EVE Search - Carrier Nerf quietly re-introduced

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Carrier Nerf quietly re-introduced

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Druadan Gallente Aristotle Enterprises Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2007.10.27 20:38:00 - [61] Back to the first page.
Atius Tirawa Minmatar Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.27 20:50:00 - [62] Originally by: Davlos Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away.... there was a game. There was a game that was awesome at first, then it got stupidly f**ked sideways by the devs because they chose to listen to all the whiners who wanted their game to be more like Counter-Strike. Then it died. It was Star Wars Galaxies. 'Users of carriers' who post here, aka whiners ought to be slapped with the Order of Stalin's Silence for their own good. Words of e-wisdom here. . .I am feeling that pull in eve. More vegas, concorde and carriers. . .just killing the game. -----------
SiJira	Posted - 2007.10.27 21:27:00 - [63] Originally by: Mikal Zackfelt I would like to say that the amount of whining the past few weeks have been astounding... I mean ffs, didnt CCP clearly state that they dont want players using carriers as freighters, jumping stuff in and out 0.0 and empire? This is why the Rorqual and the new jump freighters are coming in the next patch. Maybe I am still a noob who doesnt quite understand 0.0 mechanics, politics, and logistics; but come on, the amount of whining is just outstanding. And almost sickening. P.S. before I get flamed, I would like to state, I understand the timesink that carriers and other cap ships involve; I am currently speccing up for a carrier myself, and I welcome the new changes (although I clearly have a long way to go and much more iskies to accumulate) /me still dons asbestos flame suit just in case... rorqual blueprint has been released a while ago and there have been rorquals flying around eve since about 40 days ago Originally by: Druadan I don't have a problem with the spirit of the nerf, but it's another ridiculously stupid implementation. Logistics carrier pilots don't have freighters trained, or the rorqual stuff trained. So this carrier logistics nerf needs to come in like 6months after the introduction of the jump freighters, so that the logistics guys can retrain. Even that is a really awful way to do it, because it means these logistics guys have a tonne of useless skillpoints. Time wasted on stuff they don't need because CCP decided to reimagine a whole aspect of the game, at the expense of the players who invested time into that area of the game. What is the point of doubling our SMB and halving the size of battleships, if we can't even bring fitted and loaded ships to the battlefield? It's also a redundant nerf, as you could significantly reduce the effectiveness of the SMB using the specialisation idea that's coming in in three months. This change makes me think the specialisation idea isn't even coming, that it was just said to placate us. In other words, Nixon's not bringing the smokes. if you trained carriers just to be able to use them as glorified haulers then you already fail eve go cry somewhere else ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried! _lies above_ CCP Morpheus was here Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn [yellow]Kaem
Kerfira	Posted - 2007.10.27 21:57:00 - [64] I posted this in another thread, but I think it deserves repeating..... Quote: CCP! Please take a step back from the nerf-bat, and provide us with this: 1. Outline your vision for how it's supposed to be to live in 0.0. 2. Outline your vision for how it's supposed to be to live in low-sec. 3. Outline your vision for how it's supposed to be to live in high-sec. 4. Outline your vision for how battles are supposed to be. 5. Get a discussion with the community how to achieve this. 6. Modify your vision with the good points raised in the discussion. 7. Outline your plan for how you want to get to that point. 8. Discuss this with the community. 9. Adjust your plan with the good points raised in the discussion. 10. Implement! All these individual random-looking nerfs/changes that you continuously spring on people doesn't go down well, since we don't know what your vision is! It makes your changes seem random and makes it look like you have no clue to how people actually play the game and uses its features. CCP most likely (I hope) has a plan with what they're doing, but if we don't KNOW that plan and the vision behind it, it's pretty damn hard to help them get it right, not to mention hard to understand their actions... Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
14882	Posted - 2007.10.27 22:07:00 - [65] The only reason people use carriers more than freighters for moving cargo is because CCP hasn't solved the logonski/logoffski tactic. Early-Mid '06 the use of freighters disappeared for any 0.0 alliance not living on the border out of fear that 100 people would log on at your position when your freighter jumped through a gate. How about preventing these ridiculous and exploitative tactics and giving freighters back their role instead of nerfing carriers and all the people who spent months training for them?
Secretary Bargain consumables	Posted - 2007.10.27 22:15:00 - [66] Quote: stuff. This is a democracy! we demand representation. there must be a committee! Yes i fly a carrier, no i really don't care about the changes that are being tested on sisi. The ship is not a pwnmobile, it's not a great logistics tool, it's an albatros. If you tie it round your neck, it'll slow you down. As for ccp having a plan... ahah. The carrier nerf theme arose because it turns out lots of people want them, lots of people wanting them must mean they're unbalanced in some regard. The same could be said of isk, faction modules and outposts but carriers apparently don't enjoy the same attrition rate as isk, faction mods and outposts so The Nerfbat Must Swing. The game is a cruel and heartless ***. You like cruel and heartless *es or you wouldn't play. You knew she would turn on you, you knew the happy times couldn't last but you still delude yourself that your happiness is important to the ***. Play or fold, ccp will do what they want. --------------------------- The signature. Here i can type my Bio.
ReaperOfSly Gallente Lyrus Associates M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.10.27 23:03:00 - [67] Read the latest devblog. It says to ignore the state of things on SiSi, those changes were put there by accident, and will be changed back shortly. Don't Panic. --------------------------------------------------------------------
Druadan Gallente Aristotle Enterprises Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2007.10.28 01:28:00 - [68] Originally by: ReaperOfSly Read the latest devblog. It says to ignore the state of things on SiSi, those changes were put there by accident, and will be changed back shortly. Don't Panic. No, it's referring to the fact that we all flipped out over the five fighters thing being on SiSi. Screw you, Jacques.
Vitrael Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.10.28 01:40:00 - [69] CCP: Here are carriers. They are good at everything. Players: The carrier is good at EVERYTHING! CCP: Well, that was a bad idea, let's make the carriers not good at something. Players: NO OMG WTF. Carriers are being nerfed in a logistical aspect and in turn we are getting jump freighters. Nothing to cry about. You carrier owners won't be Eve's #1 POS *****es anymore. ___________ I learned to accept ship changes months ago. Suddenly I enjoy Eve. You should try it some time.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.10.28 02:09:00 - [70] This is amazing. Whining that your carriers cannot double as freighters. Brilliant. We all know CCP wants to nerf the effect of mineral compression. With mineral compression and a carrier toting around ships they had a capacity FAR greater than freighters (and before you flame me a Dev admitted there was a way to get a frigate to double the capacity of a freighter via mineral compression). I do not know if CCP stopped that little trick but surely you can see that is bogus. A carrier has a 3300 m3 cargo hold and carriers were sidestepping this by a large amount using ships in their hangars to carry cargo too. That is unbalancing. As for people being "logistics" carrier pilots well...if that is why you got a carrier you have other problems. Leave logistics to your logisitcs folks. If your corp is nothing but combat pilots and no one can fly a freighter and able to train for a jump freighter in short order that is your own lookout. Try and recruit some or deal with it. Why should the carrier be the "do all" ship in EVE? Many already said they'd still rather haul in a carrier than a Jump Freighter. So why is it wrong for CCP to give life to the Jump Freighter? Have ships that actually fill their role?

infinityshok	Posted - 2007.10.28 04:50:00 - [71] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h This is amazing. Whining that your carriers cannot double as freighters. Brilliant. A carrier has a 3300 m3 cargo hold and carriers were sidestepping this by a large amount using ships in their hangars to carry cargo too. That is unbalancing. As for people being "logistics" carrier pilots well...if that is why you got a carrier you have other problems. Leave logistics to your logisitcs folks. If your corp is nothing but combat pilots and no one can fly a freighter and able to train for a jump freighter in short order that is your own lookout. Try and recruit some or deal with it. Why should the carrier be the "do all" ship in EVE? Many already said they'd still rather haul in a carrier than a Jump Freighter. So why is it wrong for CCP to give life to the Jump Freighter? Have ships that actually fill their role? The carrier is not a freighter and is nowhere near its capacity. It can carry a single large hauler along with a small hauler. In total it can carry the equivalent of maybe two large haulers. This is not unbalanced. The new jump freighters are a POS. And the acronym POS has nothing to do with starbases. All ships in this effing game have the ability to do something other than their 'intended' role and if your mental state is so unbalanced that you cant realize that it is time to bash your face into your computer until the lights go out. Post the video.
AK Archangel Warhamsters Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.28 06:01:00 - [72] ehmm ... first haulers cant have cargo conts inside it, now hauler cant have nothing in cargo, first devs remove carrier from front line, now he lost last usefull role -hauling, time for quick sale it. ------------------------------ kill the devs - save the eve!
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.10.28 06:12:00 - [73] Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 28/10/2007 06:14:42 Originally by: infinityshok The carrier is not a freighter and is nowhere near its capacity. It can carry a single large hauler along with a small hauler. In total it can carry the equivalent of maybe two large haulers. This is not unbalanced. There is (or at least was) a way to get a carrier to haul more than twice what a freighter could via mineral compression. This was verified by a Developer and was part of what prompted their move to nerf mineral compression. Of course as soon as they proposed the mineral compression nerf the 0.0 community screamed bloody murder and CCP backed off. Quote: The new jump freighters are a POS. And the acronym POS has nothing to do with starbases. All ships in this effing game have the ability to do something other than their 'intended' role and if your mental state is so unbalanced that you cant realize that it is time to bash your face into your computer until the lights go out. Post the video. The new freighters may be a POS. I don't know. Certainly looks like their jump range is crap. How that argues that carriers ought to also be freighters is beyond me though. And does the personal attack make you feel better? If so seek professional help...you've got issues man.
franny Phoenix Knights Dark Nebula Galactic Empire	Posted - 2007.10.28 07:59:00 - [74] /me starts collection to buy CCP back from EA/Sony PKKP recruitment
Reverend Revelator Elite Storm Enterprises	Posted - 2007.10.28 08:49:00 - [75] It's like the devs ENJOY being mocked... -- Dead People Laugh At The Murder Of Love --
HivemindedIndividual Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.10.28 08:58:00 - [76] Haha, I've been reading some of the carrier threads. What a bunch of cry babies, here is a ship that is clearly making huge parts of the game redudant; they totally circumvent supply lines and logistics for starters. I thought this game was supposed to have a mature community. How childish then are you, when the developers ask for constructive feedback, all you do is copypasta some lame signature and scream "RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!".
realbadman	Posted - 2007.10.28 09:30:00 - [77] why do people who don't fly carriers keep posting about ** they know ** all about? must be devalts
Sovereign533 Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.10.28 09:55:00 - [78] Originally by: Race Rogers bring an ammo ship. flame all you want but this newbie thinks it is a good idea. you cannot fight a war without a logistic supply line and supplies. if the carrier is able to have ammo in it's cargo hold and able to dispense ammo once the ships are out, then all the better. a freight ship to resupply the carrier. i have yet to fight out in the real world [only 6 days old] but anything that makes it more strategic/tactical is a good thing. i want every ship to have a purpose in battle. is this such a crazy thing to want? is it only one percent of the player base that post on these boards? if it is only one percent, then ninety eight percent seem to cry all the time? those who cry and do not adapt should just quit. there is no love here for non progressive thought. flame on! look, every 8 days, i have to go to a pos to get the moon minerals out of the silo. now i could do 2 things, OR i take my uber-freighter-speed-Impel with massive cargohold (36k m¦) for 24 jumps to potentionally hostile terratory and back to grap 40k of mineral (so i need to go down and up twice). OR i drop my Impel in my Archon, and jump once to the pos, leave my carrier in the forcefield, board my impel, take most of the mins, jump in my Archon, scoop the Impel and drag the rest in my corporate hangars, and jump back. yes, i might be jumping into a hostile blob located at my pos just as i jump in and die horribly because i jump out of the forcefield. but i won't have to risk getting my slow-as-a-freighter-impel trough 256 potentional gatecamps (32 jumps up, 64 gates, and then the same amount back, and this twice). if i need to refuel, i'd take 2 haulers, Impel and that blockaderunner (which name i forgot). and it would still require me to jump twice. and jumpable freighter? let me guess, needs Freighter lvl 5? i got lvl 1 atm >_<. great time being a logistics officer, Th?
Kerfira	Posted - 2007.10.28 10:13:00 - [79] Edited by: Kerfira on 28/10/2007 10:17:04 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h This is amazing. Whining that your carriers cannot double as freighters. Brilliant. Quite a few of us doesn't really mind that part a lot. Ok, it's nice that carriers are able to do so, but much more important is the ability to carry replacement ships for combat. Making this more cumbersome as the result of nerfing total cargo is annoying and stupid. I usually place my carrier in our base of operations, and have a number of 'dictors, a couple of cov-ops/'ceptors, and 1-2 HACS or a CS in it... This enables me to get a ship that's suitable for what we're doing, instead of me sitting at a POS doing nothing. Ie. it enables me to enjoy and participate in the game. If I had to first unload a ship, then store it, retrieve another and then load it up, every time I need to do something else, that'll seriously inconvenience me, and for no reason whatsoever..... Instead of just banning cargo in stored ships altogether, just make it impossible to store ships that have more than 750 m3 of cargo in them (or just ban industrials/barges). This'll cover all combat ships nicely, but'll prevent large-scale cargo carrying. Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2007.10.28 10:22:00 - [80] Hm, Vanguard looks really good on my new 8800GTX ... EVE still looks so 90's. "...been designed for one purpose and one purpose only. Imagine a handful of repair drones pouring from the carebear's mouth. Now imagine they have um, nothing." -Unknown Hel redesigner (2007)

Bonny Lee Caldari Trinitas Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.28 10:26:00 - [81] Originally by: realbadman why do people who don't fly carriers keep posting about ** they know ** all about? must be devalts Because we also do play the game and perhaps dont want the carriers to be the ultimate solution to everything. Its a bad idea that politicans and managers can decide about their own salary. Its a bad idea to let the carrier pilots decide what a carrier should be able to do too.
realbadman	Posted - 2007.10.28 10:39:00 - [82] Quote: dont want the carriers to be the ultimate solution to everything my point exactly. if you actually piloted one, you'd know how inaccurate that statement is. you are wasting my bandwidth
Woddawick	Posted - 2007.10.28 11:12:00 - [83] Edited by: Woddawick on 28/10/2007 11:12:46 Originally by: Wild Rho People are going to cry foul at any change to the carrier anyway. He probably doesn't request constructive feedback because he won't actually get it. What he'll get is generally a load of ranting about players who are annoyed their favourite toy isn't as uber as it once was. It's interesting that loads of people deny that the carrier is a 'Swiss army knife' and yet the devs seem able to annoy them by reducing its effectiveness in almost any game area they choose. Having just read the lengthy threads on the subject I can also see that a lot of people are bad at reading comprehension. The rest are apparently just looking for an excuse to get angry and have a go at CCP. I don't think there's anything on the subject the devs can post that wouldn't be flamed and torn apart right now. My advice to the devs is to just do it. It's always a shame when your favourite toy gets nerfed but the current attitude and public hostility displayed by carrier pilots deserves a slapping. If get rids of the people that it seems like it will then good riddance. Those that remain will eb the few sensible ones that are up for a proper discussion with the devs.
MrMunro Caldari PILGRIMS	Posted - 2007.10.28 12:30:00 - [84] Originally by: Fswd There are freighters for hauling stuff. The function of carriers is to carry fighters, not stuff. In some way, this can even be regarded as an exploit, like how miners use jet-cans. Right... If they concider it an exploit, why not remove the jet can exploit first then? I'll tell you why, cuz that would get every player that's mining in EvE to start flooding CCP's mailbox and quit their subscription. This is just them being mad about our reaction to the carrier nerfs, it's just pestering carrier pilots. MrMunro Co-CEO Pilgrims Corporation
Jaabaa Prime Quam Singulari	Posted - 2007.10.28 13:24:00 - [85] Edited by: Jaabaa Prime on 28/10/2007 13:24:33 A legitimate reason for having ships in the ship maintenance hanger with stuff in it hold is when you are flying support with spare ships or taking in ships for other members. What about ammunition, charges, modules, etc.. Want to dump it all into the corp hangar ? Try sorting out that logistic nightmare (it would be even worse for a MS). If CCP keep on going at this rate, we'll only be able to store unpackaged ships in carrier class ships, and have people assemble, fit and stock up in space. If you want to stop them from being used as "hauler haulers", then just change it so that industrials can't be stored with anything in their cargo hold. This gets better by the day (NOT ). --
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2007.10.28 14:05:00 - [86] What I see with all this fuss and bother is that CCP are right in what they say. After all - if carriers weren't a master-of-all-trades why would people complain quite so much? Sure people would be a bit ***ed off after investing time and money in their carrier but it'd only be one ship in their hangar. The fact that people are so annoyed about the proposed change suggests that those who fly carriers are so reliant on them that they don't have an alternative. And that* is exactly what the devs are unhappy about and they are right to be unhappy. Eve needs variety ships should be specialised in role and require appropriate fittings for each role they are capable of. Losing one ship to the nerf bat should be nothing more than a minor irritation. Pilots should have enough alternatives to be able to just adapt. The fact that so many carrier pilots think that they cannot adapt either means that they all suck monkey doo-das or else have got used to only needing one ship in their hangar. Either way something has got to go. -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned.
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2007.10.28 14:06:00 - [87] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h This is amazing. Whining that your carriers cannot double as freighters. Brilliant. Yup. It pretty much proves the point that CCP are trying to make. -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned.
Macro Slasher	Posted - 2007.10.28 14:42:00 - [88] Originally by: Viqer Fell Edited by: Viqer Fell on 27/10/2007 12:15:57 Originally by: Fswd There are freighters for hauling stuff. The function of carriers is to carry fighters, not ships. That is simply not true. If it was then carriers would never have been given the capacity to carry ships at all. Bingo. Okay, that was a mistake. Now remove that capacity altogether.
Druadan Gallente Aristotle Enterprises Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2007.10.28 22:41:00 - [89] Originally by: Macro Slasher Originally by: Viqer Fell Edited by: Viqer Fell on 27/10/2007 12:15:57 Originally by: Fswd There are freighters for hauling stuff. The function of carriers is to carry fighters, not ships. That is simply not true. If it was then carriers would never have been given the capacity to carry ships at all. Bingo. Okay, that was a mistake. Now remove that capacity altogether. Not without giving us the logistics guys time to respec. Also, bump. Screw you, Jacques.
C601	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:52:00 - [90] Originally by: Wild Rho People are going to cry foul at any change to the carrier anyway. He probably doesn't request constructive feedback because he won't actually get it. What he'll get is generally a load of ranting about players who are annoyed their favourite toy isn't as uber as it once was. ^^This ....



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: 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.