EVE Search - Do carriers have a place on the front lines?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Do carriers have a place on the front lines?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kasibee'an	Posted - 2006.01.10 01:58:00 - [1] One day I plan to be able to fly a Carrier. I would love to use them in fleet battles, pounding away at the opposition. Now I've read much that suggests that having a carrier literally on the front line is not their best use, but instead they should sit in a safe having assigned their fighters to gang members and rep said members as they come back from the fight. This is not my style of play. Does it make tactical sense to use a carrier the way I want? P.S. I'm not talking about Motherships here, just Carriers.
Alan Bell	Posted - 2006.01.10 02:05:00 - [2] you could with a tank.. i mean, gate camping with a decent carrier skill (4?) wld pawn just about anything that cld come thru the gate... actually i think it wld pawn anything, unles it cldnt hit it.. but the fighters have decent sensor resolution http://coldfusion.online-guild.com
Alan Bell	Posted - 2006.01.10 02:07:00 - [3] but the thing is, thye have roughly 20k armor, shields and hull. that isnt much to kill. http://coldfusion.online-guild.com
Tekka	Posted - 2006.01.10 02:08:00 - [4] Originally by: Alan Bell you could with a tank.. i mean, gate camping with a decent carrier skill (4?) wld pawn just about anything that cld come thru the gate... actually i think it wld pawn anything, unles it cldnt hit it.. but the fighters have decent sensor resolution Cant type "ou"? Anyways soo the sentries switch to the fighers and they go pop? ¼_¼
The Major	Posted - 2006.01.10 02:11:00 - [5] Bullets <3 Carriers. So much so all the bullets from enemy ships rush to hug them. Missiles too lets not discriminate. Now Carriers have lots of energy transfer arrays and shield transfers. They're really good at this. But Carriers have no guns. This makes Carriers sad. They envy their Dreadnaught siblings who wave their huge phallic weapons of destruction around like giant symbols of their overbearing testosterone. But when you have two Carriers together you have a special union between them. They take comfort in each others presence and express their love by healing each others wounds. This makes bullets jealous and they no longer want to hug the Carriers quite as much as they will be ignored. This union of carriers spawns forth Fighter progeny who seek out and destroy those who wish to destroy the true love their parents share. The Carriers rejoice. Short answer: Carriers do not bring much to a front line fight and alone they will be taken down in short order by enemy battleships thus rendering their fighters basically useless. In a team they can repair each other but still don't actually bring anything directly to the fight that cannot be delegated to other pilots in the fleet. And finnaly: If you're on the front line it makes it very dangerous for shipless pilots to retreat and secure a new vessel thus undermining the entire point of the ship as a support platform and elevating it to a glorified drone ship. During a POS siege if it can stay out of range of POS guns a carrier is an excellent supplement to a Dreadnaught as it regnerates their cap and shield smaking their siege mode that much more effective. You want a Dreadnaught.
Filan	Posted - 2006.01.10 03:14:00 - [6] Carriers in proper use will be just like those used by the US Navy, as part of a combined battle group. a Nimitz would never be found alone and nore should your Carrier in EVE.
Vivus Mors	Posted - 2006.01.10 03:32:00 - [7] Originally by: Filan Carriers in proper use will be just like those used by the US Navy, as part of a combined battle group. a Nimitz would never be found alone and nore should your Carrier in EVE. Precisely. The battle group tactic, developed in World War 2 to counter the German Wolf-Pack technique for their U-Boats, is still the most effective and difficult to engage formation of ships currently known. Any ship, no matter how formidable can quite easily be countered on itÆs own, just ask the Germans about the Bizmark and Graffspree among others, or the Japanese and their mighty Yamato and Musashi. (Although if you want to pour salt in the wounds equally the English lost the HMS Hood in one salvo from the Bizmark, and the Prince of Wales to Japan, but I digress) The whole reason to have ANY ship in fleet combat is as a compliment to the other ships. Now for it to actually complement the force, it has to have a ôraison d'Otreö. In game, as well as in life, the carrier is the ultimate ôscreen defenseö, it keeps enemies at armÆs length, and can still engage them. Anything suicidal enough to take the fight in close has swarms to deal with and the wonderful logistics benefits of the carrier to contend with (as well as the rest of the battle group of course). Now in real life, the advent of sea-borne airpower spelt the demise of large battleships, and has over time relegated them to either an oceanic artillery role, or to the realm of decommission. In EVE however, the battleship is just too deeply ingrained into the mechanics of the game to relegate to mothballs, so it may well come down to carriers being harassment for them and dreadnoughts, while other classes focus fire on enemy harassment classes, but actual performance at the front may well come down to the situation. ------------------------------------------------- For the price of one can of Quafe cola a day, you can adopt an Ewok... Please... think of the Ewoks...
Filan	Posted - 2006.01.10 03:59:00 - [8] Edited by: Filan on 10/01/2006 04:02:47 its not just carriers though, even the mighty titan will be part of a battle group. capitol ship alone=billions wasted by a properly formed enemy battle group.
Novo DuPont	Posted - 2006.01.10 04:51:00 - [9] Well I don't know but the lvl 2 Gallente Carrier kicks some ass thought. It can't not be jammed by anything, it CAN mount NOS in all its high slots and even with skills at Carrier lvl 4 it can deploy 12 fighters (read 12 cruiser ships that orbit out of smartbomb range) and carry 50 of them. The best option for a Carrier would be get up close and personal, either jam or multi target paint, suck energy and have some fun. I personally think the lvl 2 Gallente Carrier would kick a Dread's butt 1 on 1. Carriers would be ALOT of fun in deadspace though, that is if they could be used??? I got no info on that though, anyone try a Dread in DeadSpace. "To succeed greatly one must sacrifice greatly"
Kasibee'an	Posted - 2006.01.10 05:18:00 - [10] Edited by: Kasibee''an on 10/01/2006 05:19:14 Hmm, very interesting. And your post made me chuckle Major . I had not realised that the high slots were neither turret nor launcher points. I think the observation that I should think more along the lines of a Dreadnought may possibly be more appropriate, but this raises another question. My worry is that Dread's are not used much on the front line currently. I'm guessing that's because on their own, they are only moderately succesful at taking down battleships. However, given Dreads great anti-capital ship role, do you think perhaps as more pilots graduate Dread training school that we'll get to a point where both sides will say "Well, we better bring our Dreads in case they bring theirs, and we better bring more than they do."? And thinking about it, taking the suggestion that multiple carriers support each other, wouldn't that role extend to supporting front line Dreads? Also, some people are taking this into a discussion about Motherships and non-fleet environments. That's not what I'm discussing here.
Azeroth Uluntil	Posted - 2006.01.10 05:38:00 - [11] Carriers are looking to be fairly useful, however, as has been stated, they shouldn't be on the front lines. If you feel the need to use a carrier like a sledge hammer though, with close range combat, remember, it is vulnerable to ewar, unlike the mothership. It is useable, but if you keep transferring those fighters, all you have to do is soak up damage in the carrier. You should probably look into having 1-2 people train up logistics ships as support for your carrier. A mothership has no need for outside aid, due to it's superiority over the carrier. However, the question was about carriers... Sitting in a safespot may not be such a good idea, as your people will actually have to warp out when they come under heavy fire. If they are warp scrambled, they obviously won't survive. Until capital nos/neut come out, however, it may be safer to keep the carrier at a ss. It makes sense to use it in combat, as if needed, you can switch your fighters targets. Just remember the vulnerability to ew. Also remember that no matter how great your tank is, 30 bs's will still kick your head in before you can move. Might help if you list some questions so we can actually answer them. :-)
Minuz1	Posted - 2006.01.10 05:57:00 - [12] Originally by: Kasibee'an Edited by: Kasibee''an on 10/01/2006 05:19:14 Hmm, very interesting. And your post made me chuckle Major . I had not realised that the high slots were neither turret nor launcher points. I think the observation that I should think more along the lines of a Dreadnought may possibly be more appropriate, but this raises another question. My worry is that Dread's are not used much on the front line currently. I'm guessing that's because on their own, they are only moderately succesful at taking down battleships. However, given Dreads great anti-capital ship role, do you think perhaps as more pilots graduate Dread training school that we'll get to a point where both sides will say "Well, we better bring our Dreads in case they bring theirs, and we better bring more than they do."? And thinking about it, taking the suggestion that multiple carriers support each other, wouldn't that role extend to supporting front line Dreads? Also, some people are taking this into a discussion about Motherships and non-fleet environments. That's not what I'm discussing here. Dreads are very succesful at taking down battleships, but in a fleet of 50 vs 50+1 dread, you'd see a dead dread very fast I think. They aren't mobile so if the action moves, the Dread gets left behind and offers a great target. As POS/Conquerable Station killers/takers they are quite valuable since they combine tanking and great firepower. The Tier 1 Carriers(Motherships=Tier 2 Carriers) are great at supporting Dreads, and when they come into action there will be a new ballgame starting where you will see more dreads in the front lines. And as all of the Capital ships are quite new ingame there will be several seasons of trial and errors as to where and when these will be used. The Tech 2 Lottery is rigged, In my favor!
Kasibee'an	Posted - 2006.01.10 06:17:00 - [13] My main concern has been which ship should I sink months of my training into to fight the way i like fighting and the comments and discussion have been very insightful so thanks to all that have posted so far. The future roles of the capital ships are becoming much clearer.
Terradoct	Posted - 2006.01.10 07:54:00 - [14] Originally by: Kasibee'an My main concern has been which ship should I sink months of my training into to fight the way i like fighting and the comments and discussion have been very insightful so thanks to all that have posted so far. The future roles of the capital ships are becoming much clearer. You should decide for yourself her, no one will tell you. If you can't then you better not to fly them.
Sentani	Posted - 2006.01.10 07:58:00 - [15] think the minmatar one will be good in fleet figths... get 2 in a fleet and you can probably remote-tank the primary target just having one migth make the carrier primary ____________ The cargo bay is overloaded and cannot be made to fit Expanded Cargohold I. It is currently only capable of fitting 8772.12 units and it is currently jammed full with 9558.33 units.
Terradoct	Posted - 2006.01.10 08:57:00 - [16] one carrier will die easyly, but if they used in numbers there are invincible.
Jennine Tyler	Posted - 2006.01.10 09:44:00 - [17] Originally by: Azeroth Uluntil Just remember the vulnerability to ew. I havent checked the other carriers, but the Thanatos (Gall.) has 76 Sensor Strength. This gives a well skilled falcon/scorpion pilot approximately, 1 in 6 chance of jamming it. 1 in 5 for a fully skilled rook pilot. This is using Tech2 Racial Jammers. Admitedly, not impossible, but i dont think EW is the carriers main threat.
LordHong	Posted - 2006.01.10 10:02:00 - [18] well given that you only need a lock for as long as it takes to click "engage target" EW isn't really going to worry a carrier ----------------------------------------------- --No Apologies, No Regrets-- _(\_/)_ \_____/ Bunny pie anyone?
Koori	Posted - 2006.01.10 10:19:00 - [19] Quote: Admitedly, not impossible, but i dont think EW is the carriers main threat dampners and ECMs may not be a big problem for carrier... but it can still be scrambled. - ------------------------------------------- Helios enterprises is recruiting. 0% tax, 100% fun.
The Major	Posted - 2006.01.10 10:24:00 - [20] A Carrier doesn't even need to be the one in control of it's fighters. While it's taking all sorts of jamming flak from the enemy the fighters can be under the control of a maniacal interceptor pilot. Figuring out exactly who that is amongst 20-30 ships could be pretty tricky.
B orange	Posted - 2006.01.10 10:34:00 - [21] Originally by: Azeroth Uluntil I havent checked the other carriers, but the Thanatos (Gall.) has 76 Sensor Strength. This gives a well skilled falcon/scorpion pilot approximately, 1 in 6 chance of jamming it. 1 in 5 for a fully skilled rook pilot. This is using Tech2 Racial Jammers. Admitedly, not impossible, but i dont think EW is the carriers main threat. 1 ECCM -> 120+ sensor strenght 1 remote ECCM -> 150+ sensor strenght ..so that will be last problem for a carrier in close combat.
Acwron	Posted - 2006.01.10 10:43:00 - [22] You should ask yourself: What does a Carrier have to contribute when being inside the battle? And that remote boosting bit won't work very well against a competent opponent.
Berrik Radhok	Posted - 2006.01.10 11:07:00 - [23] Considering fighter drones own anything up to and including HACs in seconds, I really think carriers will change the nature of 0.0 warfare quite a bit. While the skill requirements for a carrier are relatively high, the ship itself is not too expensive for anyone with access to half decent belts to purchase outright.
Koori	Posted - 2006.01.10 11:39:00 - [24] OK. Now. There are two opposing statements about carrier damage output. Some people says that it is not that great, other says it pwns BSs in 10 seconds. Lets say I have carrier lvl 3 (8 fighters) and Fighters lvl 3 (+60% dmg output). How much damage will my Fighters do? Is it really true that I'll be able to kill BS in 5-15 seconds? - ------------------------------------------- Helios enterprises is recruiting. 0% tax, 100% fun.
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.01.10 11:48:00 - [25] For one, carriers (not motherships) are NOT immune to EW. That fact alone makes them a ship bet left outside the battle with its fighters assigned to others then inside the battle. Unless of course you have multiple and do the healing trick, but dont forget that you cant heal or use drones on what you can't lock. _______________________________________________ Power to the players !
The Major	Posted - 2006.01.10 12:06:00 - [26] The overwhelming consensus is that the Carrier ship itself adds nothing to a fleet battle that cannot be acheived remotely (assigning fighters as wingmen to gang members and using Gang Warfare Links to buff the gang). The ability to supply new ships and repair/recharge existing ships very quickly makes them an excellent defensive strongpoint for Guerilla forces to retreat to between strikes and the Fighters allow the Carrier to make up the numbers on a force with less players giving them the hitting power of a much larger force while retaining flexibility. If I wasn't quite so cycnical I would suggest that Carriers will spell the demise of blob wars and usher in an era of Guerilla tactics and 72 hour long battles. But I am that cynical.
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.01.10 12:09:00 - [27] Check the space inside a carriers hangar. no 72 hour battles _______________________________________________ Power to the players !
Tozmeister	Posted - 2006.01.10 12:39:00 - [28] As regards fighters firepower, when they were on SiSi prior to RMR rollout i went up against them in my well tanked raven (took down a NOS+sentry drone Dominix without taking any armour damage on a previous engagement). Anyway, the GM flying Gallente mothership (Nyx?) spilt his fighters into 2 groups. 1 group of 14 and one of 6, the smaller group came at me and popped me in about 10 seconds. These are VERY powerful weapons.
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.01.10 12:47:00 - [29] Edited by: Gronsak on 10/01/2006 12:47:33 Originally by: Tozmeister As regards fighters firepower, when they were on SiSi prior to RMR rollout i went up against them in my well tanked raven (took down a NOS+sentry drone Dominix without taking any armour damage on a previous engagement). Anyway, the GM flying Gallente mothership (Nyx?) spilt his fighters into 2 groups. 1 group of 14 and one of 6, the smaller group came at me and popped me in about 10 seconds. These are VERY powerful weapons. oh rly? cos i was attacked by the same guy me thinks, pre rmr and he had lots of fighters on me, i think it was minimatar fighters since i remember them doing em dmg i was able to sit there and thank them long enough to shoot at one and nearly pop it, and then warp out when low, and then reallign and rewarp ect ect i think someone did a calculation on DPS of the galante one with near maxed skills and got a number about 1000DPS [ which is a typical gank BS] carrier not motership
Wulfgard	Posted - 2006.01.10 13:09:00 - [30] I truelly hope we'll be able to use these ships in a pvp context. A pilot with a carrier bring a +2bil isk to the battle field, it better be useful On another note, PvE needs to be rebalanced. In most MMO game, if the devs raise the arsenal of the players (by uber weapons or raising or lvl), they also introduce new PvE monsters to keep the game challenging. Soon people will start flying Titans, carriers, dreads in consequent numbers... what will be their goal if pvp is a no go? Ratting the already overcrowded belts? Run lvl 4 missions in 0.4? Camp 24/24 the 7 and 10/10 complexes that are the only PvE challenge left for us atm? Please CCP revamp the NPCS, make them challenging by introducing capital ships we can shoot. Obviously bounties on these need to be carefully balanced

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.