Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
reddy90311
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 13:23:00 -
[1]
Hello there I think that ccp should let the chance to have capitols in highsec not motherships or titan as that will screw up game, but I am getting tired of seeing cribba or some other idiot undock his shiny thing and I can't do the same. Eve is about working toward things but I also whant it to be fair let everyone do what they want removing this is not very fair, who want's to sit in high watching only like 6 people getting the chance to undock their nice rides, of corse this might sound stupid but I just don't think it's fair.
|
Sarah Scarlett Mackenzie
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 13:31:00 -
[2]
I wouls say; allow them in highsec but dont let them use there fighters/bombers/turrets/doomsdays etc...
|
Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar Shark Investments
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 13:53:00 -
[3]
Originally by: reddy90311 ..but I am getting tired of seeing cribba or some other idiot undock his shiny thing and I can't do the same...of corse this might sound stupid but I just don't think it's fair.
Calling others idiots is not nice. They have capitals in highsec because they are not idiots.
Also, you dont point out a reason for it, other than you dont can undock one in high, showing it off.
The main reason why they shouldnt do it in my opinion, is that you could fast travel stuff in a carrier without any risk at all. Also making the low sec even more empty as it is already.
|
Velicitia
Gallente Open Designs
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 15:28:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome The main reason why they shouldnt do it in my opinion, is that you could fast travel stuff in a carrier without any risk at all. Also making the low sec even more empty as it is already.
how? you can't light a cyno in hisec (CONCORD doesn't allow it -- you won't get concordokken, just simply can't activate the module). =========================
Originally by: CCP Games, 2010 Creation is so precious; and greed, so destructive. Your choices can make a diference
|
Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar Shark Investments
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 15:34:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Velicitia
Originally by: Nautsyn Thome The main reason why they shouldnt do it in my opinion, is that you could fast travel stuff in a carrier without any risk at all. Also making the low sec even more empty as it is already.
how? you can't light a cyno in hisec (CONCORD doesn't allow it -- you won't get concordokken, just simply can't activate the module).
well i assumed that this would be changed, if capitals would be allowed in highsec. otherwise there wouldnt be a reason to have them there at all.
|
Fredfredbug4
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 16:15:00 -
[6]
There is a reason why caps were removed from hi-sec years ago. Stop suggesting ideas that have been tried and failed.
|
Shieko Chan
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 16:46:00 -
[7]
Originally by: reddy90311 Hello there I think that ccp should let the chance to have capitols in highsec not motherships or titan as that will screw up game, but I am getting tired of seeing cribba or some other idiot undock his shiny thing and I can't do the same. Eve is about working toward things but I also whant it to be fair let everyone do what they want removing this is not very fair, who want's to sit in high watching only like 6 people getting the chance to undock their nice rides, of corse this might sound stupid but I just don't think it's fair.
booo hooo...
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 19:32:00 -
[8]
Edited by: ShahFluffers on 08/08/2011 19:34:01
Just an FYI...
Capitals were never meant to be in high-sec from their inception. The only reason Chribba and a few others have one in high-sec is because they found a loophole to this rule before it was closed. Today, the people who still have a capital in high-sec are under some pretty draconian rules... which are more or less along the lines of "if you use your capital in any way other than to 'strut your stuff,' the capital will be moved and/or you will be temp-banned."
Here's some things to consider as well:
- Capitals have VERY large amounts of EHP... upwards of 700k to 1 million. Battleships have, at most, 200k EHP (average is 120-160k). This means you are going to need a large-ish group of people to chew a capital down before it disappears from a "logoffski." This puts small groups of people (i.e. newbies) at a disadvantage.
- Capitals aren't strictly limited to using "capital" equipment. Carriers can deploy up to 10 to 15 "normal" drones to assist any friendly they desire. And 5 well skilled Warrior IIs already hurt frigates.
- Capitals are HUGE force multipliers. One capital remote repair unit can regenerate 1500 hp ever 5 seconds. To compare... a large remote repair unit regenerates about 384 hp every 4.5 seconds. If you thought that neutral RR logis were annoying, wait til people start using capitals as neutral RRs. Combined with their aforementioned EHP, you can't force these ships off the field without substantial support.
- Bringing capitals into high-sec allows people, especially large alliances, to stockpile their capital fleets without fear of a "surprise attack" or trap (remember, in high-sec you have to war-dec a corp if you want to attack them without getting CONCORDed... provided they are actually in a player corp in the first place).
- Due to the aforementioned EHP of capitals, they would ideal for moving very valuable cargo across empire space. It would take hundreds, maybe thousands, of subcapitals to gank a capital before CONCORD responds... oh wait... no... scratch that... capitals can just jump and avoid gatecamps altogether.
- (personal thought) By allowing capitals into high-sec you take away one of the big reasons to go out into low and null-sec. Why go out to "dangerous places" when you have [almost] all the available ships of the game in high-sec?
Remember... "because it'd be cool" is rarely a good enough reason on its own to change a mechanic and/or lift a restriction. You'd only be doing older players a favor by allowing these ships into high-sec. _______________________
"Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
Sobaan Tali
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 23:28:00 -
[9]
No one in their right mind would fly anything else if caps were allowed in high sec, since it seems more people are in high sec over null and low...period. Don't get me wrong, yeah, it sucks that some are fortunate to have a cap in high sec, but you also don't see cribba war-decking someone only to snipe their autopilot frieghter off a gate with his dread, do you?
|
Breaker77
Gallente Reclamation Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 23:37:00 -
[10]
Originally by: ShahFluffers
Capitals were never meant to be in high-sec from their inception. The only reason Chribba and a few others have one in high-sec is because they found a loophole to this rule before it was closed.
Wrong. CCP screwed up. It's not a loophole.
Quote:
Today, the people who still have a capital in high-sec are under some pretty draconian rules... which are more or less along the lines of "if you use your capital in any way other than to 'strut your stuff,' the capital will be moved and/or you will be temp-banned."
This TBH.
Except well maybe perma banned depending on the violation.
|
|
Kolya Medz
Gallente PyroStorm Enforcers STR8NGE BREW
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 23:44:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Kolya Medz on 08/08/2011 23:45:26 This is a good idea, its a nice isk sink as more capitals will be dying overall.
In order for it to work tho, concord would need uber-dreadnaughts so corps can't take over hi sec systems.
Altho realistically, it would probably not be a good idea... This is a sig. |
Nezumiiro Noneko
|
Posted - 2011.08.09 02:21:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Kolya Medz Edited by: Kolya Medz on 08/08/2011 23:45:26 In order for it to work tho, concord would need uber-dreadnaughts so corps can't take over hi sec systems.
not needed really...these would be used by mercs and large corps who like to war dec in empire to evict pos owners off of moons. It be a war dec set up...no concord intervention.
And current concord bs' be fine. Not like you can fight back against concord. Hell if sadi dread tried...not like it could hit a concord ship. Anything moving faster than 0 m/s can speed tank a dread lol.
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
|
Posted - 2011.08.09 06:07:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Breaker77
Originally by: ShahFluffers
Capitals were never meant to be in high-sec from their inception. The only reason Chribba and a few others have one in high-sec is because they found a loophole to this rule before it was closed.
Wrong. CCP screwed up. It's not a loophole.
poh-tay-toe... poh-tah-toe...
People got around CCP's high-sec capital "ban" by taking advantage of the fact that they could BUILD said capitals in high-sec. They rectified this mistake but the capitals stayed. _______________________
"Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
Talia Nachtigall
Caldari Hidden Souls
|
Posted - 2011.08.09 09:46:00 -
[14]
I believe that Carriers & Dreadnaughts should be allowed into HiSec. Standard tactics for those class ships should also be allowed (Fighters, Triage, Siege). However Super-Carriers (long live "Motherships!") & Titan's should remain in LowSec and NullSec.
Just my two cents.
/This will never happen.
--- --- <(^_^)> --- ---
Sincerely, Talia Nachtigall |
Nnamuachs
Caldari Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.08.09 10:15:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Nnamuachs on 09/08/2011 10:16:28
Originally by: ShahFluffers
Originally by: Breaker77
Originally by: ShahFluffers
Capitals were never meant to be in high-sec from their inception. The only reason Chribba and a few others have one in high-sec is because they found a loophole to this rule before it was closed.
Wrong. CCP screwed up. It's not a loophole.
poh-tay-toe... poh-tah-toe...
People got around CCP's high-sec capital "ban" by taking advantage of the fact that they could BUILD said capitals in high-sec. They rectified this mistake but the capitals stayed.
Additionally i believe at some point either the cargo of freighters was higher or the volume of capitals was lower, but capitals could be shoved into freighters and moved that wasy as well.
*Also, they only fixed the mistake when they realized that high sec Rorquals were going to be a massive problem. It was only when the rorquals came about that they removed the grandfather clause for the LSAA's in high security.
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.08.09 10:33:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Kolya Medz This is a good idea, its a nice isk sink as more capitals will be dying overall.
Ship being destroyed is not an ISK sink, and capitals being able to hide in highsec would mean fewer of them died. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
|
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.08.09 13:09:00 -
[17]
If carriers would be allowed in high-sec, and be allowed to fight/rep, they would pretty much obsolete anything else. And even if they were not allowed to fight/rep, making it so they can enter high-sec would simply be tantamount to introducing superfreighters. And they'd be a platform to launch battleship size ships from. All of these functions are currently already performed by Orca's, only with more reasonable stats (less EHP, only BC-size class ships).
tl;dr: No, bad idea.
-- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP |
Nautsyn Thome
Minmatar Shark Investments
|
Posted - 2011.08.09 13:18:00 -
[18]
@Ranka Mei
Nice jacket and portrait!
/thread
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |