EVE Search - CCP: Capital ship fuel bays?

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

CCP: Capital ship fuel bays?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 10 post(s)
dastommy79 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.02 05:45:00 - [91] Originally by: Darth Sith and you have not been able to scoop capital loot to a carrier for eons... plus i don't remember the last time i moved a sub 100k/sec carrier to a capital wreck to loot it :) I am keeping an open mid mind on this one :) you arnt an experienced carrier pilot. sorryz Former SmashKill Coaliton Leader WTB Leviathan. Hit me up ingame
Kayosoni Caldari Destructive Influence	Posted - 2009.08.02 05:49:00 - [92] Edited by: Kayosoni on 02/08/2009 05:49:44 ah there is much dumbassery going on in this post... Nerfing the regular cargo bays in capital ships is LONG OVERDUE and the first step in bringing capital ship rebalance (cause capitals are all screwed up in every way right now.) Those of you complaining about not being able to anchor and unanchor pos mods now.. ever heard of JFs? That's what they are for. Also, giving black ops a fuel bay does not instantly make them good. They still suck ****. ---
Darth Sith Genbuku. Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.08.02 06:17:00 - [93] Edited by: Darth Sith on 02/08/2009 06:18:56 Originally by: dastommy79 Originally by: Darth Sith and you have not been able to scoop capital loot to a carrier for eons... plus i don't remember the last time i moved a sub 100k/sec carrier to a capital wreck to loot it :) I am keeping an open mid mind on this one :) you arnt an experienced carrier pilot. sorryz So I guess the fact that I was one of the first carrier pilots in game, have ~100 mil skill points, have 5 carrier pilots among my accounts and have been in carrier capital fights in every region of eve mean nothing but your moronic rants in this thread make you a carrier flying mastermind? Pull out a calculator and and work the numbers before you open your mouth noob :)
Trimutius III Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.02 07:35:00 - [94] Edited by: Trimutius III on 02/08/2009 07:37:08 Edited by: Trimutius III on 02/08/2009 07:35:55 Originally by: CCP Abathur Originally by: Trent Nichols I can't fit 2 Megathrons in my Thanatos. I want one of your carriers. Are you 100% sure about that? Everybody who's is looking attributes of ships knows that u can't put just any 2 BS u like in a carrier. Because some of them have volume more then 500k, like Mega have volume 513k, and Thanatos can fit only 1 mill but not 1,026 mill somehow... Plus i wanted to ask 1 question: Is this nerf of cargo in carriers an attempt to boost Rorqual, or this happened accidently? ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius
OwlManAtt Gallente Yasashii Heavy Industries	Posted - 2009.08.02 10:36:00 - [95] Somebody said something about the Orca/Rorq being changed? They now have an ``ore bay''? Can somebody post the sizes of the cargo/corp/ship maintenance/ore holds from SiSi? I hope the Orca's regular hold isn't getting gimped too badly. I was under the impression that, when the CSM asked about a mini-freighter, they got the Orca (which is arguably not what they wanted, as it's more towards the exhumer training path than the freighter...) instead. --- Owl
Magarine Caldari The Fallen Circle Die BierBrauer	Posted - 2009.08.02 10:59:00 - [96] hmm.. The Jumpfreighters need 3* fuel like the rorqual for the same distance. I think this should be considered in the ammount of the fuel-bays from JFs and the Rorqual..
Issea	Posted - 2009.08.02 11:46:00 - [97] Why not premake the ships as they dev's want them to be flown? Why give players any ideas to fit rigs or add modules at all? The "jump fuel nerf" is the latest of the "you have to fly the ships as we dev's want you to" nerf. What happened to the sandbox - where you actually had freedom of fittings? Are you trying to boost the jumpfreighter by this mega nerf, or what's the resoning behind it? As many allready HAVE said on this thread - why do the devs even have a thread here? If you are so set in stone to make the change, then do it - why even ask? Why ask for feedback, when you clearly have set your mind into this poor idea - why not make blueprint cargohold on shuttles, probe cargoholds on cov ops, boubble cargo holds on recons... the list goes on and on... Here's an idea - why not make ONE cargo hold on the ships? that may actually give the players the freedom of playing the game as THEY feel is right?
Jojin Gallente The 0ri	Posted - 2009.08.02 12:21:00 - [98] Originally by: OwlManAtt Somebody said something about the Orca/Rorq being changed? They now have an ``ore bay''? Can somebody post the sizes of the cargo/corp/ship maintenance/ore holds from SiSi? I hope the Orca's regular hold isn't getting gimped too badly. I was under the impression that, when the CSM asked about a mini-freighter, they got the Orca (which is arguably not what they wanted, as it's more towards the exhumer training path than the freighter...) instead. At the moment: Orca 30k Cargo 50k Ore 40k Corp 400k Ship Maint Rorq 40k Cargo 250k Ore 30k Corp 1000k Ship Maint 10k Fuel
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.08.02 13:27:00 - [99] Originally by: Trimutius III Everybody who's is looking attributes of ships knows that u can't put just any 2 BS u like in a carrier. Because some of them have volume more then 500k, like Mega have volume 513k, and Thanatos can fit only 1 mill but not 1,026 mill somehow... Mega: 486,000.0 m3 (50,000.0 m3 packaged) Heck, even Hyperions fit: 495,000.0 m3 (50,000.0 m3 packaged) BattleDB.com moderator
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.08.02 14:21:00 - [100] Okay, I've done the numbers on the new cargobays, so let's do some theorycrafting. Cargospace for a dread today goes from 7250 (Rev) to 10250 (Nag). With the extra cargospace added from 2xGSC, this goes up to 9050 (Rev) to 12050 (Nag). With the new bays, GSCs can no longer be used. However, total cargo space will increase. The revelation will go from 7250 (9050) to 9060, while the Naglfar will go from 10250 (12050) to 11810. The Moros goes from 8500 (10300) to 10875. Let's take a look at the moros. A single cycle of siege (lv4 skills) takes 900m3 cargospace. Ammo needed for a full siege cycle takes up 54m3 worth of space. This means that a Moros with 22k isotopes can fit 7 cycles worth of stront and ammo today. Drop to 15k isos, and you can do 8 cycles worth. Both of these examples assume a reserve of 2 cycles worth of ammo, such as long-range or faction types. Live scenarios may use a bigger reserve, but for the sake of argument, let's go with this. A Moros with the new bays will get 575m3 more total cargospace than the old cargobay with 2x GSC. The total cargospace usable for fuel and stront is 7000+2125 = 9125 m3. This is 625m3 more cargospace than before, but 1175m3 LESS cargospace if GSCs are accounted for. Assuming 15k isotopes, we have space for (9125-2250)/900 ~= 7.64. This means that we'll get one LESS cycle of stront total (The actual numbers allow for 18500 isos and still do 7 cycles). At 22k isotopes, we now have INT((9125-2250)/900) = 6 cycles worth (6.47). That's one less than the 7 cycles carried today. Why does this happen when we have more total space? The ammo needed by a Moros for a full cycle of siege is 54m3. For 7 cycles, this is 387m3. The total of 10875 m3 cargospace does include an ammobay of 1750 m3 size. While I'm not at all complaining about that ammobay, it is a bit big. For instance, 10 cycles worth of ammo takes up 540m3 cargospace. Add a bit of long-range and faction ammo for capital slugfests and you'll hit 1000 m3 worth of cargospace. For a 1750m3 ammo bay, that's 750m3 we don't actually NEED (although I for one am not complaining about getting it). With the 750m3 that we don't need, we now get 10875-750 = 10125 m3 of cargospace, which is slightly less than the 10300 m3 that we used to have. Add the fact that we're likely not going to need more than 750m3 worth of ammo, even for 10 cycles, and that's about 500m3 worth of cargohold that we're missing out on. I'm definitely not opposed to specialized bays (heck, a fully honortanked Revelation can carry over 83k worth of cargo, that's just ridiculously wrong), but if the powers that be could find in themselves to up the fuel bay to 7500 m3, that'd bring the total (usable) cargospace in-line with today's figures. Heck, reduce the ammo bays by a similar amount (200m3 for the rev), and you'll still have a small total boost compared to today. PS: This change means that the Rev will get slightly more usable cargospace for fuel/stront and the phoenix/naglfar will get less. HOWEVER, this means that all dreads will now have about similar number of strontcycles and fuel, which makes things a LOT easier for FCs and logistics people. I approve. Just... 7500m3 fuel bays, plz? BattleDB.com moderator
dastommy79 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.02 15:20:00 - [101] Originally by: Darth Sith Edited by: Darth Sith on 02/08/2009 06:18:56 Originally by: dastommy79 Originally by: Darth Sith and you have not been able to scoop capital loot to a carrier for eons... plus i don't remember the last time i moved a sub 100k/sec carrier to a capital wreck to loot it :) I am keeping an open mid mind on this one :) you arnt an experienced carrier pilot. sorryz So I guess the fact that I was one of the first carrier pilots in game, have ~100 mil skill points, have 5 carrier pilots among my accounts and have been in carrier capital fights in every region of eve mean nothing but your moronic rants in this thread make you a carrier flying mastermind? Pull out a calculator and and work the numbers before you open your mouth noob :) Hey just cause you have "skill points" and own the ship doesnt make you good at it. The tackle carrier is quite an effective weapon in a fleet fight. Useing a 100MWD you can almost double the ships speed and you can then lock down and tackle enemy carriers and dreads if all your dictors and support get chewed up. You can also refit with cargo expanders to scoop loot and there was a time when you could actualy help in logistics by moving pos mods, ammo, stront and such to help your gang. To those saying moving things is only a JF pilots job i say no it isnt. First a JF is a t2 ship that costs around 4billion isk. It cant deploy anything unless its in a station or at an already setup pos.(unless they changed that but i doubt that). It is not a common ship and not one that every player can own. The ship is also a burdon for the owners because now they have to do 100% of the logistics work. If this is ccp's goal then they need to make the build cost alot smaller say 1-1.5 billion. This will allow more people to participate and release the stress of the few pilots that can afford the ship. Rorquals should also see a build price decrease to around 700-800mill. So a carrier should have a: 10km3 Corp hangar 4km3 cargo hold (this can be drastically reduced if the ability to scoop and deploy from corp hangar can be introduced) 5-7km3 fuel bay (a pilot should be able to carry enough fuel IN THEIR FUEL BAY to make a run from the farthest 00 point to the closest lowsec system in a straight line. Its a fuel bay, make it do its job. It is not cost effective to use a carrier as a hauler and with the suggestions i made it still wont be BUT it will be better suited to do its job. This is a video game. We play this to have fun not do work. You should keep that in mind everytime you make a change to the game. Ask yourself will this make a pilots life easier or worse before you even think of implementing anything. Its your job that we all pay you to do. DO YOUR JOB AND FIX IT Former SmashKill Coaliton Leader WTB Leviathan. Hit me up ingame
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.08.02 16:50:00 - [102] Originally by: dastommy79 Hey just cause you have "skill points" and own the ship doesnt make you good at it. Darth Sith is a noob c/d? Originally by: dastommy79 The tackle carrier is quite an effective weapon in a fleet fight. Useing a 100MWD you can almost double the ships speed and you can then lock down and tackle enemy carriers and dreads if all your dictors and support get chewed up. Because nanocarriers are going to win the battle when your support is gone, amrite? :) Originally by: dastommy79 You can also refit with cargo expanders to scoop loot and there was a time when you could actualy help in logistics by moving pos mods, ammo, stront and such to help your gang. THAT, I will concede. However, I doubt that a carrier was ever intended to be a POS monkey. A hauler is much better suited to the role, as is a Rorqual. In fact, it's generally accepted that the Rorqual is a FAR superior ship in that regard. Originally by: dastommy79 If this is ccp's goal then they need to make the build cost alot smaller say 1-1.5 billion. This will allow more people to participate and release the stress of the few pilots that can afford the ship. Rorquals should also see a build price decrease to around 700-800mill. To quote Abby, how about no? :) Originally by: dastommy79 So a carrier should have a: 10km3 Corp hangar 4km3 cargo hold (this can be drastically reduced if the ability to scoop and deploy from corp hangar can be introduced) 5-7km3 fuel bay (a pilot should be able to carry enough fuel IN THEIR FUEL BAY to make a run from the farthest 00 point to the closest lowsec system in a straight line. Its a fuel bay, make it do its job. So, you're proposing that not only should a carrier get a fuelbay, but ALSO get a BIGGER cargobay to boot? Yeah, that's gonna pass. ;) As for the fuelbay... You're getting 3000m3 + 820m3 cargohold in the smallest carrier, right? The furthest 0.0 to lowsec route I could find quickly was 42ly (ZDYA-G to Porsharrah). According to the jump planner: "Total travel distance: 41.99ly. You will need 25,192 isotopes (3,779 m3) for this journey with your skills." 3780 m3 needed, and you have 3820. I don't see the problem. :) Heck, if you need to go further, you have 10k m3 worth of corporate hangar array to use as well. Originally by: dastommy79 It is not cost effective to use a carrier as a hauler and with the suggestions i made it still wont be BUT it will be better suited to do its job. What part of a carrier's job can you not do anymore? Besides acting as a hauler with a jumpdrive, that is. Originally by: dastommy79 This is a video game. We play this to have fun not do work. You should keep that in mind everytime you make a change to the game. Ask yourself will this make a pilots life easier or worse before you even think of implementing anything. Its your job that we all pay you to do. DO YOUR JOB AND FIX IT Devs make a lot of changes to the game that make it easier to play. Not every change must cater to dumbing the game down tho. Now, I'm applauding these changes as they'll still allow capitals to do their jobs (Carriers can still deploy fighters and remote rep, dreads can still siege etc). We may not be able to use our capitals as glorified jumphaulers anymore, but I can live with that. One change that I think will occur if this goes live is a bigger emphasis on rorquals for 0.0 holding alliances. I find this awesome for several reasons. 1, the rorqual is an underestimated ship. 2, this is an opportunity to enlist more carebears into 0.0 warfare. Get some corp rorqs and send them out to work. 3, carebears will love you for getting corp rorqs. Just look at the ore bay boost for instance. Do some research before you throw something out. Did you even bother to look up the fuelreqs for jumping from 0.0 to lowsec? Please do the numbers (like I did) before you suggest a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. BattleDB.com moderator
Soleil Fournier AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.08.02 17:09:00 - [103] Originally by: CCP Abathur Edited by: CCP Abathur on 31/07/2009 21:58:37 Originally by: dastommy79 also how are you suppose to loot a capital battle after the fight when you are the away team? All capital-sized modules are currently 4,000 m3, so unless you are adding cargo expanders to your carrier after the fight, then you are not going to be looting with your carriers now either. Motherships can loot these items now though, and can't post change. It's not out of the realm to carry cargo expanders in your corp hanger then refit after the fight. Especially if it was a capital fight and there's a lot of capital loot, you'd see this happen. The solution, if you absolutely must nerf cargo bays (which I don't see why you have to! an additional 5k of fuel isn't a lot of extra room and won't upset any kind of balance) is to allow carriers to drag items from wrecks into their corp hangers.
Mynas Atoch UK Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.08.02 17:41:00 - [104] Edited by: Mynas Atoch on 02/08/2009 17:45:16 Originally by: Soleil Fournier Motherships can loot these items now though, 5000 mc3 cargo, and can't post change, 1300 mc3. I don't see why it's more applicable for a rorqual, who's main job is crushing rocks, to pick up loot after a battle than a carrier who's main job is fighting. Realistically it's going to be salvage ships coming in to cleanup after the battle, but we don't have any of those...so the carrier is the next best option since it belongs on the battlefield. Why not just carry a salvage destroyer/interdictor in your ship hangar like many mom/carrier pilots have been doing since 2007? Or even just salvage/cargo fittings for one of the spare dictors that are already there? Why do you need to be slowboating around in a carrier to clear a debris field?
Soleil Fournier AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.08.02 17:44:00 - [105] Was talking about a Capital-class Salvage ship. A salvage-destroyer in the cargobay cant fit a 4k mc3 capital mod either :P
Mynas Atoch UK Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.08.02 17:48:00 - [106] Originally by: Soleil Fournier Was talking about a Capital-class Salvage ship. A salvage-destroyer in the cargobay cant fit a 4k mc3 capital mod either :P OK .. but you can use the cargo rigged blockade runner you keep in the Mothership/Carrier corp hangar for ninja deploying safe POS for that too. All of these have trivial solutions with a bit of planning. I don't see why a carrier has to be the answer to everything. And obviously CCP agree.
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.08.02 18:07:00 - [107] BAD MYNAS! Stop making sense when we're trying to nitpick about carrier changes! That much said, I don't use haulers or salvage dessies in my holds, but I also don't expect to hang around the battlefield much in my carrier either. BattleDB.com moderator
Mynas Atoch UK Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.08.02 18:09:00 - [108] Originally by: Pallidum Treponema BAD MYNAS! Stop making sense when we're trying to nitpick about carrier changes! That much said, I don't use haulers or salvage dessies in my holds, but I also don't expect to hang around the battlefield much in my carrier either. Someone has to. This CCP guys doesn't know one end of a capital from the other. Rumour is he is on secondment from their vampire game and got confused when they asked for volunteers who knew what Nosferatu meant.
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.08.02 18:43:00 - [109] Edited by: Myra2007 on 02/08/2009 18:45:00 1000m¦ fuel bay for a black ops well a bit of a letdown. How about 2000? Any kind of chance? edit: well thinking about it its not that bad actually -- Originally by: Professor Slocombe I will only buy tickets if the prize is your stuff and you leave Eve. Forever. You irritating self obsessed cretin.
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.08.02 18:52:00 - [110] Originally by: Myra2007 Edited by: Myra2007 on 02/08/2009 18:45:00 1000m¦ fuel bay for a black ops well a bit of a letdown. How about 2000? Any kind of chance? edit: well thinking about it its not that bad actually How much fuel does a Black Ops use for jumping/bridging? I've never flown one, but I imagine that if it's to be used in any reasonable way, it needs to have sufficient fuelbay to do the job. I'd love to see some figures. BattleDB.com moderator
dastommy79 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.02 18:53:00 - [111] lol look. Why FORCE people to fly logistical ships to a fleet fight. You guys can talk all you want about the roles of ships but i seriously doubt either of you would constantly x up for cta to fly a jump frieghter or rorqual to a fight. Its not fun, its work. Also lol you should play around with your carriers more. The ability of them to tackle when your support gets butchered is a big asset in a capital fight. Atlas is a cap heavy alliance and we have used carriers dozens of times for that purpose. Get out and play with em more. If you want to make carriers not the multi task capital ship, then boost their combat effectiveness and introduce a logistical capital that can tank and fight (not as good as a dread or carrier but close). The rorqual is a mining ship. Thats what it is desinged and used for. A simmilar ship that has the hauling capabilitys but also turret hardpoints for offensive capability is needed. The carrier is nothing but a logistic ship atm so if you are gonna keep nerfing both its battlefield effectiveness and its logistical effectiveness than you might as well just remove the ship from the game. I didnt train for years for an offensive ship that can only remote rep effectivly. And since we gotten off topic, the point i started is that a capital should have a large enough fuel bay to get from the farthest 00 system to its closest lowsec system. Dont touch the cargo holds and allow GSC to be in the stront bays. Former SmashKill Coaliton Leader WTB Leviathan. Hit me up ingame
Kayosoni Caldari Destructive Influence	Posted - 2009.08.02 19:02:00 - [112] 1000 m3 fuel bay for black ops is still ineffective. You can carry what like 5000 isos in that? You use 250 per LY to jump a recon so if you bridge a recon 4 LY that uses 1000 fuel. Completely worthless still. BO need 10k m3 bay. ---
Vrenth Gallente Lightning Industries	Posted - 2009.08.02 19:31:00 - [113] Okay, as someone who has actually tested these changes and has had both positive and negative feedback to give about them, let me lay down some points pertaining to the various ships and their specialized bays... perhaps you can use my opinions to shape some changes, as nobody else is doing anything but posting drunken rage and getting off topic. Blackops: Fuel Bay(1000m3): A little more is always nice, but with what it will be jumping, one blackops will be able to field and entire fleet squad of bombers/recons, which is plenty for one blackops. Cargo: It was nerfed into line with other ships of it's class. Nothing wrong there. Arguements: The blackops seems okay, but could use a little more fuel bay if you intended it to field more than 5-10 ships. Carrier: Fuel Bay(3000m3): The fuel bay on the carrier/mothership is an absolute joke if it is intended to hold fuel to do the equivalent sized job as a dreadnought. The triage modal has the same fuel consumption, and for a ship intended to jump a longer distance, it's fuel bay remained the same size. The fuel bay should not be based off the size of the original cargo that was nerfed. It should be based off of fuel consumption. Others would argue that the carrier's fuel bay is small because of the 10,000m3 corporate hanger. This is absolute crap. The Corporate hanger array is designed to hold moduals and ammunition for the ships it is holding and it's fleet members, hence the ability to allow ships to refit in space. If you fill this up with fuel, you not only acknowledge that the current ship carrying system is so broken that nobody uses it, but your building the rest of your game mechanics around it. Cargo bay(~700m3~850m3): This is also a joke, but if the fuel bay is made a bit larger, I can deal with it. We lose the ability to do anything pos related without taking a hauler with us, which is a nuisance, but we can live with it. This is a step forward and backwards in fleet warfare, as it forces us to use haulers for scooping POS structures and some loot. A scoop to corp hanger ability would fix this instantly. It is a step forward becuase it would force other classes of ships to join the frey, unfortunately with current blobs, it is impossible for most high-cargo class ships to be involved in a fleet battle without being decimated (rorqual, haulers, you name it). I don't mind so much having the ability to get 20km3 cargo removed as I do the things I could do with 3500 w/o extenders. Motherships need to keep their original cargo, hands down. Arguments: Carriers need a 7000m3 fuel bay, and motherships need more cargo. The feature to scoop structures/containers to corp hangers would be fantastic. Everything else, I personally, can live with. Dreadnaughts: Fuel Bays(7000m3): This fuel bay is adequate to hold isotopes and strontium, and other ships will no doubt have to be loaded with extra stront to keep the battle going for extended periods of time, but 7000 is fairly balanced with their consumption, ironically the "nerfing cargos into fuel bays" idea worked out here.. if only the case had beent he same for carriers. More fuel is always nice, but 7000 is a great start. Cargo(~2000): Nice. I'm not sure why they need this with their ammo bay, but nice. I'm not sure why carrier's don't have the same cargo, but nice. Ammo bay: I forgot to look at the exact number on my moros, but it was enough to hold a good ammount of ammo.. and carrier's can always bring more. Great addition. Put this on all ships now Arguments: Dreadnoughts are looking pretty good. I think Chribba will be sad that the days of the Veldnought has come to an end, but the overall changes here look decent. More fuel would be good, but that is an issue of playtesting. OVERALL THOUGHTS: I think that the overall changes are positive, but the method of implementing was not CCP's greatest work. The cargo bays did not need such drastic changes. After a few tweaks, I'll be happy
Vrenth Gallente Lightning Industries	Posted - 2009.08.02 19:33:00 - [114] Edited by: Vrenth on 02/08/2009 19:34:44 Originally by: Kayosoni 1000 m3 fuel bay for black ops is still ineffective. You can carry what like 5000 isos in that? You use 250 per LY to jump a recon so if you bridge a recon 4 LY that uses 1000 fuel. Completely worthless still. BO need 10k m3 bay. To your post, blackops are not a solo ship, any of the ships it is with can carry fuel, especially the blockade runners that were changed to compliment blackops and even be used as a dedicated fuel/ammo transport for the gang. 10,000m3 fuel bay is more than a dread/mothership... so to that comment, your a fool. Also, the consumption quantity listed is for the blackops jumping. Portal consumption is based on ship size, I believe a recon is like 80m3 or something silly like that.
Mynas Atoch UK Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.08.02 20:02:00 - [115] I don't see where this equivalence between SIEGE and TRIAGE is coming from. An upper limit of six cycles of stront is acceptable on dread ops, so sizing the bay for six cycles with reasonable skills is fine. Four carriers can rep a POS from out.of.reinforced.shield.level to restront.shield.level in one triage cycle. No one needs to be in triage for more than two cycles, as it is currently used. So two cycles of triage with reasonable skills is an acceptable limit. Also, triage currently takes place mainly at friendly POS, so providing extra stront from a fleet support Rorqal and hauler is pretty easy to do. Now if the triage mode had a shorter cycle, things might get more intersting.
Barrus Inane	Posted - 2009.08.02 20:03:00 - [116] Okay, some of the intelligence level was giving me a headache, so I will only put in two bits. First, I cannot see how NOT being able to fly around the whole of eve without support is a bad thing. My car cannot drive around the world, current military rl needs supply chains, eve should be no different. A massive alliance shouldn't be able to just up and cross the entire eve to get in on a feeding frenzy. That will help smaller alliance dynamics as a start. People shouldn't have to join goon just to get in on sov dynamics. Also on the less fun idea, ever think that some people would prefer being a fleet supporter? I doubt it would be as hard as one thinks to find people who would like to specialize in being a "fueler" ship. I know I would (I refering to my main since this char is an obvious alt). Flying with my buddies in salvagers and fuelers, etc. Good role for miner mains who want to get in on more than 24/7 mining manufacturing. As for lag, I would think this would reduce lag since it is in hard programming, the ability to apply data compression is a wonderful thing. I do agree their needs to be the offset, haven't looked up numbers, but if the loss of the space is equal to ore more than that of what a GSC would take, sounds like a bonus. Lastly, not being able to tractor wrecks... wtf? ever hear of a can flip? you can tractor them... omg.... and salvagers, shoot, ninjas do it all the time, part 20 t1 speed frigs with salvage modules somewhere. Sure, I see lots of people whining about loss of versatility, but any military vessel needs something special to resupply it. Carriers are big, just like naval carriers. But naval carriers still need a constant resupply, they hold crew, planes, and armaments, they do not transport full industrial crews for setting up advanced bases. Peeps just want an easy button. Try making it tactical, I bet once you get peeps who want to do courier support, you will find combat alot more fun as you will no longer need to worry about such things and making long voyages becomes more risky and imo more exciting at that risk of being cut off.
Antoine Lefevre Genos Occidere	Posted - 2009.08.02 20:19:00 - [117] Also while you're at it remove jump bridges.
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.08.02 20:30:00 - [118] Originally by: dastommy79 Also lol you should play around with your carriers more. The ability of them to tackle when your support gets butchered is a big asset in a capital fight. Atlas is a cap heavy alliance and we have used carriers dozens of times for that purpose. Get out and play with em more. As everyone who knows me knows, I've never flown a capital in my life, nor do I know anything about capital warfare. Please evemail me up in game as I'd love to learn about nanocarriers and their role in fleet warfare. Now that that's taken care of, I'd like to adress the carrier's fuelbay. 3000m3 might not sound like much, but do consider the fact that triage is a rarely used module, in the grander scheme of things. Sure, there are carriers that are built entirely around the concept of triage, but those carriers have managed just fine so far without getting an extra few hundred m3 worth of cargospace for free. Yes, that's right. Carriers will in fact get MORE room for fuel with these changes than before. As for carrying modules in my corp hangar for the ships I'm carrying? I've always thought it'd be a better idea to have them fitted to the ships I'm carrying in the first place. You know, so that people can grab those ships and go on to fight right away. :) I've never flown a carrier that DIDN'T use the corp hangar to hold extra fuel (both for myself and the inevitable dreadnought that forgets to fuel up), but that's okay because I've never flown a carrier in the first place. BattleDB.com moderator
dastommy79 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.02 20:40:00 - [119] Originally by: Pallidum Treponema Originally by: dastommy79 Also lol you should play around with your carriers more. The ability of them to tackle when your support gets butchered is a big asset in a capital fight. Atlas is a cap heavy alliance and we have used carriers dozens of times for that purpose. Get out and play with em more. As everyone who knows me knows, I've never flown a capital in my life, nor do I know anything about capital warfare. Please evemail me up in game as I'd love to learn about nanocarriers and their role in fleet warfare. Now that that's taken care of, I'd like to adress the carrier's fuelbay. 3000m3 might not sound like much, but do consider the fact that triage is a rarely used module, in the grander scheme of things. Sure, there are carriers that are built entirely around the concept of triage, but those carriers have managed just fine so far without getting an extra few hundred m3 worth of cargospace for free. Yes, that's right. Carriers will in fact get MORE room for fuel with these changes than before. As for carrying modules in my corp hangar for the ships I'm carrying? I've always thought it'd be a better idea to have them fitted to the ships I'm carrying in the first place. You know, so that people can grab those ships and go on to fight right away. :) I've never flown a carrier that DIDN'T use the corp hangar to hold extra fuel (both for myself and the inevitable dreadnought that forgets to fuel up), but that's okay because I've never flown a carrier in the first place. there are people that use ships differently than you and do it better. Just sayin yo Former SmashKill Coaliton Leader WTB Leviathan. Hit me up ingame
Haffrage Haff and Haff	Posted - 2009.08.02 20:53:00 - [120] Atlas member in "Wait, who the hell are they again?" non-shocker. Seriously, stop overcompensating. Everybody I've seen in this thread with the slightest bit of carrier experience - and that's adding up to a fair list now - is for this change. I've never flown carriers so personally I've no idea how awful/awesome this is. But I do know there's people here with opinions I respect saying it's a warranted change.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: 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.