Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 02:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
Capital ships havent seen much love lately and im wondering if something like haveing a class of carriers that can fit a limited
number of guns/missles which would definatly mix some gameplay up and the best example of this is Battlestar Galactica. |
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 02:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
I think BSG online already exists dude. |
Bill Serkoff2
Tachyon Technology
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 03:00:00 -
[3] - Quote
It's called a Dominix. |
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 03:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:I think BSG online already exists dude.
im not saying use that EXACT ship but more of an example of putting guns on a carrier |
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 03:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
drakkaror wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:I think BSG online already exists dude. im not saying use that EXACT ship but more of an example of putting guns on a carrier Aren't they called dreadnoughts XD. |
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 03:17:00 -
[6] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:drakkaror wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:I think BSG online already exists dude. im not saying use that EXACT ship but more of an example of putting guns on a carrier Aren't they called dreadnoughts XD.
Dreads cant use fighters or drones for that matter, and they dont even have to be capital guns |
EvEa Deva
State War Academy Caldari State
49
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 03:22:00 -
[7] - Quote
Domi, Rattlesnake
mini carrier would be cool though, i just like the idea of more ships to mess with. |
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 03:28:00 -
[8] - Quote
drakkaror wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:drakkaror wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:I think BSG online already exists dude. im not saying use that EXACT ship but more of an example of putting guns on a carrier Aren't they called dreadnoughts XD. Dreads cant use fighters or drones for that matter, and they dont even have to be capital guns So why not fighters on dreads instead of turrets on carriers? |
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 03:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
[/quote]So why not fighters on dreads instead of turrets on carriers?[/quote]
because that would make dreads too powerfull with the amount of damage a fighter can put out. |
Bill Serkoff2
Tachyon Technology
15
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 05:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
So why not fighters on dreads instead of turrets on carriers?[/quote]
because that would make dreads too powerfull with the amount of damage a fighter can put out.[/quote] And that would make carriers too powerful with the damage guns can put out. |
|
mxzf
Shovel Bros
1794
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 05:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
drakkaror wrote:Quote:So why not fighters on dreads instead of turrets on carriers? because that would make dreads too powerfull with the amount of damage a fighter can put out. You seem to have completely missed the irony of your post. |
Alexa Coates
The Scope Gallente Federation
141
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 06:16:00 -
[12] - Quote
Moonlit Raid wrote:drakkaror wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:drakkaror wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:I think BSG online already exists dude. im not saying use that EXACT ship but more of an example of putting guns on a carrier Aren't they called dreadnoughts XD. Dreads cant use fighters or drones for that matter, and they dont even have to be capital guns So why not fighters on dreads instead of turrets on carriers? Because the dreads would then be carriers. Love my Gallente Federation Navy ships! |
Kelhund
Multiplex Gaming SpaceMonkey's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 08:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
While I support the implementation of other ships in EVE, I dont think we need any more caps at the moment. If there is another capital to be put in, perhaps the OP is speaking of something similar to Japanese pocket/light carriers towards the end of WW2, that had a number of cruiser/battleship sized guns in addition to a complement of aircraft. While I think it would be better to make these ships more suitible for Heavy Drone use, they could find a purpose in life as a fighter carrier - though they should only be able to field 1/4-1/2 of the fighters of a carrier. I know I would fly a cap like this, since I like the DD output of guns with the flexibility offered by drones. Definately something for the devs to think about when they get past balancing the BSs :D |
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage Ethereal Dawn
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 23:33:00 -
[14] - Quote
Kelhund wrote:While I support the implementation of other ships in EVE, I dont think we need any more caps at the moment. If there is another capital to be put in, perhaps the OP is speaking of something similar to Japanese pocket/light carriers towards the end of WW2, that had a number of cruiser/battleship sized guns in addition to a complement of aircraft. While I think it would be better to make these ships more suitible for Heavy Drone use, they could find a purpose in life as a fighter carrier - though they should only be able to field 1/4-1/2 of the fighters of a carrier. I know I would fly a cap like this, since I like the DD output of guns with the flexibility offered by drones. Definately something for the devs to think about when they get past balancing the BSs :D
Agree on this, you other guys are takeing me waaaay to literal on this and just thinking inside the box and odveously with implementing guns on something like a pocket carrier, their would be some changes to them as to what a full carrier can do, and im sure if any of you participated in capital operations you would know that a lot of corps use their carriers off grid and send their fighters in to attack a station/pos thus leaveing them defensless untill their fighters return and allies warp in to assist them if they are cought.
If you look at a lot of world war 2 carriers they had around four 5 inch guns to help protect them even modern carriers have use of some source of defence of this nature |
Alara IonStorm
2430
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 00:01:00 -
[15] - Quote
drakkaror wrote: Agree on this, you other guys are takeing me waaaay to literal on this and just thinking inside the box and odveously with implementing guns on something like a pocket carrier, their would be some changes to them as to what a full carrier can do, and im sure if any of you participated in capital operations you would know that a lot of corps use their carriers off grid and send their fighters in to attack a station/pos thus leaveing them defensless untill their fighters return and allies warp in to assist them if they are cought.
There are [shock] risks to splitting up your fleet?!
Good because they can do damage without committing to the fight and if that leaves them vulnerable then so be it. They would not have said weakness on the front lines.
drakkaror wrote: If you look at a lot of world war 2 carriers they had around four 5 inch guns to help protect them even modern carriers have use of some source of defence of this nature
If you look at World War II Destroyers they had Torpedo's, Guns, Depth Charges, and AA Battleries. Real Life Examples mean nothing.
|
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage Ethereal Dawn
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 00:54:00 -
[16] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:drakkaror wrote: Agree on this, you other guys are takeing me waaaay to literal on this and just thinking inside the box and odveously with implementing guns on something like a pocket carrier, their would be some changes to them as to what a full carrier can do, and im sure if any of you participated in capital operations you would know that a lot of corps use their carriers off grid and send their fighters in to attack a station/pos thus leaveing them defensless untill their fighters return and allies warp in to assist them if they are cought.
There are [shock] risks to splitting up your fleet?! Good because they can do damage without committing to the fight and if that leaves them vulnerable then so be it. They would not have said weakness on the front lines. drakkaror wrote: If you look at a lot of world war 2 carriers they had around four 5 inch guns to help protect them even modern carriers have use of some source of defence of this nature
If you look at World War II Destroyers they had Torpedo's, Guns, Depth Charges, and AA Battleries. Real Life Examples mean nothing.
if you are trying to troll, you are doing a very poor job of it and I have heard better arguements from a 4 year old, as I have said befor it would add a new style to the gameplay for a carrier class |
Alara IonStorm
2431
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:14:00 -
[17] - Quote
drakkaror wrote: if you are trying to troll, you are doing a very poor job of it and I have heard better arguements from a 4 year old, as I have said befor it would add a new style to the gameplay for a carrier class
Carriers do not need a new style of game play and they do not need guns. Carrier DPS is fine and so is the risk of warping your fighters.
In the future try to be less childish in your replies. Which is ironic considering the nature of your petty insults and spelling mistakes. |
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage Ethereal Dawn
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:26:00 -
[18] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:drakkaror wrote: if you are trying to troll, you are doing a very poor job of it and I have heard better arguements from a 4 year old, as I have said befor it would add a new style to the gameplay for a carrier class
Carriers do not need a new style of game play and they do not need guns. Carrier DPS is fine and so is the risk of warping your fighters. In the future try to be less childish in your replies. Which is ironic considering the nature of your petty insults and spelling mistakes.
Finally a decient argument from you, as far as childish replies... really, you should read your responses are and how they dont relate to the topic, Im throwing an idea out their and reasons why I think they would be a cool idea and defending it and as far as grammer, i couldnt really care as long as i got my point across and no one is perfect at spelling even me. |
Alara IonStorm
2431
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:33:00 -
[19] - Quote
drakkaror wrote: Finally a decient argument from you, as far as childish replies... really, you should read how stupid your responses are and how they dont relate to the topic,
My first argument was to counter a weakness you stated was in the game and should be covered and I think otherwise. It is a valid weakness in return for off grid DPS.
The post was relevant and on topic as opposed to your rude attacks. |
drakkaror
Dragon's Rage Ethereal Dawn
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:42:00 -
[20] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:drakkaror wrote: Finally a decient argument from you, as far as childish replies... really, you should read how stupid your responses are and how they dont relate to the topic,
My first argument was to counter a weakness you stated was in the game and should be covered and I think otherwise. It is a valid weakness in return for off grid DPS. I did not call you names for thinking the contrary but simply disagreed. The post was relevant and on topic as opposed to your rude attacks.
I will apologize then for the rudeness then on account i made a mistake of things in the beginning of how many different white haired ppl posted on this thread, just the bad replys are starting to annoy me when im trying to make a valid point. |
|
Alara IonStorm
2432
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:43:00 -
[21] - Quote
drakkaror wrote: I will apologize then for the rudeness then on accound i made a mistake of things in the beginning of how many different white haired ppl posted on this thread, just the bad replys are starting to annoy me when im trying to make a valid point.
Thank you. |
Cedo Nulli
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
183
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 03:04:00 -
[22] - Quote
I have to say one thing that bothers me most in this game is indeed the fact that these ships sport only one weaponsystem. I mean who in their right mind would design a battleship that only has the big guns ... no "aa" batteries or other lighter weapons.
wtb somesort of phalanx close defence mods ^^ |
ovenproofjet
The Illuminatii Mildly Intoxicated
51
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 20:11:00 -
[23] - Quote
The Galactica would be hilariously overpowered in Eve. Full compliment of fighters, siege guns, small ship defences and thick enough armor to take on a small capital fleet for 5mins.... |
Lucas Schuyler
Mortis Noir.
26
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 20:54:00 -
[24] - Quote
To be honest, I really don't see how something like this would fit in the design scheme that we like to call "balance."
You want a gunship with drones... As many have pointed out, the Dominix really does fit that RP role, just as a Battleship rather than a Cap.
Except for the Cloaking stuff, probably the Sin is the Eve ship most like Battlestar Gallactica - a Battleship that can carry guns and support craft (drones) plus has a Jump drive and Bridge.
Or you might say that the Titan is the ship in Eve that most exemplifies a Battlestar... in which case, there it is.
Either way, trying to add a new Cap with both Dread and Carrier features, complimenting both while infringing on neither? Seems like a very tall order and filling a niche that mostly exists as a RP/preference thing rather than a game function that is lacking. |
Kelhund
Multiplex Gaming SpaceMonkey's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 07:26:00 -
[25] - Quote
I dont see how it would be a big stretch of the imagination to implement something like this, especially for the Gallente. It would just be the logical next step in the line that ends in the Myrm and Domi. Another, slightly bigger hull that would be tooled to accomodate both guns and drones. Caldari would have range bonus or missle velocity bonuses, gallente would have a damage bonus, minnies a ROF, etc. I think its workable, and would give players another capital choice to choose from aside from straight logistics or a dread that is only useful for POS bashing. Should prolly keep hammering this topic home with the devs until they're in the cap rebalcing stage heh |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
145
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 09:49:00 -
[26] - Quote
We don't need any more cap ships. Really, we should get rid of the ones we have (or re-purpose them into roles that have more to do with force projection and much, much less to do with battlefield domination.)
Mobile stations? Yes please. Carriers that can actually carry other ships? Yes please. Gigantor-solopwnmobile-bbqs? No thanks, that's just silly. Whether or not you win the game matters not. -áIt's if you bought it. |
john marston talylor
VC Academy
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 16:34:00 -
[27] - Quote
yo drakkaror i think its a good ideya i would support
|
john marston talylor
VC Academy
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 16:38:00 -
[28] - Quote
mechale dumbest ideya every why would you if you think that then your the fool
|
Morph Eis
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 16:40:00 -
[29] - Quote
John Marston:
http://i50.tinypic.com/258rrzd.png |
Renier Gaden
Exanimo Inc Hedonistic Imperative
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.19 17:02:00 -
[30] - Quote
Maybe if Dust is successful CCP might decide to do a joystick GÇ£Wing CommanderGÇ¥ type game where players fly fighters. Then more carrier classes might be in order. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |