|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3813
   |
Posted - 2017.02.24 13:40:01 -
[1] - Quote
Sieve Boy wrote:Carriers are already a pathetic joke in wormhole space already, they get used to roll holes and that is it. The sleepers tear the fighters apart just fine and any pvp carrier gets defanged because it's hilariously easy.
Not sure what game you're playing or stats you are watching Larrikan, cause I make fighters in hi sec and they sell pretty quickly, people lose them so much. Except for support fighters. It's sirens or forget it.
Instead of making something already in a bad place worse, how about you address the problem of DSTs full of booster 3200 parked next to cap injector faxes in WH space? Something that requires a stupid number of Bhaalghorns to neut out.
If they are selling that well it means they are getting used that well...
But yeah they are a joke and it has nothing to do with killing them in pvp they are stupid easy to jam and yeah I wish I knew why they made support fighters so ****
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3813
|
Posted - 2017.02.24 13:41:41 -
[2] - Quote
Destriouth Hollow wrote:This makes me laugh ^^
I've done some carrier ratting and the following statement is true:
If you are carrier pveing and your fighters target dies, you have less then 5 seconds. if you dont attk the next target in these 5 seconds the first fighter is gone.
Also webbing npcs make your fighters die fairly quickly already.
Does that REALLY need a nerf? just lol ^^
Fighter squads are really expensive. Most ppl i know dont even use t2 fighters for pve because they are really risky to use.
Just lol....
If you want battleships to hit fighters, at least seriously buff their hp pls...
lol
As pve balance issue really isn't a concern when up against how it's balanced pvp and it was kinda dumb that they were harder to hit than heavies
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3813
|
Posted - 2017.02.24 13:57:51 -
[3] - Quote
Juvir wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Destriouth Hollow wrote:This makes me laugh ^^
I've done some carrier ratting and the following statement is true:
If you are carrier pveing and your fighters target dies, you have less then 5 seconds. if you dont attk the next target in these 5 seconds the first fighter is gone.
Also webbing npcs make your fighters die fairly quickly already.
Does that REALLY need a nerf? just lol ^^
Fighter squads are really expensive. Most ppl i know dont even use t2 fighters for pve because they are really risky to use.
Just lol....
If you want battleships to hit fighters, at least seriously buff their hp pls...
lol As pve balance issue really isn't a concern when up against how it's balanced pvp and it was kinda dumb that they were harder to hit than heavies They're also piloted by people, rather than being computer controlled. Being harder to hit makes more sense in that aspect. Which is why I personally have always questioned how they sit still and do NOTHING without a command, since they are supposed to be piloted by a sentient being. Are people dumber than computers in Eve? While I don't think they need an auto aggress feature like drones have (I honestly LIKE the active management required while ratting in a carrier, vs afk VNI ratting) why don't they orbit a nearby celestial? Or auto return? Or orbit themselves in a small pattern? These are people, why in the world would they sit absolutely still for that long, seeing how much fire they are under?
Don't start thinking of lore or realism when it comes to balance you'll hurt yourself.
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3813
|
Posted - 2017.02.24 13:58:39 -
[4] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Pesadel0 wrote:So basically you nerf the figthers in sig and in agroo but dont give even a bit of HP or something? That's a big issue. Does any one know, do the the Drone Durability Enhancer rigs affect fighters? I know the description says so but thats from back before the fighter changes. If it does I might have a use for some of those "uselss" capital BPCs I've aqquired over the years 
It does
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3814
|
Posted - 2017.02.24 14:41:18 -
[5] - Quote
Sieve Boy wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Sieve Boy wrote:Carriers are already a pathetic joke in wormhole space already, they get used to roll holes and that is it. The sleepers tear the fighters apart just fine and any pvp carrier gets defanged because it's hilariously easy.
Not sure what game you're playing or stats you are watching Larrikan, cause I make fighters in hi sec and they sell pretty quickly, people lose them so much. Except for support fighters. It's sirens or forget it.
Instead of making something already in a bad place worse, how about you address the problem of DSTs full of booster 3200 parked next to cap injector faxes in WH space? Something that requires a stupid number of Bhaalghorns to neut out. If they are selling that well it means they are getting used that well... But yeah they are a joke and it has nothing to do with killing them in pvp they are stupid easy to jam and yeah I wish I knew why they made support fighters so **** They sell quite well because they die. A lot.
Can't die if they are not being used and they won't sell if ppl don't see value in buying them
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3831
|
Posted - 2017.02.25 03:24:53 -
[6] - Quote
Krieg Austern wrote:[
The problem with that is, if carrier blobs are OP, you shouldn't just nerf the hell out of the ship class to the point where they are pointless to solo pilots. Address carrier fleets specifically, rather than just penalising everyone who flies a carrier.
well.... no a capital ship should not be viable to a solo pilot. they are not solo ships capitals should always require a fleet
only thing i'm worried about with this is how the chimera and archon already have meh to **** poor dps and so little fighter bay this is going to push things even more into just using nid/thanny
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3834
|
Posted - 2017.02.25 16:19:59 -
[7] - Quote
Dip PotatoChip wrote:Don't touch fighters please :( the new Chimera model is so cool
it's ****
the took a powerful sturdy looking ship and made it look fragile and awkward
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3842
|
Posted - 2017.02.26 03:14:00 -
[8] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Fifth Blade wrote:Honestly it's the extremes which are the problem.
They need to be significantly less oppressive to mwd cruisers (bc/bs are obviously in a worse spot still), and more oppressive to 100mn ab cruisers. Otherwise we'll be flying them until the end of time, as the only viable option. Very boring. No diversity at all.
an example depending on which prop mod i use on my cruiser:
I can choose to either be 1-2 shot (mwd) or
I can choose to infinitely tank 3 squadrons (actually more) with no problem at all.
They should not counter, nor be countered so absolutely. I think this presents a decent argument in favor of maybe adjusting the sig bloom on the MWD to account for the sig changes here, but it really does need some testing to back it up.
im not sure altering the bloom on all mwds just to account for carriers is a good idea.
besides that extreme is just wrong you can shut off your mwd when you see fighters headed in your direction and tank them relatively well with no prop mod (particularly with logi) only time this is a problem is if you are all anchored on one guy in one spot and the entire fleet has to shut off their mod but that avoidable with better fleet tactics. When it comes to ABs it's sort of true but if the carrier has a proper support fleet with webs and paints its not all that bad.
only issue with fighters is HAW are better in most med sized fleets do to the carriers extra cost over dreads and the fighters vulnerability to ECM.(this is also true for small gangs but that not an area caps need to be balanced around) in large fleets they have a role since the number of fighters makes ECM less practical but by that time you may as well be using supers.
another issue with fighters is since carriers have such a small bay and you can not mix fighter squads it means carriers are generally damage locked. and to a large extent role locked. if you decide to bring Kin and EM fighters you will wind up in situations where you still have fighters in the hold but are unable to field a full 3 squads of fighters drastically hampering your dps. Chimeras and Archons are also in a bad place. chimeras melt under even the smallest amount of neut pressure and have a minuscule fighter bay anchons get anemic dps if they want any tank at all and again that fighter bay.
that said just upping the fighter bay is not that good of an option either considering the monster amount of resources CCP has made fighters. the T2 ones will cost you more than the carrier itself if you bring a full load. Really i think carriers would be in a good place if the cost of fighters was cut by ~25% at least this way carriers and dreads would cost about the same to field combine this with a 2x to fighter sensor strength and over all i think they will be a more viable choice.
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3872
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 12:36:13 -
[9] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:So much tears from the PVE 0.0 Carebears.
I ratted about 40 hours in a niddy. My drones had around 5-6 times the aggro and i managed to lose only 1 fighter.
If this is 100% for some guys or way to much. No it isn-Št stop crying. Carrier ratting was/is way to safe for the ticks.
This is a start.
+1
i would gladly see ratting carriers made nonviable if it some how meant they could have a decent place in pvp q.q
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3881
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 00:21:51 -
[10] - Quote
Whippy Whip wrote:maybe fighters should get proper t1 and t2 resists to compensate
otherwise their effectiveness in pvp will be crap if they are getting vollied off the field with ease
they are already crap
if there are few enough that they are getting shot any competent FC is just jamming them
BLOPS Hauler
|
|
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3881
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 05:13:41 -
[11] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Kagi Anzomi wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:I'm pretty sure you can take it as confirmed if that's what the stats in the game say... despite the opinions of some CCP don't generally do things on accident.. So the Networked Sensor Array not having stacking penalties with sensor boosters wasn't an accident? What about Fighter Support Units giving a penalty to fighter shield regen instead of a bonus? Lowsec sentry guns not shooting fighters if the carrier is out of range? Fighters warping after the carrier while tackled? Fighters disappearing from space while tackled if the carrier logs off? Regular neuts getting the sig radius reduction of capital neuts? Blueprints inventing the T2 version of a different item? Requiring an item as input to build itself? Reprocessing ammo for more materials than used to make it? There are a lot of things that were obviously not working as planned after the Citadel patch, many lasted for several months. There's a difference between something kind of fiddly, like stacking penalties or how a bonus applies in code, and something fairly obvious like the basic HP value and lack of resists that someone very clearly sat down and wrote out specifically. There's a big difference between a bug and a defined value. If you can't tell the difference then I'm really not sure how to explain it to you without teaching you how to code first.
from what i understand the low/no resists were added so frigates could do enough dps to overcome the passive recharge. maybe rather than backing resists into the fighters we can lower the recharge bonus of the FSU and add a small resist bonus
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3919
|
Posted - 2017.05.14 13:22:03 -
[12] - Quote
Dictateur Imperator wrote:Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:Dictateur Imperator wrote:
Maybe they will have time after legal action against they.
The Judge wrote:HTFU *bangs gavel* Law is same for all. Problem is not "carrier nerf" but game accessiblity. If you buy a car with special ammenagement for exemple : change speed upper, and accelration/break. beacause for X reason you want avoid to use you're leg (or you can't). You go to garage after 3 Month to a normal survey of you're car and you're selle said: "ok we have remove all option, now use you're leg". For the law it's a change of accessiblity. Same appear with game. Solve is easy : Make fighter orbit automatically after a kill. CCP have answer they want to do it: So do it fast to don't penalise people who can'"t push W in same time of mouse using (or don't want game don't make obligation to use mouse+keyboard same times before so...).
i'm confused what are we talking about? how does a car come into this? what law?
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3919
|
Posted - 2017.05.15 02:09:31 -
[13] - Quote
ApolloF117 HUN wrote:Dictateur Imperator wrote:ApolloF117 HUN wrote:i don't think ccp even reading this forum after the first 2-3 page, they just simply posted the **** they wanted then pace out like everything is ok :) I'm sure some people of support and not dev read it.... Yeah that's a problem, devs make the game changes not the support
you want devs to see it go to reddit. What? did you think they would use their own forums over a third party? why would they do that
BLOPS Hauler
|
|
|
| |
|