EVE Search - Carriers broke on frontline still (kali) because of

All Channels

Revelations Testing and Development

Carriers broke on frontline still (kali) because of

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Drutort Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.26 21:18:00 - [1] Edited by: Drutort on 26/10/2006 21:31:19 Its simple ya carriers and capitals got there hp boost thatÆs all nice and dandy its about timeà and its ok BUT 1 flaw remainsà the capital remote armor and shield transporters Are stuck in the old system, and frankly eat far far too much cap for a frontline battle, they are only ok in the current state with a small short duration boost to a single ship, not for fleet or medium sized gangs Carriers need to get a major cap reduction bonus for capital remotes and the range should be far greater then large or medium remotes that are on the logistics ships That and or get more hp boost for it? But then it will not be good because for small ships that is far too much boost and at a great cost of cap, its better to have reduced cap usage and reduced cycle time also the fighters/drones did not get hp boost
Aeaus Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.10.26 21:33:00 - [2] I've suggested several things to buff capital ships on the front lines. Reducing the capacitor usage of remote modules was one of them, and is key to a workable front-line carrier. Carriers also need to be able to insta-lock their gangmates, actually all logistics ships need this so they can actually repair before the target dies.
Thesiuss Oberon Incorporated Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2006.10.26 21:43:00 - [3] ALL gangmates should be able to instalock another gangmate. That's the big problem with pvp. Enemy insta focus fire on a gangmate vs the gang recaction time to that gangmate taking damage from enemy. Oberon Inc Website--------------Oberon Sales Page
Drutort Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.26 23:04:00 - [4] that is a good point i read about that, and i think that is a key part, esp for all ships too, with something like this you will see more ships fit some kind of support item, then just the generic stuff we have now
eveplayer11	Posted - 2006.10.26 23:19:00 - [5] carriers are heavy support nuff said
Drutort Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 01:04:00 - [6] Originally by: eveplayer11 carriers are heavy support nuff said just exactly what does that say? nothing so no need to post it if you dont know there is a long long list of things that are still wrong with carriers and capitals, boosting there hp was only 1 thing, and infact its only because every other ship in eve got boost, but they should have had this type or less hp long long ago, always in fact
Malicious Wraith The Dark Side of the Moon Edge of Sanity	Posted - 2006.10.27 01:08:00 - [7] Carrier's should be shield/armor repping eachother, dreadnaughts, and stations. Not BS's >.> ----------------------------------------
eveplayer11	Posted - 2006.10.27 01:27:00 - [8] Edited by: eveplayer11 on 27/10/2006 01:33:11 Edited by: eveplayer11 on 27/10/2006 01:30:23 Originally by: Drutort Originally by: eveplayer11 carriers are heavy support nuff said just exactly what does that say? it said basicly: carriers are heavy support ships, not front line fighters. they might have problems with bugs sure, but having carriers be the new bs blobb and being there in the front lines as a fighting vessel and not heavy support is a bit wrong and i hope it never happens. clarification: carrier blobbs
Drutort Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 01:29:00 - [9] Originally by: Malicious Wraith Carrier's should be shield/armor repping eachother, dreadnaughts, and stations. Not BS's >.> do you know anything about carriers though? do you fly one? have you fit capital repairs? did you do some theortical math at least? if not then, i suggest you do one of them at least, because you do not have the cap to sustain any carriers hp with the capital remotes, with the old hp maybe but the point was nobody goes on the frontline with the current hp system you die in few sec regardless of capital rep or not... 1 capital armor rep eats the same amount of rep as it boosts, so its a range from like 200-333 repair a sec and same amount of cap a sec
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.10.27 05:42:00 - [10] give us "capital cap boosters" at the very least so we can run those remote reppers just a tad longer. Originally by: Wrangler Win ME is more a some sort of virus than a OS..
Baun 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.27 06:06:00 - [11] Step 1 is fixing the cap usage of remote reps/transfers Step 2 is giving the Minmatar carrier a real bonus Step 3 is allowing remote repping while jammed this will be less of a problem in kali anyway. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Juan Andalusian TAOSP Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.27 08:43:00 - [12] Originally by: Baun Step 1 is fixing the cap usage of remote reps/transfers Step 2 is giving the Minmatar carrier a real bonus Step 3 is allowing remote repping while jammed this will be less of a problem in kali anyway. 1) Yes. 2) No, after the changes, considering the new hp will allow carriers to come in play, fixing 1 means the bonus of the minmatar carriers becomes more usefull. 3) No, jamming the remoting ship should always be a valid tactic. Remote ECCM is your friend when it comes to carriers. Pain is meant to be felt
Drutort Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 09:27:00 - [13] Originally by: Juan Andalusian Originally by: Baun Step 1 is fixing the cap usage of remote reps/transfers Step 2 is giving the Minmatar carrier a real bonus Step 3 is allowing remote repping while jammed this will be less of a problem in kali anyway. 1) Yes. 2) No, after the changes, considering the new hp will allow carriers to come in play, fixing 1 means the bonus of the minmatar carriers becomes more usefull. 3) No, jamming the remoting ship should always be a valid tactic. Remote ECCM is your friend when it comes to carriers. someone did some math with the new ecm and it seems that the nerf was not enough on none spec ships... but i think the chance stuff is really lame anyway... all i would take is 1 spec ship and a carrier will be jamed
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2006.10.27 10:00:00 - [14] Originally by: Juan Andalusian Originally by: Baun Step 1 is fixing the cap usage of remote reps/transfers Step 2 is giving the Minmatar carrier a real bonus Step 3 is allowing remote repping while jammed this will be less of a problem in kali anyway. .... 2) No, after the changes, considering the new hp will allow carriers to come in play, fixing 1 means the bonus of the minmatar carriers becomes more usefull. ... I'am sorry what?
Kipkruide Quantum Dynamics	Posted - 2006.10.27 10:05:00 - [15] 1 med slot sensor strength booster on a carrier and you don't have to worry that much about jamming, you can even fit one without gimping your setup totally.
Aloysius Knight Minmatar Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.27 10:43:00 - [16] Originally by: Juan Andalusian 2) No, after the changes, considering the new hp will allow carriers to come in play, fixing 1 means the bonus of the minmatar carriers becomes more usefull. moron http://www.stevie.prince.dsl.pipex.com/AloysiusKnight.jpg http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/2107/nodecrashsiggb9.jpg Chose one, you must. Two is the way of pure ebilness, and pure ebilness is bad -ReverendM
Logan Xerxes Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.27 10:59:00 - [17] Originally by: Aloysius Knight Originally by: Juan Andalusian 2) No, after the changes, considering the new hp will allow carriers to come in play, fixing 1 means the bonus of the minmatar carriers becomes more usefull. moron Please provide reasoning. "Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion." -Sun Tzu
Miss Overlord Gallente EUROPEANS	Posted - 2006.10.27 11:06:00 - [18] perhaps some sort of capital ship repair drones or perhaps a probe that has a 20km range of bonus that adds5% to carrier sheild and armour repping (sort of like launchable repair mine-probe type idea)
FawKa Gallente Old Farts The Phantom Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.10.27 11:22:00 - [19] The basic remote armor repair should give the -5% cap to capitals aswell as capital remote armor repairs. And I am just crying for CCP abnormal brains. If drones and fighters HP arent boosted to, you just screw em all up !
Ozzie Asrail FATAL REVELATIONS Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.27 11:51:00 - [20] Originally by: Thesiuss ALL gangmates should be able to instalock another gangmate. That's the big problem with pvp. Enemy insta focus fire on a gangmate vs the gang recaction time to that gangmate taking damage from enemy. Would be a huge help to both carriers and logistics ships. 1. Give gang instalock 2. Make capital sheild\armour\cap transfer mods much more efficient ----- [23:08:46] GM Fear > I am stuck as well [23:17:57] Sharkbait > so why ... you drag me here. thats just mean :( [23:18:03] GM Fear > hahahaha
Juan Andalusian TAOSP Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.27 13:49:00 - [21] Originally by: Ozzie Asrail Would be a huge help to both carriers and logistics ships. 1. Give gang instalock 2. Make capital sheild\armour\cap transfer mods much more efficient Instalock is an interesting idea. The hp remoted per sec on the capital trasfers is ok, fix the cap use and their efficiency issues will be resolved. Capital remotes are the only capital module that gets affected by ganglinks and still the cap / s is out of whack, even on loadouts that have focused almost entirely on tank + cap. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian TAOSP Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.27 14:15:00 - [22] Originally by: Pesadel0 Originally by: Juan Andalusian Originally by: Baun Step 1 is fixing the cap usage of remote reps/transfers Step 2 is giving the Minmatar carrier a real bonus Step 3 is allowing remote repping while jammed this will be less of a problem in kali anyway. .... 2) No, after the changes, considering the new hp will allow carriers to come in play, fixing 1 means the bonus of the minmatar carriers becomes more usefull. ... I'am sorry what? All i am saying is that with the new hp fix and hopefully a lag fix which are both in the works capital ships taking the field will become more common. Remoting between the capitals will be essential once this starts to happen. That's what i meant about the Minmatar cycle time bonus becoming more usefull. Pain is meant to be felt
Vantick Iscod Wolfenrecon Center for Disease Creation	Posted - 2006.10.27 15:29:00 - [23] I'm sorry but the MM repping bonus is just a sick joke. Even 25% more speed isn't going to make capital reppers that much more effective. They are horribly inefficient, and with the HP boost, almost equal to trying to bail out the Titanic with a small bucket. Give the Niddy/Hel a bonus worthy of their descriptions, or atleast in line with the other carriers bonuses. Its just pathetic at this point.
Skawl GeoTech	Posted - 2006.10.27 15:55:00 - [24] There should be 2 lock huds really, 1 for friendlies and one for hostiles - would make managing logistics ships so much better.
Baun 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:19:00 - [25] Edited by: Baun on 27/10/2006 16:24:29 Originally by: Juan Andalusian 2) No, after the changes, considering the new hp will allow carriers to come in play, fixing 1 means the bonus of the minmatar carriers becomes more usefull. This is probably not true. I think the bonus should remain logistics oriented but that keeping the current bonus while lowering the cap useage is not ok. A minmatar carrier will not be appreciably better at logistics if it has increased cap problems without any low slots to compensate. In order for the logistics bonus to be meaningful it has to allow for cap useage. Whether this means making a dual bonus (i.e amount repaired + cap useage) or just cap useage is up to balancing people. Quote: 3) No, jamming the remoting ship should always be a valid tactic. Remote ECCM is your friend when it comes to carriers. Didn't remote ECCM get nerfed by stacking it with onboard ECCM? If they undid this nerf then I wouldn't have any problems. Off hand, allowing gangmate instalock is a GREAT idea. I would go farther and suggest that the target GUI should be changed to display gangmates in a different location and that locking a gangmate should not count against your target locks. Instead a new skill would govern that. So you would have your enemies locked in one place and your gang mates in another. You would be able to keep straight which people you are shooting at and which you are remote repping and which you need to remote rep just by glancing. It would provide for alot more support strategy and really goes hand in hand with the changing face of combat. This would be a relatively significant paradigm shift, however. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Viktor Fyretracker Caldari Worms Corp	Posted - 2006.10.27 16:22:00 - [26] Originally by: Thesiuss ALL gangmates should be able to instalock another gangmate. That's the big problem with pvp. Enemy insta focus fire on a gangmate vs the gang recaction time to that gangmate taking damage from enemy. no repair/support modules and drones shouldnt require any lockons or retargeting at all. however instant lock is the best solution that wouldnt require totally rebuilding the entire client. they also should make a Smart Repair Bomb that repairs every gang member that is with a certain radius of the carrier.
Areconus Caldari Cereal Killerz Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.27 20:36:00 - [27] Technically, carriers aren't frontline ships, assuming CCP modeled their ideas somewhar on real life.......but I can see why people want them to be, itd be fun! Gloria Stitz- "Try not to bring reality in to these forums Otherwise we might take the game seriously"
Viktor Fyretracker Caldari Worms Corp	Posted - 2006.10.27 23:24:00 - [28] Originally by: Areconus Technically, carriers aren't frontline ships, assuming CCP modeled their ideas somewhar on real life.......but I can see why people want them to be, itd be fun! thing is IRL the carrier has access to the data it needs to put its fighters on target from a safe distance. whats needed is a form of AWACS ship that transmits its overview to the gang and allows them to lock targets. the carrier could then dispatch and control fighters remotely.
Juan Andalusian TAOSP Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.28 02:01:00 - [29] Originally by: Vantick Iscod I'm sorry but the MM repping bonus is just a sick joke. Even 25% more speed isn't going to make capital reppers that much more effective. They are horribly inefficient, and with the HP boost, almost equal to trying to bail out the Titanic with a small bucket. Give the Niddy/Hel a bonus worthy of their descriptions, or atleast in line with the other carriers bonuses. Its just pathetic at this point. The hp boost is more of a buffer. Comparing the ammount of hp repped vs the total hp is pointless. The average large sized fleet consists of 35 bs. Tech II fitted, 60 damage, tech II ammo say 700 dps each. At max skill, with ganglinks runinng in gang, 5 Nipplehuggers with 2 remotes each can rep enough hp/s to keep a ship with 80% resists alive (not including the target's own repper). 5 other carriers, under the same conditions, will only be able to cover the dps of 25 of those battleships. If lag and cap consumption is fixed which will allow the carriers and other capitals to be frontline ships then you ll see the bonus will be greatly apprieciated. If one of those aspects isn't fixed then yes a different bonus would be required to justify the second bonus for minnie carriers. Pain is meant to be felt
Shimarra Caldari AWE Corporation Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.10.28 02:13:00 - [30] The concept of instalock on gangmates is interesting, but I believe that such a thing might be more appropriate for the new Fleet system that seems to be coming out in Kali 1. The basic gangs still have the problem of the gang-in gank, and instalocking in gang might facillitate the usage of such a thing. Shim -------------------------- "only a fool flies a barge in 0.0..." "Well, I'm that fool..." --------------------------
De FENS Caldari Eastern Heritage O X I D E	Posted - 2006.10.30 20:12:00 - [31] Insta locking gang members is an ideaàbut honestly is it really all that necessary? Why cant a logistics ship just pre-lock onto gang members before the fight begins? According to its description a logistics cruiser can lock 10+ targetsàa logistics pilot should lock all the gang mates who are in repair range ASAP (before fighting even begins ideally). More often then not you can probably guess what ships will be on your opponents kill listàhave them locked upàunless the target is you of course.
Saris Hookers and Black Jack	Posted - 2006.10.30 20:43:00 - [32] Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker thing is IRL the carrier has access to the data it needs to put its fighters on target from a safe distance. whats needed is a form of AWACS ship that transmits its overview to the gang and allows them to lock targets. the carrier could then dispatch and control fighters remotely. Best Idea Ever hope you don't mind If I steal it :) and no worries I will still give the credit to you.
Cosmic Flame	Posted - 2006.10.30 20:58:00 - [33] Originally by: Saris Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker thing is IRL the carrier has access to the data it needs to put its fighters on target from a safe distance. whats needed is a form of AWACS ship that transmits its overview to the gang and allows them to lock targets. the carrier could then dispatch and control fighters remotely. Best Idea Ever hope you don't mind If I steal it :) and no worries I will still give the credit to you. Don't compare a RL carrier to this in game carrier. The technology theorized into EVE is supposed to be FAR more advanced than the need for an "awacs" ship... Not a good idea at all. Some of you people should get more into combat in EVE before proposing "fixes" in those areas.
Saris Hookers and Black Jack	Posted - 2006.10.30 21:25:00 - [34] Originally by: Cosmic Flame Don't compare a RL carrier to this in game carrier. The technology theorized into EVE is supposed to be FAR more advanced than the need for an "awacs" ship... Not a good idea at all. Some of you people should get more into combat in EVE before proposing "fixes" in those areas. First off not everyone has the same experiences in eve as you do. I fly a carrier and the lag in fleet battles is to great to expose one to the front lines. So an ability to still be effective while not being in direct harms way would be nice. And if the technology is so great in eve then why have the empires not already found a way to keep there carriers which are very expensive out of harms way? Afterall you think that would be important economically. One should really know who they are talking about before they make comments about what they do in eve. You don't like the Idea fine your opinion. But makeing personal remarks about people who you know nothing about is well ignorant at best.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.