| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
Snuffed Out
6881
   |
Posted - 2014.12.22 22:30:29 -
[31] - Quote
I'm also not buying into any of the OP's arguments.
Dreds are not "dreads" without the use of their Siege Module. Otherwise they are just ungankable battleships that can't hit anything without lots of subcapital support.
Carriers and Rorquals outright obsolete Jump Frieghters and the Bowhead just by entering high-sec as they are better in every concievable way.
And then there are the remote reps, local reps, drones, etc.
To make them even somewhat high-sec viable you would have to cut out almost all of their abilities.
And then we come back to the HP problem.
Basically the OP don't care about the rest of the game as long as he gets the convenience and safety of being able to move through high-sec in his "big boy toys."
Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?"
|
Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden
Workers Trade Federation
177
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 23:34:25 -
[32] - Quote
Is it really so hard to use the search tool?? This stupid topic is brought up nearly every week... |
Amak Boma
Dragon Factory
45
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 00:18:25 -
[33] - Quote
capital ships should be allowed in high security space but with few strong limitations and penalties
from my view carriers and dreads should have several limitations
- no siege from dreads
- not riage from carriers
- industrial cores couuld be limited only to 0.5 space and no auto-repeat.
- cannot access rookie systems
- titans and supercapitals stay still banned from high security space
- supercapitals and titans shall be allowed to throught lowsec-nullsec lowsec-lowsec wormholes .
- no cynosural fields howewer capital ships in high security space should be able to jump between systems on jump freighter rules.
- capital ship production in high security space shall be brought back but only to npc stations one character limit to produce only one capital ship
- 75% dps loss on dreads
- 25% dps loss to carrier that use sentry drones -50% penalty for using small/medium/heavy
- when in highsec carriers should gain bonus to mining drone yield to harvester mining drone usage lets say 55 per skill level
- capital reppers,shield boosters lose 70% of repair amount
- capital remote armor/shield repair/booster loses 50% repair amount
- when suspect flagged player boards capital ship in highsec, local police ships will engag suspect for its timer duration
- criminal flagged player cannot board capital ships for timer duration
- suicide ganking in capital ship should not be allowed in highsecurity space
- pos bashes with capital ships in high security space should be allowed
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
80
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 02:33:36 -
[34] - Quote
I have to fall back on this
If you have to reduce / limit / remove capabilities for them to be allowed into high sec then they do not belong there at all.
Since the OP brought up the English language or more importantly others lack of comprehension I put this into the conversation
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerf
As one can clearly see from this a "reduction" in the capabilities of cap ships in high sec is clearly a nerf. The fact that the nerf only applies to their use in high sec does not mean that it is not a nerf. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2069
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 03:18:41 -
[35] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:
Basically the OP don't care about the rest of the game as long as he gets the convenience and safety of being able to move through high-sec in his "big boy toys."
^^
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group
Templis CALSF
444
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 03:30:22 -
[36] - Quote
Paynus Maiassus wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:Paynus Maiassus wrote:baltec1 wrote:If you have to savagely nerf them to allow them into high sec then they don't belong there in the first place. Nothing would be nerfed except the carriers, which need nerfing completely apart from any issue of high sec. The concept of unbridled firepower outside of a siege mode is the realm of the super cap. That carriers have monstrous power without a siege is fundamentally unbalanced anyway. It's why I have been on tower repping ops with the carriers boot fit. I think carriers should be given an extra high slot and be allowed to fit siege modules and require that the module be active in order to use drone cone control units and get drone number bonuses from the racial carrier skill. Dreads wouldn't be nerfed at all. Rorqs wouldn't be nerfed at all. Carriers are NOT overpowered. Fighter drones can be taken down like any other drones and are easy enough to tackle and avoid. Their dps isn't anything to write home about compared to a few cruisers. They also have the weakest tank in relation to other capitals, especially the minmatar and gallente ones. Fighters aren't the problem. Sentries are. The brunt of the carrier obscenity was taken care of with Phoebe, since they can't be everywhere instantly. However, requiring that they siege is to me a good idea. If it's not to you, fine. That's not the point of the thread. The point of the thread is that caps should be allowed to move through highs secbut not be allowed to utilize their distinctive there. There could still be misuse. A dread outside of siege does DPS like a BS but would still have an amazing tank and could be used as a ratter (with insanely expensive ammo - would not be popular). But overall, my point is to lets caps in highest but clip their wings in highest. So they can be used as transport and be transported in high sec.
I agree with you about sentries, but those can already be used in hisec. Do you think barring them from using triage is enough or would something else have to happen? |
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3113
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 20:58:27 -
[37] - Quote
Paynus Maiassus wrote:ISD please lock. Thread locked at the OP's request.
Mind you, if I would not have locked it, several posts would have been removed for rule infringements.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |