| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Bein Glorious
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
   |
Posted - 2007.04.20 17:18:00 -
[91]
It is probably difficult to find the right spot where everyone is satisfied that the ship is both vulnerable enough to be balanced but useful enough to be worth the money. But either way, the main point is that there needs to be some kind of adjustment to the traits of supercapitals to balance them in the scope of the game. Philosophy on what capital ships should and should not be might be better left to another thread, but I think enough has been said about the problems of EWAR immunity, as evidenced by the issue of not being able to use interdictor spheres in lowsec space, among other things. |
iqplayer
Caldari
Dragon's Rage
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2007.04.20 21:57:00 -
[92]
"Invulnerable"
That sums up entirely what's wrong with Supercapitals.
There should be nothing in Eve that is invulnerable. Give it a + WCS strength, it already has a high sensor strength, and a bonus to targeting range to counter sensor damps - but remove 'invulnerable'.
You cannot balance something which is infinite.
|
prathe
Minmatar
Omega Enterprises
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.04.23 18:40:00 -
[93]
a sensible and balanced list
TBH ccp needs to get some serious drone <3 going on all drone ships need it really drone organization and deployment are still messy
for many pilots drones can be a main weapon and there are too many bugs in the way the operate and maneuver
c'mon tux give a drone a hug
/signed
|
gordon cain
Minmatar
x13
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 18:09:00 -
[94]
Edited by: gordon cain on 24/04/2007 18:05:46
1) Mothership and titans are close to unstoppable. And I am talking low-sec here. You can be lucky to bump one long enough to kill him. But still you should either be able to deploy dictor bubbles or let low-sec be a " NO GO" for super capitals.
2) Why on earth should a ship be immmune to something else in eve. I dont care if it cost 150 billion or 2 billion. Thats the good thing about eve. You loose stuff if you dont know what you are doing, and if you dont bring your friends you are screwed.
Some good points in this thread. The best I think is some built in warp-core bonus affected by skills. That would even things out.
|
Sir Bart
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 19:31:00 -
[95]
 Originally by: Aeon Yakati
[*]5. Nerf bumping
Frigates and sub-capital ships in general should have a minimal effect on keeping a 40 billion worth supercapital in place. Even if you get a gang of 30 non-capitals together and spend the night planning the assassination, ....
I'm with you on most points except for this one. Motherships are already nearly impossible to kill. They don't need to be any more invulnerable than they are. Same goes for titans. Currently, the only way to kill a mothership or titan involves a mixture of nos (to prevent jumping), bubbles / bumping to prevent warp, and finally... a plan to not get killed by the super capital while you're doing it. The other way is to find exploits to flag a pilot while they log off or drop a lag bomb of 200 people to load onto grid so that they may be too lagged out to initiate jump.
-Bart
|
Sir Bart
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.04.24 19:36:00 -
[96]
Something that wasn't suggested that I think carriers / motherships need is a warp disruption fighter... without that, you can attack a carrier with just 5-6 battleships and have nothing to worry about.
-Bart
|
Chronus26
Gallente
Team Laser Explosion
|
Posted - 2007.04.25 02:13:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Sir Bart
Originally by: Aeon Yakati
[*]5. Nerf bumping
Frigates and sub-capital ships in general should have a minimal effect on keeping a 40 billion worth supercapital in place. Even if you get a gang of 30 non-capitals together and spend the night planning the assassination, ....
I'm with you on most points except for this one. Motherships are already nearly impossible to kill. They don't need to be any more invulnerable than they are. Same goesfor titans. Currently, the only way to kill a mothership or titan involves a mixture of nos (to prevent jumping), bubbles / bumping to prevent warp, and finally... a plan to not get killed by the super capital while you're doing it. The other way is to find exploits to flag a pilot while they log off or drop a lag bomb of 200 people to load onto grid so that they may be too lagged out to initiate jump.
-Bart
Killing a Mothership should be possible under 'normal' game circumstances; I think everyone agrees here. However, the disagreements begin to surface when you try to decide how difficult this should be.
Peronally, I believe that the destruction of a Mothership should be something that takes both planning and skill in large measures. It should be a feat that commands respect. It should be achivable by only those groups skilled enough to come up with a plan to counter any actions the MS pilot may take to escape, and who have the dicipline to carry out this plan without error.
I know a lot of people are in favor of giving MS a Blockade Runner-like '+ to warp strength' bonus of a high magnitude. I feel this subtracts a lot from the tactical aspect of MS killing, as it would take nothing more than your average blob to destroy a MS.
In my opinion, the only things that needs to change in regards to locking down MS are:
:- They should not be able to use the Jump-drive to escape from Mobile Warp Disruptors or Interdiction Spheres. This gives people the tools to lock them down; however using them to achive a result is where that planning and skill comes into play.
:- As Aeon Yakati says: 'Frigates and sub-capital ships in general should have a minimal effect on keeping a 40 billion worth supercapital in place.' - if nothing else, its a total immersion-breaker. I think the entire game physics systems needs a little reworking at this stage, not just on this issue.
-----
|
xttz
|
Posted - 2007.04.25 13:24:00 -
[98]
Edited by: xttz on 25/04/2007 13:20:11
Originally by: Aeon Yakati
On a more serious note, the risk vs reward sheet needs balancing. Frigates and sub-capital ships in general should have a minimal effect on keeping a 40 billion worth supercapital in place. Even if you get a gang of 30 non-capitals together and spend the night planning the assassination, the efforts still come nowhere close to the work, time and ISK spent in fitting, maintaining and building a supercapital over a 3+ month period. The very least that one should do to hold a supercapital, is bring an almost equal amount of assets into the fight. I.e. a decent sized capital fleet (10+) with support minimum. And cook up a masterplan. Only then a supercapital kill would seem fair and square if you think about it.
Bumping and collisions in general needs alot of tweaking to make the process less silly. Anyone who has attempted to get a freighter out of a busy station knows it's a daunting task. Catching an Ibis will cause you to lose momentum and stop dead. Undocking onto a cargo can or shuttle wreck will bounce the freighter away at high speed without moving an inch itself. I've had my dreadnought undock onto a corpse which got stuck inside the ships bounding box, and the only way to move again was to scoop or blow up the body.
Floating cadavers and worthless bits of metal should have no effect on powered, multi-billion ton machines.
|
iqplayer
Caldari
Dragon's Rage
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2007.04.25 14:48:00 -
[99]
Originally by: xttz
Edited by: xttz on 25/04/2007 13:20:11
Originally by: Aeon Yakati
On a more serious note, the risk vs reward sheet needs balancing. Frigates and sub-capital ships in general should have a minimal effect on keeping a 40 billion worth supercapital in place. Even if you get a gang of 30 non-capitals together and spend the night planning the assassination, the efforts still come nowhere close to the work, time and ISK spent in fitting, maintaining and building a supercapital over a 3+ month period. The very least that one should do to hold a supercapital, is bring an almost equal amount of assets into the fight. I.e. a decent sized capital fleet (10+) with support minimum. And cook up a masterplan. Only then a supercapital kill would seem fair and square if you think about it.
Bumping and collisions in general needs alot of tweaking to make the process less silly. Anyone who has attempted to get a freighter out of a busy station knows it's a daunting task. Catching an Ibis will cause you to lose momentum and stop dead. Undocking onto a cargo can or shuttle wreck will bounce the freighter away at high speed without moving an inch itself. I've had my dreadnought undock onto a corpse which got stuck inside the ships bounding box, and the only way to move again was to scoop or blow up the body.
Floating cadavers and worthless bits of metal should have no effect on powered, multi-billion ton machines.
The sad part is, I very much agree that bumping and collisions need fixing - but nerfing bumping at the moment would make holding down MS even worse. Really, the whole system needs to be rethought.
|
Valea
Wrath Of Khaine
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.23 21:29:00 -
[100]
Very very Signed. Managing a carrier's drone bay is pretty absurd when you have about 25 different kinds of drones. My greatest problem with the EVE interface in general is the lack of subtabs, this applies to chat windows, cargo bays, hangers, and drone bays. Everything would be so much smoother if I could have my 4 stacks of heavy drones under one tab, then each stack gets their own tab within that. Or if I could have a chat tab and in intel tab, then different channels within these. Managing a large hanger or drone bay is total hell, and least with hangers you can do cans, but is that really necessary? CCP, please boost tabs!
|
Barthezz
Paradox v2.0
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.08.24 08:25:00 -
[101]
Normally I'd call necro, but alot on this list still seems very accurate (and required). And it seems that issue 2 (drone folders not saving) has returned with a vengeance.
|
Una D
Ex Coelis
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.24 15:46:00 -
[102]
I would agree. Only part I don't agree on is 4h (why would a MoM have to be able to fire of 4 flights of carriers I have no idea).
And please please (if nothing else) change how much space active drones take up on the overview. I'm starting to think about widescreen 22" turned 90¦ for carrier flying 
|
Barthezz
Paradox v2.0
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.08.29 08:00:00 -
[103]
Back to the first page, please give us carrier/mom pilots the option to tell our fighters NOT to warp after our targets. Yesterday my fighters went awol again for the majority of the fight.
|
Nikol Kidman
Sadistic Influence
|
Posted - 2007.08.29 12:55:00 -
[104]
Edited by: Nikol Kidman on 29/08/2007 13:05:24
First of all:
Bigger ships should lock faster, because they got more place for electronics. Carriers have quite good lock range until someone damp you, and time to lock something even without damps is really really bad.
In real life huge ships like real carriers, crusiers have far better radar and can lock a target (even small) from bigger distance faster than planes onboard.
Carriers should have lock range around 200km and speed around 500-600mm (with maxed skillz). Mothership a bit more maybe 250km and 700mm. And both up to 10 or even more target (maybe new skill).
|
Finderup Soren
Caldari
The Ankou
The Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:47:00 -
[105]
Such a nice job!!! A big "Thank You" for this!
Gotta Bump this so that others can agree1!!!
Thanks,
Soren
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar
Res Publica
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 23:19:00 -
[106]
/necro signed
SAVE carrier and Moms |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |