EVE Search - I wonder when CCP will remove invincible ships.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

I wonder when CCP will remove invincible ships.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hyuuga Veralis Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.08.27 02:49:00 - [121] Originally by: Hayah Theos Originally by: Tunak Originally by: Hayah Theos Out of touch, YOU ARE! Tell me again how you achieve the above without T2 BPO's or Capital Ship "NPC market exploit haulers", none of which is available to the AVERAGE pilot of Eve. Then tell us all about how you don't have a death-grip on 10/10 Complexes... You people are so transparent and self-serving. Your very response bespeaks your BORGness... Idiot. Did you miss the part where I said less than 6M SP? Did you miss the part where I said using only a shuttle. Both those points mean that T2 BPO or Capital ships are not needed. 10/10 complexes? No one farms those anymore. CCP nerfed them. Please try and know something about the game. As for how. I already told you. I'll use smaller words. Lvl 4 courier missions pay 2.7M a mission. You can do them in a shuttle. No skills needed. Nothing ever risked. isk is free. Anyone can be "rich". ************** 100 million a day divided by 2.7 million per mission is about 37 missions per day to do that.... Simple math betrays you. I'm not sure anyone reading this believes you. Unless you have multiple accounts to do nothing but run Courier missions, which sounds very much like an exploit to me. If a courier mission has you moving 6 jumps, you can cover that in what, 10 minutes total, if that, in a shuttle, both ways? 10*37 = 370, just over 6 hours. Now you'll have quite a few LP as well, so lets not ignore that in the isk factoring.
Captian Internet	Posted - 2007.08.27 02:51:00 - [122] Originally by: RtoZ The part where it has no cap... I never said it was easy though, I fully realise the task it is to organise a fleet, bait the mothership and be lucky enough for the timing to be good enough to get rid of all his cap in one pass and still have surplass people to keep it there as he fights back. It is pretty improbable, even with all the people assembled it's probably a less than 10% chance of success, then there is lag issues... but the mothership does have to run, because he knows if he stays just a bit too long he will die, and those things are slooow. Try and get the bait to bump him around a bit to mess up the warp outs and have people organised so if he warps to a system object people warp in at all distances so he dosen't get away easily. But yes, pretty remote chance, I will agree to that. Impossible? Well, It's possible under the current game design, hypothetically, I'll let the people who actually command fleets debate on whether it is possible in reality or possibly come up with some other approach... Also ask yourselves this, if you allow these things to be scrambled in low sec don't they become just a tad easy? Keep saying that I have plenty of these to go around
Hyuuga Veralis Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.08.27 03:07:00 - [123] Originally by: umop 3pisdn Originally by: Rells Originally by: Minmatar096773 No amarr ship is invincible. Their blood will spill. Uhh ... what the heck kind of reply is this supposed to be. If you are asserting an Amarr mothership is invincible, lets have a rational argument buddy. A little fact and reasoning is what is called for here, not some silly quip. lol @ rells... and now that they arent hard to kill in 0.0 as of Tuesday, we're only a few months of *****ing and whinging away from a low sec nerf of some kind... they will probably get relegated to 0.0 only with a storyline justification.... Considering that flying a supercap in lowsec empire would be like China doing manuvers between Hawaii and the US mainland, I think it'd be justified for the Empires to send capital strikeforces to wtfpwn a supercap that enters lowsec.
Captian Internet	Posted - 2007.08.27 03:35:00 - [124] Originally by: Hyuuga Veralis Originally by: umop 3pisdn Originally by: Rells Originally by: Minmatar096773 No amarr ship is invincible. Their blood will spill. Uhh ... what the heck kind of reply is this supposed to be. If you are asserting an Amarr mothership is invincible, lets have a rational argument buddy. A little fact and reasoning is what is called for here, not some silly quip. lol @ rells... and now that they arent hard to kill in 0.0 as of Tuesday, we're only a few months of ****ing and whinging away from a low sec nerf of some kind... they will probably get relegated to 0.0 only with a storyline justification.... Considering that flying a supercap in lowsec empire would be like China doing manuvers between Hawaii and the US mainland, I think it'd be justified for the Empires to send capital strikeforces to wtfpwn a supercap that enters lowsec. These semi-role playing arguments being used are quite strange They pop up in threads like these another example would be the removal of local. People would semi rp on why it should stay. But the thing is if your going to make a play at EVE realisim you've got to go through with it all the way and not just when its convenient snip* Your signature was removed for being inappropriate. Please email [email protected] with a link to your signature graphic if you have questions. -Rauth Kivaro ([email protected])
xeom Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.08.27 03:40:00 - [125] I haven't read the post,just the op.But It's a rells so post so I'm just going to say. Rells is always right,CCP could only dream of having him as a employee. And he is in fact the best PvPer ever.No questions asked you should always bow to Rells. PS:Pay him to teach you how to PvP.Really you could never learn this alone. --- -Videos- Viciously Delicious
Captian Internet	Posted - 2007.08.27 05:07:00 - [126] Originally by: xeom I haven't read the post,just the op.But It's a rells so post so I'm just going to say. Rells is always right,CCP could only dream of having him as a employee. And he is in fact the best PvPer ever.No questions asked you should always bow to Rells. PS:Pay him to teach you how to PvP.Really you could never learn this alone. Sarcasm Senses Tingling! snip Your signature was removed for being inappropriate. Please email [email protected] with a link to your signature graphic if you have questions. -Rauth Kivaro ([email protected])
Karlemgne The Malevolent	Posted - 2007.08.27 06:03:00 - [127] Originally by: Kaar you should be able to kill them with a destroyer gang! LMAO! -Karl
Karlemgne The Malevolent	Posted - 2007.08.27 06:13:00 - [128] Originally by: Derovius Vaden Originally by: Tunak Originally by: Derovius Vaden Motherships are meant to be difficult to kill, for the following reasons: 1. They cost in excess of 25 billion (in excess because 25 bil is just the ship) Again this is not a valid reason. isk cannot be used as a measure of power. With less than 5 mil sp you can run level 4 missions with no in game risk and earn an unlimited amount of isk. isk is free. Acquiring a large amount of isk is not an achievement. Therefore it cannot be used to measure power. To further illustrate the point. Now that HACs have dramatically dropped in cost are they less powerful? Now that a miner 2 cost nothing compared to what they originally sold for do they mine less? Its not a matter of power; motherships are not solo-pwnmobiles and they never will be. Its a matter of value. If someone pays 5x more for their pew-pew ship, they should be 5x less likely to die. Else, if we follow what you're suggesting, all the motherships will be blown to hell and back within a week, and no one will buy new ones because they are a waste of money. Once again, more expensive = harder to die. Right, so if I buy a Navy Raven, which is 10x the value of a regular Raven, I should be able to tank 10 Battleships simultaneously. -Karlemgne
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.08.27 06:16:00 - [129] Pointless smacktalk aside, the assertion that the MS can be killed in lowsec is paently false. The pilot would have to be extremely stupid or totally desynched. Sending in thousands of people to create a wreck pile or needing to bump them with dreads is idiotic. Having to explot lag or desynch a pilot to kill him is a broken mechanic. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
hellsknights Hells Angels Inc.	Posted - 2007.08.27 06:30:00 - [130] Originally by: Kruel It is a bit silly that you must resort to bumping a MS in lowsec to even have a chance of killing it... But on the other hand it costs billions, so I don't really complain. I personally don't care....BTW try bumping a MS you will be dead in a matter of seconds.. so it's not a real option. recruitment thread Join channel Hells Angels Inc
Karlemgne The Malevolent	Posted - 2007.08.27 06:37:00 - [131] Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny Originally by: Rells Tunak: I like your style. Poeple using emotional arguments and you nuking them. ... Anyway. The motherships would not all be blown up in a week. They might have to travel with a fleet and have force protection like a Nimitz Class carrier in real life. They will have to decide whether to engage or warp away before the enemy gets there, not just simply say "ya, Ill engage a few and if I get low, I will just jump." They would have to think about whether or not they are willing to get warp scrambled or not. They would lose their status as solo pwnmobiles (which is probably the reason for the plethora of obvious alts posting on the thread.) The motherships would still be very powerful, they would just be susceptible to warp scramblers and so should titans. The reality is that neutralizing enough cap to prevent a cyno jump would take a ton of dedicated neutrlaizing battleships. The base cap on a Wyvern, for example, is 63, 750. With rational engineering skills that will be well over 100,000. Someone just run the numbers for giggles, I would be interested to hear it. Also run the numbers of how many heavy energy neuts (assuming the BS also is running his own cap down) it would take to prevent it from jumping and ask how much time it would take and why the pilot wouldn just jump before it got there. How many would it take to neut it below cyno level on the first try and wh wouldnt the MS just passively tank, kill a few and jump. People asserting they can be killed are either stupid or lieing. Pick one. If you are going to compare a Mothership to a Nimitz... the Nimitz is a force on it's own, there's no way to sink it and it has on board weapons that autonomously engage incoming threats... so lets give motherships capital sized defender missiles Also the Nimitz is more of a titan... it boosts the fleet around it and assigns targets Motherships are fine as is.... get smarter That's a bunch of crap, I don't care what your drill instructor told you. If the Nimitz class Aircraft Carrier were "force(s)" on their own, they would require an incredibly large support fleet... a fleet who's purpose is largely anti-missile defense. Those on-board anti-missile systems you are talking about, friend, are designed for the "oh-**** something made it through the anti-missile barrier." -Karlemgne
Hugh Ruka Caldari Free Traders	Posted - 2007.08.27 07:22:00 - [132] Bubbles in lowsec is a VERY BAD IDEA... So the only option we have is to not allowing SUPER CAPITAL SHIPS to enter lowsec. Regular capitals (dread, carrier) are A-OK in lowsec. SUPER CAPS are NOT !!! easy as dell ... Originally by: Aravel Thon Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox............... I am so so terribly sorry...
Auron Shadowbane Teeth Of The Hydra R i s e	Posted - 2007.08.27 08:43:00 - [133] only real solution would be to ban supercaps from zerosec.
Cornucopian Gallente Dutch Omega United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.27 11:33:00 - [134] less talk about motherships, more about 2.7m for shuttle courier missions. agents, corps, and numbers. NOW. ----------------------------------------------- "post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer."
Laah T'Sin	Posted - 2007.08.27 11:39:00 - [135] Quote: The solution is simple. Make Motherships and Titans affected by warp disruptors and webbers. They would still be very powerful ships but they would not be solo pwnmobiles. I agree. Give the mothership a +5 (or something) Warp Strenght Bonus (like the Viator) so it's still uber but not invul and totally iwin the way it is now in lowsec.
KHEN New Horizons	Posted - 2007.08.27 12:18:00 - [136] Edited by: KHEN on 27/08/2007 12:19:45 Edited by: KHEN on 27/08/2007 12:19:05 Well, because a peep lost a shuttle and a clone, Motherships must be nerfed. I'm tired to see game mechanics change stupidly because thousands of whines sounded for months. Then the same whiners came back to yell about the new game mechanics (i.e. : nosferatus, blob & bombers, POS warfare, speed nerfs). I agree that the immunity to disruption is not fair in low sec, but should EVE be fair ? There are lame players who like to abuse of their advantages, like there are silly drivers. Should the cars be nerfed to 80mph max speed because of them ? Yes Motherships are unfair. Instead of wasting your time whining here, you'd better find a way to deal with that. I'm pretty sure that if it can't easily be destroyed, the pilot can be considerably scared by seeing a small fleet of dreads and carriers w triage jumping in and MWD BSes starting to bump the MS. If one can afford a MS, you should be able to gather 3-4 carriers and one or two dreads aren't you ? I don't care about loosing a MS in low-sec but I don't want to see the most beautiful ships in EVE nerfed because of repeated whines
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2007.08.27 12:54:00 - [137] Originally by: Gnulpie I wrote it already several times and I write it again: no supercapital should be allowed in empire space! amen. anyone who has ever tried to take down a MS with battleships i'm sure will say the same. Please stop messing with my signature!!!
Tenerhaddi Dark Skyes	Posted - 2007.08.27 13:46:00 - [138] The ibis of doom will kill it! its simple! fleet of ibis attacking it. Then the MS pilot dies laughing so much at the inbis and then bring BS to kill it :) ---------------- http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
SSgt Sniper Gallente MAIDS	Posted - 2007.08.27 16:20:00 - [139] Edited by: SSgt Sniper on 27/08/2007 16:23:20 Originally by: Imperius Blackheart A few neuts, or at the moment nos... nothing is "unkillable" in lowsec, you just need some organisation and planning. A group of around 12 remote repping BS should be able to kill a momma in low sec. Let's rephrase that to read you can run off a mom in lowsec with planning. Officer cap chargers and tech II cap rigs means he'll have cap on a level to jump out long before he has problems. And the big gripe is the inability to stop them from jumping out. One of the reasons I think interdictor bubbles (not anchorable ones) should be reconsidered for lowsec, and fighters should be warp scramble-able. This keeping in mind I prefer buffs over nerfs. ------- CEO of Maids. No I didn't pick the name. I've grown rather fond of it though.
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2007.08.27 16:39:00 - [140] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 27/08/2007 16:44:02 Originally by: Derovius Vaden Its not a matter of power; motherships are not solo-pwnmobiles and they never will be. Its a matter of value. If someone pays 5x more for their pew-pew ship, they should be 5x less likely to die. Else, if we follow what you're suggesting, all the motherships will be blown to hell and back within a week, and no one will buy new ones because they are a waste of money. Once again, more expensive = harder to die. You just have no idea, i'm afraid. Let's see - your average T2 fit fully rigged solo-pwn-mobile tier 3 battleship: 200-250M. 6 jerks in T2 fitted rifters with e-war fitted: 12-15M Watching battleship die miserably without ever getting a target lock: priceless. With everything smaller then capitals, the number of pilots plays a significant role in combat, and flying a 200-500M ship solo does not make you invincible, even if your foes have only 10% of your funds. Anyway, we can expect the number of MS to increase, and with no losses taken in low-sec, well, the problem is not exactly going to go away. The best thing i've heard so far is giving it a warp strenght of +20-50, so it takes a number of ships to lock it down. Edit: bubbles in low-sec are a moronic idea. It'd be a huge nerf for small corps and solo-ers in low-sec. Increasing the risk (without increasing the potential profits of low-sec) would drive a good part of the people out. It's not like it's crowded already... Originally by: Tsanse Kinske The second you start equating time spent playing a game with lost time and money is the second you need to ask yourself "Why am I playing?". Seriously
KtB Elite Storm Enterprises Storm Armada	Posted - 2007.08.27 16:39:00 - [141] It's a 15bill+ isk ship. I think it needs to be MORE invincible for that price..
Del Narveux Dukes of Hazard	Posted - 2007.08.27 16:48:00 - [142] How about a compromise, supercaps can go into lowsec empire, and maybe even highsec too, for the purpose of stashing them from prying eyes. But if they aggro on anything in empire space, even a valid war target unless the supercap was shot at first then a totally uber concord shows up and annihalates it. I agree with the OP, its just not fair that a ship whose primary counters have 0.0 restrictions is allowed to do its thing in lowsec. _________________ [SAK] Alumnus--And Proud Of It! -- aka Cpt Bogus Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? Originally by: Wrangler Well, at least we have forum PvP..
Princess Jodi Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.08.27 16:57:00 - [143] No, don't make Motherships succeptible by letting them get scrammmbed. Look at it this way: You've got 35+ Billion isk worth of ship. For that price, you get only about double the damage of a 2.5 Billion isk carrier. The remaining 30 Billion in cost is basically the immunity to Electronic Warfare. So: you wanna kill a Mothership in low sec? Take 35 Billion isk worth of ships and you'll alpha strike it. Or just kill off its fighters: A full wing of 20 or so fighters is a half a billion isk in cost.
muhajai	Posted - 2007.08.27 17:11:00 - [144] very interesting and a topic i have given thought too. in my opinion banning super caps from low-sec especially mom's is absurd (since they are a logistic's ship ) they need low-sec access too move bs's and supplies i think the best solution too this exploit by mom pilots would be too simply bann smart bombs in emire space just like the interdictor bubbles are at the moment my two cents and first forum post. hopefully my last
Karlemgne The Malevolent	Posted - 2007.08.27 17:45:00 - [145] Originally by: Princess Jodi No, don't make Motherships succeptible by letting them get scrammmbed. Look at it this way: You've got 35+ Billion isk worth of ship. For that price, you get only about double the damage of a 2.5 Billion isk carrier. The remaining 30 Billion in cost is basically the immunity to Electronic Warfare. So: you wanna kill a Mothership in low sec? Take 35 Billion isk worth of ships and you'll alpha strike it. Or just kill off its fighters: A full wing of 20 or so fighters is a half a billion isk in cost. Again, alright. So game mechanics should be changed so that my Navy Raven, which is 10x more expensive than a regular BS, can tank (again) 10 Battleships simultaneously. Further, they should deal 10x the damage of a regular Battleship, OR we need my calculator that determines the isk value of my ship + fittings, and gives me scaling invulnerability depending on the cost of my ship. So once my ship hits 10 billion, no matter what it is, I should be immune to ewar and scrambling. On a more serious note, 0.0 dweller, I don't think you comprehend the problem. MoMs camping gates in low-sec are un-killable. Further MoMs give logistical advantages that regular carriers don't, the price tag is NOT just about immunity to ewar. My personal feeling is they should be kept out of low-sec, period. -Karlemgne
Tunak	Posted - 2007.08.27 18:39:00 - [146] Originally by: Venkul Mul Afther your opening phrases any argument you use has lost any value. "isk is free" my *****. If your isk are soo free equip your whole corporation in officer gear and nuke that mom. "ISK is free." does not mean everyone gets unlimited isk. Anyone can acquire large amounts of isk. Only 1 person needed. No character skills are needed. No player skills are needed. No starting cash needed. No risk is involved. It's literally hit the button and receive isk. The only limiting factor to one's wallet is play time. isk gained is directly proportional to the effort you put in. There are literally _no_ external factors that can limit isk acquisition. Therefore accumulating large amounts of isk is not an accomplishment. Therefore the cost of a ship cannot have any correlation to powerlevel. That's my point in regards to this thread.
Tunak	Posted - 2007.08.27 18:43:00 - [147] Originally by: Hayah Theos ************** 100 million a day divided by 2.7 million per mission is about 37 missions per day to do that.... Simple math betrays you. I'm not sure anyone reading this believes you. Unless you have multiple accounts to do nothing but run Courier missions, which sounds very much like an exploit to me. Yeah that sounds right. To do 37 in 6 hours you would have 9.7 minutes per mission. Plenty of time to go 6 hops in a shuttle.
Hugh Ruka Caldari Free Traders	Posted - 2007.08.27 18:55:00 - [148] WTB Invincible Rifter for 35bn ISK. Originally by: Aravel Thon Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox............... I am so so terribly sorry...
Hayah Theos	Posted - 2007.08.27 19:27:00 - [149] Edited by: Hayah Theos on 27/08/2007 19:31:54 Originally by: Tunak Edited by: Tunak on 27/08/2007 18:48:17 Originally by: Hayah Theos ************ 100 million a day divided by 2.7 million per mission is about 37 missions per day to do that.... Simple math betrays you. I'm not sure anyone reading this believes you. Unless you have multiple accounts to do nothing but run Courier missions, which sounds very much like an exploit to me. Yeah that sounds right. To do 37 in 6 hours you would have 9.7 minutes per mission. Plenty of time to go 6 hops in a shuttle. EDIT: Sorry for the redundant post. Didn't see someone else come to my defense. ******************** So you believe the part about 2.7 million isk per courier mission in HIGH-SEC?..... and if you are spending 6 hours a day to do it (assuming there is a 2.7 million paying agent) when do you do anything else? 6 hours to play 15 minutes and get podded by a Mom in low sec?? Sounds like fun to me.... not! Real accomplishment by the BORG who make 2.2 billion per day on ONE PLUTONIUM RUN!!..... NOT!!!
Aziz Hekato Minmatar Vitai Lampada	Posted - 2007.08.27 19:36:00 - [150] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Minmatar096773 No amarr ship is invincible. Their blood will spill. Uhh ... what the heck kind of reply is this supposed to be. If you are asserting an Amarr mothership is invincible, lets have a rational argument buddy. A little fact and reasoning is what is called for here, not some silly quip. His one of those m8.. read my sigg. ____ Entering the Intergalactic Summit forum is like walking into a Startrek convention. All of them are a bunch of geeks and you go "WTF?".

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.