Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 69 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
984
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:20:43 -
[391] - Quote
Celly S wrote:Querns wrote: No matter how loudly you yell with your fingers plugging your ears, you can't drown out the fact that carriers have significant combat ability, and it is that ability that lead to its restricted state. That you are unwilling to consider this fact is completely immaterial to reality.
I can assure you that I'm doing no such thing, just the same as I can assure you that carriers were not nerfed because of their combat ability (or as you stated previously their tank...) I am more than willing to consider your statement if it were at all factual or relevant. all combat ships travel distance was nerfed, not just carriers, Jump freighters were not nerfed as hard because CCP stated that while the JFs were not where they wanted them to be, they were where they needed to be in relation to the current industry in null/low sec. Please try to get some real information about the points you wish to make before attempting to make them. you can start hereo/ Celly Smunt. Nowhere in your link was provided any evidence to support your claim.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rautha Harkonnen
Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:29:01 -
[392] - Quote
Totally unnecessary addition to the game. May as well just save up for a freighter. Sigh, Another ganked to hell ship for marmite to drool over.
Its ORE. Evrything ORE should be mining related entirely. Bring an 8 strip mining mega barge to the game. Make miners feel like industry gods. Lol
Anyway if a bowhead is gunna be in game wheres arrowhead for pvp players looool |
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
228
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:31:29 -
[393] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 10000 / 11000 / 36500
I think this is low EHP, even with modules, it will be very easy to gank. So if someone puts 2 t-1 battleships in there and both drop, gankers can make some pretty nice isk. |
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
328
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:32:15 -
[394] - Quote
dexington wrote:Celly S wrote:Please try to get some real information about the points you wish to make before attempting to make them. Do you understand that jump freighters, which already are in the game, can move more ships then a bowhead? Adding a T2 version of the bowhead would not drastically change the game, it just gives low/null players the option to move ships with freighters without being forced to repackage them.
I u8nderstand that.. what I'm saying is that there's already a ship in low and null to move assembled ships, and CCP has stated this new ship is to primarily be a high sec ship, so no jump drive needed.
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal.
Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular.
Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself.
A sandwich can be a great motivator.
|
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
328
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:34:20 -
[395] - Quote
Querns wrote: Nowhere in your link was provided any evidence to support your claim.
you're right, I evidently need to link you to the threadnaught that preceded that thread that has CCP's own statements about force projection...
give me a bit and I will
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal.
Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular.
Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself.
A sandwich can be a great motivator.
|
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy Caldari State
75
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:55:05 -
[396] - Quote
Fruckton Haulalot wrote:also the cargo should be closer to 10k not 5k.... or give it another bay for ammo that way mods and parts in the cargo bay... and ammo in the ammo bay
Ammo can be stored inside assembled ship in the ship hangar. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
984
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:55:19 -
[397] - Quote
Once again, you've failed to provide any evidence that the carrier's inclusion into the default fatigue ship set was due to its SMA. Or, really, for any factor at all. I enjoy onanism as much as the next Eve player, but do try to keep it on topic.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
328
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:16:27 -
[398] - Quote
Querns wrote: Once again, you've failed to provide any evidence that the carrier's inclusion into the default fatigue ship set was due to its SMA. Or, really, for any factor at all. I enjoy onanism as much as the next Eve player, but do try to keep it on topic.
I never said it was nerfed because of its SMA, please don't put words in my mouth.
you stated it was nerfed because of it's tank, then you said it was due to it's combat abilities, neither one of which were true, but neither one of which had even one iota of relevance to my statement that there were already jump capable ships in low and null that could move assembled ships.
my comment was based in fact and your statements as to the reason carriers were nerfed are not, I SAID that force projection is the reason for the nerfs CCP implemented recently (that IS in the links i provided, and that does in fact back up what I said in reply to your erroneous assertions, not what you're now claiming I said), now, If a player wishes to continue to use their ships in the manner they did previously, there is a jump timer and fatigue consequence they have to pay... again, if you are going to make a point....
so, I will state again that asking for one of these new ships to have a jump drive is basically asking for an un nerfed carrier since there's no reason to have that aside from circumvention of the recently changed mechanics...
I hope that's clearer for you o/ Celly Smunt
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal.
Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular.
Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself.
A sandwich can be a great motivator.
|
Dreiden Kisada
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
18
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:20:32 -
[399] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Dreiden Kisada wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:Dreiden Kisada wrote:I gotta say, that name is really bad. As opposed to sayGǪ "Humpback", "Minke" or "Sperm"? Yeah, Bowhead is just fine. Humpback is way better than Bowhead. Then there's also Narwhal. That's a whale. Bowhead sounds like someone saying Towelface. It's like two words who never should have been together had a "thing" at EVE Vegas and now have to live with the consequences. The bow of a ship is the front. Thus a whale with a head that looks like the front of a ship certainly deserves the name "bowhead", especially when that head is used to break through layers of ice up to 60cm thick. So not "bow" the stringed arrow-launcher, but bow the front of a ship (or bow, the action performed in formal greetings or acceptance of applause)
That is correct, the front of the ship is called the Bow.
It still sounds silly. May as well call it Flipperside. Or Tailend. Or Bellybottom.
Actually, bellybottom sounds kinda cool. |
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy Caldari State
78
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:21:30 -
[400] - Quote
Dear CCP Rise:
Here's a few thoughts I've had on this fantastic ship.
Now that we have a ship dedicated to moving ships around, Do you think it's time to address the plastic wrapped ship exploit?
There is a TON of debate going on around the jump fatigue bonus on this ship, I'm of the belief that it warrants a reasonable amount of internal and possible external discussion if for nothing more than to demonstrate your commitment to improving the status quo in terms of force projection. Convince us that you care and that you took the time to make a good decision on the matter.
Being this ships role is to move ships from point A to point B, perhaps giving it a "Deployed" state (which uses fuel and provides bonuses to defense) if you wish to interact with any of the ships in the hangar. This would force players using this asset to deploy ships to a fight to commit this ship in the same way Marauders, Dreadnaughts, Rorquals, etc get committed to their advantages. This would also give the Bowhead a means of hunkering down to endure a gank attempt.
Get more bang for your developmental buck by giving us an ore (Ice, Ore, etc..) hauling variant. It's makes complete sense lore wise, It gives more value to training the skill that's only used for this one ship. You've already made the model, make a small variation and twice the mileage for the money invested in the development of the asset.
A more advanced concepts would be to give the bowhead an interchangeable core, One for larger ship hangar, One for Defense (Think deployable state from above) and one for hauling ore.
Just some food for thought. I fully expect some people to praise and others to rage and flame over these ideas, I don't care as long as people are discussing them :) |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
984
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:23:16 -
[401] - Quote
Celly S wrote: I never said it was nerfed because of its SMA, please don't put words in my mouth.
you stated it was nerfed because of it's tank, then you said it was due to it's combat abilities, neither one of which were true, but neither one of which had even one iota of relevance to my statement that there were already jump capable ships in low and null that could move assembled ships.
my comment was based in fact and your statements as to the reason carriers were nerfed are not, I SAID that force projection is the reason for the nerfs CCP implemented recently (that IS in the links i provided, and that does in fact back up what I said in reply to your erroneous assertions, not what you're now claiming I said), now, If a player wishes to continue to use their ships in the manner they did previously, there is a jump timer and fatigue consequence they have to pay... again, if you are going to make a point....
so, I will state again that asking for one of these new ships to have a jump drive is basically asking for an un nerfed carrier since there's no reason to have that aside from circumvention of the recently changed mechanics...
I hope that's clearer for you o/ Celly Smunt
Uhhh
Celly S wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:A jump drive would be nice. No, we already have ship haulers with jump drives, they're called carriers... (not trying to be an ass, but seriously, we have that already and CCP just nerfed them cause they were too easy) and BTW, not just no, but Hell NO!!!!! *wink* o7 Celly Smunt
Celly S wrote:Querns wrote:
That is a gross misrepresentation of the restriction carriers received. They were restricted due to their superlative tank and damage application to subcaps, not their SMA.
no it is not part of the reason carriers (like all other combat capitals) were nerfed was due to the ability to travel across long distances in a matter of minutes and carriers can haul combat ships as well, if your statement was correct, CCP would have nerfed their tank and NOT their travel ability. if you're asking for this new ship to have a jump drive and the 90% reduction in fatigue, then you're asking for an un-nerfed carrier, no matter how you try to make it seem otherwise. I appreciate the reply, but stand by my original comment, if you want something to haul ships in that has a jump drive, you already have one, it' is called a carrier. o/ Celly Smunt
How many more petards can you hoist yourself upon?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
392
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:24:48 -
[402] - Quote
RoAnnon wrote:Lidia Caderu wrote:Quote:5% bonus to max velocity per level What is that for? Going faster...
You get that each time Aura says "Skill training completed". Duh.
In all seriousness, I would rather this be an HP bonus, considering where the HP totals are to begin with. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
984
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:26:01 -
[403] - Quote
Anonymous Forumposter wrote: There is a TON of debate going on around the jump fatigue bonus on this ship,
Not really. It's one or two posters having a conniption over a thing they don't understand, and one lone, strapping forums hero disassembling their fits with surgical precision.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
328
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:33:56 -
[404] - Quote
Querns wrote:
How many more petards can you hoist yourself upon?
i've hoisted myself upon none; easy = easy to travel to travel = force projection (whether they carried smaller combat ships or not to the destination)
a ship with a jump drive that can haul assembled ships exists already, it is called a carrier..
I have stayed true to my point throughout this discussion .
o/ Celly Smunt
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal.
Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular.
Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself.
A sandwich can be a great motivator.
|
Arielle Silverwing
River-Rats in space The Ditanian Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:39:54 -
[405] - Quote
Celly S wrote:Querns wrote:
How many more petards can you hoist yourself upon?
i've hoisted myself upon none; easy = easy to travel to travel = force projection (whether they carried smaller combat ships or not to the destination) a ship with a jump drive that can haul assembled ships exists already, it is called a carrier.. I have stayed true to my point throughout this discussion . o/ Celly Smunt
he is clearly trolling you girl.. just ignore him
A.S. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
984
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 03:59:14 -
[406] - Quote
Celly S wrote:Querns wrote:
How many more petards can you hoist yourself upon?
i've hoisted myself upon none; easy = easy to travel to travel = force projection So anything that is easy to travel to travel (:allears:) is now force projection?
Why, then, are you not calling for the nerfing of the Interceptor?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Mina Sebiestar
Mactabilis Simplex Cursus
754
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:06:49 -
[407] - Quote
Looking nice.
As battleship carrier i hope it will be bigish,can it launch ships or just transport? |
Jaro Essa
Dahkur Forge
13
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:07:05 -
[408] - Quote
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:Get more bang for your developmental buck by giving us an ore (Ice, Ore, etc..) hauling variant. Miasmos, Orca, Rorqual. Or compress and put it in any hauler. Plenty of choice already. Let the Bowhead do as it was designed to do, fill a niche that 's not already occupied. |
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy Caldari State
78
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:11:00 -
[409] - Quote
Jaro Essa wrote:Miasmos, Orca, Rorqual. Or compress and put it in any hauler. Plenty of choice already. Let the Bowhead do as it was designed to do, fill a niche that 's not already occupied.
There is a niche for a large scale ore hauler as evidenced by all the freighters seen in high sec Ice belts. As someone who's regularly ran 8+ accounts at once all mining into an Orca, and then passing into a freighter, I would welcome a freighter that felt less out of place in a belt occupied by ORE ships!
ORE master race. |
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
329
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:16:29 -
[410] - Quote
Querns wrote:Celly S wrote:Querns wrote:
How many more petards can you hoist yourself upon?
i've hoisted myself upon none; easy = easy to travel to travel = force projection So anything that is easy to travel to travel (:allears:) is now force projection? Why, then, are you not calling for the nerfing of the Interceptor?
my bad, I didn't realize that an interceptor had a jump drive and could haul assembled ships
o/ Celly Smunt
PS. when you decide to stop trolling and want to have a serious discussion as to whether my statement that "there are already ships with jump drives and the ability to haul assembled ships in low and null" is correct or not, I'll be happy to continue this discussion and even show you the ship's pictures and stats, but as long as you're going to act as though you have no ability to read and understand, then I won't allow you to waste any more of my time.
Thanks for the replies though, they have been good for a round (or two) of laughs on comms...
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal.
Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular.
Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself.
A sandwich can be a great motivator.
|
|
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
329
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:18:15 -
[411] - Quote
Arielle Silverwing wrote:Celly S wrote:Querns wrote:
How many more petards can you hoist yourself upon?
i've hoisted myself upon none; easy = easy to travel to travel = force projection (whether they carried smaller combat ships or not to the destination) a ship with a jump drive that can haul assembled ships exists already, it is called a carrier.. I have stayed true to my point throughout this discussion . o/ Celly Smunt he is clearly trolling you girl.. just ignore him A.S.
I was hoping you were mistaken, but I guess you're right. *hugz* Celly Smunt
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal.
Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular.
Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself.
A sandwich can be a great motivator.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
984
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:22:20 -
[412] - Quote
Celly S wrote:Querns wrote:Celly S wrote:Querns wrote:
How many more petards can you hoist yourself upon?
i've hoisted myself upon none; easy = easy to travel to travel = force projection So anything that is easy to travel to travel (:allears:) is now force projection? Why, then, are you not calling for the nerfing of the Interceptor? my bad, I didn't realize that an interceptor had a jump drive and could haul assembled ships It needs neither, as it's faster than anything with a jump drive and jump freighters exist to move things far faster than a carrier can.
You're so fixated on the carrier's SMA that you are blind to its other, more powerful attributes. The carrier SMA just isn't that good. Get over it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
984
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:45:11 -
[413] - Quote
Also, if I truly was a troll, I'd report your name for obscenity. In fact, I might just do that anyways.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Masao Kurata
Z List
132
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:47:16 -
[414] - Quote
Spc One wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 10000 / 11000 / 36500
I think this is low EHP, even with modules, it will be very easy to gank.
Over 400k. Do people not realise how ridiculously well hull tanking scales with slots? A damage control multiplies hull EHP by 2.5 and every module and rig after that multiplies it by 1.25 with no stacking penalty. The growth is exponential with slots which is why one extra low compared to the orca is so significant on this ship, and unlike the orca there is no tradeoff to be made between cargo and tank. The only remotely reasonable thing to fit instead of hull tank is warp speed, which is just as greedy a choice. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1988
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:52:51 -
[415] - Quote
yay! \o/
p.s. huuuuge tank is huuuuge. does not need buff.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13838
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:55:26 -
[416] - Quote
I assume this can use titan bridges?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
426
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 04:57:25 -
[417] - Quote
More EHP would be nice. But even more so if it was shield tanked rather than hull. Give it high and even innate shield resists so that logistics are more effective at repping it. If squads of logistics have a high chance at keeping it alive under gank attack then maybe incursion runners will use it.
|
Ele Rebellion
Underground Coalition
31
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 05:01:34 -
[418] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Dreiden Kisada wrote:Humpback is way better than Bowhead. Then there's also Narwhal. That's a whale. (insert) Humpback joke here. With that name, it could potentially even rival the Nestor for notorietyGǪ As much as I like Narwhal, being predatory in nature it doesn't really fit with the intent for this particular ship. Now an ORE AMC (armed merchant cruiser) called the Narwhal - totally down for that.
I would assume that CCP is actually naming this ship after a whale since they 'want' it to get slaughtered. Particularly a whale that was considered 'ideal' or whaling in the early 17th century due to its similarities to the Right whale: slow-moving and float after death. CCP is an Icelandic based company and Icelanders apparently don't like whales. They are one of only three countries that commercially whale despite the 1983 IWC ban on commercial whaling. (Though I will note that the Faroe Islands aren't considered one of the three countries that still commercially whale, since they brutally slaughter hundreds of whales a year for sport..) Though surprised that they didn't name it after the endangered Fin whales or Minke whales that Iceland is known for killing now days (maybe because they aren't as slow and easy a target as the Bowhead). |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
259
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 05:11:06 -
[419] - Quote
Idea is great, but the tank is far too small, 500k ehp minimum to account for the gankers these days. Even JFs are getting blown up.
Also need an agility buff to avoid the bumpers, otherwise can be pinned indefinitely and hit by waves of gankers. Unless this ship is reasonably safe, incursion runners won't use it. |
Masao Kurata
Z List
132
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 05:15:01 -
[420] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Idea is great, but the tank is far too small, 500k ehp minimum to account for the gankers these days. Even JFs are getting blown up.
Also need an agility buff to avoid the bumpers, otherwise can be pinned indefinitely and hit by waves of gankers. Unless this ship is reasonably safe, incursion runners won't use it.
You got over 80% of that EHP already, better agility than freighters and single mwd cycle warping, now shut up. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 69 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |