Kintaana
Minmatar Trogdor Burninators FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 22:25:00 -
[1]
Before starting this, CCP please keep in mind that a good many of the replies are non-cap pilots...
A) This is utterly absurd logic behind this possible nerf. Lets scale this down to a smaller example:
This is equivalent to nefing a Battleship pilot to only control half of his turrets while gangmates control the other half because they can 5 volley cruisers. The isk ratio is almost the same.
"we feel that capital ships are being used way too much as better-than-battleships-at-killing-stuff ships" This ship costs as much as EIGHT well fit battleships, it very well should be able to kill a battleship solo! You DESERVE to be incinerated in 0.2 seconds if youre going to go attacking a MS with a group of battelships with no capital rep or heavy logistics to back you up. Battleships are continuously being upgraded and made harder to kill while carriers continue to be stable with no upgrades, if anything carriers are too easy to kill with a dampening nano/sniping gang. People do not pay over half a bil to train for a capital, then another 2bil+ to fit it just to have a Carrier thats nice to use as a mobile refitting array, even moreso for a Mothership. The entire idea of a capital is that it should be an awe inspiring tool of mass destruction, while a mothership/carrier certainly has the option of being an oversized box of band-aids, if thats all they were used/wanted for then people would just save a ton of isk and fit logistics Dominix's with 100% faction gear. The entire idea of a Carrier is for it to carry a fleet of it's own, it's a command style ship both in and out of game, fighters worth the price of battlecruisers. That in itself should be enough to dictate it's role as a ship that you DO NOT WANT TO MESS WITH. As is the entire idea of a capital, part of the fun of having such a highly expensive non-disposable ship (battleships are disposable) is the power it wields which is very equal to it's immense cost. Also forcing these highly expensive drones into other's hands needs to attach a 100mil deposit to be taken out of their wallets when given control and have it be re-deposited when the fighters are unassigned, in most cases it's the capital's pilot funding this, not someone else who can be stupid and send them into a disco Domi without caring if they lose a fighter or not.
Capitals are already HIGHLY vulnerable to sensor dampening, you get a gang of 10 each fitting a damp and youve got a completely useless carrier, have a ship sit on top of you and itll still take you 5mins to lock them. Making not only their logistics useless but what little solo control they would have over their fighters. This happened a few days ago, had two carriers on a gate against a nano/sniping EW gang and the carriers while they had all their fighters there was little they could do with all the dampening etc, battleships popped in under a minute 1 after anothr before the carriers could even target them. Got 1 carrier out, lost the other. Dampening is their gaping hole of vulnerability no reason to make it even worse.
B) On the other hand, as was mentioned earlier: How does a gang as small as even 2-3 BS being able to kill a solo carrier balance them? IMO Carriers/MS are perfectly fine, if youre going to face a carrier/MS and dont bring cap support/hvy logistics to back you up you DESERVE to be atomized, any situation that warrants combat with a Carrier is a situation that needs heavy support, with a MS you want capital support. Dreads are already useless in 90% of situations, most only bring them out once a month if you dont include the mega-Alliances as they have much heavier pos stacking to deal with for the constant sov juggling.
The only reason I can think of for this uncalled for unbalancing would be the fact that there are more carriers in existence, which is inevitable as more characters get more SP and new buffs ship increase ratting/isk generation speed.
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels -Rauth Kivaro ([email protected]) |