|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 15:21:00 -
[1]
Originally by: DRDNOUGHT Guys.... we are talking about carriers here yes ? 10 times the price of a typical battleship.... months more of skill training.... the whole point of a carrier is its superior fighter and drone carrying power as well as its support capabilities. If it is to be stepped down to just a support vessel, I as well as many others Im sure, are going to have to rethink its value when compared with the training time required as well as the large ISK investment. A carrier is a tactical vessel first and a support vessel second and we cant go nerfing It because it is successful at what it was designed to do. If We need to change the balance then we need to do the same as we would do in the real world when faced with a superior weapon.....invent something that can disable it easier.......
exactly and actually THERE IS something that diseable a carrier easier it is dampeners, oh maybe you dont know that item dear Dev ^^ but hell yea a dampener like on any other hip can make a carrier useless at all.
I havent trained a year on ONLY cap skills on 2 accounts to see this silly idea prevailing, this will end my fun with supercaps and game. simple. what you propose simply make the fighter skill itself useless, right?
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 15:31:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Coolgamer on 21/10/2007 15:31:53
Originally by: Vile rat Zulupark seriously listen to us on this one. Every major alliance is in total agreement here from Bob to MC to Goonswarm.
You are tweaking something that is insignificant and unimportant to fix a problem nobody is complaining about while ignoring or glossing over a fundamental break in the mechanics that are Carrier/Ms fighter control. Nobody cares about the firepower they bring to the table, it's fine. Everybody thinks it's fine. The frigate pilot thinks it's fine and the carrier pilot thinks it's fine.
It's fine!
The problem is the lag generated and the way fighters perform in a completely lagged out environment. Put down your pad of paper where you are furiously scribbling new carrier designs and step away from your excel spreadsheet where you are plopping in more cosmetic fixes to a problem that doesn't even exist. Your sole job should be fixing the real problem and not messing around with this horse crap.
indeed, and starting fixing the drone delegation menu and in general the WHOLE drone menu in overview (excuse me but some carrier carries over 500+ drones, that's tons of folder, and lag generation in combat on client side thanks to db, fix that first !)
there were multiple good old threats about new drone system delegation in the dev forum, like having drones icons not only in overview but near the F1-F8 keys were we could give order to drones or group of drones.
you should better work on this idea rather than ruining the fun all carrier pilots have ingame.
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 15:45:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Molly Neuro A lot of people have put the case for not implementing this, many of them much more eloquently and effectively than I can. A lot of the MC posts have been very interesting, and if you want want to hear from people with experience of frontlining capitals you won't do much better.
The only interesting thing this proposed change has going for it - is whether, in the face of almost universal derision, you'll continue to implement it.
I've seen many dev posts saying that they listen to what players are saying - I think we'll find out how true that is very soon.
lol yea we'll find out
/me ready to click on unscubscribe button * 3 accouts
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 16:18:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Coolgamer on 21/10/2007 16:24:17 Hey if you want to work on some change for carriers user here are some very good ideas
i'll link them to you since seem most of them just go to oblivion, instead of those stupid "omg i got an idea i'll nerf the game and ruin your fun"
example 1 : give ability to make shortcuts better : shortcuts for drones like using shortcuts for controlling DRONES, omg this is an idea interesting !
example 2 : have some DECENT drone menu, and not the one in overview thta is damn laggy thanks to database when you carrer carries over 500 drones in multiple folders.
like : i simply love the following one : http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=422990
one of my favorite oldest (the stacking thing) : http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=9431 yes 4 years we wait for a BETTER DRONE MANAGEMENT system
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=440979 http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=279072 http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=497025
Some goods ideas from Aeon also : http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=494448
example 3 : About bumping (yes bumping super cap and cap is silly and even though last patch, game mechanics dont reflect what would be reality) : funny one : http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=490326 realistic one : http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=479182 (in a space opera when a small ship rush and crash on a large one, expect the small ship to die, the large one unharmed) Basically a bumped ship should not be stopped if it's size larger than the ship bumping him
example 4 : well your try now, use your brain, but NOT A DAMN NERF !!
you have many ideas there, all without any devs reply, take a coffee and read them instead thinking or nerfing the game that cost your brain nothing to do.
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 16:40:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Coolgamer on 21/10/2007 16:40:57
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Armus Jenson To be quite Honest, Fighters do cost 50x as much as your frigate.
Dude, I'm flying Recons, Battleships and HACs. I simply referred to frigates, as frigates and Assault Ships are pretty much useless and unpopular atm. Apart from that, please read carefully. I proposed a cost change, so please don't interpret to your liking.
Capital ships need a weak point or weak points. Otherwise the core concept is bigger=better, which Imho is a very bad game design, 'cause it tends to fail terribly in the long run.
again a cap ship is as weak as ANY OTHER ship to EW, so seriously no need to add more weakness compared to other ships
damp DO the job on a cap ship, yes it does, and if you fly recons you know for sure as webs DO the job on a cap ship
get 1 arazu + 1 rappier + 4-5 bs and you kill a carrier
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 03:04:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Spartikaz My opinion is the same as the people on these posts, i vote to kill/ban/linch/execute/torture this dev.
i would just say "i vote to kill/ban/linch/execute/torture this idea" remember he is just the messenger
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 01:11:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Diablique Edited by: Diablique on 23/10/2007 01:01:41 Edited by: Diablique on 23/10/2007 01:01:06 Hi, I'm Zalapurk and recently transferred from the Quality Assurance department to the Game Design team. IÆve been with CCP for just under two years now and donÆt plan on going anywhere. Say hello to your newest balancer (I still haven't received a nerfbat though).
I'm posting here now because the last few days we've been looking at the way battleships are functioning on Tranquility, and to be honest weære a little concerned with the direction itæs taking.
What we want is pretty basic: We want to make battleships more reliant on their support fleet and less of a direct nber deathbringer.
How are we going to do it?
Well, we have an idea, and before you go ballistic remember that this is an idea and weære still working on it:
We plan on changing the way guns work, and have it so that you can still have all the guns you want (within limits of your ship/skills) but you can only directly fire 2 of them at a time. That means that a battleship can assign 2 guns to a gang mate, assign 2 more to another gang mate etc. etc.
This means you will NOT be able to fire 6/7/8 guns from a battleship and aim them all to incinerate a cruiser in .2 seconds. It does however mean that you can assign 2 guns to each of your lilæ friends in the fleet and use them as the messengers of your burning fury.
Remember, weære not messing with the final total amount of guns you can have, just the amount you can control and delegate at a time. You can of course also operate 2 guns and make them attack a target of your own choice, if it pleases you.
i just looooled at this
good one
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 04:56:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Vishous Edited by: Vishous on 23/10/2007 04:38:04 I may not fly a carrier, but after reading that blog, I knew it was not the solution. Carriers are anything but IWIN ships. Everyone in EVE knows that (however, some people in CCP apparently do not). Any problems caused by carriers would be more from the drone spamming down in the south, which has to do more with server issues then carrier issues.
We have to remember, they threw this out to us as an idea (though they seemed a bit to confident in implementing it).
"Well, we have an idea, and before you go ballistic remember that this is an idea and weære still working on it:"
I would like to give possible suggestions of ideas for any type of carrier change, but I have none to give, since, as I stated, I have no direct experience with using them. I just hope CCP has better ideas that would involve less /nerfbat and more /impr*CRASH*
Hehe lag issues you said? there is no lagg...
And even if this is an idea i would like CCP to admit that if people just say NO, it's a NO, as simple as NO could possibly ever means, and telling people to not just say NO but be more constructive about their NO is NOnsense...
So i will be more constructive about my NO.
NO : absolutly NO, I would say NO, NO way, answer is NO, certainly NOt, Not at all, i think NOt...
SAVE carrier and Moms |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 17:40:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Coolgamer on 23/10/2007 17:40:14
Originally by: Blood Ghost
Originally by: Cadela Fria On SiSi After launching 5 fighters from their NYX (mothership), they were presented with:
17:14:18 Hint You don't have enough bandwidth to launch Firbolg. You need 0.0 Mbit/s but Firbolg requires 25.0 Mbit/s.
Speaks for itself.
You've got to be kidding me??? They wasted all that time implementing it? All this **** talk about listening before doing anything???
Hoping this is some sort of joke/rumour start
i really hope also...
this would be a total SLAP in the face of the community after they told here THEY WOULD let us know any progress on this idea
/me is ready to click on unsubscribe x 3 accounts
SAVE carrier and Moms |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 18:05:00 -
[10]
3 accounts cancelled too
this is outrageous and ridiculous, they totally forget WHO pay this F**** game and their salaries...
---
SAVE carrier and Moms |
|
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 18:10:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Spike 68 Boredom during class = hilarity
THE ADVENTURES OF NERFGUN!
^^
SAVE carrier and Moms |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 18:25:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Cannizza Junior I got this from another thread
Posted - 2007.10.23 15:55:00 - [119] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by: Mag's --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Sharkbait -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- posting in a player thread which i came up with the idea to derail it --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any chance you could post in zulu's blog and derail that? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Sharkbait
haha no. i love the changes thats happening.
i approve them in the face
Alright ppl, you can stop wasting your time posting here. It¦s implemented and aproved. What¦s left now? Nerf noob ships?
wtf
SAVE carrier and Moms |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 19:02:00 -
[13]
Originally by: CCP Abathur Edited by: CCP Abathur on 23/10/2007 18:40:56
Ladies and Gentlemen, this has to do with the upcoming drone and fighter bandwidth and is not related to the delegation idea. The test server gets updated daily and as Trinity gets closer to release you will likely see a lot of things happening there. We are also working on an updated new dev blog to outline our concerns and plans for carriers. Please do not jump to conclusions and be patient. Thank you.
i'm usually cautious with annoucement :p i will reactivate accounts *possibly* after seeing that new dev blog
SAVE carrier and Moms |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 19:23:00 -
[14]
Originally by: ZaKma [19:05:18] CCP Gangleri > Everyone that is crying about their Carrier, take a long deep breath and compare your carriers ability to kill small targets with a Dread. Which is bigger and more expensive.
From Sisi local. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
SAVE carrier and Moms |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 20:52:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Necronomicon
Originally by: ZaKma [19:05:18] CCP Gangleri > Everyone that is crying about their Carrier, take a long deep breath and compare your carriers ability to kill small targets with a Dread. Which is bigger and more expensive.
Our carriers dont have a module that gives our drones a stupid amount of extra damage, or one that that makes our ships able to ultra tank...oh wait...we do, but it cuts our offensive capability to ZERO.
Dreads and carriers can be compared about as much as Cruise Launchers and Mining Lasers, yeah, they both use a high slot, whoopdy doo, that is where the similarities end.
You sir obviously have little knowledge of the game, and you are insulting those of us who do. I suggest you refrain from further irritating the commuity with your throwaway 'whining' comments when addressing players who have been in this game longer than you have probably been in CCP.
gogo bite him Necro
SAVE carrier and Moms |
Coolgamer
Minmatar Res Publica R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 05:31:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Coolgamer on 24/10/2007 05:33:34
Originally by: Merin Ryskin Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 24/10/2007 01:44:22 Most of what I'd add has already been said, but +1 on "what the hell are you thinking?". This is an incredibly stupid idea, forget about three months from now, just bury the issue and call it a joke. The last thing we need is for carriers to be forced even more strongly into sitting at a POS trying to keep track of who actually has fighters, and praying the server is stable enough to get them assigned properly.
Really, the fact that this was even proposed makes it even clearer that whoever suggested it has no experience with carriers or large-gang fights. It might work alright for ONE carrier, but for several? To assign fighters in a big group, you'd have to:
1) Find someone who doesn't already have fighters assigned from one of the other carriers in the gang.
2) Get them to pull in their drones.
3) Wait for the fighters to arrive.
4) Start over from the beginning, since the guy you were trying to assign fighters to just died.
Of course don't forget, you're doing this on a busy teamspeak server, where your FC is trying to coordinate targets, your logistics pilots are listening for calls for help, etc. And probably in a situation with heavy lag, changing a simple "launch, attack" to include several more steps of lag delays. This isn't skill or balance. It's frustrating, pointless fighting against the interface.
I won't threaten to cancel my account, but this change has made me seriously reconsider training for capital ships. Good job disappointing your paying customers.
/agreed
and it has been said multiple times here before, this is in fact THE only reason i am totally against that nerf the micromanagement of delegation will be such a pain that this nerf is nonsense
SAVE carrier and Moms |
|
|
|