Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hygelac
|
Posted - 2006.04.06 13:17:00 -
[121]
Edited by: Hygelac on 06/04/2006 13:17:34 ...
You can restrict this sort of behaviour to Carriers/Motherships and Titans by creating a module called 'Signature Masking Link' which can only be fitted on these ships (Hi-slot), without a Signature masking link the 'Signature Masking Emmiter' modules will not stack. So still a useful module, but only 1 reduction of 20% will ever be effective.
I'm belabouring the point here, but the gist of my argument is some sort of method of making Capital ships survive when called primary, except for other capital ships.
|
Hygelac
|
Posted - 2006.04.06 13:17:00 -
[122]
There is a lot of talk of 'all out war' in the description of the Carrier but I've not really seen a carrier used for anything other than Hauling or sitting at a POS. This one applies to all Carriers.
The problem is that if you send it in the middle of a Battleship fleet, it won't last very long when 50 battleships all focus fire on it. The result is that very few pilots will want to risk it in a large size conflict. Smaller skirmishes are a completely different story.
It's very clear that the Minnie bonus is wrong, there's no question about it and the reasoned arguments of this thread only serve to highlight that fact.
However I think the question should not be "OMGMinniBonusSuxx" but rather, 'How can these ships take an effective role in the centre of battle?'. Because right now these ships are glorified logistics ships and work better at a safespot/pos than in a fleet proper and having spent months training for the ship only to find that my best use is not fighting at all, I feel kind of empty inside.
I've a number of ideas that might change this:
Rework the bonuses to include armour/shield resistance bonuses? Increasing the resists will make for a much more tankable ship, could such a vessel achieve greater longevity in a fleet fight? With greater native resistances, the ship would last a long longer in a fire-fight
Warhammer 'Command Rule' When I was younger I played a lot of Warhammer including Warhammer Epic. In these games each army would have a command unit which was invulnerable to all but area effect weapons unless the troops it was commanding were all dead. I think a direct implementation of something like this would be waaaay to powerful and prone to exploitation though. Additionally I wonder if something like this would usurp the role of Tech2 Battlecruisers?
Make Carriers more difficult to 'lock'? A variant of the Command rule would be to include some kind of native ability *not* to be targeted. Say something like a 50% likelihood of targeting failure with +5% per level. I.e. when another ship attempts to target the Carrier there's a % chance that 'Targeting Fails' or 'Target Invulnerable'. Of course, there's nothing preventing you from attempting lock again. Capital ships should be immune from this sort of thing.
Something like this would make it VERY difficult to insta-pop a carrier at the centre of the fleet. Eventually the enemy fleet will have a lock on the Carrier and be able to shoot it, but the time wasted while the whole fleet tries to relock the carrier will have a massive impact on the outcome of the combat.
Carrier 'invulnerability' modules Another variant of preventing people from instantly taking down a Carrier, or any other command ship really. How about an Electronic Warfare module which you target on a Capital ship, which prevents other ships from locking it. For example. 5 Battleships in your fleet gimp their setup to fit a 'Remote Signature Masking Emitter', massive CPU and grid requirements means that these ships will have to sacrifice a large portion of their offensive and defensive capabilities.
The Fleet warps into engage the enemy, the 5 Battleships target the Carrier and activate the modules on the Carrier. Each of these modules reduces the Carrier's Signature radius by 20% without stacking penalty.
While these ships survive the Carrier has a Sig Radius of '0' and cannot be targeted. However, you take out one of these battleships and the signature radius is up to 80% of original. The Carrier can now be locked (eventually) and hit (to a degree).
Something along these lines would promote 'taking out the support' first, the Carrier would be a very survivable vessel. And the enemy fleet commander will need to take careful stock of the formation of the enemy ships, the ships closest to the carrier are more likely to be the ones masking the signature and will be the focus of fire.
...
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2006.04.06 14:12:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Aloysius Knight
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
Originally by: Aloysius Knight
Originally by: Swethren
Originally by: smallgreenblur How does that help when the fighters are orbiting too fast to hit things properly...
sgb
Train the tracking skills for em?
i highly recamend 5 to 7.5% to repair amount affecting both armour and shield reps
turning the minmatar carrier into the "Healer" of the carriers
You do realise that, cap use aside, that's the exact bonus they have already, right?
you do realise your wroung right?
how is a reduction of 5% secs for the cycle time on arrays per lvl that same as
7.5% to amount repaired for remote and capital reps per lvl???
Do the math. The important number is damage repaired/s. A 5% bonus to the amount repaired per second gives you 25% extra damage repaired per second. On a capital remote rep doing 200/s normally, that gives you 250/s repair. A 5% reduction in cycle means you repair the same amount per cycle but each cycle is shorter. Rather than 2000HP/10s, you're getting 2000HP/7.5s, which works out as 266HP/s. A 5% cycle time reduction bonus allows you to heal more damage per second than a 5% boost in repair amount per cycle bonus would.
|
Hohenheim OfLight
|
Posted - 2006.04.06 14:36:00 -
[124]
but who wants to train for a carrier only to spend their lifes reping others thats no fun at all. ----------------------------------------------
|
Velius Donegal
|
Posted - 2006.04.06 14:59:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Swethren Edited by: Swethren on 05/04/2006 11:18:32 Caldari Fighter - dragonfly Shield: 3000 Armour: 2750
Amarr Fighter - templar Shield: 2250 Armour: 3750
Gallente Fighter - firbolg Shield: 2500 Armour: 3000
Minmatar Fighter - einherji Shield: 2750 Armour: 3250
Notice how you the amarr fighters are the 2nd BEST in both shield AND armour and your better than Gallente on both fronts, not to mention your fighters are the fastest so should technically take less dmg
You get your carrie bonus, when you fighters take a nerf, mkay?
Swethren
You realize that any carriers can use any fighters, right? Because the people I know who have Thanatos carriers use Einherjis.
|
Spartan239
|
Posted - 2006.04.06 15:12:00 -
[126]
You spin me right round
i am ***
|
Aloysius Knight
|
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:04:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Spartan239 You spin me right round
i am ***
.....ok then
|
Kaylana Syi
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 01:20:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Hohenheim OfLight but who wants to train for a carrier only to spend their lifes reping others thats no fun at all.
I would/amand i'll like it too.
Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
|
Scalor Valentis
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 02:47:00 -
[129]
Edited by: Scalor Valentis on 08/04/2006 02:52:54 how many of you who post in here that "remote repping boni is fine" have actualy flown a carrier in a fleet situation?
I happened to do so, in EC-P8R
I was one of the carriers taking on TRUST pos when abaut 40 G warpped on us.
there were abaut 8 dredds and 5 carriers, 3 Thanatoses, arcohn and silly me in nidhoggur. Now, strictly from my personal experience, ther capital remote reppers dont repair nearly well to be actualy worth the cap drain. Majority of us were fitted with heavy nosses.
Now there were no need for repping, as none of us were reciving anykind of critical damage. And in that situation, where we were workign in fast phased order, with molle giving us orders in TS is dont thaink anykind 5% remote repairing bonus whuld make any notabel diference.
Ability to repell 20% more damage or cause 40% of it more, served much more purpose in that situation, than piddly 20% to cycle rate (2 secs off cycle ). The lag, locking time and many other factors just compleetly eradicates any benefit from it in combat situation! So much for battlefield repairing.
5 thanathosses whuld do much beter than 5 nidhoggurs; they still can pack 1-2 repairer as just-in-case equipment to repair the primary target. If the target is reciving firepower that requires repairing ability of more than 2x5=10 remote repairers, its simpply a gankkfleet, and remote repairing wont do you any good, as they can just change primary and instagibb it! That is, if you manage to lock and repair it from the first vollies wich is realy unlikely. Adition to the repairing, the thanatos dishes out aprox 40% more raw DP/S on reasonable lvl 4 carrier. that means the 9 fighters (with fighter lvl 4) pretty much instagibs Battleships on sight.
Thats 40% more ability to remove damage dealing objekts, and less the repair stress on to your ships - so what is realy repairing beter
So unless it is somesort pre-calcuated sentry tankking scenario in 0.4, the bonus of nidhoggur serve little purpose - Also it drains your cap that much faster .
[23] Member: BoB Alt whoe
Lelos or Cocordokken! |
Aloysius Knight
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 03:12:00 -
[130]
well it would be nice get a dev reply for this, but we all know they don't give a **** about it
|
|
Kashre
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 03:57:00 -
[131]
Edited by: Kashre on 08/04/2006 03:58:37 I didn't read this thread, because it makes me cry. But here's my 2 cents anyways:
Every carrier should have this as the bonus: +10% damage per level for racial fighter, +5% per level for other races fighters.
If changing the bonuses on all the fighters too much (and I can just hear the Gallente snarfing their escargot in outrage now) then I like the idea posted earlier for a jump range bonus. That would make them much more mobile but less combat effective, a tradeoff I could live with.
+++
It's called "low security space" for a reason. |
Kaylana Syi
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 05:42:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Aloysius Knight well it would be nice get a dev reply for this, but we all know they don't give a **** about it
I highly doubt that. We don't know what they are doing atm except working on code and business infrastructure to keep EVE's future alive. But... lets just stop what they are doing to get one ship 10-20 people in EVE fly fixed.... right.
Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
|
Aloysius Knight
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 06:01:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Originally by: Aloysius Knight well it would be nice get a dev reply for this, but we all know they don't give a **** about it
I highly doubt that. We don't know what they are doing atm except working on code and business infrastructure to keep EVE's future alive. But... lets just stop what they are doing to get one ship 10-20 people in EVE fly fixed.... right.
exatly **** everyone else and fix that ship please!!!
|
Scalor Valentis
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 09:01:00 -
[134]
Edited by: Scalor Valentis on 08/04/2006 09:02:05
Originally by: Aloysius Knight
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Originally by: Aloysius Knight well it would be nice get a dev reply for this, but we all know they don't give a **** about it
I highly doubt that. We don't know what they are doing atm except working on code and business infrastructure to keep EVE's future alive. But... lets just stop what they are doing to get one ship 10-20 people in EVE fly fixed.... right.
exatly **** everyone else and fix that ship please!!!
yes pleas Frack everyone and fix our toys, we are paying customers...
But before that, look in mirrors, Devs, and think; what went wrong when you were choosing randomly bonuses to carriers, prolly drunk >__>
In future, try to avoid this kind of BS, and you wont have as many whining treads.
You fracekd over not only the minmatars pilots, but also the industrials who got the minmatar carrier/mothershios bpo's - sideways.
[23] Member: BoB Alt whoe
Lelos or Cocordokken! |
Scalor Valentis
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 11:13:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Kashre Edited by: Kashre on 08/04/2006 03:58:37 I didn't read this thread, because it makes me cry. But here's my 2 cents anyways:
Every carrier should have this as the bonus: +10% damage per level for racial fighter, +5% per level for other races fighters.
If changing the bonuses on all the fighters too much (and I can just hear the Gallente snarfing their escargot in outrage now) then I like the idea posted earlier for a jump range bonus. That would make them much more mobile but less combat effective, a tradeoff I could live with.
Or as someone stated before:
5% to racial fighter damage + 5% actual bonus.
Now on Chimerra and archon its 5% to racial fighters damage and 5% to resistances.
On thanatos its 5% to racial and 5% to all fighters damage = making it still 10% if it uses firablogs and 5% if it uses others, Not so RETARDETLY overpowered, comparing 10% on Einherjis, wich are considereblty best fighres, mixed with templars.
On nidhoggur, a 5% to racial fighter damage and 5% to all fighters tracking.
This whuld make 2 tankking Carriers, able to work in frontline, and 2 carriers that are beter to keep out of front line yet still do well.
Now we got one carrier to rule them all.
Oh and Stuff the remote repping in uranus allredy! Sideways! Remote Repairing Is not AND never will BE viable in EVE unless you get;
A: 100km + Range on them B: Instalock C: Beter health managment systems to ACTUALY see who needs the repping. D: Repairer repairs Before cycletime ends, and reloads acording it, not repairing only after the cycle ends. E: All above
EVE =! yer olde goodly poo WoW where you can "white mage" peoples araund >__> Whoever came up with remote repairing stuff in eve needs to go play the damn game and try it out.
[23] Member: BoB Alt whoe
Lelos or Cocordokken! |
Aloysius Knight
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 10:35:00 -
[136]
well still no dev reply
how about fixing all carriers?
Thanatos 5% bonus to fighter damg, 5% to racal figher damg per lvl
Archon 5% bonus to armour resistances per lvl, 5% bonus to racal fighter damg per lvl
Chimera 5% bonus to Sheild resistances per lvl, 5% bonus to racal fighter damg per lvl
Nighoggur 5% bonus to Fighter tracking per lvl, 5% bonus to racal fighter damg per lvl
hows that sound?
|
Emno
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 10:42:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Aloysius Knight
hows that sound?
balanced
tho caldari should be the ones doing loads of damage going by Linkage + Linkage
|
KilROCK
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 11:03:00 -
[138]
Just give the nidhoggur 5% damage per level and suddenly every minmatar will be happy. Well, I'll still train for a thanatos but meh.
It's not only the nidhoggur that needs fixing. I'd love to be able to use 4 freaking guns on the naglfar, and MAYBE have the ability to fit citadel torps if i wanted to use them.
Oh wait, too bad the new trend is to force everyone to train for stinking missile skills.
Originally by: KilROCK I make sigs, evemail me if interested.
|
Aloysius Knight
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 11:10:00 -
[139]
ohhh thats another idea
add 4 turret slots to the Nidhoggur and 5 to the Hel
change the bouns to 7.5 reduction to rof per lvl
mmmmm
|
Scalor Valentis
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 21:08:00 -
[140]
ffs, devs, say something
[23] Member: BoB Alt whoe
Lelos or Cocordokken! |
|
Pesadel0
|
Posted - 2006.04.09 23:03:00 -
[141]
IsnŠt the naglfar one of most damaging dreads with his four highs?Honest question because i'am training for one
As for the minmatar carrier its poo i will never train for that.
|
Princess Beefcurtains
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 03:33:00 -
[142]
I fly a Nid, and I say "Make it Uber Alles!" cause we need some love
I say... ehm... forget bonus completely and make it able to fit 2 turrets ftw j/k, but seriously, no matter what people say, its a totally pointless bonus as to keep even 2 going for any length of time you need to have like 5+ cap II fitted which means your lock time is **** so you actually loose more time than you gain cause it takes you like 10 sec to lock a bs. If for any reason you need to tank as well as transfer, you need all your mids for cap mods. maybe, just maybe, if you made the cap recharge a crapload faster or made the cap 3x bigger it could fit this 'role' its been supposedly given, which still leaves it the most vulnerable carrier by far. To those who have never fought in fleet battles or large gang engagements, one thing that is sure is this: Targets are called out by the gang/squad leader, these targets then have fire concentrated on them. What ship the hostile leader chooses can be guessed but not known so with carrier in field the bonus is useless cause you cant be ready to rep every one and also concentrated fire = dead ship in next to no time anyways. Having the carrier at a SS to remote rep ships returning from battle is pointless also as 9/10 a ship thats been shot at is killed or scram and cant get out anyways so the only ones you get come back 9/10 are the guys who ran away and have no damage anyways. Which leaves us with repping other cap ships like other carriers... but why would you need to do that in a ss and how would that help in the least in battle when it means your left the most vuln target cause you use all your cap repping another ship which already has a bonus to protect itself.
The bonus is useless, there is no argument, its 100% pointless and in fact worstens the carrier if used.
FIN
UNHAXXORABLE TECH II SIG OMGWTFh4xX0rPwn3dBBQ!!!111elevenone ~kieron |
Lonectzn
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 03:58:00 -
[143]
Edited by: Lonectzn on 10/04/2006 03:58:55
Originally by: Scalor Valentis
A: 100km + Range on them B: Instalock C: Beter health managment systems to ACTUALY see who needs the repping. D: Repairer repairs Before cycletime ends, and reloads acording it, not repairing only after the cycle ends. E: All above
Since I can't fly a carrier (yet) can't comment with much credibility. However that don't stop me commenting =)
A: Would be nice, doesn't need to be that high though B: True, but better would be a way of repping without locking. C: Hell yeah!!! D: Or just reduce the cycle time (and other stats accordingly) to a couple seconds.
-----------------
|
Scalor Valentis
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 05:56:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Pesadel0 IsnŠt the naglfar one of most damaging dreads with his four highs?Honest question because i'am training for one
As for the minmatar carrier its poo i will never train for that.
Not anymore,
Guess what happened since the release of sentry gun drones ;)?
Yes, the Moros can outdamage Nafglafar hands down, sideways.
[23] Member: BoB Alt whoe
Lelos or Cocordokken! |
Porro
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 06:29:00 -
[145]
Just a tad offtopic but I thought id bite. The moros can't use its drones on a pos, which is what dreadnaughts are for; pos killing. They're not very useful/cost effective in a fleet battle.
and looking at the nidhoggur bonus it does seem a bit weird :( ---------------------------------------------------- (22:01:14) (Sangxianc) you, porro, have madder skillzors than i, sang, do
|
Aloysius Knight
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 07:14:00 -
[146]
as far as i know you can use sentry drones on a pos
|
Princess Beefcurtains
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 07:16:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Aloysius Knight as far as i know you can use sentry drones on a pos
you can but the pos will pop them soon as it switches target to them
UNHAXXORABLE TECH II SIG OMGWTFh4xX0rPwn3dBBQ!!!111elevenone ~kieron |
KilROCK
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 07:20:00 -
[148]
Moros > Naglfar, hands down. CCP kinda owned most minmatar specced pilots by adding those stupid half/half turret/missile.
Just 5 ogre II with level 4 dread skill + level 5 drone skills and you do 977DPS.
The DPS of sentry drones might be lower, but it's still a huge chunk of 800DPS ++
Well, you can only have 20 heavy drones, oh yea... Only
Originally by: KilROCK I make sigs, evemail me if interested.
|
Golan Trevize
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 07:55:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Aloysius Knight
Thanatos 5% bonus to fighter damg, 5% to racal figher damg per lvl
Archon 5% bonus to armour resistances per lvl, 5% bonus to racal fighter damg per lvl
Chimera 5% bonus to Sheild resistances per lvl, 5% bonus to racal fighter damg per lvl
Nighoggur 5% bonus to Fighter tracking per lvl, 5% bonus to racal fighter damg per lvl
hows that sound?
That is a super duper idea , Minnes get a usefull bonus , Thanatos is nerfed sllightly and the other carriers is brought in line with Thanatos.
Oh and i do not wanna sound like im sucking up to GMŠs, but they do read these boards so lets keep it civil and act like adults, we just continue to plead our case and eventually their eyes will open.
The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
|
Pesadel0
|
Posted - 2006.04.10 07:59:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Scalor Valentis
Originally by: Pesadel0 IsnŠt the naglfar one of most damaging dreads with his four highs?Honest question because i'am training for one
As for the minmatar carrier its poo i will never train for that.
Not anymore,
Guess what happened since the release of sentry gun drones ;)?
Yes, the Moros can outdamage Nafglafar hands down, sideways.
Why train for other carriers then?Because as i see it the moros kicks ass ,i knew it was going to be like this, now i feel depressed
I dont fly the dread yet but man ,do i feel i'am on a road to self destruction
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |