|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
972
   |
Posted - 2015.03.25 13:11:48 -
[1] - Quote
Daerrol wrote:I suspect carriers will still be incredibly useful for Sov Null. Their repping power alone means, in small numbers, they can compensate for entire wings of logi. Have you ever fought in a T3/BS fleet backed by a carreir or two? You can take some incredibly fun fights.
Small Gang capital warfare is probably the most fun I've had in EVE ever.
Thats great and all (and one of the most fun things I've done in the game) but it doesn't require the 5+m SP the carrier pilot might have put into fighters and ADI, etc. or compensate for having trained it.
I spent quite a lot of time and investment of what little time I get to play any more into training up multiple characters for full fighter capabilities and fighter/dcu production for my own dabbling (as it was something that interested me) and maybe a little PVE use completely unrelated to skynet - I'm quite happy to use capitals on grid for PVP - could accept that some changes would be needed due to skynet and even was supportive of efforts to nerf skynet but these changes as implemented are pretty much a kick in the balls for me and I won't be continuing with paying to play this game after my current subscriptions expire (putting it in writing so I don't go back on it as its something I've decided with a lot of reluctance). |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
972
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 14:53:10 -
[2] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:
so because you cant sit near a pos and assign your fighters to an alt your going to quite the game because your now useless, htfu and get on grid with your drones and stop crying like a little b!tch.
ps can i haz your carriers when you leave?
Please educate yourself and read through some of the recent threads including the main one on "skynet" and how I've campaigned for months against it including showing how broken it can be i.e. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUZsKXSEU8M - while I'm not going to link all my alts/mains even on Rroff theres a fair few instances of where I've fielded capitals on grid - aside from some comedy killmails (hauler on hauler, etc.) I don't think I've ever used a capital in PVP that hasn't been ongrid.
You'll have to join the end of quite a large queue. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
981
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 19:38:14 -
[3] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Lets say you trained for an obviously unbalanced game mechanic knowing full well that it was disruptive and poorly designed content that gave you a huge advantage with almost no risk.
Why made you think CCP was never going to fix it?
Anyone training specifically for skynet without anticipating it would get some tweaking to reduce its effectiveness or even stop it would be naive at best and has no sympathy from me - there is a whole world of difference between that and completely removing any kind of fighter delegation/assistance from the game... no one ever complained about "skynet" when fighters couldn't hit the broad side of a barn at the worst you'd expect a regression to that (which IMO is a pretty poor fix but atleast there would be something still to play with) - there are a lot of balanced ways to completely stop skynet without taking the hacksaw to fighters and with minimal if any knock on effect to people using fighters in ways completely unrelated to "skynet"... this is pure and simply bad development plain and simple and for that reason I'm out. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
988
|
Posted - 2015.03.26 09:41:04 -
[4] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:James Bessar wrote:
Well they never actually fix anything else....
But the point stands, don't solicit feedback if you're not even going to listen to it. There was an easier fix that made everyone happy, no Assignment within X-km of a POS (50 was the most common number I saw). Everyone lives, worlds keep spinning.
You mean that fix that a number of people provided easy work around options to straight away, even if it slightly increases risk it still didn't stop skynetting happening. You obviously didn't read the debate thread properly or you would have seen all those posts. Or did you just ignore them because they weren't raging at CCP.
In combination with some tweaking to fighter weapon sig/target sig damage scaling that would have effectively put an end to the impact of skynet on smaller roaming setups without completely destroying fighters in other uses.
As you mentioned skynet was never a thing when fighters struggled to hit anything sub battleship sized - skynet was broken because the combination of tracking enhancement, weapon range and speed possible when a carrier didn't have to use slots for anything but drone upgrade modules meant they could negate almost any degree of pilot skill on the part of the target with the carrier pilot able to make themselves all but immune to repercussion if they weren't lazy and/or stupid. Worst case we should have been looking at fighters losing all bonuses when delegated - an ugly fix but atleast left them somewhat usable outside of skynet. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
988
|
Posted - 2015.03.26 14:45:31 -
[5] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
Dude, show us the source of your facts.
I dunno about facts but I'd say it a fair factor - I've tried to get a few people into eve IRL - one undocked with PLEX (despite all my advice) and was ganked and quit because of it (I found out later his corp set him up) and another had his retrievers suicide ganked multiple times within a short time and quit. I'm not really sure how to balance that though as having highsec risk free would be pretty meh as well.
As I a veteran player and having put a significant amount of investment into this game over the years I do find the way fighters were handled (something that took a lot of training and so on until I came to be able to fully use those capabilities) and without any real dialogue over the changes really really poor with the result I can't justify investing any more effort into this game as its likely to go to nothing on the snap of a developer's finger without any real say in the matter - I can understand sometimes things need to be changed but something like this should be in a much better managed way. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1005
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 00:27:59 -
[6] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
At Fanfest it was shown that when new players lose a ship they are subscribing more often than players who do not lose a ship. Your "few people" isn't anything else but a "few people". It has no meaning in the argument.
Context - break it down by players losing a ship to NPCs, consensual PVP, non-consensual PVP, etc. and the "facts" may show something different (maybe). Ultimately what I posted before is anecdotal but its certainly been my experience with those players who are new to the game and getting suicide ganked early on tends to discourage them from sticking with the game more than it "inspired" them to get more into the game (as before I don't think having high sec as super safe is the answer either). |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1006
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 22:46:32 -
[7] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Getting ganked is exactly why I stuck around. For revenge. Which I got. Then I took over a whole low sec constellation with some friends, was a small part of some other big stuff in and around Khanid, and have had a lot of fun in the last three years. If just getting ganked is enough to discourage someone from sticking around, then they weren't cut out for the nitty-gritty of EVE anyway, so it's no real loss.
Depends a bit - getting ganked once is one thing - one of the people I'm talking about was ganked multiple times before they'd even had enough time in game to figure out how to deal with it or familiar enough with the game to see past it.
Glathull wrote:so my first thought when I read this thread was that if carriers are truly worthless now, the prices must have tanked. Surely people must be giving them away or maybe even paying you to take them off their hands.
Huh. Not really the case. I guess OP is full of it.
Okay, that's a lie. My first thought was that OP is full of it. Then I checked the markets.
Them markets: they don't lie.
Carriers aren't worthless now - far from it - full on fighter roles (completely ignoring skynet) are a niche by far even by carrier use standards - but its a fairly long road to get to (100s of days of training just for the core skills necessary) - bare in mind that most people who are skilled up for a full 15 fighter setup would have had to have started training towards that goal long before CCP made the changes that made skynet a thing (so wouldn't have been doing it with the intention of doing skynet). Now 9/10th of their (fighter) functionality and potential use has been removed with a casual wave of the hand - for anyone who'd actually trained towards their use with a goal in mind thats a pretty bitter ending. |
|
|
| |
|