| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
212
   |
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:52:06 -
[1] - Quote
good riddance :D |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE
Fidelas Constans
2019
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:57:24 -
[2] - Quote
I'm gonna need more details like now |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
34008
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:58:26 -
[3] - Quote
Removing fighter assist mechanic and removing ability for fighters to warp off grid from the carrier.
As someone who has lost ships in TAMA to the fighter assist mechanic, I say, sad to see it go. Just a case of huge whinge within the have-not part of the community, affecting another part of the community. "CCP please fix, because I'm too weak too" .
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
902
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:58:31 -
[4] - Quote
Sigh... nerf into ground != balance... |
Bel Tika
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
322
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:58:33 -
[5] - Quote
drone assist an warp removed, sure thats what they said |
Assassn Gallic
Big Diggers
Get Off My Lawn
12
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:59:55 -
[6] - Quote
When they remove the ability to assign surely they can give scan res back to fighters.
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
212
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:01:12 -
[7] - Quote
Assassn Gallic wrote:When they remove the ability to assign surely they can give scan res back to fighters.
sounds reasonable |
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
20061
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:02:22 -
[8] - Quote
Please contract all unwanted Carriers to me. I will find a use for them.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
|
Anhenka
The Cult of Personality
DARKNESS.
1113
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:04:35 -
[9] - Quote
Remove assist, keep warp ability.
RIP ratting carrier if I have to recall fighters between each anom :(
Not like anyone actually used the warp follow feature in combat intentionally, since it just resulted in people warping around the system and keeping your DPS locked down until you recalled them to engage them again. |
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
321
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:08:55 -
[10] - Quote
Triage carrier pilots are real men. Skynet carrier pilots are cowardly little girls. We laugh at your dismay. :) |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
212
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:11:28 -
[11] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Sigh... nerf into ground != balance...
The only way to properly balance them (that I can think of) would have been to have boni from drone damage amplifiers, tracking computers and so forth not apply off grid. But I guess that's not something that CCP could have implemented easily, if at all, or else they probably would have done it. |
Khan Agnon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:11:42 -
[12] - Quote
please link the carrier nerf |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
212
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:13:12 -
[13] - Quote
Khan Agnon wrote:please link the carrier nerf
CCP Rise just said so on the o7 show. Dev blog should be out tomorrow. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
902
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:13:47 -
[14] - Quote
Ab'del Abu wrote:Rroff wrote:Sigh... nerf into ground != balance... The only way to properly balance them (that I can think of) would have been to have boni from drone damage amplifiers, tracking computers and so forth not apply off grid. But I guess that's not something that CCP could have implemented easily, if at all, or else they probably would have done it.
There are other ways to balance them - which I've explained in detail in atleast 2 other threads. But I guess basically commenting out a few lines of code is an effortless "fix"................................... |
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:13:51 -
[15] - Quote
I understand the reasoning towards eliminating fighter assist, but removing their ability to warp...
Have you ever checked the cost, size and attributes of a ******* fighter?
Do you ever think what you do or just roll a dice? Does any of the developers actually play the game? Another absurd change to totally **** your most loyal players, capital ones.
Just remind who are the guys playing the games for years: the same people you keep on ruining game experience for the last 6 months. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
34008
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:14:25 -
[16] - Quote
Khan Agnon wrote:please link the carrier nerf
Link what. It was just announced in the o7 show.
Devblog post coming tomorrow apparently and I'd assume, with an associated feedback thread.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Anhenka
The Cult of Personality
DARKNESS.
1114
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:15:01 -
[17] - Quote
Khan Agnon wrote:please link the carrier nerf
It's from the o7 show which just aired.
TLDR: Removing fighter assist and warp ability, Ishtars get 16.7% dps nerf and a tiny range nerf, all railguns are being toned back, Tengu resist bonus halved, other t3's resist bonus dropping by a quarter, bouncers getting tiny nerf....
Oh and CCP are announcing the next sov overhaul early next week. |
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
1821
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:17:58 -
[18] - Quote
Ab'del Abu wrote:Rroff wrote:Sigh... nerf into ground != balance... The only way to properly balance them (that I can think of) would have been to have boni from drone damage amplifiers, tracking computers and so forth not apply off grid. But I guess that's not something that CCP could have implemented easily, if at all, or else they probably would have done it.
at this point CCP just needs to ball up and remove every capital from the game
because as it is every time capitals come up, its a nerf, nerf nerf nerf. hell, the titan is literally a bus, it has next to 0 combat use unless the enemy has their own cap fleet, that is usually more effective to just counter with dreads anyways, for the most part capitals and subs even on the same grid at this point are fighting separate fights, because of all the restrictions on who can damage what for *balance*
its a joke. just ******* delete them if you want them to be nothing more than bragging rights and glorified freighters |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
903
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:25:04 -
[19] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:Ab'del Abu wrote:Rroff wrote:Sigh... nerf into ground != balance... The only way to properly balance them (that I can think of) would have been to have boni from drone damage amplifiers, tracking computers and so forth not apply off grid. But I guess that's not something that CCP could have implemented easily, if at all, or else they probably would have done it. at this point CCP just needs to ball up and remove every capital from the game because as it is every time capitals come up, its a nerf, nerf nerf nerf. hell, the titan is literally a bus, it has next to 0 combat use unless the enemy has their own cap fleet, that is usually more effective to just counter with dreads anyways, for the most part capitals and subs even on the same grid at this point are fighting separate fights, because of all the restrictions on who can damage what for *balance* its a joke. just ******* delete them if you want them to be nothing more than bragging rights and glorified freighters
Just applying titan style damage scaling with sig on fighters (NOT with the same parameters as titans use) would go a long way to fixing the issue alone as they'd no longer be able to insta-blap frig sized targets without some significant on-grid assistance from bonused webbing/tping ships with minimal knock on effect to fighter use in other scenarios. Fighter damage to anything sub BC sized should be fairly minimal anyhow in the overall balance of things - you've got the appropriate sized drones for that. |
Metal Icarus
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
732
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:28:16 -
[20] - Quote
I would have settled for them fighters to be vulnerable to ewar...
Absolute removal though, that removes people getting mad at losing their fighters. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
6094
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:29:02 -
[21] - Quote
Should restrict capitals to fighting capitals and structures only while requiring sub-capital assistance to be able to do so.
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics
|
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:30:54 -
[22] - Quote
Btw, in a pure gameplay analysis, the only change to gameplay on removing warp (given that removing assistance is ok) is to make people lose a plex each time they forget/are unable to recall fighters/fbs. |
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra
The 99 Percent
1135
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:42:38 -
[23] - Quote
So I won't be able to warp off in a bomber, cloak, and have the carrier's fighters follow me, only to sit idle when they arrive on grid? Bummer, dude. I liked being able to free fire fighters and cost the carrier pilot the equivalent of an AF per fighter with no risk.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:05:33 -
[24] - Quote
Going to enjoy smugging it up tonight when I log in. I suggested this as a solution and everyone was saying it won't happen.  |
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
323
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:05:40 -
[25] - Quote
Metal Icarus wrote:Absolute removal though, that removes people getting mad at losing their fighters.
If you get mad from losing fighters, you are too poor to be flying carriers.
I know, I fly in Arctic Light. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9909
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:09:32 -
[26] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Removing fighter assist mechanic and removing ability for fighters to warp off grid from the carrier.
As someone who has lost ships in TAMA to the fighter assist mechanic, I say, sad to see it go. Just a case of huge whinge within the have-not part of the community, affecting another part of the community. "CCP please fix, because I'm too weak too" .
I stopped using fighter assist in PVE a long time ago because I like Alpha'ing npcs with sentries when I do anoms (and im on grid with the fighters when doing lvl 5 missions).
But arrrrrgggrh this is stupid. CCP removing a very cool and ancient mechanic rather than fixing the actual problem they created when they allowed fighters and FBs to recieve boosts from mods and skills. CCP is slipping back into some old bad thinking patterns here, because they are punishing people for creative use of existing mechanics rather than fixing the actual problem causers or doing more sensible things like keeping carriers from deploying fighters near a POS or station.
CCP won't be happy till creative people are handcuffed completely it seems. And like you said, all because people are too weak to assign someone to find the carrier and force it to dock or go in shields. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
805
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:12:30 -
[27] - Quote
so why would i use fighters over sentries now?
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:23:09 -
[28] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:next we will probably see ECM go as well 
ECM replaced with something that actually has counter-play like the rest of electronic warfare? Sign me up! |
The Newface
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:33:32 -
[29] - Quote
Yea its sad to see how little effort they put into this.
Its little early for the sky is falling though but it does seem like fighters got almost useless.
At the very least they should then be able to fight over the entire grid and not use drone ranges.
|
maCH'EttE
Mafia Redux
Feign Disorder
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:59:12 -
[30] - Quote
Good news, good news. I approve and endorse this.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
805
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:02:43 -
[31] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:next we will probably see ECM go as well ECM replaced with something that actually has counter-play like the rest of electronic warfare? Sign me up!
ECM does its the opposite of damps pull range
or fit ECCM
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
11934
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:11:30 -
[32] - Quote
This is a good thing. They forgot to delete drone assist entirely, but this is a good step.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
handige harrie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
285
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:17:27 -
[33] - Quote
So instead of fixing the problem, they chose to go for the easy route and remove another feature from EvE. A much more elegant solution was to just to drop bonuses that the carrier gives from Mods/Skill to fighters that are off-grid.
The frigate and cruiser hull balance was nice, but now CCP is really dropping the ball by swinging around not well thought out nerfbats and now even the removal of features the last few balance passes :(. It's starting to look like they're losing the plot of their own game here.
I just hope they will let the fighters warp life, as for a carrier it's a huge plus to be able to warpoff and collect your fighters instead of losing 450M isk isk every time you're the slowest, saddest panda in class.
Baddest poster ever
|
Allant Doran
Patriot Security Services
New Signature
68
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:17:53 -
[34] - Quote
As somebody that was on the cusp of training for Capitals and who loves the 'Carrier' fantasy of controlling a group of fighters throughout a solar system, this is sad news.
I appreciate it from a balance standpoint, but in terms of gameplay I might as well just stick to my Vexor or Stratios now. Same mechanics, nowhere near the cost.
I'll probably still grab a Dread though. Citadel Missiles look too fantastic to not use. |
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
690
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:21:33 -
[35] - Quote
Gypsien Agittain wrote:I understand the reasoning towards eliminating fighter assist, but removing their ability to warp...
Have you ever checked the cost, size and attributes of a ******* fighter?
Do you ever think what you do or just roll a dice? Does any of the developers actually play the game? Another absurd change to totally **** your most loyal players, capital ones.
Just remind who are the guys playing the games for years: the same people you keep on ruining game experience for the last 6 months.
Guys that play the game in capitals dont give a damn about the fighter cost. 15-20mil per fighter is peanuts, chump change.
And if you count the cost of fighters, you should not be using them. |
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
323
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:27:20 -
[36] - Quote
Allant Doran wrote:Citadel Missiles look too fantastic to not use.
Oh boy, I have some bad news for you. |
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
I'd Rather Be Roaming
33
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:28:30 -
[37] - Quote
So the new "Most Useless Ship in the Game" award goes to the Thanatos? |
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
20064
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:34:12 -
[38] - Quote
Pg. 2 Reminder: Your stuffs.. Dibs.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
|
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
690
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:34:28 -
[39] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote:So the new "Most Useless Ship in the Game" award goes to the Thanatos?
No, think of a thanny as a field command ship with a 1800 dps and a monster tank, that you can refit of, that carries spare ships like sabres, spare items like warp bubbles, ammo, drones, cap charges, etc., and that can go into triage in a pinch.
thats what a carrier shouls be - 1 repper, triage, 3 links. Try breaking that in a medium gang. And not terribly expensive either, just slow as hell. |
Anhenka
The Cult of Personality
DARKNESS.
1116
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:37:40 -
[40] - Quote
LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:Ele Rebellion wrote:So the new "Most Useless Ship in the Game" award goes to the Thanatos? No, think of a thanny as a field command ship with a 1800 dps and a monster tank, that you can refit of, that carries spare ships like sabres, spare items like warp bubbles, ammo, drones, cap charges, etc., and that can go into triage in a pinch. thats what a carrier shouls be - 1 repper, triage, 3 links. Try breaking that in a medium gang. And not terribly expensive either, just slow as hell.
And why not Archon or Chimera? They do all that except 20% less DPS (but the same with sentries or non fighters), but tanks far better, and can participate in the cap circle jerk.
It's not that the Thanatos would be the worst ship in the game, it's that it wold become as niche as the Nidhoggur that you only dust off on rare occasions where you are not expecting any resistance. |
Allant Doran
Patriot Security Services
New Signature
68
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:40:38 -
[41] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Allant Doran wrote:Citadel Missiles look too fantastic to not use. Oh boy, I have some bad news for you.
I said 'look', which is subjective, and therefore true to me.
I'm one of those players that doesn't care if his gameplay style is optimal, or even useful. I'll spend my isk on things I think look pretty :D
|
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
690
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:44:01 -
[42] - Quote
Anhenka wrote:LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:Ele Rebellion wrote:So the new "Most Useless Ship in the Game" award goes to the Thanatos? No, think of a thanny as a field command ship with a 1800 dps and a monster tank, that you can refit of, that carries spare ships like sabres, spare items like warp bubbles, ammo, drones, cap charges, etc., and that can go into triage in a pinch. thats what a carrier shouls be - 1 repper, triage, 3 links. Try breaking that in a medium gang. And not terribly expensive either, just slow as hell. And why not Archon or Chimera? They do all that except 20% less DPS (but the same with sentries or non fighters), but tanks far better, and can participate in the cap circle jerk. It's not that the Thanatos would be the worst ship in the game, it's that it wold become as niche as the Nidhoggur that you only dust off on rare occasions where you are not expecting any resistance.
Depends what you are doing. I use nidhoggur in the dps/link role every now and again in wormholes.
thanny has range bonus for armor and shield transfer, which is suitable for a kitchen sink roam with no set tank. Nidhoggur is more agile and a better repper, but thanny is more dps.
Archon/chimera is more suitable for pre-set doctrines. |
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
I'd Rather Be Roaming
33
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:44:05 -
[43] - Quote
LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:Ele Rebellion wrote:So the new "Most Useless Ship in the Game" award goes to the Thanatos? No, think of a thanny as a field command ship with a 1800 dps and a monster tank, that you can refit of, that carries spare ships like sabres, spare items like warp bubbles, ammo, drones, cap charges, etc., and that can go into triage in a pinch. thats what a carrier shouls be - 1 repper, triage, 3 links. Try breaking that in a medium gang. And not terribly expensive either, just slow as hell.
Why field links? Plus Thanatos gets no bonus to links. OGB Commandships and T3s will still fill that role. Thanatos doesn't have near the tank of the Archon or the Chimera, and nothing close to the reps of the Nidhoggur.
The only thing it had going for it was DPS, but most people don't field carriers unless they are triage in which case they cannot use drones or fighters. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
30616
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:45:03 -
[44] - Quote
I'm wondering why this is being addressed right now, after all this time. A couple things that come to mind are Sov and Drifters. Possibly related.
CCP's motivation behind med clone cost removal was very self-serving. Yes, it was to the benefit of players, and for something new in the game (Drifters/Circadians podding us), but there was constant player support of their removal for years. That's why I call the change self-serving.
Applying this possibility to other things on the horizon, like Sov and Drifters, the outcomes I imagine are comical.
Killing Drifters will be necessary for maintaining Sov, or the new Sov system involves a grind mechanic that is exceptionally exploitable by something like fighter assist.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Allant Doran
Patriot Security Services
New Signature
68
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:49:14 -
[45] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering why this is being addressed right now, after all this time. A couple things that come to mind are Sov and Drifters. Possibly related.
CCP's motivation behind med clone cost removal was very self-serving. Yes, it was to the benefit of players, and for something new in the game (Drifters/Circadians podding us), but there was constant player support of their removal for years. That's why I call the change self-serving.
Applying this possibility to other things on the horizon, like Sov and Drifters, the outcomes I imagine are comical.
Killing Drifters will be necessary for maintaining Sov, or the new Sov system involves a grind mechanic that is exceptionally exploitable by something like fighter assist.
This is my overarching feeling on the whole thing too.
It's like how removing the harsher penalties for being podded has allowed CCP to introduce NPCs that aim for the pod too.
I can't help but wonder if reducing Fighter capability in this regard is setting up for either a new gameplay mechanic that will make sense of this change, or it is in preparation for a general Carrier-class overhaul in the upcoming months. |
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:57:48 -
[46] - Quote
LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:Gypsien Agittain wrote:I understand the reasoning towards eliminating fighter assist, but removing their ability to warp...
Have you ever checked the cost, size and attributes of a ******* fighter?
Do you ever think what you do or just roll a dice? Does any of the developers actually play the game? Another absurd change to totally **** your most loyal players, capital ones.
Just remind who are the guys playing the games for years: the same people you keep on ruining game experience for the last 6 months. Guys that play the game in capitals dont give a damn about the fighter cost. 15-20mil per fighter is peanuts, chump change. And if you count the cost of fighters, you should not be using them.
Peanuts in isk, but half a plex cost in a super for 10 fb's getting lost + the logistical "issue" of getting a bomber set into your ship with the proficient and glorious space aids cap-fuckery system.
Given that in a recent post you declared that you fly a Niddhogur, there's nothing else to be said as you're clearly disabled to discuss about capital ships. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
903
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:04:44 -
[47] - Quote
Gypsien Agittain wrote:
Given that in a recent post you declared that you fly a Niddhogur, there's nothing else to be said as you're clearly disabled to discuss about capital ships.
Nids have their niche - their local burst rep capabilities and bonused remote rep can be pretty useful for surprise attacks outnumbered where your working on the premise of crippling the other fleet before they are organised enough to turn the tables i.e. log on ambushing a multi-dread escalation fleet. |
handige harrie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
285
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:07:43 -
[48] - Quote
Allant Doran wrote:
It's like how removing the harsher penalties for being podded has allowed CCP to introduce NPCs that aim for the pod too.
I can't help but wonder if reducing Fighter capability in this regard is setting up for either a new gameplay mechanic that will make sense of this change, or it is in preparation for a general Carrier-class overhaul in the upcoming months.
Seeing how the industry expansion panned out; with the lost promise of another capital class ship rework (rorqual) that is 9 months overdue, the removal of one of it's most touted 'Teams' feature, the removal of Tech 3 Reverse Engineering and the glorious new Industrial UI, which is really really really big and cumbersome, once you've run a BPO three times and just want to see the input and output in text instead of long lines, big icons, huge buttons and a lot of wasted screen estate. Let's not forget the removal of slots, so everyone and his production alts can produce in Jita IV-4, never having to leave station for anything.
I won't get my hopes up. (looking back at it, they removed about as much gameplay as they added in the industrial patches)
Baddest poster ever
|
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:08:11 -
[49] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Gypsien Agittain wrote:
Given that in a recent post you declared that you fly a Niddhogur, there's nothing else to be said as you're clearly disabled to discuss about capital ships.
Nids have their niche - their local burst rep capabilities and bonused remote rep can be pretty useful for surprise attacks outnumbered where your working on the premise of crippling the other fleet before they are organised enough to turn the tables i.e. log on ambushing a multi-dread escalation fleet.
A delusionary niche created by the superb failure of purchasing a Minmatar Carrier skillbook and the lack of interest in spending another 500M and >50 days to train for a real ship. |
Allant Doran
Patriot Security Services
New Signature
68
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:10:53 -
[50] - Quote
handige harrie wrote:Allant Doran wrote:
It's like how removing the harsher penalties for being podded has allowed CCP to introduce NPCs that aim for the pod too.
I can't help but wonder if reducing Fighter capability in this regard is setting up for either a new gameplay mechanic that will make sense of this change, or it is in preparation for a general Carrier-class overhaul in the upcoming months.
Seeing how the industry expansion panned out; with the lost promise of another capital class ship rework (rorqual) that is 9 months overdue, the removal of one of it's most touted 'Teams' feature, the removal of Tech 3 Reverse Engineering and the glorious new Industrial UI, which is really really really big and cumbersome, once you've run a BPO three times and just want to see the input and output in text instead of long lines, big icons, huge buttons and a lot of wasted screen estate. Let's not forget the removal of slots, so everyone and his production alts can produce in Jita IV-4, never having to leave station for anything. I won't get my hopes up. (looking back at it, they removed about as much gameplay as they added in the industrial patches)
A fair point. I'm just doing what I do best, trying to find a silver lining haha!
|
Don Pera Saissore
31
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:20:38 -
[51] - Quote
Could someone link the video please. |
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
323
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:29:59 -
[52] - Quote
Gypsien Agittain wrote:Rroff wrote:Gypsien Agittain wrote:
Given that in a recent post you declared that you fly a Niddhogur, there's nothing else to be said as you're clearly disabled to discuss about capital ships.
Nids have their niche - their local burst rep capabilities and bonused remote rep can be pretty useful for surprise attacks outnumbered where your working on the premise of crippling the other fleet before they are organised enough to turn the tables i.e. log on ambushing a multi-dread escalation fleet. A delusionary niche created by the superb failure of purchasing a Minmatar Carrier skillbook and the lack of interest in spending another 500M and >50 days to train for a real ship.
Nidhoggur also has a niche in being the fastest and most agile carrier, which is relevant for rage rolling wormholes in c5 and c6 space, as Nidhoggur can burn from spawn point to wormhole activation range in hostile environments where slower capitals would die. It also saves you valuable time.
Speed fit Nidhoggur goes some 300m/s and aligns surprisingly fast. This is an extremely narrow niche that is useful to just a few corporations in all of EVE, but it IS a niche. Nanoggur is a beautiful thing, in a very perverted way, like an oiled fat grandpa in a thong. |
DaReaper
Net 7
1811
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:38:07 -
[53] - Quote
Keeping the abilty of fighters to warp, maybe not by following a target, but to return tot he carrier if it warps off without its fighters, or it disconnects, should remain. As an ex carrier and super pilot, losing 200m is fighters (10 fighters X20m each) cause i had to run or forget to pull them in will make me cry.
yes tears.. *cries*
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
1822
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:39:07 -
[54] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Gypsien Agittain wrote:Rroff wrote:Gypsien Agittain wrote:
Given that in a recent post you declared that you fly a Niddhogur, there's nothing else to be said as you're clearly disabled to discuss about capital ships.
Nids have their niche - their local burst rep capabilities and bonused remote rep can be pretty useful for surprise attacks outnumbered where your working on the premise of crippling the other fleet before they are organised enough to turn the tables i.e. log on ambushing a multi-dread escalation fleet. A delusionary niche created by the superb failure of purchasing a Minmatar Carrier skillbook and the lack of interest in spending another 500M and >50 days to train for a real ship. Nidhoggur also has a niche in being the fastest and most agile carrier, which is relevant for rage rolling wormholes in c5 and c6 space, as Nidhoggur can burn from spawn point to wormhole activation range in hostile environments where slower capitals would die. It also saves you valuable time. Speed fit Nidhoggur goes some 300m/s and aligns surprisingly fast. This is an extremely narrow niche that is useful to just a few corporations in all of EVE, but it IS a niche. Nanoggur is a beautiful thing, in a very perverted way, like an oiled fat grandpa in a thong.
dafuq, nidhoggur speedfit goes faster than my paladin?
shouldnt have mentioned that mate, didnt you know? capitals are supposed to be worse than a subcap in every way except when fighting stationary structures that cant shoot back. incoming nidhoggur nerf, enjoy your 15m/s max speed-fit |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
904
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:48:11 -
[55] - Quote
DaReaper wrote:Keeping the abilty of fighters to warp, maybe not by following a target, but to return tot he carrier if it warps off without its fighters, or it disconnects, should remain. As an ex carrier and super pilot, losing 200m is fighters (10 fighters X20m each) cause i had to run or forget to pull them in will make me cry.
yes tears.. *cries*
All it needed really was making it so that you can't assign* fighters within a certain proximity (say 50km or something) of a control tower (the code is already there anyhow) due to "harmonic distortion" from POS mods or some other reason for the somewhat arbitrary restriction and giving fighters damage scaling based on target sig like titans and most of the biggest issues are fixed in a balanced way rather than taking the nerf bat to it and destroying part of the game for people who are entirely unconnected to the "skynet" issue.
* *cough* cough* assist *cough* |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9909
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:49:59 -
[56] - Quote
I tell you one thing that does suck. In null sec in cases where a cloaky camper would be present I would rat in my tanked Tech1 Hauler with fighters assigned daring the mofo to hotdrop me and had some hilarious results. I started doing that because instead of crying about cloaky campers some of us decide to do something about it. That and things like that will never happen again. This is just another nail...
As I said, so much for creativity, gotta protect those lazy people who don't wanna burn any brain cells in a video game dontcha know. |
Aknan
Babylon Knights
DARKNESS.
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:01:11 -
[57] - Quote
I have some proposal for nerfing assing fighter without kill the mechanics and fighters :
creating a bs ship or bc with the hability to have assissing figthers or a modul hight slot only for carrier and ms making ayble to assist one fighter.
You killed nerfed inoff capitals spending 1 year skilling time for only remote is a little to hard no?
And fighter would be totaly use less if this comme out : a set of sentry makes more domage than a set of fighters.
or other thing you creat an option (in petition) for reinbourse sp spend for a carrier and buy back if players dont wanna play this ship anymore. (and eventualy the time i spend to skill alts for assissting figthers and get a mother ship
Thx in advance for this
you nerfed before the capacity of travel and mouving assets i dident say anything i was interested about thes changes.
BUT ON THIS I DONT agree totaly |
Anhenka
The Cult of Personality
DARKNESS.
1116
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:08:23 -
[58] - Quote
Aknan wrote:I have some proposal for nerfing assing fighter without kill the mechanics and fighters :
creating a bs ship or bc with the hability to have assissing figthers or a modul hight slot only for carrier and ms making ayble to assist one fighter.
You killed nerfed inoff capitals spending 1 year skilling time for only remote is a little to hard no?
And fighter would be totaly use less if this comme out : a set of sentry makes more domage than a set of fighters.
or other thing you creat an option (in petition) for reinbourse sp spend for a carrier and buy back if players dont wanna play this ship anymore. (and eventualy the time i spend to skill alts for assissting figthers and get a mother ship
Thx in advance for this
you nerfed before the capacity of travel and mouving assets i dident say anything i was interested about thes changes.
BUT ON THIS I DONT agree totaly
Haha... suck it up. CCP has NEVER given a refund for SP or isk when they nerfed ships, and I doubt they ever will, barring a total removal of the shiptype. |
Ilaister
Absolutely Certain
146
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:17:58 -
[59] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering why this is being addressed right now, after all this time. A couple things that come to mind are Sov and Drifters. Possibly related.
.
Possibly. There has also been a spate of people sitting just outside their POS shields and assigning fighters to frigate camps in lowsec = instadeath for anyone jumping in without a cloak. Aggro was assigned to the carrier, so no gateguns for the frigs to worry about.
I fail to see why everyone's so mad. It's a broken mechanic. If you want the effects of your ship to be felt, you should be on grid risking it.
Asking every gang who wants to take frigs into low to bring a) enough people and b) the right ships to deal with bumping a carrier into it's POS is missing the point a little. Crappy gameplay for all involved despite the 'imagination' shown by the risk-averse in their caps. |
Aknan
Babylon Knights
DARKNESS.
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:24:01 -
[60] - Quote
they did reinbourse sp at the time they remouved learnings, now they remouve one of the use of carrier and i spend one year skilling carrier. i can hope to make a petion for having remouving some skill vs some sp to spend in other thing more important than a fast useless ship, and i invite you to hope so and petition if this comes realy to the next patch.
hope make us live  |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9909
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:29:58 -
[61] - Quote
Ilaister wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering why this is being addressed right now, after all this time. A couple things that come to mind are Sov and Drifters. Possibly related.
. Possibly. There has also been a spate of people sitting just outside their POS shields and assigning fighters to frigate camps in lowsec = instadeath for anyone jumping in without a cloak. Aggro was assigned to the carrier, so no gateguns for the frigs to worry about. I fail to see why everyone's so mad. It's a broken mechanic. If you want the effects of your ship to be felt, you should be on grid risking it. Asking every gang who wants to take frigs into low to bring a) enough people and b) the right ships to deal with bumping a carrier into it's POS is missing the point a little. Crappy gameplay for all involved despite the 'imagination' shown by the risk-averse in their caps.
The problem is "standard CCP operating procedure" .
Step one: create a problem that sees an old mechanic that no one complained about become massively overpower in a narrow set of circumstances.
Step 2: Nerf the old mechanic but leave the new stuff THAT CREATED THE PROBLEM completely alone. Don't forget to use a jackhammer to nerf something that only requires a scalpel.
They did it when they nerfed fighter scan res because a few people abused a bug (while not even touching the faulty mechanic/bug), and it's happening again. Not the end of the world, but it's damn annoying to see it happen again and again. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
904
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:45:18 -
[62] - Quote
Ilaister wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering why this is being addressed right now, after all this time. A couple things that come to mind are Sov and Drifters. Possibly related.
. Possibly. There has also been a spate of people sitting just outside their POS shields and assigning fighters to frigate camps in lowsec = instadeath for anyone jumping in without a cloak. Aggro was assigned to the carrier, so no gateguns for the frigs to worry about. I fail to see why everyone's so mad. It's a broken mechanic. If you want the effects of your ship to be felt, you should be on grid risking it. Asking every gang who wants to take frigs into low to bring a) enough people and b) the right ships to deal with bumping a carrier into it's POS is missing the point a little. Crappy gameplay for all involved despite the 'imagination' shown by the risk-averse in their caps.
If it was just people sitting on the edge of the FF doing it there would have been a lot less complaints, techniques are being used so that the carrier is to all intents and purposes immune to repercussion either by sitting right by the control tower with the FF down and the dialog open to bring it online or other ways of "misusing" pos mods to a similar effect.
There are ways to resolve it without having the knock on effect on people using carriers in completely unrelated ways. |
Ilaister
Absolutely Certain
148
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:53:46 -
[63] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:
The problem is "standard CCP operating procedure" .
Step one: create a problem that sees an old mechanic that no one complained about become massively overpower in a narrow set of circumstances.
Step 2: Nerf the old mechanic but leave the new stuff THAT CREATED THE PROBLEM completely alone. Don't forget to use a jackhammer to nerf something that only requires a scalpel.
They did it when they nerfed fighter scan res because a few people abused a bug (while not even touching the faulty mechanic/bug), and it's happening again. Not the end of the world, but it's damn annoying to see it happen again and again.
First legit argument I've seen against the changes, I hope you make your argument that well in the post when it goes live. You realise you will be drowned out by all the ouin ouin from those that only ever bought their carrier to rat though.
Perhaps it's best we bear in mind with a game this complex, and players this - zealous? - CCP will never be able to see all ends, and we can't see the code that needs reworking to fix it, nor the number of petitions generated etc etc.
|
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
20070
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 01:57:01 -
[64] - Quote
Just in case you forgot while reading page 3, UaE will take those useless carriers of your hands.
UaE cares for your stuffs.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9909
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:02:54 -
[65] - Quote
Ilaister wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:
The problem is "standard CCP operating procedure" .
Step one: create a problem that sees an old mechanic that no one complained about become massively overpower in a narrow set of circumstances.
Step 2: Nerf the old mechanic but leave the new stuff THAT CREATED THE PROBLEM completely alone. Don't forget to use a jackhammer to nerf something that only requires a scalpel.
They did it when they nerfed fighter scan res because a few people abused a bug (while not even touching the faulty mechanic/bug), and it's happening again. Not the end of the world, but it's damn annoying to see it happen again and again.
First legit argument I've seen against the changes, I hope you make your argument that well in the post when it goes live. You realise you will be drowned out by all the ouin ouin from those that only ever bought their carrier to rat though. Perhaps it's best we bear in mind with a game this complex, and players this - zealous? - CCP will never be able to see all ends, and we can't see the code that needs reworking to fix it, nor the number of petitions generated etc etc.
My experience with CCP is that they won't listen, by the time they announce a change they've made their mind up. Their game so all good. But you'd think they'd know better by now, taking away fighters ability to warp is going to mean less carrier ratters (some still will, hell I carrier rat sometimes with sentries and an inertia stab fit) and carrier ratters getting caught is the beginning of much hilarious content.
It's like CCP doesn't know how their game 'fits' together. |
Ilaister
Absolutely Certain
148
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:03:27 -
[66] - Quote
I also, am in the market for an Archon.
Cap rigged though, not those weird Trimark fits. |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
297
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:06:56 -
[67] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering why this is being addressed right now, after all this time. A couple things that come to mind are Sov and Drifters. Possibly related.
CCP's motivation behind med clone cost removal was very self-serving. Yes, it was to the benefit of players, and for something new in the game (Drifters/Circadians podding us), but there was constant player support of their removal for years. That's why I call the change self-serving.
Applying this possibility to other things on the horizon, like Sov and Drifters, the outcomes I imagine are comical.
Killing Drifters will be necessary for maintaining Sov, or the new Sov system involves a grind mechanic that is exceptionally exploitable by something like fighter assist.
If this is at all related to Drifters, I'm much rather see a different mechanic added to Drifters over just no more warping around.. Like, say, Drifters can seize control of Fighters/Bombers :) Or will aggres and one shot fighters on sight :)
Personally I'm torn on it..The idea of Carriers launching fighters that can be assigned to a Frig and off to fight whatever is a little broken... Maybe some other changes could be, once they are beyond a Carriers control range, ALL Bonuses/SP that affects them is removed. So no bonus from the hull, no DDA's, no Fighters V, making them far weaker and less OP..
As for assign.. Maybe I donno.. one thought I had was make only some ships ABLE to use assigned drones. Like a role bonus, or as a module? Mod could be like polarized weapons, when enabled sets resists to 0? Or make only specific ships able to control them as a role bonus. That was you know what ship(s) to primary if you see a boatload of fighters and no carriers/supers?
For the people complaining about SP.. HTFU. CCP has always said as long as you benefited from it before they won't give you back SP, not since Learning Skills were nuked. So we didn't get wasted SP back on things like Orca change (remind me, why did I need Mining Barge V?), or every other time they have nerfed a ship.. You got to use it for a while, or otherwise know that ships get changed.. |
d0cTeR9
Astro Technologies
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:08:39 -
[68] - Quote
CCP please reimburse carrier and supercarrier pilots.
SP returned and isk returned.
When you change a ship so much, it's only normal.
After playing EVE since 2004, I still don't see CCP's thought process... A few abuse it, nerf it for all, instead of fixing the problem. |
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
125
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:09:53 -
[69] - Quote
well done... 2 years of skilling for a useless ship...
just reduced my ratting income by 65%
and you just forced all carriers back to using sentry drones (thought you were trying to avoid this one?) |
Anhenka
The Cult of Personality
DARKNESS.
1117
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:10:41 -
[70] - Quote
d0cTeR9 wrote:CCP please reimburse carrier and supercarrier pilots.
SP returned and isk returned.
When you change a ship so much, it's only normal.
No, it's not normal. It's never happened, it's never going to happen. Stop being such a baby and demanding everything because of a relatively minor nerf. (Except to ratting carriers, in which is it a significantly larger nerf) |
d0cTeR9
Astro Technologies
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:13:00 -
[71] - Quote
Anhenka wrote:d0cTeR9 wrote:CCP please reimburse carrier and supercarrier pilots.
SP returned and isk returned.
When you change a ship so much, it's only normal. No, it's not normal. It's never happened, it's never going to happen. Stop being such a baby and demanding everything because of a relatively minor nerf. (Except to ratting carriers, in which is it a significantly larger nerf)
Actually it has happened... But good try sounding smart.
People have been telling CCP fix caps or reimburse, instead they chose nerf again so it's even more useless. That doesn't sound right to players that spent a long time training for them, even longer now, back in early eve caps skills weren't so intensive. |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
298
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:26:37 -
[72] - Quote
d0cTeR9 wrote:Actually it has happened... But good try sounding smart. SP has only ever been given back after a skill was removed from the game. Not just because they changed the ship and YOU (Or hell, everyone) think it's not useful anymore.
CCP's made significant changes to lots of ships before, most of them had people cursing about how they were destroying it.. once or twice people were right, still, you never got your SP Back. It's not going to happen. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9910
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:28:06 -
[73] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:d0cTeR9 wrote:Actually it has happened... But good try sounding smart. SP has only ever been given back after a skill was removed from the game. Not just because they changed the ship and YOU (Or hell, everyone) think it's not useful anymore. CCP's made significant changes to lots of ships before, most of them had people cursing about how they were destroying it.. once or twice people were right, still, you never got your SP Back. It's not going to happen.
This is true, asking for SP back is a waste of time.
|
Kraft Ogburn
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 02:57:00 -
[74] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm wondering why this is being addressed right now, after all this time. A couple things that come to mind are Sov and Drifters. Possibly related.
CCP's motivation behind med clone cost removal was very self-serving. Yes, it was to the benefit of players, and for something new in the game (Drifters/Circadians podding us), but there was constant player support of their removal for years. That's why I call the change self-serving.
Applying this possibility to other things on the horizon, like Sov and Drifters, the outcomes I imagine are comical.
Killing Drifters will be necessary for maintaining Sov, or the new Sov system involves a grind mechanic that is exceptionally exploitable by something like fighter assist.
Give that man a cookie. I think he got it. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
30619
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 03:11:34 -
[75] - Quote
Triage carriers will still be a thing, and lowsec PVP will remain a cesspool of gotcha game mechanic shenanigans. Outside of lowsec, triage carriers are still beast. Even if they only had ONE of their current capabilities of Triage, Drones, and Jump Drive, I still think they're underpriced.
Their role of bailing out supercapitals is still valid. I'm not sorry to see any other capabilities of carriers get nerfed.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
d0cTeR9
Astro Technologies
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 03:20:56 -
[76] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:d0cTeR9 wrote:Actually it has happened... But good try sounding smart. SP has only ever been given back after a skill was removed from the game. Not just because they changed the ship and YOU (Or hell, everyone) think it's not useful anymore. CCP's made significant changes to lots of ships before, most of them had people cursing about how they were destroying it.. once or twice people were right, still, you never got your SP Back. It's not going to happen.
2006, 2008, i got SP back when some changes were done. I'm sure other time's, but i recall those because it affected me :)
Back to ceptor-online.
Edit: 2004 too.
Rain6637 wrote:Triage carriers will still be a thing, and lowsec PVP will remain a cesspool of gotcha game mechanic shenanigans. Outside of lowsec, triage carriers are still beast. Even if they only had ONE of their current capabilities of Triage, Drones, and Jump Drive, I still think they're underpriced.
Their role of bailing out supercapitals is still valid. I'm not sorry to see any other capabilities of carriers get nerfed.
So let's recapitulate:
ceptor-online, aka catch me if you can online.
noob ship > supers, aka bait super's online and blob them to death.
don't be moving... anything via cyno/bridge.
ishtar-online (maybe not anymore?... Gila online!!!).
Well at least we got a cool shuttle out of this, and NPC's with real... balls :) |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
30622
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 03:59:14 -
[77] - Quote
Get-tackle-and-undock-triage online
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Zekora Rally
Negative Density
10
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 04:04:30 -
[78] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Gypsien Agittain wrote:
Given that in a recent post you declared that you fly a Niddhogur, there's nothing else to be said as you're clearly disabled to discuss about capital ships.
Nids have their niche - their local burst rep capabilities and bonused remote rep can be pretty useful for surprise attacks outnumbered where your working on the premise of crippling the other fleet before they are organised enough to turn the tables i.e. log on ambushing a multi-dread escalation fleet.
A Chimera does that much better. Nids have been proven time and time again to be lackluster unless you are repping a structure. 99.9% of the time, one would be better of with an Archon. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa
Stark Enterprises
2759
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 04:52:48 -
[79] - Quote
I'm getting tired of calling capital nerfs bullshit.
I'm gonna start labeling this game as such now.
Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
30626
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 05:07:51 -
[80] - Quote
Here's a thought everyone is sure to like:
Disallow capital things from affecting subcaps. Susceptible to subcaps, but helpless against them.
Capitals business becomes restricted to structure grinding, and in turn, anti capital PVP.
Want to pew subcaps? use subcap modules and drones.
End fly-by-night capital gameplay forever.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Daerrol
Furtherance.
34
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 05:39:39 -
[81] - Quote
I find it interesting the only people I have seen IN GAME complain about skynet are notorious station campers and gang bangers. Whenever I found a skynet system, I just didn't go in there unless I wanted to die. I suppose it's annoying in the way it's annoying to a three year old to be told not to go into his parents room, but there are literally thousands of systems to visit, many uninhabited. If you were looking for a fair fight, Skynet users were never going to give you one to begin with... Those fighters will become an ECM Alt fast enough (Something I personally despise FAR more than assigned fighters) |
Iudicium Vastus
Incognito Holdings and Savings
318
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 05:50:08 -
[82] - Quote
Daerrol wrote:I find it interesting the only people I have seen IN GAME complain about skynet are notorious station campers and gang bangers. Whenever I found a skynet system, I just didn't go in there unless I wanted to die. I suppose it's annoying in the way it's annoying to a three year old to be told not to go into his parents room, but there are literally thousands of systems to visit, many uninhabited. If you were looking for a fair fight, Skynet users were never going to give you one to begin with... Those fighters will become an ECM Alt fast enough (Something I personally despise FAR more than assigned fighters)
Yeah, people whined even though the tactic was severely limited in scope. I don't think I ever once saw someone freely roaming around in that sort of setup with a gang wrecking anything in their path making sure no one was safe.
Nope, it's just limited to a defensive position in an entity's home system. And instead of just going around, they have to cry.
[u]Nerf stabs/cloaks in FW?[/u] No, just..
-Fit more points
-Fit faction points
-Bring a friend or two with points (an alt is fine too)
|
Gorski Car
489
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 06:15:33 -
[83] - Quote
Nothing of value was lost.
Collect this post
|
HarlyQ
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
64
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 06:23:26 -
[84] - Quote
d0cTeR9 wrote:CCP please reimburse carrier and supercarrier pilots.
SP returned and isk returned.
When you change a ship so much, it's only normal.
After playing EVE since 2004, I still don't see CCP's thought process... A few abuse it, nerf it for all, instead of fixing the problem.
Lol I'll buy your carriers off you if you don't want them anymore. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6548
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 06:31:47 -
[85] - Quote
Iudicium Vastus wrote:Daerrol wrote:I find it interesting the only people I have seen IN GAME complain about skynet are notorious station campers and gang bangers. Whenever I found a skynet system, I just didn't go in there unless I wanted to die. I suppose it's annoying in the way it's annoying to a three year old to be told not to go into his parents room, but there are literally thousands of systems to visit, many uninhabited. If you were looking for a fair fight, Skynet users were never going to give you one to begin with... Those fighters will become an ECM Alt fast enough (Something I personally despise FAR more than assigned fighters) Yeah, people whined even though the tactic was severely limited in scope. I don't think I ever once saw someone freely roaming around in that sort of setup with a gang wrecking anything in their path making sure no one was safe. Nope, it's just limited to a defensive position in an entity's home system. And instead of just going around, they have to cry.
Doubtless it was because it was a timer
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Jori McKie
TURN LEFT
The Camel Empire
204
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 07:01:36 -
[86] - Quote
I love all those tears from Skynet pilots, keep them coming.
But as I'm a nice guy here is a hint: Get your **** on grid, it will still work, you can still use a full DPS/tracking Carrier but with much less tank compared to a full combat one. Choices guys, it is all about choices.
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
--áAbrazzar
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6319
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 07:40:20 -
[87] - Quote
Interesting nerf.
I think this is a nerf that preceeds some new content
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
McDarila
Delusions of Adequacy
Get Off My Lawn
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 07:45:32 -
[88] - Quote
I mixed on this, In a way I think overall its a good thing for pvp. The bad part is the pve in low/null only a complete idiot would take a carrior into a anom. Asign fighter(s) gave a 300 to 400 jump in dps, with out them your looking at deflation |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
DARKNESS.
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 07:49:44 -
[89] - Quote
So does this mean the scan res nerf will get repealed?
I do think taking the ability to assign fighters is yet another case of nerfing without thinking out every angle first it first like CCP has shown many times in the past.
The nerf should have been to the number of fighters a super can assign. I.E. - Fighters take 25 bandwidth to control. The ship being assigned said fighters should have a minimum of 25 bandwidth to accept that fighter. So on and so forth until that ship is out of bandwidth. You can limit this further by causing a penalty to assigning, such as they lose the actual bonus provided by the super's passive, effectively turning them back into basic fighters w/module boosts.
Is the carrier/super still "safe"? Yes. But it severely limits how many you will see on field. Outside of massive combat where slow cats or triage carriers are fielded (which while in triage bye bye fighter control) They can already put their fighters on field, so.. moot point.
Just wanting to throw that out there as another option to look at before completely obliterating yet another aspect of a class of ships that takes a lot of time and effort to obtain and fly properly. Too many things in this game are getting hit by the recent actions of CCP making our time and assets less and less valuable of a resource. |
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
477
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 08:08:43 -
[90] - Quote
Only cool thing about carrier was having special drones that follow you around as you warp but hey who likes cool things anyway and sentries/gecko's do a far better job then fighters in any case. |
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 09:35:57 -
[91] - Quote
Up to now some people agree with the removal of assistance, some don't.
But I haven't seen a single non-3month-old-t1-frig-pilot, nor a mentally impaired individual, agree on the removal of warp mechanic. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
30632
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 09:38:00 -
[92] - Quote
Gorski Car wrote:Nothing of value was lost.
but but my nyx sitter with a specialization in dps... you expect me to PVP with a SITTER? the character is worthless now!
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Cerelem
Dropbears Anonymous
Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 09:40:55 -
[93] - Quote
If CCP reimburse the Isk, they should also takeaway all the Isk people made from it. Only fair, right? |
Mirina Adelfanir
DIGIBUS
Here Be Dragons
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 09:45:30 -
[94] - Quote
For ccp:
i m actualy student and i work for living.
i make a choice in game have a ms and up this caractere in hope to have a supercarrier for farming and pvp.
i havent ~ 33b for buying or the time to have this almont so i choice tu up an account.
with this nerf i dont wanne more have a Super carrier. i wont risk to have an super for farming in annomaly for be easly hot drop or ganked just for a shiny kill.
yes i was expecting isk for flying it but the cost of this toy involve:
1) having 3 active account
2) Investing 24B
3) more than a year skilling it
4) a pos
having all this requirment is not easy take a lot of time and money, and you will make them more easly killed ?
Do you realy expect any one us these toys and pay an accunt for just pvping and have no reward at pve.
do you not understand that for sutch an amount of game time and isk these toy shouldent be easly kill.
you encouraging the disconnected mechaniques in hid afk camper and other thing like this.
so if this patch pass i will ask you to reinbourse me the game time that i pay in real currency. this patch is a big scam |
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 09:51:22 -
[95] - Quote
Mirina Adelfanir wrote:For ccp:
i m actualy student and i work for living.
i make a choice in game have a ms and up this caractere in hope to have a supercarrier for farming and pvp.
i havent ~ 33b for buying or the time to have this almont so i choice tu up an account.
with this nerf i dont wanne more have a Super carrier. i wont risk to have an super for farming in annomaly for be easly hot drop or ganked just for a shiny kill.
yes i was expecting isk for flying it but the cost of this toy involve:
1) having 3 active account
2) Investing 24B
3) more than a year skilling it
4) a pos
having all this requirment is not easy take a lot of time and money, and you will make them more easly killed ?
Do you realy expect any one us these toys and pay an accunt for just pvping and have no reward at pve.
do you not understand that for sutch an amount of game time and isk these toy shouldent be easly kill.
you encouraging the disconnected mechaniques in hid afk camper and other thing like this.
so if this patch pass i will ask you to reinbourse me the game time that i pay in real currency. this patch is a big scam
Shut up you man, how you dare to want a 25b ship that can't dock and requires a coffined pilot trained for a year an half at least to be as good as frigates?
|
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
512
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 09:56:01 -
[96] - Quote
Its a shame that they are planning to remove the ability of the Fighters to chase someone through the system - afterall it was one of the big things that seperates them out from the rest of the drones. You might escape the carrier and its convoy, but its fighters will buzz you until you leave the system...
"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57
|
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
33863
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 09:59:25 -
[97] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Removing fighter assist mechanic and removing ability for fighters to warp off grid from the carrier.
As someone who has lost ships in Tama to the fighter assist mechanic, I say, sad to see it go. Just a case of huge whinge within the have-not part of the community, affecting another part of the community. "CCP please fix, because I'm too weak to" .
sadly the live stream had shyte framerate on my end so I couldn't watch it(PC Master Race guy, can't tolerate low framerate).
so that's what I missed, huh? a shame.
E: ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRline!
Founder of the Graycember movement and LAGL's pet cat.
Critically Preposterous is recruiting! please send evemail if interested.
|
Mirina Adelfanir
DIGIBUS
Here Be Dragons
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 10:04:38 -
[98] - Quote
Gypsien Agittain wrote:Mirina Adelfanir wrote:For ccp:
i m actualy student and i work for living.
i make a choice in game have a ms and up this caractere in hope to have a supercarrier for farming and pvp.
i havent ~ 33b for buying or the time to have this almont so i choice tu up an account.
with this nerf i dont wanne more have a Super carrier. i wont risk to have an super for farming in annomaly for be easly hot drop or ganked just for a shiny kill.
yes i was expecting isk for flying it but the cost of this toy involve:
1) having 3 active account
2) Investing 24B
3) more than a year skilling it
4) a pos
having all this requirment is not easy take a lot of time and money, and you will make them more easly killed ?
Do you realy expect any one us these toys and pay an accunt for just pvping and have no reward at pve.
do you not understand that for sutch an amount of game time and isk these toy shouldent be easly kill.
you encouraging the disconnected mechaniques in hid afk camper and other thing like this.
so if this patch pass i will ask you to reinbourse me the game time that i pay in real currency. this patch is a big scam Shut up you man, how you dare to want a 25b ship that can't dock and requires a coffined pilot trained for a year an half at least to be as good as frigates?
i think you forgot if you farm with it the 2 other accunt you must pay for assisting figthers,
 yes it's better so you will us super only for grind hoo no wait sorry a dread is better for this
hm other idea for figthing other supers hmm wait but why should an other super on field hooo i know sorry for make like PL Super: make some beautiful screenshot with a lot of color and a lot of td
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
214
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 10:06:49 -
[99] - Quote
Arline Kley wrote:Its a shame that they are planning to remove the ability of the Fighters to chase someone through the system - afterall it was one of the big things that seperates them out from the rest of the drones. You might escape the carrier and its convoy, but its fighters will buzz you until you leave the system...
yeah great mechanic |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
736
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 10:31:16 -
[100] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:CCP won't be happy till creative people are handcuffed completely it seems. And like you said, all because people are too weak to assign someone to find the carrier and force it to dock or go in shields.
Quoted for obvious reason. One side gets their ass pounded, its an exploit...using game mechanics as is. Obviously its difficult to attack a carrier when some idiot flies a cheap cruiser cause the idiot doesn't bother to fly a carrier or dread to take down the other carrier. Power creep vs skill point/time investment; one can use a bigger ship with more fire power or use a smaller ship and out maneuver the enemy (pre-planning is outmaneuvering, forcing the carrier to dock or bubble up...you won even though they didn't die), works with cruisers taking down battleships since their guns cannot track smaller ships (aka for cap ships find the carrier, drop a dread on it, or chase it into a station/POS)
Simplest thing I could do if I where a developer......shields take longer to online for a POS, so they cannot be used like mobile cover like the bubble grenade in HALO 3. Biggest problem was the carrier was pre-planning how to attack using his bubble grenade, the other side could never figure out how to counter it  .
Developer taking a little bit more effort, you know how titans can only fit one doomsday and surprisingly the only ship that can fit it is a titan....now you have a fix that is a single module that buffs fighters/bombers only that doesn't effect drones that only carriers/super carriers can fit. Now the carriers have to fit actual tank instead of sitting idle near stations/POS, docking would be unreliable (active docking aggression timer would help as well). To many modules where buffing the fighters, cap out their buffs and you fixed part of the issue.
Still think the guy attacking a carrier should bring several BS fleet or at least a cap ship dread/carrier of their own to take it another carrier, carriers where like the support DPS/heal classes in other games while the guy getting his ass kicked was the crappy DPS getting his ass kicked by a support class  . Flying cheap and desiring the killmail without putting in the bigger effort of taking down the enemy carrier...is laughable while you whine to fix a "exploit" of working as supposed to mechanics until CCP had to do something to shut the whining up on the forums. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
214
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 10:57:53 -
[101] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:CCP won't be happy till creative people are handcuffed completely it seems. And like you said, all because people are too weak to assign someone to find the carrier and force it to dock or go in shields. Quoted for obvious reason. One side gets their ass pounded, its an exploit...using game mechanics as is. Obviously its difficult to attack a carrier when some idiot flies a cheap cruiser cause the idiot doesn't bother to fly a carrier or dread to take down the other carrier. Power creep vs skill point/time investment; one can use a bigger ship with more fire power or use a smaller ship and out maneuver the enemy (pre-planning is outmaneuvering, forcing the carrier to dock or bubble up...you won even though they didn't die), works with cruisers taking down battleships since their guns cannot track smaller ships (aka for cap ships find the carrier, drop a dread on it, or chase it into a station/POS) Simplest thing I could do if I where a developer......shields take longer to online for a POS, so they cannot be used like mobile cover like the bubble grenade in HALO 3. Biggest problem was the carrier was pre-planning how to attack using his bubble grenade, the other side could never figure out how to counter it . Developer taking a little bit more effort, you know how titans can only fit one doomsday and surprisingly the only ship that can fit it is a titan....now you have a fix that is a single module that buffs fighters/bombers only that doesn't effect drones that only carriers/super carriers can fit. Now the carriers have to fit actual tank instead of sitting idle near stations/POS, docking would be unreliable (active docking aggression timer would help as well). To many modules where buffing the fighters, cap out their buffs and you fixed part of the issue. Still think the guy attacking a carrier should bring several BS fleet or at least a cap ship dread/carrier of their own to take it another carrier, carriers where like the support DPS/heal classes in other games while the guy getting his ass kicked was the crappy DPS getting his ass kicked by a support class . Flying cheap and desiring the killmail without putting in the bigger effort of taking down the enemy carrier...is laughable while you whine to fix a "exploit" of working as supposed to mechanics until CCP had to do something to shut the whining up on the forums.
hmk |
Mirina Adelfanir
DIGIBUS
Here Be Dragons
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 11:31:44 -
[102] - Quote
with this nerf you killing a great part of industrial miner for capitals game play. the results apear this morning in our corp 50 % have already canceled theyr capital order |
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
93
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 12:21:18 -
[103] - Quote
Quote:I fail to see why everyone's so mad. It's a broken mechanic. If you want the effects of your ship to be felt, you should be on grid risking it.
So much this. It's a great change; the ability to project dps off-grid with no risk to the ship was just ridiculous. |
handige harrie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
288
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 12:22:52 -
[104] - Quote
The fix to assisted fighters is the same simple one as the fix to AFK cloaking in space, just move to a system next door. Apparently the concept of being a mobile force while being in a spaceship is too hard for a big part of the 'pvp' crowd.
Baddest poster ever
|
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
93
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 12:29:50 -
[105] - Quote
handige harrie wrote:The fix to assisted fighters is the same simple one as the fix to AFK cloaking in space, just move to a system next door. Apparently the concept of being a mobile force while being in a spaceship is too hard for a big part of the 'pvp' crowd.
How do you fight the people in the first system if you have to move next door to avoid skynet? |
Vince N0ir
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 12:29:54 -
[106] - Quote
o/
When does this officially go into effect? I heard a few people say they received warnings about assigning fighters already.
|
handige harrie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
288
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 12:33:16 -
[107] - Quote
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:handige harrie wrote:The fix to assisted fighters is the same simple one as the fix to AFK cloaking in space, just move to a system next door. Apparently the concept of being a mobile force while being in a spaceship is too hard for a big part of the 'pvp' crowd. How do you fight the people in the first system if you have to move next door to avoid skynet?
not, you just fight people who don't use skynet in the another system. As the one who uses skynet isn't interested in a fight anyway, but just wants to farm kills using low effort tactics. Just like afk campers aren't interested in giving anyone a fight, but just want to farm bads.
Baddest poster ever
|
Jori McKie
TURN LEFT
The Camel Empire
206
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:00:56 -
[108] - Quote
handige harrie wrote:Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:handige harrie wrote:The fix to assisted fighters is the same simple one as the fix to AFK cloaking in space, just move to a system next door. Apparently the concept of being a mobile force while being in a spaceship is too hard for a big part of the 'pvp' crowd. How do you fight the people in the first system if you have to move next door to avoid skynet? not, you just fight people who don't use skynet in another system. As the one who uses skynet isn't interested in a fight anyway, but just wants to farm kills using low effort tactics. Just like afk campers aren't interested in giving anyone a fight, but just want to farm bads.
And you can't do that anymore, why not bring the Carrier on grid instead? Ahh, yes could lose that thing, i really love the attitude you guys have and to be clear that was sarcasm.
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
--áAbrazzar
|
Lan Wang
Coreli Corporation
The Kadeshi
217
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:01:47 -
[109] - Quote
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:Quote:I fail to see why everyone's so mad. It's a broken mechanic. If you want the effects of your ship to be felt, you should be on grid risking it. So much this. It's a great change; the ability to project dps off-grid with no risk to the ship was just ridiculous.
what about offgrid boosting?
EVEALON Creative --á****Logo Design | Killboard Banners | -áWeb Design | Website Graphics
-á
|
Brutus Utama
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:17:34 -
[110] - Quote
As a fairly new player who has no experience using the "skynet" advantage i disagree with it being removed...
they should have limited it to bandwith as said earlier in this thread per 25mb bandwith you should be able to field 1 assigned fighter so vexor for example can 4 a harbinger can take 2 and most frigates can take 0 etc etc.... this is still a nerf but also not so badly it makes everyone flip their **** and claim caps are useless ( i wouldnt know i dont have the skills to fly one), wasnt the original argument that small ships using the fighters was the issue....? so they remove the biggest advantage of carriers altogether?
also if you know a system has assigned fighters in just ignore it and go elsewhere....there is hundreds of systems out there they dont all have a carrier assigning fighters...
if they are removing off grid fighters then it would only make sense to remove off grid boosters aswell... i have often seen a loki/confessor arrive in system loki cloaks up confessor runs around with huge boosts to speed sig shield etc and the loki is 100% safe whilst cloaked is this not basically the same thing as "skynetting"... getting a bonus from a ship which is 100% safe and not on grid... |
handige harrie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
288
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:22:06 -
[111] - Quote
Jori McKie wrote:handige harrie wrote:Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:handige harrie wrote:The fix to assisted fighters is the same simple one as the fix to AFK cloaking in space, just move to a system next door. Apparently the concept of being a mobile force while being in a spaceship is too hard for a big part of the 'pvp' crowd. How do you fight the people in the first system if you have to move next door to avoid skynet? not, you just fight people who don't use skynet in another system. As the one who uses skynet isn't interested in a fight anyway, but just wants to farm kills using low effort tactics. Just like afk campers aren't interested in giving anyone a fight, but just want to farm bads. And you can't do that anymore, why not bring the Carrier on grid instead? Ahh, yes could lose that thing, i really love the attitude you guys have and to be clear that was sarcasm.
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but running reactions while playing other games till fun things happen is a much more fun way of spending time, than sitting on a gate with assigned fighters. And more profitable to boot.
I'm not the one complaining to CCPlz, when there is a simple solution for your 'problem', which you could implement yourselves.
never realized small gang pvpers where such a whiny crowd when the other side doesn't play the way they want them to.
Baddest poster ever
|
Mirina Adelfanir
DIGIBUS
Here Be Dragons
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:27:53 -
[112] - Quote
I invite evry
industrial and miner in 0.0 to CANCEL his subscription:
this patch is killing the industry of cap making them no more atracrtive
And evry cap/ super pilot / and assissting accounts
Now carrier and supercarrier wont be ayble to farm anymore and paying account only for this.
This should make ccp thinking a little about nerf this mechanics
Dont alow this in low sec
Creating a module for assiting one figther
Creat a ship specialized in assisting fighter (and not alow little ship to have assist even from drone) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9919
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:30:42 -
[113] - Quote
Brutus Utama wrote:As a fairly new player who has no experience using the "skynet" advantage i disagree with it being removed...
they should have limited it to bandwith as said earlier in this thread per 25mb bandwith you should be able to field 1 assigned fighter so vexor for example can 4 a harbinger can take 2 and most frigates can take 0 etc etc.... this is still a nerf but also not so badly it makes everyone flip their **** and claim caps are useless ( i wouldnt know i dont have the skills to fly one), wasnt the original argument that small ships using the fighters was the issue....? so they remove the biggest advantage of carriers altogether?
also if you know a system has assigned fighters in just ignore it and go elsewhere....there is hundreds of systems out there they dont all have a carrier assigning fighters...
if they are removing off grid fighters then it would only make sense to remove off grid boosters aswell... i have often seen a loki/confessor arrive in system loki cloaks up confessor runs around with huge boosts to speed sig shield etc and the loki is 100% safe whilst cloaked is this not basically the same thing as "skynetting"... getting a bonus from a ship which is 100% safe and not on grid...
Exactly. They have so many options that they could use that would kill the thing they want to kill ("skynet") without totally screwing over carriers and fighters (for pvp and pve), and the option they choose is the one that...totally screws over carrier and fighters for pvp and pve lol.
Limiting fighters to the receiving ship's bandwidth (and I would add player skill, if a player can only deploy 4 drones in a ship that can deploy 5 because of skills, he could only use a max of 4 fighters also) is a great idea that eliminates one of the 2 biggest complaints about 'skynet'.
The other complaint (safety of the carrier/SC) can be fixed by preventing a them from deploying fighters within 250 km of a POS or station.
Hell, they could make a new "Carrier Siege Mod" that a carrier would have to activate if it wanted to send fighters off grid. So you know that any carrier that assigns fighters is locked in place for 5 minutes away from a pos or station so it doesn't matter if they aligned or not.
The above ideas may or may not have merit, but CCP seems to go for the easiest nerf they can, that's not good game development policy IMO. |
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
94
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 14:07:54 -
[114] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:Quote:I fail to see why everyone's so mad. It's a broken mechanic. If you want the effects of your ship to be felt, you should be on grid risking it. So much this. It's a great change; the ability to project dps off-grid with no risk to the ship was just ridiculous. what about offgrid boosting?
Also needs nerfing really. Bring it on grid is fine by me. |
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
402
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 14:15:39 -
[115] - Quote
I have no opinion on this but wanted to remind everyone that hunting the carrier is impossible with the new "deadspace safe spot" tactic.
~ Bookmarks in overview
~ Fleet improvements
|
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
Spaceship Bebop
468
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 14:24:19 -
[116] - Quote
Mirina Adelfanir wrote:I invite evry
industrial and miner in 0.0 to CANCEL his subscription:
this patch is killing the industry of cap making them no more atracrtive
And evry cap/ super pilot / and assissting accounts
Now carrier and supercarrier wont be ayble to farm anymore and paying account only for this.
This should make ccp thinking a little about nerf this mechanics
Dont alow this in low sec
Creating a module for assiting one figther
Creat a ship specialized in assisting fighter (and not alow little ship to have assist even from drone)
You have zero likes. Apparently no one likes your posts or your tears. 
Good riddance to one off-grid stupidity in this game. o7 Although, removing the assignment of drones altogether may have been better. Anyway, now they just have to remove off-grid boosting.
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
Lupe Meza
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
88
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 14:51:53 -
[117] - Quote
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:Quote:I fail to see why everyone's so mad. It's a broken mechanic. If you want the effects of your ship to be felt, you should be on grid risking it. So much this. It's a great change; the ability to project dps off-grid with no risk to the ship was just ridiculous.
I'm really hoping they sort out off-grid ...EVERYTHING. It just shouldn't exist in a game that supposed to be about Risk vs. Reward. The only assets that should benefit you are the assets you are willing to risk on the field.
Too bad about the PvE impact though, they aren't an inconsequential ship to train into. Maybe getting the scan res back up on fighters may ease the blow. Sorry guys though, your elite PVP compatriots kinda blew this for you. Players have to own up to what they do in the sandbox when they force CCP to intervene like this. |
handige harrie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
288
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 15:00:51 -
[118] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:Mirina Adelfanir wrote:I invite evry
industrial and miner in 0.0 to CANCEL his subscription:
this patch is killing the industry of cap making them no more atracrtive
And evry cap/ super pilot / and assissting accounts
Now carrier and supercarrier wont be ayble to farm anymore and paying account only for this.
This should make ccp thinking a little about nerf this mechanics
Dont alow this in low sec
Creating a module for assiting one figther
Creat a ship specialized in assisting fighter (and not alow little ship to have assist even from drone) You have zero likes. Apparently no one likes your posts or your tears. Good riddance to one off-grid stupidity in this game. o7 Although, removing the assignment of drones altogether may have been better. Anyway, now they just have to remove off-grid boosting.
The problem with the way CCP is fixing this is that instead of repairing broken fingers, they just cut off the arm. There are wayyy better solutions than removing features to fix this, but just like with Teams and Tech 3 reverse engineering, CCP opts for the hatchet and cuts off limbs instead of mending the broken parts.
This is lazy development and is nogood to anyone in the long run.
Baddest poster ever
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
299
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 15:03:54 -
[119] - Quote
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:I have no opinion on this but reminder that hunting the carrier is impossible with the new "deadspace safe spot" tactic.
And what may i ask is that?
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Jori McKie
TURN LEFT
The Camel Empire
208
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 15:22:34 -
[120] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:I have no opinion on this but reminder that hunting the carrier is impossible with the new "deadspace safe spot" tactic. And what may i ask is that?
It isn't new, it exists since there is gated deadspace area or dungeons as CCP calls them. It only became more popular since Burner missions and Skynet.
It is simple, get into a Ceptor and burn out in any gated deadspace area until you can warp to your Ceptor again and don't land on the gate. Then turn your Ceptor around until you hit the invisible border, it can be 10k to 30k km from the main grid depending on the dungeon.
Mark the border, get +3km out, warp your Carrier to your Ceptor and slowboat your Carrier into the "can't be warped to area".
As long as the dungeon is active you can't be warped to directly and have plenty of time to react if some probes you and tries via align to the probed bookmark to catch your Carrier.
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
--áAbrazzar
|
Bak
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 15:37:51 -
[121] - Quote
Genesis looks kind of dumb |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
217
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 16:41:43 -
[122] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Brutus Utama wrote:As a fairly new player who has no experience using the "skynet" advantage i disagree with it being removed...
they should have limited it to bandwith as said earlier in this thread per 25mb bandwith you should be able to field 1 assigned fighter so vexor for example can 4 a harbinger can take 2 and most frigates can take 0 etc etc.... this is still a nerf but also not so badly it makes everyone flip their **** and claim caps are useless ( i wouldnt know i dont have the skills to fly one), wasnt the original argument that small ships using the fighters was the issue....? so they remove the biggest advantage of carriers altogether?
also if you know a system has assigned fighters in just ignore it and go elsewhere....there is hundreds of systems out there they dont all have a carrier assigning fighters...
if they are removing off grid fighters then it would only make sense to remove off grid boosters aswell... i have often seen a loki/confessor arrive in system loki cloaks up confessor runs around with huge boosts to speed sig shield etc and the loki is 100% safe whilst cloaked is this not basically the same thing as "skynetting"... getting a bonus from a ship which is 100% safe and not on grid... Exactly. They have so many options that they could use that would kill the thing they want to kill ("skynet") without totally screwing over carriers and fighters (for pvp and pve), and the option they choose is the one that...totally screws over carrier and fighters for pvp and pve lol.
That's just a huge pile of bullshyt. Before the fighter/drones balance pass the assign mechanic was barely being used by anyone ... yet, now CCP is totally screwing over super and carrier pilots?
CCP says they don't like it from a design point of view and for once that's a 100% valid call. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6319
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 16:43:48 -
[123] - Quote
Jori McKie wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:I have no opinion on this but reminder that hunting the carrier is impossible with the new "deadspace safe spot" tactic. And what may i ask is that? It isn't new, it exists since there is gated deadspace area or dungeons as CCP calls them. It only became more popular since Burner missions and Skynet. It is simple, get into a Ceptor and burn out in any gated deadspace area until you can warp to your Ceptor again and don't land on the gate. Then turn your Ceptor around until you hit the invisible border, it can be 10k to 30k km from the main grid depending on the dungeon. Mark the border, get +3km out, warp your Carrier to your Ceptor and slowboat your Carrier into the "can't be warped to area". As long as the dungeon is active you can't be warped to directly and have plenty of time to react if some probes you and tries via align to the probed bookmark to catch your Carrier.
Ahhh the creativity of the nullbears.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9954
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 16:45:15 -
[124] - Quote
Ab'del Abu wrote:
That's just a huge pile of bullshyt. Before the fighter/drones balance pass the assign mechanic was barely being used by anyone ... yet, now CCP is totally screwing over super and carrier pilots?
CCP says they don't like it from a design point of view and for once that's a 100% valid call.
See that bolded part. That means the THING THAT ALREADY EXISTED didn't cause the problem, the 'balance pass' did. So if you have 2 things (1 thing that causes a problem and 1 thing that doesn't cause a problem) who in hell does it make sense to change the thing that didn't cause the problem?
Creative people found uses for the fighter delegation mechanic before CCP muffed it up with drone mods/bonuses. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
217
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 16:49:40 -
[125] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Ab'del Abu wrote:
That's just a huge pile of bullshyt. Before the fighter/drones balance pass the assign mechanic was barely being used by anyone ... yet, now CCP is totally screwing over super and carrier pilots?
CCP says they don't like it from a design point of view and for once that's a 100% valid call.
See that bolded part. That means the THING THAT ALREADY EXISTED didn't cause the problem, the 'balance pass' did. So if you have 2 things (1 thing that causes a problem and 1 thing that doesn't cause a problem) who in hell does it make sense to change the thing that didn't cause the problem? Creative people found uses for the fighter delegation mechanic before CCP muffed it up with drone mods/bonuses.
CCP wanted to make fighters a viable weapons platform, which they successfully did with the drone rebalancing. What they didn't intend to happen was skynet. So they're removing it ... makes sense to me :P
|
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
403
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 17:26:24 -
[126] - Quote
Jori McKie wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:I have no opinion on this but reminder that hunting the carrier is impossible with the new "deadspace safe spot" tactic. And what may i ask is that? It isn't new, it exists since there is gated deadspace area or dungeons as CCP calls them. It only became more popular since Burner missions and Skynet. It is simple, get into a Ceptor and burn out in any gated deadspace area until you can warp to your Ceptor again and don't land on the gate. Then turn your Ceptor around until you hit the invisible border, it can be 10k to 30k km from the main grid depending on the dungeon. Mark the border, get +3km out, warp your Carrier to your Ceptor and slowboat your Carrier into the "can't be warped to area". As long as the dungeon is active you can't be warped to directly and have plenty of time to react if some probes you and tries via align to the probed bookmark to catch your Carrier.
Heh, I had forgotten you can align to the probed bookmark. Not impossible then to catch the carrier but certainly quite the feat.
~ Bookmarks in overview
~ Fleet improvements
|
Thayden Reid Nordic
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:20:50 -
[127] - Quote
I lost a Naga on Station undock, literally AS I undocked. I saw two LITTLE frigates on my overview, and thought, "Meh.." Then I saw them targeting me and thought, "That's cute." But as I was in a fast lock frig popper, I decided to dock up to be safe. (I had JUST undocked, mind you) Next thing I know, I'm in structure, and POOF! No more Naga. It took looking at the killmail to realize the frigs had fighters assigned to them. And that was my 2nd day in Null Sec. |
HarlyQ
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
66
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 03:46:47 -
[128] - Quote
Thayden Reid Nordic wrote:I lost a Naga on Station undock, literally AS I undocked. I saw two LITTLE frigates on my overview, and thought, "Meh.." Then I saw them targeting me and thought, "That's cute." But as I was in a fast lock frig popper, I decided to dock up to be safe. (I had JUST undocked, mind you) Next thing I know, I'm in structure, and POOF! No more Naga. It took looking at the killmail to realize the frigs had fighters assigned to them. And that was my 2nd day in Null Sec.
Welcome to nullsec :) I'm looking forward to this nerf though it is exciting no more ratting tengus with fighters assigned so excited. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
109
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 05:08:06 -
[129] - Quote
Iudicium Vastus wrote:Daerrol wrote:I find it interesting the only people I have seen IN GAME complain about skynet are notorious station campers and gang bangers. Whenever I found a skynet system, I just didn't go in there unless I wanted to die. I suppose it's annoying in the way it's annoying to a three year old to be told not to go into his parents room, but there are literally thousands of systems to visit, many uninhabited. If you were looking for a fair fight, Skynet users were never going to give you one to begin with... Those fighters will become an ECM Alt fast enough (Something I personally despise FAR more than assigned fighters) Yeah, people whined even though the tactic was severely limited in scope. I don't think I ever once saw someone freely roaming around in that sort of setup with a gang wrecking anything in their path making sure no one was safe. Nope, it's just limited to a defensive position in an entity's home system. And instead of just going around, they have to cry.
Or you can just anchor a tower in a popular FW nexus/pipeline system, drop a carrier next to it and assign fighters to an instalocking ceptor sitting on a gate to farm kills all day whilst risking nothing but a 30M ISK ceptor, secure in the knowledge that going around you requires a 10 jump detour and that none of the local FW entities will be able to muster the firepower to knock down your POS.
You abused it for easy kills and now it's gone. Now go on, I just know there's a gate somewhere in null that's feeling neglected.
So much tears. I love it. God forbid I HAVE TO RISK MY SHIP TO GET KILLS. |
mannyman
High Flyers
The Kadeshi
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 11:24:08 -
[130] - Quote
First of all, I have to say I am deeply disappointed with CCP for just "removing" the functionality. I will give you all the reason for it here:
There are different mechanics in play in lowsex and Nullsec today:
Lowsec:
* Possible to stay outside dickstar with carrier or super carrier and dip into shields within 20 sec if something happens on grid.
* Super is not web-able, so super gets in. Carrier can be webbed
* Possible to sit at online POS with no forcefield, open the management window and enter password and shield goes up if something happens on grid.
* NO bubbles allowed in Lowsec. This means, the delegated/assigned fighters nerf makes SENSE in Lowsec as it is too overpowered vs the risk. It is fair to say it is "safer" to use carrier/super on grid in a fight in Lowsec.
* Lowsec does NOT have structure grinding which it has in nullsec. No SBU's, TCU's, Ihubs, stations to shoot.
NullSec:
* Carrier and Super can be bubbled by a 40m isk interdictor, and get tackled.
* Fighters can NOT track a fast moving agile ship if tank is in lowslots and mids.
* Alot of stucture grinding compared to nullsec
* Due to the fact that a super carrier drones can not track a cheap 40m interdictor, a "safer" environment with lower dps should be allowed for a 30b ship incl fittings.
* Therefore the POS mechanic as sitting outside POS should be ALLOWED to delegate fighters (not the bombers), mabye minimum 20km off the POS forcefield. Still exposing the super carrier and can be tackled. It is all about a players preparations with the POS that can save him.
General:
* Sitting next to online POS with no forcefield, seems to me as a exploit. I used it myself to jump supers and carriers around, and it is fairly safe to move like that with a small POS, launch a cyno next to online stick, and once carriers are on grid, enter password and shield is up. This functionality should be removed together with delegating fighters that close to the POS stick itself.
There is alot of fun a single player can do with delegated fighters in nullsec, lots of fun small fights because of it. whether you loose or win. I agree to expose the super carrier or carrier more, but not nerf it totally from nullsec. I can easy see why this should be nerfed in lowsec, as there are no structure grinding done there, so if you want to gate camp with fighters, ok, expose your super or carrier on that gate, as you can not get bubbled. But in nullsec you get bubbled easily. You should still be able to get tackled/bubbled and exposing super/carrier more in null, but again, removing the delegation/assignment of fighters in null is totally unreasonable as it is a fun mechanic for all parties.
What CCP will see if they remove delegation/assignment in null, is that they will only see subcap fights, no cap fights, as cap usage only will be used when system is safe or no hostile fleet is near. so stacking up more supers in game is gonna happen. Supers will not be used for ratting where you assign/delegate fighters anymore, so it wont get exposed with that, unless someone uses a super on grid offcourse.
There will be more nullsec stagnation due to this nerf.
The fights will be done when its "safer", wait a few days until attack happens again.
repeat - repeat - rinse - die - repeat subcaps.
|
Jori McKie
TURN LEFT
The Camel Empire
212
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 12:45:09 -
[131] - Quote
You are wrong on so many levels not even funny, most importantly Fighters do track and one volley Frigs, Cruiser.
Read this blog from Gorski:
http://gorsking.blogspot.de/2015/02/****-skynet.html
Better get your facts straight next time
You don't need a POS/station to set up Skynet read this:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5532655#post5532655
Yep, safespots galore.
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
--áAbrazzar
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
30659
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 12:50:00 -
[132] - Quote
lol. Someone is obviously the brightest rock in the pile.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
mannyman
High Flyers
The Kadeshi
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 17:42:27 -
[133] - Quote
I wrote this: Fighters can NOT track a fast moving agile ship if tank is in lowslots and mids
If you setup tracking yes, you can one volley fast going frigs. but then u have to drop some of the tank.
Interesting to see someone saying its wrong in so many ways without stating the fact ! |
Suitonia
Genos Occidere
Warlords of the Deep
462
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 20:10:59 -
[134] - Quote
mannyman wrote:I wrote this: Fighters can NOT track a fast moving agile ship if tank is in lowslots and mids If you setup tracking yes, you can one volley fast going frigs. but then u have to drop some of the tank. Interesting to see someone saying its wrong in so many ways without stating the fact ! Safespots are really not safespots, they are probe-able. Any decent pvper with respect for himself, atleast a super hunting dictor, has combat probes.. easy peasy. I do own a super toon and super, and I have tried many times to get my fighters hit agile ships. Only way to take my own fast going frigs is to setup good tracking, 2 omnis in lows, and 2-3 omis with tracking script in mid. Even then, the drones dont hit that good. with more tracking you drop tank, so that isnt an option either.
There is absolutely no need for tank however as the Invulnerable POS Forcefield is your tank.
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
Potamus Jenkins
eXceed Inc.
No Holes Barred
140
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 23:37:07 -
[135] - Quote
Quote:. i have often seen a loki/confessor arrive in system loki cloaks up confessor runs around with huge boosts to speed sig shield etc and the loki is 100% safe whilst cloaked is this not basically the same thing
thats not how it works at all |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
30668
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 23:38:48 -
[136] - Quote
Looking at my last loss again I noticed a thanatos and nyx on it (for the first time). What you don't see on the kill parade is the archon they had in triage at the undock. And I thought the archon was bad. lol. black legion best legion.
come to think of it, BL and PL are getting kicked squarely in the groinds repeatedly over these last several months.
(camping out a revenant for two months is not gameplay m8s)
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Potamus Jenkins
eXceed Inc.
No Holes Barred
140
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 23:46:13 -
[137] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:mannyman wrote:I wrote this: Fighters can NOT track a fast moving agile ship if tank is in lowslots and mids If you setup tracking yes, you can one volley fast going frigs. but then u have to drop some of the tank. Interesting to see someone saying its wrong in so many ways without stating the fact ! Safespots are really not safespots, they are probe-able. Any decent pvper with respect for himself, atleast a super hunting dictor, has combat probes.. easy peasy. I do own a super toon and super, and I have tried many times to get my fighters hit agile ships. Only way to take my own fast going frigs is to setup good tracking, 2 omnis in lows, and 2-3 omis with tracking script in mid. Even then, the drones dont hit that good. with more tracking you drop tank, so that isnt an option either. There is absolutely no need for tank however as the Invulnerable POS Forcefield is your tank.
are people really denying the fact that people are sitting in the supers poking out of of the pos shield, forgoing tank instead of full wrack of drone mods?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
16154
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 10:37:58 -
[138] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:Ab'del Abu wrote:Rroff wrote:Sigh... nerf into ground != balance... The only way to properly balance them (that I can think of) would have been to have boni from drone damage amplifiers, tracking computers and so forth not apply off grid. But I guess that's not something that CCP could have implemented easily, if at all, or else they probably would have done it. at this point CCP just needs to ball up and remove every capital from the game because as it is every time capitals come up, its a nerf, nerf nerf nerf. hell, the titan is literally a bus, it has next to 0 combat use unless the enemy has their own cap fleet, that is usually more effective to just counter with dreads anyways, for the most part capitals and subs even on the same grid at this point are fighting separate fights, because of all the restrictions on who can damage what for *balance* its a joke. just ******* delete them if you want them to be nothing more than bragging rights and glorified freighters
T2 Seige & Triage modules were a huge nerf, for instance.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
310
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 10:50:04 -
[139] - Quote
Holysmokes some of the stuff in this thread is funny.
Cloaked Links, 6000DPS assigned fighter damage etc... (as pointed out if your a TL;DR person, links don't work cloaked, and you can only assign a max of 5 fighters ).
There are clearly some people that believe the only way they die is when the others had a "unfair" advantage.
This is Eve. It is your job to be on the other side of unfair.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Jori McKie
TURN LEFT
The Camel Empire
216
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 12:24:22 -
[140] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Holysmokes some of the stuff in this thread is funny.
Cloaked Links, 6000DPS assigned fighter damage etc... (as pointed out if your a TL;DR person, links don't work cloaked, and you can only assign a max of 5 fighters ).
There are clearly some people that believe the only way they die is when the others had a "unfair" advantage.
This is Eve. It is your job to be on the other side of unfair.
Ahhm, before you start sperging, you should check your facts ;)
How many times i have to post this?
http://gorsking.blogspot.de/2015/02/****-skynet.html
Read it carefully.
Quote:http://puu.sh/g4gH2/b9e630ead6.png
As you can see all the fighters do the same dps per 5 drones. Whats different is the volley, speed, tracking and damage profile. Tracking is what really stands out here. These fighters will track frigs easily and will easily remove entire fleets especially if your assigning ship has some webs and painters. Another thing that's really overpowered with these is the speed. This is not even the maximum speed these are able to reach. By changing the drone nav comps you can get Einherjis to almost hit 7k m/s. It's worth noting that the dps and volley number is per ship you assign to. A single carrier can provide fighters to 3 players increasing the dps on Einherjis to 3334 with a 20k volley for example.
^^ this 1xCarrier, 3.3k DPS with 20k volley from 15 Fighters delegated to 3xships
Quote:Now lets touch a subject I haven't talked about yet. Supercarriers assigning drones. These massive ships have a insane price tag with them but they have ewar immunity allowing them to easily mwd into a pos shield if you are sitting on the edge of it. Supercarriers have another type of fighter called Fighter Bomber. These are different from fighters in that they shoot missiles that use the missile damage formula instead of the damage formula. While Fighter bombers benefit from drone damage modules like any other drone. They get nothing from Omni directionals and this means that they will never be as great as normal fighters for killing smaller stuff. Fortunately for us supers can use Fighters as well and they can pack way more of them and they get a nice 100% bonus to damage. 15 super Templars will be able to dish out 6668 dps with 40k volleys for example and that's using t2 drone damage amps.
^^ this 1xSuper, 6.6k DPS with 40k volley from 15 Fighters delegated to 3xships
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
--áAbrazzar
|
Steppa Musana
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 17:41:33 -
[141] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Holysmokes some of the stuff in this thread is funny.
Cloaked Links, 6000DPS assigned fighter damage etc... (as pointed out if your a TL;DR person, links don't work cloaked, and you can only assign a max of 5 fighters ).
There are clearly some people that believe the only way they die is when the others had a "unfair" advantage.
This is Eve. It is your job to be on the other side of unfair.
Yeah they are using capital ship weapons, on subcaps, without putting the capital ships at risk. Id say thats unfair. The subcap ships are all balanced against one another and you throw that all away allowing these kinds of drones to be fielded like that. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
10002
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 17:53:35 -
[142] - Quote
Steppa Musana wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:Holysmokes some of the stuff in this thread is funny.
Cloaked Links, 6000DPS assigned fighter damage etc... (as pointed out if your a TL;DR person, links don't work cloaked, and you can only assign a max of 5 fighters ).
There are clearly some people that believe the only way they die is when the others had a "unfair" advantage.
This is Eve. It is your job to be on the other side of unfair. Yeah they are using capital ship weapons, on subcaps, without putting the capital ships at risk. Id say thats unfair. The subcap ships are all balanced against one another and you throw that all away allowing these kinds of drones to be fielded like that.
And again that wasn't in the least bit a problem when those "capital ship weapons" couldn't hit anything sub-capital sized. The problem wasn't fighter delegation it IS CCP's phoebe fighter changes. Rather than getting rid of cool and unique features, CCP should attack the actual problem, which was their own poor thinking prior to the Phoebe patch when it comes to fighters.
|
Hicksimus
Xion Limited
Resonance.
543
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 19:06:36 -
[143] - Quote
I'll gladly put my Archon at risk but with hotdrop mechanics being what they are we seem to have gone from near 0 risk to maximum risk and I'd really rather have a middle ground. Not that I have any alts subbed to assign to at this point because CCP has returned to lazy mode and my interest in the game is near 0.
Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you?
Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.
|
mannyman
High Flyers
The Kadeshi
7
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 21:58:23 -
[144] - Quote
Potamus Jenkins wrote:
are people really denying the fact that people are sitting in the supers poking out of of the pos shield, forgoing tank instead of full wrack of drone mods?
So the problem is more that the mid/low slot modules are still IN EFFECT when fighters are off-grid of the super/carrier ! |
Davir Sometaww
Snuff Box
Snuffed Out
27
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 22:05:15 -
[145] - Quote
Hell; removing is a stupid idea. Its a unique form of gameplay and you can make it more risk adverse. Removing it will be a bad idea because A:
-Less carriers will get killed because nobody will undock them.
-No more large turd carriers killed. The last one that was skynetting? Risk adverse my ass. After some planning - got DD'd.
Easy fix:
Can't assign fighters while near a pos shields at 5km ((Carrier is too far to safely get inside and leaves it vulnerable to hotdropping)).
Done and done. Thank you I just fixed eve.
|
Grog Barrel
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
57
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:31:51 -
[146] - Quote
Oh man. Just resubbed after a 2 years break to just find out about these coming changes which I wouldn't support in any ways... Not only the fighters, but also the t3 ships as a whole plus bonus points for nerfing the tengu -once againGäó-.
What a massive letdown to find out the mindset regarding balance hasn't evolved a crap over the years. Instead of exploring the depths of asymmetrical balance, just keep it on par with ****** medieval fantasy mmorpgs. Homogenize the **** out of everything. Yet devs have the courage to come up with t3 destroyers and bring them onto live server in their current state.
I leave disappointed. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |