Not necessarily as my char was not playing for 3 of those years. (And you still are cowering behind a forum alt).
I do like the attempt to make your higher death rate appear more 1337. 
also i donāt really specialise in ganking ventures in low sec, so considder that these donāt count as a risk embracing playstyle either
I canāt decide which of you is more deperately cringeworthy. Please, for the love of dog, stop.
Best way to deal with the sheer spam of Supers is to give those groups with them reasons to risk them without fear of losing it all.
If Supers werenāt the linchpin for holding Sov, they would get used more.
CCP have spent years turning Sov warfare into āSupers requiredā, that isnāt changing anytime soon - Devs donāt know how to actually āfixā the problems plaguing NulSec.,.
Super capital proliferation is only a symptom of recent years poor development.
1 Like
This is anti-thetical to EVE.
There needs to be a conflict driver that must be contested, otherwise itās just stasis.
There used to be moon-goo that was required for t2 manufacturing and limited to a handful of moons, wars were fought over control of these moons.
Now you can get what you need anywhere.
Thereās not much other than putting up your own flag or taking someoneās down to fight over.
Space has been homogenized itās fundamentally the same everywhere.
I think this was a side effect of the BO, that some ore farmers moved to high sec even with the lesser ores, and new PoS popped up in generally empty systems. Watching some players (and their alts) take over certain regionsā asteroid belts was interesting. Someā¦donāt seem anxious to head back to null. Maybe the ISK swings in favor of less ship loss?
I didnāt see it as much in my low sec backyards but I assume it happened there, too?
I donāt think you understand. When he says āwithout fear of losing it allā, he doesnāt mean āwithout fear of losing those shipsā. Rather, heās referring to the fact that if risk all your supers, and you lose that fight, you may well be unable to prosecute another major war for years at this point.
Again, when B-R happened, Sniggerdly lost over 1T in assetsājust Snigg. Not even āPandemic Legionā. And it took them and the rest of PL 6 months just to get back on-track. That was in 2014, when the number of losses needed to really count as ālosing your supersā was maybe 1/20th what it is now.
And thatās purely from a materiel POV. What that kind of unrecoverable loss does to morale is even worse. There were real concernsāon both sidesāthat if we deadzoned that station and didnāt let N3/PL get their stuff out, we wouldnāt have anyone who could fight usā¦ ever. From what Iāve heard, Grath had serious concerns about how many of his guys would just stop playing.
Thatās not a question of āHTFUā, either. If youāre looking at needing to spend years just to get back to where you already wereā¦ for most people, thatās not fun. Getting a major milestone the first time, working toward it, putting in all that effort and then getting that feeling of āyeah, I did itāā¦ thatās fun. Thatās an achievement. Doing it a second timeā¦ yeah, there can be a level of āok, time to come back from adversityā that motivates, but the longer and more work itās going to take, the less likely people are to stick it out. Itās just not worth the time and effort, after a certain point.
If CCP wants people to risk their supercapitals en masse, then losing them en masse has to be a loss you can recover from.
6 Likes
Iām starting to like your posts.
Perhaps you need an industrial and logistical perspective. I will use a Hel Supercapital and a 1000 man alliance as my example.
Iāve pulled off an estimated mineral requirement of a Hel from a website;
Tritanium - 883,139,466
Pyerite - 212,723,120
Mexallon - 78,040,931
Isogen - 12,560,899
Nocxium - 3,547,118
Zydrine - 629,773
Megacyte - 280,142
If we focus on the trit for a moment it is 883,139,466, if this value is split between the 1000 man alliance then each member can produce approx 883,139 and then the alliance as a whole would have enough trit to build a Hel.
Looking at it from this type of perspective seems reasonable to me, an alliance is only as strong as itās weakest link and survival is dependent on how much work each member is prepared to contribute.
The current jump mechanics make it harder to deploy capitals far from home, some people think this has caused stagnation and they might be right. All I would say is I hope that alliances are stockpiling super capitals during this stagnation so they can be used in the future. Itās possible to recover from a loss if youāve planned for it.
When I set up for solo play in Stain I went to the trouble of buying 2 of each t1 blueprint and maintained that method. One copy would go in the corp hangers and one copy would go in a can in a personal hanger. When a thief stole everything from my corp hanger I was able to bounce right back simply by planning ahead. Iāve since set up another can full of blueprints in a personal hanger.
Eve is still a great game, it is unique because it must be played very very carefully.
The massive cost and itās direct relation with SOV contradicts the concept of a disposable asset.
No one would risk anything alike in appreciable numbers.
I find it hard to solve the issue from a PVP perspective. If perhaps PoS would demand their presence for bashing, which I believa was the primary intention for such HP ammounts on the structures, maybe Hels would fly.
Maybe giving them a module that is Structure Bashing restrictiveā¦ but I still doubt ppl would be willing to fly them.
I cannot find another solution. So for me itās either that or pickup the hull from the game, reimburse\replace for another hull, cheaper and Structure Bashing Specific. Something less of a pain to fly around.
A class so overwhelmingly cumbersome should have never be a āpopularā asset, symbol of excess ISK IMO.
Say any pilot, with a ton of isk, he can buy or build a Hel, right? I mean what are the requisites, other than ISK and where to park it?
IDK maybe if it was directly related to structures, perhaps keepstars would āissueā pilots licences for those shipsā¦ limiting their quantityā¦ bah! In any case, no one would be willing to expose it.
I think they should just go and reimburse.
I donāt know how we came to this.
I remember when undocking carriers gave la shivers.
Stuff like this, makes me wonder if itās better to just kickdock them and let them drift to rot or at the mercy of parasites.
I mean, nothing against the pilotā¦ Itās just that some ships, I guess should have restrictions.
Is it desirable for such hulls to have as sole weaknes, the bravado (or stupidity) of itās pilot?
This is what iāve been saying for the longest time. Reimbursement is the only way to fix Supercapitals without driving off a massive chunk of EVEs paying subscribers. They are super tanky because they are super expensive, scale extremly well with deadspace gear relative to their cost and take massive amounts of minerals and time to build. Nobody would ever field titans, ever, if they cost 50 bil a pop and had twice the hp of a dreadnaught, theyād get volleyd of the field by subcaps ffs.
I see the issue in multiple scalesā¦ I would love to have a way to force a confrontation once a super or similar ship is exposed.
The problem is that such weapon, ruins the battlefield or the chances of a fightā¦ It happens on all levels. If an FC scouts a bigger, impossible to fight setup, he will not take it.
6 yrs ago, if a simple carrier was spotted, man that was a sure swarm towards the battleground because there was a huge chance for loss of the carrier. An escalation was expected, but not to something that will immediately end the fight for it being so disproportionate.
In other words, it was an opportunistic kill.
Then anything could cyno spawn supers.
Now, we have cyno restrictions. Which helped in nothing to āexposeā anything big but greately restricted their mobility and projection.
So, as strategy you had 2 chancesā¦
- cyno in an end game hull, resulting in the loss of minimal isk
compared to
- a brawl that results at least in some destruction.
But then the proliferation made it so that functions like entosing being not hull specific, had dreads doing it as Cap Baitā¦ as if it was gonna work. Itās just an exampleā¦
That way, less ISK was at ārealā risk because that dread was cyno fitted with 4 to 10 in line at the other end. So no one even bothered to attack an entosing dread.
Why do these hulls have that ability. Here is where the restrictions play. An entosing dread? I mean, really?
I rather have entosing as a group weapon of specific hulls necessary for the purpose. At least if it was say 5 battlecruisersā¦ activating the modules at the same time like DPS maybesā¦ IDKā¦
Something would be blown for sure. Itās just an example, there are many ways to do it with multiple scenariosā¦ entosing is just one of them.
The idea is that the problem has nothing to do with the ships. It has to do with the expenditure.
If you blow a frigate or a capital makes no difference. The idea is to make things blow and better 10 than zero. Destruction is the only way to roll the economy. Little matters what is destroyed as long as itās enough for a healthy demand.
I donāt know much about all these things but I believe from this perspective, the cyno changes won. Now there are more confrontations and fights at a smaller scale instead of close to nothing at any scale, which is the inherent proposal of the supercapitals whether we like it or not.
This is why I once asked if BO and cyno changes were directly relatedā¦ For me, the BO blurred the real effect of the cyno nerf on the battlefield. I saw those changes as a signal of the end of BO because such changes were not dependent of BO.
My point is, nothing else mechanics-wise happened that āendorsedā the BO, to put it somehow. So itās days were numbered.
dosnāt the dread have a bonus for entosing
Looking at it from that type of perspective doesnāt have anything to do with the strategic issues Ock and I are pointing out. There are also missing steps in what youāre looking at.
When you make a Thrasher, or a Megathron, how many BPCs do you need?
One. You need 1 BPC. It takes 2h 30m to do 1 run of Thrasher, 5h to do 1 run of Megathron (ie; build 1 ship).
When you build a Hel, how many BPCs do you need?
Sixty-three. You need 1 Hel BPC, 6 Capital Propulsion Engine BPCs, 3 Capital Sensor Cluster BPCs, 4 Capital Armor Plate BPCs, 1 Capital Capacitor Battery BPCs, 5 Capital Power Generator BPCs, 5 Capital Shield Emitter BPCs, 6 Capital Jump Drive BPCs, 15 Capital Drone Bay BPCs, 3 Capital Computer System BPCs, 2 Capital Construction Parts BPCs, 6 Capital Ship Maintenance Bay BPCs, and 6 Capital Corporate Hangar Bay BPCs.
Thatās the minimum number of BPCs, which means the maximum number of runs per BPC. Letās assume you run everything simultaneously because youāve got 63 industry slots available on your alts.
The components take (3h 33m 20s x 40 =) 5d 22h 13m 20s to build. The Hel itself another 55d 13h 20m, for a total of 61d 11h 33m 20s.
Now, obviously, that can call be brought down somewhat by researching for better timeā¦ but it works as a baseline.
2 months to replace a Hel. If you have max skills, each alt can run 11 production lines. Thereās 12 lines of production for parts, but some of those finish quicker than others. So letās say you juggle those bits and commit 1 character to producing Hel-parts. 6 days for the parts of a single Hel, so you can make 5 Helsā of stuff a month. So you end up with 2 characters producing 10 Hels every 2 months. And doing nothing else.
Thatās not too badā¦ if youāve got space and a Sotiyo where you can do it. If you donāt, then itās going to take ā days, because you canāt build them if you donāt hold sov.
And if you lose all your supersā¦ youāre not going to have sov for long enough to build new ones. And thatās where the problem lies. Because as long as thatās true, nobodyās going to risk losing them.
2 Likes
A penalty, in fact. All capitals take 5x as long for entosis links to cycle, during which time, capitals cannot receive remote repairs. Dreads and Faxes have pretty insane local tanks, so they might still get used, but itās usually better to just drop a disposable Nereus or Drake on the node. Or a Command Ship or T3 with insane resists and a small logi group (and, preferably, a few Remote Sebos to prevent jamming) to keep them going.
To me the blackout was the single bumest thing they could do. Eve is a butterfly effect game, so to add gameplay story elements that are a non opt in ( like w/h and incursion fleets) to a large portion of the eve plagerbase was a giant middle finger to eve in general. Pilots of Eve choose what they want to do in the game, some like null but donāt like w/h gameplay, while other pilots like the occasional w/h play but come back to null for the main home. To force everyone into playing with w/h style systems does force gameplay changes. I know of players who love null but abhor even the thought of going to w/h space because they donāt like it. To me I like to not see story elements injected into butterfly effect games. Giving an option to fly that way is the only right option. But donāt force it upon the players. If they put a perm blackout I can almost guarantee the end of eve. We seem the playerbase drop by almost 1/3 or more overnight with this blackout.
Indeed itās quite funny how this gnome made a trillion ISK in a few weeks only to keep complaining about āNull blocksā and how bad they are but i do give him credit for only needing to spend a few days with the veteran CSM to admit that the tinfoil nonsense about null groups abusing CSM for their own advantage is nothing but tinfoil nonsense.
About the cyno changes he said itās āmore than he would have asked forā
So in summary we can allready note that the āwhaler CSMā so far made no useful contribution at all, other than his admission that Null CSM are indeed trustworthy and akting in the best interest of the entire community.
In my eyes still a wasted seat for the council, but it cold have turned out worse.
1 Like
But what if the nullblock CSM members bribed him to say they are legit? 
1 Like
With what?
Real life $$$