EVE Search - I feel as if regular carriers are fine

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

I feel as if regular carriers are fine

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Acac Sunflyier Crimson Infamy Fuzzy Nut Attack Squirrels 18	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:03:00 - [1] - Quote I hope CCP doesn't accidentally nerf regular carriers. While a super carrier can both deploy fighters and fighter bombers, I don't believe fighters should get a nerf. Carriers should be left alone. They're right where they need to be.
Crunchmeister THORN Syndicate BricK sQuAD. 42	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:05:00 - [2] - Quote I agree. Carriers are fine the way they are. And I don't think there's any plan to nerf them that I've heard of anywhere. If there is and I missed it, then by all means, please link the source.
Acac Sunflyier Crimson Infamy Fuzzy Nut Attack Squirrels 18	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:08:00 - [3] - Quote My concern is that they'll nerf both fighters and fighter bombers to nerf the super carrier, and end up nerfing the carrier accidentally
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 75	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:21:00 - [4] - Quote AFAIK, neither fighters or Fbs are getting a nerf at all. And carriers are getting a buff too
Jita Alt666 183	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:31:00 - [5] - Quote Headerman wrote: AFAIK, neither fighters or Fbs are getting a nerf at all. And carriers are getting a buff too I to have heard this. Increased space in the SMA for regular carriers and the Drone deployment options for Supers modified with an EHP nerf. Let us hope some idiot at CCP doesn't try a work around involving fighter/fighter bomber attributes.
Large Collidable Object morons. Interstellar Hobos 174	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:38:00 - [6] - Quote Well - there are many possibilities for CCP messing them up - like accidentally changing drone deployment options for carriers as well or overpowering dreads (although I'd welcome having overpowered dreads for a change). morons are recruiting. You know who you are!
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 75	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:42:00 - [7] - Quote Large Collidable Object wrote: Well - there are many possibilities for CCP messing them up - like accidentally changing drone deployment options for carriers as well or overpowering dreads (although I'd welcome having overpowered dreads for a change). OP dreads would still be pretty damn hard pressed to take out a spider carrier gang :)
Large Collidable Object morons. Interstellar Hobos 175	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:51:00 - [8] - Quote Well - if they couldn't take out a couple of pantheon-archons, they wouldn't be properly OP - but I still have faith in CCP properly messing it up ;) morons are recruiting. You know who you are!
Crystal Liche ACME Mineral and Gas 16	Posted - 2011.09.14 01:54:00 - [9] - Quote I feel like something was announced and I missed it, did they give more detail on what is coming
Headerman Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx 75	Posted - 2011.09.14 02:07:00 - [10] - Quote Crystal Liche wrote: I feel like something was announced and I missed it, did they give more detail on what is coming Nope. Need to sit tight and wait, sorry
Har Harrison Amarrian Retribution 25	Posted - 2011.09.14 02:14:00 - [11] - Quote Crystal Liche wrote: I feel like something was announced and I missed it, did they give more detail on what is coming I wasn't aware anything had been formally announced - though http://www.evenews24.com/ I think had a speculative article based on something a source said iirc. If I don't recall correctly, apologies to the Intranets Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!!
Alec Freeman The Dark Space Initiative Revival Of The Talocan Empire 2	Posted - 2011.09.14 02:41:00 - [12] - Quote Too be honest i wouldnt worry about anything being nerfed until CCP give up on space barbie & ken.
Lord Wiggin Furian Necromongers 1	Posted - 2011.09.14 03:21:00 - [13] - Quote Acac Sunflyier wrote: I hope CCP doesn't accidentally nerf regular carriers. While a super carrier can both deploy fighters and fighter bombers, I don't believe fighters should get a nerf. Carriers should be left alone. They're right where they need to be. Yes, by all means, don't nerf the ships you fly, only other peoples stuff...
David Grogan The Motley Crew Reborn Warped Aggression 38	Posted - 2011.09.14 13:49:00 - [14] - Quote Acac Sunflyier wrote: I hope CCP doesn't accidentally nerf regular carriers. While a super carrier can both deploy fighters and fighter bombers, I don't believe fighters should get a nerf. Carriers should be left alone. They're right where they need to be. carriers actually need a tiny buff...namely the size of the fuel bay...3000m3 is too small for making multiple jumps.... especially if the carrier is triage fitted cos strontium takes up loads of corp hangar space. increase the fuel bay to match that of dreads @ 8000m3 this would allow for enough fuel for 4 jumps and still have enough room for upto 8 triage cycles (for pos/i-hub reps)
Vicar2008 Royal Black Watch Highlanders Warped Aggression 22	Posted - 2011.09.14 13:56:00 - [15] - Quote David Grogan wrote: Acac Sunflyier wrote: I hope CCP doesn't accidentally nerf regular carriers. While a super carrier can both deploy fighters and fighter bombers, I don't believe fighters should get a nerf. Carriers should be left alone. They're right where they need to be. carriers actually need a tiny buff...namely the size of the fuel bay...3000m3 is too small for making multiple jumps.... especially if the carrier is triage fitted cos strontium takes up loads of corp hangar space. increase the fuel bay to match that of dreads @ 8000m3 this would allow for enough fuel for 4 jumps and still have enough room for upto 8 triage cycles (for pos/i-hub reps) Well, I wouldnt go that far David, you have too factor the Jump range of a Carrier against a Dread, I wouldnt match the fuel Bay, maybe say 5500m3.....? Oh and btw I am all for Ship Maint Bay increase :D
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 165	Posted - 2011.09.14 13:57:00 - [16] - Quote Jump Fuel Conservation 5 ftw. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal made on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Crunchmeister THORN Syndicate BricK sQuAD. 43	Posted - 2011.09.15 15:42:00 - [17] - Quote I'd be for an increase in fuel bay size for carriers. For a general purpose combat carrier, it's ok, but once you throw triage into that equation, not so much. The cargo hold on carriers is ridiculously small, and the corp hangar isn't very large either. I would love to see an increase in cargo bay size instead, which would make carriers a lot more useful in general for corp / alliance moves as well as serving the purpose of holding more fuel for combat / triage operations. But I'd be ok with just an increase in fuel bay size.
Shionoya Risa The Xenodus Initiative. 46	Posted - 2011.09.15 16:05:00 - [18] - Quote Malcanis wrote: Jump Fuel Conservation 5 ftw. That.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.