Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Viktor Fyretracker
Emminent Terraforming
26
|
Posted - 2012.07.03 22:33:00 -
[31] - Quote
I thought a bear cap already existed in the form of the Rorqual.
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Emminent Terraforming
27
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 03:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
Okay let me make a more serious post now.
One thought for a bearing cap would be an ORE carrier, that gives up ore compression for the ability to deploy cargo drones. Cargo drones could be assigned to fleet mates like fighters can except they are mined into and when full they fly back to the ORE carrier and unload.
Okay even that might be overpowered and pointless, would make more sense to just make a "Cargo Fighter" for existing carriers. of course this would require a Rorq to park next to the carrier to compress the ore but that is how things go. |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 06:29:00 -
[33] - Quote
Viktor Fyretracker wrote:Okay let me make a more serious post now.
One thought for a bearing cap would be an ORE carrier, that gives up ore compression for the ability to deploy cargo drones. Cargo drones could be assigned to fleet mates like fighters can except they are mined into and when full they fly back to the ORE carrier and unload.
Okay even that might be overpowered and pointless, would make more sense to just make a "Cargo Fighter" for existing carriers. of course this would require a Rorq to park next to the carrier to compress the ore but that is how things go.
I focus on pve and i use Thanatos among other ships for that. However, it seems all those 0.0 carebears(the don't nerf titans, don't nerf caps, don't nerf blob, don't nerf jb, don't nerf jf just nerf highsec!!!) are crying at the thought of carebears getting more tools.
|
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks The Omega Industries
129
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 09:43:00 -
[34] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote: Also, as someone suggested, a totally new PvE oriented cap ship is a good idea.
You're not quite right. I suggested that you might be after a new PVE centred cap ship.
I'm certainly not suggesting that I think it's a good idea.
Personally, even though I'm a carebear, I don't believe combat cap ships of any sort should really be used for PvE (except perhaps carriers in PvE end content like C6 WHs). I definitely don't think that super caps should be used in pve at all.
Super cap ships are for PvP. They're for defending your space or attacking you're enemy's. If people co-opt them into PvE that's their business but PvE should not be their primary focus.
EvE is a PvP game. I don't play it as a PvP game. I've never attacked anyone. I've only defended myself in PvP. So I don't opt in on PvP but PvP finds me. To try to claim that you can opt out of PvP in EvE is a little naive. You can mitigate some of the risks but you can't opt out.
I can undestand you pushing for what you want. A lot of people do. What I can't get my head around is why you don't understand that it could be detrimental to the game as a whole. Or is it that you do but you simply don't care? |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1224
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 09:50:00 -
[35] - Quote
Fidelium Mortis wrote:TotalCareBear wrote:Nyx looks good, but there is a problem - it cannot dock, and thus is not suitable for those without 3+ alts or major alliance backing. That is why I think this should have a "one way modification" that grants it the ability to dock, but also totally gimps it it for pvp. For example, it loses like 75% of hp, EW immunity etc. This way, a Nyx could be a realistic long term goal for many carebears(though unrealistic for 99% of us). A change like this, would give more niche endgame goals for carebears and not break anything in pvp. What would you even use it for? It's not like you can take it into missions, or can light a cyno to move it to another system. Fighterbombers can't go into deadspace pockets, and are basically only effective against battleships or other caps. If it retains any of the logistics bonuses, it really would only be beneficial for high sec wars since nothing in high-sec really would do enough damage to require capital RR. Honestly, it's about as useful as the dreads that are stuck in high sec which are used as a LOL mining barge. Same with a titan, although I suppose you can use it as a hot-dropping platform based out of high-sec.
have you ever used fighter bombers on a battleship?
scratch that, have you ever flown a supercarrier?
Dheeradj Nurgle wrote:Super Caps are almost always Corp/Alliance property, not personal...
this is entirely wrong, the vast majority of supercarriers and titans in the game are purchased with personal ISK
TotalCareBear wrote:I focus on pve and i use Thanatos among other ships for that. However, it seems all those 0.0 carebears(the don't nerf titans, don't nerf caps, don't nerf blob, don't nerf jb, don't nerf jf just nerf highsec!!!) are crying at the thought of carebears getting more tools.
not really, it's always been hisec miner scum who bleat about nullsec being "too easy" even though they don't actually live there because, well, it's not "too easy" a rogue goon |
Xhaiden Ora
University of Caille Gallente Federation
245
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 12:21:00 -
[36] - Quote
So your entire justification for this idea boils down to "Because I want it"?
Wow.
|
mykor backlash
Miner's Yield and Co
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 20:51:00 -
[37] - Quote
I think hi sec pve capital would be a good end game ship for say lvl 5s. You can be in most pve BSs within the first year playing the game, would give us carebears something to look forward to in the long run |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 21:03:00 -
[38] - Quote
Xhaiden Ora wrote:So your entire justification for this idea boils down to "Because I want it"?
Wow.
Having more endgame for carebears... surely that isn't bad? |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 21:22:00 -
[39] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:
not really, it's always been hisec miner scum who bleat about nullsec being "too easy" even though they don't actually live there because, well, it's not "too easy"
1. What counters are there for local? This "ultimate intelligence feature" makes it almost impossible to kill vast majority of 0.0 carebear ships. Near zero risk for anyone who has been in 0.0 for longer than 1 month.
2. How often do you have 50 man freighter gangs needing 50 jumps in 0.0 space? Oh, wait, you use capitals/JF/Jumpbridge for logistics.
3. How many supercaps do you lose? 1-2/month? How many do you have have? 200? 300? Wow, big risk all over again.
4. Why do you have tech-naps in North? I know, because you can't attack them and they can't attack you, because of ridiculously defensive nature of EVE sov/pos/station mechanics.
5. Once you engage some fail alliance(like Nulli, from what read from CAOD) and you totally "win", how much of their assets will they lose? Maybe 2% of the total value thanks to point 2. and 4.?
For all the cold harsh pvp 0.0 space rhetoric, EVE sure does have a lot of mechanics to defend you from all the risks. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1225
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 07:38:00 -
[40] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:
not really, it's always been hisec miner scum who bleat about nullsec being "too easy" even though they don't actually live there because, well, it's not "too easy"
1. What counters are there for local? This "ultimate intelligence feature" makes it almost impossible to kill vast majority of 0.0 carebear ships. Near zero risk for anyone who has been in 0.0 for longer than 1 month. 2. How often do you have 50 man freighter gangs needing 50 jumps in 0.0 space? Oh, wait, you use capitals/JF/Jumpbridge for logistics. 3. How many supercaps do you lose? 1-2/month? How many do you have have? 200? 300? Wow, big risk all over again. 4. Why do you have tech-naps in North? I know, because you can't attack them and they can't attack you, because of ridiculously defensive nature of EVE sov/pos/station mechanics. 5. Once you engage some fail alliance(like Nulli, from what read from CAOD) and you totally "win", how much of their assets will they lose? Maybe 2% of the total value thanks to point 2. and 4.? For all the cold harsh pvp 0.0 space rhetoric, EVE sure does have a lot of mechanics to defend you from all the risks.
thanks for your opinions on nullsec, noted npc corp member a rogue goon |
|
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 08:52:00 -
[41] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:
thanks for your opinions on nullsec, noted npc corp member
thanks for your opinions on pve/carebear topic, go play your "harsh sandbox pvp 0.0" in CAOD. |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks The Omega Industries
130
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 09:06:00 -
[42] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote: .... I don't understand what it's like to live in null sec...
There. Fixed that for you. Nullsec isn't as easy as living in high sec. Try it before you make judgements like that. It's a LOT more dangerous. Just because a corp doesn't lose 100% of it's assets when kicked in the teeth doesn't mean it's "easy". You should try getting out from under CONCORD's skirts some time, then you might actually understand what you're talking about.
|
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
160
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 09:29:00 -
[43] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote:endgame
I see the problem. You don't know that EVE doesn't have an endgame. It's just the sandbox, and you're in it from day 1.
It's too bad game balance is so ****** up at the moment, or I would say that no ship is outright better overall than any other ship because they all just fill different niches.
Anyway, if you want an endgame, play something that isn't a sandbox. Whether or not you win the game matters not. -áIt's if you bought it. |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
160
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 09:40:00 -
[44] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:
not really, it's always been hisec miner scum who bleat about nullsec being "too easy" even though they don't actually live there because, well, it's not "too easy"
1. What counters are there for local? This "ultimate intelligence feature" makes it almost impossible to kill vast majority of 0.0 carebear ships. Near zero risk for anyone who has been in 0.0 for longer than 1 month. 2. How often do you have 50 man freighter gangs needing 50 jumps in 0.0 space? Oh, wait, you use capitals/JF/Jumpbridge for logistics. 3. How many supercaps do you lose? 1-2/month? How many do you have have? 200? 300? Wow, big risk all over again. 4. Why do you have tech-naps in North? I know, because you can't attack them and they can't attack you, because of ridiculously defensive nature of EVE sov/pos/station mechanics. 5. Once you engage some fail alliance(like Nulli, from what read from CAOD) and you totally "win", how much of their assets will they lose? Maybe 2% of the total value thanks to point 2. and 4.? For all the cold harsh pvp 0.0 space rhetoric, EVE sure does have a lot of mechanics to defend you from all the risks.
These are all valid points that really do need to be rectified (removal of jump bridges and cynos and local, destructible outposts ... for starters.) However, this does not make your original post a good idea. Whether or not you win the game matters not. -áIt's if you bought it. |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 11:48:00 -
[45] - Quote
Tchulen wrote:TotalCareBear wrote: .... I don't understand what it's like to live in null sec...
There. Fixed that for you. Nullsec isn't as easy as living in high sec. Try it before you make judgements like that. It's a LOT more dangerous. Just because a corp doesn't lose 100% of it's assets when kicked in the teeth doesn't mean it's "easy". You should try getting out from under CONCORD's skirts some time, then you might actually understand what you're talking about.
Really, be honest here, what part of it is dangerous?
I never said running a 0.0 alliance isn't easy, but you have to remember... tedious != hard.
Having more content for PvErs is obviously a good thing, regardless of what the 0.0 carebears say. |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks The Omega Industries
131
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 12:16:00 -
[46] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote:[quote=Tchulen]
Really, be honest here, what part of it is dangerous?
I never said running a 0.0 alliance isn't easy, but you have to remember... tedious != hard.
Having more content for PvErs is obviously a good thing, regardless of what the 0.0 carebears say.
The part where you can get hot dropped by 50-100 caps and supercaps and have your home (POS) caged, reinforced and then the system camped until the reinforce ends at which point they jump the cap fleet back in and finish it off.
The part where a roaming fleet comes through your system and decides to camp all the gates in it for laughs.
The part where you make one little mistake when talking to one of your neighbours which escalates into a full blown war which you cannot surrender from.
The part where cov ops fleets hot drop onto your mining op and waste everything in less time than it takes your combat ships to get there.
I could go on but you get the gist. Seriously, if you want to comment on something you should at least experience it first. There is a massive difference between being in a massive alliance and hiding in the backwater of their space than there is in "living" in nullsec.
I live in high, null and WHs. Null is by far the hardest place to live.
Now, I didn't say having more content for PvEers was a bad thing. Content, you're correct about. Ships? Capital ships, big fat yes, that is bad.
EvE is a PvP game. Just because you delude yourself into thinking that you "opt out" of PvP doesn't mean that it isn't. It just means you're deluded. One of the draws that pull people into the sandbox side is the use of capital ships. If you start removing all the incentives to move into nullsec corps/alliances it detracts from the game as a whole. The main point of EvE is it's sandbox nature. The insular high sec existence shouldn't be an end game in itself. If people want to do that then fine but the cap and super cap ships were supposed to be used for corp/alliance nullsec and lowsec operations which is specifically why they're not allowed in high sec.
To give into the whinings of an individual who simply cannot see things from the perspective of the game as a whole would set a horrible precedent and I think (and hope) that CCP are sensible enough not to do that.
Just to clarify, I'm a carebear. I'm not a pvper. I've spent most of my time in high sec but I have multiple capital ships which I've used when I've joined nullsec alliances. I'm not a nullsec denizen whining that high sec people aren't playing the game properly. I'm a high sec denizen who looks at the game as a whole and tries to argue based on what I consider to be good for the game as a whole, not necessarily for me personally. |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 12:41:00 -
[47] - Quote
The part where you can get hot dropped by 50-100 caps and supercaps and have your home (POS) caged, reinforced and then the system camped until the reinforce ends at which point they jump the cap fleet back in and finish it off.[/quote]
Tell me, how many poses do big 0.0 alliances have? Tell me how long does it take to shoot down all the poses. Now add in all the sov mechanics, cynojammers, blobs, lag and everything else... you end up with a boring grindfest, that makes it impossible to inflict damage to 0.0 alliances.
Quote:The part where a roaming fleet comes through your system and decides to camp all the gates in it for laughs.
That is because all they are getting is laughs. You have the ultimate tool for intel(local), that pretty much makes it impossible to lose any flying asset, beyond someone who a) fell asleep during carebearing b) first month in 0.0.
Quote: The part where you make one little mistake when talking to one of your neighbours which escalates into a full blown war which you cannot surrender from.
See point 1.
Quote: The part where cov ops fleets hot drop onto your mining op and waste everything in less time than it takes your combat ships to get there.
Ehm, are you suggesting that following local is too hard?
Quote: I live in high, null and WHs. Null is by far the hardest place to live.
Tedious is not hard. Mining in a hulk in highsec is more dangerous highse |
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 13:01:00 -
[48] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote:
Tedious is not hard. Mining in a hulk in highsec is more dangerous than 0.0. Highend Maradeurs/Faction BS are just as safe in 0.0 as they are in highsec.
Null sec is safe because players make it safe.
High sec miners could make it safe if they bothered to pay attention to the game while mining.
|
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 13:05:00 -
[49] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote:
Having more content for PvErs is obviously a good thing, regardless of what the 0.0 carebears say.
Not really.
This is a pvp game. More pve content (lol shooting red crosses and stationary rocks, how is this enjoyable?) just encourages more pve, which is not pvp.
|
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 13:27:00 -
[50] - Quote
Liliana Rahl wrote:TotalCareBear wrote:
Tedious is not hard. Mining in a hulk in highsec is more dangerous than 0.0. Highend Maradeurs/Faction BS are just as safe in 0.0 as they are in highsec.
Null sec is safe because players make it safe. High sec miners could make it safe if they bothered to pay attention to the game while mining.
Tell me, how players make 0.0 safe? Don't game mechanics do that... and by that I mean local.
There is no counter to local.
|
|
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks The Omega Industries
131
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 13:29:00 -
[51] - Quote
I wrote a massive response to your last response to me but realised that no one wants to read that and I don't really care what you think.
So I'm leaving this conversation because it's quite clear that you're either deluded or a troll. I wish to continue discussing things with neither.
Luckily for the rest of us who are capable of perception larger than merely our own tiny sphere, you're unlikely to get what you're asking for because CCP aren't SOE. |
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 13:33:00 -
[52] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote:
Tell me, how players make 0.0 safe? Don't game mechanics do that... and by that I mean local.
There is no counter to local.
I don't know if you've noticed, but theres a new tear thread about afk cloaking that pops up every few days.
This is because carebears are babies and dock up at the first sign of a neut/red.
More to the point, players make null safe via intel channels, defense fleets and otherwise being active. If your argument is null sec is safe because it has local, then you're essentially arguing that null sec is safe because null sec miners are active, whereas high sec miners are not. If high sec miners were actually actively playing the game, they'd be ready to leave at the first sign of trouble. |
FireT
Royal Advanced Industries Imperial Hull Tankers
56
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 14:02:00 -
[53] - Quote
TotalCareBear wrote: Having more content for PvErs is obviously a good thing, regardless of what the 0.0 carebears say.
Not that you needed to lose any credibility, as far as I am concerned, but you proved yourself right there (again).
A dockable super carrier is NOT 'more content for PvEers. Good lord, people like you should be charged double. |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 14:22:00 -
[54] - Quote
Liliana Rahl wrote:TotalCareBear wrote:
Tell me, how players make 0.0 safe? Don't game mechanics do that... and by that I mean local.
There is no counter to local.
I don't know if you've noticed, but theres a new tear thread about afk cloaking that pops up every few days. This is because carebears are babies and dock up at the first sign of a neut/red. More to the point, players make null safe via intel channels, defense fleets and otherwise being active. If your argument is null sec is safe because it has local, then you're essentially arguing that null sec is safe because null sec miners are active, whereas high sec miners are not. If high sec miners were actually actively playing the game, they'd be ready to leave at the first sign of trouble.
Of course a cloak recon disrupts a 0.0 system, but alliances have more than 1 system and afking at them causes income losses, not asset losses.
You cannot follow local in highsec, you just can't. In 0.0 the very little traffic is by non-blues and they easily stand out thanks to the standing markers in local. In highsec most traffic is by people you will never see again, thus you cannot just dock up like in 0.0, just because local changes. Scanners also do not work, because most of them are just non-hostile players, and even if we were to warp off when we see geddons on scanner, you could still counter this by bumping us with cloak recons. Now you could say: set any gankers to red... then I also propose that all 0.0 standings are blue by default.
Now, 0.0 mining hulk cannot be killed unless you AFK in a belt or perhaps a rare awox... so in the end, 0.0 is safer. So, unless anything could ki
Those active measures you take are based around local - it is just too strong. Being just 5 seconds in local, I can see the enemies fleet size, and member names. Even if i don't see ships in scanner, i can google killboards and get a good idea what we are up against. Local is a godsend to 0.0 alliances, and has pretty much destroyed most of the risk for individual players in null. |
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 14:34:00 -
[55] - Quote
Did I say high sec players need to use local?
No. I said they need to be active. You know. See that gang of thrashers warp in. Have a tank fit. Be aligned, ready to leave.
But the vast majority don't do this. Thus the "risk."
Thats not really risk. Thats just stupid. |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 14:55:00 -
[56] - Quote
Liliana Rahl wrote:Did I say high sec players need to use local?
No. I said they need to be active. You know. See that gang of thrashers warp in. Have a tank fit. Be aligned, ready to leave.
But the vast majority don't do this. Thus the "risk."
Thats not really risk. Thats just stupid.
You can counter that with bumping with neutral cloak scouts. Are you suggesting you need to be more active in highsec, than in 0.0?
Tell me, how to counter local in 0.0. |
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 14:59:00 -
[57] - Quote
We already went over that. AFK cloaking. Its surprisingly effective. Note the amount of threads that pop up crying about it.
As for, neutral cloakers in high sec....thats a lot of :effort: and I'm willing to bet that its rarely used. The fact is most people who mine in high sec do so afk which is...not being active. If they were more active, the risk would be reduced. Do you contest this? |
TotalCareBear
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 15:15:00 -
[58] - Quote
Liliana Rahl wrote:We already went over that. AFK cloaking. Its surprisingly effective. Note the amount of threads that pop up crying about it.
As for, neutral cloakers in high sec....thats a lot of :effort: and I'm willing to bet that its rarely used. The fact is most people who mine in high sec do so afk which is...not being active. If they were more active, the risk would be reduced. Do you contest this?
I already said that
Quote: Of course a cloak recon disrupts a 0.0 system, but alliances have more than 1 system and afking at them causes income losses, not asset losses.
Of course risk would be reduced, nothing wrong with that. But it is stupid that it is safer to mine(with higher rewards) in 0.0, than it is in highsec. By the way, when you regularly change mining spots, "mine when aligning" you are just as safe from afk cloakers as well, so that is no argument at all. |
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 15:27:00 -
[59] - Quote
I can see why you think a pve supercarrier is a good idea now.
Your brain works in interesting ways. |
FireT
Royal Advanced Industries Imperial Hull Tankers
57
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 15:41:00 -
[60] - Quote
Liliana Rahl wrote:I can see why you think a pve supercarrier is a good idea now.
Your brain works in interesting ways.
And by interesting you mean 'oh my god this is not humanly rational'? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |