You Spin Me Right Round, Baby Right Round Like a Record, Baby Right Round Round Round

“Just when I thought I was out, they’re pulling me back in,” seems to be a common theme in a blogger’s life. Due to some real life concerns I’ve actually taken a week off from Eve, something that I hope to change after the weekend. That was also supposed to include a hiatus from blogging, excepting an innocuous little role-play post about Eve technology. After reading the latest article on TMC, though, I just can’t resist rolling up my sleeves and commenting.

This article shows only the barest understanding of the state of supercapital warfare in Eve, in fact evincing a level of understanding dwarfed by my own as a player who has never so much as sat in any kind of super. It is riddled with references to a type of capital warfare that either no longer exists or is quickly fading into Eve’s history. It is doing this in order to prop itself up as a part of a spin wave churned to the fore in the wake of a recent battle in Saranen with the aim of keeping Goon spirits from waning. So first, I’ll talk a bit about the meat of things concerning super warfare, and then I’ll show you how the article is trying to spin you like tops, Goonies.

First, the article is replete with references to B-R and Asakai, trying to set up some kind of a “he who loses supers loses the war due to waning spirit” kind of a situation, talking about how a future battle of B-R where one side wins, (maybe the Imperium?) could totally change the course of the war. He neglects to mention that HoneyBadger lived far longer than Asakai and N3/PL lived far longer than B-R. Neither battle actually had the effect that he predicts from a future battle of the sort. He makes much ado that Fozziesov doesn’t have much to do with Titans, claiming that such battles will be rare and too costly, and for right now we just have to accept that two mighty supercap powers won’t go toe to toe, although they are probably of equal strength.

This is just comical. Let me explain a few things. To paraphrase the one intelligent thing this guys says: ‘structures might have something to do with something.’ The war you see right now is legacy war with a twist. Station games with Titans. Stations are going away. Future wars will be fought over moon goo and Fortizars. For reasons you will see, no Keepstar is going to be destroyed in K-space unless it was anchored by a moron in the first place. At any rate, camping a power in with an enormous supercap group is a result of two things. The first is that stations exist, and the second is that Titans are now specifically designed to slaughter large subcap fleets as a part of their target package. The phenomenon of a hundred billion ISK ship that can only fight like a 3 billion ISK ship (dreadnought), except for being able to do 3 million points of damage to a single ship is gone. Bye.

As of right now, the primary target of supercapital ships is actually a system of structures that have only begun to be implemented. The secondary target of supercapital ships is actually a hive of subcapitals. Shooting other capitals and supercapitals is actually a tertiary target for these ships to be employed against in the event of escalations.

If I haven’t said it before, the sov system is about ratting ticks. That’s pretty much it. We already see alliances not giving a hoot about what DOTLAN looks like. Once outposts are gone, Ihubs will be it. So this guy’s comment that supercap battles will be rare because the sov system doesn’t need them is just silly. We are just biding our time.

How will things look? Well, the players love to undock when they are going to win. CCP loves attrition. Players love to find some little system they can game such as killboard spying, use of local, or DSCAN tools to get a decisive edge that will cause them to surely win or avoid the fight. CCP loves the fog of war. They’ve already talked about delayed local. We had to scream until they saved fleet warping. Off grid alt boosters are on the chopping block.

Supercapital battles will generally be multicompositional battles where supers play a part, usually in a structure fight, as part of an escalation. With damage mitigation, a small number of ships can tear down a structure, but since that structure is going to be shooting back and have the ability to tear down your fleet, you will need to bring extras in order to actually take it down, and the tactics developed by the attackers will require defenders to actually have more than just their structure on field to be victorious.

This will create an attrition scenario in which supercapitals will be an escalation option available to either side. In the case of a Keepstar, the defender will be able to just undock as many supers as he needs, each one able to rip an entire subcap fleet to pieces. An attacker will need his own supers to keep pace with that. Now chances are, nobody is going to risk sending supers against a Keepstar with that kind of escalation capability. However, with the Fortizar, where defenders as well as attackers will face limitations on their ability to infiltrate the field with apex weaponry, things could get dicey. Asakai or B-R dicey? No. But situations will arise where parties will be willing to commit x resources to achieve an objective. Battles will be measured in lots of subcap losses with the possibility of small or large capital losses and with the further possibility of the loss of this or that super or Titan.

That’s what things are going to look like, folks. The picture will become clearer after the drilling platforms come out. I expect they will come out in various sizes and with various capabilities, and that platform on your dyspro moon might just tempt someone to drop supers on it or at least a lot of dreads supported by supers.

The article is woefully ignorant of all this and pretends that the present and future will consist of the same world that we have known for years of supers normally only being dropped in huge masses completely obliterating their targets or, by some freak accident, are dropped on another unimaginably large super force. Given this false future landscape, the author is drawing up an illusory comparison to WWI in order to con the readers into thinking that the MBC and CFC have a parity that we are never going to see because it’s just too risky, but don’t worry, the CFC is just as strong.

Along with this, you see laughable we-didn’t-want-that-anyways such as the statement that lone supers getting picked off is an acceptable risk for the CFC. Frankly, we’ve been well inculcated that the MBC can kill them with impunity, and with a minimal risk to killing them. The real deal is that if the CFC uses supers, they will get annihilated. The MBC doesn’t have this problem. So let’s not eat the hogwash of “don’t leave us guys, we still have our supers! That we won’t use because the risk is to great for both us and the MBC! It’s like WWI where our using our possibly giant super fleet that might not be camped into MBC POSes just doesn’t help with Fozziesov in a fight with MBC supers who would assume the same risk!”

Joseph Goebbels and Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf couldn’t get together and make this stuff up. Bravo Goons!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s