If capships were the way they are in E:D, you would be complaining that they’re easily defeated by mere fighter sized ships.
Unlike an Eve cap ship, you really CAN shuffle those things off with what is essentially a mere “frigate”.
They are visually impressive, but that’s to be expected from what is basically a scripted event.
I don’t disagree. I’m not familiar with the games depicted, and haven’t played them. You are right - I was going based on “visually impressive.” But if that’s all we’re going on, and using imagination afterwards, THAT’s what they should be like.
Okay, well, what they’re actually like is, it’s a scripted event where they warp in and “fight” each other and you can send one packing by circle-strafing around it and blowing up the various targetable bits and bobs on its hull and… that’s it, that’s the whole thing. IIRC, they don’t even blow up, it just jumps away.
I won’t speak to X4 as I have not played it since launch and they’ve (allegedly) made a lot of improvements to it.
I don’t disagree with this. One would think that a capital ship would have a gross amount of weapons at its disposal, capable of taking out anything but other capital ships in one fell swoop. In fact, when I first saw the fitting slots on a cap, I was absolutely shocked. I would have thought there would be at least 20 high slots, 20 mids and 20 lows, and didn’t even realise at the time that there were cap-specific weapons and armaments.
There is, however, also a logic to the way it is now. Just as Battleships are ineffectual against interceptors (not necessarily, but you get the idea…), so too are caps ineffectual against smaller ships (again, not necessarily but you get the idea). I think the op, though, conflates it all and comes to the conclusion that, because caps are ineffectual against smaller ships, that a fleet of Lokis can take out a fleet of caps. This is incredibly flawed logic. The way it is now is predicated on fleet engagement and not individual fights. From the get go, EVE online encourages you to make friends and get into a fleet with other real live people. In light of that, capitals make so much more sense. Dropping a capital on a fleet is not a win-button, nor should it be (though wouldn’t that be cool??).
One can think of the mechanics as akin to real life really. On the battlefield, you’re going to roll in with 10 tanks, but those 10 tanks will burn hard and fast alone, as was theorised near the end of WW1 and into WW2. Tanks have a purpose, as do all of their supports. Much of the mechanised warfare involved troops walking or running alongside tanks, with support vehicles behind and air strikes just a call away. You’re going to win a battle if you can diversify.
EVE battles should be approached, and are approached, in the exact same way. The OP put to us a theoretical scenario, stating that “100 loki’s is all you need to dominate the grid.” He then went on to use that proposition to justify his idea: “its quite obvious that the loki ship needs a nerf or capitals needs a damage application buff - or both.” Finally, he went on to say “10 haw dreds would not kill 1 loki as the loki has longer range than the haw guns and… 10 anti-cap dreds would not kill 1 loki… unless loki was webbed - but it would not be webbed, as its has its optimal within a web range! and even if webbed, 10 cap gun dreds might not be able to alpha a loki… if no alpha kill, loki got full hp for next gun cycle…”
This statement demonstrates a complete failure in understanding warfare both in real life and in this game.
Based on that, the op finally states that “endgame should be capitals, not cruisers? ironic or… intended perhaps? the word tiercide means ‘tier murder’ and thats what it is.” I think, if I may, that this was his ultimate point. Again, however, he fails to understand the game. There is no endgame to this game, as others have pointed out. Your endgame depends on what you want to do, and that goal can shift on a whim. If you want to solo-pvp, then do it, but don’t expect to do it in a capital ship. Caps are designed for and meant for fleet engagements. If you want to fleet-pvp, you still don’t need to train for caps. I, for one, love countermeasures and, when I was involved in null sec fleets, I tried (and failed miserably) to be the ECM guy. My endgame was to train up all of my jamming skills and learn to jam opposing players.
Whether we like it or not, or want to admit it or not, the game is designed so that caps require fleet support, and fleets do better with cap support (depending of course, as all things in this game do). The scenario proposed by the op does not make sense because it is a scenario that just wouldn’t happen, so he can’t use that scenario to justify a change to lokis and capitals. One simply does not flow from the other.
X4 is indeed a good-looking game and quite possibly interesting - but - IT IS A SINGLE-PLAYER GAME!
As such it really can’t be compared to EvE, they are completely different games because of that. The social / single shard aspect of EvE makes it everything it is.
I’m not going to sit here and say Eve is super realistic… because (let’s be honest), its not; however, Eve does try to maintain some similarity to reality in some respects. The whole bigger turrets having problems tracking faster vehicles being a prime example of it…
There was this change in the way naval battles were done in after World War 1. The Japanese realized that the key to naval battles was these small things called planes. Yes, there is some difference because naval ships are effectively on 2D while planes are on 3 dimensions. But we’re back to the point: smaller ships wolf-packing larger ships should be an effective tactic and the OP wanting capital ships to be ‘I Win’ buttons against smaller ships goes against some of the principles Eve appears to be built on.
Should a capital be able to blow smaller ships that don’t maintain good angular velocity out of ‘space’ in one or two salvos? Damn right.
One of the tactics I feel is lacking in Eve Online is the ability for ships to effectively mount weapons of smaller sizes for dealing with smaller ships. Naval battleships did have smaller guns for dealing with smaller and faster moving ships in real life. Maybe caps need some sort of hull bonus for using smaller weapons so they can effectively use smaller weapons to defend themselves from wolfpacks in exchange for their normal big booming weapons…
Like all things in Eve, the ship could give something up for something else.
This is wrong. If a loki is close enough to shoot a HAW dread it can be shot by a HAW dread. Lokis only lock to 81.2 km. Go ahead go back to pyfa and warrior the fits, even tho I already did it for you. HAW nag will typically be fit with 2 tracking enhancers putting it to 52+46 with nuclear. HAW rev with scorch shoots to 63+20, HAW moros using null with 1 tracking computer scripted for range is 35+45, rapid torp phoenix with javelins and 1 guidance computer scripted for range or 2 guidance enhancers(more likely fit) shoots to 92. If the single loki doesn’t disengage it will lose to the single HAW dread 100% of the time.
edit: the only one that has damage mods is the nag fit as well, I didn’t have fits saved for the other dreads
thank you for seeing my point of view.
i have not been cought in a lie, i have been caught by a softisticated troll. you.
both you and me can guess that a dred would not intentionaly re-siege and just sit like a expensive brick in space… as zkillboard only shows kills, not attempts… this is is hardley “the truth” that you claim it to be, and for you too oversseing this “little detail” while at the same time seem to be so smart…
makes me sure you are a troll .
obviously - after it dawns on cap-pilot that he cant apply damage in that fight, cap pilot warps away “giving up”, thus one might say loki won - but did not get a kill or zkillboard stats.
as pointed out by your zkill-oracle who holds all the answers of truth; a loki cant lock the dred down from warping away, at that range.
oh wow… i agree 10000%.
this should be how capitals are represented in eve aswell!
imagine dropping this as a home-pocket defence anytime some kiki/loki gang come to kill newbro vexors… Capitals really should be a GTFO-button.
instead, loki (cruisers) are the gtfo-buttons of eve… what a shame.
you think wrong.
i think, it should go both ways…
a capship cant hurt something small?
well then… something small should not be able to hurt the capship.
i get that there is a certain way to fly and form up fleets, every engagement deserves diffrernt tactics… unless that fleet can fly in lokis.
then it lokis all the way - **the only thing that wins over 100 lokis is 101 lokis. **
this is not an theoretical, this is a fact of eve today.
and i dont see how RL military skills plays into it
IRL a cap-ship(carrier ship) would win vs a cruiser ship…
so you see, i formed two thoughts here.
capship should have a real subcap damage application - to cruiser ships.
if people want to yolo caps into roams/pvp content, let them? let it be known in all of eve that they are just eve bullys - let people form-up to kill them in destroyers? let people be bait to a gank setup?
lokis are an instant i-win button, if anything should be allowed to be a “i win button” in eve, it should be bloody caps and not cruiser ships.
Oh really…
i get 262km target range with faction booster and script (wich is overkill)
…since 720 t2 arty “only” reach 113.8 km with tremor
now 114 km is outside your damge chart, but at 100 nag has about 300 dpsand dropping hard.
at 114km loki does 500 dps and has 144 passive regen…
and i guess i could fit a better passive regen, or a active regen in place of that second sebo.
It can’t.
IRL a carrier has an escort group of frigates, destroyers and cruisers to take care of that, on top of which they have a carrier air wing.
and they also have ammo with its own guidance system, thus tracking turret speed dont even matter.
so i dont see how any IRL military aneqdots/talk is relevant or on topic.
yeah i guess its hard to deny every physics and nature laws of the universe, that big eats small.
What does that have to do with what I said, which was that the small ship can’t hurt the capital ship?
Carrier armament generally consists of a CIWS for use against air targets that make it through the defences of the escort group and air wing, surface to air missiles and missiles designed to take out anti ship missiles. The only turrets on a carrier are the CIWS.
Nothing on a carrier is designed to take out other ships, which is why it has an escort group that can.
the airplanes that it hold, i consider weapons.
and im pretty sure they can even launch uav etc etc etc…
thus my comment about cruiser beeing sunk before its even on grid with the carrier.
I’m not disputing that a carrier air wing can take out a cruiser but that’s not what you said , you stated:
A carrier air wing is part of the overall operational formation, which also includes other ships.
Keep changing those goalposts…
yeah, i think of you an a shitposter tbh, its quite obvious.
i have said that uav and airplanes are apart of a carriers arsenal, in the first post i did not say this, as its bloddy obvious, by its name alone.
the ship that is called “carrier” are carring things that have self-aimed weapon systems.
can you pls stop nitpicking about offtopic subjects please?
oh lol. i just rememberd, i asked you before and you did not.
nvm my bad. bye.
Yes, you have been caught in a lie; not only that, I’m about to catch you in an argument fallacy. There is almost no evidence (minus pyfa data) that supports your argument. And thank you for the compliment, its nice to know you understand I’m sophisticated. That means I have a great deal of worldly experience and knowledge of fashion and culture; I’m going to do what you do and assume you mean Eve culture. That’s a very fine compliment, thank you.
No, we cannot guess. Guessing is what children or those who don’t have facts to support their argument or idea do. They don’t know the answer, so they guess. If you want to convince me of anything, you’ll need hard factual evidence and data. Guessing is neither of those criteria.
How is it obvious? Do you have video footage? Do you have the raw data from the fight? No, you don’t. So it is not obvious. Also, remember how I said I was going to catch you in an argument fallacy? Here you doing what is known as moving the goalpost; you can’t defend your original argument so you change your argument slightly (in this case: going from a Loki will dominate a capital to instead the capital gets bored and leaves) and continue the argument as if the new claim was your original argument. Sadly, I’ve been in enough debates not to fall for such things. Save that for the amateurs… doesn’t work with me.
And while we’re at it, let’s catch you in yet another change of opinion that you’ll deny. At the very beginning of this, you said:
Later you say (agreeing with me about Eve not having an end-game):
Here you are again… confused on your own points.
Here’s what I think: you want to fly around all nice and safe in your expensive capital that you’ve been wanting in Eve Online for a long time. That’s not Eve… nothing is safe… that’s been one of the major truths of Eve. I guess I just understand that better than you do… but its understandable: after all, I am sophisticated. 
IRL a carrier or any other capship can deal with a small ship COMPLETELY by itself with no escort needed. I know, I’ve seen video of it with my own two eyes.
Also, I’m probably the only guy on the forums who has actually ridden on a real life battleship in sea trials. Guess what? They’re NOT slow, nor are they unmaneuverable. Very agile and fast. Like a hot rod in the water. Can even do ‘loop de loops’ or ‘figure 8s’ or ‘circular burnouts’ or whatever you want to call it, right there in the water. Again, I know, I was on one while this was being done. Note this was a battleship, not a carrier. I can’t personally attest as to the speed or agility of a carrier. But a battleship can outrun a speedboat.
