EVE Search - Capitals online?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Capitals online?

» 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 - 1 post(s)
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:18:00 - [1] I say no. Not capitals online. Carriers online. Most people probably already know this. Carriers are too versatile. If you disagree, then go look at what people use Carriers for and come back. Most Dreadnought pilots don't take their dreads out unless they're shooting a POS because that's the only thing dreads can do well. CCP did a good job at making their damage potential useless in most situations. On paper, Dreads look like solopwnmobiles. 3k DPS, massive tank? But nope, you can't hit anything that decides to move one bit. Titans can't really do much... And they're logistical nightmares, and they can't dock, and they cost loads. However, Carriers are different. The versatility of droneboats carries over and gets injected with steroids. Carriers can do a lot of things very well, with little penalties to the other things. I have no idea what Carriers were supposed to be. People use them for so much that the original idea was lost. The problem with fixing them is that people use them for so much. What exactly should they do? What can the Carrier pilots of Eve agree on, if that's even possible? If carriers can't haul as much, POS logistics become a huge issue. That's a completely different problem. POS suck in almost every way. Fixing that is something different. Take away Carrier's combat abilities, and they can't fight, which is obviously important. Too many people use them to fight for that. Too many people use Carriers in all the possible ways for it to be easy to give them a specific role. People are going to have to agree on something. Seeing as this is Eve, and adding to that, the Eve Forums, I really doubt that will happen. Then CCP will just wrench Carriers into nerfdom and make the forums explode for about 5 weeks because Carriers will be useless because nobody could figure out what everyone could agree on, so they just made everyone angry. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Zeba Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:24:00 - [2] So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? Originally by: Nice Guy This means that the writer epicaly fails at english. Irony. So delicious.
A wiseman Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:26:00 - [3] Dreads can be made to take out all sorts of things remember ginger. And carriers are fine i really don't see a problem with them.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:28:00 - [4] Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? That's what I'm asking everyone else. I don't fly a carrier. Never have, except on Armageddon Day. CCP could easily make carriers only able to fight, or take away their remote rep abilities, or something, but people are too used to using Carriers for whatever that is. That's the problem with changing Carriers. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:28:00 - [5] On whose paper do dreads look like solopwn machines? Everyone and their mom can look at capital weapon tracking speeds and realize they can't hit subcapital ships effectively. The drone bonus on the Moros is good but it still won't put out truly lethal DPS against a group of opponents. Maybe carrier versatility is a good thing Why does every ship need a narrowly defined role? Carrier pilots train so long to use them they should be rewarded with something useful.
Kurando Inugami Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:29:00 - [6] If you look at our own history, the Dreadnoughts and Battleships were obsolete by the time Carrier warfare was perfected, look at WW2. ------------------- ôWhat gunpowder did for war the printing press has done for the mind.ö -Wendell Phillips
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:30:00 - [7] Originally by: Dirk Magnum On whose paper do dreads look like solopwn machines? Everyone and their mom can look at capital weapon tracking speeds and realize they can't hit subcapital ships effectively. The drone bonus on the Moros is good but it still won't put out truly lethal DPS against a group of opponents. Maybe carrier versatility is a good thing Why does every ship need a narrowly defined role? Carrier pilots train so long to use them they should be rewarded with something useful. Then you end up with everyone flying carriers, simply because they can do most everything at adequate levels. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:30:00 - [8] Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 05:32:19 Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 05:31:52 Originally by: A wiseman Dreads can be made to take out all sorts of things remember ginger. And carriers are fine i really don't see a problem with them. True. But they aren't as good as just shooting poses. Originally by: Dirk Magnum On whose paper do dreads look like solopwn machines? Everyone and their mom can look at capital weapon tracking speeds and realize they can't hit subcapital ships effectively. The drone bonus on the Moros is good but it still won't put out truly lethal DPS against a group of opponents. Maybe carrier versatility is a good thing Why does every ship need a narrowly defined role? Carrier pilots train so long to use them they should be rewarded with something useful. If you look at DPS and Tank only (Like EFT morons), then they look uber. Versatility is good, but not when it can do stuff as good as a specialized ship. Jack of all trades, master of none would be fine. Originally by: Kurando Inugami If you look at our own history, the Dreadnoughts and Battleships were obsolete by the time Carrier warfare was perfected, look at WW2. Real Life != Eve -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Roman legionnaire's	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:33:00 - [9] You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:36:00 - [10] Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Demarcus Killjoy. G Thanks Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:37:00 - [11] Originally by: Kurando Inugami If you look at our own history, the Dreadnoughts and Battleships were obsolete by the time Carrier warfare was perfected, look at WW2. If you look at history a dreadnought IS a battleship. The battleship Bismark and it's sister ship were both classed as dreadnoughts. Since the carrier nerf I use my dreadnought as a hauler. Holds a ton more than the carrier. And they increased the carrier's ship bay so I think it balances out pretty well. ------------------------------------- You are all worthless, and weak.
Demarcus Killjoy. G Thanks Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:40:00 - [12] Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. So? The BS shouldn't have a problem getting away, or calling in support. Keep them ecm'd take out the fighters then work on them 1 by 1. ------------------------------------- You are all worthless, and weak.
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:41:00 - [13] Once they stop allowing new alts to be created we'll see a huge drop in the number of casual players flying carriers or other cap ships (I'm just guessing carriers are the most popular due to versatility and cost.) No cyno alts means people will have to rely on actual players to get them from system to system, and it isn't like everyone flies around with a cyno generator as a standard ship fixture. Now let's pretend that CCP would ever actually consider halting the creation of new alts for the sake of my argument. Please
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:43:00 - [14] Originally by: Demarcus Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. So? The BS shouldn't have a problem getting away, or calling in support. Keep them ecm'd take out the fighters then work on them 1 by 1. In theory. But we see Carriers dropped on groups of battleships, and it works. So apparently, the theoretical anti-Carrier attack doesn't work. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Demarcus Killjoy. G Thanks Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:54:00 - [15] Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Demarcus Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. So? The BS shouldn't have a problem getting away, or calling in support. Keep them ecm'd take out the fighters then work on them 1 by 1. In theory. But we see Carriers dropped on groups of battleships, and it works. So apparently, the theoretical anti-Carrier attack doesn't work. It isn't the game mechanics fault that the BS pilots sucked. ------------------------------------- You are all worthless, and weak.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:56:00 - [16] Originally by: Demarcus Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Demarcus Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. So? The BS shouldn't have a problem getting away, or calling in support. Keep them ecm'd take out the fighters then work on them 1 by 1. In theory. But we see Carriers dropped on groups of battleships, and it works. So apparently, the theoretical anti-Carrier attack doesn't work. It isn't the game mechanics fault that the BS pilots sucked. Yes, you can set up a battleship fleet specifically to take out carriers. But one that isn't expecting Carriers, or is designed for general PvP, is going to have a hard time. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Weirana Gatorna Gallente Internal Revenue Service	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:02:00 - [17] The problem as I see it is not as much one of carrier dominance, but one of a lack of natural predators. In the beginning, EVE effectively had three ship classes available for PvP, frig, cruiser and bs. Capital ships are a new breed. With just four classes capable of PvP, two of which are out of reach for all but a few, there are too few variables. What capital ships need, is a greater number of classes, and T2 variants before things even out. The gap between carrier and mothership is as large as the gap between cruiser and bs. As with T1 ships, the BC class was needed to fill this gap, and it is only natural that something comes along and does the same for capital ships. In a year or two, someone will make an argument to boost carriers...
A wiseman Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:06:00 - [18] Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. it's too effective a tactic to drop 14 battleships on 20 battlecruisers nerf battleships
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:09:00 - [19] Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 06:10:13 Originally by: A wiseman Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. it's too effective a tactic to drop 14 battleships on 20 battlecruisers nerf battleships Not as much. Most Battleships can't spidertank while doing 1k DPS and tanking 4x as much without any remote help. And that's a case of having 6 less than the other side. The BS outnumber the carriers almost 4 to 1, and lose. 14 BS vs 20 BC, the BS will win but have some losses. 6 Carriers vs 20 BS, usually the Carriers win. Also, Battleships can't arrive anywhere relatively quickly. People will drop 5 carriers on a 4v4 BS fight or a 20-person BS fleet because they can be there within 2 minutes or less -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
A wiseman Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:16:00 - [20] Originally by: Verx Interis Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 06:10:13 Originally by: A wiseman Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. it's too effective a tactic to drop 14 battleships on 20 battlecruisers nerf battleships Not as much. Most Battleships can't spidertank while doing 1k DPS and tanking 4x as much without any remote help. And that's a case of having 6 less than the other side. The BS outnumber the carriers almost 4 to 1, and lose. 14 BS vs 20 BC, the BS will win but have some losses. 6 Carriers vs 20 BS, usually the Carriers win. Also, Battleships can't arrive anywhere relatively quickly. People will drop 5 carriers on a 4v4 BS fight or a 20-person BS fleet because they can be there within 2 minutes or less in buying and fitting those 6 carriers how many times would you spend the same amount as 20bc and 14 bs. Somthing that costs as much as they do should be able to give and recive massive amounts of damage does this mean people will use them for hotdropping sure but how many do they lose and losing one hurts alot more
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:20:00 - [21] Originally by: A wiseman Originally by: Verx Interis Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 06:10:13 Originally by: A wiseman Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Roman legionnaire's You do know that carriesr can no longer haul anything really. since the hauler nerf. SO all carriers can do now is pretty much combat Still, their in-combat versatility is.. big. It's too effective a tactic to drop 6 carriers on an enemy fleet of 20 or so BS. it's too effective a tactic to drop 14 battleships on 20 battlecruisers nerf battleships Not as much. Most Battleships can't spidertank while doing 1k DPS and tanking 4x as much without any remote help. And that's a case of having 6 less than the other side. The BS outnumber the carriers almost 4 to 1, and lose. 14 BS vs 20 BC, the BS will win but have some losses. 6 Carriers vs 20 BS, usually the Carriers win. Also, Battleships can't arrive anywhere relatively quickly. People will drop 5 carriers on a 4v4 BS fight or a 20-person BS fleet because they can be there within 2 minutes or less in buying and fitting those 6 carriers how many times would you spend the same amount as 20bc and 14 bs. Somthing that costs as much as they do should be able to give and recive massive amounts of damage does this mean people will use them for hotdropping sure but how many do they lose and losing one hurts alot more Cost should never be a reason for something to be that superior. We see people dropping Carriers on groups of BS, so that's obviously effective. We don't see people dropping BS on groups of BC as much. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Calypso Rose	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:35:00 - [22] Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? Limit carriers to launching only fighters, no regular drones.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:36:00 - [23] Originally by: Calypso Rose Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? Limit carriers to launching only fighters, no regular drones. Not that I necessarily disagree, but what would that do exactly? -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Karyuudo Tydraad Caldari Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:37:00 - [24] Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Calypso Rose Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? Limit carriers to launching only fighters, no regular drones. Not that I necessarily disagree, but what would that do exactly? It would cripple the Carrier's ability to defend itself against smaller ships.
Apophis Omega Amarr M'8'S Frontal Impact	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:39:00 - [25] Carriers can do everything at once, thats their only problem IMO. A simple solution is implement something like a rigs. Have it so a carrier has 100 points and its like this: Corp hanger/maintance bay (15% armor and shield reduction): 40 Ability to fit remote reps: 30 Ability to deploy Fighters: 70 points Something like that were the pilot is forced to chose every time they undock what they want to do. Oh you want to deploy fighters, well no spare ships for you allies, you want to haul, great add 2 corp hangers and you can increase your hauling. Flame away. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calypso Rose	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:40:00 - [26] Edited by: Calypso Rose on 20/01/2008 06:40:56 Originally by: Karyuudo Tydraad It would cripple the Carrier's ability to defend itself against smaller ships. Yep. It would also restore the main downside of drone ships to carriers. Most drone ships have a fairly limited amount of spare drones, so you can shoot their drones down and remove their damage. With carriers, they have such a huge drone bay that they can have hundreds of regular drones in reserve. If they were limited to fighters their total number of reserves becomes much smaller.
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:42:00 - [27] But at that point you've made a change that doesn't make any logical sense. The carrier is a ship designed to manage a hoard of deployed parasite craft. What justification could there be for not allowing such a vessel to control regular drones? I'm not a roleplayer, but I do like in-game design decisions to have a basis in some type of in-game rationale that extends beyond mere balance into the realm of Eve backstory and the technical side of the ships themselves.
Calypso Rose	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:44:00 - [28] Originally by: Dirk Magnum What justification could there be for not allowing such a vessel to control regular drones? Balance.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:46:00 - [29] How about Fighters, instead of being 5000m3, are 150m3? That way you don't get a fleet of shield, armor, ECM, and combat drones for dropping a single fighter. This way a carrier pilot has to choose what's in his dronebay, and if he doesn't have the appropriate drones, he's in trouble. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:46:00 - [30] Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 20/01/2008 06:49:35 Originally by: Calypso Rose Originally by: Dirk Magnum What justification could there be for not allowing such a vessel to control regular drones? Balance. Then the universal counter to both carriers and motherships becomes the massed frigate gang. Stay out of smartbomb range and you're golden. edit: well maybe not motherships. Obviously apart from the ewar immunity they can tank, what, 50-60,000 DPS for the better part of an hour? Someone said the Aeon can tank 75000 DPS against its armor.

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.