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) |
LordVodka
Earned In Blood Black Sun Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 02:01:00 -
[2761]
Originally by: Silmaire humm .. makes me think, is there any feature in eve that didnt had the nerf ? so many things in eve that are unbalanced, common .. put that + ur a minmatar pilot, then the capital piece of junk you had, will only look awesome to look .
were talking about a billion(s) ship . billions that takes time to gather, time that is spent to gather that isk . i completly understand the word pwnmobile is not to be considered in eve, like moms are .. but carriers ?
did ccp ever consider in lowering the build needs for capitals ? to compensate in anyway the pilot/customer for the nerfs ? i really think that customer should be compesated in any way they could be . if a pwnmobile costs 40bil, if its not a pwnmobile anymore, why still does it costs 40bil ?
the issue here is not the nerf or whatever .. is really the isk, time customers spend to gather that sort of resources to buy/build the damm ships . if you wanna nerf, go ahead .. but at least compensate in any way the damage done to players . this is called respect and consideration for the customer that keeps this 4 years game alive .
nerf caps, lower the build reqs ...
put it this way.. cheaper to have 4 carriers camping a system, than actually buying a mothership for that purpose . insane ....
That doesn't change a thing fo people who have already trained and invested in our ships.... That just would effect future pilots which is pointless cause they will no the ships abilitys before they buy it are limited. It does nothing to a person like me who already trained hte ****ing skills and spent hte ****ing isk....
|
BIRDofPREY
Minmatar KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 02:22:00 -
[2762]
Edited by: BIRDofPREY on 25/10/2007 02:24:49 I can believe I read the Whole Fecking Thread....
Two words CCP DRUG TESTING
|
Komaito
AFK
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 06:19:00 -
[2763]
Edited by: Komaito on 25/10/2007 06:20:51
Originally by: Ztrain Edited by: Ztrain on 24/10/2007 23:17:36
Originally by: Komaito Hmmh well... If I understood the 2nd carrier dev blog correctly, the intention of the devs is to encourage a greater variety of shiptypes.
But if pilots just have to refit their carriers to perform various roles, why not use some differently fitted carriers in a gang?
I can't see how carrier specialization via modules encourages the usage of more different ships.
Originally by: CCP garbage Pt.2 Yes, but not like proposed earlier. You will have more choices to make. You can be all you can be, just not all at the same time. We will look at tracking of Fighters, Drones and so forth, including the addition of more Fighter types. We will look at new modules for a broader selection, and at moving basic functionality to modules, such as you have to fit the ship hangar to get the functionality, but offer something up in exchange(like, a slot).
Read a little closer.
Z
I was getting that.
I have just the impression that the proposed changes in the 2nd blog will not promote the usage of more different ship types in gangs, but of several differently fitted carriers.
If CCP is really pursuing the goal of a greater diversity of ships (not carrier fittings), the changes would be meaningless in that regard.
But I guess time will tell... ------------------------------------ radiation... too much radiation... |
Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Lucky Hydra Corp SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 06:30:00 -
[2764]
Hm, I think I can recall the same thing being said about the ECM nerf, Drake nerf, Nos nerf.
Adapt, or die.
|
CHAOS100
Momentum. The Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 06:46:00 -
[2765]
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien Hm, I think I can recall the same thing being said about the ECM nerf, Drake nerf, Nos nerf.
Adapt, or die.
yes there were 3000 posts in response to each of those. --------------
|
infinityshok
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 06:48:00 -
[2766]
It is time the devs realize this idea has ****ed off a significant portion of the Eve community and give in. At this point the only recourse is for some dev to make a new blog saying they've decided to leave the carriers/MSs the way they are and they're sorry for vocally expressing their ideas during a drug-induced stupor. Everyone wants to get back to playing the game and stop spamming all 843 threads bashing this idea than only a lobotomized poo-slinging tree monkey could appreciate.
|
Piper Krul
Union Of Xtreme Military M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 07:53:00 -
[2767]
I would like to say that I have read 109 pages worth of posts on this issue, but that would be a lie. However, after 3 or 4 pages, I already have a big knot in the pit of my stomach.
To put my opinion in the forefront, I have played this game for three years, and I like my carrier just how it is. I did not put almost a years worth of training into this ship and its modules to fly a big battlefield doctor and drone giver. Sure, I can do the logistics stuff when it is required, but honestly I shouldn't be forced to. I can support the fleet, but I also should be able to pwn 3 or 4 3-month players in battleships.
I urge you to not cater to the vast majority who have not invested the time or effort to fly this ship. Let them spend their years to reach the level I am, and don't punish me for my skillpoint total.
Please spend your effort to appease those who have supported you for so many years. Poll everyone who has been a subscriber for 2 or more years, and I guarantee most will tell you to spend your efforts on reducing lag, to make the game more enjoyable and responsive. Forget the nerfbat, and the new ships, until you fix what really needs fixing.
Regards,
Piper Krul
|
LT IRIS
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:16:00 -
[2768]
U HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING!!!! i dont think the drone bays r big enough for carriers and u want to take away the only defence carriers got it takes 10 battleships to = carrier. If the carrier can take a battleship down in 0.2 sec then he shouldnt be in the fight in the first place ITS THE BATTLESHIPS that need support in there fleets not carriers its a CAPITALSHIP! ccp always talks about not getting involved ingame affairs LEAVE IT ALONE
|
Lcdr Welcome
Blue Labs Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:40:00 -
[2769]
Originally by: Piper Krul I would like to say that I have read 109 pages worth of posts on this issue, but that would be a lie. However, after 3 or 4 pages, I already have a big knot in the pit of my stomach.
To put my opinion in the forefront, I have played this game for three years, and I like my carrier just how it is. I did not put almost a years worth of training into this ship and its modules to fly a big battlefield doctor and drone giver. Sure, I can do the logistics stuff when it is required, but honestly I shouldn't be forced to. I can support the fleet, but I also should be able to pwn 3 or 4 3-month players in battleships.
I urge you to not cater to the vast majority who have not invested the time or effort to fly this ship. Let them spend their years to reach the level I am, and don't punish me for my skillpoint total.
Please spend your effort to appease those who have supported you for so many years. Poll everyone who has been a subscriber for 2 or more years, and I guarantee most will tell you to spend your efforts on reducing lag, to make the game more enjoyable and responsive. Forget the nerfbat, and the new ships, until you fix what really needs fixing.
Regards,
Piper Krul
qft ------------------- Lcdr Welcome
|
Annihilator X
Caldari Outkasts
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:06:00 -
[2770]
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien Hm, I think I can recall the same thing being said about the ECM nerf, Drake nerf, Nos nerf.
Adapt, or die.
Battlecruisers dont costs 1-30 billion isk. Battlecruisers can be trained for in less then 1 month not several months and nearly 1 billion isk in skills. ECM and NOS are global nurfs that effect all ships in the game that used them.. thats a game balance... this proposed nurf here is targetd at people who wasted all there time on what now will become a broken logistic ship that wont even be effective at that (at least carriers will become that).
In reality this is no nurf different from any other... but the fact that this one wasted several billion isk and several million sp of several thousand people in EVE this hits us all below the belt. This balance should have been considerd before the ship was ever introduced so you didnt waste your players REAL world time! If you add this you should reimburse people all that skills training time and cash.
Right now this game is ridiculous anyway... capital ships cant hurt little ships without drones or fighters. However a lil frigate can total immunize a carrier (not motherships but a carrier)... basically little eats big.. big cant eat little... makes no sense. Thats a direct result of devs trying to make it user friendly to new players and not to old players. Its the old players that keep the pay checks flowing... if they leave new players wont join a community that has no players. Its a double edge sword.
I think carriers are getting nurfed because motherships are just to powerful in .4-.1 space... no bubbles in "upper low sec" and they can be free to never get scrammed or dampened. Carriers are pieces of trash in comparison for that reason (they DONT need a nurf.. that CANT do it all.. they are gimp now as it is).. nurfing carriers is ridiculous. A carrier may require same skills as a Mom but they are not even close in ability. I am not saying nurf moms and leave carriers alone either... nurfing anyone who spent 30 billion+ isk on something is ridiculous. I was saving up for one.. I am glad I never made it to my goal.
Also that dev response about saying the nurf will come in 3 months but not as it was explained before.... They make mention of how motherships/carriers can "do it all" and they should not be allowed to do that. ALL drone ships can "seemingly" do it all.. even on a battleship and battlecruiser ship level... and they can ALSO all die easy against skilled players (including carriers and moms) This almost seems like at the route of this the devs are hating the idea of drones in general after all these years of adding them to the game.. and you are taking it out on carriers/moms cause they can use the most at one time and tank better. If you nurf carriers into becoming giant floating logistic ships then you should give carriers immunity to EW like the mom... but if you do that.. whats the point of the mom? There is no "easy" answer and it should ALL be left alone... This is turned into more of a philosophical debate in which players are going to be penalized on some random experiment based on some random philosphy of how it "should be" or how it "could be".
If you want people to use other "end game" ships.....boost dreads and titans.... leave carriers and moms alone.... better year boost carrier and leave mom alone. Or how about this... invent NEW capital ships to pick from... if we had options on the capital level like we did for frigates and cruisers.... no one would be ALL going for the same carrier/mom as their end game goal.
|
|
Lord Timelord
Artifex Dynamics New Eden Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:54:00 -
[2771]
Originally by: Robet Katrix About 2-3 Months ago I was flying my carrier and i got caught.
we had a 15 man IAC gang coming through 49-u. (this was shortly after we had lost sedith's aeon) we only had about 7 in gang, 2 command ships a inty or two and something else. we used a claymore as bait figuring he could tank them until i exited warp and got remote reps on him.
Plan fell apart. i intiated warp early but claymore died as i locked him. the other 2 inties died as inties tend to do and it quickly became a chimera and an Eos vs. a 15 man gang. With only shield transfers i couldn't keep the Eos alive forever, he died after we had killed a phoon a rapier and something else because of his webs + my drones.
Now im trapped. 13 hostiles (more incoming from IAC territory) holding me in place a blasted caracal dampening me and no support anywheres close.
I have a good tank and they dont ahve much DPS so im survivng for the minute. i drop 12 t2 light drones (twice) but kill them with my own faction smartbombs. third time i managed to get them out and not kill them and they auto-aggro a cruiser. i wait a minute and figure hes probly tanking them. Recall them try mediums which auto aggro on an interceptor. recall them. I MANAGE TO LOCK a battlecruiser who gets in close. drop 3 web drones and 9 heavies. put my warp disruptor on him. they shoot my heavy drones down. i launch fighters. by this point hes out of warp disruptor range and all of a sudden i have lost all my fighters for 3 minutes while he takes them on a ride.
their support is continuing to grow.
i eventually get my fighters back and switch to sentries. sentries autoaggro something and pop it. im so happy ;p. they then shoot something else but i dont know what. it says their fighting so i let them do their thing.
they were attacking the damp caracal! yay. he warps out. im locking **** now. start shooting at their dictor with sentries he out-tracks them. try to switch. sentries are out of range. activate smartbombs and try to kill them so i can launch heavies and web drones. arazu just came in. im screwed. damp caracal is back now too.
wait 5 minutes under more fire tank is still holding. drop heavies and let them run loose.
10 minutes later friendly fleet comes to save me.
now.
with your changes what kind of defense do you think 5 drones would offer me vs. the 12 i had before?
Quoted for speaking like a TRUE carrier pilot! If the forthcoming changes in 3+ Months of time isn't thought out VERY carefully... CCP is liable to severely aggo a large part of the long-term, loyal player base. This might cause a large portion of them to leave the game in disgust.
I for one have been flying a carrier since January 2006. Think about that for a minute. That's one year and 10 Months! Do I really want to have something that I've sunk so much time, effort, isk, and sp into be delegated to a ship that I can't use solo if I so choose?
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! __________
My Corporation's Website
|
iiixiii
GREY COUNCIL Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 12:19:00 -
[2772]
carriers/motherships dont need a nerf!!! a lone carrier is a dead carrier... their easy to kill even if they use 15 fighters. So rendering them down to just 5 fighters is omfgwtfbbq.. am glad i dont fly one myself! would been a waste of time training for one if these changes goes live!
GREYC
iiixiii |
Lord Oz
Caldari Warrior Nation United SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 12:34:00 -
[2773]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: pershphanie
Originally by: CCP Zulupark There won't be any difference between a Carrier and a Mothership!! If this change nullifies the difference between those two ships, what's the difference today?
Motherships do more damage than a carrier.
Seriously dude. Witness protection program. Think about it.
If the reason for flying a mothership over a carrier is just that it does more damage, what's the change? It will still do more damage if it delegates the extra fighters it has over carriers?
Well it seems no matter what anyone says, youve made up your mind in doing the carrier nerf. And the end result is still the same, less damage. But I dont fly carriers anyway so GL everyone.
SKILL QUEUE It's on the "to do" list since, like, forever. Just do it already, ffs. It's not like it's rocket science... |
sia alexandria
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 14:33:00 -
[2774]
Aweful, horrible, nasty idea. Of course carriers should be able to kill Bs's, of course they should be better than killing. Of course it should take a specially outfitted Bs and/or several others to pose a serious threat to it.
This is what you get for you investment in time, isk and sp.
just like any other ship. more cost/Reqs = a better ship. this chage would be saying all ships should be noob frigs, cause why should people who have trained and spent more have an advantage! is ANYONE seriously arguing that!
carriers and moms are fine the way they are. they are not invincable. they are not an i win button, they are difficult to kill and they should be. if your going after a carrier/mom you should be fitted, trained and have a plan to counter it.
i could go on forever. but this is not a good idea, ccp for the love of god abbandon these changes
|
Rachen Mysuna
Brotherhood of Polar Equation Mordus Angels
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 15:14:00 -
[2775]
Originally by: sia alexandria Aweful, horrible, nasty idea. Of course carriers should be able to kill Bs's, of course they should be better than killing. Of course it should take a specially outfitted Bs and/or several others to pose a serious threat to it.
This is what you get for you investment in time, isk and sp.
just like any other ship. more cost/Reqs = a better ship. this chage would be saying all ships should be noob frigs, cause why should people who have trained and spent more have an advantage! is ANYONE seriously arguing that!
carriers and moms are fine the way they are. they are not invincable. they are not an i win button, they are difficult to kill and they should be. if your going after a carrier/mom you should be fitted, trained and have a plan to counter it.
i could go on forever. but this is not a good idea, ccp for the love of god abbandon these changes
agree 100% on this one, just drop the changes CCP they are not needed nor wanted
|
Silent Justice
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 16:15:00 -
[2776]
Edited by: Silent Justice on 25/10/2007 16:15:20 ok, i have just read this since being away, and all i can say is, why? why are you thinking of doing it ccp? thought you changed carriers/MS so they could fight on the front, now your changing it back? i actually dont know what to say, apart from, for the love of god, dont nerf dreads too
|
RubberDuckey
Amarr UNITED STAR SYNDICATE Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 16:33:00 -
[2777]
Sorry CCP but Carrier Changes = Epic Fail
|
TheSard
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 16:50:00 -
[2778]
Great change CCP. It will force fleets to be balanced, not just carrier/mom ownage expresses.
|
Olli Hokkanen
Full Life Alternative
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 16:58:00 -
[2779]
Originally by: TheSard Great change CCP. It will force fleets to be balanced, not just carrier/mom ownage expresses.
go troll elsewhere, and post with your main
|
Malena Panic
Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 17:20:00 -
[2780]
Originally by: Olli Hokkanen go troll elsewhere, and post with your main
WTF? So now a dissenting opinion is a 'troll'? THIS is the disgusting sense of entitlement that makes all 110 pages of this thread stink to high heaven.
|
|
Quanteeri
Invicta.
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 17:34:00 -
[2781]
Edited by: Quanteeri on 25/10/2007 17:36:15 I love this idea so much I want to hump it in the ear!
Thank you CCP for trying to bring combat back to the diverse fleet. |
|
CCP Wrangler
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 17:52:00 -
[2782]
Since we have another Dev Blog and thread on this, please continue the discussion in that thread.
Wrangler Community Manager EVE Online, CCP Games Email/Netfang
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it." |
|
|
|
|
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 |