EVE Search - SKYNET.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

SKYNET.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux Feign Disorder 143	Posted - 2015.02.19 13:49:45 - [1] - Quote Is skynet becoming a problem? Put your thoughts.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5864	Posted - 2015.02.19 13:55:24 - [2] - Quote My thoughts are my own, you cannot have them. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 303	Posted - 2015.02.19 14:03:35 - [3] - Quote Skynet has always been just as silly as off-grid boosters. Nothing new in that. I fly Triage Archons. Skynet carrier pilots are pussies. I point my finger at you and laugh mockingly, you plebeians.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 894	Posted - 2015.02.19 14:16:40 - [4] - Quote Assuming your talking about what I think you are then the main problems are pretty simply sorted IMO by (somewhat arbitrarily) making it so that fighters can't be deployed within the normal FF radius of a POS whether its online or not and giving fighters titan style (with some changes to the parameters) damage scaling so that it is much harder for them to apply damage to smaller cruisers and downwards - with the right parameters this would (should) have no impact on their ability to hit bigger stuff (i.e. BCs and upwards).
Jin Kugu Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 20	Posted - 2015.02.19 14:19:34 - [5] - Quote Fighters should lose the effects of all modules on the carrier/super once they are assigned.
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 303	Posted - 2015.02.19 14:20:29 - [6] - Quote Rroff wrote: Assuming your talking about what I think you are then the main problems are pretty simply sorted IMO by (somewhat arbitrarily) making it so that fighters can't be deployed within the normal FF radius of a POS whether its online or not and giving fighters titan style (with some changes to the parameters) damage scaling so that it is much harder for them to apply damage to smaller cruisers and downwards - with the right parameters this would (should) have no impact on their ability to hit bigger stuff (i.e. BCs and upwards). I don't think that damage application from on-grid carriers is an issue. Fighters have sufficiently bad tracking and velocity if you cannot afford to fill all of your module slots with tracking enhancers and navigation computers. EDIT: The above suggestion by Jin isn't actually half-bad either. Skynet carriers are so effective exactly because they can forgot about tank and capaictor and fit an obscene amount of drone damage, navigation and tracking modules.
RomeStar BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective 568	Posted - 2015.02.19 15:06:32 - [7] - Quote Fighters seem to be fine in my book so I don't really know what the OP is complaining about. Signatured removed, CCP Phantom
Phoenix Jones Isogen 5 1078	Posted - 2015.02.19 15:29:51 - [8] - Quote RomeStar wrote: Fighters seem to be fine in my book so I don't really know what the OP is complaining about. http://puu.sh/g3jX2/fa783efa62.jpg You really want to try saying that again with a straight face. Yaay!!!!
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux Feign Disorder 143	Posted - 2015.02.19 15:50:27 - [9] - Quote RomeStar wrote: Fighters seem to be fine in my book so I don't really know what the OP is complaining about. Fine, I guess u are one of the dudes that assigns his drones to a insta lock frigate gate camping.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 136	Posted - 2015.02.19 16:36:33 - [10] - Quote Can somebody please define the meme "SKYNET" in EvE? I know it is a reference to the Terminator movies, but I can't connect it to EvE ... I'm my own NPC alt.
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 303	Posted - 2015.02.19 16:49:56 - [11] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Can somebody please define the meme "SKYNET" in EvE? I know it is a reference to the Terminator movies, but I can't connect it to EvE ... Skynet is a fairly new new term for the fashionable tactic of assigning fighters or fighter bombers to small ships from the safety of a POS and using them as heavy DPS all over the system without putting the carrier or supercarrier at risk.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9825	Posted - 2015.02.19 16:51:11 - [12] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Can somebody please define the meme "SKYNET" in EvE? I know it is a reference to the Terminator movies, but I can't connect it to EvE ... It;'s a term some idjot or another applied to the fact that carriers can delegate control of fighters to other ships off grid while sitting in a safe/at a pos/on a station etc. The use of the term is to pretend something that has existed for a decade is somehow new and unbalanced when in reality it's old and the users of the term of butt hurt at some lose ....to an old game mechanic. Just like "drone assist", the users of the term misidentify the problem. Instead of putting the 'blame' where it belongs (on the inclusion of drone damage and tracking mods and buffing of Drone ships like the Ishtar, things that didn't exist in the past), the instead focus on the older game mechanics (Drone Assist, Fighter Delegation) and lose their minds. Mainly because they like drone bonuses and drone mods but don't like it when other people use those things to kill them in a blob or from afar. In other words, it's just the same old "those guys used something that killed me...ME of all people, Don't they know who the F$%^ I am? TO THE FORUMS to right this injustice!!!" crying we all shold be used to by now.
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 303	Posted - 2015.02.19 16:55:23 - [13] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: It;'s a term some idjot or another applied to the fact that carriers can delegate control of fighters to other ships off grid while sitting in a safe/at a pos/on a station etc. The use of the term is to pretend something that has existed for a decade is somehow new and unbalanced when in reality it's old and the users of the term of butt hurt at some loss ....to an old game mechanic. Just like "drone assist", the users of the term misidentify the problem. Instead of putting the 'blame' where it belongs (on the inclusion of drone damage and tracking mods and buffing of Drone ships like the Ishtar, things that didn't exist in the past), the instead focus on the older game mechanics (Drone Assist, Fighter Delegation) and lose their minds. Mainly because they like drone bonuses and drone mods but don't like it when other people use those things to kill them in a blob or from afar. In other words, it's just the same old "those guys used something that killed me...ME of all people, Don't they know who the F$%^ I am? TO THE FORUMS to right this injustice!!!" crying we all shold be used to by now. It is true that assigning fighters was a fringe tactic before drone stat boosting modules were a thing. Drone modules themselves are also not really a problem, since you need to compromise tank and capacitor to fit them on an on-grid carrier, which means it will die in a fire in an amusing and embarassing manner. It becomes a problem when you can fit a carrier for full damage and full damage application without ever putting it at risk, so you get fighters with unreasonably high tracking and damage without the tradeoffs you would otherwise have to suffer for those fitting choises.
Jack Hayson Atztech Inc. Ixtab. 98	Posted - 2015.02.19 16:56:57 - [14] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Can somebody please define the meme "SKYNET" in EvE? I know it is a reference to the Terminator movies, but I can't connect it to EvE ... Off grid fighter assist from regular carriers or supers. The carrier is usually positioned slightly outside of a POS force field so that he can get to safety almost instantly. (can also be sitting next to a freshly anchored tower that doesn't have a FF yet) Since the carrier isn't in any realistic danger of getting shot it doesn't need to fit tank and can instead fit for max drone damage and application, which in turn enables them to even hit frigs. The tactic itself has existed for a really long time, but it's relatively new that fighters get benefits from drone modules which enables them to apply insane dps even to small targets.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9825	Posted - 2015.02.19 17:10:09 - [15] - Quote Godfrey Silvarna wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It;'s a term some idjot or another applied to the fact that carriers can delegate control of fighters to other ships off grid while sitting in a safe/at a pos/on a station etc. The use of the term is to pretend something that has existed for a decade is somehow new and unbalanced when in reality it's old and the users of the term of butt hurt at some loss ....to an old game mechanic. Just like "drone assist", the users of the term misidentify the problem. Instead of putting the 'blame' where it belongs (on the inclusion of drone damage and tracking mods and buffing of Drone ships like the Ishtar, things that didn't exist in the past), the instead focus on the older game mechanics (Drone Assist, Fighter Delegation) and lose their minds. Mainly because they like drone bonuses and drone mods but don't like it when other people use those things to kill them in a blob or from afar. In other words, it's just the same old "those guys used something that killed me...ME of all people, Don't they know who the F$%^ I am? TO THE FORUMS to right this injustice!!!" crying we all shold be used to by now. It is true that assigning fighters was a fringe tactic before drone stat boosting modules were a thing. Drone modules themselves are also not really a problem, since you need to compromise tank and capacitor to fit them on an on-grid carrier, which means it will die in a fire in an amusing and embarassing manner. It becomes a problem when you can fit a carrier for full damage and full damage application without ever putting it at risk, so you get fighters with unreasonably high tracking and damage without the tradeoffs you would otherwise have to suffer for those fitting choises. That means the problem is the tracking mods and ability of fighters to benefit from those, not the actual mechanic of fighter delegation (which is the thing everyone seems to want nerfed).
Noriko Mai 2063	Posted - 2015.02.19 17:19:19 - [16] - Quote Skynet is already active. Look up the amazon cloud incident on April 21st, 2011. It seems doing quite well on it's way to world domination. Come On Everybody, support Dark Opaque theme
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 304	Posted - 2015.02.19 17:22:38 - [17] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: That means the problem is the tracking mods and ability of fighters to benefit from those, not the actual mechanic of fighter delegation (which is the thing everyone seems to want nerfed). I am arguing that those modules are fine and well in balance when used in on-grid drone boats, including carriers. These are the conditions ships should be balanced in. Delegating was a fringe mechanic no one would have cared about, before these modules were added, so why should we lose the modules and keep the fringe mechanic no one would have missed if it was lost before it was made viable by the modules?
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 289	Posted - 2015.02.19 17:33:12 - [18] - Quote I have been in fights with these fighters. They still have plenty of tracking problems. You also learn where these guys are, its not like they have a POS in every system. And if your doing FW or some such in such a system, it is not so hard to deal with the drones with a proper fleet. These things are not cheap (fighters and fighter bombers. ) But they don't show up on kill boards :( Oh also does the carrier need to be outside the force field to assist? I would assume so, clearly dropping on top of a POS is no trivial matter however. But if so that is not zero risk. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9826	Posted - 2015.02.19 17:40:40 - [19] - Quote Godfrey Silvarna wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: That means the problem is the tracking mods and ability of fighters to benefit from those, not the actual mechanic of fighter delegation (which is the thing everyone seems to want nerfed). I am arguing that those modules are fine and well in balance when used in on-grid drone boats, including carriers. These are the conditions ships should be balanced in. Delegating was a fringe mechanic no one would have cared about, before these modules were added, so why should we lose the modules and keep the fringe mechanic no one would have missed if it was lost before it was made viable by the modules? This is exaclty what I alluded to in my post. "I like being about to put on mods that boosts MY drones on grid, I don't like the fact that other people can do it from off grid). The actual 'solution' (to this thing that isn't actually a problem) is to remove carrier and module bonuses from assigned fighters (like it used to be, fighters assigned from a Thanny were no better than any other carrier's fighters because the Thanny's fighter bonus wasn't applied to it's off grid fighters), not to screw with a mechanic that isn't actually the problem.
Jack Hayson Atztech Inc. Ixtab. 99	Posted - 2015.02.19 18:22:45 - [20] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: Oh also does the carrier need to be outside the force field to assist? Technically yes, but since they can just sit at the edge they can enter it at any moment.
Agent Unknown Night Theifs DamnedNation 22	Posted - 2015.02.19 18:30:03 - [21] - Quote Oh, another one of these threads...
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 19936	Posted - 2015.02.19 19:01:51 - [22] - Quote I don't see how this is a problem, unless your name is either John or Sarah Connor.. *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?* Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
Asuka Solo Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises 2758	Posted - 2015.02.19 19:07:33 - [23] - Quote Working fine thnx. In fact, lets get some t2 fighters that wtfown frigates for thinking they can stand up to a fighter swarm without a fleet. That'l fix the true problem. Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
RomeStar BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective 569	Posted - 2015.02.19 19:12:55 - [24] - Quote Phoenix Jones wrote: RomeStar wrote: Fighters seem to be fine in my book so I don't really know what the OP is complaining about. http://puu.sh/g3jX2/fa783efa62.jpg You really want to try saying that again with a straight face. Yep Fighters seem fine to me if you cant beat them join them right.... Signatured removed, CCP Phantom
RomeStar BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective 569	Posted - 2015.02.19 19:17:07 - [25] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: I have been in fights with these fighters. They still have plenty of tracking problems. You also learn where these guys are, its not like they have a POS in every system. And if your doing FW or some such in such a system, it is not so hard to deal with the drones with a proper fleet. These things are not cheap (fighters and fighter bombers. ) But they don't show up on kill boards :( Oh also does the carrier need to be outside the force field to assist? I would assume so, clearly dropping on top of a POS is no trivial matter however. But if so that is not zero risk. Actually there is a risk free way of doing this and we call it a candy stick. What you do is anchor the pos fuel it and online it. Then you warp your carrier to it and open the manage box put in the password but don't hit apply unless something drops on top of you. This way you can assign fighters until your hearts content or somebody drops on you but in that case you hit apply and the shield goes up. Everyone who knows about fighters knows this little trick. The only way to counter this is too get a ship between the carrier and the stick before he puts up his shield that way when the shield goes up the enemy ship bumps the carrier out of the POS but you better be pretty damn fast or have a good warp in to do this because that shiled will go up fast. After that all the pilot has to do is rip the tower down and repackage it and take it back out takes about 30mins or so to resetup a candy stick. Signatured removed, CCP Phantom
Baali Tekitsu AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 671	Posted - 2015.02.19 19:34:09 - [26] - Quote No matter the outcome of this discussion considering how fast CCP adress balancing issues you better start training a Thanatos now, if you cant fly it yet. RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
Potamus Jenkins eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred 137	Posted - 2015.02.19 19:41:42 - [27] - Quote Jin Kugu wrote: Fighters should lose the effects of all modules on the carrier/super once they are assigned. I like this, or even off grid
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 305	Posted - 2015.02.19 20:01:26 - [28] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: The actual 'solution' (to this thing that isn't actually a problem) is to remove carrier and module bonuses from assigned fighters (like it used to be, fighters assigned from a Thanny were no better than any other carrier's fighters because the Thanny's fighter bonus wasn't applied to it's off grid fighters), not to screw with a mechanic that isn't actually the problem. Ah, I probably misunderstood you the first time over. I thought you were advocating for making it so drone modules would not affect fighters at all. Now that I understood what you are actually saying, I agree.
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 19938	Posted - 2015.02.19 20:01:51 - [29] - Quote Potamus Jenkins wrote: Jin Kugu wrote: Fighters should lose the effects of all modules on the carrier/super once they are assigned. I like this, or even off grid It wont happen, simply because the solution is too simple and elegant. It will probably be resolved with some kind of complicated Fighter Fatigue Timer and a needless Fighter Command and Control Deployable with a new toggle and some kind of faction implant acquired only from a new kind of highsec exploration site or randomly distributed level 2 mining mission. *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?* Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
DaReaper Net 7 1794	Posted - 2015.02.19 20:52:40 - [30] - Quote Forgive me if i'm wrong, as its been a while since i used a carrier besides ratting, but once you go into a shield don;t you automatically recall your fighters? So wouldn;t a counter be to find the damn pos the carrier sits at and keep forcing him inside his shield? Then his fighters are now useless. or if your lucky you can bump him and kill him. Esp if the tower has no guns. Back in the day you coudl deploy fighters, go in the shield and be 100% safe. OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,06s, ref 20250921/1811
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

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.