Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Re-Awakened Technologies Inc is a Minmatar Republic loyalist corporation? Read more here

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Supercap balancing  (Read 4224 times)

Esna Pitoojee

  • Keeper of the Harem
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2095
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #15 on: 24 Jul 2012, 10:28 »

Unfortunately, the only truly long-term answer I can give is an answer which will cause so much :raeg: and :threadnought: that it will never happen:

On a given day, all titans will be removed from the game and deconstructed into their capital components. The components will be delivered into the clone stations of the titan pilots. All titan pilots will receive a unique BPC with near-zero build time, allowing them to replace their ships as soon as they feasibly can.

However, the catch is that all titan blueprints - BPOs, BPCs, the unique BPCs titan pilots will receive - will now have vastly increased material requirements, perhaps on the order of 30-50x more than it is currently. The same could be applied to all supercapitals and supercapital-unique items - i.e., FBs, doomsdays, remote ECM, etc.

It'd successfully decrease the number of titans in the game, AND severely limit further proliferation at the current rate. However, the nullsec alliances would raise so much hell over it that it would never pass.


I also have to comment - it is a fact of reality that by attempting to make titans rarer, they will also become toys of the richest and most elite alliances in the game. This is how it was, and many of those alliances still fell. To try to make them both available to moderately-sized alliances AND much harder to produce is a paradox.
Logged
I like the implications of Gallentians being punched in the face by walking up to a Minmatar as they so freely use another person's culture as a fad.

Louella Dougans

  • \o/
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • \o/
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #16 on: 24 Jul 2012, 12:00 »

Something I thought about a while back, was an idea that Titans and others, were persistent in space. Logging off would merely eject the pilot's capsule which would warp off, and the ship would stay where it was.
This would mean Titans and such would be proper Alliance level assets, rather than individual level assets.

It would make anyone deploying rashly pay the consequences. However, it would tend to make people much more conservative about deploying them at all, except in overwhelming force, which wouldn't help to reduce numbers. Meh.

There's also the problem of timezone coverage, and parking for such ships, example are the numerous exploits in the past to do with bumping ships out of POS shields, or the thing that allowed you to destroy things in a POS without reinforcing the shield, as long as you started shooting no earlier than 11:59 before downtime, or whatever that was exactly. bugs and exploits like that need to be sorted before you could reasonably have persistent ships.


Outpost destruction is tricky, because it gives the NPC 0.0 systems, much more importance, because of invulnerable stations. It also makes lowsec bordering 0.0 hugely more important for the same reason.

The NPC stations have to be invulnerable, otherwise you'd have to write the pirate factions out of the game.

It could mean that groups such as the current CFC would be able to sweep regions clear of opposition, and also to prevent any establishment of opposition in future, if Titans and such were persistent. Destroy stations, destroy POS,  prevent re-establishment, people do not have ability to form a challenging force, and then things stagnate.
Logged
\o/

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #17 on: 24 Jul 2012, 12:03 »

Esna has the right approach i think.

I think perhaps a few main avenues to consider. Not saying I support any of these but also throwing out a few things

1. Maybe make them easier to kill, so the supply goes down?

2. OR make them more valuable and harder to kill.  Reset and make them exponentially more expensive, so there will be fewer of them produced. Death-Star expensive, a year to build, massive, massive undertakings, but with ridiculously enhanced ability. Something like 10 trillion each.  Maybe downgrade titans and introduce these as 'jove motherships' or some such.  Only a few in the game.  No blueprint copies.

3. Stop titan productions.  Say a year or two ban on all titan production

4.  Remove any use of them as glorified taxis and mobile jump bridge networks.  These should be separate things.

5. Only the largest and most powerful large alliances should even be able to own these, and even then maybe one or two. Then they are special. 


6. I'd also love supers and titans only pilot-able by pilots that are members of groups of a certain size.  Retcon it as a needed support infrastructure or whatever you want.  Titan pilots must be members of 500+ member alliances, etc.  Supers must be members of 250+ pilot alliances. 

I'm guilty of this too but I'd welcome the change for small groups not to be able to field these things -at all-

7. Capital ships banned completely from lowsec.  I feel CONCORD would be justified in keeping titans out of lowsec perhaps.









Logged

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #18 on: 24 Jul 2012, 12:07 »

I 100% love the idea of supers being persistant in space.

So much this, so much this. 


I'd go even further and state that supers and titans should NOT be able to even enter POS shields.  These things should be vulnerable 100% of the time.

If you've got 100s of members and the resources to build and use this thing, you should have to pay the price to keep it mobile and on the move. Risk / Reward.

You'd get an amazing hunter / killer game going.  It'd be like Battlestar Galactica, with the titans always one jump ahead of the chaser fleets. 

Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #19 on: 24 Jul 2012, 12:13 »

Or, you know, they could cloak in a safespot like I do with my Nyx anytime I think our POS might be in jeopardy.
Logged

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #20 on: 24 Jul 2012, 12:20 »

Or, you know, they could cloak in a safespot like I do with my Nyx anytime I think our POS might be in jeopardy.

no cloakz for superz :P

obviously  :)
Logged

Merdaneth

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #21 on: 24 Jul 2012, 12:56 »

Uncloakable Titans that are easily stolen by 100% reliable immune-to-revenge-because-immortal spies? No thanks.

I prefer vastly more the X-Wing idea. Give them a load of short-range point defense weapons with lethal damage, but with the tracking that a fast moving frig-size vessel can get under. Then allow said frig(s) to take out one specific hit location.

I still think the most insane idea about capitals is still that the biggest ships are among the most mobile (due to cyno's and jump bridges). If they would take 10 minutes to warp across an average system, they would stop being a easily deployable asset and turn into a localized asset. If your Titan fleet is out defending POS A, it would be pretty hard to deploy them to defend POS B some 20 systems farther. Effectively, capitals would give the defender an advantage, and if the attacker brought his main capital fleet, he would leave his own systems defenseless against hostile capital fleets.

Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #22 on: 24 Jul 2012, 12:58 »

Remove alts out of the game.

Enjoy.

 :yar:
Logged

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #23 on: 24 Jul 2012, 13:37 »

I still think the most insane idea about capitals is still that the biggest ships are among the most mobile (due to cyno's and jump bridges). If they would take 10 minutes to warp across an average system, they would stop being a easily deployable asset and turn into a localized asset. If your Titan fleet is out defending POS A, it would be pretty hard to deploy them to defend POS B some 20 systems farther. Effectively, capitals would give the defender an advantage, and if the attacker brought his main capital fleet, he would leave his own systems defenseless against hostile capital fleets.


This.  Deployment and movement should be slow, cumbersome, and time-consuming to adjust. You bring your cap fleet to an area don't expect them to go anywhere else soon, or to put out fires at home while you are gone. 

One cyno or bridge per 24 hours. Period.


Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #24 on: 24 Jul 2012, 13:39 »

Remove alts out of the game.

Enjoy.

 :yar:

I'm sure CCP would be willing to give up the income from my extra 4 accounts (and everyone else's in EVE), it makes total business sense.
Logged

Ghost Hunter

  • Sansha's True Citizen ; TS-F Overseer
  • The Mods
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1374
  • True Power without limit!
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #25 on: 24 Jul 2012, 14:31 »

A thought for titans specifically :  if Titans create a jump bridge, at the end of the jump bridge cycle, the Titan is forcefully dragged through by the closing bridge and into the battlefield directly? The tactical advantage of the bridge would be a lot more dangerous to use with due consideration for the Titan's health.
Logged
Ghost > So yes, she was Ghost's husband-
Ashar > So Ghost was a gay Caldari and she went through tranny surgery
Ghost > Wait what?
Ashar > Ghosts husband.
Ghost > No she was - Oh god damnit.

He ate all of them
We Form Moderation
For Nation

Gymir Asaadan

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #26 on: 24 Jul 2012, 14:38 »

A thought for titans specifically :  if Titans create a jump bridge, at the end of the jump bridge cycle, the Titan is forcefully dragged through by the closing bridge and into the battlefield directly? The tactical advantage of the bridge would be a lot more dangerous to use with due consideration for the Titan's health.

This idea has a lot of merit, for many reasons. +1
Logged
An insincere and evil friend is more to be feared than a wild beast; a wild beast may wound your body, but an evil friend will wound your mind.
-Buddha

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #27 on: 24 Jul 2012, 15:13 »

I really like your ideas. Devil's advocate would say that with mobitlity limitations that would increase drastically the incentive to get more of these titans, but it is already high anyway, so...
Logged

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #28 on: 24 Jul 2012, 15:35 »

The other way to do it is diminishing returns, just like module stacking.

Anything past X number of titans or supers in system reduces effectiveness by an increasing penalty.

So fielding anything more than that number becomes pointless.

I'd also apply this to all ship types on a sliding scale.....

500 frigates

300 cruisers, whatever



Logged

Casiella

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3723
  • Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.
Re: Supercap balancing
« Reply #29 on: 24 Jul 2012, 15:40 »

Balancing game mechanics just thru cost is a non starter with most game designer for good reasons. And imagine the cries "now only GSF can afford them!" Balancing through nerfs and increased counters is a much more likely approach.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3