Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:15:00 -
[1]
Greetings.
First I would like to say that this is not meant to be a whining thread. It may turn into one though so be forwarned.
After a recent thread I posted about wrecks and drones I started thinking.
Could we please get an idea of what is planned for a carriers role? A while back it was said that you wanted to bring carriers to the front lines of the battle. Has there been any progress?
PVP
It is well known that the main viable role of a carrier is to sit inside a POS or at a supersafe spot and assign fighters. I for one am not happy with hiding in a corner during a battle, especially if its large enough to involve Capital ships. Yes we got a massive HP increase but that just means we have more time to do nothing.
Yes, a carrier can get in the middle of the fight, but then what do we do? NOS the enemy, shield and armor rep people that, even with the HP increase, will most likely pop before we can even target them?
The Revelations patch was a major nerf to all carriers.
Pre patch, fighters were already fairly fragile. With the post patch HP increase, fighters are a very risky and very expensive offensive ability. Most battleships that fighters are attacking can tank them long enough to destroy them. If they dont want to kill a couple hundred million ISK worth of fighters they can now insta-dock, insta-jump out from any point in the system making it pointless to send fighters, other than the possibility of scaring the enemy into leaving.
Add to this, the drone overview bug for assigned fighters. If the fighters are taking damage, neither the owner nor the assigned pilot have any idea. Only people with very deep pockets dare to assign fighters.
PVE
Carriers were recently denied access to deadspace gates. I have no problem with this and believe this was a problem that should have been taken care of long ago. Hopefully capital ships will get their foot back in the mission/complex door in the future.
Personally, I love to NPC in my carrier. I dont think there is anything that should or could be changed to make NPCing in a carrier better. However, there are bugs and nerfs that can make this very frustrating.
First, why is it fighters still dont MWD back when they are recalled. If I am NPCing my targets are usually a minimum of 30k away. When NPCs spawn they almost always target the fighters first. This is fine, but when the fighters attack it causes the NPC to try keeping an optimal range on the fighters. The fight can finish up to 60-70k away from the pilot. With this MWD bug it can take several (4-5) minutes for the fighters to return to the ship. If more than one BS is firing on a fighter that is this far out, you can almost guarantee it will get destroyed. This can get very expensive with a couple unlucky spawns and targets.
I had this happen a couple weeks ago and was told that I was out of luck. 60mil in fighters gone from this in one night. Luckily it hasnt happened since then.
If a fighter/drone does take lots of fire and youre lucky enough to get it back, you send out repair drones to fix it right? Not anymore. Due to the drone changes in the latest patch, drones no longer fire on anything owned by you. This includes repair drones.
Related to this is the change that fighters/drones can no longer blow up your own cans/wrecks. As a ship that has no weapons and as a pilot that has absolutly no urge to salvage, this is a problem for me warping out/moving around, and can cause quite a bit of lag.
A person should not have to waste time skilling for salvage just to remove wrecks.
In conclusion, even though it was said carriers would be improved through more frontline enhancements and different, more desireable and useful bonus', its feels as though you are slowly trying to phase out carriers all together, leaving only "Jump Hauling" as a needed role/use for them.
Could we please get definitive answers to these issues and longstanding bugs?
Thanks for your time.
Merrick Solipsus
|
maarud
Einherjar Incorporated Corelum Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:18:00 -
[2]
Did you miss the 50% HP increase to capital ships?
It takes a couple dreads/carriers + support to take down a carrier now and not quickly IIRC.
Maarud.
Proudly a Ex-BYDI member |
Sales Merchant
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:21:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Sales Merchant on 05/12/2006 10:28:49 Fighters need a comparative boost in hitpoints. They are 20mil a pop and are now having to shoot things with much more hitpoints than before.
As for a carriers role...they can carry other fully fitted ships and allow you to fit/unfit modules at them. The larger ones can be used for jump cloneing.
They have a role, its more logistic than battle orientated but its still a role and a very unique one. I'd like to see them more viable on the battlefield but giving them offense capabilitys would lean towards the solo pwnmobile theory which ccp tries carefully to avoid.
One improvement i would make for carriers is XL Nos's with a nos bonus for carriers.
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:23:00 -
[4]
No I mentioned that in there. The addes HP was great but that doesnt change what we can do. It just means we can nothing for a longer time. Please read the entire post before replying.
This was not meant to be an argument or flame thread. These are issues that have been talked about for quite a while. I am just looking for any updates to the devs ideas/thoughts, especially a response to fighters not MWDing back. This is personally VERY frustrating.
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:25:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Merrick Solipsus on 05/12/2006 10:25:05 Thanks Sales Merchant, somehow I forgot to put that into the post. Its ok though, I only had 14 characters left when I finished.
|
Darius Shakor
Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:33:00 -
[6]
Originally by: maarud Did you miss the 50% HP increase to capital ships?
It takes a couple dreads/carriers + support to take down a carrier now and not quickly IIRC.
I thought it was more like 400%. Prepatch HP and what they are now on sisi shows they were increased by more than 50% ------
Shakor Clan Information Portal http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=3 |
Pan Crastus
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:33:00 -
[7]
Originally by: maarud Did you miss the 50% HP increase to capital ships?
It was 400%, not 50%.
Quote:
It takes a couple dreads/carriers + support to take down a carrier now and not quickly IIRC.
Nonsense. A dozen BS + support are still enough even after Kali. poof
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:37:00 -
[8]
In regards to capital ships on the front lines, one aspect which would really help define their role their would be the addition of some range dependent support functions for the ships about them. Signature radius reductions and the like would enable support ships to keep boosting a cap ship, and make their presence a much more decisive factor.
|
Zodiaq
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:37:00 -
[9]
I'm not carrier pilot but use most of time drones... as gallente this is my main offensive weapon as I have more sp in drones than gunnery... as I see that drones have a lot bugs which are sadly ignored by devs... drones not returning to ship, drones not attacking selected targets (many time I saw that after issuing attack order drones at half of distance to target suddenly turned and wend back attacking previous target). And must say these bugs are in game for LONG time... will they be dealt with??
ps. this is also not a whining, just needed to point few problems linked with fighters (as these are also drones) and problems, with are ignored for too long... maybe time to add this to 'known issues' at least?
|
Pan Crastus
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 10:42:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Merrick Solipsus
Yes, a carrier can get in the middle of the fight, but then what do we do? NOS the enemy, shield and armor rep people that, even with the HP increase, will most likely pop before we can even target them?
With the right setup, Carriers are already pretty deadly on the front lines. I died to one in a gate camp recently, it had BS support, but from what I can tell, it had web/scram/heavy neuts on it as well.
I would like to see carrier-sized variants of these EW modules though: huge PG and better range - and not as expensive as the officer ones, e.g. Capital Stasis Webifier I with 30km range and -75%, Capital Warp Disruptor with 45km etc.
Quote:
[...] If a fighter/drone does take lots of fire and youre lucky enough to get it back, you send out repair drones to fix it right? Not anymore. Due to the drone changes in the latest patch, drones no longer fire on anything owned by you. This includes repair drones.
Related to this is the change that fighters/drones can no longer blow up your own cans/wrecks. As a ship that has no weapons and as a pilot that has absolutly no urge to salvage, this is a problem for me warping out/moving around, and can cause quite a bit of lag.
I believe these 2 issues will be fixed today(?).
|
|
Kiyano
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:02:00 -
[11]
A single carrier on the battlefield isn't as useful as 4+.
Using Carriers to help tank eachother is very useful. If anyone is stupid enough to fire on them they can pretty much make it take an eternity to kill one of the carriers, also the carriers can then remote rep other ships in a gang. Its tricky to pull off but nothing in the mechanics is stopping you, its the organization that stops you. With new gang options in Revelations that allows you to shout you need shields/armour, its good boost to that side of combat.
|
DriveCrash
The Graduates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:02:00 -
[12]
drones still wont be able to attack wrecks, i'm almost sure of that, they are just reduceing the skill req of salavage.. but i still dont want to fit a salvage mod to clean house. =/
Drones are bugged to all hell. Repair drones are considered hostile, why? if assisting a friend, none corpmate, you have to acknowledge that it is a concordable offence. But no concord comes. Then when you mis-click and do something hostile, guess what? no warning. BOOM. concord. That is not right at all.
Carriers can be taken down by a few battleships, not a dozen. If they are solo. What I would really like to see (as a drone / logistics pilot) is a real focus on both things. Give logistics more surviablity and more effectiveness. I wanted a carrier for it's logistics reason. Capital armor rep, etc. But it's range is stiffling for a cap ship, and lets not even speak of the lock time on your friends or your own fighters. I would really like to see some form of bonus to scan resolution when targeting a gang member or your own property. This would make logistics ships in whole more useful, but especially carriers.
Right now I cant risk a carrier on front lines to ATTEMPT to repair my gangmates that i cant lock before they pop.. and there is NO battleship logistics ship. And the t2 cruisers are crap. Ok for HAC / Command support perhaps, but battleships? worthless.
Why have drones been ignored so long? are they considered that over powered? I've spent alot of SP's in drones only to find someone with half the sp's in thier offensive weapons of choice by far exceeds me due to faction gear/ t2 and drone bugs.
I lost a domi the other day because my heavy drones would not return from 60km out with any amount of urgancy in order for me to get my smalls out to kill off the interceptor pinning me down. Sad.
Ok sorry i'm getting off topic.
More captial modules please. More love on logistics. A little more attention on drone bugs.
Thanks. -DCO
|
Zebler
Four Horsemen
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:04:00 -
[13]
Pre Kali, I have only met one carrier on the front line. He was a lame arse camping a low sec system where he thought he was safe.
Post Kali, I have run into 4 carriers on the front lines, in 0.0, going toe to toe with whatever ppl could throw at them.
Sit at a pos if you are feeling scared, but click that warp button and come and join the party imo
|
Nasdram
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:16:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Nasdram on 05/12/2006 11:16:31
Originally by: Pan Crastus
I would like to see carrier-sized variants of these EW modules though: huge PG and better range - and not as expensive as the officer ones, e.g. Capital Stasis Webifier I with 30km range and -75%, Capital Warp Disruptor with 45km etc.
These already exist as Officer modules
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:18:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Merrick Solipsus It is well known that the main viable role of a carrier is to sit inside a POS or at a supersafe spot and assign fighters.
Be creative. There's been a 400% hitpoint boost, use it to your advantage.
-[23] Member-
Awesome new space games site, from the editor of E-ON! |
KIAEddZ
Caldari KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:19:00 -
[16]
Tier 2 Carriers?
Same ship in every way except it is immune to EW... and costs about 3x as much to build/purchase.
This would see the carrier become a real front line ship, I know the carriers role in real life isnt front line, but the paying public of Eve want to see these ships deployed and risked in engagements....
Fighters also need a BIG hp boost, right now a Raven can tank 8 of them long enough to kill most if not all of them.
Kali has hit carrier pilots hard.
KIA EVE Home
|
Pan Crastus
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:27:00 -
[17]
Originally by: KIAEddZ Tier 2 Carriers?
Same ship in every way except it is immune to EW... and costs about 3x as much to build/purchase.
Motherships you mean? They cost a bit more. ;-)
Quote:
Fighters also need a BIG hp boost, right now a Raven can tank 8 of them long enough to kill most if not all of them.
This is mostly a result of Carrier pilots not choosing the type of Fighters they use well (and being limited to 18-20 ones at a time, i.e. being much less versatile than a drone BS/HAC). 8 Templars would rip a shield tanking Raven apart quickly, but with 4 Einherjs and 4 Firbolgs it may be tougher...
|
FalconHawk
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:28:00 -
[18]
it¦s realy funny, all want a boost for their capital ships and hey it¦s right. they cost a massive amount of isk and they can deal nice damage in fleet fights ... but please leave an option to kill them in low sec systems when one of this silly nyx pilots (yeah igno it¦s aimed at u ) starting to lock down a system completly. it¦s realy not too much fun to live in a deadend system when a mothership or carrier is camping the gate the whole time and you simply have not enough dreads around ... and not all corps can easily field 10+ bs pilots with neuts.
|
Shiva Seran
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:44:00 -
[19]
first off - if you are really ratting in a carrier you are doing something wrong.
imho, there is only one very annoying "feature" involving carriers. if a node crash or ctd happens whilst fighters are out in space, you are screwed. i think now it will be possible to scan them down, but it will take time and in that time, while the carrier has to slowboat there and scoop them, it is totally useless. if you loose a complete set of fighter drones by doing nothing wrong, you are ******...
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 11:56:00 -
[20]
Quote: first off - if you are really ratting in a carrier you are doing something wrong.
Whats wrong with ratting in a carrier? It was my money and time put into it. I may as well get as much use out of it as possible. I enjoy it so thats what Ill do.
|
|
Pan Crastus
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:00:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Shiva Seran first off - if you are really ratting in a carrier you are doing something wrong.
And what is that?
Some people whack out their Harvester drones and mine in 0.0 ...
|
twit brent
Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:05:00 -
[22]
Carriers are way too vunerable to things like sensor damps. If one celestis locks and damps the carrier the carrier will be of no more use than it was at the POS. My carrier has had a few fights away from the SS or POS but its just not worth it.
|
DaChMon
Caldari FireTech Imperium Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:09:00 -
[23]
In several occations it has been stated that carriers, dreads and titans never were ment to be OMFGBBQ Complex pawnmobiles.
Secondly you state that their pvp use is at ss or pos asigning fighters, to that statement i must say:
BIIIIIINGOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, WE HAVE A WINNER!
Thats EXACTLY what they were ment to do, asign fighters and repair/refuel ships in combat.
------ My oppinion, views, flames, whines, discussions, rants and all other postings are not the view of my corp, my alliance, or anyone affiliated with me or my family.
|
Thar Kahn
Caldari Swedish Aerospace Inc Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:12:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Thar Kahn on 05/12/2006 12:13:52 Edited by: Thar Kahn on 05/12/2006 12:13:28 /signed Great post Merrick! /TK [url=http://profile.xfire.com/krokenjra][/url] |
DriveCrash
The Graduates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:31:00 -
[25]
Originally by: KIAEddZ Tier 2 Carriers? Same ship in every way except it is immune to EW... and costs about 3x as much to build/purchase.
Try 20x cost.
Originally by: Shiva Seran first off - if you are really ratting in a carrier you are doing something wrong.
What else productive can you do with it besides haul fuel and throw away fighters? =P
Originally by: DaChMon In several occations it has been stated that carriers, dreads and titans never were ment to be OMFGBBQ Complex pawnmobiles.
Secondly you state that their pvp use is at ss or pos asigning fighters, to that statement i must say:
BIIIIIINGOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, WE HAVE A WINNER!
Thats EXACTLY what they were ment to do, asign fighters and repair/refuel ships in combat.
are you some kind of retard?
Complex pwnmobile? last i checked, cap ships cant enter any complex or mission. and may i state for the record that you've made yourself out to be a complete moron.
what are the bonus's on the carrier?
Repair.. unhuh, how do you do that from a pos? Oh, they warp to you.. right.. except your gang mate thats in desprate need of your repair ability and bonus's, is tackled and scrambled down. Or better yet how do you do that on a combat line (where it's needed) when your rendered useless by a 5 million isk cruiser? Yes a fleet of well planned tactical attacks should take down a carrier. However one should not be rendered completely useless so easily.
Refuel ships.. what? oh you mean refuel the pos, right. Oh ammo?.. modules? cause pvp takes so long there's totaly time for a jump back to the carrier and a tactical refit.
And just for clarity, let me quote you one more time.
Originally by: DaChMon Thats EXACTLY what they were ment to do, asign fighters and repair/refuel ships in combat.
Please sit down and shut up for the remainder of the thread. Thank you. -DCO
|
Pan Crastus
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:34:00 -
[26]
Originally by: DaChMon
Secondly you state that their pvp use is at ss or pos asigning fighters, to that statement i must say:
BIIIIIINGOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, WE HAVE A WINNER!
Thats EXACTLY what they were ment to do, asign fighters and repair/refuel ships in combat.
Assigning fighters and repairing ships, as well as hauling empire <=> 0.0 is the role they were limited to before Kali, the Devs never stated that this was their intended (only) role.
Besides, you cannot repair ships while sitting inside a POS.
|
ZelRox
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:37:00 -
[27]
Ive observed 2 carriers in the middle of a battlefield last night :D Great view. ----------------------
BiH 4tw |
James Duar
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:40:00 -
[28]
The thing I've always imagined as being ideal for cap ships in EVE would be if we could have battles which spanned over a distance of say 300-1000km, with ships deployed everywhere in between. So carriers are holding the line offering support to forces up front, and while they're not in any direct danger in a straight fight they are of course vulnerable to a flanking manoeuver or similar.
My proposal for this is as above - give us cap ships which can actually render ships within a certain range effectively unhittable (massive sig radius reductions etc.) but that also suffer from not having these bonuses if enemy ships get within the same "sphere of influence" of the ship. To balance it you could also nerf the falloff on the guns of ships to account for "obstruction of view" by the cap ship.
In fact, EVE might do well to have these apply to every ship, since it would finally make combat formations actually useful. Bunch of frigs in a cluster of BS's? Pretty much impossible to hit at range, but get inty's amongst that formation and their toast.
|
Hohenheim OfLight
Pegasus Mining and Securities R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 12:48:00 -
[29]
have to admit even after the hp boost, peopel still all me mad for ratting in my carrier, infact my corp tends to beg me not to.
But what else am i going to do with it?
The are so many fighter bugs its insane, I have so far had to put in 5 pettions to get fighters back, and have another one in now, its no fun spending 2 weeks at a time without fighters while you wait to get them back off reembersment petions there is not even a fighters cartigory you have to just pick on of the others at random.
Its not good enuth, if i ctd or loss connection due to lag, (which is happening a lto these days) i warp off and fighters warp... warp.. well warp to some where god knows where they jsut fanish you can not scan for them or any thing.
If i warp off and leave my fighters attack in a belt i find my self spending 5 mins finding some one to give my fighters to so i can recall them back to me.
TBh its not he hp boost or any thing liek that gets on my nerves its the fact that the carriers only wepon is so bugged!
Its the fighters that need fixing not the carrier, thou it would be nice if we could sort out the frig jamming issue. ----------------------------------------------
Gone but not forgotten
|
Rawthorm
Gallente The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 13:23:00 -
[30]
I agree with the OP here. Carriers are still pretty fragile and while the HP boost was nice, it just means that a fleet will take 5 minutes to kill you instead of 2. With sensor dampeners being so effective against everything its rather easy to put a carrier out of commission.
Then you have motherships. Thankfully with imunity to EW no cheap sensor dampening tricks will work on it so it puts up a hell of a fight but there are 3 things these ships suffer from:
1 - HP increase does NOT = better tank. Sure you have alot more HP but once its gone its gone. This problem also effects Titans in that at heart they tank no better than a carrier because they use exactly the same mods to exactly the same effect. They really need some kind of tanking bonus to the reps (cap reduction maybe) so that these ships can actualy tank better than their little cousins.
2 - Fighter HP was kind of weak before. Now with Kali why bother chewing through a 16 billion isk ship when you can defang it in a matter of minutes? Add the various bugs that get your fighters killed, I do often wonder why motherships were made so hard yet have such a glaring vunerability. They simply need more HP or tbh elite ship type resistances based on race.
3 - Fighters will always take damage in most fights and when its all said and done you end up with a hold full of them usualy with structure damage. While a carrier can dock to repair these, there is no way to remove them from a mothership so you end up flying around with a bunch of d fighters in your drone bay. This ship needs to be able to rep its own frighters FULLY (even if you have to pay isk like at a station)
|
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 13:35:00 -
[31]
One more thing that bugs me. How is it other ships can use your Ship Maintainance Array yet you cant use your own? I know this will never change, its just one of those things that doesnt make sense.
|
Hohenheim OfLight
Pegasus Mining and Securities R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 13:38:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Merrick Solipsus One more thing that bugs me. How is it other ships can use your Ship Maintainance Array yet you cant use your own? I know this will never change, its just one of those things that doesnt make sense.
Q4T ----------------------------------------------
Gone but not forgotten
|
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:04:00 -
[33]
Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that. _______________ |
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:09:00 -
[34]
Tux replied to my post! /faints
And with a super secret plan none the less!
Cant wait too see what yall have in store.
Any word on Fighters MWDing back to the ship?
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Aerial Boundaries Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:11:00 -
[35]
Give the carriers nerfbat launchers.
Go on. ----------
IBTL \o/ EVE is upside down! WTZ+Slower Warp=Win |
Sales Merchant
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:13:00 -
[36]
But Tux...what about Fighters are they in 'the plan'?
|
Parallax Error
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:14:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
I'm glad your looking at carriers and the thought of new stuff is always nice.
Few suggestions based on the current state and mechanics of Carriers:
It's my observation that in many situations heavy drones are more useful than Fighters so I reckon three things might be worth trying out.
Firstly: Make fighters get all the bonuses from drone skills and modules. Change the Fighter Skill bonus from +20% a level to +5% a level. Theres a reasonable boost there which addresses some of the major problems with fighters to a reasonable degree (more HP's for starters). This would take a Fighter with fighters 4 trained from 90 to 120 dps, not a huge increase but enough to make them well worth using over heavies even with tracking issues.
Secondly: Increase the optimal and falloff on fighters, for a weapon with comparable tracking and Sig Res to a Medium Turret they have a hell of a job hitting, and that seems to be a function of them having to go too close for their tracking values. I reckon fighters should be aiming engage around 7.5-10km, still in web range but just further enough out to allow them to hit a bit better.
Thirdly: MWD behaviour. Fighters really do need to MWD back when recalled, it's painful at the moment.
For Carriers themselves, I'm undecided on the whole EW issue. I don't think making them immune to EW as a whole is a good thing, they have a high sensor strength to combat Jammers and aren't exactly affected by Target Painters or Tracking Disruptors. the problem seems to be sensor dampeners only. Unsure of a workable resolution here though.
The other frontline problem with carriers is the awkward nature of remote repairing, so this isn't really a carrier problem but a logistics problem. I think TomB has mentioned wanting to look at the logistics side of things already so that would inherently help carriers.
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:17:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 05/12/2006 14:21:01 Maybe an increase in the range of remote repairers would be handy as well.
Regarding fighters, they could perhaps be given rules of engagement - tick boxes accessible from the drone overview which would stop them warping off to chase after retreating enemies, assign target priorities in the event of the carrier becoming jammed etc.
Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
It's great being Amarr, ain't it? |
Wild Rho
Amarr Black Omega Security
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:22:00 -
[39]
More than anything they really need a purpose on the frontline. Right now a carrier deploying fighters from a safe spot is no different from one dropping them on the front lines (apart from the obvious deployment times).
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it.
|
Matrix Aran
Legio Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:23:00 -
[40]
Tuxy, I hope this plan inculdes the much awaited Chimera model fix. The one that has been in the known issues section for weeks. ----
Originally by: Wrangler It's a neuralizer.
|
|
xaix ikkul
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:27:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
turn them into battlestars by giving them turrets
|
Rezerwowy Pies
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:33:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Sales Merchant Edited by: Sales Merchant on 05/12/2006 10:28:49 Fighters need a comparative boost in hitpoints. They are 20mil a pop and are now having to shoot things with much more hitpoints than before.
I'm wondering why CCP don't see that. Everyone (players who pay for this lagging game) know that, only our CCP's friend not :/
-- Why some admins can't do that :P
|
FalconHawk
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:34:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
It¦s nice that you have a plan, but stop making capital ships allmighty omgwtf pwnzorz ships for gate camps in low sec
sure they are not designed for that, but maybe you should have a look at the establishment killboard from time to time ... igno has no carrier, but motherships are nearly the same kind
i know it¦s slightly off topic, but hey it seems it¦s one of the few threads you realy read
|
Eddie Gordo
Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:42:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Wild Rho More than anything they really need a purpose on the frontline. Right now a carrier deploying fighters from a safe spot is no different from one dropping them on the front lines (apart from the obvious deployment times).
and the suprise element.
Sitting in a POS or a deep safe spot is a very defensive way to use a carrier, sending a small/medium skirmish group into enemy space with the backup of 2-3 carriers is a nice way to suprise the enemy once a fight is underway.
Now Recruiting |
Mr Krosis
JuBa Corp
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 14:58:00 -
[45]
I think allowing ships to instantly target their own drones/fighters as well as any other ship in their fleet would go a long way towards making both logistic ships and drone boats (of which carriers are both) much more effective.
I would also like an "abandon drone" option for all drone types that breaks the link as if you warped away/cloaked. Sucks waiting a minute for your heavies to get back to you before you can redeploy lights on a tackler (and ofc fighters should MWD back as well..)
-- Mr Krosis The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge. |
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:01:00 -
[46]
Well I like that idea if it werent for the fact that people would soon start deploying 10 thousand small t1 drones to lag out battles.
|
Piotr Anatolev
Gallente The Older Gamers Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:14:00 -
[47]
Quote: New programming has been added to drones. They will no longer attempt to become self-aware and will not pick random targets on their own.
From the lates patch installer
\o/
|
Rawthorm
Gallente The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:23:00 -
[48]
Originally by: FalconHawk
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
It¦s nice that you have a plan, but stop making capital ships allmighty omgwtf pwnzorz ships for gate camps in low sec
sure they are not designed for that, but maybe you should have a look at the establishment killboard from time to time ... igno has no carrier, but motherships are nearly the same kind
i know it¦s slightly off topic, but hey it seems it¦s one of the few threads you realy read
Do you know how much skill it takes to avoid loosing fighters to do that tho? At lvl 5 fighters and carrier im still quite lucky to kill and get out before the fighters start taking critical damage from sentry guns.
A carrier doing what I do will cost the carrier pilot hundreds of millions of ISK so its just not doable. Even with the motherships it takes good timing to get out with all my little minions in one peice...
|
Swirler
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:32:00 -
[49]
I think this whole thread is bonkers. Carriers are a specific type of unit. You DO NOT bring carriers to the front of any battle, they sit way in the back and send fighters. They don't have guns to take out other ships, only for defense. To ask for such things from CCP is frankly stupid. They have already provided you with what you are asking for. Battleships and Dreads.
Now, if you want better fighters with more capabilities...then send out real pilots in frigates and cruisers. Drones are only drones, they should never be as effective as a real person in a similar sized craft. It's the human that makes the difference.
What you are asking for is a dread. Stop being a cheapo, get a dread and bring it to the front. Leave my carrier and its strategic role alone. Thank you.
|
FalconHawk
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:33:00 -
[50]
i know :) saw it often enough in that 5 days, but that is a simple fighter bug, i wouldn¦t have a prob with them mwding back to the ship. But u know that you are pretty indestructable atm in the nyx and no dictors in lowsec Problem atm is that captial ships are build for fleet and gang fights and the designers of the ships simply overlook the possiblity of "abusing" them. Don¦t think any of the Devs thought about a nyx camping a 0.4 system
|
|
FalconHawk
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:35:00 -
[51]
btw Rawthorm you just missed another nyx by 1 hour ...just good he was just around to search for exploration sites ...
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:35:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Swirler
Now, if you want better fighters with more capabilities...then send out real pilots in frigates and cruisers. Drones are only drones, they should never be as effective as a real person in a similar sized craft. It's the human that makes the difference.
Fighters have human pilots.
Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
It's great being Amarr, ain't it? |
La Haine
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:45:00 -
[53]
I know of atleast one alliance that was spamming front lines with cariers long before Kali...and sometimes using more cariers than hostile gang bs count. You should ask them how it works...but they definetely belong to front line.
With HP boost it should even be more interesting. Cariers offcourse get bonus on fighter damage and fighter damage if they are delegated to gang members is considerably smaller.
|
Radioactive Babe
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:46:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Rawthorm Do you know how much skill it takes to avoid loosing fighters to do that tho? At lvl 5 fighters and carrier im still quite lucky to kill and get out before the fighters start taking critical damage from sentry guns.
A carrier doing what I do will cost the carrier pilot hundreds of millions of ISK so its just not doable. Even with the motherships it takes good timing to get out with all my little minions in one peice...
Yeah, dont nerf low sec gatecamping motherships .... because its hard enough already and stuff ... I mean he VERY NEARLY lost a fighter last week
alas, poor risk and reward, I knew you well |
baaaaal
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:49:00 -
[55]
its not just sensor damps that can ruin a carrier pilots day its nos/neuts aswell 2 bs with there high slots filled with them can kill a carriers cap and stop the carrier from even running 1 active armor hardner
Quote:
It takes a couple dreads/carriers + support to take down a carrier now and not quickly IIRC.
Maarud.
you ever actually piloted a carrier?
|
Rawthorm
Gallente The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:49:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Radioactive Babe Yeah, dont nerf low sec gatecamping motherships .... because its hard enough already and stuff ... I mean he VERY NEARLY lost a fighter last week
Actualy I did loose 9-10 over the space of a few days. In anycase there is nothing to stop the inhabitants of that system getting their own mothership to counter mine.
|
bundy bear
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:55:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Hohenheim OfLight
Originally by: Merrick Solipsus One more thing that bugs me. How is it other ships can use your Ship Maintainance Array yet you cant use your own? I know this will never change, its just one of those things that doesnt make sense.
Q4T
Your joking right?
I can think of many ways this could easily be abused. Wonder what would happen in comabt if you put stabs on yourself to get away or dropped your shield tank for armor when your shields are down lol.
|
Gunstar Zero
Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:55:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
Portable POS-style shield generators?
|
Tehyarec
Erasers inc. Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:55:00 -
[59]
Regarding lock times, I always found it annoying that big ships have so stupid locking times. Without a sensor booster, a BS locks a frig in maybe 15 seconds roughly. It's silly. As if a big ship wouldn't have more powerful sensor systems to acquire locks fast. I guess it's to prevent instalock'n'pwning small ships, but currently the times are just too long. Especially for capitals.
|
Kinsy
Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:58:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Parallax Error I reckon fighters should be aiming engage around 7.5-10km, still in web range but just further enough out to allow them to hit a bit better.
YEA so then you dont get bumped by the feckers, sounds good to me!
Rest of the changes sound good. But.
Make them scramble-able. They have a warp drive and can follow you anywhere, why can't you stop them leaving when they get there?
|
|
Illegal
KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:01:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
Personally im of the opinion the 99% reduction for warfare links bonus on carriers and motherships should be replaced with something that makes them "all warm and fuzzy inside"
I forsee carriers with warfare links as commanders in gangs only for the command bonus of the module, not because the player is an actual gang leader, and thats not what you intended for the new system exactly, is it? --
|
FalconHawk
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:01:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Rawthorm
Actualy I did loose 9-10 over the space of a few days. In anycase there is nothing to stop the inhabitants of that system getting their own mothership to counter mine.
argh come on you know that us cuddly carebears have no souvereignity to build that thingy :) and since you disrupt our only income we won¦t have the iskies to buy it but beware, i¦m only (how much does it cost?20bil?) 19.5bil short atm
|
Ange1
Gallente The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:07:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Ange1 on 05/12/2006 16:07:34
Originally by: FalconHawk but please leave an option to kill them in low sec systems when one of this silly nyx pilots (yeah igno it¦s aimed at u ) starting to lock down a system completly. it¦s realy not too much fun to live in a deadend system when a mothership or carrier is camping the gate the whole time and you simply have not enough dreads around ... and not all corps can easily field 10+ bs pilots with neuts.
You know most of the time our Nyx is out in 0.0 space killing people, not low sec. There is a way to kill or at least neutralize a Mothership's ability to do serious damage, I've seen people fight our Nyx with some measure of success on several occasions. If you lack the firepower, then look for a way to rob it of its teeth at the very least. Killing a Mothership - whether you have interdictors to be able to hold it or not - will require a sacrifice on your part in ships unless you have an extremely efficient method of killing a Mothership without a single loss.
I'm sorry if it ruins your agent running time, but you have to learn to adapt and deal with threats like this, not whine about nerfing them so you can continue agent running in relative peace. You're just lucky there are only a couple Motherships in pirate hands at the moment. At least you can just dampen a Carrier to make it useless and its easy from there.
The Establishment is at your service...
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:15:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Tehyarec Regarding lock times, I always found it annoying that big ships have so stupid locking times. Without a sensor booster, a BS locks a frig in maybe 15 seconds roughly. It's silly. As if a big ship wouldn't have more powerful sensor systems to acquire locks fast. I guess it's to prevent instalock'n'pwning small ships, but currently the times are just too long. Especially for capitals.
When you double the maximum lock range of a ship, the volume of space being scanned is increased eightfold.
On top of that, as we can see from the recent WCS nerf, having a strong warp field interferes with your ability to lock targets. I imagine that the bigger your ship is, the larger the base interference from its warp core.
Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
It's great being Amarr, ain't it? |
FalconHawk
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:21:00 -
[65]
hehe sure i know where it is most of the time ange1 and i have never said something about to nerf it (did i?), my post were just to remind tux that some ppl use the ships he tries to boost all the time not for the things he has in mind. Motherships, Carrier and Dreads are simply not in the game for gate ganks and are already pretty hard to kill (and i¦m not talking about 1 carrier vs. 10+ bs with neuts). It¦s a fleet combat ship and so the new shiny plan of tux should reflect it that way and not boosting it¦s solo abilities. And don¦t worry, i can live with 5 days without agent running, it¦s quite boring anyway
|
shivan
Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:33:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Tuxford
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1.
I can agree with this, I was using my carrier to warp into LV and V gate camps to break them up. I lost my carrier about a week before Kali 1 was out, but a solo carrier set up like a giant vamp domie works wonders against a6 bs or less gate camp. ------------------ Ka-Tet alliance Diplo
|
Caesium
Amarr Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:40:00 -
[67]
What I'd like to see changed :
Increase drone bay size on all carriers by 40,000m3
If fighters don't get drone bonuses because they are not drones then they should be on a separate control pool from drones.
There should be an option in overview to display the target the drone/fighter is engaged on.
There should be an option in overview to display the nearest celestial body the fighter is at. (why the hell can the fighters follow people into warp but not tell me wtf they went to?)
Carriers should have the ability to warp to their fighters as should people who have delegated control.
As mentioned above some sort of bonus to lock time of gang/alliance/corp assets (more of a global change really)
Of course fix the status updates for the fighters, hp etc.
We have warp to 0 now, why don't fighters warp back at 0 when they come back from remote locations? make it an option?
When a target is over 150km from me the fighters should be able to warp to it, they can follow people to safe spots with no book marks via uber fighter magic, they should be able to warp to targets > 150km via same juju.
Capitol webbers/scram/sensor upgrades. Capitol ships need more capitol modules. we shouldn't have to use the same small stuff that small ships use it makes no sense that some tiny ass sensor array that fits on a frig is being used on a capitol ship. Make them expensive 50-75m a module, make them far more effective, hell make them require t2 components. And no, officer web/scram are not capitol modules they are battle ship mods.
I'd like to see Some method of still telling fighters to attack a person without having them targeted. we keep hearing how fighters are fighters, manned ships not drones! they can warp 20au away and have no issues attacking something the carrier obviously can not target. this would make jammers/damps still disable some functionality on a carrier (neut/web/scam) but not completely screw it over.
Additionally balance amongst the carriers is out of wack, in the case of the archon and chimera. 80,000m3 is too small of a drone bay. 14 fighters is 70k, technically you can run 15 fighters for 75k. the last 5 k is going to be various drones. This leaves the carrier with 0 replacements for it's fighters and no way to diversify it's damage types. I can understand the gallente carrier getting a larger bay, but it shouldn't be the only one with the ability to carry spares or partially change it's damage output types.
I'm sure there is a few things I've missed touching on, am at work and not much time.
Caesium Lyrus Associates |
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:44:00 -
[68]
Originally by: FalconHawk hehe sure i know where it is most of the time ange1 and i have never said something about to nerf it (did i?), my post were just to remind tux that some ppl use the ships he tries to boost all the time not for the things he has in mind. Motherships, Carrier and Dreads are simply not in the game for gate ganks and are already pretty hard to kill (and i¦m not talking about 1 carrier vs. 10+ bs with neuts). It¦s a fleet combat ship and so the new shiny plan of tux should reflect it that way and not boosting it¦s solo abilities. And don¦t worry, i can live with 5 days without agent running, it¦s quite boring anyway
Its not "Tuxford's grand plan of capital ships" its "CCP's plan", and the point is obviously not to make them solopwnmobiles. _______________ |
|
FalconHawk
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:05:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Tuxford
Its not "Tuxford's grand plan of capital ships" its "CCP's plan", and the point is obviously not to make them solopwnmobiles.
hard to say it, but ... i realy start to like you
|
Drutort
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:31:00 -
[70]
I donÆt care how the plan isà all I want is that capital ships not be handicapped by 1 single ship, thatÆs all, its ridiculous periodà each capital ship thus far but carrier has unique abilities or bonuses that help it do its job very wellà sadly you can not call carriers very good logistics ships or haulers as other ships do that job better IE mothership, even dreads or freighters. Capital reps you say? Well ya if few people in a fleet fight have damps all they do is put it on a carrier or if more carriers are thereà thatÆs it boom the whole carrier fleet is useless and completely vulnerable now.
Does that sound fair? I think something is broken, the promises of having linking between gang and insta locking your gang members was stated but we have yet to see something like thatà and carriers should have capital range in the 100km not messily 45km with lvl4 that is pathetic and insult to capital.
fighters? dont get me started on that one right now you cant even use the can trick anymore as they do not attack anything that belongs to you... how pathetic is it now to watch your fighters pop 1 by one as they crawl to your drone bay... oh might i add that now they dock 1 by one.. taking from anywhere 1-4 sec each... by that time if you have 10+ fighters your bound to lose few fighters just by them drying to dock at your carrier as if you dont have multiple docking bays on a ship design to host drones.
|
|
Drutort
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:36:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Caesium What I'd like to see changed :
Increase drone bay size on all carriers by 40,000m3
If fighters don't get drone bonuses because they are not drones then they should be on a separate control pool from drones.
There should be an option in overview to display the target the drone/fighter is engaged on.
There should be an option in overview to display the nearest celestial body the fighter is at. (why the hell can the fighters follow people into warp but not tell me wtf they went to?)
Carriers should have the ability to warp to their fighters as should people who have delegated control.
As mentioned above some sort of bonus to lock time of gang/alliance/corp assets (more of a global change really)
Of course fix the status updates for the fighters, hp etc.
We have warp to 0 now, why don't fighters warp back at 0 when they come back from remote locations? make it an option?
When a target is over 150km from me the fighters should be able to warp to it, they can follow people to safe spots with no book marks via uber fighter magic, they should be able to warp to targets > 150km via same juju.
Capitol webbers/scram/sensor upgrades. Capitol ships need more capitol modules. we shouldn't have to use the same small stuff that small ships use it makes no sense that some tiny ass sensor array that fits on a frig is being used on a capitol ship. Make them expensive 50-75m a module, make them far more effective, hell make them require t2 components. And no, officer web/scram are not capitol modules they are battle ship mods.
I'd like to see Some method of still telling fighters to attack a person without having them targeted. we keep hearing how fighters are fighters, manned ships not drones! they can warp 20au away and have no issues attacking something the carrier obviously can not target. this would make jammers/damps still disable some functionality on a carrier (neut/web/scam) but not completely screw it over.
Additionally balance amongst the carriers is out of wack, in the case of the archon and chimera. 80,000m3 is too small of a drone bay. 14 fighters is 70k, technically you can run 15 fighters for 75k. the last 5 k is going to be various drones. This leaves the carrier with 0 replacements for it's fighters and no way to diversify it's damage types. I can understand the gallente carrier getting a larger bay, but it shouldn't be the only one with the ability to carry spares or partially change it's damage output types.
I'm sure there is a few things I've missed touching on, am at work and not much time.
ya capital ships remind me of the days when BS came out and they lacked some of the BS modules and people were still using frig and cruiser sized guns and or other modules... its fine so long as you have your own class modules... but when you have no option thats when its pathetic... and waiting for kali 2,3 or whatever to fix carriers is just not acceptable, because i do not see were it is stated heavy changes like that are going to be done... each of those areas will have its own new items features added that will require extensive amount of fixing and carriers should be in the plan of being fixed NOW not later with all the other stuff... they will get the shaft once again
|
Kat Jupiter
Warspite Developments
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:45:00 -
[72]
What if you reduced everything on a fighter by a factor of 5, save its damage.
20% of its HP, 20% of its space, and 20% of its cost
Still couldnt use them in other ships, could carry lots of spares, and they wouldnt be compleatly out of whack, i mean, they are really small, have the HP of a cruiser, thats pretty big (comparitivly with HP) and cost an exorbatant ammount of money. at those prices, you could afford to have ALOT of them, actually lose some and it not feel like you lost the fight, and people could actually kill them when they are chasing them.
Right now it feels to me like a lauch retards in battlecruisers when i launch my fighters
|
R0ze
Hounds of Basgerin
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:50:00 -
[73]
/signed .. and the whole scene could be improved just by implementing few of the requested features. In my opinion primary would be - mwd back to drone bay and fighter damage status being displayed always.
|
Retseldog
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:59:00 -
[74]
A carrier shouldnt be completly at the mercy of 1 ship...
As exampls a Lachises with 3 damps and a disruptor is capable of holding a carrier down with its lock range <10km ....Is this right?.....NO!!!!
Motherships with their immunity to EW are fine IMO... and carriers should have this ability....
Immunity to EW and instalock on own gang members ( for repping) would go along way to seeing Carriers used alot more in the frontlines......The HP buff is nice and gives them longlevity. but even a million HP's arent enougth if one ship alone can make the carrier useless...
|
R0ze
Hounds of Basgerin
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:04:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Retseldog A carrier shouldnt be completly at the mercy of 1 ship... Immunity to EW and instalock on own gang members ( for repping) would go along way to seeing Carriers used alot more in the frontlines......The HP buff is nice and gives them longlevity. but even a million HP's arent enougth if one ship alone can make the carrier useless...
Although the imunity would be nice to carrier users I dont agree fully on your statement.. There should be some counter tactics/ships .. And if you want those gang boosts (lock speed /repp range) bonuses why wouldn't the Lachesis be able to render the carrier a bit useless??? In case of a gang it would make the Lachesis user as primary target anyway (the same goes for all specialised ships).
|
Bagehi
Caldari BFG Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:10:00 -
[76]
I know people will complain about this. But you do realize there are ECCM modules in the game, right? If you KNOW the weakness in your setup... fix it! Mount some anti-ECM gear. You start with 80 points, so it'll take a fair amount of ECM modules to jam you to begin with. A single T2 ECCM will boost you to 128 points. And that will take several Scorpions full of race specific ECM gear to lock you down.
If you fit only kinetic resistance mods and complained that the Amarrian guns we doing too much damage to you, people would laugh you off the forums. There are a lot of different ways to take down a ship in this game... that's why you aren't supposed to fly around solo.
|
Ravelin Eb
Minmatar Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:11:00 -
[77]
at the moment carriers are just very expensive toys tbh. the only ones i encounter are safespotted and we enjoy popping all the fighters he assigns. even with the 400% hp increase we killed one last night in about 6 minutes with just a cruiser/BC gang. they are still very vunerable to this sort of attack and without massive support are useless in close up combat. i havent got one myself due to the vast amounts of money needed for what is essentially a mantlepiece object, but i would like to see some sort of changes to make them more useful than what they are in thier current state.
|
Rafein
Eye of God Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:11:00 -
[78]
I think the the HP change, and the gang change, needed the command ship to be on the grid for bonuses to be given, that is the role of Carriers. Command ships that last a while, and support
|
Parallax Error
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:23:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Bagehi I know people will complain about this. But you do realize there are ECCM modules in the game, right? If you KNOW the weakness in your setup... fix it! Mount some anti-ECM gear. You start with 80 points, so it'll take a fair amount of ECM modules to jam you to begin with. A single T2 ECCM will boost you to 128 points. And that will take several Scorpions full of race specific ECM gear to lock you down.
If you fit only kinetic resistance mods and complained that the Amarrian guns we doing too much damage to you, people would laugh you off the forums. There are a lot of different ways to take down a ship in this game... that's why you aren't supposed to fly around solo.
All of which is completely beside the point, people are saying that a Carrier is too easy to nullify with Remote Sensor Dampeners.
Don't go off on a rant when you have not actually read the points people are making, it can make you look somewhat foolish.
|
Ange1
Gallente The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:25:00 -
[80]
I think giving Carriers the immunity to EW like Motherships, may throw the scales the other way and make them too powerful. Mini-motherships as it were. If you gave the Carriers this ability, the only real difference between them is the storage size, HP and the number of Fighters deployed. 1.5Bn for a Carrier compared to 20Bn for a Mothership, you should expect some major differences between the two.
Perhaps a bonus can be added that severely reduces the effectiveness of EW modules per level of Carrier. So perhaps at level 5 Carrier, a Dampner would lose 90% of its effectiveness for example. You'd need a feck load of Dampners then to stop it locking you and ECM mods would rarely jam it.
The Establishment is at your service...
|
|
R0ze
Hounds of Basgerin
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:33:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Rafein I think the the HP change, and the gang change, needed the command ship to be on the grid for bonuses to be given, that is the role of Carriers. Command ships that last a while, and support
They kinda have allready warfare link CPU reduction bonus.. So you can practically use them as command ships. With decent skills and mindlink wouldn't be that too much diference between fleet comand ship +3% bonus (unleast cmdship LVL5 :) ).
|
Princess Jodi
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 20:43:00 -
[82]
First of all, I love my Carrier, and honestly don't want to fly anything else. At least till I can afford a Mothership.
I've used them on the front lines since I got them, primarily by warping into a battle and sending 14 Fighters after a single BS, then warping out. That one BS is either gonna have to leave system, or be destroyed.
Assigning Fighters is just not an option for me. I have spent too many fights sitting in a POS or safespot watching pilots not using my Fighters or trying to get someone to assign Fighters to after the first contoller gets blown up. Not to mention that only 5 Fighters won't kill most ships, and therefore just become targets themselves.
Sitting in safespot or POS is just plain BORING, not to mention a bit cowardly when your buddies are getting blasted to bits.
Jamming of a Carrier is quite simply too easy. A Carrier shouldn't have to use up valuable slots just to make it hard to Jam. If any ship had such an obvious weakness in RL, it would be fixed. Not to mention that a Jamming ship actually should be lit up like a Christmas Tree, and therfore be easy prey for things like a HARM-Missile defense system. Hell, the Carrier is big enough to triangulate on any ship with just a telescope on its bow and stern.
I'm not sure of the new 'Drones don't become self-aware' patch fix, but if it means that drones don't automatically pick a new target when one is destroyed, then I HATE it! I had actually hoped that Fighters would have the same ability, and auto-engage nearby hostiles, as that would help the 'Carrier being jammed' issues somewhat.
Other than that: Make Fighters Warp Back to Bay. Fix Fighters and Drones getting Stuck on each other (yes, it is better, but 14 Fighters almost always gets 2 stuck on themselves.) Give us a way to recover lost Fighters after a disconnect. Make Fighters get Gang Bonuses. Let Fighters target Wrecks.
Oh, and it would be sweet if your Fighters orbited you in a V-Formation.
|
ProphetGuru
Gallente Evolution Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.05 22:51:00 -
[83]
I'd like to see some AOE stuff added to carriers and dreads. Both of these ships could be so much more involved in regular combat. Portable shield generators hardened by racial ship type would be an amazing carrier function and propmote fleet diversification.
How about dreads that can mount aoe weapons.. not insane dmg of course, just something to contribute. Make it not get the siege bonus if you have to... or whatever. You could be very original with the effects of these aoe's Imagine a nagalfar launching a web bomb from 80km away, slowing the opposing fleet. A Rev launching an ion blast that disrupts all electonic (medslot) items for 15sec... or whatever.
[CLS] Bawldeux IV- start posting all kinds of crap about BoB members, insulting their families,friends,anything that will **** them off. |
Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 01:27:00 -
[84]
I'll be honest, I was reading the OP but when he said he hopes capships get back into mission/compex running, I decided the OP is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
Carriers have their purpose, they are large logistics/fleet ships, they can assign fighters to gangmates to give them some extra wtfpwnage DPS (AF or INTY with 5 fighters is EVIL), you can use them to re outfit in space, with the HP boost they can sit on the lines and soak up some insane damage as well.
Not sure what else you want. A Carrier already has quite a few roles, one of which players gave it: Uber indy.
Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 01:35:00 -
[85]
What I mean by getting back into missions, is someday I would like to see Capital level missions where a group of carriers/dreads is needed. Could be very interesting.
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 03:53:00 -
[86]
Tux, if you stop by again could we please get some info on fighters not MWDing back?
Even just a "yes we know its a problem" would help. As it sits now it seems that CCP is purposly avoiding the problem.
|
Audri Fisher
Caldari The Keep THE R0CK
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 07:51:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
What we vae now are escort carriers. we need fleet carriers. Instead of fighters, they use Bombers. Slower, but much tougher than fighters, they pack a hell of a punch against Battlecruiser sized targets and up. Instead of remote repair bonuses, they need offesive bonuses. teir II would be nice, as motherships are teir III.
|
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 08:34:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Merrick Solipsus Tux, if you stop by again could we please get some info on fighters not MWDing back?
Even just a "yes we know its a problem" would help. As it sits now it seems that CCP is purposly avoiding the problem.
I looked into it, seems a number of drones are behaving this way. I thought it would be an easy fix but apparently its bigger than I thought. There is a bug report about it and lets hope it gets fixed asap. _______________ |
|
Strength Cow
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 09:03:00 -
[89]
So normal drone skills don't boost fighters? That kinda sucks, since some people have 8m sp in drones skills but only a small fraction of them affect fighters.
Think if you spent tons of time training perfect battleship skills, then trained up to T2 hybrids, and once you fit them you learned that the only gun skills that affect them are Gunnery and Large Hybrid Spec. Nothing else. Even torps (to give diversity and help balance their super high damage, and due to the fact that there is already anyther BS sized missile that DOES use all the missile support skills) use most of the missile boosting skills.
Just nerf all fighters, but allow drone skills to boost them, so that a player with decent supporting drone skills will bring his fighters up to as good as they currently are now so that fighters strengths are as diverse as drone users drone skills.
Understand my point?
(BTW, I'm not 100% sure drone support skills don't affect fighters. If this is not the case, please let me know.)
|
Mirasta
Caldari Enigma Enterprises Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 09:18:00 -
[90]
I Want BSG style carriers, Great for anti fighter(small ships) work. Weapons systems that can be assigned to gang members like fighters can but cant be used by the carrier pilot them selfs.
Would mean assignable fire support in the form of direct fire for gangmembers, obviously the only way to use would be on the front lines. Makeing the weapons so they cant be assigend to the same target, they must be spread arround targets by the pilots controling them to avoid them just being used to smash up the primary target.
The pilots controling the gun batterys would beable to see where the other guns from the carriers have been assigend using tags so you can besure not to lock the same target. The only control the carrier has over the weapons is to start and stop them fireing as obviously they will be using cap and getting caught cap less in a fleet fight is never good.
The whole concept is tied togeather by the new gang system, only letting the batterys to be assigned in the same wing and the assigned members displayed with tags.
These would never be good against BSs and BCs as they can deal high damge and cant be massed on a target But will be better against smaller ships like destroyers and crurisers.
Not to mention it would look damn cool to see carriers strafing tagets with crap loads of fire across a battefeild. Well i do.
Of couse, You are now reading my sig. |
|
Merrick Solipsus
Flashman Services Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 11:44:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Merrick Solipsus Tux, if you stop by again could we please get some info on fighters not MWDing back?
Even just a "yes we know its a problem" would help. As it sits now it seems that CCP is purposly avoiding the problem.
I looked into it, seems a number of drones are behaving this way. I thought it would be an easy fix but apparently its bigger than I thought. There is a bug report about it and lets hope it gets fixed asap.
Excellent. Thanks a lot for checking into that Tux.
|
Kra Martel
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 13:26:00 -
[92]
New thingymajigs to put carriers on the front line?
Short range none assignable Fighter Bombers? Gundams?
|
booh
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 13:35:00 -
[93]
Smartbomb like remote repping? :)
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 13:43:00 -
[94]
Originally by: maarud Did you miss the 50% HP increase to capital ships?
It takes a couple dreads/carriers + support to take down a carrier now and not quickly IIRC.
What we need is a relative boost in drone hitpoints as well.
Nebula Rasa Holdings |
Goberth Ludwig
The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 14:16:00 -
[95]
If you wanna fix carriers start by removing the chasing from fighters or at least allow players to turn it off, because its bloody useless.
Immunity to EW isnt necessary but immunity to dampeners need to be given imo. MS would still be better because of the extra ECM and warp scram immunity.
The problem with carriers right now is a blasterthron will dish almost the same damage but is much easier to move around or get to engage. With carriers you have to open up the cyno at the camp, lose the cyno ship, and then hope the enemies will not immediately run off.
- Gob
|
Cadela Fria
Amarr eXin Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.06 15:49:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Cadela Fria on 06/12/2006 15:49:42 .....*sniff*......I...I LOVE YOU CCP!
*huggles Tuxford*
IE. I'm glad you have "The Plan" for carrier
-Knowledge is a priviledge, not a right |
Anonymous Coward
Gallente Panopticon Citadel
|
Posted - 2006.12.07 03:19:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Swirler I think this whole thread is bonkers. Carriers are a specific type of unit. You DO NOT bring carriers to the front of any battle, they sit way in the back and send fighters. They don't have guns to take out other ships, only for defense. To ask for such things from CCP is frankly stupid. They have already provided you with what you are asking for. Battleships and Dreads.
Are you some kind of idiot? That's the entire point of the first post, that carriers sitting in safespots or at a POS assigning fighters is boring as hell. Trying to respond to a proposed role change for a ship by saying, "But that's not its current role!" is utterly nonsensical anyways.
Quote: What you are asking for is a dread. Stop being a cheapo, get a dread and bring it to the front. Leave my carrier and its strategic role alone. Thank you.
You also have no idea what dreads are for, even including the Moros they're pretty much for POS sieging and POS sieging only.
|
MissileRus
|
Posted - 2006.12.07 06:45:00 -
[98]
Edited by: MissileRus on 07/12/2006 06:45:57
Originally by: Anonymous Coward
Are you some kind of idiot?
small innocent and Anonymous QFT
gah got one word right from your name atleast.. lol!
--------------------------- 4. i like pizza |
Farrellus Cameron
Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e
|
Posted - 2006.12.08 00:27:00 -
[99]
How about capital sized NOS? That would be awesome. Give them like a 40-50km range, maybe more.
|
Altai Saker
Omniscient Order The Sani Sabik
|
Posted - 2006.12.08 00:53:00 -
[100]
4 Sensor Damps from a lachesis/celestis/maulus take a carrier out of the fight. Carriers should be immune to EW BUT NOT PROPULSION JAMMING.
http://www.omniscient-order.com/ |
|
Trojanman190
Caldari Entropy Tech. Blood Raiders Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.08 02:12:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Farrellus Cameron How about capital sized NOS? That would be awesome. Give them like a 40-50km range, maybe more.
Are you nuts?!?!?! How would that solve anything??????? People complain about nos enough... and you want BIGGER ones?
|
Bad Touch
|
Posted - 2006.12.08 11:33:00 -
[102]
how about fixing freaking jump queue during carrier jump ?
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.08 11:55:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Trojanman190
Originally by: Farrellus Cameron How about capital sized NOS? That would be awesome. Give them like a 40-50km range, maybe more.
Are you nuts?!?!?! How would that solve anything??????? People complain about nos enough... and you want BIGGER ones?
Nos's range is a fair maximum as it is. We shouldn't have sniper nos setups running around. Then again, capital nos need not be unbalanced, the cycle time on it could just be made really really long, so in fact you have a fair chance of nos'ing the character a lot back. However, since nos and neuts are one of the few ways to take down a mothership as is (and it's still HARD even then), I don't think it should be done.
|
Small Bea
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 22:24:00 -
[104]
Well 2 patches and the Fighter MWD problem didnt get fixed.
However there was another nerf to carier since then. The bug/exploit of permanent cynos has been fixed. I have no problem with that but why was is made so you cant dock after making a cyno?
It is now a suicide mission for the cyno pilot to make the field in a system without a POS with even one hostile.
|
Alistair Wright
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 12:45:00 -
[105]
Originally by: twit brent Carriers are way too vunerable to things like sensor damps. If one celestis locks and damps the carrier the carrier will be of no more use than it was at the POS. My carrier has had a few fights away from the SS or POS but its just not worth it.
thats what sensor boosters are for. its hard to sensor danpen a chimera that much with a faction sensor booster.
|
Alistair Wright
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 12:45:00 -
[106]
Originally by: twit brent Carriers are way too vunerable to things like sensor damps. If one celestis locks and damps the carrier the carrier will be of no more use than it was at the POS. My carrier has had a few fights away from the SS or POS but its just not worth it.
thats what sensor boosters are for. its hard to sensor danpen a chimera that much with a faction sensor booster.
|
Audri Fisher
Caldari The Keep THE R0CK
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 22:33:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Farrellus Cameron How about capital sized NOS? That would be awesome. Give them like a 40-50km range, maybe more.
NO NO NO.
On second thought, yes yes yes. So all those damn Battlship drivers that say that it is completly balanced that you can insta zap a frigates cap can whine on the forums when it happens to there battleship.
|
Wardani
Minmatar The Black Rabbits Fatal Persuasion
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 22:41:00 -
[108]
How about you introduce a capital EW platform good enough for it to be invaluable on the frontline of the battle but fragile enough so you need carriers to support it.
Maybe it could have some AOE EW function, be able to jam a dread in siege or maybe warp scramble a mothership? - Obsidian Enforcer - The Black Rabbits |
Shanzem
DarkStar 1
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 22:54:00 -
[109]
heh.. so the bombers on the TQ database then.. they must be the new "front line toy"
no wounder they looked so sexy!
also what about more rig slots on capitalships? and what about fitting capitals with rigs in space.. as a titan and mothership cannot dock! -------------------------------------------
|
Nake
Primary Targets
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 22:55:00 -
[110]
I know its a bit late to reply solely to the OP, but think about what Carriers do in real life. They sit a hundred or so miles into the sea, deploying fighters to distant lands to do the fighting. If you want to kill a carrier, you bring a fleet into the waters the carrier sits, destroy its suport and defenses and finally the carrier.
So, to be honest, I don't see a large problem with the way carriers work.
|
|
Just Smith
Shinra Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 23:09:00 -
[111]
or you send one sub and kill it
or you fire one long range missile and kill it
real life combat does not have much of a role to play in eve
|
Clavius XIV
Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 23:09:00 -
[112]
It is wrong that a single damping ship can hamper a carrier to the extent that it does.
It is equally wrong that a MS/Titan can escape from any fight, unless the pilot is an idiot or has computer problems, due to the fact that scramblers count as EW + the way officer smartbombs work when used on these vessels.
What is needed is to seperate warp jamming from EW, THEN:
Carrier: Immune to EW Mothership: Immune to EW, +8 warp core strength Titan: Immune to EW, +8 warp core strength
Result: Carrier's aren't neutered by a single dampening ship
There is actualy a chance of holding down a mothership or titan piloted by someone with a clue, with enough teamwork, even in lowsec.
|
ElCoCo
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 23:15:00 -
[113]
Almost a full year of carriers ingame and still the fricking fighters don't mwd back (among other things). Be glad you work for the gaming industry
|
Argyle Jones
Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 00:52:00 -
[114]
Carriers and cap ships in general were maybe never meant to be Solo Ownage-mobiles.
But seriously. It's a massive ship. If there's any consistency in the EVE universe, such massive ships should be deadly opponents to any gang of battleships. From an RP perspective it seems silly that 5 nos domis can take down a dread. I guess it's all about how you use it, but a big load of hitpoints ain't quite enough to make these ships the all out warfare monsters their descriptions claim them to be.
|
Kerushi
Caldari BIG
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 01:10:00 -
[115]
Thanatos = Iteron Mark VI
nuff said
|
Moraguth
Amarr Rangers
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 02:50:00 -
[116]
I usually read all the way before hitting the reply button, but i could only get through 2 and a half pages. Almost every single complaint is about the "remote sensor dampeners". Well... if you're in a fleet with a carrier, have him fit one sensor booster. Then, since you know a good number of the enemy fleet ships will fit sensor dampers, how about you have a good number of people in your fleet fit remote sensor boosters? I haven't tested it yet, but the theory is that they more or less cancel eachother out right? Then, not only will you be able to counter their tactic (making it useless) but if you have a couple extra on your side, then your carrier will be able to lock you even faster and get that remote shield/armor stuff ASAP. If they (remote dampers vs remote boosters) don't cancel themselves out very well, maybe THAT is what should be argued about.
---------
Now that that is done (cause i like to be devil's advocate) please make carriers better. I plan on getting one eventually for use with small gangs in low sec, but if any passing pirate fleet can wtfpwn us, either we need to make our tactics more about helping the carrier, OR carriers will need a big boost if what everyone is saying is true. good game |
Evil Basterd
AFK Mining
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 15:48:00 -
[117]
Before you guys really start complaing about carriers think of what a carrier is in real life. How many times do you see carriers on the front lines in RL? Carriers are ment for support sending out waves of ships to attack targets far off, also repairing, refuling, refitting, rearming others. Next think of is do you ever see a RL carrier out on its own? No they always have a support fleet with them. If a war target finds your carrier you did something wrong. Please think about what a Carrier is before you wine.
|
Alski
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 16:03:00 -
[118]
how the hell did this get to four pages without me finding it first??
i have some reading to do... -
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 16:34:00 -
[119]
Carriers can already provide logistical support on the front line - be it through armour, shield and capacitor transferers or the use of gang support modules.
Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
It's great being Amarr, ain't it? |
Gaia's Wrath
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 16:56:00 -
[120]
Carrier is great for controlling a gate. Large bubble a 3 ship support crew for the Carrier (I like a Scorp, logistics ship (lock time boost on the Carrier) and a heavy tackler). Keep this group in mid range off the gate (about 60 KM) and keep your primary squad on the gate. Setting up a small Carrier squad within your primary fleet gives the Carrier a Very Expanded role in terms of using it to secure a primary point of interest in a system.
I am just waiting for Mini Carrier pilots to clue into this and start using those remote bonuses that apply to Minimatars. The Mini Carrier in this role is just Nasty when use properly.
|
|
Tana Pleiades
Caldari Phoenix Knights
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 17:06:00 -
[121]
Quote: thats what sensor boosters are for. its hard to sensor danpen a chimera that much with a faction sensor booster.
Wow! that means it might take 2, 5 million isk t1 cruisers to take it down!!.....
As for repping people how are you going to do that when you cant lock due to one ew/damp ship using its tricks?
Remove the need to lock to rep ganged ships. put them in a auto assigned list you can use quick icons with (sheild energy etc symbols).
This means that even if the carrier is jammed to hell it can still act out its "fleet role" but still makes carriers impossible/hard to use as solo killers.
|
Iyanah
Minmatar Mining Munitions and Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 17:13:00 -
[122]
Originally by: maarud Did you miss the 50% HP increase to capital ships?
It takes a couple dreads/carriers + support to take down a carrier now and not quickly IIRC.
the problems wit hcarriers are not with the carriers themselves, but with FIGHTERS and drones in general misbehaving and not working in a desirable manner (i.e. no repair drones on your own drones, and not shooting wrecks).
please read the OP again. it points out a few issues, some sound like bugs, others are features gone wrong IMO. ========================================== Iy |
Karash Amerius
Amarr O.E.C
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 17:38:00 -
[123]
I will say one thing...people crying about losing 20m fighters need to man up and suck it up.
Merc Blog |
Drethon
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 21:43:00 -
[124]
Something that would be nice to see is a way to control fleet engagements more like surface fleets. Now this may not be possible in space but if you could form a blockade with smaller ships to keep the capital ships from being attacked, you could have more tactics in fleet battles.
|
Wulinshu
|
Posted - 2007.01.17 22:31:00 -
[125]
Such tactics wouldn't really be feasable unless we get a ship dependant sensor range(ship detection not lock) so you get a fog of war. |
Wendat Huron
Lupus Industries
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 00:29:00 -
[126]
Definatelly not more Nosferatu as a defensive capability but a Neutralizer bonus would be good.
|
mechtech
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 00:37:00 -
[127]
Some of it is whining/opinion, but there are some really good points.
Fighters need to be able to MWD back first of all, they are painfully slow without it.
Also, you should be able to use rep drones on the fighters. They are the size of cruisers, and should be able to be repped.
In PvP, fighters should be a bit more menacing for their price. That can be done by making them smarter or a bit stronger, but in their current state, a pilot can pop in, kill 100s of millions worth of fighters, and leave without you being able to do much of anything (remember, they don't MWD back to the carrier.)
|
Jurushy
SteelVipers YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 08:54:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Tuxford Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.
hi Tux nice to hear that u have a plan fr Capital ships but that also means that u could tell us the changes
plz make a Blog about this and dont let us suggest what would be happen for a long time some fakts would be really great ------
REVENGE IS A DISH BEST SERVED COLD Old Klingon prover |
Virtuozzo
eXceed Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 11:37:00 -
[129]
And here I thought Tux wanted to turn carriers into the next version of industrials or mini freighters :P
Good to see they're still thinking.
I'm still keen on the idea of area effect mechanisms deployed from carriers .. bonuses and effects which extend to the location of the ship in question, range and leadership skill based, which would serve nicely to prolong combat. Nothing like a deployable POS shield or that, and no module based mess with exposure to lag and having to support 30 ships in your gang while you can only target a feasible 5 or so to assist with remote repairs. Carriers are fleet ships. Right now they have a limited role in that perspective. It would be lovely if people didn't train for carriers with the prime motivation of "ohwowienowicanjumpovergatecamp" ...
Virtuozzo
RECRUITMENT TEASERS. Last words of a Caldari general: "Pull the Ravens back! Full retreat! they've got frigates!" |
hotgirl933
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 11:41:00 -
[130]
as always its a question of balance and well making things work my guess is the rush to kali 2 might solve 50% of the issues and leave the other 50% borked.
|
|
Akira Serenity
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 11:53:00 -
[131]
Yes I may be bringing a point up that some have made before but hey ho. Am spending ages training for carrier... the minmatar one to be exact. Checking stats.. the other three seem to have HUGE advantages in terms of tanks or drone output damage. The minmatar one seems to have such a weak bonus it makes you want to cry because of all the effort one puts in to get it. WHY oh WHY is the carrier class SO unbalanced against the minmatar carrier. Please CCP give the min carrier a better bonus. Armour repair boost or resistance or something.
Thanks
|
Apolitos
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 12:36:00 -
[132]
First of all, carriers have also logistic bonus, but due to their "couple centuries" locking time, he ll lose the ally before locked. Solution to this: Carriers are able to lock every corp/ally ship in 3secs, no matter its size (frig, cr, BC, BS, cap) or if is jammed. That will solve the "logistic" part of a carrier.
Some drones "problems" have mentioned above, i believe DEVs are aware of them and they will fix it A.S.A.P and not A.S.A.T.W (As Soon As They Want).
Also you should be able to "release" your drones (abandon, not able to control etc them ) so you ll be able to launch a new set near you. The "Abandoned" drones stops imediatly every action they do and stay there at 0 velocity. Since the launch new set has advantages, it has also disadvantage, cause anything it could kill the "released" drones and cost you, but they not cost you way to much if a drone doesnt MWD Back when you tell it to.
And finally i wanna see some shortcuts for drones, example: Ctrl +E All active drones engages selected target, Ctrl +D All drones return to Drone bay etc Also some otpions for launching drones from a specific drone group, example: Ctrl + L, launches max drones from "Logistic" drone group, CTRl + N, launches max drones from "Medium" drone group, same for mining, heavy, fighters etc drones.
|
UGWidowmaker
Caldari Setenta Corp Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 13:02:00 -
[133]
bahhh just make a nosferatu carrier module... and i bet you will see the carrier used 200% more in frontline combat! or like 100% to energy wamp modules. in range and strenght should have bonus at 50% but then again wouldent that make it to powerfull ? I will make your wife/mann a widow. |
Caesium
Amarr Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 13:48:00 -
[134]
I can see where you're coming from on the release drones suggestion but I think that this would be exploited to the extreme. (imagine what launching and releasing 20,000 vespas would do to a node)
Fighters need a pair of tick box options :
Seek and Destroy (FoF) Do not Pursue Through Warp
I'd also want to see Fighter class EW Drones.
Caesium Lyrus Associates |
Jan Riksma
Appetite 4 Destruction
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 14:07:00 -
[135]
Couple solutions to make a carrier a little more atractive on the frontline would be:
As mentioned before cap nos or neut, more hitpoints on fighter and make them imumme to ewar.
Make fighters cheaper by 50% or even 75% i mean less minerals to produce them.
Decrease them in size or make drone bay bigger so you can take much more replacement fighter drones with you. I don't mind loosing them but now its just: he lets take out his fighters and he is dead meat.
Thats what i can think of.
Cheers,
Jan
|
ElCoCo
KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 15:05:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Karash Amerius I will say one thing...people crying about losing 20m fighters need to man up and suck it up.
Man up and suck it up?
|
Kerushi
Caldari BIG
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 15:35:00 -
[137]
2 heavy energy neutralizers - 3 drone control units 2 warp scramblers - 1 webber - 2 sensor boosters 1 cap armor repair - 3 hardners - 2 cpr
locking speed isn`t that bad anything that comes into close range goes dead on cap pritty fast anything that comes really close is dead for sure
works against the lone/small gangs like when ratting or station camp get rid of the ew ship to be able to jump to a alt
|
Iratus Caelestis
KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 17:17:00 -
[138]
I think what we need is 5000MN Microwarp Drives.
I'm thinking a NanoThana going 4k a second with a 50k nos and warping faster than a cruiser.
Would rock.
Imagine being bumped by that :)
|
Orree
Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 17:44:00 -
[139]
Edited by: Orree on 18/01/2007 17:42:35 Well, the people I fly with have been agressively using carriers "on the front lines" ever since they were released. ...not just sitting in POS and assigning fighters. In a few weeks, I'll have my carrier and will be doing the same.
The biggest problem I see with carriers/fighters is that pilots need to be able to decide whether and/or when their fighters will pursue a target that warps off. A choice between a etting of "never pursue" or "always pursue" would be cool.
Yes, carriers can always call back their fighters, but in the heat of a battle and given the sort of buggy nature of drones and fighters in general, doing so can be problematic at best...and takes time...time where the fighters are off doing something you'ld prefer them not to be doing, rather than engaging the targets in local space.
The OP almost seems to be complaining about the carriers ability to fill the role of cap-drainer and shield/armor repairer. I don't get that. That's a good thing...very good thing, if you're using your carriers properly.
|
Pesadel0
Vagabundos
|
Posted - 2007.01.18 18:59:00 -
[140]
I would love them to fix the minmatar one that is for sure.
|
|
Elmo Zumwalt
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 05:46:00 -
[141]
This makes me a sad panda. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |