| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Stamm
Amarr
   |
Posted - 2006.07.20 00:28:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Secondly you haven't proven to me that a carrier can go anywhere. There is a lot of logistics involved in moving 1 carrier and if you flew one you'd know. But I assume you don't since you talk as if you know nothing about it. Low sec is very dangerous, moreso than 0.0 even in the heart of alliance land. You are at a disadvantage in 0.4 space since carriers don't work properly there.
Assumptions.... wrong ones...
A carrier can go anywhere it likes. You'd know if you had the proper skills to fly one.
All you need to do is get the cyno fielding ship to wherever you want the carrier to be - log the pilot off in a 400AU deep safe if you like.
But what all this boils down to is this.
You want space. You see alliances claiming regions and not using all of it. You seem to think you should have it, so you want game mechanics that allow you the logistics to move into that space, and out safely.
If you want your own few systems or a constellation for your corporation, then go out and get one. Pick one, decide you're going to live there, shoot anyone that tries to mine or rat in it, and safespot and log when hostiles come, they'll get bored of coming after you and you can live there forever - or until someone else wants to put the effort into it.
Either that or approach an alliance diplomatically and offer to live in their space. You'd be surprised how many alliances have space they aren't using, and would like someone non-hostile to live there, simply to prevent hostiles living there instead.
But you cannot have Eve with empire building alliances if you just change game mechanics to bypass it so your corp doesn't have to deal with it.
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 00:42:00 -
[32]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
With all due respect, this is a terrible idea simply because of the sheer power jump clones have in EVE. A mothership is not restricted to alliances, we've seen smaller corporations beat them to the punch, and even certain individuals trying to buy one solo (albeit being exploiting dirtbags in the latter).
Well me and my CEO are working up to motherships and to say my CEO is an exploiting is pretty rude since he is about as clean as saint peter and provides the object explorer at no cost to the eve community.
Quote:
A Mothership holds a maximum of 45 clones. Out of an alliance of 1000+ with peak activity of 200 pilots in alliance chat on a daily basis, this is nothing. You'd need a small fleet of motherships to ensure that all your active pvpers can participate on the front lines. They can also carry around 40 cruisers and 30 frigates, which comes down to one replacement per person in one fleet. Still as impressed? Motherships are not qualified to be called alliance-scale toys, they're within range of any medium to large sized 0.0 corporation.
If a small corp takes a carrier out to 0.0 with 30 frigates, or two carriers with 1 with frigs and the other with cruisers, and gets members into shuttles to go run blockades then what is the problem in opening up smaller clone vats to carriers ( lets say 15 ) so that you aren't ruining intelligance by having a big blob swarm out to a cyno that is saying 'here I am meet me at my ship so we can have tea and pie?'
Quote:
If every jackhole and his dog started hopping around the map for the price of a new pair of pants, we'd see more abuse of the travel system than innovative combat. Cause lets face it, Corp Taxi would be a role more common than diplomat. I wholeheartedly disagree that all game mechanics should be given to everyone. EVE is not a level playing field but for only one moment in your existance - creation. Everyone starts off with the same wealth. Where you go from there, and what powers you wield is dependant on how much effort you put in.
First of all diplomats in EVE don't work againt alliances unless you bring frankensence and mur. All I need to do is ask whoever exerts force on a region to let me stay and if the system I like is worth anything you bet your bottom dollar the anser is no. Diplomacy is over... if they wanna come remove me then they can. All I want is for the unestablished to have a logic way of exerting their collective muscle without having to fight everyone to get to where they are going.
Maybe there can be a case that those who own areas now had to but then again there weren't capital ships out then. I don't think a carrier should have 45 clones but 15 is not a bad number and surely wouldn't be an exploit.
Quote:
The 'little guy' is nigh on unstoppable with current mechanics. True territorial control is still the same as it was 3 years ago. Whoever has more people in the system owns it. Putting your name on the map means nothing.
The little pirate might not be easy to swat but the little industrialists and freelancers are.
Team Minmatar
Carriers need Clone Vats
|
res0nance
Dark Cartel
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 00:51:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Ok lets put it this way stamm...
The way EVE is going all the tools are being given to large alliances to put vice grips on 0.0 space. Large alliances claim every reagion in space. Some war over identical claims. Noone owns a good 80% of space yet they claim it because they can. They build dread fleets.
They go and take down half a billion or so in POS equipment and atleast another half billion in time spent setting up the POS. There is no balance to the risk vs reward. The alliance isn't going to loose anything and the corp is going to loose everything. This is the way 0.0 works right now. Buy a pass or sneak in and risk everything. Eitherway the alliance has you bent over a desk.
Now...
What would a clone vat on a carrier bring to the game? It would give small corps the ability to get their voice heard. It would open up PvP to people in much the same way GoonFleet has. Carebears wouldn't dream of 'one day' being able to traverse 0.0 they could clone to a carrier and grab an assault frig.
It would also allow Large Alliances to field tactical incursions to their enemy. Blobs? Why bother? You can send 10 carriers out with differnt complements. You can send 1 carrier with frigs, 1 carrier with HACs and interdictors and 1 carrier with command ships. 3 squads to tactically engage at different areas and one for backup.
Now... you want chaos? You have to deal with the defending alliance and also have to look for random corp x that has the same ability. This could lead to more targets OR more allies. Battleships can fight over choke points and frig, destroyer, cruiser and battlecruisers can battle in the field like it SHOULD BE. It could also lead to small, unknown corps getting the ability to prove themselves in battle and get reputation. It would shake up the monotony of 0.0 politics and the alliance elitism.
As it stands now... only the best alliances have the tools at their disposal. Its go to 0.0 and be at the mercy of someone bigger.
QFT.
|
Jovius Marginus
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 00:55:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Stamm
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Secondly you haven't proven to me that a carrier can go anywhere. There is a lot of logistics involved in moving 1 carrier and if you flew one you'd know. But I assume you don't since you talk as if you know nothing about it. Low sec is very dangerous, moreso than 0.0 even in the heart of alliance land. You are at a disadvantage in 0.4 space since carriers don't work properly there.
Assumptions.... wrong ones...
A carrier can go anywhere it likes. You'd know if you had the proper skills to fly one.
All you need to do is get the cyno fielding ship to wherever you want the carrier to be - log the pilot off in a 400AU deep safe if you like.
But what all this boils down to is this.
You want space. You see alliances claiming regions and not using all of it. You seem to think you should have it, so you want game mechanics that allow you the logistics to move into that space, and out safely.
If you want your own few systems or a constellation for your corporation, then go out and get one. Pick one, decide you're going to live there, shoot anyone that tries to mine or rat in it, and safespot and log when hostiles come, they'll get bored of coming after you and you can live there forever - or until someone else wants to put the effort into it.
Either that or approach an alliance diplomatically and offer to live in their space. You'd be surprised how many alliances have space they aren't using, and would like someone non-hostile to live there, simply to prevent hostiles living there instead.
But you cannot have Eve with empire building alliances if you just change game mechanics to bypass it so your corp doesn't have to deal with it.
Well a small gang of cruisers can go anywhere they want also. This just makes forming and using small gangs easier with the added risk of losing a 3b ISK ship(from my ideas thread). This wont change anything from the way it is now. How will having a 3b ISK carrier in a system allow you to claim it anymore than if it wasnt there. All it will do is provide a nice juicy target for alliances and lead to more small gang combat and more use of carriers for more than ss firepower(again see ideas about carriers using cap weapons from my thread.)
The fact is all these ideas will lead to is a small boost for small gangs which will be fun for everyone. 0.0 conquest will still be based around POS killing blobs and if an alliance truly controls an area they will see a carrier jumping in as a yummy 3b ISK killmail and not a threat to taking over their whole area of control. This could also be used with some of Seleene's ideas from the corps forum regarding having the only way into the new 0.0 regions be cynos. Another way this could be balenced is to have any carriers using clones to have to use a second kind of cyno that can only be created by a new t2 class ship that is BS sized.
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 01:06:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Stamm
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Secondly you haven't proven to me that a carrier can go anywhere. There is a lot of logistics involved in moving 1 carrier and if you flew one you'd know. But I assume you don't since you talk as if you know nothing about it. Low sec is very dangerous, moreso than 0.0 even in the heart of alliance land. You are at a disadvantage in 0.4 space since carriers don't work properly there.
Assumptions.... wrong ones...
A carrier can go anywhere it likes. You'd know if you had the proper skills to fly one.
All you need to do is get the cyno fielding ship to wherever you want the carrier to be - log the pilot off in a 400AU deep safe if you like.
But what all this boils down to is this.
You want space. You see alliances claiming regions and not using all of it. You seem to think you should have it, so you want game mechanics that allow you the logistics to move into that space, and out safely.
If you want your own few systems or a constellation for your corporation, then go out and get one. Pick one, decide you're going to live there, shoot anyone that tries to mine or rat in it, and safespot and log when hostiles come, they'll get bored of coming after you and you can live there forever - or until someone else wants to put the effort into it.
Either that or approach an alliance diplomatically and offer to live in their space. You'd be surprised how many alliances have space they aren't using, and would like someone non-hostile to live there, simply to prevent hostiles living there instead.
Ok lets get one thing str8. I have jump drive operation 5 and jump drive calibration 4. It takes me 3 jump drive opterations to go where I go. You say you can go anywhere you want but you forget that EVE is a massive place. To go ANYWHERE you need MASSIVE logistics which is not feesible. You stick to a region if you don't want to burn as much fuel as your carrier and time and effort cynoing.
Don't believe me? Go Here and start pushing out some numbers on how many jumps on my skills it will take you then work out the logistics and come back to me saying you can go where you want. Then remember it takes 2 to tango and 0.4 is a hostle b*tch of a place to move across NPC empires to prove you can do so.
I want smaller scale logistics available in proportion to what the big guy has since my moniker is a small scale version of the bigger guy.
Alliance diplomacy is cruel, egofilled, and giving intelligance away for free. Especially when they don't own it. Now I don't disagree to what you are saying about moving out to someplace and making havok until you become more of an annoyance to fight. Most of the time you will be given alliance offers to join since you prove your worth or they save face and allow you to rent at a reasonable price. However, if you don't see the game changing to allow the alliances to kick dust in your face with motherships soon and destroy diplomacy then you really are naive.
They will be able to do what you think corporations should and make it harder for corporations to do what you say they should. Hmmmmmmmm...... goofy?
I don't need a lesson on 0.0 politics from you btw...
Quote:
But you cannot have Eve with empire building alliances if you just change game mechanics to bypass it so your corp doesn't have to deal with it.
But you can't have an EVE where empires can get wide scale logistics bonus when there really is no good reason why they should.
Team Minmatar
Carriers need Clone Vats
|
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 01:07:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Outa Rileau
Originally by: XGS Crimson
i <3 andrea 
It's a dude...
Being desired is boundless!
|
Murukan
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 02:02:00 -
[37]
DC saying anyone can get a mothership is rather rich considering your alliance scouts like crazy on sisi for cap shipyards then dread zergs anyone that has them.
In rust we trust!!! |
Outa Rileau
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 02:04:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Murukan
DC saying anyone can get a mothership is rather rich considering your alliance scouts like crazy on sisi for cap shipyards then dread zergs anyone that has them.
They remove pos' when they mirror, afaik
-------------------------
Getting Sig Removed / Rank 8 / SP: 762039 of 2048000 
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 02:07:00 -
[39]
While motherships can be had by the small guys... they are still at the mercy of an alliance to sell them one ( which I don't neccessarily disagree with). That said, if any alliance is smart enough they won't do it since that corporation just became a major threat to them.
Team Minmatar
Carriers need Clone Vats
|
Maya Rkell
Corsets and Carebears
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 02:10:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
What would a clone vat on a carrier bring to the game? It would give small corps the ability to get their voice heard. It would open up PvP to people in much the same way GoonFleet has. Carebears wouldn't dream of 'one day' being able to traverse 0.0 they could clone to a carrier and grab an assault frig.
Goonfleet's history is one of zergs, standoffs and outright defeats without carriers figuring, so I'd not be using them as a model.
Clone vats are much of the reason to get a mothership, and quite apart from that it is FAR too potent an ability to give to a sub-1 billion ship. The sort of instant movement that provides should take COMMITMENT, if you want to get it.
Moreover, it gives large alliance unparalled strategic deployment ability on the cheap, doing nasty things to smaller corps. The large alliances allready HAVE the strategic movement advantage, and I don't see how amplifying it further to every csrrier will help.
We use Carriers VERY successfully in Empire space, incidentally. We're looking at a mothership. They are not THAT expensive to a corp with T2 production abilities, again like ourselves.
Gee, DC and I agree. This is usually significant.
|
Jovius Marginus
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 02:18:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Jovius Marginus on 20/07/2006 02:18:38
*double post* =(
|
Jovius Marginus
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 02:18:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Jovius Marginus on 20/07/2006 02:19:38
This would be a boost to Motherships also. Carriers could still only move small cruiser fleets while Motherships would have the useful ability of moving larger BS fleets. Also Motherships could move 3x as many people, use siege mods(under my idea), and would do more damage with fighters and cap weapons(again under my idea).
This would be a boost to small corps and large alliances. It seems people are arguing both sides. Also with a cost nerf it would be a bigger loss to lose one but they would be much more useful at doing what they were designed to do, field and support small fleets. Motherships will still be worth the extra ISK for a specific role they fill. One idea to nerf Carriers as mobile stations would be to have all clones last 30min and put a 5min time between all jumps with clones on board.
|
DigitalCommunist
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 02:57:00 -
[43]
I don't think you get the basic jist of it, still. It doesn't matter if a carrier could only hold 3 clones, it would still be used for travel more than combat. You admit that pirates/pvpers don't really need this ability to thrive behind enemy lines, and that you're aiming towards freelancers and industrialists. So how is this anything but a personal jumpdrive for anybody with a billion isk? Its a lame way of evading the risks associated with stargate travel, which remains the only true method of locking down a solarsystem in EVE. Any form of cloning is just a watered down version of teleportation, which is a huge deal when you consider how many people would be using this. Already Jump Clones allow alliances to control more territory than they would normally.
This change would help the alliances exert their influence over more area, which means anyone without a carrier is going to get the short end of the stick as roaming gank fleets are covering more distance. You're just upping the entry requirements for 0.0, even if not literally, it will be percieved that way. Fact is, once you infiltrate alliance space and pick some hole to grind in, you're not in any serious danger even as a freelancer/industrialist. Its the hauling of goods back and forth which can be difficult; lo and behold, carriers save the day.
It sounds more like a want than a need, to be honest. There isn't much to discuss here, moves like this would certainly loosen up control of territory but thats a move in the wrong direction. Players should be able to control space to a greater extent, not less. I want to see people forced into fighting for their right to be somewhere, and any smaller entities either settle for less lucurative space or strike a deal with the resident landlords. Homogeneous gankzones with bunnyhop travel would really shaft EVE big time.
You're better off just going for a mothership, because theres big epeen value in that for a small corp (shows you're on par with some alliances). This gives you a bit more respect and bargaining power for future deals, than would normally be given to a smaller entity. And of course, an advantage is only an advantage until everyone has it. Then it becomes a necessary part of every day life.. like instajumps ¼_¼
Purchasing Complex Fullerene Shards, contact me ingame. |
Jovius Marginus
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 03:05:00 -
[44]
No alliane in the game effectely controls their territory. If I wanted too I could effectivly rat anywhere.
How would this change anything. All a person has to do is wait and use a scout and they can eventually get to any system in the game. Are you saying people would just log in and out carriers. Then put a timer on them for warping out on logoffs. Also as I said Carrier's clones would last 30 minutes meaning all pilots that want to use it would have to be there right before it jumps.
Basically I want to use its ability to move a small gang of ships quickly and not its ability to function as a mobile station.
|
sr blackout
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 04:45:00 -
[45]
maybe they should have made mothership tier3 or something and put a tier2 carrier that cost half the mothership? and has this feature? and few more fighters?
but ya atm i think cap ships have lots of issues on there own... hp, size, fixing fighters, more cap items... and the list goes on and on....
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 04:50:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 20/07/2006 04:51:39
@DC industrialists and freelancers do not mean they are devoid of PvP.
Also, giving corporations a miniature ability to field their navy in a similar mannor to the group of allied corporations is nothing ground breaking.
A corporation can deploy a POS. The alliance gets massive benefits to that system. There will be new tools to make alliance control even more concrete. You can sit there behind a massive dread fleet at your disposal and tell me that I could somehow sneak my carrier into Delve, setup a pos and mine something worth the trip of my corp m8s, and not worry that your alliance doesn't take it down with a dread fleet while I logg off to avoid the local residents. And then feel safe that my corp isn't going to get some magical war dec from an corp in empire composed of bored BoB members?
Seems to me that the more small corps 1-60 members, will somehow always have the ability to be shafted by the bigger players outside the bounds of reason and the big boys are continuing to get tools to improve that seperation.
I am all about risk vs reward but tbh it seems that the risk vs reward is really starting to look like the eiffel tower to a midget when it comes to 0.0 space.
Team Minmatar
Carriers need Clone Vats
|
Ange1
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.20 18:57:00 -
[47]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
You're better off just going for a mothership, because theres big epeen value in that for a small corp (shows you're on par with some alliances). This gives you a bit more respect and bargaining power for future deals, than would normally be given to a smaller entity. And of course, an advantage is only an advantage until everyone has it. Then it becomes a necessary part of every day life.. like instajumps ¼_¼
I got the impression that the alliance powers were trying to control the production of Motherships and Titans to prevent them from getting into the hands of small entities, like The Establishment.
The hard part isn't getting all the parts together in my opinion, its waiting 3 and a half weeks while it builds inside the Capital Shipyard where its vulnerable to the OMGWTFBBQ blob of doom and then your months of hard work is down the drain.
The Establishment is at your service...
|
TuRtLe HeAd
The Bratwurst Burglars
|
Posted - 2006.08.23 13:53:00 -
[48]
Quote:
Carriers need Clone Vats
They do ? Not so sure about that. |
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.08.23 14:04:00 -
[49]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
A Mothership holds a maximum of 45 clones. Out of an alliance of 1000+ with peak activity of 200 pilots in alliance chat on a daily basis, this is nothing. You'd need a small fleet of motherships to ensure that all your active pvpers can participate on the front lines. They can also carry around 40 cruisers and 30 frigates, which comes down to one replacement per person in one fleet. Still as impressed? Motherships are not qualified to be called alliance-scale toys, they're within range of any medium to large sized 0.0 corporation.
To note, the nyx can only hold for example 15 thorax and 27 Incursus. Its only the unpackaged size and thus even motherships are very limited in what they can carry.
A hauler for logistics, and a few recons and you've filled most of it TBH.
|
Nyxus
GALAXIAN
|
Posted - 2006.08.23 14:12:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Nyxus on 23/08/2006 14:12:19
Personally I don't see much of a problem with Carriers getting clone vats. Even the motherships holds are too small to effectively launch much more than small scouting group. Carriers wouldn't be *THAT* good.
TBH I would rather see carriers able to use gates as well as cynos. THAT would be really usefull.
Nyxus
Originally by: Tux
The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
|
Rawthorm
Gallente
The Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.08.23 14:15:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Ok lets get one thing str8. I have jump drive operation 5 and jump drive calibration 4. It takes me 3 jump drive opterations to go where I go. You say you can go anywhere you want but you forget that EVE is a massive place. To go ANYWHERE you need MASSIVE logistics which is not feesible. You stick to a region if you don't want to burn as much fuel as your carrier and time and effort cynoing.
Don't believe me? Go Here and start pushing out some numbers on how many jumps on my skills it will take you then work out the logistics and come back to me saying you can go where you want. Then remember it takes 2 to tango and 0.4 is a hostle b*tch of a place to move across NPC empires to prove you can do so.
I want smaller scale logistics available in proportion to what the big guy has since my moniker is a small scale version of the bigger guy.
Alliance diplomacy is cruel, egofilled, and giving intelligance away for free. Especially when they don't own it. Now I don't disagree to what you are saying about moving out to someplace and making havok until you become more of an annoyance to fight. Most of the time you will be given alliance offers to join since you prove your worth or they save face and allow you to rent at a reasonable price. However, if you don't see the game changing to allow the alliances to kick dust in your face with motherships soon and destroy diplomacy then you really are naive.
They will be able to do what you think corporations should and make it harder for corporations to do what you say they should. Hmmmmmmmm...... goofy?
I don't need a lesson on 0.0 politics from you btw...
You moan to much. We move the nyx daily and it has half the range a carrier does.
Logistics is just another way of saying effort, tho tbh i dont see much effort in slapping a cyno on a frig, filling the carrier with fuel and jumping across the gallaxy.
Hell you got a long way to go? Use those spare character slots and seed some disposable kestrel flying cyno creating alts where u need to go.
|
Skva
Caldari
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2006.08.23 14:38:00 -
[52]
Carriers should be able to carry a large frigate fleet, a considerabley sized cruiser gang, or a couple of battleships.
Motherships should be able to carry a large frigate fleet, a large cruiser fleet, and enough BS to get pilots back into the fight at fleet battles. (Think tens of ships).
I'm not sure if giving them the ability to use clone vats is a good one, as it gives people even less of a reason to get a mothership. Then again, it would allow them to be used as a very valuable tool for constructing ops into hostile space. Sneak a cyno frig in, cyno up, jump in the carrier,pod fleet jumps to carrier, fits, carrier stays in as support for giving them more ships when they get destroyed.
May be pretty fun actually, and not make them too similar to motherships.
Your signature is too large! Please resize it according to the forum guidelines. Jacques Archambault |
Kerm
Gallente
Turbulent Subversion
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 12:48:00 -
[53]
Id like to see carriers being able to field a limited number of jump clones. Just change a few or add to the carrier bonus.
How about:
Thanatos: 1 Jump Clone per Carrier level (this way you get total of 5, smaller than others but remember the Thanatos has a Fighter dmg advantage so it cant be to powerful.
Chimera: 2 Jump clones per level (total of 10)
Archon: 2 Jumps per level (total of 10)
Nidhoggur: Can deploy 3 (total of 18) maybe give it a jump range bonus too, make this one useful as a quick strike craft like the Matar are suposed to be. Maybe take away the extra fighter or fighter range bonus.
Its all up for tweaking here and there but thats a basic outline of how id like to see jump vats in carriers deployed. Anyone else?
|
Thelonius Rat
Caldari
Praxiteles Inc.
E N I G M A
|
Posted - 2006.10.29 14:44:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Kerm
Id like to see carriers being able to field a limited number of jump clones. Just change a few or add to the carrier bonus.
How about:
Thanatos: 1 Jump Clone per Carrier level (this way you get total of 5, smaller than others but remember the Thanatos has a Fighter dmg advantage so it cant be to powerful.
Chimera: 2 Jump clones per level (total of 10)
Archon: 2 Jumps per level (total of 10)
Nidhoggur: Can deploy 3 (total of 18) maybe give it a jump range bonus too, make this one useful as a quick strike craft like the Matar are suposed to be. Maybe take away the extra fighter or fighter range bonus.
Its all up for tweaking here and there but thats a basic outline of how id like to see jump vats in carriers deployed. Anyone else?
I think this is quite a good idea, but I think 10 clones is too much. Perhaps if they all had 1 clone per level, but started with different bases (where Thanatos would get the smallest base and Nidhoggur would get the largest) it would be better. Jump clones on carriers are a good idea since it makes the game more balanced for smaller corps, but it has to be very limited.
Also there should be a massive skill requirment to use them, and the skills should cost alot (more than 1 bill) so that if you want this clone fielding ability you still have to put some effort into it.
As someone said, it would also make it very very easy for alliences to harras smaller corps easier, but making the jump clone capability limited would make it less attractive for alliences to use fleets of carriers instead of motherships.
------------------------------
PWWWN MASTER OF TEH YOUNIVERSE AND PROUD MEMBER OF PRAXITELES |
Drutort
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.10.29 22:13:00 -
[55]
i would be happy if carries had more space to hold different ships... i wouldnt even mind a restriction on what type of ships fit into the carrier... like have slots so to speak for ships... but give us at least option to move a bs and other ships... instead of just giving them a lot of space and having them be cheap and safe way to transport indies full of stuff
i would rather they had slots of X amount of ships types that can be fit, a combination or so... so that you would not exploit the space for say hauling only... i think that is a logical way of doing it...
having a poor mans clone vat would be the way to go.. and maybe make a t2 carrier and mothership to be t3? while current carriers stay as t1 (not tech)
what it should be is that t2 should be regular clone vat, but far less then mothership... and beef up the mothership a lot more then it is to justify its expensive cost and long production cycle.
the t2 would be something that not rich solo players would get, but more of corp or alliance level, make it req like the mothership BUT the duration of time to make it cut by half or more, i think its only fair... but a poor mans clone vat for regular carrier would be a cool option i think.. even if its limited to say 1-5 or 5-10 amount... they could make some kind of module that has to stay on your carrier to hold more clones thus nerfing your carriers other functions... I believe that would be a nice alternative while t2 and t3 (mothership) would not need such modules at all
|
Drutort
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.10.29 22:24:00 -
[56]
i just think its far to big of a gap from carrier to mothership... its just not right...
t1 should get more fix for the logi option... they should be the backbone of capital logistics, t2 is well in between t1 and t3 but it should lose the logistics bonuses, instead far more tanking ability command ship bonuses, and fighter dmg bonus as well as a little bit nerfed clone vat then mothership... it should be able to move few BS's
while mothership should have some kind of mix of t1 bonus or from t2 bonus + what it has now, just far more boosted in clone vat, and space
as far as docking ability for t2? i dont really know... its a big ship but its not motehrship or titan... maybe it should be called a capital command ship?
i really think there should be different types of fighters or of that size drones.. and then giving some of the tier lvl carriers different bonuses to them, i believe t1 shoudl be more of a logistics carrier, with bonus to some kind of logistics fighters as well... while t2 a capital command ship with either heavy fighter dmg bonus or something else... and we know i thnk what mothership be... just raw amount of fighters, to give support ships that extra dmg amount
|
Tasty Burger
|
Posted - 2006.10.29 22:40:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 20/07/2006 04:51:39
@DC industrialists and freelancers do not mean they are devoid of PvP.
Also, giving corporations a miniature ability to field their navy in a similar mannor to the group of allied corporations is nothing ground breaking.
A corporation can deploy a POS. The alliance gets massive benefits to that system. There will be new tools to make alliance control even more concrete. You can sit there behind a massive dread fleet at your disposal and tell me that I could somehow sneak my carrier into Delve, setup a pos and mine something worth the trip of my corp m8s, and not worry that your alliance doesn't take it down with a dread fleet while I logg off to avoid the local residents. And then feel safe that my corp isn't going to get some magical war dec from an corp in empire composed of bored BoB members?
Seems to me that the more small corps 1-60 members, will somehow always have the ability to be shafted by the bigger players outside the bounds of reason and the big boys are continuing to get tools to improve that seperation.
I am all about risk vs reward but tbh it seems that the risk vs reward is really starting to look like the eiffel tower to a midget when it comes to 0.0 space.
I agree completely. It is extremely hard for a corp to set up any kind of POS operation in 0.0 without some big alliance sending a dread fleet to take it down, just because they can. And the new tools just make it worse for smaller corps, both pvp and industrial ones.
-
It's great being Minmatar, ain't it? |
Shirazz
|
Posted - 2006.10.29 22:41:00 -
[58]
could the idea be that a mothership and titan cant dock and therefore could have a clone vat operational at all times?
I dont see why you would want them on a carrier if its just gonna jettison you as a pod, this is because:
carrier under attack by bses and frigs, in need of help.
pilots jump to carrier
pilots either get instapoped as pods or as frigs, not much difference
|
Shin Ra
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2006.10.29 23:03:00 -
[59]
I really think they need to boost ship bay size. I mean you can't even carry one battleship in a carrier. These things were supposed to be mobile stations, not a place to get more ammo and spare t1 frigs.
|
Dano Sarum
Giants in the Playground
Black Flag Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.18 11:45:00 -
[60]
I would LOVE to see a carrier able to be used like ms are SUPPOSEDLY getting used only on a small scale.
Being able to clone jump with a few of your friends to a deep 0.0 area and roam around in inties ftw.
Even if its 5-10 clones it opens up possibilities.
It's great being Amarr, aint it? |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |