Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 30 .. 33 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Neera Saldana
Tritanium Express
6
|
Posted - 2016.04.25 20:56:57 -
[571] - Quote
Flying a carrier feels.. off. You cant see fighter HP without mouseover. Controlling them with module cycles is weird when you have 3+ of them out and the cycles keep being off from each other. The switching between fighter can ship control isnt obvious enough, there needs to be some big text telling you youre not controlling you ship anymore. Lost fighters dont reload automatically when recalled. Having the same icon different kinds of fighters is weird, make something new for the ewar ones or something. Put the role icon as well as the type icon on fighters in fighter bay. Allow fighters to be moved out of bay in space, if you fill tubes and fighter bay you cant switch fighters anymore! |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2016.04.25 21:13:37 -
[572] - Quote
Neera Saldana wrote:Allow fighters to be moved out of bay in space, if you fill tubes and fighter bay you cant switch fighters anymore! You can launch a squadron, abandon them, load another, and scoop the abandoned squadron back to the bay.
I'm honestly quite surprised they didn't make squadrons in the tubes still take space in the bay. It would really simplify things if the carrier could hold exactly a certain amount of fighters instead of a certain amount plus up to 5 squadrons. |
Sepheir Sepheron
The Congregation No Handlebars.
48
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 00:52:31 -
[573] - Quote
Chimera eats **** once again. That severely gimped fighter Bay is just hilariously bad. But don't worry it has lock range lololol |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2294
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 01:27:03 -
[574] - Quote
lol i'm not the only one who sees the issue with the chimeras bay \o/
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
926
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 03:41:16 -
[575] - Quote
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Neera Saldana wrote:Allow fighters to be moved out of bay in space, if you fill tubes and fighter bay you cant switch fighters anymore! You can launch a squadron, abandon them, load another, and scoop the abandoned squadron back to the bay. I'm honestly quite surprised they didn't make squadrons in the tubes still take space in the bay. It would really simplify things if the carrier could hold exactly a certain amount of fighters instead of a certain amount plus up to 5 squadrons. It's all about micromanagement - Devs Want the confusion and messing about due to really quite silly un-intuitive over sized fighter interfaces. Having to leave a certain amount of your fighter bay empty makes no sense in game play but an enormous amount of sense when it comes to "micromanaging" (taking a lot longer to do anything with) your fighters. If it is streamlined and player friendly, Devs have not succeeded in their primary goal of making player involvement and micromanagement "a thing" for carriers and supers.
What i find really annoying (on a 32" monitor) is losing nearly 1/4 of my screen to the fighter bay and Hud. Having to have your fighter bay open as well as the fighter control hud, is not good design as far as screen space goes. But then this is CCP Devs we are talking about here - Everything has to be bigger (according to the Citadel team at fanfest) and it seems this doesn't stop at structures - It also includes how much space on your monitor is taken up with interface windows.
I often wonder if designing things for eve in a way to make it as difficult as possible for players, leaves Devs feeling good about their achievements. I'm sure designing things to be more difficult and less effective must bother at least some of the more professional developers that work for CCP.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
113
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 07:51:32 -
[576] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:What i find really annoying (on a 32" monitor) is losing nearly 1/4 of my screen to the fighter bay and Hud. Having to have your fighter bay open as well as the fighter control hud, is not good design as far as screen space goes. The physical size of your monitor isn't really relevant. If you want to talk about screen space, it's the resolution that matters.
Why do you have to have your fighter bay open? You can do pretty much anything you need with the right click menu of the fighter/tube icons on the main fighter HUD. The only exception I can think of is merging stacks of fighters after returning incomplete squadrons. |
Thercon Jair
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
15
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 09:25:57 -
[577] - Quote
Well, guess we'll get FAXes as is. No discussion or feedback going on about them, eh? (I hear there's some only on reddit, but I am unable to locate said threads.Focus group only?)
Also: is the Capital Ancillary Shield Booster final? Because if it is, it's going to be the "de facto" standard for FAXes. It boosts nearly twice as much as the T2 Capital Shield Booster, uses less cap than the T2 when not used with charges, and even uses considerably less fitting resources. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2296
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 09:29:06 -
[578] - Quote
Thercon Jair wrote:Well, guess we'll get FAXes as is. No discussion or feedback going on about them, eh? (I hear there's some only on reddit, but I am unable to locate said threads.Focus group only?)
Also: is the Capital Ancillary Shield Booster final? Because if it is, it's going to be the "de facto" standard for FAXes. It boosts nearly twice as much as the T2 Capital Shield Booster, uses less cap than the T2 when not used with charges, and even uses considerably less fitting resources.
Being The optimist I am I think think ccp has pre-nerfed fax and carriers to make sure they are not op and will tweak numbers after getting more data.
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Zockhandra
Jewish Zeppelin Mafia
30
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 13:37:11 -
[579] - Quote
Thats great and all.....How do the fighter changes effect the current blueprints? will material costs change, will they produce several fighters per run instead of one?
Theres been no information on that front, frankly its quite concerning especially considering the large isk investment needed for ships of this size...
On a more related note, those fighters are waaaaay too powerful now..
Light and heavy fighters are capable of one hitting a fairly tanky stealth bomber, which was equipped with high-grade halos and an afterburner....That's just not fair at all. It almost feels like youve tried interbreeding gheckos and fighters.....and youve somehow made something that isnt better....Its disgustingly effective.
Carriers now have the potential to slaughter dozens of ships without much concern for fighters (thanks to the insanely small fighter size and stupid big bays) without worrying too much about fighter squads....I thought the theme of EVE Online was that bigger Does NOT necessarily mean better..
Shield are red, Armor is too, i slapped my heavy neut, all over you.
Fingers crossed, broken shattered and burned,
across from the bubble and into your hull.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2305
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 13:41:41 -
[580] - Quote
Zockhandra wrote:Thats great and all.....How do the fighter changes effect the current blueprints? will material costs change, will they produce several fighters per run instead of one?
Theres been no information on that front, frankly its quite concerning especially considering the large isk investment needed for ships of this size...
one fighter per run
about 2hrs for a light attack fighter
less mats to build one fighter but one flight will cost more than one fighter does now
all this info is on sisi
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
Zockhandra
Jewish Zeppelin Mafia
30
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 13:43:58 -
[581] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Zockhandra wrote:Thats great and all.....How do the fighter changes effect the current blueprints? will material costs change, will they produce several fighters per run instead of one?
Theres been no information on that front, frankly its quite concerning especially considering the large isk investment needed for ships of this size... one fighter per run about 2hrs for a light attack fighter less mats to build one fighter but one flight will cost more than one fighter does now all this info is on sisi
So we lose the materials that weve put into fighters allready? Sounds like a completely fair change
Shield are red, Armor is too, i slapped my heavy neut, all over you.
Fingers crossed, broken shattered and burned,
across from the bubble and into your hull.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2305
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 13:53:46 -
[582] - Quote
Zockhandra wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Zockhandra wrote:Thats great and all.....How do the fighter changes effect the current blueprints? will material costs change, will they produce several fighters per run instead of one?
Theres been no information on that front, frankly its quite concerning especially considering the large isk investment needed for ships of this size... one fighter per run about 2hrs for a light attack fighter less mats to build one fighter but one flight will cost more than one fighter does now all this info is on sisi So we lose the materials that weve put into fighters allready? Sounds like a completely fair change
if you are building some now i would cancel it
all the ones already built will be split into an amount that reflects their build cost
iirc light fighters turn into 4
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen. LowSechnaya Sholupen
117
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 13:55:22 -
[583] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Zockhandra wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Zockhandra wrote:Thats great and all.....How do the fighter changes effect the current blueprints? will material costs change, will they produce several fighters per run instead of one?
Theres been no information on that front, frankly its quite concerning especially considering the large isk investment needed for ships of this size... one fighter per run about 2hrs for a light attack fighter less mats to build one fighter but one flight will cost more than one fighter does now all this info is on sisi So we lose the materials that weve put into fighters allready? Sounds like a completely fair change if you are building some now i would cancel it all the ones already built will be split into an amount that reflects their build cost iirc light fighters turn into 4 I distinctly remember something saying all existing fighters and production jobs would be converted. Did that change?
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2312
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 21:34:57 -
[584] - Quote
no clue i just handn't seen that
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Zenafar
6
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 21:55:30 -
[585] - Quote
Fighters & Drones
Existing Fighters are being multiplied by 6 (Their size & construction costs are reducing by a similar amount). Existing Fighter-Bombers are being multiplied by 4 (Their size & construction costs are reducing by a similar amount). Fighters will be moved into the new Fighter Bays of their respective ships. Fighter manufacturing jobs will have their outputs multiplied appropriately. |
Amber Solaire
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
49
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 23:16:57 -
[586] - Quote
Hm, well done
What happens to any triage modules left over after this patch?
Also, what about the BPOs owned?
Triage modules won`t be any use to anyone after the patch, but I have not seen anything about compensation...
(Is this an intentional omission by CCP? ) |
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
927
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 23:28:45 -
[587] - Quote
Amber Solaire wrote:Hm, well done What happens to any triage modules left over after this patch? Also, what about the BPOs owned? Triage modules won`t be any use to anyone after the patch, but I have not seen anything about compensation... (Is this an intentional omission by CCP? ) Fax's use triage modules (or are at least pretty useless without them)
BPO's will be modified to show the new triage attributes but aside from that nothing changes.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2314
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 23:31:09 -
[588] - Quote
point still stands triage will be useless after this patch :p
no no after i got pyfa running they don't seem to bad just have a useless high for some reason
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
927
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 00:19:09 -
[589] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:point still stands triage will be useless after this patch :p
no no after i got pyfa running they don't seem to bad just have a useless high for some reason Could I ask what fitting you came up with?
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2315
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 01:38:56 -
[590] - Quote
nothing cheap looking back at ir >.>
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Affirmative.
437
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 04:08:46 -
[591] - Quote
From the Patch Notes "All drones in a Carrier's drone bay will be moved to the owner's home station." Does this mean that if my Med Clone is currently set to a different station to the one that Carrier is currently Docked in, the drones will be magic'd to the other station? Instead of station that the carrier is currently docked in? |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2317
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 04:28:00 -
[592] - Quote
Yep
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen. LowSechnaya Sholupen
117
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 08:34:33 -
[593] - Quote
Caldari 5 wrote:From the Patch Notes "All drones in a Carrier's drone bay will be moved to the owner's home station." Does this mean that if my Med Clone is currently set to a different station to the one that Carrier is currently Docked in, the drones will be magic'd to the other station? Instead of station that the carrier is currently docked in? Yes indeed, so if you want the drones there, I recommend you do one of 3 things: 1. Set that as your home. 2. Take the drones out yourself. 3. Temporarily put the carrier in a contract so it's considered unowned and the drones get stuffed in the cargo. |
Ron Seer
Phantom Squad The Blood Covenant
2
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 17:39:07 -
[594] - Quote
So one of the main reasons for the carrier change was to nerf the slowcat fleet and remote repping carriers and turn a capital fleet into being no more invulnerble than what a fax can tank.
I totally get the nerf to carrier capital repping and range but you actually nerfed it so much now that a large t1 remote shield booster is better (in all stats) than a capital module.
large = 8 sec cycle 492 gj cost and 520 shield boost
capital 16 sec cycle 2400 gj cost and 960 shield boost
or converted its 984 gj vs 2400 gj every 16 sec and
1040 vs 960 shield boost.
The capital module does get a little enstra range thougth.
but I "think" the capital module should have been 8 sec cycle also.
(also triage module for fax gives 75% reduction in cycle, should be 50% then).
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
928
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 21:00:03 -
[595] - Quote
Ron Seer wrote:So one of the main reasons for the carrier change was to nerf the slowcat fleet and remote repping carriers and turn a capital fleet into being no more invulnerble than what a fax can tank.
I totally get the nerf to carrier capital repping and range but you actually nerfed it so much now that a large t1 remote shield booster is better (in all stats) than a capital module.
large = 8 sec cycle 492 gj cost and 520 shield boost
capital 16 sec cycle 2400 gj cost and 960 shield boost
or converted its 984 gj vs 2400 gj every 16 sec and
1040 vs 960 shield boost.
The capital module does get a little enstra range thougth.
but I "think" the capital module should have been 8 sec cycle also.
(also triage module for fax gives 75% reduction in cycle, should be 50% then).
If they changed it, you would have enough cap for a full triage cycle (with capital cap boosters).. That is not what they want. Faxes are designed to sit in a blob and be disposable.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2334
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 22:34:38 -
[596] - Quote
Ron Seer wrote:So one of the main reasons for the carrier change was to nerf the slowcat fleet and remote repping carriers and turn a capital fleet into being no more invulnerble than what a fax can tank.
I totally get the nerf to carrier capital repping and range but you actually nerfed it so much now that a large t1 remote shield booster is better (in all stats) than a capital module.
large = 8 sec cycle 492 gj cost and 520 shield boost
capital 16 sec cycle 2400 gj cost and 960 shield boost
or converted its 984 gj vs 2400 gj every 16 sec and
1040 vs 960 shield boost.
The capital module does get a little enstra range thougth.
but I "think" the capital module should have been 8 sec cycle also.
(also triage module for fax gives 75% reduction in cycle, should be 50% then).
they did not want any repping outside triage think of them as logi dreads now
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Ele Rebellion
Yugoimport SDPR
64
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 00:26:24 -
[597] - Quote
So. without sentries. how do carriers hit a control tower? |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2336
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 00:36:06 -
[598] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote:So. without sentries. how do carriers hit a control tower?
they don't carriers are anti sub cap
not anti structure or anti capital
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Best Kept Frozen. LowSechnaya Sholupen
119
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 00:36:11 -
[599] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote:So. without sentries. how do carriers hit a control tower? Normal carriers fit a bunch of tracking links and have the fighters manually orbit just outside the force field. Supers use long range heavy fighters. |
Starrakatt
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps FETID
459
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 00:46:10 -
[600] - Quote
And it is a temporary thing anyway, Towers (and force fields) are going to be phased out within a year...
Sneaky bastard.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 30 .. 33 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |