|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
17
   |
Posted - 2015.03.01 08:50:39 -
[1] - Quote
So a 30bill Mom is safe next to a pos? Is it balanced that a few greifers should be able to dictate how they dont want to face any fighters in their frigs as they warp in to light cynos. What is the use of moms ? none.. good job working to get one.. now go self destruct. thats what they are for. Is this the enjoyment you want? There are a few ships that should be overpowered. If they want to face a fleet with capitals in it they should bring caps. quit listening to cry babies who wine that skynet killed them.
A 30bill capital should have benefits over a bunch of frigs. Fighters should be able to be assigned. Capitals should be able to deal out death.
let the greifers cry. |
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
19
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 09:10:12 -
[2] - Quote
You want to keep things interesting; Instead of constant nerfs, how about making something new?  |
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
20
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 09:26:09 -
[3] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Byson1 wrote:So a 30bill Mom is safe next to a pos? Is it balanced that a few greifers should be able to dictate how they dont want to face any fighters in their frigs as they warp in to light cynos. What is the use of moms ? none.. good job working to get one.. now go self destruct. thats what they are for. Is this the enjoyment you want? There are a few ships that should be overpowered. If they want to face a fleet with capitals in it they should bring caps. quit listening to cry babies who wine that skynet killed them.
A 30bill capital should have benefits over a bunch of frigs. Fighters should be able to be assigned. Capitals should be able to deal out death.
let the greifers cry. I'm confused. Could you clarify. Do you feel it's an acceptable practice to nose out of a POS and delegate fighters?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGKP-d15HmA
YES! why not? a POS CAN COME DOWN. A carrier should be able to project force. A fleet with one SHOULD BE a force to recon with. It's difficult to deal with them AS IT SHOULD BE.
No what i really mean is lets nerf carriers so much that no one uses them. Get rid of all options change all ships so they do the same DPS (EXCEPT the ones ccp and friends are using) then when people figure out which ones those are- change it up. Thats what I mean. yeah sounds good right? that way its fair. they are all the same except the people that count they can have an advantage no matter what you go against. a capital... pfff... its just another ship. everyone should be able to kill them.
I know CCP should just hand out carriers for free so everyone can get a carrier kill mail when they are board. maybe pre pointed and can only deploy ecm drones. yeah sounds good. fighters are too scary. please ccp dont make me face fighters thanks. |
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
22
|
Posted - 2015.03.01 21:22:00 -
[4] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:I'm still trying to see why keeping the fighter warp is beneficial. Nobody is saying why.
you obviously dont use carriers.
No one wants to say why cause they dont want to admit the use... And then give CCP a great idea to nerf it..
wait carriers are being used? NERF
For those that dont use carriers:
You have to be completely out of the shields to be able to assign fighters. It's been that way for a while now. There was a time when they could stick their nose out and assign. That time is no longer..
I would suggest maybe slowing carriers down more, lowering aggility, so it takes longer for them to return to shields rather than have to be a minimum distance from pos shields as there is already a min distance -you have to be out of the shields.
Those who are pansies and cant handle fighter aggro should figure out how to handle it rather than complain to CCP for them to change game mechanics to make it easier for them.
|
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
23
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 00:27:13 -
[5] - Quote
beakerax wrote:This would be more convincing if you weren't defending people who are unwilling to actually deploy their carriers on-grid.
All i hear is cry cry cry. If you want to do something rather than cry,
Hot drop the pos with the carrier. take down the pos. Target fighters. It's doable- why have CCP make carriers pathetic?
Yes everyone wants carriers to warp to gates- GUESS WHAT, Until carriers can really do the damage for 'their risk' aka cost no one is going to do that. IT'S ********.
THE ONLY ONES GOING TO DO might be LARGE ALLIANCES
IS THIS WHAT CCP WANTS? LARGE COALITIONS AND ALLIANCES THE ONLY ONES ABLE TO FIELD CAPS?
What? should we make this so you can fly in with your shuttle and destroy carriers?
Fighters are expensive. More so than most frigs, so to say sticking a few on a frig is no risk is BS.
FIGHTERS CAN POP.
Keep crying, it shows how pathetic you are.
|
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
29
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 19:54:10 -
[6] - Quote
Nada Spai wrote:fighters should definitely still warp, as they are more like frigs than drones and it adds a degree of difficulty to using them as well as fighting them. the question you were looking to answer was not "are fighters op" but "how do we stop skynet" so this is the answer i propose. Fighters should be able to be assigned to any other ship to control while ON GRID WITH THE CARRIER/SUPER! Once they leave that grid, they can longer issue an order to the fighters, who would return to the carrier after completed its final orders. Regular drones can be assisted so it isnt reasonable to say fighters have no right to be. A bs can assign drones to a frig to make up for lower scan res, a carrier should be able to do the same. Changing fighter assist to require both ships be on the same grid most definitely includes the amount of risk to a capital as you are intending, and it will lower the overall dominance skynet has over a system by requiring caps to stay more connected to the fight.
Completely useless to only be able to assign fighters while on grid that would be what is considered assist rather than assign. |
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
29
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 20:22:47 -
[7] - Quote
Kane Carnifex wrote:Skynet, an overview and suggestions review
...
Note:
If you cannot kill a carrier with your fleet DPS , you will not have a chance against it on grid or off grid.
[/i]
IMHO
Your 20 men fleet is hunting for everything in a region which doesnGÇÖt belong to you. This region knows you and chooses the fight which they could win. Either you travel through a gatecamp and die in the camp as you not able to get to optimal or you will be baited. Nobody would bait you if they are not able to win the isk war or to bring the death to you whole fleet. Due the intel in this region the defender knows more about you than you about his fleet.
You can expect following long before you know the enemy fleet:
-More vessels (more DPS)
-Powerful vessels (fleet multiplier)
-Logistic
-If you only bring stuff from one race, be ready to get jammed.
-Lets cover the jamming under EWAR.
-Skynet Carrier (fleet multiplier)
So you donGÇÖt choose the fight, the living people choose the fight and it is not required to have a fair fight. Why should we? It is eve, RL ethics doesnGÇÖt work here. This is war, combat it will be unfair for one of the fighting sideGǪ the advantage is to let them believe which they could win or have a bigger support fleet in the backhand.
LetGÇÖs spin this little bit up. You jump into a system which is heavily camped as it is an pocket entrance. You see fighter drones on grid and decide to first probe out the carrier for a Titan drive by.
You bring a fleet up which supports the titan and a fleet which fights the local gate camp. Unfortunately once the Titan landed in the System it got holded by an hic and the defender brings in more reinforcesGǪ. Escalation escalation escalationGǪ
Is there now a Problem?
People build up a POS, Station or make a deep safe spot somewhere in space. They are the defenders which want to defend their space unfortunately CCP doesnGÇÖt provide tools for defending space neither a own controlled concord or gate guns or something else to defend it. But you can use carriers to provide a locate defense in this system which allows you to turn a fight to your advantages, yes you also can bring an offgrid boosterGǪ I
The Skynet carrier live in 0.0 also with the advantages and disadvantages which this space area brings. Why should a PVP Fleet from Highsec get more advantageGǪ they come to unknown k-space and search for a fight the others just live and defend their space whit it.
Also you can easy kite out the fighter drones with an cruiser as these small medium scale pvp ships are always build for kitingGǪ you will be hard to hit, once you get webbed it is over.
I am starting to spinning around with my points, but I think I made my point clear which I donGÇÖt think this is a good decision to remove this function. If you cannot fight it ask you friends for help.
Capitals Ships requires high skills and it also requires high skills to counter it easy or a huge amount of mid skilled player to kill it.
Its my point of view, and yes i am pro skynet :)
Well said.
The whole point of this nerf is -
A CCM and a few with load voices wants the game to be easier. They get CCP to change mechanics for their advantage.
my opinion:
A FLEET WITH A CARRIER should have an advantage. IT SHOULD take effort to hunt it down and kill it at a POS or where ever. LEAVE IT ALONE
you want options:
learn how to target, kite fighters, they are more expensive than your frig ships you bring to greif miners. Risk vs Reward right?
There is nothing wrong with this. It's worked for those who have come before you.
The current mechanics of carrier dps takes more pilots to do a bit of dps, with these mechanics level of work it takes to kill capitals represents the risk reward it should be- rather than carrier pilots have all the risk at a gate and a reward of woot you killed a frig good job.
|
Byson1
Origin Unlimited
Natural Selection Initiative
34
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:51:16 -
[8] - Quote
afkalt wrote:I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.
wow there has been several rule breakers, check this one out...
you want risk vs reward, a carrier vs a bunch of frigs isn't ballanced.
|
|
|
| |
|