| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Fate
Caldari
Hammerfall Industries
   |
Posted - 2007.10.21 20:49:00 -
[1]
Why are you nerfing carriers? Carriers - this ship class should be in front line of battle not sitting in SS and assigning fighters.
Carriers are already thin like paper but now you are nerfing them even more! And if nossed/EW-d they are useless bricks!
Or please let us fit capital guns in high slots! Or make them immune to NOS/EW!
|
madaluap
Gallente
Mercenary Forces
Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 22:38:00 -
[2]
Edited by: madaluap on 21/10/2007 22:38:56
 Originally by: The Fate
Why are you nerfing carriers? Carriers - this ship class should be in front line of battle not sitting in SS and assigning fighters.
Carriers are already thin like paper but now you are nerfing them even more! And if nossed/EW-d they are useless bricks!
Or please let us fit capital guns in high slots! Or make them immune to NOS/EW!
What a great idea to make a 1 bil ship immune to nos/EW, not overpowered in the least. Or capital guns on a that special designed remote repping support vessel. Not to mention it just has 200 k armor or shield and can deal 1200 dps while having no problem to tank quite some damage, especially if you start using them in groups.
Yes, it should be on the frontline as support ship, not solo pwn mobile that everyone and their dog can get for a couple pennies.
_________________________________________________
Breetime
A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA |
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 23:05:00 -
[3]
You know, some of us are trying to steer the game away from Capital Ships Online. Having a role is fine, but dominating every engagement scenario is just silly.
|
ReePeR McAllem
The Carebear Stare
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 23:10:00 -
[4]
Carriers were not supposed to be wtf pwn mobiles. They are SUPPORT ships.
Though I do not agree with this coming nerf.
|
madaluap
Gallente
Mercenary Forces
Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.10.21 23:19:00 -
[5]
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Carriers were not supposed to be wtf pwn mobiles. They are SUPPORT ships.
Though I do not agree with this coming nerf.
What do you think is a decent change than or do you believe the situation is allready fine. Just wondering.
_________________________________________________
Breetime
A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA |
Sammell
Amarr
The Nova Foundation
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 00:08:00 -
[6]
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Carriers were not supposed to be wtf pwn mobiles. They are SUPPORT ships.
Though I do not agree with this coming nerf.
Carriers are still quite vulnerable to small and organized gangs, it's only with a team that they are truly effective.
I think that things are quite alright now a few tweaks would be ok but I don't think limiting the carriers ability to defend itself would be wise as a support ship is only as good as it's ability to stay alive to help others.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
MASS HOMICIDE
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 00:20:00 -
[7]
Problem lie snto on gangs with 1 , 2 or 3 carriers. But on groups of 30 or 40 carriers and motherships, simply ignorign any need for support . THose make this game a capital online game.
Becuse nothign but a 40 dreads fleet woudl have any chance against such a fleet.
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough |
ReePeR McAllem
The Carebear Stare
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 00:21:00 -
[8]
Originally by: madaluap
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Carriers were not supposed to be wtf pwn mobiles. They are SUPPORT ships.
Though I do not agree with this coming nerf.
What do you think is a decent change than or do you believe the situation is allready fine. Just wondering.
Well I think they're fine how they are.
Carriers can keep a small fleet of BS alive. Which gives it great purpose. And even for those who decide to use for other reasons have a capital, that is not 'too' expensive now. That with good skills can have good offensive.
In terms of changing it, I would be inclined to go with the previous drone changes, remember? when they introduced the reduction in drones for increased HP and Dmg. This I believe is all that needs to be changed. It would reduce lag in fleet fights.
Fighters are expensive, and arent overpowered at all, (just for example) if my abaddon could tank 30 fighters with good skills, why would they change carriers to only being able to control 5 and assign the rest. I figure CCP want to see the carriers used for the roles they were designed for... go figure, coz imho there are alot of ships in eve that dont do what they're intended for.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
MASS HOMICIDE
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 00:39:00 -
[9]
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Originally by: madaluap
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Carriers were not supposed to be wtf pwn mobiles. They are SUPPORT ships.
Though I do not agree with this coming nerf.
What do you think is a decent change than or do you believe the situation is allready fine. Just wondering.
Well I think they're fine how they are.
Carriers can keep a small fleet of BS alive. Which gives it great purpose. And even for those who decide to use for other reasons have a capital, that is not 'too' expensive now. That with good skills can have good offensive.
In terms of changing it, I would be inclined to go with the previous drone changes, remember? when they introduced the reduction in drones for increased HP and Dmg. This I believe is all that needs to be changed. It would reduce lag in fleet fights.
Fighters are expensive, and arent overpowered at all, (just for example) if my abaddon could tank 30 fighters with good skills, why would they change carriers to only being able to control 5 and assign the rest. I figure CCP want to see the carriers used for the roles they were designed for... go figure, coz imho there are alot of ships in eve that dont do what they're intended for.
30 fighters? From nyx or thanatoses? Hard to believe unless you pimp it to a price that it makes the nyx soudn cheap. 3k dps is not really tankeable by any BS without deadspace fitings.
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough |
Locke Ateid
Minmatar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 00:43:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
But on groups of 30 or 40 carriers and motherships...
I take it you're refering to the fleet BoB fielded the other day.
|
ReePeR McAllem
The Carebear Stare
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 01:01:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Originally by: madaluap
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Carriers were not supposed to be wtf pwn mobiles. They are SUPPORT ships.
Though I do not agree with this coming nerf.
What do you think is a decent change than or do you believe the situation is allready fine. Just wondering.
Well I think they're fine how they are.
Carriers can keep a small fleet of BS alive. Which gives it great purpose. And even for those who decide to use for other reasons have a capital, that is not 'too' expensive now. That with good skills can have good offensive.
In terms of changing it, I would be inclined to go with the previous drone changes, remember? when they introduced the reduction in drones for increased HP and Dmg. This I believe is all that needs to be changed. It would reduce lag in fleet fights.
Fighters are expensive, and arent overpowered at all, (just for example) if my abaddon could tank 30 fighters with good skills, why would they change carriers to only being able to control 5 and assign the rest. I figure CCP want to see the carriers used for the roles they were designed for... go figure, coz imho there are alot of ships in eve that dont do what they're intended for.
30 fighters? From nyx or thanatoses? Hard to believe unless you pimp it to a price that it makes the nyx soudn cheap. 3k dps is not really tankeable by any BS without deadspace fitings.
They had around 30 fighters, not sure if it was exactly 30 or 27 etc. But I do know there were two carriers, that had all their fighters on me. They had ok skills, and for the time my cap boosts lasted I tanked them.
The fitting did was not faction, just t2. You'd be supprised what an abaddon can tank.
This is not the point of the thread though Kagura, back to the thread...
|
omiNATION
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 01:44:00 -
[12]
Anyone have a link to the dev blog that the OP is talking about? I'm having trouble finding it.
|
Ilya Murametz
Caldari
Cruororis Consors Conlegium
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 01:52:00 -
[13]
Originally by: omiNATION
Anyone have a link to the dev blog that the OP is talking about? I'm having trouble finding it.
Link to the Dev Blog that the OP is talking about, and you having troubles finding :)
|
digitalwanderer
Gallente
Archon Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 01:57:00 -
[14]
I say leave them as they are right now,for the simple reason that it takes quite a long time to train up for these properly,and the ship + fittings and skill costs are quite high,wich means that only fairly advanced chars,that have been playing(and paying)for the game for a long time now,can actually fly them,so royally kicking them in the proverbial **** like this isn't appreciated in the least.
If the main issue is the sheer amount of capital ships that some aliances can already field,then find a way to limit the amount on any given location,at any given time...Nerfing the ship itself is not the answer.
I proposed a solution to the large blobs that make up 0.0 fleet fights,and eventual complaints about lag and node drops a long time ago,but it fell on deaf ears aparently...
|
Zanarkand
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 04:01:00 -
[15]
I support this nerf. My alt flies and owns a carrier.
|
Arenis Xemdal
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 04:02:00 -
[16]
This post couldn't be more wrong if it tried.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 04:19:00 -
[17]
Originally by: The Fate
Why are you nerfing carriers? Carriers - this ship class should be in front line of battle not sitting in SS and assigning fighters.
Carriers are already thin like paper but now you are nerfing them even more! And if nossed/EW-d they are useless bricks!
Or please let us fit capital guns in high slots! Or make them immune to NOS/EW!
You know why its not in front line right now? Because they can just station hug wait for some brave fleet to engage them, send 20 fighters on single ships, kill a few of em and then dock.
With the nerf it will be totally boring to sit and station hug because you wont imba pwn everything that tries to attack you = wasted time doing nothing. They'll hopefully now get used as support ships as intended.
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Gallente
Eve University
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 04:33:00 -
[18]
Or they'll sit at posshields and assign fighters in relative safety since their only real frontline role will be a mobile triage boat and some damps shut that down right quick?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.10.22 04:42:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin
Or they'll sit at posshields and assign fighters in relative safety since their only real frontline role will be a mobile triage boat and some damps shut that down right quick?
They can still do that yes, but they wont be able to solo outside stations when they are bored and hopefully boredom will push them into active support roles.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |