| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
   |
Posted - 2015.04.13 15:30:39 -
[1] - Quote
An idea with mooring ships maybe instead of a moored ship becoming not active it becomes part of the platform defense. Carriers and dreads would ad there drones and weapons. it makes sense that the weapons system of a moored ship would add to the defence of the platform. This could also be used with the bonuses that a capital ship can provide. A dread the platform could go in siege mode and if a carrier is moored it could go in triage mode. Or if an orca or rorqual are moored those ships could give mining bonus to a mining fleet. This would require the skills of the pilot to moor the ship. Plus they would risk the ship if they left it moored while they were offline. I mean carrier,super,and Titan pilots if they log off with out getting back in there ships then they deserve to loose there ships. |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:20:48 -
[2] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:This sounds like Skynet. You know, that thing Carriers could do for no risk that they just removed with extreme prejudice.
The guns or drones would be in defense of the structure it self. The way I look at it is say that you have a hub structure you can moor your carrier in while you go ratting in your tengu or pvp in what ever ship. With your skills if you own the structure you can activate your command links on your carrier and deploy fighters or sentries to defend the structure while you are away. It would act like the pos guns that don't need someone there to use them. If you are then you can choose which guns you want to have access to to defend the structure.
Same with a dread if you dock your dread to go sub cap pvp your dread's weapons become part of the structure gun system and will shoot at targets the structure says fire. With a with a dread if you want it to put the structure in a siege mode while the structure is defending it self I would thing that would be an option.
The point is the structures are going to have defense slots to use weapons on the structure why not allow the structure to use any weapon system on the ships that are moored to increase the protection of the structure. If your going to risk your ship with mooring it should help with its defense. I think using command links and drones to defend the structure makes sense. |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:56:17 -
[3] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Because this sounds really really really easy to abuse to give a structure absurd amounts of unkillable DPS in the form of endless waves of drones and super-tracking faction Battleships or just, you know, Moor a bunch of Titans there.
These structures are going to have their own fittings and guns so there's their defense, your benefit in mooring your ship should be that your ship is safe, not that it now acts as a super-POS gun.
It's far easier to balance these things if they have their own defenses independent of ship guns and modules.
If you actually read my post a person would have to deploy what they wanted to use before they left.
If you read the dev blog there would be only mooring capital ships and larger.
As far as I can see there is no reason for me ever to get a super carrier or titan ever because that is no way I can do something with out that ship. However if I could moor it to a structure and go ratting or on a roam for a few hours and give control of my titans guns or supers flight of fighters to the structure to assist in defense I might actually think of moving in that direction however as I see it capital ships and super capitals should be removed from the game right now because they are basically useless except for logistics. |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 11:47:45 -
[4] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Directly mentioned that this is their intent in the Fanfest presentations. You take control, you run the entire station as if it were just one ship with 0 speed. They specified player controlled guns, I don't think they specified how many players, but yes. This is part of why I don't see them letting moored ships actually do anything. They're safe, they shouldn't be having an impact on the grid around them without risking themselves. Otherwise this isn't so much an incentive to use mooring as a way to abuse it.
I don't think ccp is going to allow more the a couple ships be moored at the same time. The description of mooring is sounds like leaving you ship floating in a pos shield or a corp ship maintain economic array. In either case this is eve you never trust your corp mates with your stuff. There is a reason most super cap pilots have parking alts.
|
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 00:55:47 -
[5] - Quote
i agree that certain types of defenses need to be manned.
I will use this example to explain.
Say I have a super carrier. I moor it to a structure to go ratting in what ever ship. Then I see reds jump into local I warp to my structure. I doc as I see a red fleet bubbling up my structure. I man the guns. I feel that if my super is moored I should be able to use my fighters as an option in the fight. I would be controlling them just not from my ship. I am at the structure and not off line. This might explain what I think should be on option with moored capitals.
Maybe for dreads and carriers be able to either use the siege or triage mode to either boost defence and attack. Of course you would be in the structure.
The only other thing I think we might be able to do is turn on mining links of your rorqual or orca if you are the squad, wing, or fleet commander of you ship that is moored. This might be something that would only be used on a drilling platform.
This example is work of fiction. You would not find me in any super or Titan.
Lol |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 12:58:04 -
[6] - Quote
I am looking at it this way the enemy can destroy the platform or turn the platform and take or destroy the ship. The end result is the same if pilot casts off can be killed. If enemy destroys structure the can take or destroy. That is the point I am trying to make if capital is moored up out side and can use station services and since it can be captured or destroyed any way why not let me uses it defenses while I am in the structure to defend the structure.. i think people are thinking these new structures are going to be like outposts. But ccp wants these structures easily destroyed or flipped with the entasis link. As of right now I don't see any use for these structures other then to maybe Change fitting. unless ccp wants to force more people to have multiple accounts. Each player in null has a carrier pilot to keep ships. A ratting or pvp pilot and a jump freighter or rorqual pilot to store fuel , modules and charges. |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 13:51:01 -
[7] - Quote
Well he naval definition of mooring is tying up to a dock. If that structure is destroyed then the ship is afloat. By the definitions words ccp is using state that exact intent. I would never leave any ship moored and log off at a destructible structure. I am looking at these structures as a you log in and want to rat or Pvp for a couple hours great. Moor your capital drop your ratter or Pvp ship. Plus with the security of not having to anchor at a moon. Go have fun. Ccp will probably put some type of reinforce timer on these structures however 24 to 48 hours is not very long and you never know what is going to happen in real life to delay you getting back on. I don't think that capital ship defense should be used if you are gone. I really don,t see a lot of alliance level structures. Becasue of the cost I can see space cities being created with smaller structures next to each other for mutual defense. They might be corp but I think most will be personal with just alts on standing access. |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 15:22:02 -
[8] - Quote
Well I think the new structures will be death to all capitals.
They need to die so the rorqual can die as well. |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
10
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 01:23:52 -
[9] - Quote
I think if ccp really wanted Titans and super carriers to be alliances bases assets they would have made them to take more then one pilot to control them.
Yes alliances use these ships but it's usually the pilot themselves that usually buy the ship from the alliance. Maybe make all capitals have an option when deploying structures to merge with the structure. The structure would loose its high slots for fitting weapons. The base ship would take over control. The only access to this modified structure would be the pilot.
Also as a bonus the defenses would increase there ability. Say dreads and Titans guns would get a boost to tracing speed so they could hit cruisers. Not with full damage but enough to that it can defend its self for a while. Carriers of any type would be guarded by a wing of fighters that would also have better tracking and speed. Now since fighters can be destroyed have them be able to dock and repair or have the structure repair them in a range of it. |
Hafwolf
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
11
|
Posted - 2015.05.25 20:53:48 -
[10] - Quote
How about making bubbles not anchor able within say 60 k at a structure. That might help with the problems people are having with the new system. I think because guns will be fitted they will No longer be uncapped by an attacking force. So bubbles might not be a problem any more.
|
| |
|