The topic all the nullsec players are avoiding.... Capitals

Capitals have been an issue in eve for a while, its something we need to talk about as a community.

we have to ask

  • What is the role of capitals in eve?
    • Are they logistic boats, or are they intended to pillage subcap fleets.
  • What should be there advantages and disadvantages?

I purpose the following to start a discussion on them


  • Captials (including supers) can no longer target any sub-capital class ship.

  • Various encounters now will be labeled as “capital encounter” and will be designed for capital specific ships.

  • Non-target specific weapons are removed from capitals fitting possibilities

  • Directional Super Weapons will require a target to fire and will fire at its current location

  • NPC Capital Encounters will have isk scale to equal rates of other subclass ships. (Average 100-150m an hour depending on encounter)

  • Some or all NPC capital encounters will require multiple capitals (group encounter)

  • Capital ships are redesigned to specialize in capital to capital battles, and destroying structures as follows

  • All non-frieghter, and jump frieghter capitals will lose a significant value of their cargo capability to turn them into a more combat specific ship, so they cannot fill logistical roles

  • The First black Ops capital ships will enter the arena of new eden

    • “Covert Command Vessel”
      • Has unique a unique command module that
      • allows for all ships in fleet to be instantly cloaked. requires they have a cloak fitted.
      • allows black ops ships to extend its bridge by up to 50%
    • has a significant cargo hold, that can compress jump fuel
  • Titans

    • has high damage output, and can use super weapons, weak to carriers and super carriers.
  • Dreadnaughts

    • High single target damage, build for killing stations, weak to carriers.
  • Carriers, Super Carriers

    • Capital to Capital battles.

Pillage subcap fleets.

Incase you didnt know, CCp created a Capital just for logistics. They are called Force Auxiliary capitals.

What? Why. What is your reason for this change?

We have a Capital anti-capital ship. They are called Dreadnoughts. Also, making HAWs on Dreads, useless.

Your change would make all capitals, anti-capital ships. Which makes no sense.

You might as well be advocating for battleships being unable to target frigates.

What? You want to turn Jump Freighters into combat ships??? WTF???

Can you explain why you want to change Jump freighters into generic anti-capital ships??? Why do we need more of them?

Again, WHY??? Why would titans be weak against carriers and supercarriers, but, im guessing, strong against Dreads and other Titans? That makes no sense.

The only way they could be powerful against titans and dreads but not against supers and carriers is if the supers and carriers were all massively overpowered.

Suffers from the same problem above, but I dont think you know how Citadels work. Theres a reason why we dont bring out dreads to take down stations anymore.

Again, so you want all Capitals to only be effective against other capitals? Wtf?

Absolutely terrible ideas, please expand on why you would think this would be a good idea.


I agree that capital ships in general need something of a re-alignment.

I wholeheartedly disagree with you in terms of what needs to be re-aligned or how to accomplish that re-alignment. What you’re describing is astonishingly similar to how capital ships used to be prior to the last major (non-jump-related) capital changes, so it would actually be a huge step backwards. (Anyone playing since 2003 should realize this BTW…)

One point in particular I just have to comment on though is the whole “capital ships cannot target sub-capital ships” idea. This notion is patently ludicrous for (at least) two reasons:

  1. FAXs, and especially Rorquals, are designed with sub-capital support in mind. Removing their ability to target sub-capital ships would inherently undermine their mission.

  2. Being unable to target sub-capital ships at all would mean that any capital ships could effectively be held hostage indefinitely by a single T1 frigate (or, in the case of supers and titans, a slew of T1 frigates), to say nothing of being HIC pointed. While I agree that moving capital ships without a sub-capital escort should be a risky proposition, there are a whole slew of other such risky propositions in EvE where there is at least some chance of escape. RNGesus saves…sometimes…


EDIT: As if on cue, CCP released a devblog with the next round of capital changes shortly after I posted this.

1 Like


1 Like

Yes, I want to make capitals only fighting capitals, and i believe carriers should carry most of that fighting, with dreads and titans focusing on structures as form of control to structures.

I also dont want capitals targeting sub caps to prevent them from doing subcap ratting.

  • removing capitals from subcap battles provides value to subcap support fleets
  • removing the capitals ability to target subcapitals also provides balance to isk gain rates in eve significantly balancing the ratting rates of capital (specially super caps)
  • creating capital engagement encounters will improve the fun factor of capital null ratting and with some scaling can be created for multiple people which will improve immersion and community
  • having sub capitals being able to target capitals, and capitals no longer having weapons like smart bombs, or being able to target sub capitals will improve the threat factor to the captals, especially from ships like covert ops, which will significantly open up game play options for cloak based corps.
  • no more afk, botting goon supers on gates. go read.

those changes are not going to balance capitals out.

You should spend more time creating your new game and less time trolling the forums.

Your suggestions are terrible. Get a clue and come back with better ideas.

He isn’t from 2003. Yet again I get to quote myself in regards to the OP:

You may need to go find yourself a +5 sarcasm implant.


1 Like

I agree that the disgusting amounts of money null guys can farm, especially supercap ratting and rorqual moon mining, needs a massive nerf. The market is so screwed up right now, with things being cheap in null sec (given a good market hub) and horribly expensive in high sec, with the high sec people having to pay the ludacrice prices the null guys have set for them. It’s unfair that because of the horrible balance between earnings in high sec vs earnings in null sec, the game basically pushes you down to null and people who run in high sec are basically pushed out of EVE alltogether. Too many people are leaving this game because the high sec experience is uncoordinated and not smooth and streamlined and it feels more like a smattering of crap all over the place. “You can do this! You can do that!” but the rewards of spending hours doing those things do not justify the time and risk spent on that activity. might as well put your money on Star Citizen and hope to God that Chris Roberts releases the game in the next 10 years. That would be more interesting than doing high sec content earning what feels like peanuts for money while the null guys cry and moan that EVE should be a NULL PVP ONLY experience.

I +1 your changes.

Capitals need nerfing BADLY.

Solonius Rex has perfectly explained why OP’s ideas are really non sense
OP, are you aware that If caps can only target caps, then…NOBODY will fly a cap, everybody will fly a subcap, correct? because all subcaps can shoot a structure… or… do you also want to make subcaps unable to shoot structures?
so then, what you should write is “remove caps from eve online”…ok…i see…
Currently this is a stone papers scissors game, and yes, you can already kill a 30B super with a bunch of bombers…

1 Like

This is not true, and is an unfounded position. This can be easily proven by asking “why do people rat in capitals and supers in null”.

The answer is because the isk rates are higher then subcapitals, just as the super isk rates are higher then capitals. So the bases of “player efficiency” is applied here, as it is generally in all game design choices.

Thus, If players can farm isk at a higher rate in capitals, while thy target other capitals, the result will be the same. Further, by providing capital to capital ratting, you engage the player in potential capital training for pvp, as well as stabilize the economy.

If your advocating against such changes due to the fact that you want to “roflpwn” noobs in sub capitals, that is even more reason to ignore your position and change it. This mentality ruled over eve for 15 years, and it has proven that it will never be successful.

Its time for change, and balance.

Btw, As mentioned before if capitals and supers cannot target subcaps, this nonsense of afk supers on gates go’s out the door, creating better sinks for the game. Capitals are out of control, and they need entire mechanical changes, no balance passes on them.

Ccp is not aggressive enough with some topics, largely due to unskilled developers who have a hard-stuck position on what the game should be instead of providing a good, balanced atmosphere for the population.

So by your new feature:

  1. Dreads and Titans are only used for structure bashing and is terrible at everything else.

  2. Carriers and Supercarriers are only good at killing Capitals, and terrible at everything else.

  3. Jump Freighters are now anti-capital ships. We must gate our freighters through low and null from now on.

How will you segregate the damage application from capitals to structures? Dreadnoughts apply damage to both Ships and Structures at the same rate, by the same calculations as any weapon, just like subcaps.

For Dreads to only be effective against structures, but not capitals, would make no sense. The only way you could achieve that, is to prevent Dreads from locking anything but structures. And Carriers to target capitals.

Which is stupid.

And have hisec become more profitable than nullsec? Despite being severely less dangerous?

Well, no, it wouldnt provide value, it creates a necessity. It would create an N+1 without the ability for a side to bring in a supercapital to even the odds when outnumbered.

You can do this by nerfing the sites, not removing the ability for capitals to target subcaps completely.

No, because a single cruiser or battlecruiser could destroy a carrier while the carrier could do nothing. You are creating a system where one side has no option but to either multibox a subcap fleet or bring in allies.

You would basically be creating a system where small corps and alliances couldnt exist in nullsec.

Where a single pilot can essentially shut down a small corp.

Where people would require the necessity of being in a large group or alliance.

You could have a hundred capitals, and they would all be at the mercy of a single subcap.

And thats just so stupid.

Hate to break it to ya bud, but people can bot in subcapital ships too.

Okay, this makes no sense.

I agree, rorquals and super ratting needs to be fixed, which is why CCP is changing them.

But what do you mean by “cheap in nullsec”, and “horrible expensive in highsec”?

I just checked the market price in Jita and our main hub for goonoswarm. Megathrons are only 12 million isk more expensive in Jita.

I dont consider 12 million as “Horribly expensive”, or a “ludacrice price”, so please, clarify.

Ever heard of incursions?

Yeah, you dont have a leg to stand on.

You sound like a Star Citizen Shill, to be honest.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.