EVE Search - SiSi: No cargo allowed in ships inside a carrier ship maint. array

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

SiSi: No cargo allowed in ships inside a carrier ship maint. array

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 07:51:00 - [1] Edited by: Damned Force on 26/10/2007 07:56:46 As i read before CCP told us, no drastic change on Carriers, just discussion and just modules, and even thats not in rev3. Let's wait on the TQ deploy, but i think: CCP LIES TO THE COMMUNITY AGAIN!!! GO TO HELL WITH THE SILENT NERFS!!! PS: is idiotic again. U warp the carrier with backup ships into the battlefield to do at least some support to gang too. Someones ship is blowed up. He fly in pod to the carrier and take the ship, than need to search in the corp hangar for ammo, and boosters, etc in a laggy battle. Thats would never work in the practice
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 09:07:00 - [2] Originally by: Benn Helmsman Use a jump freighter, stop crying your ubercarriers cant do anything on their own. U IDIOT!!!!! AND U GIVE ME BACK THE TIME AND MONEY SPENT ON CARRIER TRAINING???
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 09:41:00 - [3] Originally by: Stellar Vix I support this nerf as a means and way to have people encourage getting miners and industrialists and making more risks in 0.0 and STOP THE CAPTIOL-ONLINE game thats slowly been building. I have a carrier and have a dread and in 99% of my time i fly ships under BS size so shut up with such f***ing answers. Go back to the hole and die!
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 10:09:00 - [4] This nerf is good for Corps alliances who have Titans, and extremely bad for all small corps, alliances, making almost unable to hold the space in 0.0. My problem is still not that they nerf it. They want do so, should be. Just give me back the isk i spent for the skillbooks and the skillpoints what i invested, so i would be able to put somewhere else, because thats not what for i trained!
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 10:41:00 - [5] Originally by: Dalekplunger Slick Hahahahaha I bet the guy at CCP who publishes these updates to SiSi is a chronic maniacal laugher and gets a real kick out of saying "Let them chew on THAT for a while!" And he should die soon and horrible
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 10:43:00 - [6] Originally by: Lord Maldoror Moving fighters to Ship Bay Why not just increase the volume of fighters to 25,000m3 and move them to the ship bay? This means when hauling you can't carry a full offensive setup. You'd still be able to field normal drones (drone bay should drop to 4,000m3) for some defence - but a hauling carrier would be easy to kill if you pin it down. So you get the best of both worlds; small corps are still able to use carrier logistics in 0.0 but at the expense of much of their dps when performing this task. It's also a more 'natural' change than hauling modules and other such things. Just 2 quick reasons: 1. if u transport backup ships on the fron u would be defendless 2. because 25000 m3 fighters need to transport somehow to the ship, what cant be done without a rigged hauler
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 12:08:00 - [7] No The answer is much simpler and much worts that they don't know for what is this ship... U trained a year for a carrier, bought skillbooks, invest ISK, Time and money to use it the way it was designed. After 2 years CCP decided we want to hold our customers even longer and they should training new ships, but what to training? Oh yes the new Jump Freighter. Hmm, but not everyone would train for and is too expensive too, so we FORCE the customers do what we want! Thats all is just about money!!! U payed for something and CCP takes now away to force u to pay for other one.
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 12:10:00 - [8] Originally by: Pilgrippa I wholeheartedly support this nerf. Maybe now pos spamming will require more than 1 guy. I like to see that just looser pirate corps support this change or noobs who never flight a carrier.
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 13:20:00 - [9] Edited by: Damned Force on 26/10/2007 13:20:47 Originally by: Pilgrippa Originally by: Damned Force Originally by: Pilgrippa I wholeheartedly support this nerf. Maybe now pos spamming will require more than 1 guy. I like to see that just looser pirate corps support this change or noobs who never flight a carrier. Hey I fly a carrier! I am part of a loser pirate corp, so you got me there. Maybe I should have posted with an alt ;) Yes, the reason I like this nerf is it will force people to expose their valuable assets. I don't think pos were meant to be so easily maintainable. Now it'll be easier to starve em out! There is nothing easy in the pos maintanence. Is hard and boring work to position cynoships, open cyno, sitting duck...... It take time to get into the bubble.... There are many places where u could attack the carrier or the cynoship, sure thats need more work than sitting by a bubble and just F1-F8 on everything jumping trough
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.26 19:08:00 - [10] Originally by: NoghriViR The only way the devs are ever going to understand how this game is played is if they actually lived in conq. space. Open up jove and I bet the devs wouldn't last a week. YEAH, open Jove space. u can keep your uber ships just dont use cheats. we would see how long u can stand there!!!

Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.27 20:06:00 - [11] If they implement such drastical changes and force us to use another ship for the same thing, after 6+ months training and invested bilions, i hope they would burn in hell and the game would go down very quick so they dont have they jobs anyomre.. So take my "best" wishes, because the worst i even dont want to public
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.31 07:27:00 - [12] Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible. I reiterate: Carrier != Hauler Whant about the amarr dread? dread = hauler?
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.11.04 10:47:00 - [13] Is very simple. BoB is not able to defend his space anymore with force, so CCP implement changes which making impossible to hold the space for other alliances because logistic!!!!!
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.11.06 13:35:00 - [14] Give us a module which unable deploy fighters, make remote rep and remote energy transfer -100% range and amount and make ship bay -100% but give 500-1000% to corp hangar. And thats even if the module is offline. With this move u don't crap the training time of peoples fully and the ships would not be able to fight fitted for hauling

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.