Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Aralis
Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 15:15:00 -
[511]
The changes to the Moros are one of the few changes I approve of. It does it no harm at all to a dread doing what it's meant do. Currently it's the only dreadnaught that is dangerous out of siege mode and this is wrong. It's a griefers low sec tool.
|
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 17:31:00 -
[512]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist Supercapitals didn't come out right for three reasons:
- kept relying on isk/skillpoints as a deterrent to ownership, which obviously does not work in the long run
... <rest of quote redacted>
I am so glad someone said this, in particular (the rest of the post was good too). It seems to get forgotten so often. Ships need to have a focused unending purpose & drawback that is unique to them to remain viable in the long term, because eventually a much larger population will be able to afford and fly them or their betters (though the sov changes might semi-reduce the ability on the side of being able to build them, I guess, if the resources available to a given alliance change a great deal).
Oh and I absolutely loved the idea (as a concept anyway) that a Titan's presence would somehow interdict both sides' ability to escape, akin to a giant gravity well or somesuch. That alone is suitably original and unique, something that other vessels can't do. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
|
Laur Khal
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 20:17:00 -
[513]
Originally by: ElvenLord
Originally by: Zastrow J I said this at the CSM summit and I'm repeating it here: while I understand the desire to keep a Moros from raping any subcap to get closer than 60km with drones, making it rely on sentries in siege to even come near the dps of the other dreads makes it by far the least desirable dread. Its only saving grace was it's ability to fight off subcaps out of siege but with that gone it's just going to be one more class of ship where Gallente is the worst.
I agree 100% with the goon. Removing something that made moros what it was just makes it worthless.
"Of all the dreadnoughts currently in existence, the versatile Moros possesses perhaps the greatest capacity to fend off smaller hostiles by itself while concentrating on its primary capital target. By virtue of its protean array of point defense capabilities - including a drone bay capable of fielding vast amounts of drones to safeguard the behemoth - the Moros is single-handedly capable of turning the tide in a fleet battle." - this is/was the moros description
QFE. So much for the versatility now... can I have my skillpoints back for the false advertising?
Wouldn't it just make more sense to drop the drone bonus from 5x to 2x and then balance the turrets?
|
Roland Thorne
Dark Sun Collective Kahora Catori
|
Posted - 2009.10.02 03:09:00 -
[514]
Originally by: Laur Khal Wouldn't it just make more sense to drop the drone bonus from 5x to 2x and then balance the turrets?
If ccp simply drops the drone hp bonus it will solve the lowsec camping issue.
|
Solvia
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 22:51:00 -
[515]
Big thoughts... mother ship.
So, CCP is going to free up the term mother ship and that does open for something else to fill that hole in our hearts. The term itself just sound massive awe inspiring and breathtaking, so according to my line of thoughts the new mother ship will match this.
First of: then looking at other universes, game/movie/other, mother ships tends to be A) massive B) a ship carrier, in difference to drone carrier. C) none-combat ship
So what Im going for here, is a ship that like a capital ship maintenance array have the capacity to carry other ships, with say 100.000.000m3, it would house a cloning bay. A flying pos with a few changes...
it would have no shield unless deployed, the ship maintenance bay could only be accessed then deployed, and apart from a jumpdrive no engine. It simply to massive to move and must use a cyno, its engines would be used only to keep it "anchored".
Once deployed anchor able starbase structures could be put outside the ship, this would open for the possibility to put i.e. an refinery in a faraway system that has thus not been mined for years, or just put a lot of guns spelling a very bad day at your enemy's favourite stargate.
yes... stargate, since its a ship it would not need a moon to hover around... just enough free space in all directions. That includes with in firing range of enemy stargates, right next to an asteroid belt, or just where the wormhole usually opens.
Unlike normal ships that "vanishes" then the player logs off, the mother ship would stay where the pilot left it, being accessible (and controllable) for his corporation. This would presume its all ready deployed and thus its shields are up. In other case, a deployment cycle, 15-30minutes depending on the ships final amount of OMFG, would begin.
A deployed mother ship that does not belong to you, your corp, or your alliance would be very bad news. But that also means it would result in very interesting and huge operations, of immense strategic value, involving several pilots to move and deploy it... or prevent it from being deployed.
This proposal is ship that will be massive, and that will make a just a massive impact on the strategic map where ever its positioned, and will take just as massive amount of resources time and ISK to build.
|
Manterror
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 01:50:00 -
[516]
Originally by: Solvia A big ship
Yes, good concept. Except I would like to see some control as to how many can be built. (ie. 1 per alliance/corp, and a ****LOAD of resources to construct).
|
Solvia
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 08:40:00 -
[517]
I'm glad you liked the concept, and yes, such limitations could be necessary unless the shear bill of materials is so high you only build one, possibly two if your in a big alliance.
The cost to build it, as well as its final amount of hp (OMFG factor), will be crucial balancing points for this shipconcept.
|
Gunther Nhilathok
Caldari Warsmiths
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 21:39:00 -
[518]
I've been playing EVE for four years. People assume I fly capital ships and seem surprised when I tell them I never skilled for them. I then refer them to the forums. Professional Material Re-Allocation Technician |
Electra Sabbota
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 07:00:00 -
[519]
Why nerf the moros?Or why ask why ccp needs to nerf skills or ships to make new releases look better?Why not make the new content great instead?
|
Anathstasia
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 19:14:00 -
[520]
"One more thing - the Hel is getting rid of its current repair bonuses and trading them in for bonuses that enhance the endurance of its Fighters and Fighter Bombers. I guess the Flight Deck Chiefs on Hels like duct taping spare bits of armor onto their strike craft or something..."
Noooooooo! Minmitar Piolets like to duct tape their various allies while combat rages on, you guys are seriuosly killing my dream of a Hel with this change. At least the Nid isn't changing... At least give the hel's fighters a Damage, RoF or SPEED bounus! thats what the minmatar do. Now they are looking like Caldari, and that just seems wrong, nothing in the minmatar line up gets resistance bounuses!!! It doesn't matter hpw much Duct tape you use, your ship doesn't get any more reflective....
Does anyone agree with me or am I all alone on this one? I won't complain if this is what the people want... -sigh-
|
|
Anathstasia
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 19:19:00 -
[521]
And I Forgot to say LOVVVVVVVVE the new Minmatar Titan
|
Anathstasia
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 20:16:00 -
[522]
Originally by: Tarnia Xavian You don't need new weapons to sell more motherships. Let them dock and I'll buy one tomorrow.
Yes Yes Yes and Yes! And for Titans too Please!!
|
Bemoteajh
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 09:46:00 -
[523]
The titan even with the 1 hit weapon will still be out matched as it will obviously have massive fuel cost and slow rate of fire unless they give it 5mil+ structure/armor/shield before fittings right now the Ragnarok only has around 1.5mil base
MAKE THEM THE BEASTS THEY ARE DESIGNED TO BE!!!
|
Ammon Dei
|
Posted - 2009.10.15 17:12:00 -
[524]
Remove the Nerf to the Moros. There are far more pressing issues in game than removing the only thing that makes it worth flying. It sets it apart and has it's roll in fleet battles. The longer I play EVE, the more it becomes evident that I chose the wrong race.
GO AMARR!!
|
Heloise ChateauBriande
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 06:47:00 -
[525]
Originally by: HunterHH .. i think the name strike carrier will fit more then super carrier. or assault carrier.
Here are some of my alternative naming suggestions for "Supercarrier or Mothership"
POS Carrier No Role Carrier Expensive Target Failcarrier Waste of ISK
any other suggestions?
|
Mack Bane
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 16:15:00 -
[526]
Edited by: Mack Bane on 22/10/2009 16:24:58 Per Definition, a "mothership" should be "The mother of/and to all ships" My take on it would be:
Gigantic =50-100km in diameter,Stationary, apart from JD Expensive = 100 billion or so(for the blueprint)+ Material(maybe a trillion in total) Modular Build,(like Tech 3)only one allowed per Corps. Mobile SOV-maintainer/Aquirer/Pos Transporter/ship repairer/Flying POS/Corps Mainstation Docking place for at least 2 Titans, ten Capitals,and Hangars for at least 250 BS or smaller ships
Firepower (Depending on Modules) 500KM range,Pos-instapopping focus-fire,or 100km Smarties,With Cruiser instapop power.
CloneVatBay for about 300 Jumpclones
Shield like a POS (maybe just 10km)If enemy ships collide with it,they pop(insert Admiral Ackbar quote here)Exceptions could be Stealth or Covert-Ops ships,When cloaked Drone bay for 50 Fighters/Fighter-Bombers, and for 150 smaller drones enough bandwith for 20 Fighter/FB's Needs 4 Cynofields to move,needs more jumpfuel than 4 Titans, gets all "Incarna" Pizzaz.(is basically an Aggro or defensive Station,according to its build)
I also would like to see "Dust 514" players to duck in fear, when this thing covers the sun, and turns the planet into a 24/7 dark place (or equipped with Planetar bombing equipment, into a nice little Asteroid Field)
I know, it sounds a little Uber, but i am pretty sure, some Alliances would try to take one down, with let's say 10 Titans or so. And i would also like to see that fight,
|
Fitz VonHeise
Eye Bee Em
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 20:59:00 -
[527]
Motherships would have been much more Relevant with two changes:
Make their clone vat bays act just like a station.
In that if a clone is put into a MS then people can clone jump from any station to the MS and if they are not podded can jump back to the same station if within 2,500k of the MS.
The other change would be to double the size of the MS's ship hanger so they can carry more ships to battle.
This would allow MS's to be close to the battle and people can clone from the HQ area that is often far away from the battle.
|
Estios
Destructive Influence
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 10:46:00 -
[528]
Originally by: Mack Bane Edited by: Mack Bane on 22/10/2009 16:24:58 Per Definition, a "mothership" should be "The mother of/and to all ships" My take on it would be:
Gigantic =50-100km in diameter,Stationary, apart from JD Expensive = 100 billion or so(for the blueprint)+ Material(maybe a trillion in total) Modular Build,(like Tech 3)only one allowed per Corps. Mobile SOV-maintainer/Aquirer/Pos Transporter/ship repairer/Flying POS/Corps Mainstation Docking place for at least 2 Titans, ten Capitals,and Hangars for at least 250 BS or smaller ships
Firepower (Depending on Modules) 500KM range,Pos-instapopping focus-fire,or 100km Smarties,With Cruiser instapop power.
CloneVatBay for about 300 Jumpclones
Shield like a POS (maybe just 10km)If enemy ships collide with it,they pop(insert Admiral Ackbar quote here)Exceptions could be Stealth or Covert-Ops ships,When cloaked Drone bay for 50 Fighters/Fighter-Bombers, and for 150 smaller drones enough bandwith for 20 Fighter/FB's Needs 4 Cynofields to move,needs more jumpfuel than 4 Titans, gets all "Incarna" Pizzaz.(is basically an Aggro or defensive Station,according to its build)
I also would like to see "Dust 514" players to duck in fear, when this thing covers the sun, and turns the planet into a 24/7 dark place (or equipped with Planetar bombing equipment, into a nice little Asteroid Field)
I know, it sounds a little Uber, but i am pretty sure, some Alliances would try to take one down, with let's say 10 Titans or so. And i would also like to see that fight,
Before you typed all that you did realise that Titans are supposed to be the largest ships in New Eden right? You do something Art related for a job right?
So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
|
Mack Bane
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 04:09:00 -
[529]
Edited by: Mack Bane on 25/10/2009 04:14:34 LOL, why Art?I just say, what a "Mothership" should be.(in my view) Something Massive.My "Ship" would actually be more of a jump-capable station, than a real ship.Something like a flying city,ready to house a full corp, if necessary.A main base.And as far as ship goes, Yes, Titans may be the biggest ships right now. But the future is, what it's all about.
|
Lusulpher
Blackwater Syndicate Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 02:24:00 -
[530]
Edited by: Lusulpher on 07/11/2009 02:29:52 Edited by: Lusulpher on 07/11/2009 02:28:01
Originally by: Roland Thorne
Originally by: Laur Khal Wouldn't it just make more sense to drop the drone bonus from 5x to 2x and then balance the turrets?
If ccp simply drops the drone hp bonus it will solve the lowsec camping issue.
The lowsec camping issue is one of Stationhugging...drone hp is needed in all capital fights for anti-lag response, but seeing as how the Moros can't even use sentries at sniper range...CCP goofed. Hopefully, they fixed the orbit on those new Fighter Bombers and increased their sig so small ships actually hurt them.
Griefer tools are legal AS LONG AS THERE IS REPRISAL, aka suicidegank = CONCORDOKKENED + Loot rush! Unsieged dread needs to be outside long enough to go into armour with another dread/BS fleet that shows as backup.
People aggress in buffer ships and then dish as much damage as possible.(buffer setups still better than the much harder to train active ones)
The first solution would be to assign scalable aggro timers for ship classes...
Second, reduce damage problem ships could do now that they have a chance of being killed themselves outside of their natural combat scenario...fix 1 would eliminate much of the practitioners of stationhugging. That would help with wardecs, cowardly stationfights and all other problems. CCP took the lazy solution. They will redeem themselves when they actually make larger ships fit superbuffer(no damage mods) setups and actually fear reprisal.
Saves them needing to scale sentry damage to shipsize, fix 3.
And I repeat, Dreads should have NO DRONEBAYS(or only 1 flight of lights/meds). Get any decent amount of dreads together and a target caller and what you have is an anti-support capable blob...wtf, no one sees an issue with that??! This is part of the yeehah!-blob-the-field problem. That and no warmup/cooldown cynoes.
Solo dread tacklers should die to support or skillfully used drones. Not be omgwtfihadnochanceofgettingasweettackleatall. Or Icantankhimhe'sscrammedOMGhedocked!
I for one welcome our former stationhugging Carrier Overlords. 7 |
|
Hyman Rickov3r
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 10:36:00 -
[531]
should be interesting to see what this new titan weapon is
should also be interesting to see these bombers in action
|
Mack Bane
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 02:30:00 -
[532]
Edited by: Mack Bane on 13/11/2009 02:32:14 WHAT IF:The DD had a smartbomb-effect? The targeted ship would explode,and the ships next to it (within a certain distance) would get some damage to shield/armor.(lets say 10-20 km diameter)
this would be A)A little more of an anti-blob weapon.Ships would need to spread out a little bit more(adding a bit of strategical planning). And B) enhance a Titans survivability, because some enemy ships would be needed to repair those damaged comrades.Reducing the enemy's attacking force.
another idea, for free
|
StS ChaosEngine
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 08:46:00 -
[533]
Making "supercarrier" and "titans" a max 5bill cost factor will only result in corporations an alliances owning even more supercaps.
at a price of approx 5bil my corporation alone could field 10 moms with the same ammount of isk reducing a supercarriers offensive capability is woth nothing because you will see three time more Supercarriers (moms) in capital fleets.
Also I expect some sort of reimbursement for our corporations mom pilots who spend a ****load of time and isk to skill by or build a mothership/titan
Supercarrier :P thats really what it is know a big fat carrier but not more ECM-Burst ; next to useless becaus it does not act like ecm . it is more like a lockbreaker bomb Clone Vat ; gone Triage: gone +3 fighterbonus: gone
thx
|
Liam Fremen
Insurgent New Eden Tribe Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 10:52:00 -
[534]
Edited by: Liam Fremen on 13/11/2009 10:53:27 I repeat my position:
All the ships of the game MUST have a role so for sum it up:
1) Titans a) You want people to USE them in field? fighitng togheter with others? give titan pilots a reason to do it except drop 20 of them and wtfbbq 20 enemy caps OR show off to friends that you can one volley a lone capital that is griefing at dock range, titan pilots like me already said it: we need HP, we need DDD shorter then 10 mins and we need something to do between one DDD and the next one, give us these 3 things and we can use them. b) You don't know how to balance them in fight? DON'T make them fight, make them a logistic platform, give them a better jump/bridge range, at least like a Dread, give them the option to bring in the ship bay 50 battlesihps, make people able to suicide-clone to titans online of the same corporation and remove all weapons, drones and doomsday, make them a logistic platform.
2) Super Carriers a) You want them to be super-capitals? they must keep the actual price tag, they must be good at something, remember that for you guys ISK are just a value in the database, for us can be years of work, you can't roll back a price from 20b to 5b and belive to go away flawless. b) you want them to be "light" super capitals? give them the carrier (or at least dreads) jump range, did you ever noticed that your wonderful map is made in a way that a dread can go about everywhere without many troubles but a mothership CAN'T? why i should change the jump route of 50 capitals for bringing 1-2 super carriers with me? is pointless.
CCP you are seriously making a wrong thing here, you did many nerfs over the last years, i'm here from 6 years at march.. i still remember tomB nerf-bat, i remember all, but you never decided from day to night to make 2 class of ships completely useless.
We speak about the 2 end-game ships guys, the maximum goal of a player ship-wise in this game is to own a titan... it MUST do something... you can't just make it a big portal generator with a "show to the friend" kaboom deathray...
-- Systematic-Chaos, Executor |
Tresiphone
|
Posted - 2009.11.14 00:15:00 -
[535]
The whole concept of a supercarrier in Eve is dumb. The aim of these ships is to do damage to capital ships. So why not structure them that way. These ships are assault carriers. They get no corporate bays, no ship bays; just a cargo hold and jump fuel bay.
The bonuses are to damage and repair - damage is racial type per level style bonus and repair is:
Minmatar - shield boost bonus level Amarr - armour resistance level Caldari - shield resistance/level Gallente - armour repair bonus/ level
These ships get no remote rep or shield bonus at all but can fit the modules if they like. Rather, they get inherent bonuses to shield or armour resists just like HACS do now in addition to EW invulnerability. Their role is anti capital work and anti structure work.
Assault carriers are T2 carriers. They can be docked and require Fighters 5 for the fighter bombers and carrier 5 for the ship. The current Motherships become assault carriers.
This is not hard CCP. By the way - the next evolution is a logistics carrier. Then you have three types of Carrier - utility carrier, assault carrier and then logistics carrier.
The logistics carrier has many high slots - uses remote repair and shield bonus and has extraordinary cap regeneration as well. It has wing repair bonuses and can fit the logistics siege module as a high slot BUT has none of its movement limitations. The Log carrier has a *****ing tank, weak to little dps and EW invulnerability. It also has a very large corporate hangar bay but no ship bay.
Now in Capitals online, which is what Eve has become, you can have logistics ships, capital logistics ships and capital killing ships. And you create a reason for getting rid of utility carriers as the essential workhorse of any fleet in Eve.
Dreadnoughts now need some loving. A capital tracking module can be fitted into a high slot which enables a sieged dread to hit moving targets that are capital sized. In addtion, these anti-capital dreads get the ability to be remote repaired while in siege. The anti-capital sie ge module requires dreadnought 5 and EW 5. Now you get a choice, raw dps or the ability to hit anything. Note that with its 4 high slots the Minnie Capital comes out as the best utility dread at the cost of dps. Thus a dread fleet will be a mixture of anti structure and anti capitals as well.
|
Quesa
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:03:00 -
[536]
Dreads don't need loving, they are the anti-structure/dread ship.
SuperCarriers were awesome in the first incarnation, you could actually use them for something. Now they are just a dread with more HP with target-able turrets (shooting the fighter bombers).
We already have logistics carriers, they are carriers with a Triage module active. I'd much rather have a carrier that can, you know, actually CARRY BS's to the front line. I'd also like a clone vat bay that might actually be beneficial in combat. Allowing someone to set their clone to it would be a start.
|
Aralis
Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 02:34:00 -
[537]
If you're going to let motherships dock I think you should only let them dock in outposts. Not in Empire stations. Last thing low sec needs is more souped up docking games.
|
Ezekialous
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 16:18:00 -
[538]
Originally by: Aralis If you're going to let motherships dock I think you should only let them dock in outposts. Not in Empire stations. Last thing low sec needs is more souped up docking games.
I have to agree, since they will be only produced in sov 0.0, why not make them dockable only in 0.0, also it should be something earned not just given.
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 07:22:00 -
[539]
Edited by: Super Whopper on 20/11/2009 07:24:13 The Epic blog of yet another EPIC FAIL by CCP.
Quote: This means NO CHANGES WILL BE MADE TO MOTHERSHIPS IN DOMINION. Since they are part of the original rebalancing effort, the DEPLOYMENT OF FIGHTER BOMBERS WILL ALSO BE POSTPONED.
Who wasn't happy with the design changes? From what I've seen the EVE population were pretty happy with it, the devs were happy with it and then someone comes along and decides the changes are bad? WTF?
FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL
|
slip66
Black Nova Corp IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:04:00 -
[540]
Originally by: Super Whopper Edited by: Super Whopper on 20/11/2009 07:24:13 The Epic blog of yet another EPIC FAIL by CCP.
Quote: This means NO CHANGES WILL BE MADE TO MOTHERSHIPS IN DOMINION. Since they are part of the original rebalancing effort, the DEPLOYMENT OF FIGHTER BOMBERS WILL ALSO BE POSTPONED.
Who wasn't happy with the design changes? From what I've seen the EVE population were pretty happy with it, the devs were happy with it and then someone comes along and decides the changes are bad? WTF?
FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL
they would help themselves out a lot if they would explain the reasons for the abrupt changes and give more then vague hints at where they want to go.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |