Arthyr Taylos
   |
Posted - 2007.10.25 09:05:00 -
[1]
I am a hopeful carrier pilot, thus this topic interests me a great deal. My input may or may not be accurate, but I'd still like to offer it to anyone who is willing to read it.
1. Lets see here...using the Thanatos as the base for my opinion (Gallente, yay), lets look at the stats here.
Major stats:
Structure - 150k
Armor - 125k
Shield - 100k
3.5k m^3 Cargo
100k m^3 Drone Bay
5 High slots
5 Med slots
6 Low slots
No hardpoints
725 CPU
700k Powergrid
Ok, looking at this so far, I see the cargo of an industrial ship encased in a heck of a lot more shielding and armor, so using this sucker as an 'armored car' wouldn't be surprising, honestly.
The bonuses are lent towards attacking with fighters and drones, naturally, however (since I don't know how carriers work NOW) I think the pilot should retain the ability to control ALL of their fighters and drones at will with the OPTION to delegate a small group of fighters to their allies as the situation requires.
As for the, apparently, ill used logistics support, I think the bonus should be re-worded for 'Remote Armor Repairers' unless I'm mistaken and you're taking your carrier's armor and putting it on your allies ships...which is baffling. Otherwise I think it's fine if not used in game because of current and up and coming mechanics.
The carrier, overall, is meant for small and large scale support the way I see it, and while it may be able to pick apart smaller ships, it still has it's weaknesses and it can still be killed.
2. To answer this simply, as a carrier pilot, you ARE the support! You are the one brought along when your battle ship group needs a more reliable mobile repairer on station, with the added benefit of a swarm of drones devoted to various tasks, and fighters to bolster the damage output of the group. I haven't looked at the stats of dreads or titans to compare, but carriers are not tanking units, that role is meant for dreads, the ships carriers SUPPORT.
3. This question is complicated in that it relies upon two vastly different variables: The readiness of the carrier pilot and the forces they are opposed against. Just as has been stated before, if the opposing forces are out to hunt the carrier, they are likely prepared. Another point, the carrier is a support craft, and unless the pilot is skilled and confident, it shouldn't be caught alone.
4. Asking this question implies that my Destroyer shouldn't be able to hold it's own against large numbers of frigates, or that a cruiser shouldn't be able to handle large numbers of destroyers and so on and so forth. YES, a carrier should be able to destroy large numbers of SMALLER ships but with increasing difficulty as the ships get larger and more resilient, where a 1 on 1 bout of carriers would rely on skill and tactics rather than a balance of strength.
5. I honestly feel that carriers could do with guns of some kind, however I also feel that these should be Large guns, and not Capitol sized guns to support the terrible Scan resolution and ultimate lack of point defense beyond drones (even navy carriers have deck guns). I'm talking, the resources in cpu and pg to support all the carrier modules alongside say...4 large guns based on race, with a limitation that capitol sized guns can NOT be mounted on a carrier, and for Motherships, the ability to mount their own guns outside of the capitol maintenance hangar.
6. Group and Fleet support, with fringe benefits based on stats.
7. No, from what I've seen, carriers lack full effective control of their fighters and drones, which would make them much more deadly.
8. I would change a lot, much of it already mentioned above and by others that I agree with (more armor for motherships and etc.). One thing that has caught my eye is the absolutely terrible Scan Resolution on carriers in general, one would think with all the computers and such dedicated to drone control, that additional scanning power would be present as well...
My 2 cents for those who wish to read.
|