These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Let's talk about Capitals and Supercapitals

First post First post
Author
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#21 - 2015-03-21 05:35:30 UTC
Every addition to the "versatility" or cap/super will also add to how much large group can "abuse" them. Remember that nobody really cared about sentry carrier until some people decided to try to put 100+ on the same grid. The stupidity of tracking titans also only really became obvious when people put too many on the same grid.

Whatever feels balanced in a vacuum when you pipe up ideas really need to be evaluated withing the "EVE online" framework where any perceived advantage will be capitalized on the the very limit.

For any capital rework idea to ever be done, the questions "How will PL/GSF/NC./whoever push this to the very limit and will be the result then" really needs to be answered. The first "iteration" of caps/supers was obviously though with too short a term for it's scope of potential effect on the game since they didn't take into account the amount that would get built. Don't make the same mistake.
Tycho VI
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#22 - 2015-03-21 05:40:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Tycho VI
I think it should work kind of like stacking penalties. Not sure how exactly.

Dropping a couple supers on grid will be really effective, dropping more will be more effective, but eventually you can reach a point where dropping past a certain amount won't be any more effective at all in the tide of battle. I assume this is the goal if they are looking to make them more effective as a supporting role in fleets....
Gremoxx
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#23 - 2015-03-21 07:01:35 UTC
Nice idea

But I don´t think that currently Capitals needs what you are proposing. I see what has been done with Caps in general and what you are proposing and I become very sad Panda. You and PL are in unique position to point out how ludicrous the current Super-Cap and Cap ownership and deployment is in the current game meta.

I think we need Titans, Super-Carriers and other Caps. But there needs to be limit on how many can be deployed each time, perhaps then - what you are proposing is an excellent idea.

Take for example PL current incursion into Catch, the current victories have not been won on numbers or clever use of sub-caps - But on-mass use of Super-Capitals.

EVE is an superb sandbox game, we are allowed to do nearly anything we can think up.. but the sandbox is only "so" big, Phoebe made that sandbox little bigger but now we need to limit how deep you can dig before you hit dirt.

-1 due to current game meta.
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#24 - 2015-03-21 07:09:46 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Every addition to the "versatility" or cap/super will also add to how much large group can "abuse" them. Remember that nobody really cared about sentry carrier until some people decided to try to put 100+ on the same grid. The stupidity of tracking titans also only really became obvious when people put too many on the same grid.

Whatever feels balanced in a vacuum when you pipe up ideas really need to be evaluated withing the "EVE online" framework where any perceived advantage will be capitalized on the the very limit.

For any capital rework idea to ever be done, the questions "How will PL/GSF/NC./whoever push this to the very limit and will be the result then" really needs to be answered. The first "iteration" of caps/supers was obviously though with too short a term for it's scope of potential effect on the game since they didn't take into account the amount that would get built. Don't make the same mistake.



If you drop offensive mode caps and supers on grind unsupported I will push their $hit in. Capitals and Supers need to be good @ things but not all things at once. Furthermore they need to be supported by other ships. I invented Slowcats they are absurd. They nerfed drone assign thinking they killed slowcats. They failed they boosted them reason being is they are more fun to fly now as the pilot is actually involved in the killing process vs assigning and going afk.

Currently nothing beats Wrecking Ball except a larger Wrecking Ball ( B-R). However in Sov 5.0 era with Jump Fatigue and Constellation wide objectives Capitals won't be able to dominate the field. This would only be enhanced with MODE. You run a Defensive Mode Cap Fleet ( Green Aura , Turtle Mode) ill ignore you , your dps and mobility will be laughable. Run a Offensive Mode Cap Fleet ( Red Aura Tiger Mode) ill pick you apart and suicide cheap ships to kill something shiny and expensive since you won't be able to tank.

However if you weave elements of Capitals and Supers into your overall comps you will be much harder to deal with. Because they will be supported properly and augmenting the subcapital components using there different forms.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#25 - 2015-03-21 07:17:15 UTC
Gremoxx wrote:
Nice idea

But I don´t think that currently Capitals needs what you are proposing. I see what has been done with Caps in general and what you are proposing and I become very sad Panda. You and PL are in unique position to point out how ludicrous the current Super-Cap and Cap ownership and deployment is in the current game meta.

I think we need Titans, Super-Carriers and other Caps. But there needs to be limit on how many can be deployed each time, perhaps then - what you are proposing is an excellent idea.

Take for example PL current incursion into Catch, the current victories have not been won on numbers or clever use of sub-caps - But on-mass use of Super-Capitals.

EVE is an superb sandbox game, we are allowed to do nearly anything we can think up.. but the sandbox is only "so" big, Phoebe made that sandbox little bigger but now we need to limit how deep you can dig before you hit dirt.

-1 due to current game meta.


CCP isn't going to tell its customers "Sorry you cannot play Eve because the arbitrary limit has been reached". That would be the equivalent of telling Goons " Sorry you have to many people and can blob too hard you have to reduce your size". I have said it many times you cannot place artificial limits on social paradigms. They aren't going to remove them because they have had many chances to do so over the years.

The problem with most capitals and supers is the same as The Tengu. They can do to many things too well all at once. This is why I think MODEs make so much sense. Making them able to still do really cool things and new cool things but not all at the same time. Instead giving players conscious choices based on their current circumstances. Perhaps the MODE shift needs to be longer. That way if you commit to a MODE you cannot simply switch away to avert danger.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#26 - 2015-03-21 07:48:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuka Solo
[Part 1 of 5]
Manfred

Congrats. Interesting idea. Give us tactical capitals. +1. But it should not be the only form of capital ship in my mind.

Getting back to your OP.

What don't you like about Capitals and Supers?
1) Jump range nerf.
-my poor JF. See point 1.2

1.2 Jump fatigue.
I used to be able to move some PI 1 night at the end of the month, just a few jumps up a gloomy ghetto pipe to hisec, a few times that same evening. Now it takes me days and given teh effort and drama i stopped bothering. So sad.

1.3 Fighter control delegation mechanic removal
We used to be able to assign "almost frigates but surely better than a heavy geko drone- thingy that costs a crap ton for a t1 version only" with people piloting them from my carriers to other broskies in the system for more pew while boosting afk like a boss. So sad.

2) Building requirements
The sheer cost of manufacturing something only 3-5 times the size of a BS.. but having to fork out 9 times more in raw materials.

3) Cyno requirement for jump drive
I'm not opposed to precision jumping with cynos the way we do now. But I'd expect a capital ship to be able to jump to a star, a planet, a station or with a capital only GUI, to anywhere in a system within its jump range to within a relatively large margin of error..... And why cant jump signatures be picked up on your ship scanner as a temp warpable anom signature.. i dont know... if local kills eve, then an all knowing overview needs to go.

4) Supers & Sub caps play a more dominant role of pvp in eve
These sub cap ships are the most over developed types of ships in Eve, the most hull ranges, t2, specialized roles. there are hundreds of different types that people can choose from. And the design philosophy current followed says that sub capitals are more important. if sub capitals are supposed to support a capital ship, it should be for a good reason both ways (mutually beneficial), not just a one way street of protection by smaller numbers. And not having the smaller numbers operate under those same rules of engagement. Capital ships should be allowed to operate under slightly different rules of PvP compared to the smallest of ships, because of what the ship is and how its supposed to be applied, giving them more teeth and awe, but within the same realm of feasibility that sub capitals & super capitals operate in. By expanding the capital ships class and empowering it to enough to operate both against (or with) sub capitals, other capital types and super caps sufficiently, we can start tearing away the indomitable super cap wings without starting another B-R and in smaller engagements. In short, the capital class needs to become more of a threat to supers and allow engagement against lesser hull types more effectively.

4.2 Capital class vulnerable to tackle from the smallest of ships
-Reckon e-war gets split into module size and affect limited number of classes based on size.
This would align them with other modules in eve. While capsules and shuttles will be affected by all module sizes, the effectiveness of the module in tackling a ship below or above its size type decreases with size. This would create a reality where supers are no longer immune to all e-war (points, tackle and webs specifically), but at the same time, give the smallest of sub capitals immunity from super ewar (points, tackle and webs specifically). This change will also force players to bring bigger toys to engage bigger targets, and force bigger targets to bring smaller broskies to help them engage you, forcing the great "mix of all hulls to have the best chance of victory, no longer the blobbing of 1 or 2 ship hulls scenarios in battle. This means that:

Small modules should point / tackle / web:
pods 100% eff. (sustained)
small hull ships 100% eff. (sustained)
medium hulls 60% eff.
large hulls 30% eff.
capital hulls 0% eff.
Super hulls 0% eff.

Medium modules should point / tackle / web:
pods 100% eff. (sustained)
small hull ships 60% eff.
medium hulls 100% eff. (sustained)
large hulls 60% eff.
capital hulls 30% eff.
Super hulls 0% eff.

Large modules should point / tackle / web:
pods 100% eff. (sustained)
small hull ships 30% eff.
medium hulls 60% eff.
large hulls 100% eff. (sustained)
capital hulls 60% eff.
Super hulls 30% eff.

Capital Modules (New) should point / tackle / web:
pods 100% eff. (sustained)
small hull ships 00% eff.
medium hulls 30% eff.
large hulls 60% eff.
capital hulls 100% eff. (sustained)
Super hulls 60% eff.

Super capital Modules (New) should point / tackle / web:
pods 100% eff. (sustained)
small hull ships 00% eff.
medium hulls 00% eff.
large hulls 30% eff.
capital hulls 60% eff.
Super hulls 100% eff. (sustained)

5) No hisec.
Nuff said.

6) No docking for supers
Nuff said.

7) Manufacturing requirements for Supers
Proportionally not in line with capital build requirements, esp considering the latter compared to battleships with relation to size of the vessel.... Cost isn't a balancing factor, so stop hiding behind it to lock people out from getting them. revamp (lessen) t1 hulls, give us more expensive t2 hulls etc.

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#27 - 2015-03-21 07:56:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuka Solo
[Part 2 of 5]

8) The extreme lack of different hulls for capital ships
Freighters - no Damage control & lack of hulls & fun...
-Carriers only have a logi / drone boat hybrid hull.... resulting in a slowcat spider tanking combo nightmare blob role.
-Dreads are just 3 gun marauders with a jump drive and nothing else to do except shoot stuff that's hardly or not moving at all....
-Super Carriers - See deathtrap carriers on steriods.
- Titans - hardly used otherwise - unless in mass numbers for pew and DDs - 0.0 bridging toon deathtraps that have counted & named each square inch of the inside of their tower / POS shields... many times.

9) Capital ships can't use gates while tackled regardless of timers.
Sub capitals can jump through, Capitals cant. I feel this i is crap game design. Either we all can jump gates if aggressed but not aggressing or nobody should.

9.2) Capital jump drive disabled by anti-warp modules?
Rly? Totally different system of travel, yet is succumbs to the same anti-warp drives used to kill only 1 of 2 different sub light travel modules (MWD and Afterburner)

10) that capitals target forever...
Cap ships are huge... they have more computing power per tonne than a rifter. The targeting system hates capitals by design. This has to change. If I'm going to be forced to sit on a gate to play with these things... then I want to be able to engage sub cap ships with something other than drones from time to time. And I'd like to do it before I die of old age now that skynet is going the way of the dodo because of game changes to modules. Capital ships need a scan res buff, major.

10.1) No dumb fire targeting for capitals or supers..
If i can't lock you before the server goes into downtime or with 10 sub caps need to be remote SEBO boosting me... why not allow me to fire at you without having to target you... using AoE weapons other than the ship fitted smart bomb. Like in the WWII movies.. point flak gun and shoot in that a way direction thingy..

11) No Space barbie with benefits
No incarna like game play on capitals. I'd love to be on the bridge, docked, or even in space. Bar in the belly of something large in the station open to various people for fees, new types of hi-sec agents that could be bought, stored and put to use starcraft style to generate new player driven content for players or w/e. So sad.

12) no t2
No T2 ammo.
No Capital propulsion mods
No T2 capital guns.
No T2 Capital missiles.
No T2 fighters
No T2 FighterBombers
No T2 anything that makes boom for anything bigger than battleships.
no AoE doomsdays or capital smart bombs.... so sad.

13) no t3 or modular caps
Don't see why we are only doing this to smaller ships and not these "important and impact full ships" CCP are selling Eve with to future generations... O the fun that could be had with t3 capital(s).

14) No anti-sub capital guns.
Why no anti-sub flak? Dumb fire small range AoE weapons that do damage to the smallest ships, but increasingly less effective against larger more powerfull ships (unless concentrated in large numbers).

15) No dedicated anti jumpdrive modules
Self explanatory. Warp scramblers and disruptors should not prevent jumping. more modules needed.


What do you love?
1. The awe

2. The size

3. Jumpdrives

4. Sheer fire power

5. notion of strategic force projection (i.e. fighter assigning)

6. Doomsdays

7. Not vulnerable to most ships in this game

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#28 - 2015-03-21 09:52:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuka Solo
[Part 3 of 5]

What do you think should change?

Capital ships need to be boosted to play more of a lynchpin role between the fight against sub capitals, capital and super capital ship hulls. If support from the bottom up is the focus of sub capitals to capitals, then the notion should apply to all hulls including supers and subs, where support from the bottom most link in the chain (subs) is no longer the deciding factor in your survival at the top (supers). The moment the hull size hits large or above, sub caps should no longer factor into the equation of threat from the top of the scale down. This will ensure the role of sub capitals are to support and help their capitals to survive, who in turn are there for super support.

While this top down - bottom up scale approach will work both ways, it should predominantly be limited so we can find an equilibrium between supers online, caps online and subcaps online. Before a long term solution for that can be achieved, we need to give capitals and supers some TLC.

To this end, I'd like to see:
1) More Capital hulls for Carriers.
Why do we have turret, missile, drone and e-war hull sub capitals, yet this design notion is dropped for capital ship and supers? This rule needs to be taken out back and shot. Twice. So we can start by giving players some new carrier types:

1.a) T1 Drone boat specialist carrier(s)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- +2 drones per level
- Can use fighters / bombers
- More drone DPS / buffs
- More drone control range
- Bonus to tanking abilities
- Better bonuses to fighters that make them lethal to Large sub caps, Capitals and supers.

1.b) T1 Turret / Missile boat specialist carrier(s) (Battlestar concepts)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit large guns / missiles (all hi-slots become weapon / turret slots, not just utility)
- +1 drone per level
- Can use fighters / bombers
- DPS / buffs to turret / missile systems
- Bonus to tanking abilities
- Can fit anti sub capital weapons (flak weapon concepts) and gets bonuses to those systems
- Can fit triage / siege / Bastion

1.c) T1 E-war specialist carrier(s)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit large guns / missiles (all hi-slots become weapon / turret slots, not just utility)
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Can fit Capital E-war modules that affect Medium & Large hulls, Capitals and Supers
- Buffs to e-war capabilities
- Can fit triage / siege / Bastion
- Can use fighters / bombers

1.1) Tech 2 Carriers
1.1.a) T2 Turret / Missile boat specialist carrier(s) (Battlestar concepts) (anti-Subcap flavour)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit large guns / missiles (all hi-slots become weapon / turret slots, not just utility)
- Buffs to large guns / missiles tracking/ damage / RoF / range
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Can fit anti sub capital weapon systems (flak weapon concepts) and gets bonuses to those systems
- Buffs to sub capital weapon systems damage / range / tracking
- Can fit triage / siege / Bastion
- Can use fighters / bombers
- Can use dumb-fire UI for non targeted fire

1.1.b) T2 Turret / Missile boat specialist carrier(s) (Battlestar concepts) (anti-cap flavour)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit large guns / missiles (all hi-slots become weapon / turret slots, not just utility)
- Buffs to large guns / missiles tracking/ damage / RoF / range
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Bonuses to fighter / bomber Damage / RoF / Speed
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit triage / siege / Bastion
- Can use fighters / bombers
- 50% bonus to Large Turret / Missile damage against capital hulls

1.1.c) T2 Turret / Missile boat specialist carrier(s) (Battlestar concepts) (anti-supercap flavour)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit large guns / missiles (all hi-slots become weapon / turret slots, not just utility)
- 150% bonus to Large Turret / Missile damage against super capital hulls
- Buffs to large guns / missiles tracking/ damage / RoF / range per level
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Bonuses to fighter / bomber Damage / RoF / Speed
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit triage / siege / Bastion
- Can use fighters / bombers
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points

1.1.d) T2 Recon Drone boat specialist carrier(s)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- +2 drones per level
- Increased dronebay size & jumprange per level
- warpable while cloaked
- Can use fighters / bombers
- More drone DPS / buffs
- More drone control range
- Bonus to tanking abilities
- Better bonuses to fighters that make them lethal to Large sub caps, Capitals and supers.
- Can use Fighters to scout local system, warp to gate, view what fighter is seeing.
- Can jump to and use CovCynos

1.1.e) T2 capital E-war specialist carrier(s) (Cap version of HICs - anti sub capital flavor)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit large guns / missiles (all hi-slots become weapon / turret slots, not just utility)
- Can fit Warp Disruption Generators (Cruiser sized module - only effect sub capital ships). Scripts for Anti-warp and Webbifier AoE effects
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Can fit Capital E-war modules that affect Medium & Large hulls, Capitals and Supers
- Buffs to e-war capabilities
- 50% bonus to Large Turret / Missile damage against sub capital and capital hulls
- 50% bonus to capital e-war module effectiveness against Large hulls, Capitals and Supers
- Can fit triage / siege / Bastion
- Can use fighters / bombers

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#29 - 2015-03-21 10:08:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuka Solo
[Part 4 of 5]
1.1.f) T2 capital Logi specialist carrier(s)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- 50 % Capital Remote Capacitor Transmitter and Capital Remote Armor Repairer range per level
- 15% Reduced fitting requirements / activation cost for capital remote Repair / Transfer modules per level
- 4% Bonus to all Armor Resistances
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can use fighters / bombers
- 200% to Drone & Fighter Control Range
- buffs to drone / fighter / hit points / speed per level
- Can Fit Triage / Bastion module

2) More Capital hulls for Dreadnaughts.
Big useless stationary target shooters, blobbers or unused machines of death? Nah. We need to put the awe back in "Ohmawegawd!, Dreads!"

2.a) T1 Attack Dreadnaught(s) (anti sub capital tanks)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit anti sub capital weapon systems (flak weapon concepts) and gets bonuses to those systems
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit siege / Bastion modules
- Bonus to capital micro jump drives?
- Can use dumb-fire UI for non targeted fire
- Buffs to anti-sub capital weapon systems damage / range / tracking
- 50% bonus to Capital turret / Missile damage against sub capital hulls per level
- 10% bonus to Capital turret tracking against sub capital hulls per level

2.b) T1 Assault Dreadnaught(s) (brawlers - all rounders)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit anti sub capital weapon systems (flak weapon concepts) and gets bonuses to those systems
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit siege / Bastion modules
- Can use dumb-fire UI for non targeted fire
- Bonus to capital micro jump drives?
- Buffs to anti-sub capital weapon systems damage / range / tracking
- 20% buffs to drone hit points / range / damage / rof per level
- 75% bonus to Capital turret / Missile damage against sub capital & capital hulls per level
- 75% bonus to Capital turret tracking against sub capital and Capital hulls per level

2.c) T1 Strike Dreadnaught(s) (Anti-super)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit siege / Bastion modules
- Can use dumb-fire UI for non targeted fire
- Bonus to capital micro jump drives?
- 100% buffs to drone hit points / range / RoF / Damage per level
- 150% bonus to Capital turret / Missile damage against Capital and Super capital hulls per level
- 100% bonus to Capital turret / Missile RoF against Capital and Super capital hulls per level
- 25% Reduced fitting requirements / activation requirements for capital repair modules per level
- 50% boosts to e-war module effectiveness per level (Damps / Tracking Disruptor, Energy Neutralizers / Vampires) against Capital and Super capital Hulls

2.1) Tech 2 Dreadnaughts
2.1.a) T2 Anti Sub Capital Attacknaught (anti-Subcap flavor)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can fit anti sub capital weapon systems (flak weapon concepts) and gets bonuses to those systems
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit siege / Bastion modules
- Can use dumb-fire UI for non targeted fire
- Bonus to capital micro jump drives?
- 75% to anti-sub capital weapon systems damage / range / tracking per level
- 50% bonus to turret / Missile RoF against sub capital hulls per level
- 50% bonus to turret tracking against sub capital hulls per level

2.1.b) T2 Anti Capital Assualtnaught (anti-cap flavor)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Can use Fighters and Bombers
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit siege / Bastion modules
- Can use dumb-fire UI for non targeted fire
- Buffs to anti-capital weapon systems damage / range / tracking
- Bonus to capital micro jump drives?
- 50% buffs to drone hit points / range / damage / rof per level
- 75% bonus to Capital turret / Missile damage against capital and super capital hulls per level
- 75% bonus to Capital turret /Missile RoF against capital and super capital hulls per level
- 50% Reduced fitting requirements / activation requirements for capital repair modules per level

2.1.c) T2 Anti Capital Interdictor (anti-Capital / Super e-war flavor)
Roles and Bonuses would revolve around:
- Bonuses to tanking abilities
- Buffs to armor / shield hit points
- Can fit siege / Bastion modules
- Buffs to anti-capital weapon systems damage / range / tracking
- 75% bonus to Capital turret / Missile damage against capital and super capital hulls per level
- Bonus to capital micro jump drives?
- 75% bonus to Capital turret /Missile RoF against capital and super capital hulls per level
- 50% Reduced fitting requirements / activation requirements for capital repair modules per level
- 50% boost to effectiveness of capital E-war modules (ECM / Damps / Tracking Disruptor / Target Painters / Energy Vamps and Neuts) per level against Capital and Super capital hulls
- Can fit capital jump drive disruption generator (New - prevents jumpdrive and cynos in a bubble effect for capitals and supers only). Scripts for traditional anti-warp effect, webbifier effect and jumpdrive effect.
- 50% bonus to range of capital jump drive disruption generator per level

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#30 - 2015-03-21 10:11:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuka Solo
[part 5 of 5]

3) T2 Weapons / Ammunition / Fighters / Fighter bombers / Capital Guns & Missiles / E-war modules that mimic sub capital gameplay for larger hulls
- New T2 Ammunition for existing weapon platforms
- T2 Guns / Missiles for existing weapon platforms
- New T2 Fighters (Fighter interceptors for anti sub cap pew pew & T2 recon / e-war fun)
- New T2 Fighter Bombers that do more damage to larger targets
- Fighters that ship owners can fit.
- New Capital e-war modules that are effective against Capital & Super Capital hulls (breaks e-war immunity)
- New Anti sub capital flak weapons that are like walls of small arms fire designed to wipe out smaller target(s) close to the ship with concentrated / longer term fire (Can be fired using dumb-fire, manual click and pew no targeting system / UI). These systems do more damage against smaller targets (sig radius) and faster moving targets with transversals.
- Capital Propulsion modules

4. Jump drives without the need for Cynos
Allow Capital ships and Super Capitals to jump to Stars / Planets / Moons in their jump range.

5. Allow Supers to Dock
Do it moar!

6. Allow Capitals into hisec.
Do it.

7. Revamp the targeting system
allow capitals to target in relative comparison to smaller ships. We have lives too you know, we'd like to get back to them before we grow old waiting to press f1.

8. More Super Capital hulls and foci (See what was done to Carriers and Dreads in posts 3 & 4 above)

9. Modular & T3 capitals and Supers. Read OP #2

10. Warp Disruptors and Scramblers should no longer effect Jumpdrives, or prevent capitals and supers from using stargates if agressed on the gate.

And that's just for a start...

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Ben Ishikela
#31 - 2015-03-21 10:40:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Ben Ishikela
So i like how fozzie continued: ca."we want them to be awesome in other ways. not just combat damage and stats."

I believe, that with these fittable stations comes the oppotuntiy!
to make carriers into dockable things. "movable"&"station" = unique.
They have limited cargo so docking space is still a considered thought. But imagine having your support ship pilots in your cargo hold and then jump into battle unleashing havoc on your enemies by deploying friend-ships!!

Supers might be able to have station services available also during battle.

imagine the logistics of fights. People could be able to log of yesterday before the fight in your super. then when the ping for battle is send, this same pilot can log on & undock directly into battle! because the wise super-pilot has already jumped there.

And dont forget the reship abilities that come with it! (+capsule tractor beams maybe)

The ^^ is way better than anything using combat stats to balance something. It makes them unique. How could you ever not want this.
ps.: stats of them would need to be completely redesigned to fit the new world of structures.

enough with the fanfest inflicted enthusiasm. . .come at me!

Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2015-03-21 10:58:19 UTC
Princess Cherista wrote:
Capitals in highsec is ridiclulous, they are balanced around being able to be engaged and killed at any time in 0.0

They would become the default lvl 4 boat and of course the station campers delight.


No they wouldn't. They'd be AWFUL for level 4. You'd make more in a battlecruiser. Why? Two words: TRAVEL TIME.

Level 4 missions do not offer sufficient target density for the power projection to offset the appalling travel time/slow boating required in missions.
Jori Ituin
Antex Solutions
#33 - 2015-03-21 11:24:48 UTC
Would it be an option to limit the mode switching to carriers that are in a squad with a super [or maybe titan] in their Squad Command position?

This would begin to give supers a specific role and encourage them to be used in limited numbers?

bonkerss
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2015-03-21 11:32:08 UTC
Caps are fine the way they are. They have a important niche of killing big structures and other caps. Nothing gonna change with nor proposed changes to sov or fighter assist. There still gonna be other caps to kill or poss to shoot.
Gremoxx
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#35 - 2015-03-21 11:35:08 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Gremoxx wrote:
Nice idea

But I don´t think that currently Capitals needs what you are proposing. I see what has been done with Caps in general and what you are proposing and I become very sad Panda. You and PL are in unique position to point out how ludicrous the current Super-Cap and Cap ownership and deployment is in the current game meta.

I think we need Titans, Super-Carriers and other Caps. But there needs to be limit on how many can be deployed each time, perhaps then - what you are proposing is an excellent idea.

Take for example PL current incursion into Catch, the current victories have not been won on numbers or clever use of sub-caps - But on-mass use of Super-Capitals.

EVE is an superb sandbox game, we are allowed to do nearly anything we can think up.. but the sandbox is only "so" big, Phoebe made that sandbox little bigger but now we need to limit how deep you can dig before you hit dirt.

-1 due to current game meta.


CCP isn't going to tell its customers "Sorry you cannot play Eve because the arbitrary limit has been reached". That would be the equivalent of telling Goons " Sorry you have to many people and can blob too hard you have to reduce your size". I have said it many times you cannot place artificial limits on social paradigms. They aren't going to remove them because they have had many chances to do so over the years.

The problem with most capitals and supers is the same as The Tengu. They can do to many things too well all at once. This is why I think MODEs make so much sense. Making them able to still do really cool things and new cool things but not all at the same time. Instead giving players conscious choices based on their current circumstances. Perhaps the MODE shift needs to be longer. That way if you commit to a MODE you cannot simply switch away to avert danger.


I do agree with you that your idea of MODE is pretty good, and I have said so.

However, if you can deploy on same grid 120 Carriers in MODE, with 90 Super Carriers and 50 Titans on standby for that "win button" then where is the risk ? CCP is trying to keep the EVE fresh, trying to make it so that in relatively short time that those who just started the game can make impact on game-play in 0.0 / low-sec / wh.

Lets again look at PL incursion into Catch as an example, under the current meta and what you are proposing the outcome of the incursion is the same - without much effort and / or risk PL will steamroll Catch.

Current meta is not sustainable
Faren Shalni
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2015-03-21 11:58:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Faren Shalni
I feel that capitals (not supers) need to focus more on their Triage and Siege modules. When using these modules they become very powerful force multipliers but with counter play built into the module (no remote assist) that can, and has been taken advantage of. In W-space the usage of capitals is limited so using them without these modules is pointless. We have developed counters to capitals that are effective or results in a nail biting slog that lasts for an hour.

The issue with carriers is that when you don't use the Triage module and have enough of them they become almost unkillable. So this would lead to a conclusion that their capabilities without triage is too strong and needs to be looked into.

What I don't want to see is a huge nerf to a highly skilled (both ingame and out) style of playing for the sake of stopping an abused aspect of capitals that really needs a nerf. (a quick example I would like to see is the drones removed and the base stats on Capital RR and ET's reducing but the triage bonus increasing to compensate therefore nerfing the OP RR fleets but preserving the incredible gameplay that is triage flying.)

So Much Space

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#37 - 2015-03-21 12:43:53 UTC
Faren Shalni wrote:
I feel that capitals (not supers) need to focus more on their Triage and Siege modules. When using these modules they become very powerful force multipliers but with counter play built into the module (no remote assist) that can, and has been taken advantage of. In W-space the usage of capitals is limited so using them without these modules is pointless. We have developed counters to capitals that are effective or results in a nail biting slog that lasts for an hour.

The issue with carriers is that when you don't use the Triage module and have enough of them they become almost unkillable. So this would lead to a conclusion that their capabilities without triage is too strong and needs to be looked into.

What I don't want to see is a huge nerf to a highly skilled (both ingame and out) style of playing for the sake of stopping an abused aspect of capitals that really needs a nerf. (a quick example I would like to see is the drones removed and the base stats on Capital RR and ET's reducing but the triage bonus increasing to compensate therefore nerfing the OP RR fleets but preserving the incredible gameplay that is triage flying.)



I agree with this. I love Dreadnoughts. I think they are well-balanced. They are basically useless unless they are in Siege mode. You have to commit to being on field for at least a cycle, but when you commit they are awesome at the intended role.

Carriers, on the other hand, are so good and versatile outside of Triage mode. Buffing Triage mode and nerfing normal mode is another step in the right direction.

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

vikari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#38 - 2015-03-21 15:07:03 UTC  |  Edited by: vikari
Issues I have:

  • Titans do not excell at anything. They don't have the most EHP of any ship, they can't exceed the DPS of a dread (in a realistic fitting). Given their size they shouldn't be second in these areas.
  • Bridge range is to restrictive on titans, simply put it's uncommon that 5ly makes any significant different in travel range for a fleet.
  • Titan and Supers have minimal or no supporting role for a large fleet. They are your fleet and sub caps support them. It would be nice if they could do the reverse.
  • Clone Vat Bays are to limited. I don't have a solution, but they are unused because of the limits they have. Allowing for remote moving a clones in Vat Bays, and also consider reduce clone timer (because if I dye I'm going back to home system with no way to rejoin fight).
  • DDs are to limited. We simply do not have enough targets to shoot at. Maybe consider adding POS's to the list, and BS's to the list. Give us a little more at the very least. Given timer, fuel costs, risk mechanics, I honestly don't see a reason to limited them from any object, but that is just me.


NOTES: I don't have an issue with modes, however I do feel the above issues need to be addressed to bring these ships back into use.
Also "No docking" for supers and titans has only one effect. The players that can't afford two accounts will never own them. Docking or lack of has no effect on if we see them in game in numbers.
Faren Shalni
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2015-03-21 17:43:20 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:


I agree with this. I love Dreadnoughts. I think they are well-balanced.


*Cough* Rev *Cough*

So Much Space

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#40 - 2015-03-21 17:57:20 UTC
Faren Shalni wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:


I agree with this. I love Dreadnoughts. I think they are well-balanced.


*Cough* Rev *Cough*


As a class, Dreadnoughts are working as intended. I can fly them all and own all but the Phoenix.

The Revelation may have some issues, but the Sarum edition looks fabulous. I have been on vacation for most of the past month, but the last time someone tried to close a WH in our space with a Naglfar, my alts and I had great fun with our sexy-looking Revelations.

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