Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Didn't the whole structure revamp meant rewriting new code instead of living with legacy code? With new mooring/docking mechanism as well as asset recovery for destroyed station etc for structures, it would be good that CCP reinvestigate docking in capital/super-capital ships.

actually I do remember this one. It has something to do with how the server recognizes ownership of things. If a person is considered to be someone else's object, it throws a fit and soul-crushing lag ensues.

TLDR

**** you got mine.

You mean like the people that want to keep them as is or even buff them are in known alliances known to have alot of supercapitals, pot calling kettle...

Everyone is biased on way or another, you either have (think you have atleast) capital superiority and want it to stay that way or you go against someone who have more capitals and want a chance to fight them.

Supercapitals are to strong due to the soul crushing lag included in fleet fights with them :P
As far as i know there have not been these fights after the jump changes, so at the moment we should focus on normal capitals.
Its not like CCP need to change SC/Titans at the same time they change carriers or dreads, lets start with defining what carrier/dread should be used for and go from there.

I may not have played this game as long as you, but I've seen my share of supercap fights, too. They are a cancer on eve. They were poorly balanced to begin with, and implemented based upon certain assumptions that any numb-nut should have seen as obviously flawed.

And no, this is not WoW. So don't come crying to the forums when your obviously broken ship that you paid too much for on Ebay gets nerfed again.

I am forever cursed to never locate these threads when they are born, only after they've already peaked. So heres my 2 cents on the first 4 pages ive read so far plus my own 2 cents on my own opinion of these.

1. Capital modes seem interesting to say the least, this does however change the uniqueness of the tactical destroyers by letting us piggyback off what made them unique in the first place. As good and well refined as the idea is i dont think thats a path we should set on just yet, perhaps we need to explore other ways to make these ships unique, I thought of the idea of Capital Cores, which functions similar to this but different at the same time


- People say capitals in highsec wouldn't work because of highsec griefers and war dec corporations, i respectfully disagree. I believe all that is required is a simple set of rules similar but adapted to what grandfather'd caps have now. Rules are as follows:

1. Triage or Siege Modules May not be activated in highsec ( this begs the question then why bring them?)
2. As already is the case Capitals may not use acceleration gates ( keeps them out of incursions, missions, complexes, etc )
3. Capital ships may not dock above 0.8 sec systems and instead must be moored to deployable structures ( maybe to the stations themselves or designated Empire Rally points which require standings to access)
4. Capital weapons may be used in legal war or legal manners, failure to abide will result in CONCORD intervention (Ganks)
5. Capitals may be restricted from certain systems ( IE Jita for server reasons, etc )
6. Titan bridges and Doomsdays are restricted.
7. Fighters Bombers are restricted to 5 at a time. ( perhaps fighters too, discuss below )
8. Capital ships may not dock or moor with weapons timers

Now why would we want capitals in highsec?

Many people are polarized against it, but perhaps we have a culmination of reasons now. New Sov 5.0, Capital jump range nerfs, capital re-balancing ( hopefully ), the growing drifter threat, a show of force for capsuleer alliances showcasing some of our most powerful fleet warships in what was strictly regulated empire space within the bounds of CONCORD Control ( this ties into RUBICON Lore with Capsuleers slowly growing out of Empire Control and becoming more and more independent of their influence. ) this shows our defiance of their control, with restraint as the Empires outnumber us millions to 1.

Feel free to discuss further below.



2. Other observations
- With Mooring now a feature we are in a good spot with Supercapitals in terms of "Docking" given that this is largely a similar mechanic with similar features.
- Supercapitals need seperate roles on the battlefield, i think a good way to do this is making them more multi-pilot oriented, NOT Multi-Pilot Controlled FYI.

Example Idea:

Supercarriers and titans right now both offer the DPS role, titans the bridge role as well, so we have 2 vastly different supers filling the same roles, lets shake this up.

I suggest titans lose the clone bay and warfare link bonuses and pass those to supercarriers ( WHY BELOW )
In turn i also suggest supercarriers get a Corporate Ship Maintenance array, with options to let fleet or alliance members access it. This is separate from the personal one that already exists. that is step one, step two may garner much more animosity.

Step 2 is to give supercarriers the clone vat bonus, and so long as the vat is active not only may you jump clone to the ship, you may set it as a home station ( dont lose your shite now keep reading ) this will permit pilots to wake up INSIDE the super, they can undock, but not re-dock, if they have access to the Corp/Alliance Hanger they can choose to undock in a ship from there.

This coupled with warfare links makes super carriers a force mobilizer and sustainability ship, given these changes i would also reduce the number of fighters deployed ( or bombers ) to better suit them in their new envisioned role. This makes the deployment of more than say a dozen or half dozen inefficient in the new Sov system which would be dominated by subcaps largely.

Why would it be inefficient? Because these basically would be relegated to sitting in system or a few jumps away assigning fighters or bombers and making sure anyone using even one can stay on the grid to fight longer by resurrecting on site or nearby and reshipping faster. You wouldn't want them on grid with the subcaps due to their reduced usefulness and immobility during deployment, which relegates the battlefield to subcaps focusing on hardpoints / objectives with capital fleets attempting to maintain staying power and engaging each-other over subcaps on a 2nd front.

Not to say caps wont be at the hardpoints as well, i just picture fewer of them in this scenario.

This makes the wars more dynamic and complex, and stresses having multiple well disciplined FC's commanding equally well disciplined fleets over sheer blobbery like we have now. Especially when you consider a well planned invasion will not only account for multiple Control point domination but also to have the capitals protecting your super carriers, maybe a bomber wing running around causing issues for existing hostile fleets, gatecamps, etc.

I personally like my idea, obv
But feel free to refine, critique, and tear it apart at will.

Anyways where does this leave titans however?
Well now they have no clone bay or warfare bonus except the hull bonus cap recharge, armor, shields, etc.

So what do we do with them?

Disclaimer: I am a dread/Carrier pilot, one time super owner, but i have never planned to own or owned a titan, i am in no way qualified to present this possibly bad idea other than as a fellow eve player. So without further adieu here it is!

(In my next post because i ran out of available space)

POST 2: TITANS AND SUPERS CONT....\


Rebalancing titans:

1. Take the titans hull bonus and multiply it by a factor of 4, permit only a single titan to boost at any given time in a fleet, this does not restrict the number of titans permitted in a fleet, just forces choices about which one to boost with depending on your setup for both caps and subcaps.

Want faster shield ships to capture and maintain better mobility of forces across hardpoints? Pick a Leviathan or a Ragnarok
Want Slower but more staying power? Pick an Erebus, want to be more anti-cap heavy or expect to be under cap pressure? Avatar it is!

2. Amplify the construction time of supers by a factor of 3 or 4 ( at this point super pilots have probably stopped reading, for those of you still here, heres why! )

- We have far more than were ever intended, its emergent gameplay yes and i by no means want to take any of that away, what i do want is the deployment of these things to have consequences beyond the ISK value. More on specific consequences later. This consequence is meant to make the deployment of mass amounts of these ships far more risky as each loss can now no longer be so quickly replaced, this will begin to deplete stockpiles and eventually help to even the playing field slightly in terms of numbers, savvy fleets may choose to eliminate supers at every chance, possibly even sacrificing a system to kill a few of them as it betters there position in the long run.

3. Increase damage and tracking on titan weapons, increase explosion velocity and missile velocity on the leviathan. This permits a fewer number of titans to apply far more damage, meaning fewer COULD be deployed this may also lead to the deployment of far more than needed of course which factors in with change idea point 2

4. Titan doomsday no longer costs fuel, but instead takes up 10%-20% capacitor and reduces cap recharge to 25% of normal ( 50% with maxed avatar booster ) this makes the use of the doomsday more tactical as the titan will be unable to adequately maintain itself after using one, this couples with current immobility and jump scrambling effects quite nicely in my mind.

5. Grant titans the ability to shoot structures with the doomsday once again and give it a limited AOE, this aoe will deal 25% of the total DD's damage to CAPITAL SHIPS AND SUPERS ONLY within 25kms of the point of impact. Subcapitals will take a flat damage rate depending on sig radius which will be nominal to prepared fleets. This gives the titans the ability to impact subcapital forces without becoming a powerhouse of OPness.

6. Titan bridges get longer range to permit tactical retreats or insertions into hostile space, plus maintains hotdrop content. Say 8ly tops maybe les, base fuel cost factor reduced from 1,000 to 750.



Again i am in no way qualified for this post, this is my own idea, discuss as seen fit or shoot it down like the Shigeruu

I'd remove the jump fatigue mechanic. Caps have had their range limited, role, limited, and while most changes may be '''''balancing'''' changes, these changes always seem to 'nerf' capitals and reduce their role to 'partially useful if already close by and can be bothered / large / expensive / waste of time / should have brought a sub-cap-t3 fleet'.

The changes to capitals would seem that CCP and a whiny number of Eve player-base, just don't like or want capitals in Eve.

The Capital Ship is a staple in the Space battle genre. It's an epic and necessary part of what makes the whole thing fantastic and exciting, almost in the same way its thrilling to see a small fighter dogfighting around massive hulks of ships while dodging debris and blowing up other fighters whilst being fired upon by a pilot in pursuit.

If you do not allow Capital Ships to be the epic monstrosity that IS a Capital Ship, then you'll find your space genre game to atrophy and feel less epic and frankly some people really want to work towards that epic massive ship that is the pride of the fleet. If the problem is that Capital Ships are owning everything, and this is a problem for Sov, then require some kind of mechanic which requires a 1) capital invasion part and 2) subcapital invasion part, but no successful sov changes hands without both.

I know there are deadspace / missions which only allow certain shiptypes, is it remotely possible to have sov specific structures in such a location within 0.0 sov space? Maybe even say the defender gets to anchor one pos by this with deployable specific anitcapital guns to narrow the odds more than the lolpos fits that capitals eat. To prevent the capitals from just jumping out to save shields, make this specific area cause a debuff that really rachets up the fuel cost to jump out, making it prohibitly expensive in fuel and m3 to jump out, and making a strategic plan and commitment for a cap fleet to engage to being with. Plus, by requiring a subfleet invasion too, you can't just welp an alliance with your supercapital superiority. Then make it so subcaps CANNOT enter this field, and then apply the same logic (without the pos) to the subcapital sov staging area.

Defender gets bonuses based on their 1) activity level in the area with some kind of equation (alliance size + number of systems, but as the numbers get higher, by necessity, make this have extreme diminishing returns so its just not a "haha we have half of Eve in our alliance") 2) resources donated / fuel to keep it active and 3) pick another way to measure in a meaningful way. The notion of sov being anything other than an alliance laying claim over an area makes the Eve notion of sov seem weird, but we get to work with what we have.

What happens in the rest of Eve should continue to be a sandbox, not some whiny pissed off empire hauler who loses a hauler to a supercarrier and then demands they get nerfed into oblivion because supercapitals are 'broken' every single time they get used successfully in Eve.

Don't know if anyone is still following this thread but just in case;
Here are some thoughts I've had on the subject.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5899298#post5899298

ok, as someone that is currently training a toon for a carrier, heres my thought, for what its worth, on how to sort out capitals.

Supers should be flagships and give bonus's to the fleet (if they are are not a super) scaled up for titans.

Dreads should be anti-capital boats, with bonus's to damage vs capitals, nerfs against subcaps.

Carriers should be the reverse of a dread, bonus's against sub-caps, nerfs against caps. enough of this logi bull, a CARRIER should not be a logi boat. revome triarge if you have to, its a stupid idea anyway.

A new Capital ship should be introduced specifically for logi, it should have NO dps ability, but bonus's to RR.

Capitals are end game content, if CCP goes messing with them to much, its just going to alieninate the portion of the player base that uses them. Nerfing the crap out of caps because of people that dont even fly them is crasy, caps are supposed to be these huge war machines that can take and deal huge volumes of damage. They need defined roles in the fleet, they are to good at the jack of all trades as they stand now.
Saying all this though, why are we even talking about this, lets be honest with ourselves, CCP has turned this into Cruisers Online, they had the perfect opertunity to put the entosis link as a battleship only modual, to bring some relavence to the ship class, but no, they let the small stuff have it as well, as i have said before, whats the point of even training past your races cruiser 5? I am, because the hell with CCP, gimme my big ships, but a lot of the people that ive spoken to dont actively fly anything above cruisers. You can argue that its the meta, but the meta games to the game, not the other way round. CCP needs to either give big ships a role, or remove them entirely.