Not all content should be available in highsec. Players can already aspire to become capital pilots, just not in high-security space.
Hisec currently does not allow capital ships.
Nullsec currently does allow capital ships.
OP wants to allow capital ships into hisec.
Ergo, OP wants to make hisec more like nullsec.
Not exactly like nullsec, that Iâll grant you, but more like it.
(Also, check out my previous post, I actually put a proper answer there. And apologies for the forum-fu, I havenât had my coffee yet, LOL!)
1 Like
Of course, they will be produced without such restrictions.
Obviously, supers should be allowed to dock in NPC stations, then.
They are just big smartbombs, let carebears use them.
1 Like
Ahhh, thereâs nothing like the smell of sarcasm in the morningâŚ
1 Like
Thatâs only âmy logicâ if youâre an idiot troll. Do not confuse objection to one particular change with a general policy that nothing can ever be changed. Highsec capitals are bad for a long list of reasons, nullsec abuse is just one specific issue related the OPâs delusions of being able to build a fleet and fight the nullsec powers.
4 Likes
So you want more than just capital ships in hisec, you want custom content for them too?
Tell meâŚwhere else in New Eden is there currently content designed exclusively for capital ships? Level 5 missions may count, but they are plenty do-able in subcaps (or in groups) and theyâre only available in losec.
AlsoâŚwho would bother with using a Titan to do a mission that doesnât offer outstanding rewards? I agree with you that any sort of PvE content for capital ships must be relatively low-yield in terms of ISK and/or items, but if thatâs the case then why would people bother? Theyâd run Incursions in their blingy battleships to make ISK instead, because if thereâs one thing that players value more than âend-game contentâ, itâs ISK.
I feel like you and I are generally in agreement about the state of nullsec. The whole âN+1â, âTitans Onlineâ, and âF1 Monkeyâ memes donât perpetuate for no reason. And if EvE is going to continue to thrive, this absolutely needs to change.
But what is being proposed here wouldnât fix any of that, it would simply spread it. Hisec wouldnât become exactly like nullsec obviously, but it would become more like it, and not in a good way. And if you think that people getting to fly around in Titans merrily doing nothing of import in hisec will keep players playing, I think youâre kidding yourself.
1 Like
In your case calling you an idiot troll is accurate. Youâve built a straw man argument, and now even when Iâve told you explicitly that I donât hold the position you claim I hold youâre insisting that youâre still right.
Such as?
-
More capital proliferation. We already have a problem with capitals dominating everything outside of highsec, the last thing we need to do is bring that to the one remaining area of EVE that doesnât have it yet.
-
Less player interaction. The reason the OP wants highsec capitals is because theyâre effectively immune to suicide ganking. Combine that with the OP making their corp immune to wars and you have complete ability to opt out of PvP and remove any possible disruption to farming.
-
Completely broken farming. Highsec content right now is balanced around not having capitals to farm it. Introduce PvE capitals and you either have completely effortless farming of everything in highsec (and no reason to ever fly anything but a capital ship) or you have to vastly increase the difficulty of highsec PvE content to match capital ships and in the process make it impossible to use anything else.
-
Loss of ability to stop enemy fleet production. Right now the only meaningful limit on capital fleets is the theoretical ability to destroy the stations where they are built and docked. Allowing highsec capitals takes that last remaining limit away, allowing the existing nullsec powers to put their fleet construction into PvP-immune highsec alt corps. This would be a major obstacle to any attempts at fixing nullsecâs capital problem.
And which of those reasons in your long yet imaginary list are unable to be negated by balance changes as part of the implementation?
In theory? None of them. Capitals could be completely redesigned and not be a problem. In practice? All of them. CCP has shown no sign of fixing capitals so that they donât dominate everything, and you (and farmer trash like you) have already explicitly rejected balancing factors like making them permanently suspect flagged.
4 Likes
When the content is bad content.
but a lot of the content in nullsec is balanced to allow capital ships without breaking everything.
It really isnât. Have you honestly not noticed the problems with nullsec farming income? Thereâs nothing at all balanced about it, and now you want to bring that to highsec where people can farm it 23/7 without having to worry about PvP threats.
Just for the hell of it. The point isnât to have people able to shower themselves with money, itâs more of an achievement thing.
So you seriously want to make a massive balance change like this just so highsec players can have a meaningless trophy ship? How many people do you think will care about having highsec capitals if they donât actually do anything useful?
I donât think that capital combat should really become a viable thing for highsec groups which is why I think that any content added should be group PvE based.
And how exactly do you plan to enforce this PvE-only rule, when capitals have already demonstrated the ability to dominate PvP everywhere they are legal? It doesnât matter what the content is, as soon as you allow them to exist in highsec they will take over PvP.
2 Likes
There are limited edition ships doing exactly that.
A completely unprecedented rule that may or may not even be possible to implement? How do you even define âPvP engagementâ? Can a capital ship that is attacked by another player defend itself? Can a FAX use remote reps on a player that may at some point be engaged in PvP?
See, now thatâs a strawman.
No, itâs almost certainly true. OP has made it very clear that their goal is the removal of highsec PvP and buffs to farming income.
You already have the ability to opt out, and quite rightly so.
No, youâre still vulnerable to suicide ganking right now which maintains the necessary rule of EVE that all space is PvP space. Being able to fly capitals in highsec effectively removes that last remaining way of forcing PvP on someone.
But this is your answer to literally every post. âwaah waah farmer trash waahâ thatâs basically every post you make.
Itâs not my fault farmer trash keeps demanding income buffs with less risk and effort. I would love for EVE to be a game where I donât have to keep saying those things.
And again, youâre ignoring the fact that content could be balanced to prevent it being farmed. Hell, any ratting or missions can be fixed by blocking capitals from using acceleration gates.
If youâre going to block capitals from doing any existing PvE and balance the capital-specific content so that it canât be farmed then what is the point of highsec capitals? Hardly anyone is going to waste time on content that doesnât pay better than what they can already farm.
So like where I said above that highsec capitals should be locked to highsec?
So, a completely unprecedented and likely impossible to implement rule that goes directly against the concept of the sandbox? We want to encourage people to leave highsec, not impose limits that literally ban them from doing so.
There we go, problem solved.
âJust do this thing that CCP has shown zero interest in doing, itâs easy.â
3 Likes
I think this is the greatest downfall of both your position and this proposal.
The current state of affairs in nullsec isnât because players want it that way, and itâs not because CCP wants it that way, itâs because the smartest players in EvE have an uncanny ability to min/max game mechanics and that process ultimately yields the current metas that we see.
If capital ships are allowed into hisec, the nullsec blocs will absolutely, without a doubt capitalize on that and use it to their advantage. Thatâs exactly how they ended up ruling swaths of nullsec in the first place: they see openings, the move in to take advantage of them. (And thatâs not a knock against them mind you, itâs just strategic thinking.) This whole notion that theyâll just stay in nullsec is demonstrably false considering that they already actively participate in hisec combat on a regular basis. (Miniluv sponsored suicide ganking, proxy wars over trading hubs, perpetual wardecs against nullsec foes, etc.)
Also, itâs worth pointing out that there is no such thing as an exclusively PvE activity in EvE. Any time you are undocked and in space, you are a target and chances are that there is someone wanting to shoot you. With the current state of affairs in hisec, that means that, generally speaking, someone (or some group) wanting to relieve you of your ship has at least some chance of doing so, even if the cost is their own. Even with Dreads and Carriers this dynamic holds since, in terms of EHP, they arenât really that much tankier than freighters, and freighters die in hisec all the time. But a Titan in hisec? That would be nigh ungankable. And that means that whatever ISK-making activity youâd be doing in hisec, youâd be doing in near absolute safety which goes against everything EvE is supposed to stand for.
At this point the forums are barking at me for replying to you too often, so Iâll leave my thoughts here. I donât necessarily disagree with your goals, but I highly disagree with your means of achieving them.
2 Likes
Someone in the thread mentioning a special Concord titan that shows up and kills you if you get criminal flagged in a capital, Iâm in favor. The guns really are not needed, concord guarantees a kill after a certain amount of time, and I doubt that capitals will be used for ganking, if they are then concord can kill them without needing improved guns. However if better sentry guns is what is needed for balance, I have no objections.
2 Likes
Agreed 100%
1 Like
Of course it is unprecedented. There are specific modules that canât be used, but no ships that canât be used (but can still enter highsec). And there is certainly no precedent for allowing a ship to be in highsec and attack NPCs but not players, even when other players initiate the fight.
By âalmost certainlyâ you of course mean that you know itâs not true.
Oh, the hypocrisy. You have no problem declaring that you know what I really want, even when I explicitly say otherwise, but now suddenly only the OPâs words in this particular thread can be considered and their previous words and actions must be ignored.
The simple fact is that the OP is farmer trash. They explicitly argue for less PvP in highsec and buffs to farming rewards, and their corpâs only response to adversity is to dock up and lobby CCP to ban the âexploitâ that let them be war eligible. That sort of corp is not building a supercap fleet to challenge the nullsec powers and you know it.
No Iâm not. There are loads of ships that would be pretty much impossible to gank, certainly as impossible to gank as a capital ship would be (which is to say, not impossible just very difficult).
{citation needed}
There is nothing currently in EVE that has the sheer EHP of a capital ship. It might be theoretically possible to gank one, but the cost would be immense and the odds of it happening would be pretty much nonexistent.
Itâs mainly for the achievement of actually getting them and the ability to fly about in them.
Then itâs a waste of time, end of discussion. If you want to ship spin in a capital ship just buy one in lowsec, we donât need to make major changes to the game just so someone can own a useless trophy ship.
How is it unprecedented?
Because there is no case where a ship is legal in system A, legal in the adjacent system B, but unable to jump into system B because it has been tainted by its presence in system A. Youâre trying to create the weird situation where I can have two exactly identical ships, one in highsec and one in lowsec, but they are each walled off into their respective systems and unable to mix.
And highsec isnât necessarily inferior, but there is a clearly established trend of decreasing restrictions from highsec to nullsec. Having stuff that is legal in highsec but not anywhere else goes against that.
2 Likes
Of course it is unprecedented.
Capitals used to be in highsec, that is precedent.
Oh, the hypocrisy. You have no problem declaring that you know what I really want, even when I explicitly say otherwise, but now suddenly only the OPâs words in this particular thread can be considered and their previous words and actions must be ignored.
Lucas is much smarter than you, Iâd listen to him.
The simple fact is that the OP is farmer trash. They explicitly argue for less PvP in highsec and buffs to farming rewards
nope
That sort of corp is not building a supercap fleet to challenge the nullsec powers and you know it.
Sure we would, we need the proper mechanics in order to do so however.
Then itâs a waste of time, end of discussion.
nope
1 Like
Stop lying. Everyone knows who you are, everyone can read your posting history here.
Stop lying. Everyone knows who you are, everyone can read your posting history here.
ummmmmm no
Titans (and I think Supers, but donât quote me on that, I havenât looked in a long time) can only be built by an alliance that owns sovereignty over the system theyâre in. So, players in hisec aspiring to own a Titan or a Super would still need to contend with actually buying one from one of the nullsec blocs.
So long as there is no issue, Iâd like to see this preserved, having small indie alliances dedicated to super/titan production for highsec would be a great sight to see across nullsec. And if nullsec only does not work, you can have it be built in lowsec or even in highsec, depending on what is best for balance.
Players aspiring to fly/own a Titan or Super in hisec will presumably need somewhere to dock said Titan or Super. Is part of this aspiration also setting up Keepstar where they could eventually house it too? Because that is a lot of aspiration.
included in my original proposal, and still held belief is that supers/titans should have docking restrictions, so that they can dock only in keepstars, thus encouraging conflict to build and maintain them in accessible areas across highsec. I mentioned a desire for a âsuper NPCâ station, one per region, which would be much larger than a normal NPC station, like the Jita IV IV station being built, and allows for super/titan access. Whether that is balanced is to be determined through CCP analysis, and as always they have final say.
Presumably, the âultimateâ end-game content on these ships would be to use things like Doomsdays, Effects generators, Burst Projectors, etc. but I can state with fair certainty that none of these will ever be allowed to be used in hisec. To get the full âend-game contentâ, you still need to go to losec or nullsec.
Original post calls for doomsday ban. And that is a false statement, endgame content is 1 owning the ship, 2 showing it off, buying some skins for it (which make ccp money) and 3 to use it for fun, say ratting, mining, etc. Whether pvp with them should be restricted I leave that to CCP, but the original reason why they were removed, (killing everyone in highsec) is no longer applicable, because concord has been massively buffed since those days.
1 Like
Active tanked carriers and dreads have about the same EHP as a tanked freighter. They can easily go higher if buffer fit, but itâs not unreasonable to say that theyâre in the same ballpark as a tanked freighter. To me, that means that carriers and dreads would be at least somewhat vulnerable to suicide ganking in hisec. And profit-wise, although they have less raw capacity for carrying cargo, they could (and likely would be) used for transporting expensive goods, not to mention that capital modules tend to fetch a pretty penny, especially for a blingy fit. So I donât see carriers and dreads as necessarily being much safer than freighters from a suicide ganking standpoint. Somewhat safer, yes, still enough at risk that a fleet intended to gank a freighter could potentially still gank one of them without adding more pilots or larger ships.
However:
- A Rorq with just a DC2 fit has roughly 1.5x the EHP of a tanked freighter.
- A Super with just a DC2 fit has roughly 5x the EHP of a tanked freighter.
- A Titan with just a DC2 fit has almost 7x the EHP of a tanked freighter.
And thatâs before adding any actual buffer. Especially in the case of Titans and Supers, you can easily end up with EHP pools 10x that of a tanked freighter. Plus, at least half of them will (potentially) have massive local shield reps that land instantly. No freighter-ganking fleet would be able to touch that.
Would it be impossible to suicide gank a Titan or Super in hisec? Not strictly speaking, no. Someone would gather a fleet large enough just for the luls, or some idiot would likely fly around with zero tank fit expecting to be immune. Itâll happen. But, by and large, they would be exponentially harder to gank than freighters, which means that folks flying them in hisec would be exponentially safer than pilots in smaller ships.
Does operating Supers and Titans in near perfect safety sound familiar? Oh right, thatâs what happens in nullsec.
Rocket launchers used to be able to fire torpedoes, MWDs didnât use to have add mass when activated, and hisec didnât used to have CONCORD.
Just because something used to be a certain way in EvE, that doesnât mean that it will, or should, ever happen again. In all of the cases I listed, the change happened because the existing state of affairs was utterly broken.
Once again, you have this mindset that small organizations will undertake an activity but the nullsec blocs wonât. If small, sov-holding alliances (a concept which, incidentally, is bordering on the oxymoronic in its own right) start cranking out Titans and Supers specifically for hisec customers, one or both of the following will likely happen:
- The existing nullsec blocs will squash them in order to prevent their opponents from buying Titans and Supers that they couldnât otherwise build.
- The existing nullsec blocs will beat them at their own game and make more ISK than Bob Almighty selling Titans and Supers to hisec customers on their own.
My money is on the first option, but I could see the second one happening too.
Goodbye small indie alliance, hello buffed nullsec blocs.
(Other capital ships donât present this problem since you can build them in NPC stations anywhere in nullsec or losec.)
Seriously, if you want to look objectively at this proposal, look at it from the standpoint of someone leading a nullsec bloc. Step out of your role as a hisec CEO and look at it and think about how a nullsec bloc could use it for their own advantage to increase their power or threaten an opponent. Because I guarantee you that this is exactly what they do with every new change to EvE.
3 Likes
This is the issue. A naked carrier/dread might be only a bit harder to gank than a tanked freighter, but tanked freighters are already getting into ânot worth itâ territory if the player is smart about their cargo value and the carrier/dread can easily fit immensely more tank with a buffer fit. At that point the only capitals that would be dying to suicide ganking would be the equivalent of the idiots flying cargo expanded freighters with 50 billion ISK in cargo.
2 Likes