EVE Search - Sticky:[Scylla] Skynet - Removing fighter assist for carriers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Scylla] Skynet - Removing fighter assist for carriers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Panther X High Flyers The Kadeshi 56	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:12:55 - [361] - Quote Igor Nappi wrote: Forgot to add, the nullbot tears in this thread are absolutely delicious. So you assume that anyone who lives in nullsec and has a carrier is a bot? How droll. Please keep the tinfoil hat on. Your argument is invalid because reasons. My super smells of rich Corinthian Leather
Primary This Rifter 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 599	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:22:17 - [362] - Quote Panther X wrote: Igor Nappi wrote: Forgot to add, the nullbot tears in this thread are absolutely delicious. So you assume that anyone who lives in nullsec and has a carrier is a bot? How droll. Please keep the tinfoil hat on. Your argument is invalid because reasons. The number of fallacies his like have been committing is pretty high: Appeal to spite: "This hurts nullbears, so I'm all for it." Genetic fallacy: "Nullbears are arguing for it, so it must be bad." Fallacy of composition: "Some people have been known to bot with carriers, so they're all botters." Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
iwasatoad AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing 14	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:27:10 - [363] - Quote here is a real simple fix Leave every thing the way it is now and make it possible to point fighters and make fighters provide kill mails if killed... Let's face it risk Vs reward there is no risk in sending out fighters because even if they die it does not hurt a kill board if they die. get rid of that and now there is reward to killing fighters other than just getting DPS off the field. Removing the ability to send fighters to players will just cause no one to use them in PVP unless large scale any more as the risk it to large for little reward. Not to mention removing this ability only helps larger groups win every time yet again. The numerical advantage of being able to send fighters out is only used because of pesky 3km's ships playing gate games and fast warp games to move non stop an have no risk because they can just keep moving so removing the ability only make them now just warp to a dead safe cause you to scann them down warp there only to have them to warp off once you land on grid. That alone is the only reason to send fighters out so that you can force them to keep moving and or allow your smaller numbers attack larger numbers. because let's face it sending out 10 fighters that have crap tracking against frigs fast cruisers is less useful than putting for example a HAC on the field that will do the same damage but have a better rate of killing them. Witch will only make them warp off and just stay pointed to there next warp out. and then it goes round again scan them down land on grid they warp this change would only lead to less content as i and a lot of others will not put cap's on the field as the risk vs reward then is not there i take huge risk with very little reward even if i get the kill with a huge lock time Simple FIX Make fighters able to be pointed and generate kill mails quite simple fix. send 10 fighters out at 20 mill a pop that's 200 million in kill mails now on the field about equal to putting a HAC on the field but not as effective all the while forcing the target to warp around and not just play the 300km range game to be a pest all day while giving the hostile the ability to warp off land point the fighters and decide if he can take on the fighters witch would be the same as facing a HAC or keep moving on. This would also bring up the point that if this were to be a true idea worth doing then fighters would also need the ability to point targets again risk vs reward you should not be able to point a fighter so it cannot leave but be able to shoot it with out the worry of not being able to warp off. Simply put all you will do by removing the ability to send out fighters to fleet members is cause more scaning warping games that lead's to no content game play as when some one comes in they can just warp off again and again. Witch is how it happens now if you do not have fighters to chase them, and once more on that i know i will never put 2 billion isk on the field if the enemy is all in frigs and cruiser the lock time is to big and i would be much more effective just putting a hack or dom on the field forcing them to warp off or die and will not proceed to play the scan warp game that will never get you a kill unless they are that stupid and not looking at there overview. But this would be some thing that would make game play more viable and it would make since so like most things in the world let's not do it let's nerff capitals even more so that no one ever uses them any more and make it point less to have one because lest face it as of right now it's the only thing they are good at for pvp as a logi fleet cost lest and rep's the same and cost a lot less as well as a hac or even a BC cost less and will give you the same result as putting a capital on the field with a lot less risk unless blobing witch is not the problem coming from the people whining
eiedu Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 13	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:28:48 - [364] - Quote I say, Make fighters a class of normal drones. where off-grid assignment isn't allowed, but on-grid assignment is okay. Then there's the thing where they can warp. You could keep that, but make it so that they only warp where the carrier is warping.
Panther X High Flyers The Kadeshi 56	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:35:13 - [365] - Quote Primary This Rifter wrote: Panther X wrote: Igor Nappi wrote: Forgot to add, the nullbot tears in this thread are absolutely delicious. So you assume that anyone who lives in nullsec and has a carrier is a bot? How droll. Please keep the tinfoil hat on. Your argument is invalid because reasons. The number of fallacies his like have been committing is pretty high: Appeal to spite: "This hurts nullbears, so I'm all for it." Genetic fallacy: "Nullbears are arguing for it, so it must be bad." Fallacy of composition: "Some people have been known to bot with carriers, so they're all botters." +1 See not everyone Grr's Goons.... (Grr Goons) My super smells of rich Corinthian Leather
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1434	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:37:36 - [366] - Quote Great change. The Tears Must Flow
octahexx Charante Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 82	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:37:38 - [367] - Quote this game keeps getting nerfed,it gets duller for ever forced gameplay style,cattleprodding the player base into the next playstyle to then nerf it,the game gets smaller and more dull for every removal of personal choice,nerfing the capitals and supers that is the current trend removes endgame,everytime a doctrine shows to be effective because its the least nerfed ship it gets nerfed. i cant put the words for it down but it makes the world of eve online smaller and less exciting,i dont want all the ships to be the same and nerfed into a childsafe yellow bumpercar with foampadding...
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 150	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:40:00 - [368] - Quote It is funny how many people come up with "great" ideas to keep this mechanic without thinking 30 seconds about how they do not change anything in the risk department or the added risk is supereasy to circumvent. If you want to use your carriers get them on grid. It is not like they were actually expensive, fragile or defenseless. Do carriers need a little extra for their nontriage role? Probably, but riskfree-dps-projection is not it.
Dedbforucme PH0ENIX COMPANY Phoenix Company Alliance 3	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:41:09 - [369] - Quote Getting rid of Skynet is absurd and makes using super capitals ships (IE Nyx, Aeon, Wyvern, Hel) pointless to fly and you are just sitting an expensive paper weights because they are 20+ billion isk or 550 plus dollars to do nothing with and not worth training towards. Also by getting rid of the ability to have fighters warp just makes carriers (IE: Nidhoggur, Thanatos, Chimera, Archon) not worth using in PVE because every time you have it in a site and a neutral or hostile comes into system chances are you are leaving behind 250-300 mil worth of fighters behind to not lose your 3-4 bil carrier. Instead of getting rid Skynet make it only usable in systems your corp and/or alliance has sov. , or make them only assignable to battleship classes and above if the issue is having them assigned to frigates and cruisers, because making these changes essentially guts all capital ship pilots and their time spent training a waste of time when they could have been training to fly a perfect marauder or something.
RogueHunteer Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:50:37 - [370] - Quote CSM said to happen since all nerfs are coming, just remove all capitals and refund the SP. problem solve. no one wants to play with all nerfs roling out...

Balani ELVE Industries Shadow of xXDEATHXx 2	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:52:41 - [371] - Quote remove scaps and remove Fighters remap all cap + fighter skills _P the game is mutating to a pure pvp sandbox where pve has no room.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 914	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:58:03 - [372] - Quote RogueHunteer wrote: CSM said to happen since all nerfs are coming, just remove all capitals and refund the SP. problem solve. no one wants to play with all nerfs roling out... Not everyone plays flavour of the month, I pretty much got into the game because it was a "sandbox" and I like capitals (and 1-2 other things) a lot of what draws other people to the game leaves me unaffected i.e. flying around in an ishtar or bomber I get no enjoyment from at all.
Raz Destructor Parallax Shift The Periphery 1	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:03:15 - [373] - Quote Make a Drone Delegation Module that acts like the triage, but allows you to use fighters while in the mode. And have it disable movement like the triage so you can get bumped right out the other side of a POS bubble before you come out of the mode. The idea is to make it riskier, not take away the potential reward of killing one. You don't want to alienate everybody who has a carrier and does Skynetting because they never get to use their carrier otherwise. Maybe you should add some features that make the carrier more fun to use and lose instead of just cutting existing features because it is faster, easier, and cheaper.
RogueHunteer Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:06:42 - [374] - Quote Rroff wrote: RogueHunteer wrote: CSM said to happen since all nerfs are coming, just remove all capitals and refund the SP. problem solve. no one wants to play with all nerfs roling out... Not everyone plays flavour of the month, I pretty much got into the game because it was a "sandbox" and I like capitals (and 1-2 other things) a lot of what draws other people to the game leaves me unaffected i.e. flying around in an ishtar or bomber I get no enjoyment from at all. the way ccp is going about nerfing all capitals to the ground and do nothing to correct the problem is clearly better to remove them all. Don't get me wrong i love capital ships, but if nerfs keep rolling out no point. They need to hit it all at once instead of re-blanceing all other ships. It's time it looks at 6 years later. I don't see why we can't sit down brain storm some ideas on roles for current. At this time i do ccp so open it's doors too feed back on capitals. make a TOPIC and let the feedback role in it and see were it can go.
Bertka Gaterau Nuclear Midnight 12	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:09:20 - [375] - Quote Here is something to think about, what if we allow the assignment of fighters but make it dependent on the available drone bandwidth of the ship being assigned. As an example: a domi with 125mbit drone bandwidth. If it has 5 sentries or heavies of its own out, then you cannot assign it any fighters. If it has no drones out, then a full complement of 5 fighters can be assigned. Now if the domi has 5 fighters assigned and decides that it wants to deploy 5 lights to go after frigs, then 1 fighter warps off and goes back to the carrier. Is this perfect, no. Is it interesting, I think so. Could be a way to nerf skynet without killing it completely, and this could also be extended to all drone assigning which would require every person in the fleet to handle their own drones (that was nerfed previously). As a counter to the person who doesnt want to leave fighters on field when warping a carrier off due to neutral while ratting. Warp to the site at range, align to a warp out point, stop your carrier, drop sentries. If you need to leave in a hurry, pull your drones, tell your carrier to warp to your pos or safe spot or whatever, pulse your mwd once. You should be able to get out before you get caught.
NeoShocker Oppose Militancy and Neutralize Invasion. Advent of Fate 207	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:11:41 - [376] - Quote For fighter assist, rather than removing as whole, maybe set it only to work for specific class of ships? Like only battlecruiser ships and above? And I'd like to keep the fighters being able to warp.
Vic Jefferson The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple 176	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:12:16 - [377] - Quote Dedbforucme wrote: Getting rid of Skynet is absurd and makes using super capitals ships (IE Nyx, Aeon, Wyvern, Hel) pointless to fly and you are just sitting an expensive paper weights because they are 20+ billion isk or 550 plus dollars to do nothing with and not worth training towards. Also by getting rid of the ability to have fighters warp just makes carriers (IE: Nidhoggur, Thanatos, Chimera, Archon) not worth using in PVE because every time you have it in a site and a neutral or hostile comes into system chances are you are leaving behind 250-300 mil worth of fighters behind to not lose your 3-4 bil carrier. Instead of getting rid Skynet make it only usable in systems your corp and/or alliance has sov. , or make them only assignable to battleship classes and above if the issue is having them assigned to frigates and cruisers, because making these changes essentially guts all capital ship pilots and their time spent training a waste of time when they could have been training to fly a perfect marauder or something. I am a capital pilot, and I do not feel these changes ruin my experience. Carriers are still extremely powerful. Rather they have the potential to make it a more exciting game - man up and put some assets on the field, you might just have some fun with them. Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
Hicksimus Xion Limited Resonance. 543	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:13:11 - [378] - Quote I like that bridging subcap fleets is super safe and effective but instead we're here attacking something that is much more of a niche. Good job CCP! Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you? Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.
Primary This Rifter 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 600	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:14:52 - [379] - Quote Vic Jefferson wrote: I am a capital pilot, and I do not feel these changes ruin my experience. Carriers are still extremely powerful. Rather they have the potential to make it a more exciting game - man up and put some assets on the field, you might just have some fun with them. People who were already doing that will still do it. People who weren't doing it aren't going to start just because you took away fighter assist. In any case, I'll reiterate. I'm fine with removing fighter assist, but once that's removed there seems to be no reason whatsoever to remove fighter warping. Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
Rattman Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion 36	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:25:43 - [380] - Quote Make them use bandwidth from what they are assigned to. Dont remove the capabilities

VolatileVoid ELVE Industries Shadow of xXDEATHXx 45	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:28:40 - [381] - Quote I will do some speculation. We got drifter now and they got a anti capital doomsday. With fighter assist it would not be that hard to kill them. The drifter have something todo with future releases. So now fighter assist needs to be removed because ppl. with carrier would have an advantage against the drifter. Doesn't matter that supercarrier render kind of useless because same happened to titans already. We need more speculation on this.
Jennifer Maxwell Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 236	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:29:38 - [382] - Quote Vic Jefferson wrote: Dedbforucme wrote: Getting rid of Skynet is absurd and makes using super capitals ships (IE Nyx, Aeon, Wyvern, Hel) pointless to fly and you are just sitting an expensive paper weights because they are 20+ billion isk or 550 plus dollars to do nothing with and not worth training towards. Also by getting rid of the ability to have fighters warp just makes carriers (IE: Nidhoggur, Thanatos, Chimera, Archon) not worth using in PVE because every time you have it in a site and a neutral or hostile comes into system chances are you are leaving behind 250-300 mil worth of fighters behind to not lose your 3-4 bil carrier. Instead of getting rid Skynet make it only usable in systems your corp and/or alliance has sov. , or make them only assignable to battleship classes and above if the issue is having them assigned to frigates and cruisers, because making these changes essentially guts all capital ship pilots and their time spent training a waste of time when they could have been training to fly a perfect marauder or something. I am a capital pilot, and I do not feel these changes ruin my experience. Carriers are still extremely powerful. Rather they have the potential to make it a more exciting game - man up and put some assets on the field, you might just have some fun with them. What suggestion would you give to someone who wants to use their carrier, but is not a part of a huge alliance, and is surrounded by other, violent, huge alliances who routinly drop on anything and everything bigger than a battleship with overpowering numbers and probably a couple titans? In that kind of environment, what kind of use is a carrier and fighters?
Bertka Gaterau Nuclear Midnight 13	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:31:15 - [383] - Quote Arent we taught from the beginning not to fly something you cant afford to lose? Just because you live in hostile area doesnt make this any more true.
GothicNightmare Stealth Tactics and Reconnaissance Service Racking Discaprine 3	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:31:28 - [384] - Quote Ok... this... this cannot be. Fighter assist is a unique and viable option and should remain. When the drone bay of supers was nerfed to ONLY fighters and fighterbombers you removed their flexibility to do anything but slap another capital around or take a nap while shooting a stationary object (structure grinding). Titans took a hit when their weapons vs. subcaps was nerfed into the ground. The Phoebe patch took a huge chunk out of roaming and ganking with supers (am I the only one who's noticed its taken longer for caps to show up as the top kills on EVE Kill). What I'm saying is, supers have already lost a lot of usefulness and taken away a lot of fun and diversity and seeing action, to the point its almost not worth owning or logging on. The problem, is not fighter assist, it's what you can assist your fighters to. A fleet of 30 stealth bombers killing a TCU on a gate with a dozen carriers/supers assisting is a little absurd. How about this... no drone bay, no assist. You can already assist 50 drones to any single ship but the ship is on grid and still using your bandwidth. Fighters take 25 bandwidth, use that. If a cruiser only has 25mb drone bay, it can only recieve 1 fighter, a battlecruiser with 50mb can only recieve 2. This diversifies who all can recieve the assist. You already can't assign fighterbombers you have to be on grid to use them, but fighters should remain unique on how they can be used over other drones. This would also reduce the amount of carriers fielding fighters, instead of 1 carrier giving 10 fighters to 2 people, if he has to give his fighters to 3-5 people that heavily reduces the presence of overwhelming dps. Also, I hate to be "that guy" who cries for the little guy but... think of the little guy! A larger corp or alliance can affordd the numbers to not need a defense like that, but smaller ones use whatever force multipliers available (#suddenlyfalcon) to give themselves a fighting chance in gate camps or other attacking forces. You take away fighter assisting and you severely impair any ability to give the little guy a fighting chance in a situation that by normal standards they could not. If you have access to a carrier or a super, enjoy the available options it provides. #NB4Death2AllSupers
XavierVE Reasonable People Of Sound Mind 323	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:32:51 - [385] - Quote Jennifer Maxwell wrote: What suggestion would you give to someone who wants to use their carrier, but is not a part of a huge alliance, and is surrounded by other, violent, huge alliances who routinly drop on anything and everything bigger than a battleship with overpowering numbers and probably a couple titans? In that kind of environment, what kind of use is a carrier and fighters? Use your carrier and fighters to make some friends.
Buzz Kill Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:34:22 - [386] - Quote Removing Assign fighters from carriers is a big mistake you should drop the max assigned to 1 fighter per 25 bandwith so your little ships will only get 1 fighter or none if you really do remove the assign function from carriers you will need to quickly find a new useful way to use carriers as you have totally removed the whole reason I had to own a carrier. they dont qualify for the 90% jump fatigue reduction that JF enjoy but you reduce carriers combat usefulness making them more and more a transport ship. What is wrong with assigning fighters and doing some ratting? NOTHING Thats what why break ratting. I have recently been involved in a fight where the enemy had fighters assigned we still over came their numbers and made kills, telling 40 people to target fighters was a easy way to get the fighters to run to safety. as an added bonus we killed some of their expensive fighters worth more than some of their ships.
Isaac Norduke Mercenarius Mercded 1	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:41:11 - [387] - Quote Axloth Okiah wrote: How about keeping their ability to warp but making them pointable? love it. Keep Assist. Learn to love Skynet. However place a range on the assist say 5 AU...?
Galen Dnari Damage Unlimited 22	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:46:44 - [388] - Quote The history of warfare is a history of development of two things: ways to overcome the enemy's "impregnable" defenses (usually via better, more powerful weapons), and ways to counter the enemy's "invincible" weapons. If there's a problem with fighters being too powerful, come with with a weapon or EW system that better deals with the threat. Don't just change the engineering capabilities of the weapon builders (ie., yesterday Mr. fighter builder could build a fighter that can be assigned to assist another ship, today he can't build it, and in fact the ones he already built can suddenly no longer do it. It's like "I pull out my .45 and start shooting at the enemy." "Sorry, but as of today, and forevermore, your .45 only shoots marshmallows." http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png
Isaac Norduke Mercenarius Mercded 1	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:48:47 - [389] - Quote Galen Dnari wrote: The history of warfare is a history of development of two things: ways to overcome the enemy's "impregnable" defenses (usually via better, more powerful weapons), and ways to counter the enemy's "invincible" weapons. If there's a problem with fighters being too powerful, come with with a weapon or EW system that better deals with the threat. Don't just change the engineering capabilities of the weapon builders (ie., yesterday Mr. fighter builder could build a fighter that can be assigned to assist another ship, today he can't build it, and in fact the ones he already built can suddenly no longer do it. It's like "I pull out my .45 and start shooting at the enemy." "Sorry, but as of today, and forevermore, your .45 only shoots marshmallows." LOL
Drigo Segvian Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 8	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:49:22 - [390] - Quote End fighter assist. Down with Sky net.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.