Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
HydroSan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:18:00 -
[1]
Edited by: HydroSan on 26/10/2007 07:18:54 Edited by: HydroSan on 26/10/2007 07:18:18 You cannot store a ship that contains cargo inside a Ship Maintenance Bay. Please remove all cargo from the ship and try again.
Kablammo.
|
HydroSan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:20:00 -
[2]
yeah just use this thread
i'm laughing pretty hard right now i honestly dont know what to say hahahahaha holy god
|
Porks
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:21:00 -
[3]
MY CARRIER BACKBONE OH JESUS
|
Gor Kraon
Minmatar Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:21:00 -
[4]
So you can carry a small gang of frigates/cruisers but they can't have ammo/charges/drones in them? Whats the point of a carrier being able to carry ships then?
If you want to nerf carriers carrying industrials, just make them friggin huge so they don't fit in a carrier.
|
Porks
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:23:00 -
[5]
so will we be getting free skills for t2 freighters and free t2 freighters because this is probably the worst decision since the fornication of your parents
|
DaMaster Architect
SOTI Inc. Bipolar Stability
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:35:00 -
[6]
What the hell? What am I supposed to think of this? First that other cruel nerf and now.. this?? Why??
|
Firane
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:38:00 -
[7]
Wat
-----
|
Ce Domina
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:41:00 -
[8]
Uh I really like your game CCP but why do you insist on making us focus on the boring parts? This just makes fueling POS's/logistics more of a pain than it already is. What does that add to the game?
I know the idea is that then everyone can use jump freighters but those take a long time to train for and are going to cost 3-4 times what a carrier does minimum, not to mention the shortened jump range to make it take twice as long. This also has the comical side effect of making SMAs at POS's sort of worthless. Now everyone will need to anchor a GSC to store their ammo? What does that add to my gaming experience?
I don't expect any of these questions to be answered because it seems you're intent on nerfing nullsec as much as you can, and this is a great step towards making it unappealing. Between the mind-numbing logistics and the nerf to the highends that's probably coming when you get rid of trit pricecaps you're really making an effort to make everyone live in empire.
Oh wait I forgot we'll have superveld in 0.0 so all we need to do is mine that then compress it using a rorqual so we can jump it to empire in our jump freighters and then refine and sell it there! So mining profitably in 0.0, which used to take a retriever (if that) and a fast frigate to run the mega/zyd now requires 7-8 billion in investments plus months of training!
Seriously I like this game but please let us focus on the fun parts. Nerfing the carrier's logistics ability really only serves to make the game less appealing, by making the parts that everyone hates take longer and be more expensive to do.
|
Porks
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:43:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ce Domina Uh I really like your game CCP but why do you insist on making us focus on the boring parts? This just makes fueling POS's/logistics more of a pain than it already is. What does that add to the game?
I know the idea is that then everyone can use jump freighters but those take a long time to train for and are going to cost 3-4 times what a carrier does minimum, not to mention the shortened jump range to make it take twice as long. This also has the comical side effect of making SMAs at POS's sort of worthless. Now everyone will need to anchor a GSC to store their ammo? What does that add to my gaming experience?
I don't expect any of these questions to be answered because it seems you're intent on nerfing nullsec as much as you can, and this is a great step towards making it unappealing. Between the mind-numbing logistics and the nerf to the highends that's probably coming when you get rid of trit pricecaps you're really making an effort to make everyone live in empire.
Oh wait I forgot we'll have superveld in 0.0 so all we need to do is mine that then compress it using a rorqual so we can jump it to empire in our jump freighters and then refine and sell it there! So mining profitably in 0.0, which used to take a retriever (if that) and a fast frigate to run the mega/zyd now requires 7-8 billion in investments plus months of training!
Seriously I like this game but please let us focus on the fun parts. Nerfing the carrier's logistics ability really only serves to make the game less appealing, by making the parts that everyone hates take longer and be more expensive to do.
Seriously, when CCP introduced jump bridge arrays and cyno arrays, it was awesome. I actually thought they cared about making a tedious part of the game a lot easier and quicker.
Now they've gone the other way and shot themselves in the head.
|
Carino Cantati
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:49:00 -
[10]
this is so ridiculous I it's funny
after the announcement of the fighters nerf and the subsequent fallout and eventual CCP retraction, you'd think they'd be smart enough to avoid cutting the logistics capabilities of the carrier in half
|
|
Shaddam V
Amarr Project EVE Research
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:51:00 -
[11]
The carrier/mommy moratorium dev blog said to ignore the changes on sisi that were accidental -- one might hope this is what they meant and not the drone changes that were implemented as they had originally had planned?
God I hope. I don't fly carriers yet - plan to get a rorqual for logistics since I am like 60 days from freighter V, but if this is permanent might have to consider going to the Ark sooner. I can't see this being permanent, though. As stated, pos refitting becomes useless. The whole idea of getting your carrier to get ships to the front line is kind of mute if you have to have a mining op in enemy territory for the ammo and having to have someone haul mods out to you.
|
Strana Mechty
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:51:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Strana Mechty on 26/10/2007 07:51:41 Melting my carrier to make T1 Frigs.
(No seriously, this is stupid. Maybe if the Carrier was a tad more Combat worthy I wouldn't mind so much. But making it so we can't even move **** properly turns carriers in PoS hugging fighter *****es. God I hope it's a mistake.)
|
Damned Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:51:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Damned Force on 26/10/2007 07:56:46 As i read before CCP told us, no drastic change on Carriers, just discussion and just modules, and even thats not in rev3.
Let's wait on the TQ deploy, but i think:
CCP LIES TO THE COMMUNITY AGAIN!!! GO TO HELL WITH THE SILENT NERFS!!!
PS: is idiotic again. U warp the carrier with backup ships into the battlefield to do at least some support to gang too. Someones ship is blowed up. He fly in pod to the carrier and take the ship, than need to search in the corp hangar for ammo, and boosters, etc in a laggy battle. Thats would never work in the practice
|
Darklin Eldaris
Prophets Of a Damned Universe
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:52:00 -
[14]
I support this nerf, and yes I fly a carrier, and yes I have fueled/will fuel POS's with it.
It makes perfect sense though, even though it seems not so fun.
A carrier is not a freighter, its not meant for bringing materials back and forth from place to place, and this has become one of the primary uses for carriers in eve. Yeah it can be argued that this sucks for everyone who trained up to use carriers for specifically this, but in all honesty its been broken for awhile and needed to be fixed. Carriers are fleet support ships.
I mean think about it honestly, the military doesn't load up a freight ship then load that into a carrier then drive it across the ocean. They load up the freight ship and drive it, because that's what it does, it moves freight.
Look on the bright side tho guys, its better than only having 5 fighters. ALOT better.
|
Porks
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:54:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Darklin Eldaris I support this nerf, and yes I fly a carrier, and yes I have fueled/will fuel POS's with it.
It makes perfect sense though, even though it seems not so fun.
A carrier is not a freighter, its not meant for bringing materials back and forth from place to place, and this has become one of the primary uses for carriers in eve. Yeah it can be argued that this sucks for everyone who trained up to use carriers for specifically this, but in all honesty its been broken for awhile and needed to be fixed. Carriers are fleet support ships.
I mean think about it honestly, the military doesn't load up a freight ship then load that into a carrier then drive it across the ocean. They load up the freight ship and drive it, because that's what it does, it moves freight.
Look on the bright side tho guys, its better than only having 5 fighters. ALOT better.
Yeah, I'm looking forward to the 120 day skill grind to be able to fly that freight ship.
|
Vladimir Tinakin
Caldari Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:03:00 -
[16]
Wow.
This is certainly one way to force people to use a titan jump portal.
If the jump freighter is Tech 2, there will be VERY VERY FEW of them. Certainly not enough to supply 0.0 with any good ability. And those people who own one will have to spend their entire eve life jumping back and forth.
If this goes through, logistics would be smashed utterly. You think 0.0 gatecamps are bad now, and prohibitive for newer alliances from heading out? Wait til you have to do things like the bad old days of industrial/freighter convoys and multi-hour ops watching a 0.6 AU/s target warp.
The reprocessing nerf was going to kill compression and freighterloads of minerals from being transported well enough. This was entirely un-necessary.
The carrier is a frontline logistics tool. POS's and POS fuel, thanks to sovereignty requirements, are frontline logistics needs. A paper-thin industrial (and transports aren't any better) is NOT a viable frontline deployment tool.
Basically, if this nerf goes through and the carrier doesn't get a 50k+ m3 corp hangar array, you're going to get a wave of response that will dwarf the initial carrier nerf. Screw with the offensive ability and get an irritated response; screw with the logistics part and get an angry torch wielding mob headed to iceland. ----------------------------------------------- Adm Vladimir Tinakin CFO Hadean Drive Yards |
Krontos
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:07:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Darklin Eldaris I support this nerf, and yes I fly a carrier, and yes I have fueled/will fuel POS's with it.
It makes perfect sense though, even though it seems not so fun.
A carrier is not a freighter, its not meant for bringing materials back and forth from place to place, and this has become one of the primary uses for carriers in eve. Yeah it can be argued that this sucks for everyone who trained up to use carriers for specifically this, but in all honesty its been broken for awhile and needed to be fixed. Carriers are fleet support ships.
I mean think about it honestly, the military doesn't load up a freight ship then load that into a carrier then drive it across the ocean. They load up the freight ship and drive it, because that's what it does, it moves freight.
Look on the bright side tho guys, its better than only having 5 fighters. ALOT better.
This is a bit of a false dichotomy. It's not no hauling ability or 5 fighters or something. Though between the two I'll happily take 5 fighters. I think I fuel more POS's than you do.
Comparing this the real world military is a bit strange, as this is a game, and frankly I don't feel any compelling need for realism. I want the game to be as fun as possible. This means it needs to be balanced, yes, and frankly I understand CCP's reason for reviewing carriers abilities. They are very versatile ships in a game that is mostly about specialization.
The problem with removing this is that its not solving an existing problem. I can't remember the last time I thought "Wow its so cheesy that our enemies can move POS fuel in carriers! Damn those things are overpowered!". I remember thinking that nano-phoons were a bit ridiculous. This isn't really addressing a balance issue per se, but it does make playing EVE much more tedious for any spaceholding alliance.
Yes the jump freighter is neat! I really approve of it being added! I see it has something to make life much easier for hardcore logistics guys, so that they can focus more on having fun with the game, but requiring it for logistics work seems over the top. It's going to cost twice what a dreadnaught does (at least, factor in you have to invent from freighter BPCs), and require a hefty skillpoint investment that does nothing else for you. (unless you REALLY like freightering things)
So let's see we've got a timesink in more ways than one, and something that just serves to make the game less fun for every logstics guy in all of nullsec. Sure maybe they shouldn't have gotten into it if they're not masochists who enjoy toiling endlessly to feed their towers but someone has to do it. That's the way game works currently.
I understand balance tweaks, but I don't see how this aspect of carriers is overpowered. Moving stuff around is boring but necessary, I don't see any reason to make it harder for anyone.
|
Tonkin
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:07:00 -
[18]
u noticed they are not doing a dev blog over it, they are doing all the changes behind peeps backs
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:08:00 -
[19]
As I read it the reasons behind this changes on the test server are very simple:
a lot of people have lamented that EVE is becoming capitals on line and CCP don't like it.
So they are:
a) nerfing the capitals so that they will need a support fleet;
b) nerfing the capacity of building capitals (making harder to move bulky minerals).
They are experimenting with the changes on the test server, then they will implement some of them.
|
clone 1
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:14:00 -
[20]
So when you board your replacement ship from your support carrier, you must also open the corp hanger after boarding and drag some ammo/charges into your hold?
Always Moaning About Race Retardations |
|
Kcel Chim
Caldari Arcane Technologies The Five
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:17:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Kcel Chim on 26/10/2007 08:19:27 its prolly on sisi for the devs to test their new philosophy to modify the carrier to a "role" relevant job.
Just that they have, as with scripts, not layed out all parts yet.
Imagine a lowslot module called "capital cargo expander", "capital maintance hangar extension" and "capital corphangar expander". Each of those modules would require a lowslot and boost their respective ressource for lets assume "100%" while requiring "50000 powergrid and 0 cpu". (the numbers are fluent it could be 1000% even) With a possible limitation (like with mwds) that only one of a kind but hence 3 as a max (one to each area) can be fit per ship. You would see carriers with a similar or even greater hauling ability but sacrifing slots for it and hence not beeing able to pvp. The changes you mentioned above would make perfect sence in such a context, otherwise ppl would only fit hangar arrays and overload it with indies bypassing the idea to increase cargo or corphangar size because its less effective.
Sounds possible but unless those modules get released or some other devblog about it, DONT panic.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:18:00 -
[22]
I'm too tired to rant, but this space is reserved for one later. I will say now however that carriers have been the backbone of 0.0 logistics for 2 years now, there better be a damn good reason for this (and in the mean time, perhaps I should plan on training up for a Revelation). ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic EVE Automated Influence Map: Keeping Down The Clone Business Since 2007AD |
Ztrain
Evolution Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:20:00 -
[23]
Okay we've established CCP are a bunch of morons but they can't possibly be this stupid with them touting the carrier as a logistical hauler.
Are you sure your doing it right? You know that if somethings in the cargo space on a ship the carrier needs to be the one to scoop the ship out of space. A player can't put a ship with cargo in to the carrier?
Z
Originally by: CCP Zulupark That's the rough idea, yes. We still have in no way started thinking about what modules to introduce, what they would do or anything of the likes, but the idea is that.
|
Tonkin
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:25:00 -
[24]
they need to get the help channel open again so i can rant.
they are bunch of f**cking idiots, damn u can get a list of the things they have done to us now
help allainces cheat
make half of the eve community angry due changing ships wasting skill points and REAL LIFE F**KIN MONEY!!!!!!!!!
THIS BETTER BE TEMPORY
|
Porks
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:27:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Ztrain Okay we've established CCP are a bunch of morons but they can't possibly be this stupid with them touting the carrier as a logistical hauler.
Are you sure your doing it right? You know that if somethings in the cargo space on a ship the carrier needs to be the one to scoop the ship out of space. A player can't put a ship with cargo in to the carrier?
Z
It was done in a station
|
Zastrow
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:27:00 -
[26]
So. I spent the last month training Jump Drive Operation 5, and am currently training Jump Drive Calibration for my carrier which sits patiently waiting in my hangar. Thanks CCP for my expensive dominix.
|
Ztrain
Evolution Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:28:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Porks
Originally by: Ztrain Okay we've established CCP are a bunch of morons but they can't possibly be this stupid with them touting the carrier as a logistical hauler.
Are you sure your doing it right? You know that if somethings in the cargo space on a ship the carrier needs to be the one to scoop the ship out of space. A player can't put a ship with cargo in to the carrier?
Z
It was done in a station
Ohhh **** okay well just when you think they can't get any dumber....... Ohh well for some reason I'm not surprised.
Z
Originally by: CCP Zulupark That's the rough idea, yes. We still have in no way started thinking about what modules to introduce, what they would do or anything of the likes, but the idea is that.
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:41:00 -
[28]
This change would be one of the more annyoing ones, why not just change something with industrials so that u cannot put stuff into em anymore and transport em but leave "regular" ships alone? -
|
Tonkin
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:42:00 -
[29]
i got a idea
GET RID OF CARRIERS!!!
might aswell cos thats what i'll be doing with mine with these sh1ty nerfs
|
Grayton
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:51:00 -
[30]
Oh, and if I'm wrong, and this is just part one of the carrier redesigning and part 2 is introducing a carrier-only mod that enables ships in the SMA to have cargo, then I will apologize to CCP, but if that is not the case, I just hope they enjoy the gigantic backlash they're going to get from this.
And when members of all alliances, even those fighting each other, agree it's a stupid idea, it should probably be listened to.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |