Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
NoNah
Unseen University
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 14:38:00 -
[31]
Yay \o/
Postcount: 567434 [02:40:22] <elmickers> if you're caldari in a fleet fight, bring a corp
|
HandSoLow
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 15:36:00 -
[32]
A bit of a noob question...
...If bought a Carrier and CCP nerfed carriers, would my ship disappear in my hanger? Would I be refunded my ISK or would I be one of the few who have a carrier left in EVE?
|
Herculite
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 15:49:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Fswd Edited by: Fswd on 27/10/2007 12:08:10 Edited by: Fswd on 27/10/2007 12:07:56 Edited by: Fswd on 27/10/2007 12:07:23 There are freighters for hauling stuff. The function of carriers is to carry fighters, not stuff. In some way, this can even be regarded as an exploit, like how miners use jet-cans.
It took you 3 edits to come up with this gem alt?
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:06:00 -
[34]
iirc in the last Dev Blog on the subject of carriers ccp said they would be looking at modules that allow you to fit your carrier for a specific role - be that as cargo carrier, defense, offense and so on.
As this change is on sisi (along with a lot of other changes) how about we all stop peering into the 'magic crystal ball' and churning out hysterical wines on the forums?
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Darius Fox
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:12:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Davlos There was a game that was awesome at first, then it got stupidly f**ked sideways by the devs because they chose to listen to all the whiners who wanted their game to be more like Counter-Strike.
Then it died.
It was Star Wars Galaxies.
Wrong. SWG died because the Devs nerfed things for the fun of it, until the game became a huge nerf circle jerk (nerf BH then Jedi, rinse, repeat). Finally the game became so screwed they nerfed everything with little notice or consultation with the playerbase. Everyone left.
Then the game died.
I left and came here because of the minimal nerfage by devs. However REV III is making me wonder whether CCP have morphed into SOE
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:18:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Viqer Fell Edited by: Viqer Fell on 27/10/2007 11:45:41
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=622267
Pretty much says it all.
Ships inside a carriers ship maintenance bay can no longer have cargo in them.
It has not been mentioned in a dev blog, and I am assuming most people won't have heard about this as it has been originally posted on the development forum but this change is live on SiSi and with only 2-3 weeks before Rev II hits it's a pretty major change to carriers but with no notice.
I will not enter on the value of the change, but to have missed it people should have blind like just born kittens or don't read the forum (an so they will not see this post too).
Yesterday there was a guy that started at least 5 thread about this change, all with the same name and within minutes from each other, in this forum.
While comments on the change are needed, starting threadnaughts on it aren't a good idea.
|
Loyal Servant
Caldari Viper Intel Squad Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:20:00 -
[37]
Every day a new nerf.
Nerf ISK FARMERS FFS. Carriers are not gankmobiles as it is, and they really cannot carry all that much since the cans in haulers nerf anyhow.
I foresee the end of the carrier over this nonsense.
|
Oniko Sengir
Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:20:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Davlos Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away.... there was a game.
There was a game that was awesome at first, then it got stupidly f**ked sideways by the devs because they chose to listen to all the whiners who wanted their game to be more like Counter-Strike.
Then it died.
It was Star Wars Galaxies.
'Users of carriers' who post here, aka whiners ought to be slapped with the Order of Stalin's Silence for their own good.
I'd just like to point out that with SWG it was the 'silent majority' that the changes were trying to cater to.
"The ôsilent majorityö never materializes, and your current base is alienated due to changes that they did not want." Taken from the article on here: at mmorpg.com
|
Karlemgne
The Black Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:24:00 -
[39]
Omg, again with the crocodile tears. I'm sorry but I don't really feel that sorry for you and your solo pown mobiles.
First and foremost the number of people flying capitals is out of control. If it were up to me, I'd banish ALL of you capital pilots to 0.0. Yeah, that's right, every capital ship would HAVE to stay in 0.0. It would also end your favorite exploit--using carriers as uber haulers.
exploit is defined as any game mechanic that allows players to do something not intended by the designers.
Personally, I think its great that they are finally going through with the nerf to your 0.0 alliances use of combat ships and expensive haulers. If only they hadn't introduced the Roquel and they weren't about to go live with a jump freighter then it would have really stopped you 0.0 alliances from removing most of the risk involved in traveling to your space.
Which reminds me, why the frack are you complaining again? Carriers aren't supposed to be giant transport ships, however since you guys complain every time CCP thought about changing it, CCP is giving you dedicated jumping haulers...
And you still complain.
-Karl
|
Druadan
Gallente Aristotle Enterprises Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:27:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Druadan on 27/10/2007 16:28:10
Originally by: Karlemgne Omg, again with the crocodile tears. I'm sorry but I don't really feel that sorry for you and your solo pown mobiles.
First and foremost the number of people flying capitals is out of control. If it were up to me, I'd banish ALL of you capital pilots to 0.0. Yeah, that's right, every capital ship would HAVE to stay in 0.0. It would also end your favorite exploit--using carriers as uber haulers.
exploit is defined as any game mechanic that allows players to do something not intended by the designers.
Personally, I think its great that they are finally going through with the nerf to your 0.0 alliances use of combat ships and expensive haulers. If only they hadn't introduced the Roquel and they weren't about to go live with a jump freighter then it would have really stopped you 0.0 alliances from removing most of the risk involved in traveling to your space.
Which reminds me, why the frack are you complaining again? Carriers aren't supposed to be giant transport ships, however since you guys complain every time CCP thought about changing it, CCP is giving you dedicated jumping haulers...
And you still complain.
-Karl
Ah you're back. Are you going to talk any sense this time round or is it going to be your one-man, frothing-at-the-mouth tirade against 0.0 logistics like in the Carrier GSC nerf thread?
|
|
Karlemgne
The Black Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:28:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Oniko Sengir
Originally by: Davlos Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away.... there was a game.
There was a game that was awesome at first, then it got stupidly f**ked sideways by the devs because they chose to listen to all the whiners who wanted their game to be more like Counter-Strike.
Then it died.
It was Star Wars Galaxies.
'Users of carriers' who post here, aka whiners ought to be slapped with the Order of Stalin's Silence for their own good.
I'd just like to point out that with SWG it was the 'silent majority' that the changes were trying to cater to.
"The ôsilent majorityö never materializes, and your current base is alienated due to changes that they did not want." Taken from the article on here: at mmorpg.com
I'd like to point out that SWG still has as many players as EVE Online does. I'd also like to point out that the changes to the game probably come from Lucas Arts, but hey.
And lasted I'd like to point out that while its true that the number of capital ship pilots is out of control, a vast VAST majority of us don't fly capitals and either:
1. Are happy you are getting nerfed
or
2. Don't give a flying f
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:33:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 27/10/2007 16:34:07
Quote: The whole point of being able to have stuff like ammo/missiles in your ships cargo, is to be able to reload. I can understand CCP would want to take away the ability to use 1 or 2 industrial ships as "cargo expanders", but then again, is that REALLY such a HUGE problem??? Arent there abnout a thousand more pressing issues to fix first?
For me this is the only valid point against the change. But honestly I will question if it is so often needed to bring out a new ship in a lag situation where you need that the ship had a full ammo load ready.
A possible solution could be to add a dedicated ammunition cargo hold in the ships, but it will require extra coding, so I doubt it is a valid solution.
About the "more pressing fix" have you ever noticed that when a lot of people are working on the same feature the end result more often than not is broken?
There is a size limit in the efficient use of people, adding some extra developer to the same task will not speed it up, more easily will slow it down as they will need to spend a lot of time explaining to all the other guys what they have changed, why and how.
|
Alski
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:42:00 -
[43]
Since we're double posting anyway, i'm just gonna repost what i said in the other thread:
...the problem is that they are not implementing these changes in the right order, if they want rorquels and jump-freighters to replace the role of carrier logistics then they need to:
A) Implicitly state that carrier logistics are going to be “removed” from the game in the future, not just by making changes on sisi, not by a random reply that is short on details in a thread, but by an official dev-blog.
B) Implement the replacement for it; ie jump-freighters and the expanded rorquel, and give us PLENTY OF TIME to train to fly them, build them and adapt to the changes
C) Then, and ONLY then should the nurfage of carrier logistics take place.
Failure to make these changes in this specific order only makes the lives of the people in charge of alliance level logistics extremely difficult and the task itself even more complicated and time consuming. -
(combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom. |
Sinder Ohm
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:42:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Karlemgne Omg, again with the crocodile tears. I'm sorry but I don't really feel that sorry for you and your solo pown mobiles.
First and foremost the number of people flying capitals is out of control. If it were up to me, I'd banish ALL of you capital pilots to 0.0. Yeah, that's right, every capital ship would HAVE to stay in 0.0. It would also end your favorite exploit--using carriers as uber haulers.
exploit is defined as any game mechanic that allows players to do something not intended by the designers.
Personally, I think its great that they are finally going through with the nerf to your 0.0 alliances use of combat ships and expensive haulers. If only they hadn't introduced the Roquel and they weren't about to go live with a jump freighter then it would have really stopped you 0.0 alliances from removing most of the risk involved in traveling to your space.
Which reminds me, why the frack are you complaining again? Carriers aren't supposed to be giant transport ships, however since you guys complain every time CCP thought about changing it, CCP is giving you dedicated jumping haulers...
And you still complain.
-Karl
So is it fun jumping on the flaming bandwagon
before the blog from CCP I hardly saw any nerf carrierz / boost carrierz threads. Now people that have no firsthand experience with carriers just jump on these threads argueing with points borrowed from other threads that they dont even personally beleive in.
|
Sean Dillon
Caldari R.U.S.T.
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:46:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Sean Dillon on 27/10/2007 16:45:53 I think i am gonna cancel my account, i spent the last months training for carriers now this.
No you cant have my stuff.
|
Bonny Lee
Caldari God's Army Corp OPUS Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:50:00 -
[46]
Better start nerfing carriers and moms as much as you can now CCP. If the part of the playerbase who is able to fly those ships doubles in the future your forum will not be able to handle the huge amount of flame they are going to produce.
We will get Jumpfreighters. We dont need Carriers as giant fighting Haulers anymore.
|
Mikal Zackfelt
Gallente THE MISPHIT'S INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 16:56:00 -
[47]
I would like to say that the amount of whining the past few weeks have been astounding... I mean ffs, didnt CCP clearly state that they dont want players using carriers as freighters, jumping stuff in and out 0.0 and empire? This is why the Rorqual and the new jump freighters are coming in the next patch. Maybe I am still a noob who doesnt quite understand 0.0 mechanics, politics, and logistics; but come on, the amount of whining is just outstanding. And almost sickening.
P.S. before I get flamed, I would like to state, I understand the timesink that carriers and other cap ships involve; I am currently speccing up for a carrier myself, and I welcome the new changes (although I clearly have a long way to go and much more iskies to accumulate)
/me still dons asbestos flame suit just in case...
|
Druadan
Gallente Aristotle Enterprises Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 17:02:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Druadan on 27/10/2007 17:04:53 Edited by: Druadan on 27/10/2007 17:04:13
Originally by: Mikal Zackfelt I would like to say that the amount of whining the past few weeks have been astounding... I mean ffs, didnt CCP clearly state that they dont want players using carriers as freighters, jumping stuff in and out 0.0 and empire? This is why the Rorqual and the new jump freighters are coming in the next patch. Maybe I am still a noob who doesnt quite understand 0.0 mechanics, politics, and logistics; but come on, the amount of whining is just outstanding. And almost sickening.
P.S. before I get flamed, I would like to state, I understand the timesink that carriers and other cap ships involve; I am currently speccing up for a carrier myself, and I welcome the new changes (although I clearly have a long way to go and much more iskies to accumulate)
/me still dons asbestos flame suit just in case...
I don't have a problem with the spirit of the nerf, but it's another ridiculously stupid implementation. Logistics carrier pilots don't have freighters trained, or the rorqual stuff trained. So the carrier nerf needs to come in like 6months after the introduction of the jump freighters, so that the logistics guys can retrain. Even that is a really awful way to do it, because it means these logistics guys have a tonne of useless skillpoints. Time wasted on stuff they don't need because CCP decided to reimagine a whole aspect of the game, at the expense of the players who invested time into that area of the game.
What is the point of doubling our SMB and halving the size of battleships, if we can't even bring fitted and loaded ships to the battlefield?
It's also a redundant nerf, as you could significantly reduce the effectiveness of the SMB using the specialisation idea that's coming in in three months. This change makes me think the specialisation idea isn't even coming, that it was just said to placate us.
In other words, Nixon's not bringing the smokes.
|
Kessiaan
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:18:00 -
[49]
I don't fly a carrier but I don't get it.
If they don't want carriers being used for heavy duty hauling, why remove the ability for ships in the maintenance bay to carry *any* cargo? What about ammo, alternate mod loadouts, exotic dancers, etc, etc, etc.
Maybe a better solution would be to not let carriers put industrial ships and transports in the bay, or at least force these ships (and only these ships) to be empty?
----- My in Eve Profile |
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:20:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Kerfira on 27/10/2007 18:25:21 Your thread will get nerfed too
I made a thread pointing out that fact yesterday since many people only read 'General'. Wrangler was quite fast on his 'lock thread' button. Seems like CCP doesn't want the general population (who doesn't read the more specialised forums) to know this....
I can live with a nerf so the carrier ship bay can't contain haulers and barges, but not being able to have combat fitted ships (incl. ammo) in there is a major annoyance.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
|
Redback911
Malevolent Intentions
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:24:00 -
[51]
I really like being able to carry battleships in carrier, but removing cargo space sucks.
Simply put a flag on haulers preventing them being carried. Leave that to the Rorqual.
|
Rhaegor Stormborn
Pestilent Industries Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:29:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Akita T Or, could it possibly be that CCP wants alliances to SHRINK their territory to sizes they can actually and effectvely control, occupy and police ? You know, leave space for more "new" players out in 0.0 ?
Winner.
Rhaegor Stormborn Fleet Admiral - Pestilent Industries Amalgamated [PIA] Recruitment Thread |
Hozac
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:35:00 -
[53]
Carriers have a corp hangar for a reason. Put your ammo in there and remove it when needed.
|
Alias11
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:35:00 -
[54]
You know, if you're going to implement a "replacement" for something, in this case logistics carriers with jump freighters, you should implement the replacement well in advance of removing the original. Bring jump freighters into the game, give people time to get characters skilled to use them, a bunch of them to be invented, and the logistics guys in the new ships, then and only then should you take out the carrier logistics. You don't outlaw cars the same day you implement the super-duper all-inclusive train system.
Also how are you supposed to get ships onto the battlefield with anything more than a single clip of ammo? Is this the long-awaited Amarr "oomph"?
|
Alias11
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:36:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Hozac Carriers have a corp hangar for a reason. Put your ammo in there and remove it when needed.
You've never actually tried to do this, have you. There is no lag in eve.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:42:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Alski Since we're double posting anyway, i'm just gonna repost what i said in the other thread:
...the problem is that they are not implementing these changes in the right order, if they want rorquels and jump-freighters to replace the role of carrier logistics then they need to:
A) Implicitly state that carrier logistics are going to be ôremovedö from the game in the future, not just by making changes on sisi, not by a random reply that is short on details in a thread, but by an official dev-blog.
B) Implement the replacement for it; ie jump-freighters and the expanded rorquel, and give us PLENTY OF TIME to train to fly them, build them and adapt to the changes
C) Then, and ONLY then should the nurfage of carrier logistics take place.
Failure to make these changes in this specific order only makes the lives of the people in charge of alliance level logistics extremely difficult and the task itself even more complicated and time consuming.
Your suggestion would be the logic way to go but then we would see more of this:
Originally by: Druadan Logistics carrier pilots don't have freighters trained, or the rorqual stuff trained. So this carrier logistics nerf needs to come in like 6 months after the introduction of the jump freighters, so that the logistics guys can retrain. Even that is a really awful way to do it, because it means these logistics guys have a tonne of useless skillpoints. Time wasted on stuff they don't need because CCP decided to reimagine a whole aspect of the game, at the expense of the players who invested time into that area of the game.
What is the point of doubling our SMB and halving the size of battleships, if we can't even bring fitted and loaded ships to the battlefield?
It's also a redundant nerf, as you could significantly reduce the effectiveness of the SMB using the specialisation idea that's coming in in three months. This change makes me think the specialisation idea isn't even coming, that it was just said to placate us.
In other words, Nixon's not bringing the smokes.
with people saying: "I had not enough time to re-train", "We need more time", ecc. as some are doing for the mineral compression change.
Probably CCP think that getting a solution in and forcefully putting it up down the player throat in only 1 step will result in less whinage that if they put the new ship in and after some time change the old ships.
As in surgery, a clear cut often is better and less painful that several lesser one.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:46:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Kerfira Edited by: Kerfira on 27/10/2007 18:25:21 Your thread will get nerfed too
I made a thread pointing out that fact yesterday since many people only read 'General'. Wrangler was quite fast on his 'lock thread' button. Seems like CCP doesn't want the general population (who doesn't read the more specialised forums) to know this....
I can live with a nerf so the carrier ship bay can't contain haulers and barges, but not being able to have combat fitted ships (incl. ammo) in there is a major annoyance.
I think your thread was closed because there was a joker opening several identical threads on this argument, using almost half of the first page of the general forum.
As a reaction all the threads about carriers where closed.
Not a perfect solution but comprensible.
|
Alski
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:46:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Alski on 27/10/2007 18:46:42
Originally by: Hozac Carriers have a corp hangar for a reason. Put your ammo in there and remove it when needed.
You don't actuley fly a carrier do you?
If you did you would know that about 30% of the time when anouther person accesses the corp array on a carrier, it reloads the carrier pilots HUD, that is the hull/armor/shield bars all return to 0% and then reload back to whatever they actuley are, when this happens it breifley lags the carrier pilots client, do this to me in the heat of battle and you'll shortley be needing a replacement pod as well -
(combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom. |
Alski
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:55:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Alski Since we're double posting anyway, i'm just gonna repost what i said in the other thread:
...the problem is that they are not implementing these changes in the right order, if they want rorquels and jump-freighters to replace the role of carrier logistics then they need to:
A) Implicitly state that carrier logistics are going to be “removed” from the game in the future, not just by making changes on sisi, not by a random reply that is short on details in a thread, but by an official dev-blog.
B) Implement the replacement for it; ie jump-freighters and the expanded rorquel, and give us PLENTY OF TIME to train to fly them, build them and adapt to the changes
C) Then, and ONLY then should the nurfage of carrier logistics take place.
Failure to make these changes in this specific order only makes the lives of the people in charge of alliance level logistics extremely difficult and the task itself even more complicated and time consuming.
Your suggestion would be the logic way to go but then we would see more of this:
Originally by: Druadan Logistics carrier pilots don't have freighters trained, or the rorqual stuff trained. So this carrier logistics nerf needs to come in like 6 months after the introduction of the jump freighters, so that the logistics guys can retrain. Even that is a really awful way to do it, because it means these logistics guys have a tonne of useless skillpoints. Time wasted on stuff they don't need because CCP decided to reimagine a whole aspect of the game, at the expense of the players who invested time into that area of the game.
What is the point of doubling our SMB and halving the size of battleships, if we can't even bring fitted and loaded ships to the battlefield?
It's also a redundant nerf, as you could significantly reduce the effectiveness of the SMB using the specialisation idea that's coming in in three months. This change makes me think the specialisation idea isn't even coming, that it was just said to placate us.
In other words, Nixon's not bringing the smokes.
with people saying: "I had not enough time to re-train", "We need more time", ecc. as some are doing for the mineral compression change.
Probably CCP think that getting a solution in and forcefully putting it up down the player throat in only 1 step will result in less whinage that if they put the new ship in and after some time change the old ships.
As in surgery, a clear cut often is better and less painful that several lesser one.
You and Druadan have a fair point, however it doesn’t change the fact that merely making this change will be hugely detrimental to all 0.0 alliances, it is better that just the carrier pilots whine about being less versatile, than it would be to have every 0.0 alliance pilot whine about how the changes have filtered down to them and effected the way Everyone plays the game. (i'm talking freighter runs and more effot to do pos fueling)
Also i think if CCP put out a clear plan telling us it is going to happen before hand and giveing us both the tools (rorquel and jump-freighters) and the time to prepear for it, that would mitigate a lot of the whineing, i for one would be happy with that.
Also, if they just left carriers the way they are right now, and then later introduced the proposed changes that will still allow carriers to be refitted to hauling crap, as well as giveing them some other perks in the form of other mode of tasking (the refitting thing) that would placate much of the objections to the change. -
(combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom. |
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:58:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 27/10/2007 18:59:10
Originally by: HandSoLow A bit of a noob question...
...If bought a Carrier and CCP nerfed carriers, would my ship disappear in my hanger? Would I be refunded my ISK or would I be one of the few who have a carrier left in EVE?
No - CCP change your carrier into the m3 cargo bay/hanger sized amount of trade goods (cattle/tobacco/etc).
SKUNK
EDIT - Not really the nerfing refers to a percieved reduction in its capabilities - not an actual removal of the ship.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |