EVE Search - carrier, moms nerf incoming

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

carrier, moms nerf incoming

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ruato Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:34:00 - [31] Originally by: Tempelier Edited by: Tempelier on 21/10/2007 12:13:50 Why not work on your "core system" first! to finally let you play in fleet fights and not staring at your monitor for about 15 mins.. Nerving everything is not helping your main problem.. so I petition! Maybe they are. Atleast somewhat. Carrier/mom blobs cause insane amounts of lag. And if this change reduces the efficiency of that blob, lag might get better. (you no longer can field capital only blob to be effective -> more people in smaller ships -> less fighters around -> less lag.) --- *Get rid of those bleeping secure containers. bleep!*
Tempest Kane Amarr Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:36:00 - [32] This the most ****** thing you have ever done to super capitals and capitals in general.... oh wait.. no its not. Please stop giving us ships that cost 20-30bill then 8 months later turning them into 100mill Domix's, your taking the ** now ccp. Get a clue.
Adoro Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:37:00 - [33] Originally by: SpaceTrucker 3000 I love this idea. The whiners crying in this thread are mostly cap-blobbers: they jump carriers and motherships en masse and lock down systems with so much lag that it's impossible to do anything. There are so many fighter drones that only another blob of caps can counter them, since battleships and command ships melt in miliseconds. However being able to deploy unlimited fighters and drones isn't that a good idea. While carriers usually have 17-18 fighters, they can bring virtually an unlimited amount of regular drones. A single carrier could provide enough heavy drones for a whole fleet, and that wouldn't help lag very much. Maybe this could be controlled with the bandwidth thing, and allow like 15 fighters and a few extra smaller drones. With this change at least a fleet would have to be more compensated. Instead of bringing 40 carriers and just raze everything without any kind of risk, you'd have to bring 20 or 30 smaller ships to control the drones. Finally support ships would have something to shoot at (each other), instead of just being meat shields waiting to be melted. You ever actually flown a carrier or seen one? 1. BS and CS dont melt in miliseconds 2. Good luck deploying 18 fighters from a carrier in its current state... 3. "A single carrier could provide enough heavy drones for a whole fleet, and that wouldn't help lag very much." Uhm what? -------- Originally by: Lavinrac Krad You're either one of us or a Minmatar! What about Amarr? Bah, ha ha ha ha, Amarr, lol...
Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:39:00 - [34] I think this nerf is fine, can't see any problem with it personally. In a different game, you wouldn't have this problem as there might be a system whereby to field 1 mothership you need 10 - 15 support ships or it won't have enough crew or fuel or somesuch. This nerf isn't really against carriers/Mo-ships as such, but against blobbing carriers Khaldari
Three0fNine FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:41:00 - [35] Edited by: Three0fNine on 21/10/2007 13:41:02 Originally by: Ruato Carrier/mom blobs cause insane amounts of lag And the solution is to nerv them, that noone uses them anymore?? when you right arm is itching you can cut off the arm of course. It won¦t itch anymore...
ZelRox Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:43:00 - [36] 2 years ago or so you removed the ability to control 10 drones, and gave us 5 drones + damage. The carriers and mother ships were the ultimate drone control ships and have the ability to control 10+ drones, with a single damage bonus. This will not reduce the amount of drones, it will just complicate the usage. And with the lag we are experiencing in any kind of fleet battle, this idea is useless. Bury it somewhere deep and forget about it. Find yourself another project to work on. ---------------------- BiH 4tw
Ruato Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:48:00 - [37] Originally by: Three0fNine And the solution is to nerv them, that noone uses them anymore?? when you right arm is itching you can cut off the arm of course. It won¦t itch anymore... Thats overreacting.. This would not nerf carriers so that nobody would use them anymore. You just would need support which you use to delegate your fighters. So pure carrier blob is no longer an option. Which obviously is a damn good change. If they do nothing, eventually you have only 2 choices if you want to participate in fleet fight: 1) Train into capital ships, or 2) train into dictors so you can stop capital ships. (because every other ship type will be useless in fleet fights) --- *Get rid of those bleeping secure containers. bleep!*
Elmicker Black Sea Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:52:00 - [38] Originally by: Ruato Thats overreacting.. This would not nerf carriers so that nobody would use them anymore Yes it would. Assignment is impractical due to lag and coordination problems, and abandons the damage bonus from the "fighters" skill (effectively halving the number of fighters). All this leaves you are your remote rep capabilities, which are all but useless in sub-capital fights as it takes too long to lock the primary target. Everything your carrier does, a dominix or logistics ship now does better.
DarkXeRoX Biohazzard Task Force Mass Destruction.	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:58:00 - [39] Eve is realy going down hill then, ccp releases stuff and it looks all cool and all that so ppl train up then a bit later on they nerf it and the time u trained for em is wasted. Carriers do cost quite a lot more as battleships so do motherships. Their not solo pwnmobiles ( cept moms in low sec however still they die out there ). So why cant a mothership 20-30 billion with ppl spending another couple billion on gear not whipe a battleship out ? Its a far bigger ship and far more sp and isk spend on it, i mean a ship that cost 30times more as a battleship should be able to take out a battleship on its own very easely not ? Super capitals arent Super anymore already with the dictor bubbles being able to stop em from jumping and all that stuff. Carriers well they arnt that hard to take out either. BTF is Recruiting!
Mifter Hogdido Amarr The 0ri Origin Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.21 13:59:00 - [40] Originally by: SpaceTrucker 3000 I love this idea. The whiners crying in this thread are mostly cap-blobbers: they jump carriers and motherships en masse and lock down systems with so much lag that it's impossible to do anything. That's strange since I firmly oppose this nerfing idea and I cant even fly a carrier yet. You just got owned. ----------------- Its "the" by the way, not whatever the made up use of letters "teh" means.
Ruato Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:03:00 - [41] Originally by: Elmicker Originally by: Ruato Thats overreacting.. This would not nerf carriers so that nobody would use them anymore Yes it would. Assignment is impractical due to lag and coordination problems, and abandons the damage bonus from the "fighters" skill (effectively halving the number of fighters). All this leaves you are your remote rep capabilities, which are all but useless in sub-capital fights as it takes too long to lock the primary target. Everything your carrier does, a dominix or logistics ship now does better. Well, let me ask you this: Huge carrier blobs is the right way for this game to go? Because if they do nothing and let current situation go on, eventually normal (sub-capital) ships just dont have place in fleets anymore. --- *Get rid of those bleeping secure containers. bleep!*
Nomispanco Minmatar	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:10:00 - [42] /Signed , Stupid Nerf -- Nomispanco --
Black Jumper Altera Odyssea Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:16:00 - [43] Edited by: Black Jumper on 21/10/2007 14:16:29 Originally by: Crohnx oh and can u erase like 60mil of my skillpoints while ure at it so those 1 week old players can stop whining and play with people that are in here 3+ years , really wtf Can i have your stuff ? Sorry mate, I just so wanted to do that, couldn't resist, really.
XXJackXX	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:20:00 - [44] Training lots of skill getting all skills maxed then CCP hey it is overpowered we are nerfing it.This is kinda boring.Capitals and supercapitals.They are support but for capitals and in a capital battle if you cant launch all figthers you need your supports in grid(Capitals and fighters making enough lag) and getting in supports to control those fighters to launch on same target will make it hard.And they are capital they are suppose to kill a bs.I'm killing bs in 3 shots with my moros so you gonna nerf dreads too?. If you want to carriers nber nerf fighter damage not the control able drones or if you are limiting the drone count in same time give more damage bonus for carriers.
Uber Amos Gallente Mean Corp The Church.	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:20:00 - [45] ... Let's add capital ships to the game! They can be tougher than battleships and we can have carriers that can launch lots of fighters, and motherships that can control more, titans that can atack an area remotly, and dreadnoughts for ... killing POS's... Then let's nerf them so no-one uses them! Hurrah! Yeah, I don't think it's a good idea... a carrier is a BIG risk on the front line, a mothership is vulnerable to far less... but is worth far more. Yeah fighters aren't difficult to kill.. and motherships/carriers can only carry so many.. So rather than kill motherships, kill their fighters :P But I think this is an unnessesary nerf, that serves no purpose... The people who only use them to assign fighters, makes no difference, the people who use their carriers/motherships on the front line... wont... so they will be harder to track down and kill... and the people who try to kill them will have less drones to kill.. and there are no drone bonuses.. wow... I think this is a Nerf Too Far (and I DON'T fly capital ships before people ask :P) --- Imgaine the Duck, the Caldari Electronic Warfare Command Ship... "OMG A DUCK! PRIMARY IS THE DUCK!!! Quick before it JAMS us!"
iiOs	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:20:00 - [46] good change
Trass Caldari DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:26:00 - [47] Originally by: Ruato Carrier/mom blobs cause insane amounts of lag. And if this change reduces the efficiency of that blob, lag might get better. We have lags so we nerfing caps? Normaly when healthy company have big problems with their products, they dismiss existing programers and employ new, wisest guys (no offence). When CCP have problem with their product, they punish players, make them suffer
Hunlight Faithus Ravenclaw Manufacturing DeStInY.	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:26:00 - [48] can undertand carriers are support but come on we need to do some dmg hell our supprot fleet killed wtf we have 5 fighters great NOT come on ccp be realistic, yes carriers r support, but also think of it as extra laod on server i send command to mine that 1 command i give my gagn mates my fighter now 3 commands r sent, please ccp carriers r meant for fighters etc let us control our own damn fighters please this is one major chnage that is for the worst.
Alyxa Mahan	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:35:00 - [49] Originally by: Trass Normaly when healthy company have big problems with their products, they dismiss existing programers and employ new, wisest guys (no offence). When CCP have problem with their product, they punish players, make them suffer Lemme guess, EVE is your first MMO?
Aurore Black	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:35:00 - [50] Hey CCp, wake up... if i put some B isk in my carrier it's not to make the dps of a battlecruiser... carrier is a big drone bay. how can a carrier defend if he can just control 5 drones ? with 10 it's already hard so with 5... This idea is ridiculous.../signed, stupid nerf
ITTigerClawIK Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.21 14:45:00 - [51] im Sorry i waited 2 years for a carrier most of the time waiting for a carrier to come out and then all the hard work and skill training to get into one and now you just killed it.... the reason BS's get taken out so quickly is couse they concentrate on the carrier and not killing the fighters.. if you kill the fighters then there is no problems... maybe Zulupark needs to learn how to fly a BS properly himself Sig space reclaimed in the name of me -courtesy of Tiggy ([email protected])
Benn Helmsman Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:08:00 - [52] Edited by: Benn Helmsman on 21/10/2007 15:08:14 I see the change as a good one, because there will be more and more carriers on the field, rendering most any other ship useless while you have ultimate lagbombs. 300 Carrier = 4500 Fighter... They reacted soon enough, i am proud of CCP (this time).
Trass Caldari DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:13:00 - [53] Edited by: Trass on 21/10/2007 15:15:25 Originally by: Alyxa Mahan EVE is your first MMO? You know any other so big MMORPG (no MMO) and company that theoretically have potential to make games like quake4 or battlefield 3? No? So STFU.
Elmicker Black Sea Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:17:00 - [54] Originally by: Ruato Because if they do nothing and let current situation go on, eventually normal (sub-capital) ships just dont have place in fleets anymore. What bull****. The full scale capital blob has probably happened a half a dozen times, if that. The vast, vast, vast majority of PvP is still done in battleships and below. Carriers and capitals still need support fleets, and always will. Yes, fighter and drone mechanics need tweaking, but this is totally the wrong way to go about it.
Benn Helmsman Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:29:00 - [55] Originally by: Elmicker Originally by: Ruato Because if they do nothing and let current situation go on, eventually normal (sub-capital) ships just dont have place in fleets anymore. What bull****. The full scale capital blob has probably happened a half a dozen times, if that. The vast, vast, vast majority of PvP is still done in battleships and below. Carriers and capitals still need support fleets, and always will. Yes, fighter and drone mechanics need tweaking, but this is totally the wrong way to go about it. Yet... wait a year and it will become very very common.
Xaarist FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:36:00 - [56] one thing is certain after reading up to this point. some people still talk about things they have no clue about. the two favoured myths from my perspective: 1st myth: carrier only blobs: i have never ever seen a carrier only blob. the most carriers in gang i have seen was around 50, with the gang being at least twice the size, probably even more. do they create more lag than other ships? what if the 100 BS blob deploys drones, ain't that the same? there have been incidents where fights involving a lot of carriers were laggy, this is true. but in the end the carriers were not alone, it was the 500 other people in system which caused this major lag. i think most people refer to the 0oy fight when talking about "the carrier blob lag", it is a perfect example. some ppl spotted 50 carriers and it is easy to blame lag on them. ask yourselves. would that fight have had less lag if it was 25 carriers less and instead of them 25 intys? i say: NOT AT ALL. 2nd myth: the prospected changes will in any way help to lessen lag: the opposite will be the case, delegation, management, will add to the lag, and more people will be unable to do anything. example: a fighter controlled by a carrier kills something: carrier gets a mail. a fighter delegated to someone kill something: carrier pilot and controlling pilot get the mail. more people will be involved and they will be involved. also, if more people have drones assigned, more people will warp around with them, deployed fighters protect their target if it gets agressed, all calculations are done twice, since the carrier pilot himself still has contact to his drones (recall command, damage bars, calculation where the drones are (distant, local space) and what they are doing (following, fighting, ..)). it won't help lag a single bit. and after all, CCP did never say in the blog they do that because of the lag. i think they do it, because the other explanation given are just stupid and untrue, so there has got to be something else behind the thoughts. but i wanted to state that they did not say it has anything to do with lag. ---------------- Your signature image exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie
Icome4u Caldari Dark and Light inc. D-L	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:40:00 - [57] Edited by: Icome4u on 21/10/2007 15:44:23 FCK YOU CCP! FCK YOU! You fcking do this and i'm out. FCKING BLLSHT. Got that? STOP NERFING SHIPS LIKE THIS! Do you even realize you are RUINING the game? What the heck is next? Cut all high damage slots by half to make fights last longer? Hey how about freaking cutting all dps in half and making all shield boosters and armor reppers have a 200% bonus! Yay longer fights!!! You guys are ruining this game, it sucks! You CAN'T nerf ships like this, we pay for something and you CHANGE it? That's bad unethical business. If Ford ever came knocking at my door to tell me they are nerfing my car and changing the engine to some **** 4cylinder id tell them to fck off and introduce them to my lawyer. Get real CCP, stop ruining the game for vets/old players just to show noobs you 'care' about them. FCK YOU! ______ Originally by: Vyger If I lose connection while walking around a station will my avatar run off in a random direction and go hide in a corner?
Benn Helmsman Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:44:00 - [58] Edited by: Benn Helmsman on 21/10/2007 15:44:46 Originally by: Xaarist one thing is certain after reading up to this point. some people still talk about things they have no clue about. the two favoured myths from my perspective: 1st myth: carrier only blobs: i have never ever seen a carrier only blob. the most carriers in gang i have seen was around 50, with the gang being at least twice the size, probably even more. do they create more lag than other ships? what if the 100 BS blob deploys drones, ain't that the same? there have been incidents where fights involving a lot of carriers were laggy, this is true. but in the end the carriers were not alone, it was the 500 other people in system which caused this major lag. i think most people refer to the 0oy fight when talking about "the carrier blob lag", it is a perfect example. some ppl spotted 50 carriers and it is easy to blame lag on them. ask yourselves. would that fight have had less lag if it was 25 carriers less and instead of them 25 intys? i say: NOT AT ALL. 2nd myth: the prospected changes will in any way help to lessen lag: the opposite will be the case, delegation, management, will add to the lag, and more people will be unable to do anything. example: a fighter controlled by a carrier kills something: carrier gets a mail. a fighter delegated to someone kill something: carrier pilot and controlling pilot get the mail. more people will be involved and they will be involved. also, if more people have drones assigned, more people will warp around with them, deployed fighters protect their target if it gets agressed, all calculations are done twice, since the carrier pilot himself still has contact to his drones (recall command, damage bars, calculation where the drones are (distant, local space) and what they are doing (following, fighting, ..)). it won't help lag a single bit. and after all, CCP did never say in the blog they do that because of the lag. i think they do it, because the other explanation given are just stupid and untrue, so there has got to be something else behind the thoughts. but i wanted to state that they did not say it has anything to do with lag. 1) Carrier blobs arent uberly common now, but they would become very very popular without this change. 2) The change reduce the drones/fighter on battlefield dramatically. Because other ships cant use their own drones and you cant field an unlimited number of carriers.
Arenis Xemdal Amarr	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:44:00 - [59] The word that comes to mind when describing their solution is "uninspired". Its like they're not even trying and going for the most direct solution without considering other things.
Noa Fuyu Amarr Wings of Redemption Black Flag Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.21 15:57:00 - [60] Dont fix things that arent broken. I would throw a hundred ships into the void just to see you crushed.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.