|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Elmicker
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 14:44:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Elmicker on 26/10/2007 14:45:01 jesus... what the **** are you thinking?!
Right.
The nerf, on paper, makes sense. +1.
The nerf, in game, IS IDIOTIC. -100.
First wtfmajor huge flaw: A carrier is meant to carry combat-ready ships. How, exactly, is it meant to do this when the ships it is carrying cannot hold any ammo or cap charges?
Second flaw: You're removing the ONLY current viable logistics tool and providing no viable alternative. Jump freighters will be costing half as much as a mothership, and regardless, will probably take a couple of months to get built and trained for. How are we meant to do corp/alliance level logistics in the mean time?
Third flaw: You've also nerfed capital module sizes. You want to force carriers to refit to perform multiple roles. How exactly are they meant to refit when they can't actually carry more than 2 capital modules?
|
Elmicker
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 15:13:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Pilgrippa What's ridiculous is the amount of pos there are. Making them harder to maintain = far fewer pos = good.
You think this will reduce the number of poses?
|
Elmicker
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 17:03:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Pilgrippa Absolutely.
I don't think anyone disagrees that it makes logistics harder. I think that's the point.
Then you're stupider than i thought.
Harder logistics does not mean fewer poses. It just means harder logistics. Those responsible for big pos wars and pos spams already have jump nets or titans available to do their logistics for them on easy-mode.
This only damages small-medium sized alliances and corps who don't have massive pos nets available. Hell, even when jump freighters are available, probably in about 3 months, they're going to cost half a mothership. Only the alliances who probably dont need them will actually be able to afford them. Everyone's just going to have to switch to the next best thing; expanded Revelations, which are ridiculously boring.
|
Elmicker
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 19:58:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Montaire I've not seen those cargo containers seeded, but I've seen items like them floating around the DB for a while. I doubt they will restrict the Rorq's cargo this way.
The Capital Industrial Ship should be better than a carrier at hauling. Much like an Itteron 5 is better at hauling than a Raven
This has nothing to do with hauling capabilities. IT's the fact that suddenly, without warning, a fortnight before a major expansion, CCP have said "Oh, you can't use this anymore. Bye!". Rorquals are now (finally) better haulers than carriers, as are the new jump freighters. CCP should leave carriers alone and allow rorquals and JFreighters to take over the logistics role naturally and then think about adjusting the mechanics of the ship maintenance bays, instead of forcing it on us and grinding just about all 0.0 logistics to an immediate halt.
Ideally, they shouldnt even need to adjust the ship maintenance bays - ships SHOULD be able to have cargo in their bays, otherwise the entire role of transporting assembled, combat-ready ships to a combat zome is useless. You end up having to waste fuel space for the ammos of the ships inside and you have to waste time doling out that ammo every time someone needs a ship. CCP need to stop plain outright nerfing things and instead need to move towards encouragement and buffs of alternatives.
|
Elmicker
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 02:52:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Montaire Put ammo in the Corp Hangar Array,
This being the same corp hangar array the most carriers have to use for fuel?
Quote: use a Rorqual for hauling. You know how the Itteron is an Industrial Ship. Crazy enough they have a Capitol Industrial Ship.
/me sighs.
"Industrials" are so called because they werent meant to be a 100% hauler class. Comparing two classes based purely on their names is ******* moronic. A rorqual is a gang mining ship, not a hauler. Using that as a hauler is no different from using a carrier or a dreadnought.
|
Elmicker
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 00:11:00 -
[6]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Congratulationg gangleri, you can have a cookie!!
We now have jump freighters.
If you've done your job properly, jump freighters == haulers.
Again, if you've done your job properly Proper balanced hauler > half-arsed job in a carrier.
Now. Let's compare this to a sub capital situation.
For hauling a hauler is superior to an expanded battleship.
Does this mean i'm banned from using a battleship as a hauler in a pinch? No, it doesn't.
Don't force things, CCP. You just **** things up in the short term. Instead let things naturally take over.
As it is now, you're screwing every 0.0 resident for the next 4 months until jump freighters come into play. This forces them to resort to an even more innapropriate mechanic - expanded dreadnoughts.
|
|
|
|