These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Supers "nerf" WRONG

First post
Author
Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
#21 - 2011-09-12 14:34:38 UTC
Dirk Tungsten wrote:

Not true at all, Supers are vulnerable,but not to a bunch of clueless noobs that expect to go into a fight in abit of everything with no structure. How it should be. Shouldnt be able to easily kill a Super. All you need to kill a super is organisation, good fleet comp a thought through plan. Newt a super an its left with a grossly smaller tank. FACT So with hardeners off an massively reduced tank can go hence an kill a super fairly fast.

Newer players have there roles in fleet scouts tackle bomber wing etc and are very useful, an with a little time an thought can focus into effective specialisation within fleets. So older players should by no means be kicked in the balls for sticking with the programme.


I think the problem is that you just really do not get it.

No malice intended, I just think you are missing the entire point of why super capitals are a problem in today's EVE.

...clearly the Ishukone Watch Scorpion is the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse, i.e. the Brown Rider, otherwise known as Poopie.

Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
#22 - 2011-09-12 14:55:36 UTC
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
The supers "nerf" is what is in question here.

Not saying supers shouldnt have a "nerf", but if what in question is true then ccp have got the balance of thing totally wrong and are condemning supers to be as useless as dreds currently are.

Positive to supers "nerf">
Being limited to fighters & fighter bombers is a well thought out an acceptable. Will mean that evolving tactics & strategys will be implemented around supers.

Major Cons to supers "nerf">
Supers should not have HP or Damage ammount taken away. A minimal ammount could be acceptable, but anything major is just a disaster waiting to happen. You prepare a character over years to be a maxed out super pilot & pay a shed load of isk for the super & everything involved with owning them. You pay for its capabilitys & its survivability. Then to have a hugely unreasonable,not well thought through outrageous nurf to be implimented is factually not the right thing to be done, narrow minded & a far oversight. If the nurfs are true then it could hit player participation greatly an faith in ccp knowing what there customers want.

Dreds of course have long awaited a buff to abilitys. If its true then dreds having more HP, damage & the 5mins siege cycle is a huge step forward & positive outlook for the future of dreds.

In conclusion what I,like so many people are concerned about is if the nurfs are true, why make your weak arm stronger ( DREDS ) & cut off your already strong arm ( SUPERS )
There has to be a balance there for player satisfaction & ensureing a positive future for gameplay. The "nerf" in question however is only going to yet again make a single class of ship relatively useless.


TLDR: I jumped on the bandwagon and bought a super + char after the ridiculous buff, and didn't have the foresight to see that they'd be brought back in line, i have spent hundreds of bucks and now i'm mad, like hella mad. Hella kelmad, infact.

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2011-09-12 15:24:46 UTC
I dont fly capitals, I am not any big player on null field either.

Nerf is neccessary to bring some major players back on field.

Major reason for changes null sec is to keep it flow, noone can get upper hand and hold whole null for certein ammount of time.

Changes will happens.
Amsterdam Conversations
Doomheim
#24 - 2011-09-12 15:43:33 UTC
Soi Mala wrote:
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
The supers "nerf" is what is in question here.

Not saying supers shouldnt have a "nerf", but if what in question is true then ccp have got the balance of thing totally wrong and are condemning supers to be as useless as dreds currently are.

Positive to supers "nerf">
Being limited to fighters & fighter bombers is a well thought out an acceptable. Will mean that evolving tactics & strategys will be implemented around supers.

Major Cons to supers "nerf">
Supers should not have HP or Damage ammount taken away. A minimal ammount could be acceptable, but anything major is just a disaster waiting to happen. You prepare a character over years to be a maxed out super pilot & pay a shed load of isk for the super & everything involved with owning them. You pay for its capabilitys & its survivability. Then to have a hugely unreasonable,not well thought through outrageous nurf to be implimented is factually not the right thing to be done, narrow minded & a far oversight. If the nurfs are true then it could hit player participation greatly an faith in ccp knowing what there customers want.

Dreds of course have long awaited a buff to abilitys. If its true then dreds having more HP, damage & the 5mins siege cycle is a huge step forward & positive outlook for the future of dreds.

In conclusion what I,like so many people are concerned about is if the nurfs are true, why make your weak arm stronger ( DREDS ) & cut off your already strong arm ( SUPERS )
There has to be a balance there for player satisfaction & ensureing a positive future for gameplay. The "nerf" in question however is only going to yet again make a single class of ship relatively useless.


TLDR: I jumped on the bandwagon and bought a super + char after the ridiculous buff, and didn't have the foresight to see that they'd be brought back in line, i have spent hundreds of bucks and now i'm mad, like hella mad. Hella kelmad, infact.


This. And nothing else.

I thought you'd bring up some valid points, instead you just say "I bought/trained a char and paid for the ship because it's overpowered". That's just plain funny.

What supercarriers need is an EHP nerf. Titans I can sort of understand because they're rather expensive - moms aren't. It is ridiculous that 200 gank hurricanes can only down 2 of 40 supercarriers (and that is the weakest tanked ones) before they die.

5 frigates gank a cruiser, 5 cruisers gank a battleship, 5 battleships gank a carrier/dread, 5 dreads can not gank a mom. See where this is going?
Dirk Tungsten
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2011-09-12 15:49:30 UTC
Not true, smaller more organised & elite alliances are able to hold there own against mass blobs due to supers being part of the fleet comp & being used well in the fleet comp etc. With HP & damage reduced grossly smaller entities will have to band together to go up against mass blobs such as Goons etc.

Wich in foresight will mean that there will be more players in certain engadgements meaning a hell of alot more lagg.
David Grogan
NerdHerd
#26 - 2011-09-12 16:02:52 UTC  |  Edited by: David Grogan
Rodj Blake wrote:
Supercaps should be generally very tough, but extremely vulnerable to x-wings RIFTERS that target the exhaust vent.


fixed that for you

Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs.

David Lo Pan
Doomheim
#27 - 2011-09-12 16:07:04 UTC
massive ehp and log off mechanics need to be looked at.
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2011-09-12 16:13:07 UTC
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
Not true, smaller more organised & elite alliances are able to hold there own against mass blobs due to supers being part of the fleet comp & being used well in the fleet comp etc. With HP & damage reduced grossly smaller entities will have to band together to go up against mass blobs such as Goons etc.

Wich in foresight will mean that there will be more players in certain engadgements meaning a hell of alot more lagg.



I almost splashed coke all over the keyboard when I read that.

You're in NCdot, part of the biggest supercap blob ever seen yet, and you're arguing that overpowered supers allow you to fight without blobing?

Were you living under a rock when the DRF used it's SC blob to conquer the north? Or are you just taking us for fools?
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#29 - 2011-09-12 16:15:08 UTC
Supers kill it with fire Cool

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard

Mendolus
Aurelius Federation
#30 - 2011-09-12 16:15:38 UTC
Shadowsword wrote:



I almost splashed coke all over the keyboard when I read that.

You're in NCdot, part of the biggest supercap blob ever seen yet, and you're arguing that overpowered supers allow you to fight without blobing?

Were you living under a rock when the DRF used it's SC blob to conquer the north? Or are you just taking us for fools?


I've decided to stop replying to him directly because I feel decidedly trolled with every additional response he makes.

...clearly the Ishukone Watch Scorpion is the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse, i.e. the Brown Rider, otherwise known as Poopie.

Satav
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2011-09-12 16:16:23 UTC
Skippermonkey wrote:
Mendolus wrote:
The only problem with super capitals is that there is no true counter to them based solely on game mechanics other than having super capitals of your own.


Black Ops cloaky battleships with citadel torpedo launchers

like a stealth bomber on steroids

make it happen


I totally am for this! I've been talking about this a long time with my alliance and friend in eve. This would be the correct counter.

I would stick my balls out to make sure this happened.

Supercarriers aren't OP. Theres just no counter to them. Plus CCP's wonderful invention of trying to figure out a isk sink in the game to prevent inflation from all the ratting ended up with PLEX's? Horrible idea. Now anyone with a semi decent RL job can buy a super without actually have to go thru the eve economy to get it. Hence the DRF is fielding 200 nyx's and 40 erebus's an such.

Gone are the days of when Battleships actually made a difference in 0.0 warfare. Bring those days back!
Mysa
EVIL PLANKTON
#32 - 2011-09-12 16:24:10 UTC
The day ccp makes the change to were supers and titains only can shoot/hit whit fb's on capitals is the day when they are balanced. As it is now were a titan can warp to a belt and 1shoot a cruiser as its aligning away and not beeing pointed by said cruiser they deserv any nerfbat swinging at their direction.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#33 - 2011-09-12 16:28:47 UTC
Dirk Tungsten wrote:
Not true, smaller more organised & elite alliances are able to hold there own against mass blobs due to supers being part of the fleet comp & being used well in the fleet comp etc. With HP & damage reduced grossly smaller entities will have to band together to go up against mass blobs such as Goons etc.

Wich in foresight will mean that there will be more players in certain engadgements meaning a hell of alot more lagg.



This from the largest collection of blues in the game who stomp on any sized fleet with a supercap blob larger than just about everyone elses combined?

Winter is coming.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#34 - 2011-09-12 16:36:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
I agree, CCP should listen to the players on the issue of Super Carrier balance....


... after all, it worked out so well last time... Roll

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Skunk Gracklaw
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#35 - 2011-09-12 16:42:23 UTC
I love these threads. Absolutely love them.
Avon
#36 - 2011-09-12 17:01:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Avon
baltec1 wrote:

This from the largest collection of blues in the game who stomp on any sized fleet with a supercap blob larger than just about everyone elses combined?

Winter is coming.


I seem to remember Goons laughing at smaller alliances and dismissing their "blob" complaints as an inability to make friends.
Now when the shoe is on the other foot they complain about it.

I love watching them become all the things they used to complain about.


As for supercarriers, I don't think nerfing them will actually have intended effect. It just means people will bring even more of them rather than less. They don't need nerfing, they need a more effective counter.

I'd rather see destroyers changed so they can auto-target and engage any drones in range, with tracking and damage bonuses against them. It should be indiscriminate but highly effective.

Nerfing ships because an alliance is too pathetic to build them or too scared to use them is not a path we should be going down.
EvilBunny DeathSpore
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2011-09-12 17:10:12 UTC
how about fixing dreads to?

MeBiatch wrote:
1:
Reduce seige mode time to 5 min/half the consumption amount

2:
remove the scan resolution penalty from the siege mod

3:
add new role bonuses to dreads such as:
ability to use capital nos/nuets (since the mod is soo big its sig radius based on if it works or not... so is useless against non cap ships)
ability to use capital capacitor injector (uses 8000's)
add bonuses to the mods in siege mode

4: make it so RR works on dreads in siege mode but are still invul to ewar mods in seige mode (edit this is up for debate whether or not ewar should be able to be used against a dread in siege mode if its receiving rr too... personally i am ok either way)

5:
add one extra high slot to all dreads so they can fit a nuet or nos.

6:
Remove the -50% to tracking and -60% to explosion velocity and replace it with a -30% to tracking and -40% to explosion velocity built into the guns (this is in effect a titan nerf)

ok so this would be my new moros fittings:

rigs:
3 trimarks

lows:
3 faction mag stab
2 true sansha endergy adaptives
1 ex harner II
dcu II

mids without ewar:--------------------------------------------------mids with ewar:
capital cap injector-------------------------------------------------- capital cap injecot
faction sensor booster (locking script)-------------------------magnometric eccm II
faction sensor booster (locking script)-------------------------faction sensor booster (locking script)
faction tracking comp (optimal range script) -----------------faction tracking comp (optimal range script)
faction tracking comp (optimal range script) -----------------faction tracking comp (optimal range script)

highs:
3 ion using faction antimater
1 capital nuet
1 seige mod

drones:
5 sentry II
Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
#38 - 2011-09-12 18:11:16 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I agree, CCP should listen to the players on the issue of Super Carrier balance....


... after all, it worked out so well last time... Roll


Because CCP did such a good job when they implemented them... At least they're being used now.


IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
#39 - 2011-09-12 18:17:10 UTC
I <3 SC pilot tears.

I hope they nerf them through the floor, you follow FOTM you face the consequences. Deal with it. Train for something good instead of hilariously OP and you are less likely to face the nerfbat.

Same with angel ships, give em a few years of being generally inferior, keep the cycle of FOTM moving.
Gibbo3771
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#40 - 2011-09-12 18:18:34 UTC
Yeah your major cons dont really make sense.

If supers dont get damage reduced they will just remain the ultimate hotdrop ships and anti any structure ship..I dont think its fair that everytime I go into russian space solo or small gang that i have to run around with the fear of having a nyx dropped on me everytime i fight something. Something needs done here, more fuel usage or something.

People dont spend years getting perfect super pilots, they buy them with ISK (or RMT) farmed by the alliances mass amount of moons and/or bots.

People dont spend a **** load of money on them, same again, funded by the broken 0.0 mechanics such as bots and moons, lets not forget RMT'in.

Need I go on?