| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
M. PIRE
   |
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:46:00 -
[31]
I see what they're trying to accomplish, and think it's a worthy plan.
lets face it, 'carrier only' blobs is just a bit silly. If you see 'mothership only' blobs in lowsec, then it's gone beyond silly, into ludicrous.
However I think this might not do what they want it to - most carrier pilots have a cyno alt. Now they need a 'fighter delegation alt' too. Yay for blobs.
--
Crane needs more grid
249km locking?
GMP and TNP |
Eddie Gordo
Minmatar
Masuat'aa Matari
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:46:00 -
[32]
This doesnt really make sense. When carriers first came along people NEVER really put them on the front line, they stayed at a POS and assigned fighters out. CCP thought long and hard about this and gave a boost to capital remote repping to try and coax them out of hiding.
Now that people DO use them on the front lines they remove any incentive to do so. Is anyone really going to bother putting a capital ship infront of enemy guns if you can only directly control 5 at a time? I doubt many will bother.
Now Recruiting |
Deanna Nuchi
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:49:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Deanna Nuchi on 21/10/2007 11:52:14
 Originally by: DeadDuck
Originally by: rig0r
Originally by: DeadDuck
Very nice... to the people about to whine think in how this will benefit the lag aspect 
Nerfing ships is not the answer to lag reduction.
Sigh.
In the case of drone spamage .. it is...
Bull, stop towing that tired old mantra.
If anything, it will increase lag, because of the additional calculations that will need to be made..
|
Molly Neuro
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:51:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Plave Okice
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Well, we have an idea, and before you go ballistic remember that this is an idea and weære still working on it:
Quick, let's all whine before they actually decide what they're going to do.
Are you new?
It's very unusual (from what I've seen) for CCP to propose an idea (bad or otherwise) and change it in any substantial way.
Tacking on a "hey let's all chat about this" line is just to soften the blow.
As one of my accounts is a carrier pilot I think this is a crap change. But then if you spend month of time and effort training something up, then have the rules changed and the drones yanked out from under you, it's hardly surprising I'd think it was crap :(
will this only apply to fighters or to all drones? If it's all drones then there goes some of your argument that it's for support (armor / shield drones) and god help you if you're caught alone by anything, BS or otherwise, 5 fighters or drones without a bonus isn't going to terrify anyone.
I wouldn't suggest that any ship should be a solo pwn mobile, but considering the expense, and the length of time to train I think the ship should be able to defend itself in a reasonable manner and this includes deploying all the fighters / drones that your skills allow even if they are just for you and not for gang mates.
|
Boomershoot
Caldari
Insurgent New Eden Tribe
Deus Ex.
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:51:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Boomershoot on 21/10/2007 11:52:14
Originally by: DeadDuck
Originally by: rig0r
Originally by: DeadDuck
Very nice... to the people about to whine think in how this will benefit the lag aspect
Nerfing ships is not the answer to lag reduction.
Sigh.
In the case of drone spamage .. it is...
will only take carrier camping to higher level, wich means thrice the ships, and the same amount of drones
it's not the damn lag reduction, stop thinking that way
EDIT: also, LOL at capital nos/neut
-----------------------------------------------
"1, 2, 3, shuttle reprocessing is right for me" |
Ratzap
Gallente
Old Farts
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:52:00 -
[36]
I like it 8)
I only bothered learning carriers to haul my ships round easily. This saves me the hassle of training adv drone or fighter skill over 2. How about upping the cargo bay again please then CCP? Can't carry jack atm and if you're going to make them back into armed ship taxis at least make boot big enough to fit everyone's suitcases
Ratzap
|
Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:52:00 -
[37]
Fun with rampant curiosity: I wonder if it would be possible, under this system, to form a small gang of carriers and reciprocally assign control? IE Pilot A assigns 5 fighters to Pilots B and C, Pilot B assigns 5 to C and A, and so on, creating what we will lovingly call a "circlejerk". In theory, a circlejerk might allow said carriers to behave something not entirely unlike how they do at the moment.
I'm sure this loophole never existed in the first place, but it's something to consider. Allowing circlejerks would encourage small group play over solo without completely declawing carriers.
|
Inturist
Nuclear Reactor Inc
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:53:00 -
[38]
/me putting sticker on his chimera - " XL Badger MK 3 " 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Miriyana
Gallente
Legions of Derek
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:54:00 -
[39]
='[
- - - - - -
Change just leads to more problems
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
Oh please no, I've had enough with real world taxes, and dealing with the tax agency. No more taxes!!
|
Stork DK
Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:54:00 -
[40]
This sounds like bad changes...
Jumping into a fleet battle and then having to assing fighters to 4 players sound a bit annoying. And we all know how well drones react when theres a bit lagg... Bad CCP! Bad! 
--------------
Originally by: omiNATION
Originally by: Triumdicta
we're getting a new kind of ore?
CAREBEAR ALERT
|
Molly Neuro
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:54:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Ratzap
I like it 8)
I only bothered learning carriers to haul my ships round easily. This saves me the hassle of training adv drone or fighter skill over 2. How about upping the cargo bay again please then CCP? Can't carry jack atm and if you're going to make them back into armed ship taxis at least make boot big enough to fit everyone's suitcases
Ratzap
Even this use will be removed with jump freighters -
"armed ship taxis"  not even that well armed. |
Boomershoot
Caldari
Insurgent New Eden Tribe
Deus Ex.
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:55:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Amarria Black
Fun with rampant curiosity: I wonder if it would be possible, under this system, to form a small gang of carriers and reciprocally assign control? IE Pilot A assigns 5 fighters to Pilots B and C, Pilot B assigns 5 to C and A, and so on, creating what we will lovingly call a "circlejerk". In theory, a circlejerk might allow said carriers to behave something not entirely unlike how they do at the moment.
I'm sure this loophole never existed in the first place, but it's something to consider. Allowing circlejerks would encourage small group play over solo without completely declawing carriers.
carrier A to G assing 5 fighter each to carrier H, Carrier H now has 5 fighters out + 35 assigned
it doesn't work that way :|
-----------------------------------------------
"1, 2, 3, shuttle reprocessing is right for me" |
Victor Ivanov
Minmatar
The Fated
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:55:00 -
[43]
I somewhat like the founding concept behind this change, however the application is... I don't know.
Painful for a carrier pilot. Now, I won't whine, because I do see merit in the idea.
But.. Meh, I think every carrier pilot feels the same right now. We've needed to train months and months and months to get into this ship, some of them wasted on useless skills that have no discernible effect on our direct environment, and now a nerf to our actual usefulness. Being scrambled by an interceptor? Use 13 warrior II's to save yourself.
13 repping drones? Nope, no can do. 5 maximum. Jamming drones? Nope.
This isn't just a nerf to DPS. It's a nerf to our usefullness. To my knowledge, a carrier isn't special because it can launch fighters. As anyone who flies a carrier knows, fighters are extremely fragile and not really that useful most of the time.
But meh, I'll probably get used to the idea over time. Just sad to see my nidhoggur, with an already pre-nerfed tank, decline even more in usefullness.
----------------------
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
MASS HOMICIDE
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:56:00 -
[44]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
While I agree with the change because it should stop the solo romping carrier or mothership, im not sure how this is going to reduce the 200+ fighter clouds that lag out a node entirely?
it fixes because as it works now, peopel simply send 30 carriers to the gate or POS release drones and dont need to repss anything, simply ignorign lag. If you need to assign fighters. You won 't be imune to lag. That means it will be stupid to GENERATE lag with carriers (that is what people do now).
Very smart move CCP. I just think a bit of balance is needed. Like carrier controllign 5 at a time and motherships maybe 10 ?
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough |
Griffinator
Gallente
Contraband Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:57:00 -
[45]
this has to be one of the worst ideas i have ever heard of, now im sure someone is about to flame me for what i am about to say but hey instead of just flaming me without reading what i put, for once read it.
carriers are the smaller versions of the motherships that bit is obvious they should be the ones who have this change not motherships, i actually fly my carrier all the time nowadays as i know i have the tank that can be ultimately changed to suit the situation, this will not decrease lag this will just make more carriers go into the battlefields and actually increase it,
But saying that 5 drones i agree with,
however fighters are the carriers main defence you can't fit guns to a carrier if you get jumped by a large group of battleships at sniping range and you only have 5 fighters that you can control then you'r basically dead as your fighters will get sniped out before you have a chance to lock the target,
not all of us fly our carriers in a large group all the time sometimes we are doing other things with them things that although they may not be designed for still work well all the same,
you have nerfed the snot out of basically all of us enough already with drone changes please look at what you are doing gallente pilots a year and a half ago had a good ship with the fact the dominix could use 10 drones when they are the primary drone users, now the only 2 things that we have is the thanatos and the nyx thats it total, everything else is worthless not due to its ability nor due to the ability of the pilot just due to the damage that can be done, changing this will make the caldari still the noob race and the matari the top dogs again,
instead of doing this proposed change look at the empire and change that disperse it around dont kill off one of the only fun elements in the game,
killing a carrier is one of the best things in the world and i'm talking to the little guys you all have the chance to do it and when you kill a carrier/mom with the current state of play it's a very large medal to pin on your chest "hi guys last night we jumped a carrier and we killed it" *rounds of applause* as it is a acheivment defeating a carrier that can defend itself now with this proposed change if it comes in it will be almost as much fun as killing a battleship nothng to write home about.
so in closing all i have to say is STOP NERFING THE GALLENTE & THE PEOPLE WHO TRAINED FOR THESE THINGS 3 months training at the very least is not worth the time if this goes through drones dont cause lag 900 people in a frigging 0.9 system do.
if anyone one wants to argue this point with me from CCP feel free to convo me in game.
|
mancert
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 11:58:00 -
[46]
This is just stupid if you ask me.
Not all carrier pilots is loaded with isk, and can afford to loose caps all the time. If they nerf the amount of fighterdrones i'm gonna sell mine. How the hell am i going to defend myselves from a gangert squad with only 5 fighters??
CCP STOP nerfing everything, you are ruining a great game. AND yes i'm a carebear. But still fly caps. And want all my drones in case i need to defend my selves.
|
Inturist
Nuclear Reactor Inc
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 12:00:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Inturist on 21/10/2007 12:01:49
Originally by: Griffinator
TRUE
Just to correct u m8 , they nerfing not only Gallente Pilots , but all the carrier pilots in the game .
Tbh , so , advanced drone interfacing lvl 5 trained for nothing now ? freaking awesome 
edit: some spelling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Arana Tellen
Gallente
The Blackguard Wolves
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 12:01:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Amarria Black
Fun with rampant curiosity: I wonder if it would be possible, under this system, to form a small gang of carriers and reciprocally assign control? IE Pilot A assigns 5 fighters to Pilots B and C, Pilot B assigns 5 to C and A, and so on, creating what we will lovingly call a "circlejerk". In theory, a circlejerk might allow said carriers to behave something not entirely unlike how they do at the moment.
I'm sure this loophole never existed in the first place, but it's something to consider. Allowing circlejerks would encourage small group play over solo without completely declawing carriers.
hard limmit 5 drones controlled at any time.
---------------------------------
Core 2 Duo E4300 1.8ghz @ 3ghz |
Theo Samaritan
Gallente
Pheonix Reborn
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 12:02:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Ratzap
I like it 8)
I only bothered learning carriers to haul my ships round easily. This saves me the hassle of training adv drone or fighter skill over 2. How about upping the cargo bay again please then CCP? Can't carry jack atm and if you're going to make them back into armed ship taxis at least make boot big enough to fit everyone's suitcases
Ratzap
sorry to say, if you want to assign people fighters, ull need your drone skills up.
______________________________
A Request About Lag Discussion
--
Yet another "Edit my sig devs!" request \o/ |
|
Jacques Archambault
Forum Moderator
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 12:02:00 -
[50]
Hello everyone,
In the interest of keeping all of your ideas in one location (helps the Devs better keep track of your ideas/comments) Please discuss this topic here, in the official thread for it in the EVE Information Portal forum.
Thank you!
-Jacques
forum rules | [email protected] | Our Website!
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |