| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hull Blaster
Gallente
Dark Nexxus
   |
Posted - 2009.05.10 17:30:00 -
[1]
In real life, carriers are a platform for force projection. The ability to send off aircraft with powerful weaponry that can attack other ships with devastating results if unopposed.
My question is this, why are carriers simply enlarged logistic vessels in EVE? It was proven in WWII that a carrier's complement of bombers could easily wipe out the most powerful Battleships as long as the Carrier itself remained out of reach. In EVE, from what I've read, Carriers are pretty useless when it comes to an actual platform for attacking other large warships and capital ships. Why is this so? How did the most powerful surface navel platform of modern times become such a bystander. Instead of being the flag ship of any task force, its now pushed aside by what would be considered obsolete Dreadnoughts (if you think of WW1 dreads, which like their smaller BS brothers were very vulnerable to air attack).
I'm not a carrier pilot, so I don't know from first hand what its like, I may be wrong in my assumptions... if any of you could answer this would be good :).
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 19:11:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Hull Blaster on 12/05/2009 19:14:52
Edited by: Hull Blaster on 12/05/2009 19:13:04
Obviously you have the bonus of warp/FTL in EVE. I wasn't simply comparing a WWII carrier like say the Yorktown/Ark Royal but commenting on the carrier as a class of ship. When I saw carriers in EVE I thought AWESOME... but looking at them they're really far from carriers in the true sense of the word. I know they carry fighters, but that's not really a great deal different from say drones... in the sense of a carrier fielding ships you could say that a Dominix is a carrier, because it can field so many drones.
Would be interesting if you could operate different types of small ship from a Carrier, like for anti-drone/small ship (frigates/destroyers) you could have the fighters... but for much larger ships field a squadron of bombers, like a real carrier would. You don't see a Nimitz class carrier go to see with just F-18's, its equipped with E-2C's and Vikings amongst others. Think it would make carrier deployment a bit more interesting if you had to think about what "squadrons" to field in an attack. The fighters would have a high tacking speed, but relatively average dps... and you could have the bombers much slower, but fire damaging cruise missiles/torpedoes with low tracking speeds... but highly dangerous for larger warships. Having this option would make things a bit more interesting for the pilot, whilst giving the carrier much greater flexibility and usefulness to a fleet.
From what I've read, carriers at the moment are simply grand logistic ships... granted its a very handy thing to have in a blob skirmish, but it would be nice to have the carrier also be able to function effectively as an all out offensive platform, as they are in RL. Just my opinion... 
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 20:26:00 -
[3]
Do you think the devs will ever give carriers more options when it comes to "fighters"... like bombers or EWAR to spice things up a bit?
About the cost for fighters... if you buy a ship that costs about 2bil to get you would think 16mil would be pennies for that person no? I wouldn't complain... its a cap ship they're not supposed to be cheap :(.
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 06:18:00 -
[4]
That is kind of my point. Like you said, carriers require a fleet to aid in the defense and support of the carrier... not the carrier being there to support the rest of the fleet (remote rep etc). If I ever flew a carrier, I'd definitely not take it out on my own... as its just suicide. I was just thinking that perhaps the carrier needed a bit more in offensive capabilities when it comes to tackling other capital ships within a fleet?
|
| |
|