Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Fyt 284
The Stone Cutters Guild Requiem Eternal
28
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 09:22:20 -
[1] - Quote
This post is being made with the assumption that damage numbers are going to be boned for the foreseeable future. Carriers will be in a worse state than they were pre-citadel after the nerfs. Citadel changes made carriers a strong anti-subcap choice, after removing triage and slowcat roles for carriers. This was good, as it made a role for carriers that made sense and fit well. Post nerf, application and damage will be so low that the anti-subcap role will be replaced by HAW dreads, who can continue to use ewar, unlike carriers. They'll have better application, better support fittings, and better tank, not to mention be cheaper to lose than a carrier. (Fighter costs / insurance numbers)
A few of the problems I see with carriers as they stand post nerf: #1: Support fighters are functionally useless. This is probably the biggest problem with post nerf carriers. You can replace basic functionality that literally every other ship in the game can use, by sacrificing 2/3rds of your dps. Even pre-nerf, this choice was uncommon, and unpopular, and post nerf, when carriers will be hurting for damage, this will become non-existent. A simple solution would be to add a 4th/6th tube (yes, supers are included in this) that can only use support fighters, and make the carrier choose between which support fighters they want to bring, and what role they want to fill (anti-sub cap or anti fighter). Worse yet, they can't even fill in as capital support because they can only launch one wing of support fighters.
#2: Inability to use ewar. The ewar penalty made sense when carriers had the 900% NSA, as instalocking ewar carriers would be toxic as ****. Now that carriers will no longer have that advantage, it makes little sense to prevent ewar from being used while the NSA is active. Waiting a minute (which will be the case with or without the NSA) to apply webs, tps, points, etc doesn't promote making choices, it negates them. I am aware that one of the original intents was to fill that void with support fighters, but you can see above why I feel that doesn't work.
#3: Anemic Fighter bays. I doubt anyone has brought this up, because as a dps platform, they don't have a problem. The problem emerges when you force a carrier to adapt to a situation, and *try* to support. Support fighters are big, and very very squishy. There isn't enough room to bring light fighters, anti fighters, and 1 or 2 different support fighters without running the risk of being completely defanged the moment frigates start engaging your fighters. It doesn't help that you can't utilize your entire fighter bay because you can't switch wings without having room to unload your fighters.
These are just my views on carriers, as a carrier pilot. Please note that I did not say that nerfs were unwarranted, but the degree to which carriers were nerfed is extreme, and forces us out of the only role we have. |
Shalashaska Adam
Partial Safety
188
|
Posted - 2016.06.29 10:21:14 -
[2] - Quote
They really need to add the ability to swap out fighters in the tubes just by dragging a group over another group.
That by itself would fix the hangar size issue pretty much single handedly.
Right now the chimera literally doesn't have the room to use a full wing of each of it's racial fighter types.
You don't have the room to even bring 1 squad of support fighters with you in the first place. |
Anthar Thebess
1586
|
Posted - 2016.06.29 11:21:18 -
[3] - Quote
Can confirm that carriers need to have some niche role. No ewar if you use NSA, inability to lock stuff fast enough if you don't use NSA. Support fighters, all fighters are anemic - even if you can deploy multiple wings and have them in different places of the grid, they are to easy to kill, jam, damp, scramble that they are made way to fast useless.
For people who don't use carriers and wonder - why 1 nerf changed situation so much: It is very simple, carrier light fighters rocket salvo allowed them to clear grid around them from light tackling ships and untanked targets. This provided carrier with unique ability to provide meaningful function on field at expense of heavy fighter and possibly carrier loses. One of the few capital engagements we had proved that you have chance of saving tackled supers, by doping enough carriers to clear dictors and hictors. Carriers will be lost in the process, but supercapitals have chance of extraction. Nerf to rocket salvo damage and application removed this totally, as carriers are unable any more to clear tackle, dictors or hictors.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Marcus Aeg
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.06.29 15:03:59 -
[4] - Quote
I agree,
it's like if they nerfed doomsday to avoid a oneshoot for t1 frigate, " which is not fair for the frigate player ". Carrier was good in the previous patch, and had his place. Now it becomes AGAIN useless for the price.
It's supposed to be a capital ship, expensive, big, and feared. Now it will be a flying beehive unable to destroy a frigate with this nerfed tracking speed. |
Kei Nagasai
X-COM Navy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.30 22:42:39 -
[5] - Quote
Are carriers even worth training into now? I mean, the hell? It takes a LONG time to train into these ships, with the carrier being the most used, it finally had a use as an anti-sub cap platform, with dread being anti cap and the new logi caps there for reps. It made sense and was logical. What was the thinking behind these nerfs anyway? Did CCP realise that a ship bigger than a cruiser was actually FUN to play? |
Erstan
Space Cavalry Regiment
0
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 08:22:06 -
[6] - Quote
To me carrier is again useless. They have too low dps to kill big target (like dred npc for example) and to kill many small targets it is micromanagement nightmare. It should be brought back to pre-nerf and also there should be improvement in the UI to reduce micro. I don't say it should be afk boat again, but it was pushed in the opposite direction way too much. |
Kei Nagasai
X-COM Navy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 08:58:10 -
[7] - Quote
Erstan wrote:To me carrier is again useless. They have too low dps to kill big target (like dred npc for example) and to kill many small targets it is micromanagement nightmare. It should be brought back to pre-nerf and also there should be improvement in the UI to reduce micro. I don't say it should be afk boat again, but it was pushed in the opposite direction way too much.
The clicky doesn't bother me so much as CCP catering to whiners "oh, my T1 ship hold down a carrier anymore, I cant get easy kills" etc etc. CCP proving yet again they dont really give a toss about any ship bigger than cruiser
|
Momiji Yakumo
Aliastra Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 15:11:17 -
[8] - Quote
You know you broke carriers when carrier ratting brings you almost the same isk per tick as a battleship, and when you are essentially worth 2 battleships worth of DPS in pvp, only you will die surely in a carrier because a t1 frigate can not only tackle you, but single handedly kill your fighters.
You should not be able to last 5 seconds if you take on a carrier with anything subcapital without logi and neuts, it's a flipping capital ship that has been nerfed to the point that a couple of battleships is literally better, I mean, what is the purpose of carriers now? To counter.... other carriers? It almost has the same ehp as a freighter for Bob's sakes, it can no longer kill interceptors, fighters are squishy and can be killed by said interceptor you can't touch or whoever has a web and scram, and they are now practically squishy giant bricks with squishy fighters that pokes battleships, if you are lucky you will kill 1 before you loose your expensive wing and become helpless. At the very least if they were going to do that to fighters, double the fighter speed and make them tankier.
As for the post, I agree with the OP's points and I think they are fair. CCP Plez un-nerf carriers so we can use them again, the nerfs addressed things that were not an issue and some that where, you fixed the fast locking issue, then for some reason destroyed its tank, its dps, and made it helpless against small stuff, that escalated quickly. |
Tsukino Stareine
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
1539
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 15:40:04 -
[9] - Quote
Momiji Yakumo wrote:wall of poo
Do you make stuff up for a living? |
Romarius Antollare
xHELLonEARTHx I N F A M O U S
3
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 14:36:14 -
[10] - Quote
As a nano cruiser pilot on my main for the most part, orthrus, cynabal, etc. and a carrier pilot on an alt I can say with absolute certainty that the carrier is now horribly unbalanced. 1. Scan Resolution - yes I agree with the changes to scan resolution. The carrier was a little overpowered in that regard, but the again svipul *cough* *cough*.
2. Ewar and the NSA - this utterly makes no sense. It is a capital anti-subcap platform. You absolutely have to have the NSA to do anything noteworthy in a subcapital engagement as was mentioned earlier in this article. You also absolutely need to be able to apply EWAR during an engagement. As you are limited to a single support wing (size and mechanic, speaking for carriers here) that in all reality is very limited in its own function as well as survivability you need those EWAR mods available asap.
3. Light Fighter DPS and Alpha - Once again, this is an ANTI subcapital platform. If you think carriers are anything more then you are happily delerious. Carriers DO NOT dps things off field. They are not HAW dreads. They cannot function capital vs capital with any great success to note as that is dreadnought, supercarrier, titan territory and always will be. They must be the end all be all name in subcapital warfare as that has always been their main focus.
4. Tank - As I have never really had an issue with this and don't have much experience flying a "tanky" carrier, I cannot really advise on or judge the current mechanics. If you are ganking it doesn't matter and if you are in a fleet with multiple carriers and you have FAX support it matters very little. |
|
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
2956
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 15:48:53 -
[11] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Can confirm that carriers need to have some niche role. No ewar if you use NSA, inability to lock stuff fast enough if you don't use NSA. Support fighters, all fighters are anemic - even if you can deploy multiple wings and have them in different places of the grid, they are to easy to kill, jam, damp, scramble that they are made way to fast useless.
For people who don't use carriers and wonder - why 1 nerf changed situation so much: It is very simple, carrier light fighters rocket salvo allowed them to clear grid around them from light tackling ships and untanked targets. This provided carrier with unique ability to provide meaningful function on field at expense of heavy fighter and possibly carrier loses. One of the few capital engagements we had proved that you have chance of saving tackled supers, by doping enough carriers to clear dictors and hictors. Carriers will be lost in the process, but supercapitals have chance of extraction. Nerf to rocket salvo damage and application removed this totally, as carriers are unable any more to clear tackle, dictors or hictors.
"Anti-subcap" is just too damn wide of an assignment to make something that is both workable and balanced. Any game where balance is at elast remotely important end up with situation like this. When you design something that has too many jobs, it's either not good enough to use over a dedicated version or it's just a flat out better option because it does it and then some. "Jack of all trades" rarely ever get good balance spots because of that. |
eddie valvetino
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
218
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 16:10:28 -
[12] - Quote
Romarius Antollare wrote:As a nano cruiser pilot on my main for the most part, orthrus, cynabal, etc.
to be fair buddy
your post should have ended there.. as "nano-faggotry" means your opinion it worth zero.
I happen to agree that if you have invested in a carrier, skills and isk.. then they should be better than they are...
CCP have a tricky job here, some many people with so many interests, all of the them valid (apart of nano-fags) and all paying their monthly subs.
Logi dictates that "capital" ships should be hard, bruisers and cable to dealing a lot of damage, whilst soaking it up too. However, logi also dictates that capital ships should need support. Eve isn't real world, i know that.. but if you are gonna to use real world logic i.e. "capital ships should be hard as ****" then it stands that capitals need support.
I will say however.. 100% agree... fighters need to be cheaper or MUCH harder to kill.. i'd even settle of a method of repairing them in-space as we used to have. currently each fighter as the cost of a well fit T1 cruiser, but they simply DO NOT perform like them.. Remember, lore tells us fighters are indeed ships, with pilots that are not pod capable.
The new fighter system is clearly designed to reduce server and client lag. which is a good thing...
personally, i think with the range of fighters with have, then having an anti-frig, anti cruiser fighters would be good..... oh wait, have them, they called drones... but CCP wont let us use them in carriers any more.....
I am wondering also, weather the chaps posting here are concerned about PvP or PvE. |
Momiji Yakumo
Aliastra Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 17:42:54 -
[13] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:Momiji Yakumo wrote:wall of poo Do you make stuff up for a living? Clearly you have never flown a carrier. You will find the most hilarious fighter wing killmails to frigates. |
Lenny Weber
Stronghelm Corporation Solyaris Chtonium
0
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 21:20:27 -
[14] - Quote
Agreed. |
Romarius Antollare
xHELLonEARTHx I N F A M O U S
3
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 23:48:55 -
[15] - Quote
eddie valvetino wrote:Romarius Antollare wrote:As a nano cruiser pilot on my main for the most part, orthrus, cynabal, etc. to be fair buddy your post should have ended there.. as "nano-faggotry" means your opinion it worth zero.
Thank you for those kind words :)
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions O.U.Z.O. Alliance
1289
|
Posted - 2016.07.06 05:25:20 -
[16] - Quote
eddie valvetino wrote:....blurrbbh...CCP have a tricky job here, some many people with so many interests, all of the them valid (apart of nano-fags. translation: I are pvppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppper, mekkkh all ship stop with mwd on so I can press FONE. Bwhaaaaaah!!!! Mekk ship insta-kill-IWIN-WTF-BBQ-solo-PWN-mobile again so pvp un-complitatettht for career pilot. career pilot guddh. mekkh win fight.) and all paying their monthly subs....
Carriers used to rep a boat or tell their fighters to shoot other capitals. And you misspelled something..
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Tsukino Stareine
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
1542
|
Posted - 2016.07.06 05:45:57 -
[17] - Quote
Momiji Yakumo wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:Momiji Yakumo wrote:wall of poo Do you make stuff up for a living? Clearly you have never flown a carrier. You will find the most hilarious fighter wing killmails to frigates.
If you've flown a carrier and lost fighters to 1 T1 frigate, I have to tell you that carriers are not at fault here |
Momiji Yakumo
Aliastra Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2016.07.07 18:56:20 -
[18] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:Momiji Yakumo wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:Momiji Yakumo wrote:wall of poo Do you make stuff up for a living? Clearly you have never flown a carrier. You will find the most hilarious fighter wing killmails to frigates. If you've flown a carrier and lost fighters to 1 T1 frigate, I have to tell you that carriers are not at fault here Web + scram + friends or friends + ecm light drones and your fighters are dead. It's that simple, ask anyone who currently uses them for PVP, in any given engagement when a carrier is facing a few cruisers, tackle and logi, you will almost always loose your fighters if you engage. Yes, a t1 frigate can easily kill your fighter wing, and that's if they don' primary, it, if everyone goes for them instead of just permajamming your fighters, you're screwed. |
Tsukino Stareine
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
1547
|
Posted - 2016.07.07 19:02:44 -
[19] - Quote
Momiji Yakumo wrote: because a t1 frigate can not only tackle you, but single handedly kill your fighters.
Bolded for emphasis |
Zix Isu
Vidu Express
1
|
Posted - 2016.07.07 22:54:58 -
[20] - Quote
Carrier's dont really have a role anymore after the changes. The argument can be made over them being capital neut boats but even thats debatable.
With the fighter changes they have a brutal time applying to anything moving faster then 100ms, Frigs will chew up fighters like candy. They need heavy support to apply to desy's and cruisers. But the big thing is that DPS wise and cost wise its much more efficient bring a BC or something along those lines. Since losing two wings of fighters just to kill a cruiser or two or being defanged by a pair of frigs without any real way to even hurt them really turns them into very expensive fireworks ships.
Supers are arguably even worse now, since i think bombers cant hit a BS if their lives depended on it.
So again what's their role again? |
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions O.U.Z.O. Alliance
1298
|
Posted - 2016.07.07 23:49:53 -
[21] - Quote
Zix Isu wrote:...So again what's their role again?
Farmville online.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Tsukino Stareine
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
1548
|
Posted - 2016.07.09 01:49:36 -
[22] - Quote
wasn't the idea to be an anti-fighter platform? |
Fyt 284
The Stone Cutters Guild Requiem Eternal
57
|
Posted - 2016.07.13 22:41:38 -
[23] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:wasn't the idea to be an anti-fighter platform? Whats the point in having a class of ship to only counter the same class of ship? And not even the ship itself, but only its weapon system. The intent was originally to make it a versatile, mobile weapons platform, where your choices in fighters mattered.
PS: If you want an anti-fighter platform, just bring a catalyst, its cheaper. |
Tsukino Stareine
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
1559
|
Posted - 2016.07.15 04:24:34 -
[24] - Quote
supers exist you know ;) |
Anthar Thebess
1614
|
Posted - 2016.07.15 09:03:40 -
[25] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:supers exist you know ;) There is no point of using carriers unless you have super carriers on grid. Even then subcapitals can be better at killing/jamming fighter bombers because of current fighter mechanic.
TL;DR: Bring dreads.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Fyt 284
The Stone Cutters Guild Requiem Eternal
59
|
Posted - 2016.07.16 11:55:04 -
[26] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:supers exist you know ;) And a catalyst would do a better job at killing fighter bombers than a carrier. Also, balancing a common and accessible hull against something that 1% of the game's pilots have is absolutely ********. |
Calael Aeg
Pavillon Rouge Opera Mundi
1
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 12:01:34 -
[27] - Quote
News about that ? Does CCP think about an upgrade after their big nerf ? |
Nemezis Savage
Moronic Confluence Inver Brass
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.22 12:07:14 -
[28] - Quote
I'm bumping this.
Make fighters warp-capable within the grid. Then again, what is the role of carriers and supercarriers today? |
Tsukino Stareine
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
1679
|
Posted - 2016.08.22 15:04:07 -
[29] - Quote
Supers are pretty effective at removing regular capitals from the grid as we saw in the battle of SH recently
With long range heavy fighters they can deal with subcaps as well.
regular carriers however with enough force in numbers can quite effectively neutralise battleships in a single rocket volley |
Looblaloobla Timmay
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.22 15:15:31 -
[30] - Quote
It's my opinion that all drones are too easy to kill. For the same reason that a battleship has a hard time killing frigates, so should a frigate have a hard time killing light drones. Even when webbed or scrammed, light drones in particular should be at least 10 times harder to destroy than they are currently. This, in my opinion, is exactly why battleships aren't used as effectively in pvp vs. frigates, cruisers etc. If we can address this one issue then we may have solved battleship pvp, while at the same time giving the Carrier a new role. A ship with a large tank, that is anti frigate/cruiser blob. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |