Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Balcora babe
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 08:55:00 -
[241]
Edited by: Balcora babe on 18/08/2009 09:04:48 I find those bays useful. Both practically and they add a bit of realistic mode in to the game. Every vessel has it's fuel bay which is separate from it's general cargo bay. 90k isotopes for a support capital ship is more then enough. With that you can reach the deepest region in eve from empire and get back in to it. However it limits you from reaching one end of the galaxy from the another end without refueling 2-3 times which imo is a nice change. I also find the idea of turning the carriers in to combat ships more then in to haulers. It is ridiculous ppl supplying regions with combat ships such as carriers and dreads. Jf's do a fine job and have a good range for hauling. Seeing a carrier with 5-7 cargo expanders or a dread makes me puke. And if carriers weren't such a "flexible" ship everyone would get a dread firs then a carrier not the way around.
All in all i find the changes very good. I am a capital pilot with 7 accounts and i have all possible capitals in game. Some ppl even haul with titans and motherships which is ridiculous imo. All ships should have per one/two roles as they do and capitals shouldn't be excluded from this just because they are bigger ships.
What i want to know is when capitals will become more expensive and we won't see a whole alliance of 1000 people show up in 120 capitals and 20 support. Are capitals supposed to be the backbone of a fleet now or battleships ? :) Is this how one fleet is supposed to look like ? Get from the other end of the galaxy to the field within 20 minutes with a fleet! A fleet for me should consist of various ship types , now adays everyone aims for capital fleets. The more capital the better. Generally yes but imo they should be at least 2ce as hard to afford with the current isk making methods and loosing a dread fleet of 30-40 dreads should be a significant blow , not something you can replace for a 1-2 days in a big alliance. And don't get me wrong i am in a big alliance that does that. Everyone can get a capital for a week or two of hardcore missioning in empire let alone other isk making activities and those are supposed to be hard to get(not only because of the training time they take , which imo should be shorter but they should be way more expensive).
Just my thoughts on this.
On a side note :good step towards breaking the blobbing. U can't just go from end of the galaxy to the other , siege 5 towers , then go back "home" siege 5 more and on the next day rinse and repeat. If i were you i would be radical and set a certain amount of LY a capital can jump per hour or day and break the blobbing wars forever as then u would have to do planning before assaulting someone somewhere 3 days out for your capital fleet. Which will bring the game to 2005 where everyone was at war with the alliance next door and game was 10 times more fun because you wouldn't have to pos camp for days and fear lag , wait for a node to get reinforced , get spies in the entire universe if you want to be in line with the other blob. |
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 09:36:00 -
[242]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 18/08/2009 09:36:10 Edited by: Trimutius III on 18/08/2009 09:35:54
Originally by: Balcora babe
What i want to know is when capitals will become more expensive and we won't see a whole alliance of 1000 people show up in 120 capitals and 20 support. Are capitals supposed to be the backbone of a fleet now or battleships ? :) Is this how one fleet is supposed to look like ? Get from the other end of the galaxy to the field within 20 minutes with a fleet! A fleet for me should consist of various ship types , now adays everyone aims for capital fleets. The more capital the better. Generally yes but imo they should be at least 2ce as hard to afford with the current isk making methods and loosing a dread fleet of 30-40 dreads should be a significant blow , not something you can replace for a 1-2 days in a big alliance. And don't get me wrong i am in a big alliance that does that.
I think winter expansion will give some answers... According to words of CCP Greyscale in EON... (about changes needed in claim system) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 12:39:00 -
[243]
Originally by: Balcora babe What i want to know is when capitals will become more expensive and we won't see a whole alliance of 1000 people show up in 120 capitals and 20 support. Are capitals supposed to be the backbone of a fleet now or battleships ? :)
Quote: Generally yes but imo they should be at least 2ce as hard to afford with the current isk making methods and loosing a dread fleet of 30-40 dreads should be a significant blow , not something you can replace for a 1-2 days in a big alliance. And don't get me wrong i am in a big alliance that does that.
The difficulty is that, not counting the actual manufacturing time, the big alliances will replace important ships quickly almost regardless of cost - look at how long it took BoB to replace their first Titan loss. Making Dreads the same cost as Titans wouldn't drastically increase the time it takes for larger alliances to replace them (though it might limit the number they would be able to replace) but it would close them off to smaller alliances.
Smaller groups occupying small areas of 0.0 is something CCP were looking for at one time - the problem with smaller groups is that they have fewer pilots on which to draw... And with fewer pilots they have less ability to call on Jump Freighters - loading their one Revelation with Cargo Expanders is their best option. As I've stated before, capsuleers have always had unusual views on the value of certain ship-types, views which ignore such arbitrary and eroneous classifications as "Warship" and "Non-Warship". The fact that the pride of the Amarr Navy sees service as a hauler is not unusual... And I don't believe it to be an issue. --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Ju Vark
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 15:31:00 -
[244]
This is just dictating how i fit and use my capitals.
How about you give it to me pre fitted so i dont have to bother with this bull**** anymore. Hang about. You can play the game for me as well. I will just give you my subscription for nothing. Thats what you want isnt it CCP.
There is an old saying.
"If it ain't broke. Don't Fix it".
Now CCP can you fix **** that is broken rather than braking **** that is working. Thats how proper companies work!!!!
|
Sertan Deras
Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 15:56:00 -
[245]
Notice how all the people blabbing about making caps more expensive, and lowering the numbers on the field, aren't in actual 0.0 alliances, and have no influence what-so-ever on nullsec politics? Funny how that works.
I know this is difficult for a lot of you empire mouth breathers to believe, but a lot of us like capital PvP, we like slug fest capital blob fights. They are fun, and mean something. Losing 100 BS means nothing, and has meant nothing for years. Losing 100 capitals can tip a war, thus making the PvP quite engaging. CCP is already trying to make capitals as tedious as possible to fly, I don't think they need any help in that direction.
The thought of making a dread cost as much as a titan is so dumb it hurts my brain.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 16:55:00 -
[246]
I really don't think the devs play the game. A carrier can jump farther than a dread and triage but somehow it only requires half as much fuel. Why? Every time I use my carrier I triage for 3-5 cycles, no exceptions. It jumps farther so it has the capability to use more fuel per jump than a dread. Please fix this
|
Isaac Starstriker
Amarr Smegnet Incorporated Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 18:49:00 -
[247]
Guess what people? You still have the corporate hanger array.
Oh no, I said it.
--Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed
|
EdFromLogistics
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 22:34:00 -
[248]
Sup I already carry alternate types of reps in my CHA. Hull and armor, both capital sized. Leaves very little room in your CHA
|
Sir Nimmo
Amarr Gun Metal Priests
|
Posted - 2009.08.18 22:42:00 -
[249]
Well, I have just given this all a look from a Rorqual pilot's perspective and I am quite liking it.
250km3 of space to store ore is very nice indeed. Would be nice if it was possible to run compression jobs directly from there, but hey, it's still quite nice indeed, makes moving all the ores and stuff a whole lot easier and more feasible to jump out into a quiet dead-end system and go for a mining op without a POS or station nearby.
Anyway, for what it's worth, I like it.
|
Alexander Knott
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 20:48:00 -
[250]
Originally by: CCP Abathur On Carriers: We will probably increase the fuel bay size a bit to better take into account Triage module fuel usage.
I guess this didn't actually happen?
|
|
Fuujin
GoonFleet
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 21:25:00 -
[251]
Edited by: Fuujin on 20/08/2009 21:26:54 I'll just repeat what I posted on the dev blog thread.
A dread is able to jump to its max range, siege at least 4x, and jump back. A carrier should be able to jump to its max range, triage 2-3x, and jump back.
To go 15LY and back with a moderate level of Jump Fuel Conservation, you'll need 2800-3000 m3 of isotopes. That is the current fuel bay. The current cargo bay is insufficient to hold even one cycle of triage, unless you have maxed out the Tactical Logistics skill.
Therefore, the carrier would require at least a 5000 m3 fuel bay (if not a bit more to allow for lower skill levels). A mothership should get at least 1.5x that to account for its inability to dock--it has to be more self-sufficient.
I understand the fuel bay and the present cargo bays were designed around the pre-patch cargobays of the carrier, but to my understanding these cargobays were deliberately left at their smaller-than-dreadnought sizes when triage was introduced to discourage the use of carriers as haulers. This logic does not hold when talking about ice-product-only fuel bays, and their size can safely be increased to accomodate their role as emergency battle 'medics'.
Please reconsider (and boost!) the carrier fuel bay.
|
Molly Flanders
|
Posted - 2009.08.20 21:38:00 -
[252]
Edited by: Molly Flanders on 20/08/2009 21:38:05 Well I must say that I am totally disappointed by the patch.
Flexibility greatly reduced, all affected ships but black ops just got nerfed. And no race defferences either - now all capital ships are leveled fuel wise.
|
Talis Mahn
Free Galactic Enterprises Aranir Citizens
|
Posted - 2009.08.21 02:15:00 -
[253]
Well, I finally get on after the patch. Saw some good things in the patch notes about the Orca and the Rorqual. Nice changes. Very useful. Still can't put anything other than industrials and barges in the ship maintenance array. I can live with that. I use my rorqual to haul bulk anyway. Then I get to my Thanatos.....WTH??? (a lot harsher than this really). To say I was blindsided by this change is mild. And I thought I was keeping up with the dev blogs.
I am part of a small corp. I solo a lot. I have also used my carrier in combat. I also use it as a remote base of operations for my alt and my corpmates. Then i find that CCP in its wisdom gutted the cargo bay??
After slogging through this whole thread. What does everything CCP said translate to?
"Players are not using ships the way WE want them to!!!
(You think its bad now wait until I figure out a way to turn a freighter into a Q-ship!)
People use ships in this game they way they want to. You should embrace this. I see many carriers being used in fleet fights. So why are you punishing us who use our ships differently? Are you going to stop players from putting mining lasers on battleships just because they are battleships? (it works well for noobs) No, didn't think so.
You (CCP) say carriers are combat logistics ships. Logistics is also carrying stuff. This change just cut my total jump range while carrying anything really usefull to me. And my Rorqual has no business being anywhere near a fight. "Use a jump frieghter for haulling." Feh. I find them pretty useless. Not to mention too expensive for the cargo volume and can't even jump as far as a Roqual. I can haul about 60% of the same volume for less than half the cost in a Rorqual, and I can use it in mining ops! And it also can fit capital reps! (Use these only after the battle , kids!) \o/ I believe in multi role ships. My carrier is my other multi role ship. I could fight with it or haul my stuff when I move. And it is mine. Not my corps, or my alliances, mine. Now I have use the room I use for my fittings and other things I've accumulated for fuel. I happen to like the idea that while I'm hauling (Not enough room for everything since the first nerf) I can actually defend myself. A rorqual cannot.
Now I can't even do that. I have to use corp hanger space for fuel with cuts down my usefullness to my corp and my alliance, both of which are not the huge "we can lose a titan whenever we want" organizations. Sorry but 875m3 for cargo is useless to me. Gutting that was pointless.
I really like this game but it gets frustrating every time you nerf ships that I fly. Before this carriers already failed at being haulers. Yes they could haul, just not well.
I could go into the Black Ops exploit. (Sheesh! They're frigging pirates! Of course they are going to use the jump drive to get away! Duuuh!)
When will you be happy with carrier balance? When they blow up as soon as they undock?
Just seems like a lot of pain for no reason other than they use a ship differently than you expect. Hello! Humans!! Been doing that since we picked up sticks to use as clubs.
Sheesh I am not surrounded. I'm in a target rich environment. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |