EVE Search - You're killing cap ships

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

You're killing cap ships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gamer Maximus	Posted - 2007.10.22 04:49:00 - [31] Personally, during armageddon day, one carrier took out 6 dreadnaughts and we hadn't even scratched its shields. Anyone else see a problem with that? The point of a carrier is to use fighters to maximize DPS. They should not be able to go one on one with another ship their size. I would support removing most of the mid-low slots on carriers, making them far more venerable against bigger ships, and much harder to tank.
Cool Wave	Posted - 2007.10.22 04:53:00 - [32] killing carriers & Dreadnaughts arn't that hard. it just needs a decent size operation.. 8-10 man gang with battleships can take down a carrier easy.. think about it. 1 billion isk for carrier (unfitted) 1 billion isk for 10 battleships (unfitted) its the same price value.. people just need to smarten up and learn how to kill a capital ship.. carriers/dreads do die.. its called do alot of DPS and have support.. it takes support to kill a carrier and a carrier is used alot as support with capital armor reps etc.. by why shouldn't it be able to defend itself with a half decent tank and DPS with fighters... thats why we spend ages saving enough ISK to fit a carrier worth 3 billion ISK.. which can be killed pretty quickly with a co-ordinated attack. people wise up CCP stop nerfing things because idiot people don't know how to kill ships.
Rhaegor Stormborn Pestilent Industries Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.10.22 04:54:00 - [33] I am sure all the people who have tons of skills in Carrier are **ed as hell. I am also sure that theother 80% of players who do not have 4 years worth of skill points under their belts and can't fly capital are happy as hell. CCP is just doing what the masses want, and this isn't the first time they have changed something drastically that made people feel that had wasted months or even years of skill training time. Rhaegor Stormborn** Fleet Admiral - Pestilent Industries Amalgamated [PIA] Recruitment Thread
Duff Man Caldari The Nine Gates Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.22 04:54:00 - [34] Originally by: Gamer Maximus Personally, during armageddon day, one carrier took out 6 dreadnaughts and we hadn't even scratched its shields. Anyone else see a problem with that? The point of a carrier is to use fighters to maximize DPS. They should not be able to go one on one with another ship their size. I would support removing most of the mid-low slots on carriers, making them far more venerable against bigger ships, and much harder to tank. This is not necessary imo. Armageddon day on a test server using the best of everything and 500 mil SP characters is not a valid comparison... Look up all the videos out there at the moment, carriers and mom's are being killed - carriers are dropping to gangs of 5 or 6 people in many instances - I personally do not believe that they need their defensive / offensive ability nerfed even further. To do this would basically in many instances, remove carriers from in the heat of battle itself - they will hide in POS almost exclusively. This change will affect people wanting to kill carriers as much as it will affect the carrier pilots themselves I would say.
Ezekiel Sulastin Gallente Eve University	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:02:00 - [35] Originally by: Gamer Maximus Personally, during armageddon day, one carrier took out 6 dreadnaughts and we hadn't even scratched its shields. Anyone else see a problem with that? Did the aforementioned carrier happen to have approximately a 500% omnitank due to glitched skills like one of my corpmates had? Armageddon Day is the single worst example time you can use for something like this ... Also, speaking as one of the 80% of Eve without carrier skills - glad this came out before I dumped the skilltraining down the drain :D
KillmAll187 Aliastra	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:03:00 - [36] Originally by: Gamer Maximus Personally, during armageddon day, one carrier took out 6 dreadnaughts and we hadn't even scratched its shields. Anyone else see a problem with that? I call BS. 6 Dreads in siege will ruin a carrier. And 1 carrier vs 1 dread is a very long boring stalemate. If you haven't ever flown a carrier on tranquility you might hold your tongue. It is hard enough during large scale fleet battles to get your drones to attack and turn on your tank, let alone assigning your fighters. When they nerfed carriers to force them out of the shields to assign fighters, that was bad enough. Now you have absolutely no chance to defend yourself in a carrier. 2x Damps on you and glhf locking stuff.
Iboku Kaeane Amarr Malicious Intentions Cult of War	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:06:00 - [37] Edited by: Iboku Kaeane on 22/10/2007 05:08:50 Originally by: Gamer Maximus Personally, during armageddon day, one carrier took out 6 dreadnaughts and we hadn't even scratched its shields. Anyone else see a problem with that? The point of a carrier is to use fighters to maximize DPS. They should not be able to go one on one with another ship their size. I would support removing most of the mid-low slots on carriers, making them far more venerable against bigger ships, and much harder to tank. If one carrier was capable of killing even one dread alone, then the dread pilot made a serious setup mistake. For the love of all that is right, Do not whine about things being killed when the fault is on the pilot flying it. the carrier can only get a DPS of 1500 (unless a thana in which case it is 1875) (both these examples are with 5 drone control units) If you are incapable of tanking that in a cap ship then it's you'r own fault, not the carrier's. I was facing off against two carriers and had no problem tanking them (two archons), in a dread, without siege mode, couldn't dent them without it either, had i gone into siege mode i could've tanked 7 of those carriers. ---------------------------------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept what i cannot change, The courage to change what i cannot accept, And the wisdom to hide the bodies of those people
waferzankko Bears Inc	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:17:00 - [38] hmm i was killed by a carrier once, i like this idea...
ViolenTUK Gallente Vindicated Exiles	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:18:00 - [39] This is a pointless nerf and completely unecessarry. There is no reason to change carriers in this way. I really dont see this helping fleet lag as you will still see the same amount of fighters. Well thats if people dont trash their carriers or indeed eve online after this nerf. www.eve-players.com
General Meridus Brutor tribe	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:34:00 - [40] I don't fly carriers. This is a bad idea. Carriers get popped all the time. So the nerf is to accomplish what game mechanic problem? Balance what exactly? Gate camps? Certainly not fleet battles. You got most of the dev team thinking up ways to stop blobbing. Along comes this guy, and dreams up a plan that requires more ships to do the same job. (Translation: blob.) [img]http://jscstudios.com/JaredC01/ISSN/mods/CaptainBig.png
Artemis Dragmire Deadspace Armada Lost Children of Eve	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:35:00 - [41] Do not fly a carrier. Am nowhere NEAR flying a carrier. Yet, I still know that this proposed idea is utter crap. You want to fix lag and fix cap ships? Find another way. With this nerf in place and nothing to back it, carriers would become nearly useless on the field of battle. Please find another way CCP.
Arron S Gallente Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:35:00 - [42] Edited by: Arron S on 22/10/2007 05:35:55 This nerf is ********, and is ment to make low skilled low sec pirates who are likly former WoW players who will only play the game for 5 months and quit happy. A) Carriers are fine the way they are B) Small gang of 4-5 pilots can take down a carrier easy Simple! 2 in battleships, 2 E-Warships and one in a ceptor or something. hell you can do this in tech 1 ships and tech 1 fitted as well. Then again, the people who are complaining about carriers\Mother ships are ones who just want easy kills and killed hualers all day and call them selves uber. Not to mention that this nerf will likely increase blobbing. My counter solution to carriers: Increase Smart Bomb range or give them a damage boost. Make ECM bursts effect drones, and rig them so more then one can be active at any one time
Shardrael Caldari AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:38:00 - [43] This is not only pointless but is infact pretty stupid. Not long ago ccp wanted carriers to be on the frontline so they made it impossible to have asigned fighters inside pos shields.... not one buff went to carriers since that happened, infact they received a sig radius nerf making them incredibly easy to kill by dread, and mom's received a nerf by proxy with the changes to dictor bubbles. I am not here to argue about those changes as they are at this point simply fact. Now the desire is to pull a 180 again and send em back to remote deployment boats(something that makes the already game breaking lag worse) WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! wake up already, pick a direction and stick with it. fundamentally swapping the way something works twice, especially when it takes over a year to skill well for these is just moronic... don't put this to live Originally by: Stamm Some people might have been convinced by the official announcement posted by Steelrat, but not me, I wasn't convinced until some random alt posts a brand new thread.
angggggry	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:47:00 - [44] Originally by: Duff Man Edited by: Duff Man on 22/10/2007 01:56:24 Now let it be said that I don't fly a cap ship, and while I have considered working towards a carrier in the past I have made no significant investment thus far in moving in that direction. CCP Cap ship Dev Blog I have to say though after reading that Dev Blog that I believe that you're killing Carriers and Motherships in my opinion. Carriers and Motherships are being popped all the time, with this drone change they will not be worth the large investment it takes to own one. with threeeee friends theeeeeeey are theeeeeeeee same as befoooooooooore
Duff Man Caldari The Nine Gates Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:52:00 - [45] Originally by: angggggry Originally by: Duff Man Edited by: Duff Man on 22/10/2007 01:56:24 Now let it be said that I don't fly a cap ship, and while I have considered working towards a carrier in the past I have made no significant investment thus far in moving in that direction. CCP Cap ship Dev Blog I have to say though after reading that Dev Blog that I believe that you're killing Carriers and Motherships in my opinion. Carriers and Motherships are being popped all the time, with this drone change they will not be worth the large investment it takes to own one. with threeeee friends theeeeeeey are theeeeeeeee same as befoooooooooore You can already target and kill off the 20 mil isk fighters like they're made out of paper, I don't think it a good or remotely necessary change to require 4 people to wield this same arsenal. As it is I think fighter themselves need a HP buff.
Sorum Daemoth Insidious Existence Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:57:00 - [46] CCP have GOT to stop hiring utter ***** losers. If i knew this was going to happen i wouldnt be wasting 4 months of my life training for a carrier. With this nerf a moros with ogre 2's could do much more dmg then 5 fighters. WTF, really, Its a capital ship its SUPPOSED to be scary, intimidating, its supposed to kill other ships, and every god damned gang ive seen with a carrier had it in a safe with its fighters assigned to its gangmates. It is proforming its job of support, by doing this nerf you wont be getting carriers to do there job more, youll be making people sell em and stop flying em. Cmon CCP think, i know your nerfbat is on viagra right now but cmon please realize what you are doing. You just got WTF EXIT ganked!**
franny Phoenix Knights Dark Nebula Galactic Empire	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:57:00 - [47] if you insist on nerfing the amount, why not do it like the domi, +% to dmg/hp increase instead of making them have to be assigned to your closest friends/alts your still gonna have blobs, probably bigger ones as now my alt gets logged off so I don't have to 2box, after i'll 2box my alt and assign her 5 fighters, and a corpmate will 2box his alt and i'll assign 5 more, look same fighters, 2 more people = more lag PKKP recruitment
Carniflex Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2007.10.22 05:58:00 - [48] Proposed changes in the initial blog seem to be somewhat hasty and not well tought out. However, in the dev answers later in the dread they seem to be willing to think it over, as as most players have pointed out their proposed solution is not fix but radical change to one ship class.
Sorum Daemoth Insidious Existence Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.22 06:00:00 - [49] also, carriers only do about 2000dps with 15 fighters, a little more maybe, and thats with good skills. so its like 3 BS, not so overpowered to me. This is just making flying em tideous and the carrier will lose its ability to defend itself against a CS,BS gang because BS will be able to tank em. *You just got WTF EXIT ganked!*
Arron S Gallente Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.10.22 06:03:00 - [50] Originally by: Carniflex Proposed changes in the initial blog seem to be somewhat hasty and not well tought out. However, in the dev answers later in the dread they seem to be willing to think it over, as as most players have pointed out their proposed solution is not fix but radical change to one ship class. Well read the first line Quote: Hi, Iæm Zulupark and recently transferred from the Quality Assurance department to the Game Design team. So yeah.. what does that tell you about this Dev...
Sarah Moonshine	Posted - 2007.10.22 06:07:00 - [51] Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn I am sure all the people who have tons of skills in Carrier are ****ed as hell. I am also sure that theother 80% of players who do not have 4 years worth of skill points under their belts and can't fly capital are happy as hell. CCP is just doing what the masses want, and this isn't the first time they have changed something drastically that made people feel that had wasted months or even years of skill training time. I'm nowhere near to flying a carrier (or a capital ship, for that matter), and I can say I'm quite disappointed. The whole point of a carrier is to be able to field flight after flight of drones. Take that away, and you have an expensive, gimpy and flavorless ship. Plus, being unable to control more than 5 drones would do little to reduce lag; afterall, if you assign them to someone else, they'd still be there.
Kwint Sommer Incoherent Inc Otaku Invasion	Posted - 2007.10.22 06:20:00 - [52] There are ways in which this could be done that would actually work. Under the current system if you were to just implement the suggested changes I think you would see alliances seriously asking how much they can reprocesses a Mothership for. I, as a carrier pilot, wouldn't go so far as to quit EVE -unlike many of the whiners threaten to do every day- but I would be so outraged by it as to still be ***ing about it a solid two or three years after the fact and if I'm ***ing two years after it imagine the hell I'll be raising in the days after it.... Assigning fighters at the moment simply does not work, you end up entrusting 100M worth of extremely fragile fighters to each gangmate and sadly these people have no idea how to handle them. They treat them like normal, expendable drones and before your know it you're out 300M and since you can only use 5 fighters you have roughly the firepower of a BS. A carrier can now no longer beat a well-tanked BS in 1 on 1 combat. This is terrible change that might improve lag a little but will ultimately take an only partially functioning class of ships and make them almost completely broken. They'll be used to haul, rep POS shields and that's about it. You'll see carrier pilots attacking in a BS as they can do the same damage with a lot less risk and frankly a lot less hassle. A workable system: If the squad/wing/fleet commander could control 5 drones/fighters per ship in the squad/wing/fleet regardless of which ship within the squad/wing/fleet they come from. You would still have the limited number of drones which is good for lag and having them centrally controlled would be nice for the fleet and probably reduce lag a little further. Also this would bring carriers closer to to how they should work than they currently are, especially motherships. It's hard to believe that a supercapital costing 25B can only control 20 drones at a time. Under this system that supercapital could launch all of it's fighters or two or three hundred heavy drones if it were in a fleet that large. Under this system a large fleet of say 50 ships would have a few carriers pumping out heavy drones that would be controlled as a massive squadron moving in formation by the fleet commander. This way a capital can't fight worth a damn on its own but in a large fleet it can send squadron after squadron of small but crippling drones to ravage the opposing fleet. This is how carrier combat works, a squadron of tiny little fighters each armed with a single torpedo can take down the largest of battleships in mere minutes but the carrier can only operate with a large supporting fleet.
Jackal79	Posted - 2007.10.22 06:20:00 - [53] Wow I'm glad I trained for dreads and not carriers. This nerf is totally worthless and makes carriers useless. You may as well rename the ship class from carrier to "capital logistics ship" if this change goes through.
Alerion Acquire	Posted - 2007.10.22 06:48:00 - [54] I can understand the reasons for CCP wanting to do this but there must be a better way than crippling a ship like this. My suggestion would be that let the carrier continue to field and control the same amount of fighters but make it so the carrier pilot can only send 5 fighters on one individual target. Remaining fighters should be in some evasive flight mode (if not assigned to anyone else) and if aggressed they should be allowed to fight back even if max number of fighters on a target is reached. This way it adds support to it's fleet, people don't instapop due to fighters and the carrier has to "scale" to the amount of opponents. Of course if you assign 5 fighters to a wingmate his fighters should be able to attack the same target as your own fighters are attacking as well. /Al
Jonathan Peterbilt Caldari Damage Unlimited Inc	Posted - 2007.10.22 06:53:00 - [55] What a stupid thing to do..... Stop "fixing" what is not broken and fix what really is broken. If you are going to nerf something just because new players cant use them yet and are whining about it, then give Kestrel 12 cruise launchers or something....
Kwint Sommer Incoherent Inc Otaku Invasion	Posted - 2007.10.22 07:01:00 - [56] Originally by: Jonathan Peterbilt What a stupid thing to do..... Stop "fixing" what is not broken and fix what really is broken. If you are going to nerf something just because new players cant use them yet and are whining about it, then give Kestrel 12 cruise launchers or something.... Capital ships do need some work -take Triage for instance- but this takes them from partially functional to utterly broken. Kestrel use to be able to mount and use cruise missiles so don't give them any ideas....Seriously ask some older timer in your corp about Cruise Kestrels.
Freya Selene Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.10.22 07:01:00 - [57] Oh ye, lets assign 100mil worth of fighters to a frigate. Maby bether off in a tier2 BS? No wait! Lets turn carriers into capital logistic ships! The reason carrier is more loved then dreadnaughts is becouse its more versatile and cheaper. Reducing his firepower by 1/3th your dooming it to a logistical ship, couse 5 fighters are not anough to kill a tanked BS.
Swordstake Minmatar Via Osmosis	Posted - 2007.10.22 07:09:00 - [58] WTF have you gone mad CCP. I was about to train for capitals but now I see no reason to train for any of this. What is the point in months(years) of training for something that a Domi can do better than a a ship that cost well over a billion(LOTS more). Why are you trying to FIX things that are not broken when you should be FIXING LAG etc and real issues and not BREAKING parts of the game that work fine. Please PLEASE PLEASE stop making work for yourself that is not needed.. STOP patching and releasing new content and FIX your game where it is now. Carrier = DRONE ship MOM = UBER drone ship This is what they are. By taking away there only real reason (apart from remote repairing) you make that entire class pointless. Keep this as an IDEA a $hit one at that but let it go no further... Also send that person who had the idea back to his old job or make him a cleaner.
Jonathan Peterbilt Caldari Damage Unlimited Inc	Posted - 2007.10.22 07:14:00 - [59] Originally by: Kwint Sommer Originally by: Jonathan Peterbilt What a stupid thing to do..... Stop "fixing" what is not broken and fix what really is broken. If you are going to nerf something just because new players cant use them yet and are whining about it, then give Kestrel 12 cruise launchers or something.... Capital ships do need some work -take Triage for instance- but this takes them from partially functional to utterly broken. Kestrel use to be able to mount and use cruise missiles so don't give them any ideas....Seriously ask some older timer in your corp about Cruise Kestrels. Thats why I mentioned it, I have other charactrs so I know about that.
Mallikanth	Posted - 2007.10.22 07:18:00 - [60] In before the lock I suspect you need to vent your (our) frustration here And I sincerely hope CCP take note and act upon the frustration vented in this and many other (since locked) topics, on this subject.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: 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.