Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Can you use a stargate in a carrier? no...

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Well, they aren't similar at all. And as you said that you're new (a few months), yourself, you probably shouldn't worry too much about a carrier.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Can you use a stargate in a carrier? no...

---

That's it?

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Marauders can't jump, Black Ops can.
Black Ops can only jump a couple of times before refueling unless you "honour tank" them and fill them up with shedloads of fuel.
Both Marauders and Black Ops can use stargates, Carriers can't.
Both can use most mission gates, Carriers are locked out of most.
Black Ops can jump to "stealth" cyno fields, Carriers announce their presence to all the galaxy.
Black Ops can form a mini-jumpportal, for other cloakers without jumpdrives to follow them into the jump.

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Can you use a stargate in a carrier? no...

---

That's it?

---

Fine.

1. Can operate solo if need be - no cyno requirement
2. Turrets
3. MWD
4. Much smaller sig radius
5. Probably still going to be cheaper
6. It's not a capital ship
7. IT'S NOT A CAPITAL SHIP

Believe or not, a number of people can't be arsed with the whole capital ship 'thing' (and besides, regardless of temporary respite, you can guarantee the current 'solo' abilities of carriers will be getting a swing of the bat in the future)

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Let's get on to the aspect of combat. How many black-ops/marauders will it take to combat one carrier? Several.
So what if carriers announce their presence, that information isn't that valuable and local isn't that hard to figure out.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Can you use a stargate in a carrier? no...

---

That's it?

---

Fine.

1. Can operate solo if need be - no cyno requirement
2. Turrets
3. MWD
4. Much smaller sig radius
5. Probably still going to be cheaper
6. It's not a capital ship
7. IT'S NOT A CAPITAL SHIP

Believe or not, a number of people can't be arsed with the whole capital ship 'thing' (and besides, regardless of temporary respite, you can guarantee the current 'solo' abilities of carriers will be getting a swing of the bat in the future)

---

This needs to happen, I don't see how it's balanced for carriers to operate at the rate at which they are doing currently. Tech 2 battleships are not capital ships, I understand that. Why then is their cost equivalent to one? Being slow isn't that big of a deal, a Rokh without skills has a default speed of what? 110m/s? SigRadius becomes a non-factor as soon as you are flying something of Battleship size, or larger.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

You have all skills maxed to V in Eve. You have enough money to buy a ship (either Marauder/Carrier) and fully fit it.
Who here would choose a Marauder, honestly? No. Honestly.
...and why?
A fully rigged and fitted Marauder will easily cost around a Bil.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

You have all skills maxed to V in Eve. You have enough money to buy a ship (either Marauder/Carrier) and fully fit it.
Who here would choose a Marauder, honestly? No. Honestly.
...and why?
A fully rigged and fitted Marauder will easily cost around a Bil.

---

Marauder for PvP ? Don't make me laugh !
With that pathetic sensor strength, and the buff of Caldari ECM boats, you'd be pretty stupid to use them for anything other than highsec missionrunning.

But picking between a Carrier and a Black Op, now, well, I'd probably go with the Black Ops ship, thank you very much, as I prefer to NOT rely on a cyno alt for each and every system jump I make, and also be able to ENTER highsec if I want to (carriers can't).

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 17:39:29
You have all skills maxed to V in Eve. You have enough money to buy a ship (either Marauder/Carrier) and fully fit it.

Who here would choose a Marauder, honestly? No. Honestly.

...and why?

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

They aren't really comparable but just to shut you up:

BS's can go in high sec
BS's can use jump gates and thus can be moved without the help of someone else
BS's don't run out of fuel and thus leave you stuck in a hostile system
BS's can fit guns which can't be destroyed by smartbombs leaving you unarmed
BS's weapons won't warp after a target never to return leaving you unarmed and out 300M
BS's can quietly jump into a system rather than making a cyno everyone in the region will notice
BS's can enter a cyno-jammed system
BS's cost a 1/10 as much to fit and arm
BS's can be insured for the full value of the ship
BS's can't be scanned down in less time than it takes them to turn

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 17:39:29
You have all skills maxed to V in Eve. You have enough money to buy a ship (either Marauder/Carrier) and fully fit it.

Who here would choose a Marauder, honestly? No. Honestly.

...and why?

A fully rigged and fitted Marauder will easily cost around a Bil. I'm looking at it from a cost analysis standpoint. If an interceptor cost 1 billion to fit, you'd expect it to be damn good at it's job.

For a good analogy, this is like both a Kestrel and an Crow both costing the same amount. Why would anyone fly the Kestrel, except for lack of skills?

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Regardless of what you think a Tech 2 BS is, they are Tech 2 BSs.

But this whole discussion is ridiculous, as it goes much more, Exeq -> Oneiros -> Thanatos rather than any other way.

A much more logical flow would be, Mega/Hyp/Domi -> Moros.

I just don't understand how in one thread you are asking for help about relatively basic things, and then in another thread you are professing to know all about all these ships you've never even flown.

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: insidion

---

Personally, I do think that the black ops needs to have fairly high reqs and cost for obvious reasons. The marauder does make me wonder what they were thinking though. The cost doesn't necessarily bother me that much (have to see when they hit TQ, but 300m or so I can live with so long as they don't suck which is another debate entirely) but the current skill reqs on SiSi are WTF for sure. I still haven't had the time to finish training Energy Management 5 to use heat, another oddly high skill req, especially for all the work that went into it.

It's all theory until it hits TQ though I guess.

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: An Anarchyyt

---

Regardless of what you think a Tech 2 BS is, they are Tech 2 BSs.

But this whole discussion is ridiculous, as it goes much more, Exeq -> Oneiros -> Thanatos rather than any other way.

A much more logical flow would be, Mega/Hyp/Domi -> Moros.

I just don't understand how in one thread you are asking for help about relatively basic things, and then in another thread you are professing to know all about all these ships you've never even flown.

---

Because I've seen the carrier fleets. I've seen just how common they are in 0.0. I understand why as well, they are simply the most cost effective combat ship out there, for their relatively cheap price their combat power is far greater than both Tech 1 and the soon to be Tech 2 Battleships (which are super underwhelming).

I don't want to play a game, where every single person flies a god damn capital.

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

every ship has a weakness, every ship, and as long as you understand that and fight your ship appropriately to it's strengths, and not on your enemies terms, you will succeed.
The marauders are most definitely not, simple ‘mission ships’.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Black Ops should end up costing 450-500 mil, Marauders 500-600 mil.
Last time I checked, carriers were still selling for at least 1 bil, if not more.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

If a Marauder ends up costing 800m, then it should be able to effectively 1v1 a Carrier which by definition is a 'LOGISTICS SHIP'. Where is the flaw in this reasoning?

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

I said this before, but I think you missed it so I'll re-state it in simpler terms:


T2 SHIPS DO NOT HAVE TO BE BASED AROUND ADDITIONAL DAMAGE OR OVERALL COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

Basically, just because it's a T2 Battleship that doesn't mean it has to be a Battleship-sized HAC. You're looking at things from too simple a perspective, there are important traits of ships that aren't cost and DPS. Combat in EVE is much more complex than that.

---

Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

If a Marauder ends up costing 800m, then it should be able to effectively 1v1 a Carrier which by definition is a 'LOGISTICS SHIP'. Where is the flaw in this reasoning?

---

Get the price tag out of your head. Just because something cost 100mill doesn't mean is should beat anything below that price.
Take logistic ships, they cost about 30mill, but any T1 frigate can kill them. And there is a pretty big differance between Logistic ships and T1 frigs in price.

---

Originally by: Cookie Muncher

---

Stop trying to compare the carrier to the marauder, they are completely different ships and comparing them is like me saying a frigate doesnt have enough damage because a bs does more. The marauder is a mission running ship in its current state and the carrier by default is a PvP ship.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

I said this before, but I think you missed it so I'll re-state it in simpler terms:


T2 SHIPS DO NOT HAVE TO BE BASED AROUND ADDITIONAL DAMAGE OR OVERALL COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

Basically, just because it's a T2 Battleship that doesn't mean it has to be a Battleship-sized HAC. You're looking at things from too simple a perspective, there are important traits of ships that aren't cost and DPS. Combat in EVE is much more complex than that.

---

I understand what you are saying, but it's STUPID.

The Carrier is FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR MORE USEFUL in a logistics capability.
The Carrier is FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR MORE USEFUL in a combat capability.

Wow, the Marauder can carry more cap booster charges. HOOOOORAY.
The Marauder can use stargates. HOOORAAY.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

They are the HAC's of Battleships.

---

Quote:

---

This isn't like comparing a frigate to a logistic ship, I haven't seen a single valid reason why a Marauder shouldn't have more combat capability than a god damn equally priced logistics ship.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 18:08:23

Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

If a Marauder ends up costing 800m, then it should be able to effectively 1v1 a Carrier which by definition is a 'LOGISTICS SHIP'. Where is the flaw in this reasoning?

---

Get the price tag out of your head. Just because something cost 100mill doesn't mean is should beat anything below that price.
Take logistic ships, they cost about 30mill, but any T1 frigate can kill them. And there is a pretty big differance between Logistic ships and T1 frigs in price.

---

Marauders are Tech 2 Offensive Combat Battleships. They are the HAC's of Battleships.

Carriers are group logistic ships.

This isn't like comparing a frigate to a logistic ship, I haven't seen a single valid reason why a Marauder shouldn't have more combat capability than a god damn equally priced logistics ship.

---

Originally by: game box

---

Conceive a new life without boundaries, where murder, plunder, betrayal, and delusions of grandeur will lead you to boundless glory or to the brink of ruin.

---

Originally by: Danae Melios

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 18:08:23

Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

If a Marauder ends up costing 800m, then it should be able to effectively 1v1 a Carrier which by definition is a 'LOGISTICS SHIP'. Where is the flaw in this reasoning?

---

Get the price tag out of your head. Just because something cost 100mill doesn't mean is should beat anything below that price.
Take logistic ships, they cost about 30mill, but any T1 frigate can kill them. And there is a pretty big differance between Logistic ships and T1 frigs in price.

---

Marauders are Tech 2 Offensive Combat Battleships. They are the HAC's of Battleships.

Carriers are group logistic ships.

This isn't like comparing a frigate to a logistic ship, I haven't seen a single valid reason why a Marauder shouldn't have more combat capability than a god damn equally priced logistics ship.

---

Marauders are NOT the HACs of Battleships. They are the Recons of Battleships. Damage is NOT the reason to fly them. Tricksy planning and tactics and being unpleasant to ones enemies are. They are logistical vehicles for covert ops ships. And I use logistical in the REAL meaning of it, not as combat medics but in the sense of "getting there the fastest with the mostest."

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Well I was originally planning to spec for a Blaster Rokh, which would take 68 days for Neutron Blaster II's. Or I could spend another couple of months, and fly a capital and be that much more effective.

Or...I could quit. Battleships suck, I wish I had gone Interceptor or something.

---

Quote:

---

A year from now, the number of capitals is going to grow exponentially, while the number of Battleships is going to shrink. There's very little use for them.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Can you use a stargate in a carrier? no...

---

That's it?

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Well I was originally planning to spec for a Blaster Rokh, which would take 68 days for Neutron Blaster II's. Or I could spend another couple of months, and fly a capital and be that much more effective.

Or...I could quit. Battleships suck, I wish I had gone Interceptor or something.

---

Then why don't you? There's really nothing keeping you from becoming an interceptor pilot, I originally started as a miner but now I'm pretty handy with an interceptor.

Quote:

---

A year from now, the number of capitals is going to grow exponentially, while the number of Battleships is going to shrink. There's very little use for them.

---

I don't think that's true, honestly. Carriers, Dreadnoughts, Motherships, and Titans require support. if someone fields a fleet entirely of carriers, all it would take to absolutely wreck them would be a dozen smartbomb-wielding battleships. They may not lose, but the battleships will escape unscathed and the carriers will be out 100 million ISK each for their lost fighters.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 17:39:29
You have all skills maxed to V in Eve. You have enough money to buy a ship (either Marauder/Carrier) and fully fit it.

Who here would choose a Marauder, honestly? No. Honestly.

...and why?

A fully rigged and fitted Marauder will easily cost around a Bil. I'm looking at it from a cost analysis standpoint. If an interceptor cost 1 billion to fit, you'd expect it to be damn good at it's job.

For a good analogy, this is like both a Kestrel and an Crow both costing the same amount. Why would anyone fly the Kestrel, except for lack of skills?

---

Originally by: Tashiell Gao

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 17:39:29
You have all skills maxed to V in Eve. You have enough money to buy a ship (either Marauder/Carrier) and fully fit it.

Who here would choose a Marauder, honestly? No. Honestly.

...and why?

A fully rigged and fitted Marauder will easily cost around a Bil. I'm looking at it from a cost analysis standpoint. If an interceptor cost 1 billion to fit, you'd expect it to be damn good at it's job.

For a good analogy, this is like both a Kestrel and an Crow both costing the same amount. Why would anyone fly the Kestrel, except for lack of skills?

---

that's...going to take you some time
This game is not simple as you think, take faction ships-they are not cost effective. the price of "a bit better things" follows an exponential curve i.e. y=e^x
if something is costy for, well it's costy for you only. and your kestrel and crow example is not very fitting here.
Even above is all bullsh*t to your point of view-the lowest standard is that you try something before you give out your point of view.
and argueing on the internet looks stupid

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

The problem is that Carriers are not on this exponential curve. It takes 5 250 million ISK battleships to take down a Carrier.

---

Originally by: Taedrin

---

Carriers have several disadvantages, the most notable being that they are extremely vulnerable without support. As someone mentioned, carriers can not really do much against ships smaller than a battleship. I believe there was a hilarious killmail posted once where a carrier was successfully destroyed by a gang of cruisers and smaller ships. On top of this, ISK-wise, a carrier is NOT effective. All capital ships cost several billion ISK to fit properly, and alone, they stand no chance against a group of battleships worth the same price.

In all, Carriers should not, and are not, a solo pwnmobile. The introduction of HACtors will emphasize this even more by allowing a small-ish ship to tackle a capital ship anywhere.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 18:29:30

Originally by: Tashiell Gao

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 17:39:29
You have all skills maxed to V in Eve. You have enough money to buy a ship (either Marauder/Carrier) and fully fit it.

Who here would choose a Marauder, honestly? No. Honestly.

...and why?

A fully rigged and fitted Marauder will easily cost around a Bil. I'm looking at it from a cost analysis standpoint. If an interceptor cost 1 billion to fit, you'd expect it to be damn good at it's job.

For a good analogy, this is like both a Kestrel and an Crow both costing the same amount. Why would anyone fly the Kestrel, except for lack of skills?

---

that's...going to take you some time
This game is not simple as you think, take faction ships-they are not cost effective. the price of "a bit better things" follows an exponential curve i.e. y=e^x
if something is costy for, well it's costy for you only. and your kestrel and crow example is not very fitting here.
Even above is all bullsh*t to your point of view-the lowest standard is that you try something before you give out your point of view.
and argueing on the internet looks stupid

---

The problem is that Carriers are not on this exponential curve. It takes 5 250 million ISK battleships to take down a Carrier.

A Carrier costs 800-1.2 BIL. Caldari Navy Ravens cost the same. It would take 3-4 Caldari Navy Ravens to take down a Carrier. This is my argument. You are obviously an empire hugger, and if you are ever to go down to 0.0 you will see fleets of 40+ capitals with 2-3x more carriers than Battleships.

---

Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn

---

I personaly think (who cares) that a Tech 2 battleship will be at least 3 times to 10 the cost of a Carrier.

So it'll be something like 300/1b.

The problem is most faction ship are at 1b/1b2. Tech II battleships are about as effective as some faction BS. So, they should be 1b.

The problem is for 1b, you have a fitted carrier. Noyt the skills, but a fitted carier.

So I agree with the op. A carrier have better stats than these BS, they can jump and have a better tank. Especially since the Rokh can out-tank the Golem.

Some like to pilot a really costly BS. I don't care, BS are PVE tools for me. What would I pay myself a PVE tool ? The Tempests I pilot are enough for my needs. A carrier would be nice, but not that needed.

OK, theses ships have good stats but nothing that is enough for a gagng of 2+ friends to be invulnerable or the famous "I win button".

Why would I want to go in an expensive ship like these ? I can buy 3/10 tempests instead... (for marauders)

Black ops are a different matter. They have a jump portal that some would want to play with. Okay. But if I need to pay 800m to have one of these, maybe carriers will go first. And no matter how I love Pvp.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Unless Marauders are like 200m, you won't see any of them in 0.0. They just aren't worth it.

---

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg

---

I think the OP is trying to say that carriers, as they are now, are the step up in terms of power from a BS.

What he's saying, and what CCP has stated, is that they dont want the carrier to be that next step, that must have after you attain sufficient BS skill. Carriers are for a support role to a fleet of BS's, not vice versa.

Carriers now are too good. A fleet of them > a fleet of gang BS's. While they're being superior to BS's--damage wise--that fleet of carriers can carry 100's millions of compressed Trit, ammo, can Remote Rep each other in a spider tank extravaganza. That shouldnt be the case and CCP is going to limit them.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg

---

I think the OP is trying to say that carriers, as they are now, are the step up in terms of power from a BS.

What he's saying, and what CCP has stated, is that they dont want the carrier to be that next step, that must have after you attain sufficient BS skill. Carriers are for a support role to a fleet of BS's, not vice versa.

Carriers now are too good. A fleet of them > a fleet of gang BS's. While they're being superior to BS's--damage wise--that fleet of carriers can carry 100's millions of compressed Trit, ammo, can Remote Rep each other in a spider tank extravaganza. That shouldnt be the case and CCP is going to limit them.

---

You are my hero.

Thank you.

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Edited by: Tarminic on 30/11/2007 18:51:45

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg

---

I think the OP is trying to say that carriers, as they are now, are the step up in terms of power from a BS.

What he's saying, and what CCP has stated, is that they dont want the carrier to be that next step, that must have after you attain sufficient BS skill. Carriers are for a support role to a fleet of BS's, not vice versa.

Carriers now are too good. A fleet of them > a fleet of gang BS's. While they're being superior to BS's--damage wise--that fleet of carriers can carry 100's millions of compressed Trit, ammo, can Remote Rep each other in a spider tank extravaganza. That shouldnt be the case and CCP is going to limit them.

---

You are my hero.

Thank you.

---

Well hell, you should have put it that way to begin with. I can agree with that.

Yes, damage-wise carriers are the next step up from Battleships, and they need some balancing in my opinion. But I don't think they're every player's end goal in EVE and they certainly aren't mine.

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

BS's can enter a cyno-jammed system

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Cmon Tarminic, even look at the title of this thread. "Carriers -- The Real Tech2 Battleships"
I think it was pretty obvious the point I was trying to get off.

Carriers are the next step up from Battleships, not Marauders.

---

Originally by: Princess Jodi

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

BS's can enter a cyno-jammed system

---

Wait...What? I have seen nothing suggesting that they will have this ability. Please back up this statement with data or a linky.

---

Originally by: Karen Serasia

---

Because some idiot decided to sell an internet connection to me and didn't think of the consequences.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by: Gabriel KaradeCan you use a stargate in a carrier? no...

---

Originally by: F'nog

---

Originally by: Princess Jodi

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

BS's can enter a cyno-jammed system

---

Wait...What? I have seen nothing suggesting that they will have this ability. Please back up this statement with data or a linky.

---

It's called a gate. Every system has at least 1.

And why do people keep saying a fully-fitted Carrier is 1 bil? That's just the basic ship cost.

---

Originally by: Trespasser

---

Edited by: Trespasser on 30/11/2007 18:44:57
Maruders are PVE SHIPS

Do you understand now ? THERE PVE SHIPS To be more percise their MISSION SHIPS

MARUDERS ARE NOT COMBAT SHIPS they would get pwned by everything else

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Or...I could quit. Battleships suck, I wish I had gone Interceptor or something. A year from now, the number of capitals is going to grow exponentially, while the number of Battleships is going to shrink. There's very little use for them.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Haniblecter Teg

---

I think the OP is trying to say that carriers, as they are now, are the step up in terms of power from a BS.

What he's saying, and what CCP has stated, is that they dont want the carrier to be that next step, that must have after you attain sufficient BS skill. Carriers are for a support role to a fleet of BS's, not vice versa.

Carriers now are too good. A fleet of them > a fleet of gang BS's. While they're being superior to BS's--damage wise--that fleet of carriers can carry 100's millions of compressed Trit, ammo, can Remote Rep each other in a spider tank extravaganza. That shouldnt be the case and CCP is going to limit them.

---

You are my hero.

Thank you.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Stop bringing up Black-Ops, please. We are arguing about the straightforward combat ability of Battleships, Marauders, and Carriers.

Black-Ops aren't even really going to be considered Tech2 Battleships, but more of an entirely different class. Their 'roles' are NOTHING comparative to each other, and this is like saying a HAC and a Cov-Ops are the same ships.
So, no more black-ops.

Explain why the Marauders aren't going to be an overpriced pieceS of **** in PvP.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Can you make a carrier go 9km/s?? A Macharial can.
A Rokh can't.
Can you bump other carriers away from shields with your carrier? No you cannot.
A Rokh can't.
Can you afford a new carrier every time they blow up?
They don't blow up that easily, after all it takes 5-10 Battleships to take a Carrier down. How easily are 500m rigged t2 Rokhs to replace?
Can your carrier warp out in 10 seconds?? No.
Yeah, My Rokh only takes about 40 seconds to perform an unaligned warp.
Can you highsec suicide gank a freighter with carriers? LOL You could, I'd like to see you try.
Again, who would suicide gank in a 500m rigged t2 fitted Rokh?

-Thanks.

---

Originally by: Valea

---

Carriers: lock terribly slow, move terribly slow, warp terribly slow, align terribly slow, huge sig radius, all weapons do max dps against it, can't use stargates, require fueling, can't go in high sec, takes a hauler to move the capital mods for it, can't do squat against small and fast ships, totally ineffective at soloing against all but the most inept targets, DOES LESS DPS THAN A MEGATHRON.

Yap thats just what I would think of a t2 battleship as.

To address your points, fuel costs add up to hundreds of millions of isk over the life of a carrier (hopefully). Getting a cyno pilot to a system can take just as long as getting there with conventionals, plus multiple jumps require several minutes of recharge. And being 80% cap drained after jump puts you in no condition to jump into the fray, whereas conventionals are good to go upon stargate jump. Battleships can defend against smaller ships better because of shorter lock times, and the potential to actually hit them, whereas fast ships can mwd away from drones while still staying in scram range. And the idea that a t2 battleship can't tank a carrier is absurd, fighters will go down like flies to BS fire, and even then, the roughly 1200 dps a carrier can produce can be shrugged off by a well tanked BS, so I would hope a t2 BS could handle it as well.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Valea

---

Carriers: lock terribly slow, move terribly slow, warp terribly slow, align terribly slow, huge sig radius, all weapons do max dps against it, can't use stargates, require fueling, can't go in high sec, takes a hauler to move the capital mods for it, can't do squat against small and fast ships, totally ineffective at soloing against all but the most inept targets, DOES LESS DPS THAN A MEGATHRON.

Yap thats just what I would think of a t2 battleship as.

To address your points, fuel costs add up to hundreds of millions of isk over the life of a carrier (hopefully). Getting a cyno pilot to a system can take just as long as getting there with conventionals, plus multiple jumps require several minutes of recharge. And being 80% cap drained after jump puts you in no condition to jump into the fray, whereas conventionals are good to go upon stargate jump. Battleships can defend against smaller ships better because of shorter lock times, and the potential to actually hit them, whereas fast ships can mwd away from drones while still staying in scram range. And the idea that a t2 battleship can't tank a carrier is absurd, fighters will go down like flies to BS fire, and even then, the roughly 1200 dps a carrier can produce can be shrugged off by a well tanked BS, so I would hope a t2 BS could handle it as well.

---

Show me a Mega that can do 1500dps at max skills, with Carrier's range/tank to boot. Yeah, shut up.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

I said this before, but I think you missed it so I'll re-state it in simpler terms:


T2 SHIPS DO NOT HAVE TO BE BASED AROUND ADDITIONAL DAMAGE OR OVERALL COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

Basically, just because it's a T2 Battleship that doesn't mean it has to be a Battleship-sized HAC. You're looking at things from too simple a perspective, there are important traits of ships that aren't cost and DPS. Combat in EVE is much more complex than that.

---

I understand what you are saying, but it's STUPID.

The Carrier is FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR MORE USEFUL in a logistics capability.
The Carrier is FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR MORE USEFUL in a combat capability.

Wow, the Marauder can carry more cap booster charges. HOOOOORAY.
The Marauder can use stargates. HOOORAAY.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 01/12/2007 00:13:27

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Valea

---

Carriers: lock terribly slow, move terribly slow, warp terribly slow, align terribly slow, huge sig radius, all weapons do max dps against it, can't use stargates, require fueling, can't go in high sec, takes a hauler to move the capital mods for it, can't do squat against small and fast ships, totally ineffective at soloing against all but the most inept targets, DOES LESS DPS THAN A MEGATHRON.

Yap thats just what I would think of a t2 battleship as.

To address your points, fuel costs add up to hundreds of millions of isk over the life of a carrier (hopefully). Getting a cyno pilot to a system can take just as long as getting there with conventionals, plus multiple jumps require several minutes of recharge. And being 80% cap drained after jump puts you in no condition to jump into the fray, whereas conventionals are good to go upon stargate jump. Battleships can defend against smaller ships better because of shorter lock times, and the potential to actually hit them, whereas fast ships can mwd away from drones while still staying in scram range. And the idea that a t2 battleship can't tank a carrier is absurd, fighters will go down like flies to BS fire, and even then, the roughly 1200 dps a carrier can produce can be shrugged off by a well tanked BS, so I would hope a t2 BS could handle it as well.

---

Show me a Mega that can do 1500dps at max skills, with Carrier's range/tank to boot. Yeah, shut up.

---

I didn't even finish reading your post, Holy Disinformation, Batman! Show me one Battleship that can tank 1200-1500 DPS.

---

Originally by: Reem Fairchild

---

By the logic of the op no one would ever fly anything but the absolutely biggest, heaviest hitting ship they had skills for

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Show me one Battleship that can tank 1200-1500 DPS.

---

Originally by: Cecil Montague

---

They should change that warning on entering low sec to:

"Go read Crime and Punishment for a few days then come back."

---

Originally by: Janu Hull

---

Originally by: F'nog

---

Originally by: Princess Jodi

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

BS's can enter a cyno-jammed system

---

Wait...What? I have seen nothing suggesting that they will have this ability. Please back up this statement with data or a linky.

---

It's called a gate. Every system has at least 1.

And why do people keep saying a fully-fitted Carrier is 1 bil? That's just the basic ship cost.

---

As insane as it might sound, not everyone flies carriers with full officer fits. The serious pilots might, but for every sovreign alliance fleet cap pilot with his soul in hock to Satan himself to finance his fit there's a dozen or more minor players who fly less than ultimate fit ups.

---

Originally by: Karen Serasia

---

Because some idiot decided to sell an internet connection to me and didn't think of the consequences.

---

Originally by: Snooter

---

Edited by: Snooter on 01/12/2007 11:21:20
Edited by: Snooter on 01/12/2007 11:19:54
edited a couple times for typing mistakes

woolygimp, as a carrier pilot i inform you that you make way too many assumptions, and those assumptions are largely wrong.

for example, operating a carrier is not easy, its expensive and time consuming and tends to involve little or no excitement. i may be dumb or something when it comes to moving my carrier but to go to from our 0 sec home to a core system in empire and back again tends to take a few hours when things are organized well, it costs 45mil to boot. that 45mil isnt just deducted from your wallet, you have to plan to have fuel for jumps, fuel wich takes up 10s of 1000s of m3. what do you get out of this? when hostiles come to our systems you end up on a kill mail for a ship that you never even saw. you get to loose 2-5x the ammount of isk in laggy fleet battles than a bs pilot. you get to replace 100s of millions worth of fighters that you werent even in control of when they died.

also carriers are not that effective in combat, to illustrate that point you will never kill a battleship one on one unless they are afk, granted you will never be killed one on one either but thats called a trade off. if you are in a nice battleship and you find yourself confronted with a group from which you have no chance of escape, presumably a group of battleships with tackling/ecm support, you have eqauly no chance of escaping that in a carrier unless you happen to already have backup lined up, which may even save said battleship anyway. you can quote 1500 dps from eve fitting tool ect, but as has been stated that requires max skills and a full rack of drone control units, wich if you flew carriers youd understand is somewhat silly to assume.

finally being in the alliance you are in i can understand where you get the idea that carriers are so common, but they really arent. you quoted a dev blog saying there is 10 000 carriers in the game, i read that myself. i also read in information released by a dev (that economic info .pdf) that the average isk per account in eve is 500mil, which is less than the skill book cost of getting in a carrier, that the most common ships are mostly industrial based ships in the company of a couple battleships, that an overwhelming percentage of players are in high sec where carriers arent even allowed. yes, in large scale alliance warfare carriers are numerous and important. no, they are not replacing battleships even in large scale alliance warfare.

carriers are possibly (including but not limited to): overpowered (not in the ways you seem to think so), too available, misused, getting nerfed. they are not: cheap, quick to train for, ultimate (?solo) pvp ships, easy to manage, hard to destroy, worth their isk weight in a tank vs gank fight, highly common, the next battleship

the balancing of the carrier probably needs to be looked at, and as everyone knows , is.

all ships should be unique, and not speaking out about the rest of the ships, carriers are most certainly unique from battleships, if you spend a few months flying both you realize that very quickly.

i dont know what to say except that trying to be polite and constructive you really need to learn more about this subject before you try to debate it, even tho at the core of what you are trying to suggest you may in a way be right

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Edited by: Woolygimp on 30/11/2007 17:22:24



For those of you who would fly a Battleship, what advantages are there to flying a Battleship over a Carrier at the present time?

Every class has it's advantages and disadvantages, but with Carriers they surpass Battleships in almost every aspect, and then some. The new Battleships will be released with Trinity, so why would anyone with the relevant skills choose to fly a Tech 2 Battleship over a Carrier? The Golem has a weaker tank than a Rokh, and that's saying a lot. Tech 2 Battleships won't even have that much of a damage boost over the normal Tier 1's.

Fuel costs are laughable, and being able to pounce around in just a couple jumps is amazing. It will take a Tech 2 Battleship 3 hours to make a trip a Carrier can make in 2 minutes, not to mention all the more dangerous.
We all know that the Tech 2 Battleships won't hold a candle to capitals in combat, so I won't even elaborate on this point.

I just don't see the point to Tech 2 Battleships when their costs are almost identical to capitals, can someone enlighten me?

---

Originally by: Lilian Long

---

Battleships don't play such a big role in 0.0 alliance pvp anymore.

---

Originally by: Pitt Bull

---

Its not about the size... its how you use it.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Several carrier pilots have said they are easily able to solo 5-10 Battleships, and think they should be able to solo more.

---

Originally by: Reem Fairchild

---

Originally by: Lilian Long

---

Battleships don't play such a big role in 0.0 alliance pvp anymore.

---

We must not be playing the same game. Or else, you're hanging around people completely different from any of the alliances in 0.0 that I've flown with or against.

The battleship is THE main fleet ship in 0.0 by far. Capitals come into play in sieges (but not all of them, especially since cyno jammers came about) and a few other situations, but even then battleships are usually in much greater numbers. And with roaming gangs (which is a very large portion of combat in 0.0) the heaviest of them would be the battleship heavy ones (I've seen that Stain Empire likes to do those). But many don't even have any battleships at all, only smaller ships.

---

Originally by: Woolygimp

---

Originally by: Snooter

---

what i posted

---

Dude, go read the carrier thread linked in the DEVBLOG. Several carrier pilots have said they are easily able to solo 5-10 Battleships, and think they should be able to solo more.

---