| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Eletro Bull
   |
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:23:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Thomus
what about the t2 barges - where can they be built!??
lol, Thomus (best joke yet)
________________________________________________
|
Ruffio Sepico
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:24:00 -
[32]
Originally by: t20
can not be built in 0.4 NPC stations and below
Titan
Carrier
Carrier bpo cost less than a Freighter bpo. Mothership bpo cost what? 14 times or more the cost of Carrier bpo. To make Motherships and carriers equal regarding where to build is imho very unrealistic, and not to say unfair over those who invested tons into prints for carriers and components already? The lack of information from CCP on this is imho ridicilous, those who invested basically all they have into this should get an option to trade in their bpo's again for isk imho. Normal carriers in 0.4 and down would be fine imho.
Anyways, thanks for the cheese and the bad xmas ccp 
Home: http://www.hidden-agenda.co.uk
|
Crayathan
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:25:00 -
[33]
I gotta say CCP have really dropped the ball here. If this was their intention all along then it should have been made clear IN THE PATCH NOTES.
Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil |
Vince Draken
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:26:00 -
[34]
It's gonna get very messy in here me thinks.
The above thoughts and statements are IC and should be taken as such. |
Vince Draken
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:26:00 -
[35]
It's gonna get very messy in here me thinks.
The above thoughts and statements are IC and should be taken as such. |
Tharrn
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:27:00 -
[36]
Read the friggin documentation...errr...oops.
------------------------------------------------------
|
Mned Graydroggen
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:31:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Mned Graydroggen on 19/12/2005 15:31:09
Quote:
can not be built in 0.4 NPC stations and below
Titan
Carrier
Hmm, now thats a serious downer
|
Dragon Master
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:37:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Dragon Master on 19/12/2005 15:41:33
Edited by: Dragon Master on 19/12/2005 15:38:15
Affordable? They have a funny definition of affordable. So besides the billions for the component BPs, the carrier BP, the hundreds of millions for the fighter BPs, the shipping of said minerals and construction components, now they want people to set up a 0.0 POS and sink several billion more into a shipyard and keep this whole thing churning away for several weeks (ice and trade good fuels) while lighting sovereignty on the map for people to see where they're building?
Looks like Dreadnought is more affordable than this. Oh well another cool idea shot to pieces by stealth nerf and poor implementation. Sounds like over nerfing creep to the point where the "budget" capital ship costs more and takes more hassle than the non budget version.
Additional point is all previous informatino mentioned Motherships and Titans. If Carriers as a class are meant or Carriers as a subclass are meant to be included then say so and don't differentiate with the term Mothership. |
Crayathan
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:38:00 -
[39]
I reckon seleenes writing one long post!
Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil |
Selak Zorander
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:41:00 -
[40]
Well this news seriously sucks tbh.
A small carrier (which is capable of docking in an NPC station or outpost last i heard) can not be built in One?
Or am I wrong and the small carriers can no longer dock in NPC stations as well?
Patch notes and other Dev responses have specifically said Only titans and motherships have to be built at the Capital ship yard array at a POS in 0.0 so why the big change now to include the small carriers.
So you are now saying that the small corp has to spend atleast 300mil on a large tower, 2 billion on a capital shipyard array, plus aquire the defensive batteries and fuel required ro run it all for a few weeks, just so that they can slap 800mil to 900mil worth of minerals together? talk about making manufacturing harder, more costly, and far more risky especially for the smaller corporation that is supposed to be able to afford to field a small carrier in battle.
|
Seleene
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:41:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Seleene on 19/12/2005 15:45:31
Originally by: Mned Graydroggen
Quote:
can not be built in 0.4 NPC stations and below
Titan
Carrier
Hmm, now thats a serious downer
Not at all. If it can't dock in an NPC station (Titan / Mothership), why should it be able to be built in one?
Conversly, if it CAN dock in an NPC station (Dread / Carrier) then it should be able to be built there.
That's really the crux of the entire problem and I'm hopeful this issue will be resolved. Grouping Motherships and Carriers both under the "Carrier" tag is wrong. They are two VERY different types of ships with vastly different capabilities and should be grouped seperately. 
Originally by: Crayathan
I reckon seleenes writing one long post!
Not really. It's simple really - we just need to help the Devs understand the issues and explain them in a way that makes sense. I think the problem was there was a big miscommunication about "CARRIERS" including both the small ones and large motherships. The programmers lumped them together, however based on the Dev blogs and comments made elsewhere, the playerbase assumed they were two different classes.
Obviously, I feel that the playerbase is correct and I honestly thing people like TomB and T20 will understand and address our concerns considering the importance of this issue and how many people it's liable to affect.
-
The REAL Eve Political Map! |
Deovina
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:45:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Deovina on 19/12/2005 15:46:06
Originally by: t20
[...]
Note that Outposts act the same way as NPC stations and that in order to build a Titan or a Carrier you will need to have a Capital Ship Assembly Array.
hmm now you are confusing me. I was under the impression that Titan/Motherships could only be build in a POS (understand till here) as long as you have sovernty (read: Outpost and Conqurable Station). But now you are saying 0.0 NPC Stations?
So what is it now?
Could e.g. built a Titan in a POS in Curse using the Angel stations?
|
|
t20
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:47:00 -
[43]
There seems to be some confusion on my end of the line, I've raised the issue of Motherships vs Carriers with gamedesign just hold on.
|
|
Elissen
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:49:00 -
[44]
Originally by: t20
There seems to be some confusion on my end of the line, I've raised the issue of Motherships vs Carriers with gamedesign just hold on.
Thank you
----
ICSC
Red Moon Rising edition: Jumpplanner tool - Routeplanner for all jumpcapable ships! |
Crayathan
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:50:00 -
[45]
Originally by: t20
There seems to be some confusion on my end of the line, I've raised the issue of Motherships vs Carriers with gamedesign just hold on.
Thanks t20
Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil |
Selak Zorander
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:51:00 -
[46]
Thank you t20 for looking into it further.
We appreciate it.
|
Ruffio Sepico
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:52:00 -
[47]
Originally by: t20
There seems to be some confusion on my end of the line, I've raised the issue of Motherships vs Carriers with gamedesign just hold on.
Yes please, and thanks.
(quickly cancels that order of a horsehead)
Home: http://www.hidden-agenda.co.uk
|
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:55:00 -
[48]
Carriers & Motherships should have been in seperate ship classes... Carrier Class, Mothership Class, etc...
It's like having BS' & BC's in the same category...
Skills could have stayed the same, etc...
------------------------------------------------
Current Hobby other than EVE |
Ruffio Sepico
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 15:57:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Bhaal
Carriers & Motherships should have been in seperate ship classes... Carrier Class, Mothership Class, etc...
It's like having BS' & BC's in the same category...
Skills could have stayed the same, etc...
Actually with the price difference between the two, its like have a shuttle and a bs in same category (kinda).
Home: http://www.hidden-agenda.co.uk
|
Apophis Blake
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:03:00 -
[50]
Thanks for the response T20, much appreciated.
Unfortunately if Carriers cannot be built in 0.4 stations a LOT of people have been screwed over, very badly.
Please reconsider this and allow Carrier production in 0.4 stations. Listen to the playerbase on this one.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:03:00 -
[51]
"I suggest you change it immediately so that carriers can be built in 0.4 NPC stations and less otherwise u gonna have a riot on ya hands. After all, carriers are smaller than Dreads and possess less firepower, so why should they be limited to capital shipyards when Dreads can be built in NPC stations?"
Well, the estimate of damage output for regular carrier (not mothership) clocks at ~3-4.5 k hp/sec depending on carrier in question.... with no damage mods. I'd need to check the dreadnaughts after their recent damage increase in last patch, but iirc none of them would get close to that value pre-patch, save maybe for Moros with combined output of drones and turrets in siege mode. o.O:
But that said, they should be possible to build in low security empire space. If not in NPC stations then at least in specifically congfigured POSes...
|
Virtuozzo
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:09:00 -
[52]
If I am going to need a POS and capital shipyard to just roll out 24/7 carrier (NOT mothership) production I will go ballistic. Waiting for T20's further responses now.
Virtuozzo
RECRUITMENT TEASERS. Last words of a Caldari general: "Pull the Ravens back! Full retreat! they've got frigates!" |
GoldHorn
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:13:00 -
[53]
I am already ballistic. We were prepering for this for a long time. We have near 2K mods on stock and **** load of bpos in production.
Our auction for the first 2 cariers ends today.
Now im asking my self WTF did we waste few months for this. Not 2 mention capital that was needed 2 pull this off.
|
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:15:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Virtuozzo
If I am going to need a POS and capital shipyard to just roll out 24/7 carrier (NOT mothership) production I will go ballistic. Waiting for T20's further responses now.
capital shipyard needs soverenty too.. a right kick in the balls if you ask me.
Author of "The Apoc Guide" |
Faith
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:18:00 -
[55]
I'm in the same boat as GoldHorn, thousands of components built up, 30+ billion bpo's purchased, auctions ending today. Please get this straight.
|
GoldHorn
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:18:00 -
[56]
Maybe i should change my sig 2 "Epic Recycler of Capital Parts".
|
No 16
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:20:00 -
[57]
if i remember correctly, carriers of any sort are not allowed in empire space due to the fact that they can remotly deploy their fighters.
CCP were looking at allowing the smaller carriers in empire space but they would have to remove the abailty to remotly deploy the fighters and as yet this remains unresolved.
i think that was it...
|
James Lyrus
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:25:00 -
[58]
Well, if you're wanting to build carriers, and they're not buildable in 0.4, then let me know. With any luck, the starbase roles will allow me to configure a starbase to allow specific people to access it, and I'm more than happy to run a capital ship yard if there's sufficient interest.
OK, so there's certain caveats on moving blueprints around, but not insurmoutable ones...
(plus I believe you get mineral discounts on starbase arrays - you appear to on smaller ones, but I've not actually managed to magic up 900km3 to move a cap ship array.)
--
Lyrus Associates is recruiting |
Kerguelen Avon
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:28:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Kerguelen Avon on 19/12/2005 16:30:31
Originally by: No 16
if i remember correctly, carriers of any sort are not allowed in empire space due to the fact that they can remotly deploy their fighters.
CCP were looking at allowing the smaller carriers in empire space but they would have to remove the abailty to remotly deploy the fighters and as yet this remains unresolved.
i think that was it...
This issue is about Carrier manufacture. If its about not allowing them in empire then thats fine as long as CCP offer a compromise to the manufacturers and allow construction in low sec systems as long as the Carrier is in jump drive range of 0.0.
By making it so carriers need a POS and sovereignty they've shifted the golapost so that the whole damn thing is in a totally new league. The many many players who've spent months preparing for this have been well and truly shafted in both terms of massive isk investment, and weeks of logistical time down the pan.
|
Mned Graydroggen
|
Posted - 2005.12.19 16:31:00 -
[60]
Originally by: t20
There seems to be some confusion on my end of the line, I've raised the issue of Motherships vs Carriers with gamedesign just hold on.
Thnx t20. Much appreciated.
Oh and Seleen, my downer remark was aimed at the small carrier, not the mothership. But gues we are in good company with our confusion 
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |