Depends. Does the frigate have a cyno and some friends?
Even a rightly fitted BS?
Yes, HAW dreads will absolutely ■■■■ alllllll over battleships.
3 Likes
Heres how I know this thread is further cherry picked into ridiculousness.
Subcap fleets destroy freighters, pos and up wells all the time…in HS where they have a time limit.
If you’re telling me your massive krab armies cant bait and kill some dreads…alpha them even with cheap glass cannons.
Then maybe the thread should be titled.
Why arent capitals worth the time of subcapitals?
Sure.
A small tornado gank fleet will one-two punch 350000ehp. I’m seriously curious now.
Why does no one just do it? Maybe they are more interested in ganking all your moon goo and you nullsecrs never undock your capitals?
That’s probably it
In a thread with just under 70 replies, half of them are off topic ramblings from someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
@Alistair_Atreides if you really want to stay on topic, can you name 3 specific and detailed changes you would propose to address the issues that Jin’taan has raised? I don’t want to hear any more of you fake psuedo-intellectual WW2 theories. I want specific changes and a reason why that specific change would be good.
Going back on topic, one area that I don’t agree with on Jin’taan’s post is the proposal to reduce Scan Resolution on FAXes with Triage. I don’t think that idea will be “controversial”, but rather just ineffective. Reducing the Scan Resolution bonus just means that you’ve got a slightly longer time to kill off a ship, otherwise it gets locked by a FAX and we’re back to the same problem again. I don’t think just increasing the window by a couple of seconds will have much meaningful impact overall. On top of this, FAXes can already pre-lock a lot of ships (7 for the Minokawa), so I don’t think simply increasing the time to lock will matter too much.
Instead, I think the better solution can be found in modifying the Rep amounts by the target’s Signature Radius. Have FAX -> Capital reps give out the full benefit, but force FAX -> Subcap reps suffer fairly heavily. FAXes can still serve as a heavy repair platform that’s difficult to take down when the situation calls for it (for example, when you need defending structures), but no longer become giant “no fun” platforms that can rep over a thousand shield HP every 20 seconds per rep cycle.
1 Like
" if you really want to stay on topic, can you name 3 specific and detailed changes you would propose to address the issues that Jin’taan has raised?"
I can.
- There
- Is no
- Problem
If you really want to fix the game , delete all alternate characters and additional accounts because just about every “issue” eve has had in the past 15 years is magnified enormously by them and cheapens the game from high sec through low sec , wormhole space and into NPC null and sov null.
Jin fails at balance analysis cause he never goes deep enough and often in the wrong direction and suffers from a “i should be able to take everything” stance and shouldn’t be listened to from his soapbox pedestal. He should stick with his revisionist history youtube videos and stop pandering to the loudest voices on reddit with his “articles”
So gut the game…that’s your solution? I think you are failing to understand a core part of the fun of EVE and that’s the management and deployment of all of ones toons…
If you are going to attack Jin’taan then you’re going to need something better than “burn it to the ground because it’s been broken from the start”.
2 Likes
Gut the game ? no the game is fine its the prevalence of alts and additional accounts that cheapen the game and distort consequences. That wasn’t even an attack on Jin , he simply failed to state why anything he posted was even a problem in his first post. He went on about things he doesn’t like and changes he wants but doesn’t “show” its an issue to begin with . There is no data there.
…which is an absolute CORE mechanic of EVE…I mean, every account comes with 3 toons so to say it’s ingrained would be an understatement.
he simply failed to state why anything he posted was even a problem in his first post
Did you even read it? It’s a pretty well laid out article with the problem of each class being stated in the first sentence…I mean really? Did you read it?
1 Like
It was increased to three , from one. It’s also not a CORE mechanic. I don’t even know where to comprehend on how you could even possibly think this is the case.
Yeah i read it . several times. He starts off with opinions on every point , which are just that opinions, which all can be avoided by bring something else or don’t do X. Its not an actual problem he’s complaining about.
So CCP encourages people to have multiple toons…and then also has no limit on the number of accounts…and then adds Alphas which gives people an army of characters to use as they see fit…
…to the point that YOU are point it out as the #1 issue Eve has always had.
But you don’t see this a a core part of the game.
Ok then…
He starts off with opinions on every point
It’s a ■■■■■■■ opinion piece. Were you expecting a painting perhaps?
2 Likes
"
So CCP encourages people to have multiple toons…and then also has no limit on the number of accounts…and then adds Alphas which gives people an army of characters to use as they see fit…
…to the point that YOU are point it out as the #1 issue Eve has always had.
But you don’t see this a a core part of the game."
That,s not a core mechanic to the game , thats CCP being a business and trying you to get more you to buy more of their product. A core mechanic is the overview , UI interface , shield/armor/structure. Turret tracking , missile damage application. Alts and additional accounts are not core mechanics of eve.
Alistair, I didn’t really agree with most of the points you made, real-world allegories aside, though to be fair I don’t think you have enough subject matter expertise nor the security clearance to really give an accurate depiction of modern naval combat, but that is beside the point.
This statement quoted is absolutely one of the most ignorant things I’ve ever read. I would highly suggest you watch Olmeca Gold’s CSM video. Goonswarm has more manpower and resources than most in-game entities combined.
Olmeca Gold’s efforts, combined with those who followed in his footsteps, achieved a state where they were able to tax ‘2 to 3 percent of the region’s income,’ and they stole/destroyed trillions of ISK in assets. That said, I really do think your point about carriers/capitals/etc being expensive is false. The proliferation of capital/supercapital ships in EVE is so wide and tall that losses of these assets only matter to smaller groups who cannot as easily replace them, and even then that is few and far between. Even Titans are in the “#AlReAdYrEpLaCeD” category now.
THAT said, I don’t think anyone, not just you, can use the opening-move or mid-game arguments, because, simply put, EVE is at the end-game stage for the majority of its core player base, whether they have the skills to participate or not. Capital ships are utilized without a lot of risk. The risk is death. So what? Already Replaced. Whether you wish to acknowledge that or not, it is the reality that is the current state of EVE.
Supcapital ships CAN be very meaningful, but I would argue their relevance in large engagements is low. I think you’ll find that HICs/Dictors/Bombers/Trig Ships are the only ones that are relevant in capital-level engagements. The first two have the obvious pinning role, while the last two bring some of the most versatile, interesting combat aspects to the engagement. However, even with that point made, those last two are only relevant in smaller engagements that don’t escalate. After an engagement escalates, as I’ve seen on countless streams of big battles, the caps fight the caps and the subcaps fight the subcaps.
The fix for this is something that is almost impossible to implement. Jin’s proposals aren’t bad ideas, but don’t fix the core issue: supercap/cap proliferation. These ships need VALUE again, rather than simply being the meta. The underlying problem is scarcity. Reading the EVE economic reports, you can see that there are simply not enough assets/ships/etc destroyed to make up for the ISK faucet that is mining/PvE/industry. However, you can’t simply make resources scarce because then those people that enjoy the non-PvP side of EVE don’t have content. This is another result of the ‘end-game’ timeline in EVE. We can mostly all remember when Titans were literal gods, and capital ships were truly force multipliers in engagements. It simply isn’t true anymore.
TLDR: Subcaps are obsolete after a certain level of escalation due to the mass proliferation of capital/supercapital ships, and this is a result of EVE being in an ‘end-game’ state. I hope this proves to be constructive.
2 Likes
In the long run, there will always be an arbitrary number of people who have any required amount of skill points and can finance any given sum of ISK.
Now we want supercapitals to be something special, remain unique, still be seen around and used so people can get precious killmails and enjoy fighting these BOSS MONSTERS - as everyone knows, it’s not happening.
I believe it won’t happen unless a supercapital ship has a SUBSTANTIAL upkeep and lower building requirements. Only if the cost of just HAVING them requires a considerable, constant effort there will be an economic limit that could potentially restrain them to the role we see in trailers without crippling their abilities (think of them as office slots in Jita 4-4).
And only if they are fairly easy to replace, people will actually use them. If they are then straight BETTER than any other ship this will just encourage their use once an organization has committed itself to paying the upkeep.
That being said about economics and incentives, I liked the idea of teams in Inferno industry. They were a failure because it was easily possible to calculate the economic value of the team.
So I throw into the ring this little idea of unshelving the feature as ship “crews”:
- customize any ship bigger than a frigate with a crew and gain some bonus
- won’t have the Inferno problem since people won’t be able to tell what exactly a 5% on agility for their ship is worth
- titan crews cost as much as a Jita office
bonus: you have to ship crews from the place where you hired them to your ship (or vice versa)
crews could ask collaterals to guarantee their safe return
1 Like
I’m a returning player from 2008-2015, and find the state of capitals mind-boggling. I was there when titan proliferation began in earnest, and they had to rebalance the Doomsday from AOE to a focused weapon, because a few titans were being used to wipe out entire fleets. The first version of their focused weapons were also problematic, as they would doomsday everything off the field. Hictors first, so that they couldn’t be tackled and nothing could hold them down (my first hic loss was to a DD). During my time, many of the dominant doctrines consistently revolved around using Capitals and/or Supers to dominate subcapital battles. From tracking titans to slowcats carriers to … It made complete sense to pursue this, too, as cyno travel is vastly more effective than gate travel, placing ships instantly onto the field, bypassing much of the game’s topography. Back then, there was a constant balancing act by CCP to reign in the ability of capital ships to dominate every situation. Now I just watched a youtube video of a single HAW dread obliterating a 30 man svipol fleet. That’s just wrong on every level (back in my day, our 15-20 inty fleets killed the occasional carrier… slowly… very slowly… but after an hour… or two…). Titans have AOE doomsdays again, and now carriers are more effective than they ever were.
I love nullsec blackout, and have returned to enjoy that, but the state of capitals in this game is appalling. I wondered why Hilmar filled the executive producer role after Nordgren left… and I hoped it’s to change the imbalances within the game! A constant state of shifting imbalances is healthy, but I don’t see how this latest iteration is. We now have upgraded webs that reach 98/99% stopping power, which essentially eliminates the whole point of diminishing returns and/or the damage application formulas. I think CCP has simply given up on the idea of Bigger Ships introduce weakness as well as strengths, and that was one of the aspects of EVE that I loved the most.
That aside. On topic. This thread continues to be nonsense but here’s why.
Everyone says basically this:
Supercaps pile up because they are never used but if they were used then subcaps are useless but then no one is using them so all that are used is subcaps.
The premise of the thread is wrong and is theorycrafting.
It’s wrong because as multiple users have opined. No one uses Supercaps. for anything.
Great fleet battles are not conducted.
And I challenged, and I still think rightly-so, that were great fleetbattles still a thing then subcaps would have a natural role by nature, not by design.
I stand by my statement that if a commander cant find a place for subcaps that’s their ignorance and their loss, not because supercaps are overwhelmingly superior.
And I stand by the statement that Supercaps are an opening move, not an end game, piece on the board. Someone said they represent an endgame state.
Since this game is not built around levels and gear, but strategy, that statement is simply false.
Supercaps represent enormous risk which is why they are never used.
Between coalitions they may get used. But they are otherwise not so much.
Everyone else spouting that they get used a certain way ignores the fact that they are cherry picking the ONE instance they dominate and they fallatiously extrapolate that to all circumstances.
Which is wrong minded.
Lastly I want to ground my latest statement in the concept of a pitched battle
What most people re confusing is the idea that all battles all the time will be pitched battles at one place and time.
Supercaptials take a lot of time to muster and put into field. And then getting your opponent to accept the challenge and push back in a great winner take all battle is also difficult achieve.
Thus the role of subcap is obvious.
It is mission flexibility and responsiveness. It is able to achieve objectives at faster time intervals across greater space with much less effort and risk
And the opponent might NOT TURTLE, presenting you targets of opportunity tht bringing out a supercap fleet may never present.
Getting your opponent to accept a pitched battle is 90% of warfare. 90% of the time spent in war is achieving that singular purpose.
lol wot
Goons deployed over a thousand titans to the north just a month or two back.
Not sure where you’re coming up with this idiot fuckery but supers are used in both fleet fights and as casual every-day drivers.
7 Likes
Was there a pitched battle of these supercaps with a clear victor?
The US and USSR postured all the time because force must meet force but doesnt require battle nor is one expected because parity is nearly achieved.
So you would see the Northern Fleet set sail and be met with a NATO joint exercise.
Must I point out the fact that I am literally commenting down the line of the last 10 or so posts.
I hardly see posturing as a good example of the obsolecense of subcaps.
Posturing or even skirmishes have their place.while subcaps are the workhorse.
Wow this thread bombed,
Pretty sure non but you are saying this.
In any case I am not convinced that nerfs to caps no___<insert number there is right approach but another cycle where ppl will complain they aren’t good enough and yet another buff will hapen.
Wasting years in process…
…lame
…unimaginative
…cheap
Might have led with last one.
It was literally said by the guy suggesting to drop the price and include upkeep.