Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 [60] 70 80 90 .. 93 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Rusty PwnStar
Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:37:00 -
[1771]
Originally by: Xeseldddim excuse me for bringing up the obvious but wont HEAT fix this issue?
Regards Rusty
|
Elmicker
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:37:00 -
[1772]
Originally by: Mos7Wan7ed 5 fighters? a well setup BS or CS could tank the 5 fighters..
A well setup BS or CS can tank 12 fighters, if necessary.
|
Sacul
Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:41:00 -
[1773]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Mos7Wan7ed 5 fighters? a well setup BS or CS could tank the 5 fighters..
A well setup BS or CS can tank 12 fighters, if necessary.
yup. 20 by a mom will shred u tho. but a solo carrier and a mean tank on the bs can indeed be done.
Boo! to this nerf aswell. bad thinking ccp ...bad
The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones!
|
Acacia Everto
Wings of Redemption Black Flag Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:42:00 -
[1774]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Mos7Wan7ed 5 fighters? a well setup BS or CS could tank the 5 fighters..
A well setup BS or CS can tank 12 fighters, if necessary.
I've seen a well setup CS tank the fighters from 2 Carriers and a Myrmidon no sweat. Don't tell me Carriers have too much DPS.
|
Transcendant One
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:43:00 -
[1775]
Edited by: Transcendant One on 22/10/2007 23:43:48 Stupidest "fix" ever proposed.
|
SamuraiJack
Caldari Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:43:00 -
[1776]
Change the damn bong water...
Are you just going to consistantly **** off the playerbase and ruin a good game?
i seriously wonder sometimes...
Btw, I wont be playing your crap Vampire game incase u are driving ppl there.
SJ. CLS CEO, Valainloce Executor and Standings Director =-
|
The Racketeer
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:43:00 -
[1777]
Edited by: The Racketeer on 22/10/2007 23:44:13 all i hear from people that like the idea is that.. they are the kinda people getting ganked or killed in low sec buy them. they think somehow if stopping carriers and moms from launching so many fighters that all low sec ganks will stop. its kinda silly and vaguely pathetic.
|
Rusty PwnStar
Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:44:00 -
[1778]
Originally by: Sacul
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Mos7Wan7ed 5 fighters? a well setup BS or CS could tank the 5 fighters..
A well setup BS or CS can tank 12 fighters, if necessary.
yup. 20 by a mom will shred u tho. but a solo carrier and a mean tank on the bs can indeed be done.
Boo! to this nerf aswell. bad thinking ccp ...bad
But but but the dev said 0.2 seconds, surely a dev knows what he's talking about.
Oh wait....
Regards Rusty
|
elohllird
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:45:00 -
[1779]
WTF ive just been skilling my alt for a year for carrier use...
If this goes ahead i would like a year's worth of skill points back, and a couple of bil, k thnx bye
ps. i thought Verone was cool but now i dont, can i have thinkin Verone was cool removed from my memory. ta
|
Sean Drake
Caldari Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:47:00 -
[1780]
Hmmm I see this threads still here that makes me a sad bunny
If Goons AND BoB are agreeing with each other that your idea is stupid, it's probably stupid. |
|
Gridwalker
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:49:00 -
[1781]
Wow, the devs at CCP sure know how to haze the new guy! Was there snickering from your coworkers as they led you to the keyboard to type out your first dev blog, or were they able to keep a straight face? ;-)
-Grid
|
The Tumaril
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:49:00 -
[1782]
I haven't posted on these forums in a long time but this idea is not a good one. If you want people to actually use carriers and MS, then you're going about it the wrong way. People want to actually use their ships to fight, what this nerf would do would be to make flying a carrier the most boring job ever. I'd never even bother training for carriers or MS if all they get to do is sit around repping pos shields and maybe assign fighters every now and then.
Just think of how useless it would be in fleet fights, takes friggin ages to lock anything as is, now the fighters are being wielded by not just one lagged out carrier pilots, but by 3 lagged our support pilots. Chances are, at least 1 of those 3 will never even load the screen in a major fleet fight thus rendering 1/3 of the carrier's firepower useless. This nerf would put the final notch on the MS tombstone, you'd just be turning MS and Carriers into logistics ships, just like the Titan. Quit killin off all the fun for cap pilots, if they're willing to risk a 2-50bil isk ship, they should be able to fly it into combat and actually get some use out of the damn thing. For the love of god, don't go through with this nerf!! Sig removed. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] |
Icome4u
Caldari Dark and Light inc. D-L
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:49:00 -
[1783]
UBER FAILED
Man i'm going to be **** (and so will others) if anything like this happens...
|
Vandalias
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:52:00 -
[1784]
Originally by: elohllird WTF ive just been skilling my alt for a year for carrier use...
If this goes ahead i would like a year's worth of skill points back, and a couple of bil, k thnx bye
You'd think people would figure out by now that training for the flavor of the month never works out in the end.
|
UPS Truck
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:53:00 -
[1785]
Originally by: Vandalias
Originally by: elohllird WTF ive just been skilling my alt for a year for carrier use...
If this goes ahead i would like a year's worth of skill points back, and a couple of bil, k thnx bye
You'd think people would figure out by now that training for the flavor of the month never works out in the end.
How is a solid combat ship that doesn't appear overpowered to most people a 'flavor of the month'?
|
Wyliee
Taurus Inc
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:53:00 -
[1786]
Originally by: Xilimyth Derlin
Originally by: Amuko I like it.
Originally by: Wyliee i like it!
however is there a limit to the system sec that you can assign drones in?
Why though? Not to sound 'mean' but "I like it" without justification is no more constructive then some of the flames going around.
Personally, I think it's a good direction, but they NEED to keep the carrier's defensive damage capability close to where it is if they do (be it a damage boost for directly commanded fighters or what not) or it'll have the potential to grossly cripple the ship.
oO i like it because, anything that wil stop people dropping a solo carrier + cyno ship on another single pilot is a good direction.
capships are there for support, in the right gangs they can still put out.
the people that are going to be upset about this are going to be the ones that drop carriers and moms on to lone bs's.
|
Vandalias
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:55:00 -
[1787]
Originally by: UPS Truck How is a solid combat ship that doesn't appear overpowered to most people a 'flavor of the month'?
Ask everyone and their mom who created alts specifically to train for it. I'm sure they had some reason. You don't see everyone training for carriers for no reason.
|
Electrafrost
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:55:00 -
[1788]
Ok heres my solution, to 1 of 2 problems, first problem being the ability to overwhelm a node with fighters
Change the way soverienty works, Make it so in order to have sov 3 you have to have the surrounding systems with a set amount of pos's, then make it, in order to have sov 4, u have to hold a region in the same fashion, and make the bonuses of sov 4 actually worth having it. To own a station you have to have sov 3, with means many solora systems with soverinety not just 1, witch avoids defending and lagging one system.
This makes it so that you have to mobalize your fleets, and if you want to put 300 fighters in one system, your enermy just goes and attacks your other systems, breaking down your soverinty slowly if you don't mobalize to defend, This helps avoid massive gate camps as well
the other thing is to make it so there is many ways to enter a solor system,
This would help with the lag problem and would allow us carriers to have our fighters, with are by no means over powered with 1200 dps, witch can't even break all tanks, or takes 10 mins to take out a passive drake or myrmidon Now a smart carrier pilot heavily relies on his support fleet, especially against a nano/ fast moving gang.
If you want to make a carrier need a support fleet, even more then it alreaedy does, then change there tanking ability, this is uneccesary but is better then nerfing the damage, witch should infact be increased, considering some bs can do 1400 dps.
The fact a frig can single handedly lock down a carrier with a faction web, is somwhat crazy. 30 km scram avoids a heavy nos.
If you want to demoralize your oldest subscribers to the game, and take away the fancy ability of haveing 10+ fighters/ drones then there is no reason to have a account with over 30 mill skill points, and we might as well scrap carriers for parts
The other option is give carriers guns, but again, i like my fighters, LEAVE EM ALONE. look at other options
|
Acacia Everto
Wings of Redemption Black Flag Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:00:00 -
[1789]
Originally by: Wyliee
Originally by: Xilimyth Derlin
Originally by: Amuko I like it.
Originally by: Wyliee i like it!
however is there a limit to the system sec that you can assign drones in?
Why though? Not to sound 'mean' but "I like it" without justification is no more constructive then some of the flames going around.
Personally, I think it's a good direction, but they NEED to keep the carrier's defensive damage capability close to where it is if they do (be it a damage boost for directly commanded fighters or what not) or it'll have the potential to grossly cripple the ship.
oO i like it because, anything that wil stop people dropping a solo carrier + cyno ship on another single pilot is a good direction.
capships are there for support, in the right gangs they can still put out.
the people that are going to be upset about this are going to be the ones that drop carriers and moms on to lone bs's.
No. I wouldn't be dropping a solo carrier on anyone. Is it wrong to want to be able to control my own damn drones though? How about we make it so only three of your guns are user controllable, and make the other three controlled by your gang. And since the Vaga shouldn't be a solopwnmobile either, lets make its MWD gang controllable. After all, it's a gang ship, why should it need to control its own MWD?
|
Rusty PwnStar
Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:00:00 -
[1790]
Originally by: elohllird
post with your main coward
He's trolling bud, don't rise to it.
Regards Rusty
|
|
jokerb
Caldari THE INQUISITI0N
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:00:00 -
[1791]
Originally by: Vandalias
Originally by: UPS Truck How is a solid combat ship that doesn't appear overpowered to most people a 'flavor of the month'?
Ask everyone and their mom who created alts specifically to train for it. I'm sure they had some reason. You don't see everyone training for carriers for no reason.
Please read this: Logical Fallacies Then come back when you stop using them in your rhetoric, thanks :)
|
elohllird
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:02:00 -
[1792]
Originally by: Rusty PwnStar
Originally by: elohllird
post with your main coward
He's trolling bud, don't rise to it.
aye
|
kookookrazyCICHEN
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:04:00 -
[1793]
Originally by: The Racketeer Edited by: The Racketeer on 22/10/2007 23:44:13 all i hear from people that like the idea is that.. they are the kinda people getting ganked or killed in low sec buy them. they think somehow if stopping carriers and moms from launching so many fighters that all low sec ganks will stop. its kinda silly and vaguely pathetic.
Well versed.
|
Vandalias
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:05:00 -
[1794]
Edited by: Vandalias on 23/10/2007 00:05:50
Originally by: UPS Truck They're useful ships in their current incarnation, that's why.
I bet more than a few trained them up to use them as a jump freighter.
I don't see why popularity means they should be nerfed to oblivion.
Well the jump freighter crowd won't be afffected in the slightest. As far as "useful" thats a pretty broad statement. They will still be "useful" after the change, just not as direct damage dealers. Also, I haven't seen anyone argue that they should be nerfed simply due to their popularity.
I'm also not sure why not being able to directly deal damage to other ships means they instantly become useless relics never to be flown again. Its an adjustment in roles for sure, but they will still be quite useful if flown correctly. However it seems the vast populace can't see beyond DPS figures for some reason.
Originally by: elohllird post with your main coward
Same to you.
Edit: also drop the personal attacks, it doesn't get you anywhere.
|
Surfinal
United Society Starfleet Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:05:00 -
[1795]
What we want is pretty basic: We want to make fighter wielding capital ships more reliant on their support fleet and less of a direct nber deathbringer.
Your proposal: Reduce a carrier's ability to deliver damage by 50%.
So a ship that has an excellent tank and at-best BS-gank is going to be an awesome tank with....the firepower of a battlecruiser. So what's the incentive to put your billion-isk ship on the frontlines? None. We're back to POS-hugging. Sure, the carrier could stay frontline and be a harder-to-kill 5-fighter controller, and soak up some EW. Sorry, that doesn't do it for me. Many carrier pilots will simply dock up and pull out their BS, its more useful.
If making the capitals more reliant on the support fleet is your goal, here's a couple of possibilities:
- Go ahead and nerf the carrier's control abilities, but also:
- Give us a capital-sized anti-frigate weapon that SHREDS frigates that get within 20km.
- Allow DCUs to add to the number of direct controlled drones/fighters, so a pilot could control 6 drones with one DCU, for example.
- Make carriers immune to EW, so there is actually an incentive to deploy them outside a POS and still do something.
- Make MoMs immune to interdiction spheres, but not the new cruiser dictor's sphere.
- Keep the carrier and MoM's control abilities as they are.
- Reduce deployed fighter damage by 50%
- Increase deployed fighter damage by 25% for each gang member directly under the carrier pilot's leadership. Have squad commanders count double, so each wing commander and squad commander could receive a full 0.5*2.5=1.25x bonus. Possibly, make it so that only MoMs in WC slots would have SCs count double.
- Give carriers and MoMs flagship bonuses like the field and fleet command ships respectively. Add these in as class bonuses, as I don't think we can afford to take away any of the existing bonuses.
Option 1 attempts to give us some incentive to deploy carriers, while living with your restriction. I don't like it, but I think its at least a decent attempt at balance.
Option 2 is far more interesting to me. We get a carrier that can, in a gang, deal more damage than before. We get a carrier that MUST have gangmates to be effective. Even better, we get an effective limit on carriers in gang, 5 WC+5*5 SC = 30 carriers per gang. To be effective, those 30 carriers need full gangs, so lots and lots of support will have to be employed. Simply adding more carriers to the mix won't help all that much. Also, carriers would be incentivized to fit gang mods.
There, my attempt to both be constructive and civil. Now watch it get lost in this 70 page mess.
|
Raeff
Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:05:00 -
[1796]
Edited by: Raeff on 23/10/2007 00:05:50 bad BAD move
leave the ships alone!
if you want to figure out a way to nerf low sec Moms then go right ahead, but this isnt it
<- spent the last year+ working my freakin a*s off getting 2 characters carrier ready and now i hear this...
|
Hells Bells
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:06:00 -
[1797]
STILL NO RESPONSE FROM CCP..
Maybe we need to send this thread to that lovely chap who recently advised us that we lost a days gameplay due to hackers..
I did a search for the icelandic translation for "CUSTOMER SERVICE" but apparently they don't have one.
LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYERS AND HAVE THE COURTESY TO RESPOND
|
Icome4u
Caldari Dark and Light inc. D-L
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:07:00 -
[1798]
Man tbh re-reading all those posts (blah) i see people are just whining about how they are scared of carriers/MS that get cyno on them (tbh those freash cyno ships are freaking easy to kill with 80ish% of their cap gone...).
To make everyone happy: DON'T do this stupid idea. JAM cyno's near gates.
|
Moraguth
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:07:00 -
[1799]
Once upon a time, I trained for logistics ships. I thought they'd be cool. I knew what i was getting in to, at that time they didn't have guns. I also knew it would be useful only in select situations. The only time it got use was when we were doing complexes as a group, and someone else went in to tank first, then I could bring my guardian in and make their tank uber. That's pretty much the only thing i've ever used them for as that's pretty much the only way they're useful. Much later on, logistics ships got a boost so they'd be used more. Better resists, a few gun slots added, and the ability to use large logistics modules. As far as I know, they still aren't used that much, except in very specific circumstances.
Then we go to now. I decided to train for carriers. They are still awesome logistics ships, but with a few changes. They're survivable and have decent firepower. I knew what I was getting in to when I made this decision. I knew it'd be expensive and they'd only be useful in specific circumstances.
CCP, you're taking away half my ship :( this is not the way to fix your "problems". Look at my previous posts if you've made it this far and missed it. I give solutions that don't alienate the eve population and insult their intelligence.
Fixes through boosting are MUCH better than "Fixes" by nerfing.
good game |
Xaen
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:08:00 -
[1800]
Originally by: Xeseldddim excuse me for bringing up the obvious but wont HEAT fix this issue?
If not heat, surely the need for speed will. --
Support fixing the EVE UI
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 [60] 70 80 90 .. 93 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |