Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.06 18:51:00 -
[181]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 06/08/2009 18:51:21
Originally by: SpankMeElmo Many of these protests would die down if you'd just increase the range of the JF. Please do that. For the children's sake, do it now.
LOL Range isn't big problem especially with Calibration 5 lvl... So i doubt that this will help to solve protests... Plus Freighter can't scoop and jetisson in space (if u don't count POS structures) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 12:10:00 -
[182]
The fuel bays when added to Black Ops battleships add flexibility to the set-up. Fuel bays if added to Capital ships would also add to the ship's flexibility û but not when the cargohold is reduced. Reducing the cargohold reduces flexibility drastically, and for no good reason to my mind.
The stated reason is to prevent warships from being used for other thingsà Now that's a precedent I'm concerned about setting. For one thing, who really cares if someone who hasn't yet gained the skills for (for example) Capital Lasers uses their Revelation to haul supplies for their alliance? Had this precedent been set a lot earlier we'd be without the concept of an Honour Tank and the game would be a little less for it. It is the flexibility of the fitting on a ship û and the effect that the right fitting or the wrong fitting can have on your chances û that is one of EVE's great strengths. The Ferox (prior to its buff) was most often fitted with heavy missiles, doing so ignored the hybrid range bonus of the ship but it was (for most of the pilots who flew it) more effective with missiles than with guns. The Dominix similarly, in a Nos/Neut fit, ignored its hybrid bonus but still represented a very effective fit. And PERVS' lowsec DDD could not have been achieved without a flexibility of fitting which ignored the way that the ships they used were "intended to be flown". If the precedent that "warships" must not be used for anything but warfare then are we going to start to see restrictions on what can be fitted in slots? Preventing cargo expanders from being fitted to a Revelation seems straightforward enough, but how about mining lasers on a Rokh? The tier 3 Battleships after all were designed to provide fleet vessels, warships. It was the stated reason that they all had 8 turrets despite the suggestions that a Damp boat to counter the Scorpion and a giant Arbitrator were what were missing from the line-ups. So do we see an end to Rokhs mining? What about the Salva'cane? Or the Salva'bond? These ships demonstrate the value of flexibility in fit and role. They demonstrate that there isn't really a right or wrong way to fit a ship, even a warship, when it comes to capsuleers. We are, after all, demigods; immortality and wallets as capacious as some GDPs give us a different perspective. The Minmatar Republic may be justifiably horrified at the number of their new mainstay battlecruisers which have had their structures weakened to a dangerous degree and which moulder in hangers throughout Empire space for use as glorified garbage trucks... But the Minmatar Republic have little control over how capsuleers act. Capsuleers see a value in the Hurricane which would be wasteful of materiel for the Republic Fleet, and because they aren't answering to tax payers, because they have their own supply network, because manpower rather than materiel is their limitation they use these vessels in ways which governments cannot. The big Alliances, like demigods among the capsuleers, might reasonably be expected to have different views as to the value of much larger vessels, out of the reach of the average pod pilot, to be willing to expend the fuel required by jump logistics to accomplish something which could be done in an Interceptor faster than it could be done in an Interceptor... If that thing is simply getting a pilot with roles to a tower before it runs out of fuel then the loss of cargo isn't going to effect it û but it's still against a perceived role for the ship.
The advent of the Jump Freighter meant that Jump Drive Logistics became more efficient û in the same way as the Rorqual had before it. But neither removed the need for Carrier logistics, nor did the advent of Carrier logistics eliminate the value of Dread logistics. <Continued below> --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 12:11:00 -
[183]
A Carrier can provide resupply on the front lines. A Carrier can provide logistics for a small force without the need for specialist skills (and therefore reduces the perceived threshold to access to 0.0 space). At present a Carrier is a sensible option as a forward command centre û it can jump into a system and, by erecting a tower, establish a beachhead through which supplies can be jumped. A Jump Freighter can't do that. A Rorqual could but (particularly if the erroneous distinction between warships and civilian ships is maintained) it has no business on the front lines.
The Carrier class vessels have been described as the Swiss Army Knives of EVE but are they all that versatile? They're logistics platforms, they have moderate combat ability, they're capable of operating as a command link and they're capable of transporting a reasonable amount of cargo (or a large amount of ammunition). The Caldari Osprey is also a logistics platform, it has moderate combat ability, it's capable of transporting a reasonable amount of cargo and it's a mining vessel as well. Granted in a fight between a Carrier and an Osprey there is likely only one winner, but in a fight between 1 billion ISKs worth of Carrier and 1 billion ISKs worth of Ospreys the table's turn. So is the Carrier really the Swiss Army Knife? Or is it simply that the Osprey is also too versatile?
--
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 13:36:00 -
[184]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 07/08/2009 13:38:23 Edited by: Trimutius III on 07/08/2009 13:38:00 Edited by: Trimutius III on 07/08/2009 13:37:44 Edited by: Trimutius III on 07/08/2009 13:36:37
Originally by: Jacob Holland The fuel bays when added to Black Ops battleships add flexibility to the set-up. Fuel bays if added to Capital ships would also add to the ship's flexibility û but not when the cargohold is reduced. Reducing the cargohold reduces flexibility drastically, and for no good reason to my mind.
Maybe people in CCP Team think that Carriers and Dreadnaughts are too flexible... If everybody say that this changes reduce there flexibility. Maybe the vision of carriers and dreadnaughts by CCP was a bit another then we have now on TQ... It just thought, i have nothing specific to say... I don't need all that cargo on my Thanatos anyway, at least i will live without it, no problem to me... (I use it for transporting matters, just can't imagine what could be so important that i need to transport fast and that want fit in ship maintanance or 10k m3 in corp hangar...) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Mynas Atoch
UK Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 17:30:00 -
[185]
Originally by: SpankMeElmo Many of these protests would die down if you'd just increase the range of the JF. Please do that. For the children's sake, do it now.
This, sir, is crazy talk. The Jump Freighter should have the WORST range of any capital ships to damp down the logistic ease of living in deep null sec (and I live in a station as far from empire as it gets).
|
Mynas Atoch
UK Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 17:32:00 -
[186]
Edited by: Mynas Atoch on 07/08/2009 17:33:05
Originally by: Jacob Holland The Caldari Osprey is also a logistics platform, it has moderate combat ability, it's capable of transporting a reasonable amount of cargo and it's a mining vessel as well. Granted in a fight between a Carrier and an Osprey there is likely only one winner, but in a fight between 1 billion ISKs worth of Carrier and 1 billion ISKs worth of Ospreys the table's turn. So is the Carrier really the Swiss Army Knife? Or is it simply that the Osprey is also too versatile?
The problem here is that I'd take 50 T1 cruisers up against a carrier any day of the week .. if I could find 50 pilots willing to fly them when they can fly much more powerful ships with easy. The Osprey had its day and was made redundant by half of those 50 guys now having their own carrier and the isk generation to fund them now being trivial.
|
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 10:16:00 -
[187]
My point is that the Osprey is as versatile as the Carrier, only scale differs. The versatility of the Osprey doesn't seem to be an issue... So why is the carrier's? --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 13:29:00 -
[188]
Originally by: Jacob Holland My point is that the Osprey is as versatile as the Carrier, only scale differs. The versatility of the Osprey doesn't seem to be an issue... So why is the carrier's?
Osprey is good only for 2 things: Shield Transfering and Mining
Carrier is much more versetile: - It has maximum possible jump range - It is cheapest ship with jump drive - It has pretty much m3 for transporting matters - It has nice bonuses to drones - It has pretty good tank - It has nice bonuses to assisting modules (Shield Transfers, Remote Armor Reps)
And u say it's not more versetile then Osprey? You are so wrong, carrier is very versetile if u compare it with other capital ships (Only Rorqual can be compared with carrier in versetality, but Rorqual is not enough useful in PVP and is almost 3 times more expensive) And osprey can do only mining and shield transfering for all other matters u could find cheap enough other ships... Some other cruisers are more versetile then osprey, plus Industrials are cheaper then osprey. ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Yon89
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 16:09:00 -
[189]
I for one would like to see the MS cargo bay remain the same size, mainly because they need to be better than a carrier .
also fix the Corp hanger lag plz. ============= SIG SIG SIG |
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 12:18:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Trimutius III Osprey is good only for 2 things: Shield Transfering and Mining
Can the Osprey no longer fit a tank? can it no longer fit guns? Can it no longer load Drones? It's not as good with missiles as the Caracal, it doesn't tank as hard as the Moa can but that doesn't mean it's useless for combat. The very fact that people dismiss the Osprey as a combat ship makes it very potent in certain situations.
Originally by: Trimutius III Carrier is much more versetile: - It has maximum possible jump range
The Osprey has a comparable jump range to all other T1 cruisers. Besides the point.
Originally by: Trimutius III - It is cheapest ship with jump drive
the 0sprey is the cheapest Caldari Cruiser.
Originally by: Trimutius III - It has pretty much m3 for transporting matters
The Osprey has a substantial cargohold, it's not an Industrial sized cargohold but neither is the Carrier's equal to that of the Rorq or Jump Freighter.
Originally by: Trimutius III - It has nice bonuses to drones
IIRC the Osprey has the largest Dronebay of all Caldari T1 Cruisers. Being the only ship in the range able to use four lights is a pretty nice bonus.
Originally by: Trimutius III - It has pretty good tank
So does the Osprey, for a tier 1 cruiser anyway. A Carrier's tank is less than that of a Dread, less than that of a Mothership... it's more than that of a jump freighter but the Osprey's tank is better than a Badger's. Scale is the big difference. Hotdrop an Osprey onto a group of frigates and it's a potent proposition. Hotdrop a carrier into a group of Sieged dreads and it's dead...
Originally by: Trimutius III - It has nice bonuses to assisting modules (Shield Transfers, Remote Armor Reps)
So does the Osprey... It's what makes it valuable for POS repair.
Originally by: Trimutius III And u say it's not more versetile then Osprey? You are so wrong, carrier is very versetile if u compare it with other capital ships (Only Rorqual can be compared with carrier in versetality, but Rorqual is not enough useful in PVP and is almost 3 times more expensive) And osprey can do only mining and shield transfering for all other matters u could find cheap enough other ships... Some other cruisers are more versetile then osprey, plus Industrials are cheaper then osprey.
Mining barges are better at mining than an Osprey - but they're more expensive and not so good in PvP. I can't think of another cruiser which is as versatile as the Osprey, the Osprey after all having the edge over the other tier 1s due to its application to POS shields. As to the cost of more specialised vessels you may be able to find cheap enough other ships, but not if you only have enough for a tier 1 cruiser. If you have 10 million and want a combat cruiser then you don't buy an Osprey... but if you have 10 billion and you want a jump drive ship to move cargo you don't buy a carrier. If, on the other hand, you want a jump drive ship which can act as a forward command and logistics node then you don't buy anything other than a carrier. --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
|
Caldreis
Caldari White Star II Ethereal Advancement Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 15:26:00 -
[191]
Originally by: CCP Abathur
Thanks to everyone who is taking the time to reply here, especially those who like to throw numbers around. What would be even more helpful though is getting some more feedback on how these changes are actually working on SiSi and if there are any problems we need to look into. Moving on...
We are asking for feedback on both the concept and the mechanics. Many people, including yourself, are offering your thoughts on if things are too big or too small; that's being read and considered. We would also like to know if anyone has run into any problems with the functionality of these features.
We're already looking at the possibility of putting 'Gas Storage Bays' into certian ship types.
Speaking of Orca while I absolutely freaking love the Ore bay. (Mineral in the ore bay would be awesomeness too at least at from wh space)
That said I would love to see the battleship courier problem in highsec to be solve somehow. For details. Go here: Long post about Orca
No one offered a real opposite reason to not do this simple method "so far". I would like ANY kind of feedback or even comment from devs.
"Yes sue me cause I am a carebear!"
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 16:08:00 -
[192]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 09/08/2009 16:09:19
Originally by: Jacob Holland
Can the Osprey no longer fit a tank? can it no longer fit guns? Can it no longer load Drones? It's not as good with missiles as the Caracal, it doesn't tank as hard as the Moa can but that doesn't mean it's useless for combat. The very fact that people dismiss the Osprey as a combat ship makes it very potent in certain situations.
I should say Carrier isn't that bad in PVP...
Quote:
The Osprey has a comparable jump range to all other T1 cruisers. Besides the point.
Comparable, that's is it, not better...
Quote:
the 0sprey is the cheapest Caldari Cruiser.
It's more expensive than Badger. (Carrier is much more cheaper then Jump Freighter)
Quote:
The Osprey has a substantial cargohold, it's not an Industrial sized cargohold but neither is the Carrier's equal to that of the Rorq or Jump Freighter.
Yes but badger is cheaper then Osprey. And ROrqual and Jump Freighter, i think u get the point.
Quote:
IIRC the Osprey has the largest Dronebay of all Caldari T1 Cruisers. Being the only ship in the range able to use four lights is a pretty nice bonus.
Lol what? That's just a drone bay, i can say that maybe Carrier can carry not so many Fighter as Mothership, but mothershipis way to expensive and hard to get, plus carrier can carry many sentry drones.
Quote:
So does the Osprey, for a tier 1 cruiser anyway. A Carrier's tank is less than that of a Dread, less than that of a Mothership... it's more than that of a jump freighter but the Osprey's tank is better than a Badger's. Scale is the big difference. Hotdrop an Osprey onto a group of frigates and it's a potent proposition. Hotdrop a carrier into a group of Sieged dreads and it's dead...
If frigates aren't newbie Osprey is deader then dead... Though carrier against dreads isn't good enough i assume, but Carrier agaisnt BSes looks better then Osprey against frigates i assume so...
Quote:
Originally by: Trimutius III - It has nice bonuses to assisting modules (Shield Transfers, Remote Armor Reps)
So does the Osprey... It's what makes it valuable for POS repair.
But for osprey that is only valuable bonus. (mining isn't valuable in PVP anyway)
Quote:
Mining barges are better at mining than an Osprey - but they're more expensive and not so good in PvP. I can't think of another cruiser which is as versatile as the Osprey, the Osprey after all having the edge over the other tier 1s due to its application to POS shields. As to the cost of more specialised vessels you may be able to find cheap enough other ships, but not if you only have enough for a tier 1 cruiser. If you have 10 million and want a combat cruiser then you don't buy an Osprey... but if you have 10 billion and you want a jump drive ship to move cargo you don't buy a carrier. If, on the other hand, you want a jump drive ship which can act as a forward command and logistics node then you don't buy anything other than a carrier.
Nice but i will not buy an Osprey even when i need to repair POS shield, i have a Basilisk, and if i have enough money why should i buy Osprey... And if u are talking about mothership and carrier it's not that easy, first of all mothership can't dock, and this is pretty bad penalty, and basilisk don't have penalties against osprey, that are related to PVP. So that is it i will not buy osprey for any reason, even if i have not enough money i'll prefer condor or griffin then osprey (if we are talking about caldari ships). And carrier have it's role that could not be done by any other ship, so carrier is more versetile... And what are u talking about... That nerf of cargo capacity isn't that bad... U still get ur 10k m3 and have some space for transporting Ice Products that is usefull for POSes (u can transport Isotopes, Heavy Water, Liquid Ozone and even Stronthium in fuel bay) So this isn't that big nerf for that much whining... CCP aren't lowering versetility of carrier that much... ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Bael Gar
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 18:36:00 -
[193]
About Rorqual Ore Hold
Why we cant start compressing ore job directly from Ore Hold? Why we cant start compressing ore job from corporation hangar?
|
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 19:29:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Trimutius III I should say Carrier isn't that bad in PVP...
Nor is the Osprey - if scale is taken into account.
Quote:
Quote: The Osprey has a comparable jump range to all other T1 cruisers. Besides the point.
Comparable, that's is it, not better...
The longer jump range of a Carrier makes it more versatile than other cap ships, it increases the number of places from which you can stage... But it does not make it more versatile than the Osprey, nor does it make the versatility of the Osprey any less of an argument.
Quote: It's more expensive than Badger. (Carrier is much more cheaper then Jump Freighter)
It also tanks better, does more damage...etc. It's also significantly cheaper than a Bustard or Crane. A standard freighter is not incomparable in price with a carrier - and the Orca is significantly cheaper. There may not be cheaper options to the Carrier if you need the Jump Drive but there are no cheaper options if you need heavy missiles than the Osprey. Something has to be cheapest - and the fact that it's a t2 ship means that it isn't going to be the Jump Freighter.
Quote: Yes but badger is cheaper then Osprey. And ROrqual and Jump Freighter, i think u get the point.
No, no i don't. You stated that the Carrier have a reasonable amount of Cargo, I said that so did the Osprey. Yes the Badger can hold more, But the Badger II can hold more than the Carrier. Again scaling is the factor you're ignoring, the existence of a badger does not invalidate the Osprey's cargohold - which is substantial.
Quote:
Quote: IIRC the Osprey has the largest Dronebay of all Caldari T1 Cruisers. Being the only ship in the range able to use four lights is a pretty nice bonus.
Lol what? That's just a drone bay, i can say that maybe Carrier can carry not so many Fighter as Mothership, but mothershipis way to expensive and hard to get, plus carrier can carry many sentry drones.
The Carrier's drone and drone range bonus doesn't add to its versatility significantly, it is implicit in its function. The carrier's drone bonuses simply allow scaling to a capital level. The Osprey's Dronebay is also implicit in its function - the fact that it's the largest available in the Caldari cruiser line-up though effects its versatility.
Quote: If frigates aren't newbie Osprey is deader then dead... Though carrier against dreads isn't good enough i assume, but Carrier agaisnt BSes looks better then Osprey against frigates i assume so...
4 warrior 2s, Assault missile launchers and a monumental buffer? All things being equal the Frigates will take a hammering simply because the osprey has more DPS and more buffer than they do individually. The Osprey may go down - but so might a Carrier hotdrop if the BSs are set-up and sensible.
Quote: But for osprey that is only valuable bonus. (mining isn't valuable in PVP anyway)
Are we ignoring anything that's not directly applicable to PvP? If so then it becomes a question of DPS vs Tank and there are more than enough ships out there which can do that. Every ship in the game has the same level of versatility. the Jump Drive becomes unimportant, the Corp hanger and ship maint become unimportant... Versatility is not restricted to the narrow PvP you're describing.
Quote: Nice but i will not buy an Osprey even when i need to repair POS shield, i have a Basilisk, and if i have enough money why should i buy Osprey... And if u are talking about mothership and carrier it's not that easy, first of all mothership can't dock, and this is pretty bad penalty, and basilisk don't have penalties against osprey, that are related to PVP.
The Basilisk is a T2 ship and therefore more specialised than its T1 counterpart. How good is your Basilisk at Mining? How much DPS can it put out? If a T2 Carrier is ever created then I expect it to be less versatile than the current - That is the nature of T2... I would also expect it to be better at it speciality. --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 19:57:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Trimutius III So that is it i will not buy osprey for any reason, even if i have not enough money i'll prefer condor or griffin then osprey (if we are talking about caldari ships).
Fair enough, that's your choice. Next time i see a Condor or a Griffin orbitting an Asteroid, mining away, i'll think of you. But people do buy Ospreys. Many of them are bought for specific reasons (like POS repair or mining) but a substantial portion are bought simply for their versatility; they save their pilot from having to buy a mining barge, train for it, buy a caracal, buy a hauler...etc.
Quote: And carrier have it's role that could not be done by any other ship, so carrier is more versetile... And what are u talking about... That nerf of cargo capacity isn't that bad... U still get ur 10k m3 and have some space for transporting Ice Products that is usefull for POSes (u can transport Isotopes, Heavy Water, Liquid Ozone and even Stronthium in fuel bay) So this isn't that big nerf for that much whining... CCP aren't lowering versetility of carrier that much...
Uniqueness doesn't equate to versatility. Stick 2 Capital modules in the Corp hanger (a triage module and a shield transfer for example), add a POS tower to provide your beachhead (assuming that Corp hangers become viable for pos launch)... Now consider how much space you have to carry POS structures. Regardless of the "compensation" of the fuel bay the reduction in Cargobay is a reduction in versatility. --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 22:01:00 -
[196]
Ok i'll answer only main spots, on other question we can argue for eternity.
Originally by: Jacob Holland
Next time i see a Condor or a Griffin orbitting an Asteroid, mining away, i'll think of you.
1) Bantam is better for mining 2) i was talking about PVP 3) i'll prefer hunting in 0.5 then mining in Osprey... (mining in a Hulk is another question, it's so relaxing)
Quote:
Uniqueness doesn't equate to versatility.
I agree... They just take away some versatility, but as soon as unique features of carrier are safe it's not that bad. CCP want encourage people to use other ships for some matters.
Quote:
Regardless of the "compensation" of the fuel bay the reduction in Cargobay is a reduction in versatility.
Of course it is, but it isn't really big reduction i should say. CCP say that Carrier wasn't made for Hauling big amounts of items, it was made for transporting some ships and fitting for them (and 1 mill m3 in ship bay + 10k m3 in corp hangar is more then enough for that role), so they want to nerf that possibility of hauling, if i understand it correctly... ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
steave435
Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 22:12:00 -
[197]
Quote: Regardless of the "compensation" of the fuel bay the reduction in Cargobay is a reduction in versatility
The only reason carriers have that large cargo in the first place is to enable it to carry fuel.
The SMA can carry roughly the equivalent of 100k m3 of packeged ships, plus alot more counting the ammo that can be fitted in the cargo, and finally adding the corp hangar. The carrier will be fine even after this change.
Your entire osprey arguement is not even worth the effort of responding to.
|
Varrakk
Phantom Squad Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 11:52:00 -
[198]
The carrier cargo hold is too small. Its now unable to deploy small/medium towers and pos modules.
Allow us to deploy directly from Corp Hangar or size up the Cargo hold some
|
kyrv
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 17:39:00 -
[199]
Marauders should be complimented with an ammo bay as they afre t2 and a smaller form of hauler after all having to pvp things with it
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 18:52:00 -
[200]
Originally by: Varrakk The carrier cargo hold is too small. Its now unable to deploy small/medium towers and pos modules.
Allow us to deploy directly from Corp Hangar or size up the Cargo hold some
If u read through this topic then u'll find out that CCP Abathur already said that possibly they will allow to deploy POS modules directly from Corp Hangar.
Originally by: kyrv Marauders should be complimented with an ammo bay as they afre t2 and a smaller form of hauler after all having to pvp things with it
Actually ammo bays were removed from all ships (and cargo of Dreadnaughts is slightly increased) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
|
Vrenth
Gallente Lightning Industries
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 21:29:00 -
[201]
Originally by: steave435
Quote: Regardless of the "compensation" of the fuel bay the reduction in Cargobay is a reduction in versatility
The only reason carriers have that large cargo in the first place is to enable it to carry fuel.
The SMA can carry roughly the equivalent of 100k m3 of packeged ships, plus alot more counting the ammo that can be fitted in the cargo, and finally adding the corp hangar. The carrier will be fine even after this change.
Your entire osprey arguement is not even worth the effort of responding to.
Wow, everything in that entire post says that you don't have a clue what your talking about.
1. Carriers have a large cargo for fuel? Why do we use much more than 3000m3 of fuel whenever we use fuel? Obviously, CCP intended our useless corp hangers as fuel bays to prevent us hauling with a 10,000m3 expandable cargobay.
2. SMA can fit 100k packaged wha-huh? The SMA can't fit anything packaged. It can fit 1,000,000m3 of assembled ships. That is 2 battleships.
3. The osprey arguement IS worth responding too, because the idiots are completely derailing the thread. 1 billion isk of ANY t1 fit t1 ship can kill any capital ship in existance (doomsday excluded), but you also can't pilot 100 ships with 1 person... it only takes one person to pilot a carrier, so shut the hell up about the Osprey.
|
|
CCP Abathur
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 23:34:00 -
[202]
Hello, all. Yes, ammo bays have been removed for now due to some technical glitches.
There will be a Dev blog covering 'bays' coming out hopefully by the weekend and we will continue the discussion on this new feature in the comments thread there.
|
|
steave435
Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 12:04:00 -
[203]
Quote: 1. Carriers have a large cargo for fuel? Why do we use much more than 3000m3 of fuel whenever we use fuel? Obviously, CCP intended our useless corp hangers as fuel bays to prevent us hauling with a 10,000m3 expandable cargobay. 2. SMA can fit 100k packaged wha-huh? The SMA can't fit anything packaged. It can fit 1,000,000m3 of assembled ships. That is 2 battleships.
1. Yes, that is what it is intended for. http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=672
Quote: We are introducing a system that allows us to author specialized cargo holds on ships. We will start by adding fuel bays on black ops and possibly other ships. This means weære adding more space for your fuel, without the ships becoming horribly unbalanced haulers of death. The technology behind this opens up doors to making other types of bays, just for ammo, just for livestock or whatever. Those options will be explored in future expansions.
2. No, sma can not fit 100k of packaged ships. It can fit the equivalent of 100k packaged ships. Assembeled ships generally take roughly 10x as much space assembled as they do packaged, so if you have 100k m3 of packaged ships, you can assemble them all and most likely fit them all into the sma.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 12:26:00 -
[204]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 11/08/2009 12:31:03
Originally by: Vrenth
1. Carriers have a large cargo for fuel? Why do we use much more than 3000m3 of fuel whenever we use fuel? Obviously, CCP intended our useless corp hangers as fuel bays to prevent us hauling with a 10,000m3 expandable cargobay.
more then 3000 m3? For one way trip on my carrier (2 jumps from 0.0 to lowsec (that is next to highsec)) i use only 14000 isotopes (Compensation lvl 3) and that is 2100 m3, and on both ends of way i can take additional fuel (in 0.0 from corp hangar where fuel was delivered by Jump Freighter, in lowsec, well it's not that hard even during war i can easily take my Viator and travel to some trading hub, or taking my neutral alt (that have skills for indutrials)) So no problem i should say 3000 m3 is enough for 2-3 jumps...
Quote:
2. SMA can fit 100k packaged wha-huh? The SMA can't fit anything packaged. It can fit 1,000,000m3 of assembled ships. That is 2 battleships.
Do u know meaning of word equivalent? 2 BS if u repackage them will be 100k m3, but 2 assembled BS are only equivalent of 2 repackaged BS.
Quote:
3. The osprey arguement IS worth responding too, because the idiots are completely derailing the thread. 1 billion isk of ANY t1 fit t1 ship can kill any capital ship in existance (doomsday excluded), but you also can't pilot 100 ships with 1 person... it only takes one person to pilot a carrier, so shut the hell up about the Osprey.
I didn't get ur point... 1 billion isk t1 ship? Maybe u wanted to say that if u buy as many t1 ships that cost 1 bill in total... Yes carrier is expensive, and against several BSes it is nothing, against dozens of cruisers it's nothing, against horde of frigates it's nothing, but nobody said that carrier should be deathdealer, and nobody said that carrier should be hauler too (even if it used so atm), Carrier is cool support ship, it can bring some ships, it allows to refit in the middle of space and assist in battle a little bit, that is its main role, and this nerf doesn't affect this role, u don't need all that cargo for supporting (especially if consider that, when u supporting u need to fit tank instead of cargoholds) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Mana Sanqua
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 12:27:00 -
[205]
Originally by: CCP Abathur Hello, all. Yes, ammo bays have been removed for now due to some technical glitches.
There will be a Dev blog covering 'bays' coming out hopefully by the weekend and we will continue the discussion on this new feature in the comments thread there.
Will this be the same sort of discussion as the War is a full time job thread?
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1118589
Lots of concerns about the penalty for rank, the reward balancing (kill a titan solo, get a frigate...) and other concerns have been left undiscussed and still implemented on test server in spite of the feedback.
Sorry to derail thread, but it is bad to see that this dev blog is just being ignored due to what appears to be negative feedback.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 14:19:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Mynas Atoch
Yes, because Triage has NO combat uses at all... it was only made for repping POS.
Because you havn't seen a more creative use for it, doesn't mean others don't.
Apart from suicidal attempts to save supercaps, yeah .. no one uses them in combat at all. Now if they had a shorter cycle time than ten minutes, things might change.
Keep on thinking that.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 14:22:00 -
[207]
Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 11/08/2009 14:22:29
Originally by: steave435
The only reason carriers have that large cargo in the first place is to enable it to carry fuel.
Exactly. The carrier was never meant to be a hauler. It's a combat-capable logistics platform, the fact that it could also be used as a hauler was a side effect (which has now been fixed, in a pretty nice way).
And yes, I do fly a carrier, and like the upcoming changes.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 14:34:00 -
[208]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 11/08/2009 14:39:07 Triage mode is useful unless carriers are cap neutralized to null... (4 times better tank at double capacitor cost not that bad, even i u can't attack and move for 10 minutes) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Ecky X
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 20:59:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Trimutius III Edited by: Trimutius III on 11/08/2009 16:30:01 Edited by: Trimutius III on 11/08/2009 14:39:07 Triage mode is useful unless carriers are cap neutralized to null... (4 times better tank at double capacitor cost not that bad, even if u can't attack and move for 10 minutes)
4 times better LOCAL tank, with the ability to be remote repaired or have cap transfered to you removed.
Situationally useful.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.11 21:12:00 -
[210]
Originally by: Ecky X
4 times better LOCAL tank, with the ability to be remote repaired or have cap transfered to you removed.
Situationally useful.
Better then overheating your armor rep in critical situation if u have fuel for triage (when there is nobody who can remote rep u atm but friends are to come soon) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |