54:07 UTC
Andski wrote:
John Maynard Keynes wrote:
Andski wrote:
John Maynard Keynes wrote:
Dear very important space ship personality,

the main purpose of AE DD was obviously to kill subcaps in large numbers.
The main purpose of focused DD was clearly to be able to kill every ship with one shot (including subcaps).

So as you can see the idea that supercaps should be a pure anti-capital weapon is rather new.

However, I do like that this was changed and do think that supercaps still need balancing. Making them useless is not the solution though.


Yes they should revert titans to the way they were originally added, AoE doomsdays coming through a kestrel cyno

sad lil pubbie


You can read reight? Made it bold for you...

John Maynard Keynes wrote:

However, I do like that this was changed and do think that supercaps still need balancing. Making them useless is not the solution though.


You're insisting that the way to balance supers is to make sure they can blap subcaps with impunity because that was their original intent, in 2005, when it was assumed they'd be rare.


Nope, Vile Rat said that supercaps were never intended to be effective against subcaps. I said that this is obviously not true. Not more and not less...