In regards to the Carrier, the current tactics employed are inline with Carrier Philosophy.
( I.E. That Carriers are not meant to be on the same grid as another hostile ship.)
They are meant to operate away from any direct combat. The Link below demonstrates how Carriers are meant to be deployed. If you wish to remove a Carrier's sole role, then remove it from the ship line up, and replace it with something that isn't a Carrier. If not, then keep it the same, and keep in mind the fact that Carriers trumped the Battleship for a reason.






http://lexingtoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/aircraft-carrier-invulnerability.pdf


Regards,
Ahmburg

You can only assign 5 fighters to 1 interceptor.
Nothing stopped the idiots getting killed from warping away, jumping the gate, bringing more ships, hot dropping the carrier, etc etc ETC...

Bunch of noobs crying because they are getting killed by OVERWHELMING forces DEFENDING their space.

CCP just give mini doomsdays to ceptors and lets call it a day, i'm sure the noobs will finally be happy nothing can kill them, and they can kill anything.

People are foolish thinking that killing the enemy super is the only way to victory. If you can make him go into his shield, you've won. If you can make him not want to log in for fear of possibly losing the super because every time he does log in so do several alts in system, you've won. If you can catch and kill his trigger ship, you've won. If you can catch and kill the super itself, then that's an enormous victory.

Each of those is in itself a victory. Problem is if some players don't see the enemy ship blow up they consider it a loss. Completely forgetting about tactical victories. Not everything is about killing the other player's largest ship.


Take the current war going on right now in Delve/Fountain. We have taken pretty hard loses in a couple of engagements, but have managed to maintain control of each timer. So at the end of the day, that's a win. Do we cry if we lose the isk war in a skirmish? No, because that's just one aspect of the game and we love it.

Here are a few things for you to think about:
Do null players cry for slowcats or drone assign to be nerfed? No, we accept it for what it is and we know we can do it right back if we so choose.
Do null players want bomb nerfs? Well maybe, but we know why they exist and accept it.
You see, unlike many spoiled players those who actually live in null typically accept and adapt to existing mechanics. We don't want CCP's hands in our sandbox. If we did we'd all play WOW where everything is homogenized so nobody had an unfair advantage over anyone else.

Not sure thats as simple a subject - the logistics of just one of the capital module alone on that carrier is probably more than the entire ishtar that invariably the pilot complaining about risk is flying :S

End of they day skynet is/was bad and had to go that doesn't mean however that the way CCP has chosen to go about that is in anyway a good solution.

I've got news for you buddy, I do speak for the majority of null sec and likely a good chunk of low who have any actual ties to the use of supers. It's you who are in the minority here.

Can we also add that carriers and dreadnoughts basically can't really defend themselves against even a small group of attackers?

what i pay for in this game is relative to the money i give you ccp and if im dumping money into a game for a monthly sub and dumping money into the game to buy the ships i want and then you take away their significance you are taking money from me and hurting loyal paying customers that are keeping this game online, you are driving away all your older based cash cow capital pilots and that's just bad business

Removing Fighter Assist kills one of the one and only interesting things about flying a Carrier.