EVE Search - Minmatar Carriers- Pertion

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Minmatar Carriers- Pertion

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nyphur	Posted - 2006.03.31 12:52:00 - [31] Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists so many th8ings put in this thread are only halfthoughtout, and would never work and end in a screwup i read that u put weapons on those - u cant. Forgive my noobiness ^^;. Never flown one before. I'm learning a lot from this thread. I didn't know that they were best used repping at a SS, for example. Eve-Tanking.com - For the ultimate tanking spreadsheet and resources.
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2006.03.31 13:17:00 - [32] TBH, I think their "best" use is sitting at a POS, because then they're pretty much invulnerable, and you can have replacement fighters sitting there too if you need to.
Rexthor Hammerfists	Posted - 2006.03.31 14:24:00 - [33] "you can have replacement fighters sitting there too if you need to." i think ive read in a carrier-bug thread that u cant replace em in a pos, too lazy to find it now tho ;) - Purple Conquered The World, We the Universe.
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2006.03.31 14:35:00 - [34] Well... meh :P
Aion Amarra	Posted - 2006.03.31 14:49:00 - [35] Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists "you can have replacement fighters sitting there too if you need to." i think ive read in a carrier-bug thread that u cant replace em in a pos, too lazy to find it now tho ;) Hope they fix that. Otherwise you'd be ****** with a mothership... since you... can't dock?
Aloysius Knight	Posted - 2006.03.31 20:47:00 - [36] Originally by: Joerd Toastius I'd rather have the Minmatar bonus than the Amarr one. Yes, really. If I ever get a carrier (miles away atm) I have no intention of ever letting anyone shoot it. Why would you? It doesn't need to be in combat to use its firepower, why risk it? A remote rep/boost bonus, on the other hand, a) works great at a safe for rapid turn-around on damaged BS, and is absolutely invaluable if you're trying to get a POS back on its feet again. By contrast, if you ever reach the point where higher resists become useful (ie you're being shot at, scrambled and without a jump target), chances are you're dead anyway, and the extra seconds from resists won't make a difference. The only exception to this would be if you were actually trying to sustainably tank your carrier, and again in this case I ask why? The only possible reason I can see is to act as a decoy or weapons magnet. In that case yes, if you're willing to take the risk then the extra resists are useful. For general useage though, I'd be very tempted to go with the Matari design. fin we'll swap im sure many people will have no problems with that again im not talking about when you have all the uber gang mods implants voodoo dolls what ever im talking about that at lvl 5 minmatar carrier your looking at a redcution of cycle .....2-2.5 sec its crap, pure 100% crap compared to the other carrers, not if it had a reduction to cap use them it would be useful
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2006.03.31 21:45:00 - [37] Absolute numbers are irrelevant. It's a 25% reduction in cycle time, which is the same bonus you get for training repair systems V.
Aloysius Knight	Posted - 2006.03.31 21:56:00 - [38] Originally by: Joerd Toastius Absolute numbers are irrelevant. It's a 25% reduction in cycle time, which is the same bonus you get for training repair systems V. wow you can say that with a strait face wtf do you mean are irrelevant!? so having 25% bonus to ristance for 2 carrers 50% bonnus to fighter damg for 1 carrer and finaly 25% reduction cylce time for the gimp 2-2.5 secs of of a normal cycle of 10 sec it badly needs a relook at the bonus
OrangeAfroMan	Posted - 2006.03.31 22:13:00 - [39] Originally by: Nyphur 5% increase in repairer speed is equal to a 5.26% increase in the tank of whatever it's remote repairing. At level 4, it's getting a 20% increase, which is a 25% increase in the tank of whatever it's repairing. at level 5, it's a 25% increase, which translates to a 33.33% increase in repair rate of remote repairers. So are you telling me that a 1/3 increase in the maximum repair rate of your remote repairers and boosters is worthless in a fleet combat situation? Put two and two together here, guys. The Amarr and Caldari carriers are good at tanking themselves, the gallente one is a good damage dealer and the minmatar one is the best at high-end logistics. If that's what it's good for, that's what you should be using it for. Does it matter all that much when each ship just gets 1-2 volley'd by 20 Tempests and Geddons? With gallente your drones kill things 50% faster... I'd much rather have something like that....
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2006.03.31 22:14:00 - [40] Edited by: Joerd Toastius on 31/03/2006 22:15:00 Absolute numbers are irrelevant. If it was 2s off a 100s cycle then it'd be pointless. As it is it's 2s off a 10s cycle, which is a big difference. Without the bonus you rep 200/s, with it you rep 266/s. That's 66 more per second, 33% more than without the skill. That means with three of them running you're repping the same amount as four on any other carrier. And that's insignificant how? {edit} The Gallente bonus is overpowered. I don't think that's up for debate.

OrangeAfroMan	Posted - 2006.03.31 22:19:00 - [41] 2 seconds off of 10 seconds is still negligable... its 2 seconds off at a safe spot, basically all that does is eliminate the lag from someone having to move their mouse over to activate the module. Thats. About. It.
Aloysius Knight	Posted - 2006.03.31 22:24:00 - [42] Edited by: Aloysius Knight on 31/03/2006 22:25:26 Originally by: Joerd Toastius Edited by: Joerd Toastius on 31/03/2006 22:15:00 Absolute numbers are irrelevant. If it was 2s off a 100s cycle then it'd be pointless. As it is it's 2s off a 10s cycle, which is a big difference. Without the bonus you rep 200/s, with it you rep 266/s. That's 66 more per second, 33% more than without the skill. That means with three of them running you're repping the same amount as four on any other carrier. And that's insignificant how? {edit} The Gallente bonus is overpowered. I don't think that's up for debate. well its 250/sec (2000/8) at lvl 4 and 266 at lvl 5 and still is crap due to the massive amount of cap used stop going on about how uber the bonus is, its 2 bloody secounds!! so u can rep just that little faster, but u still are faced with the other carriers out performing you ether being able to take more damg or lay it on other ships with uber fighters absolute numbers are everything, not some crap about %
Nafri	Posted - 2006.03.31 22:53:00 - [43] the bonus is pretty much useless if you boost POS shields, you use basilisks and ospreys you cant repair on the battlefield, BS die before thy can even call for help reparing at a warpout point is the only use of a carrriers highslots, 25% faster is nothing worth a bonus... Jawas are lousy carebears :(
Deros	Posted - 2006.04.01 02:01:00 - [44] couldnt agree more tbh nafri, with the gang mod bonii it appears for use on the battlefield, but tbh its going to die there, so :/ and if not, then the bonus doesnt really help :( Deros
Cmd Woodlouse	Posted - 2006.04.01 02:02:00 - [45] Minnies are not loved, get used to it -------------------------------- I am G and i am IRON - as we all are brothers in arms and times of need.
Tiuwaz	Posted - 2006.04.01 02:04:00 - [46] the bonus is just crap, i'd really like to know their reasoning for that bonus, besides: lets make one of them a logistic carrier Originally by: Oveur ****! Lets nerf it! To the nerfmobile!
Foulis	Posted - 2006.04.01 03:43:00 - [47] Originally by: Nyphur What the hell are you doing fitting 5 capital repairers on a carrier and trying to run them all at once? Fit some weapons, damnit Wow, why are you guys complaining about the ship when she's the only carrier that can fit weapons? ---- Cake > Pie - Imaran Originally by: CCP Hammer Boobies
Deros	Posted - 2006.04.01 03:59:00 - [48] i am sorry, i fail to see where it says that it has turret hardpoints to fit these guns you want us to use: Nidhoggur Tempest Check the fittings section, one has hardpoints (Tempest used for reference) and one does not. Deros
Eximius Josari	Posted - 2006.04.01 04:05:00 - [49] Maybe he has too much Ragnarok on the mind. ~From the creator of ActiveX and Sobeseki Pawi: The Final Main :p C.E.N.S.U.S. Arrays - The key to Covert 0.0
Aloysius Knight	Posted - 2006.04.01 04:18:00 - [50] Originally by: Foulis Originally by: Nyphur What the hell are you doing fitting 5 capital repairers on a carrier and trying to run them all at once? Fit some weapons, damnit Wow, why are you guys complaining about the ship when she's the only carrier that can fit weapons? must reisist....urge to flame....

Mando Nessen	Posted - 2006.04.01 08:51:00 - [51] Thought I'd add some numbers to this mess. Minnie bonus ONLY comes into play when repairing at a SS, all others are weird special cases. Situation: We have a carrier sitting at safe spot, the pilot has carrier 4, remote cap rep 4, 2x cap armor reps and 2x cap shield reps. BS (sig radius 400) warps in with 0 armor and shields (wow that was lucky he got out when he did). Lets see how long this SS repair Depot took to get him back in the action? Compare Gal and Minnie carrier. GalMinnie Requests rep5sec5sec carrier begin targetting3sec3sec carrier finish targetting8sec6.6sec carrier starts rep2sec2sec carrier finishes rep10sec8sec align and warp back20sec20sec Total Time48sec44.6sec The minamater ship got its battleship back to the battle 7% quicker course it used 4 cap reps to do it. The Gal carrier used 768 cap/sec The min carrier used 960 cap/sec so the question is... was the bonus ,that ONLY applies in this senario, that got its ship back in the battle 7% faster equivalent to an always applicable 40% damage bonus? Also, I believe that I was rather generous when considering human reaction times and lag, as you can see the actual Rep time is a smallish part of the total time taken. Heres hoping they change the bonus before I can fly one in 50 days. Mando
Luc Boye	Posted - 2006.04.01 08:58:00 - [52] This bonus indeed sounds retarded.
Nafri	Posted - 2006.04.01 10:28:00 - [53] the best suggestion yet: reduce fuel need for jumping, making the minmatar a logistic monster Jawas are lousy carebears :(
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.04.01 10:31:00 - [54] To be honest... I am more hurt that carrier bugs are still existant than a stupid worthless bonus. Get over it its not like it makes a difference. Just having a carrier in the system is better than nothing right now since they came pre-nerfed and pre-bugged. It is the sexiest looking ship in the game next the the hel. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Aloysius Knight	Posted - 2006.04.01 10:37:00 - [55] Originally by: Kaylana Syi To be honest... I am more hurt that carrier bugs are still existant than a stupid worthless bonus. Get over it its not like it makes a difference. Just having a carrier in the system is better than nothing right now since they came pre-nerfed and pre-bugged. It is the sexiest looking ship in the game next the the hel. BEEEGOONNNEEE TROLL!!!
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.04.01 11:01:00 - [56] Originally by: Aloysius Knight Originally by: Kaylana Syi To be honest... I am more hurt that carrier bugs are still existant than a stupid worthless bonus. Get over it its not like it makes a difference. Just having a carrier in the system is better than nothing right now since they came pre-nerfed and pre-bugged. It is the sexiest looking ship in the game next the the hel. BEEEGOONNNEEE TROLL!!! why don't you try countering with some logic instead of trolling and flaming your own thread? Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.04.01 11:02:00 - [57] Originally by: Nafri the best suggestion yet: reduce fuel need for jumping, making the minmatar a logistic monster That would make me a happy panda Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2006.04.01 11:03:00 - [58] Originally by: Nafri the best suggestion yet: reduce fuel need for jumping, making the minmatar a logistic monster Interesting. (Just for the record, I'm not saying the bonus is uber, and I've already agreed that the Gal one is better - I'm just saying that compared to say the Amarr one it's actually not that bad.)
Aloysius Knight	Posted - 2006.04.01 11:10:00 - [59] well i was think more along the line of a reduction of cap use for arrays if they want to keep it as a "logistic carrier" or maybe giving it a damg bonus to drones seeing how its bult for "all out warfair"
Nafri	Posted - 2006.04.01 11:11:00 - [60] Originally by: Joerd Toastius Originally by: Nafri the best suggestion yet: reduce fuel need for jumping, making the minmatar a logistic monster Interesting. (Just for the record, I'm not saying the bonus is uber, and I've already agreed that the Gal one is better - I'm just saying that compared to say the Amarr one it's actually not that bad.) well since the gallente one has a double bonus we could make it like this: matari: 10% fuel need per lvl amarr/cadalri: 5% resistances/5% fuel need gallente: 10% damage matari carrier will be the choice for a quick strike into enemy territory, and keeping logistics in enemy territory amarr and caldari are a tanked version of the matari carrier, but not as jumpy gallente carrier is best to defend your home, with pure damage but limited movement ability Jawas are lousy carebears :(



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: 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.