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) |
Kazaheid Zaknafein
Mara's Hounds
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:28:53 -
[421] - Quote
Removing Fighter Assist will kill off most of carrier and super use. Rather than removing it altogether perhaps a limit on it should be put in place.
Have a skill that allows the control of a fighter in assistance at +1 per level, and make this skill take a while to train.
Limit the range from a tower that any ship can be and still launch drones, if any ship is closer than 50km it cannot launch drones.
If a carrier launches then approaches tower have the drones disconnect and idle |
Siv Ilian
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:31:05 -
[422] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:CCP Rise wrote:This change being largely driven by 'skynetting' which is a tactic where carriers and super carriers can sit in near perfect safety at the edge of starbase shields and assign thousands of DPS worth of fighter drones to their fleet mates who can fly whatever ship they want, while wielding an enormous amount of damage. We feel this is not meeting our standards for risk vs reward and therefor would like to remove the ability to assist fighters. More details are covered in this dev blog. How about you just make it so you can't assist fighters if you're within 10km (or more) of a POS shield? Quote:A particular point of feedback that we are interested in surrounds the ability of fighters to warp. We know that in some circumstances it can be frustrating to have your fighters warp off grid to chase a target when you would rather have them move to another target on grid with you instead. We also know that fighter warping is unique and provides some interesting gameplay in some scenarios. Would you prefer that we removed the ability for fighters to warp or that we left warping in, despite the absence of assist? Er, you do know you can turn fighter warping *off*, right? It's not 2008 anymore.
Just this. Please just fix problems when you find them. Don't do a bunch of unnecessary stuff. Post things like "Skynetting is bad!" Then address skynetting. I love EVE, but your entire game smacks of a beta test. I understand you are offering an unfinished product, but please instill some faith in us players that after years and years of this stuff you are getting close to figuring this stuff out. Do we really need Drifters, or do we need you to get your act together and just finish the game you have been making for a decade? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2032
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:31:13 -
[423] - Quote
Not sorry to see fighter assist go. However fighters warping is not something I would like to see go just yet. |
Cyrus Doul
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
16
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:32:25 -
[424] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Cyrus Doul wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:Cyrus Doul wrote:4) For those saying keep it but make the ship have to be outside say 20-50 from the shield. I can be at a safe w few thousand kilometers out, full speed aligned. would work for ratting, and most defense fleets. I see probes and i just warp in. as mc hammer says, can't touch this. I'll admit I haven't sat in a carrier in a while, but I was under the impression that fighters either returned or were disconnected once a carrier entered a POS. This would open new tactics at catching carriers outside of a POS and BLopsing it to death, or uncloaking on grid and forcing it to panic-warp, which would let you take out the interceptor or whatever he's assigning to with ease as he's left wondering where his DPS went. They dont disconnect, they return to you, Also, remember that I am talking about this stuff from the aspect of a supercarrier. I know you can do skynet from a regular carrier too, and then i would really have to worry about anything landing on me that has a point fit, but from a supercarrier's perspective, which is immune to EWAR and can not be pointed except by a bubble, or a superpoint coming from a scripted heavy interdictor, I can just sit full aligned and not have to warp off at all, even if you guys land next to me. If i know your gang does not have a dictor or hictor, Ill just keep doing my thing, while assigning 15 drones out to my friends. You guys all decide, lets shoot the Hel, i just cyno out after recalling drones. I'm not sure about your guy's alliances since ya'll love to hide behind your alts like some neckbeard with his fedora and his guy fawkes mask. But I have seen darkness skyhook with carriers twice, yet seen it with supers countless. Nice personal attack. Really makes me consider what you said more carefully. /s Again, bubbles. If the merest hint of a dictor / HIC makes a Skynet carrier/super run for cover, then mission accomplished. Building balance patches around "what if..." is a seriously inept way to make a pass. e: Quote:that cellphone frequencies interfere with airliner navigation systems and therefore require 10km-20km clearance outside a shield. Wasn't this recently debunked?
Wasnt an attack at you, you are posting with a main, or an alt i suspect as its in goonswarm, not some rando corp with 1 player in it or whatever with a forum sig saying something along the lines of "alt poster, cause yes", unlike the others that keep replying.
And yeah. bubbles shoul dmake the super have to chose. I'm very much agreeing with you. I was trying to bring up the whole "well supers / carriers could do x" which puts them at risk while still doing what they do. I could see groups getting a competent wing of people that have the sole job of get in there and find these guys. Hell i'd finally have a use for the broadsword sitting around.
Also yes, thats why I can now turn on my cell and stuff the entire time of the flight. They still want you in airplane mode. At least in the USA.
|
Davir Sometaww
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
23
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:34:25 -
[425] - Quote
Immortal Chrono Pimpin wrote:Davir Sometaww wrote:Simple fix without ruinning this unique concept. Just have pos shields interrupt carrier interaction with its fighters on a 100 km radius.
Meaning you can't assign fighters on pos shields You can sit in a anchored online pos without the shield up and assist fighters, As soon as you are in real danger you put in a pos pw and shield goes up.
Well yeah. Well if you read the above solution fixes it. No offense intended. To translate. Being anywhere near pos offline online shields up or down means you can't assign fighters. |
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1409
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:39:47 -
[426] - Quote
I started to say, "Why not just make the carrier have to be ongrid to assign fighters...", but....well...I backspaced and deleted the rest of my discussion on that, because...I don't know. There's definitely a lot of opportunity for comedy there. It doesn't matter if something is risky or doesn't seem very viable in a lot of situations, someone is going to try it, and maybe even find a way to do it well. Or die horribly trying. :)
And don't remove the ability of fighters to warp. Pilots who don't want it can just uncheck "attack and follow". And if they don't, well, that's their problem.
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
Garuda Nil
Tailender
9
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:40:23 -
[427] - Quote
Cyrus Doul wrote:
Wasnt an attack at you, you are posting with a main, or an alt i suspect as its in goonswarm, not some rando corp with 1 player in it or whatever with a forum sig saying something along the lines of "alt poster, cause yes", unlike the others that keep replying.
It was an attack on me. I'm not ashamed of alt posting. My main can easily be traced to my supercap pilot, holders ad cyno alts, whose identities are (as far as I know) known by pretty much no one bar me, my cat and the possibly the NSA. I care to keep them all off anyone's watchlist. Thus, shameless PI/trader alt posting. Deal with it.
Alt posting because MUH FREEDOMS!
|
Chuckeysbride
BlackWatch Industrial Group Brothers of Tangra
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:41:38 -
[428] - Quote
Hey CCP. I have an idea. How about you stop screwing with OUR game. Fighters have been able to warp around with carriers since the beginning and they have been able to assist other players in fleet for at least as long as I have been playing this game. If you're trying to ruin the game, so far, you're doing a great job of it. Keep it up and no one will be playing Eveonline.
Chuckeysbride
CEO of Aerospace Innovations and member of Broken Toys Alliance.
|
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1409
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:46:11 -
[429] - Quote
And don't remove the ability of fighters to warp. Pilots who don't want it can just uncheck "attack and follow". And if they don't, well, that's their problem.[/quote]
Well, I guess that doesn't fix the problem of the guy you assigned them too not unchecking the box, if they're assigned out, but...meh...I still think fighters should retain their ability to warp. If i'm even remembering how that works correctly. I don't use caps very often.
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
Austin Ahmburg
State Protectorate Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:46:12 -
[430] - Quote
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 |
|
Kaning Olacar
The Branded Few The Pestilent Legion
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:46:53 -
[431] - Quote
1) Yes something needs to be done 2) No it should not be the complete removal of fighter or drone assist/asignment 3) Just make it so that if the carrier is within 100km of a tower or a station that their fighters cannot be assigned to another ship 4) If you do remove it completely you had better be prepaired to loose a VERY large number of subscriptions 5) another option is keeping small ships from getting fighters (basically only battlecruisers and above.......)
Sign Kaning Olacar - Extremely annoyed "brand new" capital pilot |
Cyrus Doul
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
17
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:46:58 -
[432] - Quote
Garuda Nil wrote:Cyrus Doul wrote:[
...from a supercarrier's perspective, which is immune to EWAR and can not be pointed except by a bubble, or a superpoint coming from a scripted heavy interdictor, I can just sit full aligned and not have to warp off at all, even if you guys land next to me. If i know your gang does not have a dictor or hictor, Ill just keep doing my thing, while assigning 15 drones out to my friends. You guys all decide, lets shoot the Hel, i just cyno out after recalling drones.
I'm not sure about your guy's alliances since ya'll love to hide behind your alts like some neckbeard with his fedora and his guy fawkes mask. But I have seen darkness skyhook with carriers twice, yet seen it with supers countless. There's a thing called bumping. Besides, it won't take much for some dude to watchlist you and start camping you with a hictor. Remember, you aren't inside pos shields any more. If all it takes to scare you off is a hictor in system or a covops warping at 15k from you, a prober and a single battleship in system, mission accomplished. If you decide to cyno out, fighters are gone, problem solved.
yeah. thats what im talking about, go head and bump me. I wont care. Skynet basically has three configurations for pvp.
Home defense: In a border system. The people getting skynetted are generally smaller groups, frigs and what not that are just out on a roam and we have decided to gatecamp with a skynet super. Super in a safe aligned won't generally care and will just sit there all day. even if a dic or two comes in, the gate camp just warps to super, kills pointy guy and then goes on with their lives. Lots of these fights are going to happen on regional borders, and either you'll not have to worry about cynos due to range, or have to lock down that one gate. Also since the changes that were made to the capitals a few patches back, you tend to have this system be the home system of the alliance. IE you have a big beehive just waiting for someone to yell super tackled and they all undock.
Home defense random system: something like a situation where a r64 or a CSAA got hit. This is going to be set up in advance and there will be a big fleet over here anyways. if you catch one of the supers, your fleet is going to warp to it and hit it. our fleet will then probably: eat your now unguarded dreads in siege > go to super > kill your points on super while leaving our own logi back to rep tower while you are distracted.
Attack Skynet: Lol, will most likely just be the supers entering system either though a cyno on your stick to try and get bumps. or jump though the gate and warp to someone cloaked 10km away from your own skynet to try and get bumps. Then we will just put the supers on field. |
Cyrus Doul
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
17
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:49:31 -
[433] - Quote
Austin Ahmburg wrote: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
Another fun fact with aircraft carriers, they are actually the fastest ship in the battlegroup, or at least with the nimitz and the new ford class. Also among the most nimble.
|
RyujinBlade Shahni
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:53:26 -
[434] - Quote
i don't want to see fighter warp removed at all in quite a few cases. carrier have a very unique role on the battlefield nowadays. that warping ability makes them separate from all of its capital brothers. carriers become very useful for system defense which is one of the few things they are good at as a capital. |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
228
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:54:36 -
[435] - Quote
When I occasionally rat in a carrier I'll miss the ability to assign fighters to the miners saying a BS spawn appeared in the belt.
There is no reason to remove fighter warping even if the assignment is taken away. Sometimes its nice to know the person warping away from you will still feel pain.
The other consideration is project Valkyrie. If you disallow carrier fighters - which are piloted and not drones, to warp, how will that effect the story line of Valkyrie and it's fighters? |
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
179
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:57:32 -
[436] - Quote
Celesae wrote:No. Just no. This is what made carriers unique and interesting to use. I made a dedicated account for carriers. Wasted time and money for me and many others if this happens.
Yeah, carriers were uninteresting and worthless before skynet. They have absolutely no unique features about them except to enhance gate camps.
It's bad enough these days so many people are skittish and unsportsmanlike about jousting space ships, but you seem to want a risk free way to add an absurd amount of DPS to gate camps. If you aren't going to put your chips in the pot, you shouldn't be able to win big with them.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Roo Gryphon
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:57:40 -
[437] - Quote
while something needs to change regarding assigning drones, it should only applied while on grid, once you go offgrid the drones auto return to carrier. Now for sentrys you have to be with in 5-10km of your drones otherwise they go idle and sentrys can not be assigned. |
Verskon Qaual
Paragon Trust The Bastion
31
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 01:58:20 -
[438] - Quote
I think removing fighter assist is fine. It was a fun, but broken, mechanic... mostly fun because it was broken.
I would like for fighters to retain warp ability. More for uniqueness and RP, but also for balance. That's why they're manned... right? If we removed warp-ability, then we would be sacrificing people for something drones could accomplish.
By your justification, there shouldn't be power without corresponding risk. Taking a low mobility carrier or super on to the field and attacking on the same grid is pretty risky. Having fighters able to warp follow would give more tactical options and balance out the risk better. After the fighter/fb scan range nerfs, they are more niche then ever. |
Austin Ahmburg
State Protectorate Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:01:04 -
[439] - Quote
We could just have a Timer on them. Hand wave it as the fighters needing to refuel/ Rearm. That or limited Ammunition. That makes much more sense than anything else.
Regards, Ahmburg |
Henricks
BlackWatch Industrial Group Brothers of Tangra
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:05:25 -
[440] - Quote
Kaning Olacar wrote:1) Yes something needs to be done 2) No it should not be the complete removal of fighter or drone assist/asignment 3) Just make it so that if the carrier is within 100km of a tower or a station that their fighters cannot be assigned to another ship 4) If you do remove it completely you had better be prepaired to loose a VERY large number of subscriptions 5) another option is keeping small ships from getting fighters (basically only battlecruisers and above.......)
Sign Kaning Olacar - Extremely annoyed "brand new" capital pilot
Good Idea mate
|
|
Cyrus Doul
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
17
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:15:29 -
[441] - Quote
Garuda Nil wrote:double post
suuuuure it was :) anyways in the context of what it originally said about you being paranoid of us tracing stuff back to your super main and holders cause you are afraid of people knowing who it is. same thing with everyone else having to deal with that means you get to deal with me calling you a whimp for being too afraid we might know who you are. If someone wants to get upset about something i say, locator me, then camp me in or something for it, so be it. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2709
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:31:03 -
[442] - Quote
Haha, look at all these mongoloid ratter alliances crying that removing fighter assist will kill off super and carrier use.
Lets get real here ladies, you're literally crying wolf because you use it to rat and EVERYBODY reading the thread here knows it.
Good job being so completely transparent
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:36:57 -
[443] - Quote
Roo Gryphon wrote:while something needs to change regarding assigning drones, it should only applied while on grid, once you go offgrid the drones auto return to carrier. Now for sentrys you have to be with in 5-10km of your drones otherwise they go idle and sentrys can not be assigned.
If you're on grid just assist them and they can use all ten. |
O'nira
13. Enigma Project
54
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:39:10 -
[444] - Quote
It's about time |
Chuck Ursus
Shattered Paradigm Eon.Apocalypse
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:45:13 -
[445] - Quote
please keep unique fighter warp feature, do remove delegation. |
Maddaxe Illat
HIFI INDUSTRIAL The Kadeshi
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:57:20 -
[446] - Quote
I would be ok with fighters not be able to assist anymore because it is op. but please do not remove that fact that fighters can warp. With all the change you have made over the last 6 to 12 month it look like you dont can about anyone who has played the game for more the 3 yours. So that a no from me for fighters no warping |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2032
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 03:00:02 -
[447] - Quote
Austin Ahmburg wrote: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 Unfortunately this is a game, not real life. Otherwise things would get messy. |
Cyrus Doul
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
17
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 03:05:19 -
[448] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Haha, look at all these mongoloid ratter alliances crying that removing fighter assist will kill off super and carrier use.
Lets get real here ladies, you're literally crying wolf because you use it to rat and EVERYBODY reading the thread here knows it.
Good job being so completely transparent
we do, you guys do, everybody does. way of life in the game. we will all adjust reguardless.
|
Zomgnomnom
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
58
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 03:38:38 -
[449] - Quote
Leave assist, just make them have to be on grid.
If people want the benefit, they should have to at least place the capitals and supers in harms way. |
Kuosu
PH0ENIX COMPANY Phoenix Company Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 03:45:14 -
[450] - Quote
If we apply this thought process to cloaky camping maybe we should just remove cloaking from the game... its too hard to fix...
I'm really upset that the response to a complex problem is to just get rid of the problem.
I understand that a lot of things are effected by said changes, but lets face it this is a complex game. If it is so complex you cannot do anything about it without making it that convoluted and complex that should be a sign that it needs more dev time and to hold off for now until more well thought out solutions are ready to be implemented.
Now I do agree that assigning five super fighters to a cepter is broken. Though an easy change would be to make delegating a number of fighters dependent upon the receiving ships drone bandwidth. To make effective change I would also propose at the same time increasing the bandwidth requirements of fighters and capacity of carriers and make it so that cruisers could for example support one fighter and maybe battle ships more. Something along those lines.
I also agree that sitting on the edge of a pos is kinda silly. I would like to see a distance requirement away from the pos to use/delegate fighters.
Now playing devils advocate, the only people I ever hear crying about fighters are those looking for easy kills with miners but not an actual fight. I like having some kind of benefit of owning space where I can have some kind of defensive boon. Nerf it PLEASE. But this goes beyond nerfing beyond re balancing this is removal of gameplay mechanics due to it being a complex problem. Most skilled groups that come by with logi to fight , they like to kill drones and its not even a good idea to send drones after them because drones get webbed and you lose 25 mill a pop. FYI SOME risk is actually present.
Also, if removing this gameplay is a priority and fixing/removing cloaky camping is not then you guys are in for a rude awakening when long time players such as myself un sub our carrier pilots. I pay $$$ real money for my subscriptions btw. I dont have time to rat and plex accounts I have a job. It's pretty obvious the disdane CCP holds towards ships that require so much time to skill into properly. This is the end game content it took me more than a year to skill into having the skills to use carriers properly! They should have unique game mechanics and be fairly strong! Its not like I can dock a super up and change to another ship if im fighting goons and risking a super wouldnt make sense. I'm stuck in it.
This is like saying an aircraft carrier can only launch fighters and strike targets that are within the carriers eyesight. In real life it is commonplace to have scouts providing coordinates ( warpins) for the carrier to strike on targets that are not even in the freaking ocean (off grid). It is currently over powered but this is somewhat absurd. Remember we are talking about CAPITAL ships. Do we really want to take away unique game play and just make carriers into giant dominix with the ability to field huge heavy drones?
Nerf them please but come back with a well thought out solution. |
|
|
|
|
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 |