Jita Park Speakers Corner

While I am obviously not CSM, I do feel compelled to answer your question, just because of how it was worded.
Personally, I don't feel that it even needs to be a cheap subcap. Something like a new (redesigned) type of T2 BC would be great for this, since all they are now are two slightly different flavors of booster ship per race.

Titans were simply a mistake, which CCP have been trying to correct almost since the second one was used in a fight. There's no good way to balance them in combat with the ships that 99% of EVE pilots fly, as witnessed that they have had to be nerfed over and over again and yet they're still mandatory for 0.0 - and increasingly for lo-sec (for Titan bridging) They should either be removed, or else repurposed away from being directly combat-focused to some hypothetical other role like mobile outpost or I don't even know.

The solution I favour is that each Titan pilot gets 1 weeks notice via email and evemail that on downtime of the 8th day, all the capital components, modules, rigs and the contents of the various holds that constituted his Titan will appear in the hanger of wherever his medical clone is. Blueprints are deleted and reimbursed at NPC prices. Construction jobs are cancelled and reimbursed. We all wake up from the nightmare and get on with our lives.

Supercarriers should be repurposed to be the strategic mobility platform, literally carrying subcap Fleets (or at least Wings) for rapid deployments, and then themselves becoming a tactical objective.

Delete all super capitals, it's was a bad idea and still is.

CCPgames have acquired more then enough isk/plex/stuff from banning accounts to compensate the losses for the super capital ship owners

The injection of new funds towards these entities that own(ed) the super capitals, will fuel a new war that will most likely be aired 23.5/7 on a(ny) news networks, imagine all that free advertisement !

Regards, a Freelancer

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/capital-ship-balancing/

"If you want to deal with sub-capitals, you should bring your own sub-capitals or a carrier."

It seems that CCP has forgotten this, especially so with the latest buffs to fighters and fighter-bombers.

My problem with supers is that my small alliance has no effective way to counter them. Because we don't own them, we have no way to really defend our space if someone who does own a lot of them decides to take it from us.

Should owning multiple super capitals be a requirement to owning a few systems in a corner of New Eden?

I don't think it should. I think Eve is a much poorer game due to all of the consolidation of territory and the resulting non-aggression pacts between entities. A major design change resulting in the Balkanization of the power blocs would breathe life back into the game, and more importantly to CCP, into their subscriber numbers. This won't happen as long as sov warfare is decided by who owns the largest super blob.

Nor do I think they should be personal toys that people use to easily and conveniently destroy anything they drop on.

So, here's what I'd do:
- Greatly reduce their ability to damage sov structures.

- Remove their ability to navigate from cyno to cyno faster than a cruiser can go gate to gate. They're huge, powerful ships, and they should take some commitment when used in battle.

- Create a sub-capital that is designed to counter them. Either it gets a damage bonus against supers, or disables the ewar immunity of supers, while being very vulnerable to smaller ships.

- Give them a monthly maintenance cost that is some significant portion of their value. If this isn't paid, then they are no longer able to target anything or launch fighters/bombers from their bays. This would encourage their use as alliance level assets, for large, important fleet battles, rather than be used as personal pwnmobiles.

Or, CCP could recognize that since they were never intended to be anywhere as numerous as they are today, that like The Mittani said in his article, they are ruining Eve, and remove them from the game.

I'd rather not see that happen, but clearly something needs to be done.

Most of them are not subbed right now. They only resub when there is a chance to dust off the space coffin.

They'll happen again. They're still the nuclear deterrent in null politics.

I read something on a blog last night that I thought really summed up this issue well:

"Risk in Space... Risk with modified rules allowing unlimited troop movement and air drops so you don't have to worry about any real strategy or tactics and can attack anyone, anywhere, anytime."
- From here: http://merchantmonarchy.blogspot.com/2014/07/meh.html

Tons of ideas obviously, from banning, nerfing, counter, and so on. The issue is nor has ever been ideas. Its the actual correct implementation of the idea into :

1. Technical code time/ money/ knowledge
2. Balancing it so u dont create the next super
3. Take into account the eve nerd factor, we will oush any envelop or niche
4. Did u fix it or implement a idea for the sake of it


I shoot towers with providence and pl drops 30 supers on me, ****, but ok i run. I cant kill em em ofc. A superblob with the garantied certanty of full scale escalation is a end button for the fleet op that was intended. Its goign to require a armada of dreads to ninja kill a few, before more carriers come in and get triage welped. I will loose always and dotn achieve superdeath

Now lets remove all supers, and goons drop 300 carriers on me, which ofc will be then next thing. Lets remove supers, and baltec, napocs, or any thight comp will come in , 200-400 . Cause of timers, theay can wait a week even, let me grind down timers, and do what they do with supers, except wiht subcaps or carriers. Carriers in triage however can be put down by dreads in triage, hwoever a wreckingball is a different game, goign to be hard to break that spidertank.

As in most games numbers matter and size does when it comes to ships. Eve players will maximise anything we put out there, we have seen that with glass titans, wreckingballs, sentry asigning, bombers. If u remove supers the blocks will still stand as they have the dominance in numbers. Only in theory someone else can come in and take teir sov, wiht or without supers.

The current block stand off isnt due to only supers, remove em and stuff stays the same, just on carrier and number level

Personally i believe in the introduction of more ways to take or lose sov, where activity matters, and sov can be lost even to npc status if u dont utilise it, that way a block doesnt need to defend a timer in 1 week time, but they need to protect their indices, ratters and miners in hundreds of systems, not even to players, that will activily oush it down but just by being not active, indices can be ruined, leached, syphoned, camped, by small gangs. Space falls to npc status and van be gained from there through different ways from npc. Then u see a block empire having to defend hundreds of systems from all sort of unslaughts. U can add sbu s on top of it, dont need to remove it, it woudl be just 1 way to win or lose sov.

Supers and sov are inextricably linked.

Look at HERO coalition. Thousands of new players, yet they can't do anything in sov-null, because of capitals - because they don't have them. Old players gathered lots of capitals, so no matter what HERO does, they will always be behind in this arms race.

If HERO tried fighting N3 or CFC, we will lose to the first carrier blob we encounter. If we defeat that - the older powers in null can replace that carrier blob 10 times over, if not more. Well - if you played for a longer time, you have more "power", I can accept that. But as you can see, new players have no chance of getting into sov null, and being independent, except if they are tolerated, in a region others do not care about.

I support that idea about making capitals very hard to move across space.