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.
Silvero Gallente Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:55:00 - [31] Originally by: Verx Interis 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. There were no carriers available on the armageddon day, i was there and we where amazed about the battleships alone.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 06:57:00 - [32] Originally by: Silvero Originally by: Verx Interis 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. There were no carriers available on the armageddon day, i was there and we where amazed about the battleships alone. The Armageddon day that happened in October. Remember? -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Karyuudo Tydraad Caldari Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:05:00 - [33] Originally by: Dirk Magnum 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. A massed frigate gang would be a horrible counter. The number of frigates you'd need just to break the tank would be astronomical, and if the carrier wasn't alone you'd be a laughable threat to his buddies in a conventional fleet.
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:10:00 - [34] Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 20/01/2008 07:15:35 It may not be the quickest way to beat a carrier but if a carrier couldn't launch standard drones then the frigate gang would be 100% effective every time, unless of course the gang isn't big enough and the carrier tanks the damage indefinitely. edit: actually I have what I think may be a better point to make. How does making the carrier useless against small ships fix the "problem" of versatility mentioned in the first post of the thread? Best case scenario is that the carrier kills all the cruisers and battleships its fighting, and then gets scrambled indefinitely by the frigates that its fighters can't effectively counter. Then one of two things happens: the carrier pilot logs in frustration and stops managing his tank, which the frigates then wear down to nothing, OR one side or the other deploys reinforcements to the site and either kills the carrier or kills the frigates.
agent apple Spartan Industries Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:24:00 - [35] Ill take that 6 carriers v 20 bs challenege. Please ensure your carriers are faction fitted and in place before posting on a ship you dont fly further.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:24:00 - [36] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 20/01/2008 07:16:40 It may not be the quickest way to beat a carrier but if a carrier couldn't launch standard drones then the frigate gang would be 100% effective every time, unless of course the gang isn't big enough and the carrier tanks the damage indefinitely. edit: actually I have what I think may be a better point to make. How does making the carrier useless against small ships fix the "problem" of versatility mentioned in the first post of the thread? Best case scenario is that the carrier kills all the cruisers and battleships its fighting, and then gets scrambled indefinitely by the frigates that its fighters can't effectively counter. Then one of two things happens: the carrier pilot logs in frustration and stops managing his tank, which the frigates then wear down to nothing, OR one side or the other deploys reinforcements to the site and either kills the carrier or kills the frigates. Then every fleet member everywhere can complain about how this process gets repeated every single time a carrier gets deployed, and it's wasting everyone's time. That's what I asked the suggester of that idea in the first place... Something where you have to "rig" your carrier to a certain role and it costs a lot to rig to another role might work. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:26:00 - [37] Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 07:26:41 Originally by: agent apple Ill take that 6 carriers v 20 bs challenege. Please ensure your carriers are faction fitted and in place before posting on a ship you dont fly further. I did say that I didn't fly carriers in the OP, and that's why I asked other people. I'm simply using that as an example, as I've seen 6 carriers be dropped and kill 20 BS. And, as I said, if the BS fleet is designed to kill carriers and break spidertanks, then it will win. If you specialize (hint hint) something, it should be superior. Edit: Sorry for the double post I meant for this to be added to the post above. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Silvero Gallente Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:44:00 - [38] Edited by: Silvero on 20/01/2008 07:44:54 Originally by: Silvero Originally by: Verx Interis 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. There were no carriers available on the armageddon day, i was there and we where amazed about the battleships alone. Oki i tried to make a funnle about the last evening during beta thing but. So after reading your whinning here i understand that you are after a system where any pilot can beat any other pilot disregarding what equipment or ship the have, am i correct ? 6 pilots fielding 10bil of hardware shall never take down 20 pilots fielding bs's worth aprox 3bil. You want a more mano e mano thing, i mean after all there is unjust that some ppl have devoted time and yeah more time to get these hardware, if you take away the strife for better equipment well we can all just cancel our accounts because there whouldn't be any point of doing anything at all.
Conrad Rock Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:45:00 - [39] Dev already said they would nerf fighters by reducing their scan resolution so as to not make them useful against cruiser sized ships, maybe even remove auto the aggro feature.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:45:00 - [40] Originally by: Silvero Originally by: Silvero Originally by: Verx Interis 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. There were no carriers available on the armageddon day, i was there and we where amazed about the battleships alone. Oki i tried to make a funnle about the last evening during beta thing but. So after reading your whinning here i understand that you are after a system where any pilot can beat any other pilot disregarding what equipment or ship the have am i correct. 6 pilots fielding 10bil of hardware shall never take down 20 bs worth aprox 3bil. You want a more mano e mano thing, i mean after all there is unjust that some ppl have devoted time and yeah more time to get these hardware, if you take away the strife for better equipment well we can all just cancel our accounts because there whouldn't be any point of doing anything at all. Just because something costs more and takes more time to skill doesn't mean it should dominate in every situation.. And how was my post a whine? -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Sinder Ohm Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:13:00 - [41] Carriers do have natural preditors, have you ever flown a heavy dictor? I do and trust me once you have a carrier locked down he aint going anywher(not to mention the heavy dictors insane tank which the carier wont break). Carriers need a cyno to jump anywhere. Thier "weapons" cost alot of isk and can be destroyed Spider tanking wont help you sh1t when you get bumped out of remote repair range. As a TRI member has offered fight him with 6 carriers vs 20 BS Maybe you should try fly a carrier first before you ask for it to get nerfed it may have looked impresive when you saw 6 carriers being dropped on 20 BS but it doesnt always end like that, if those BS belonged to any decent cap ship killing alliance then the carrier pilots would be in for a very bad day. Fly a ship first before you suggest people making changes to it.
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:26:00 - [42] Originally by: Sinder Ohm Jedi do have natural preditors, have you ever trained a Master Pistoleer/Fencer? I do and trust me once you have a Jedi knocked down he aint going anywher(not to mention the Pistoleer/Fencer's insane dodge which the Jedi wont hit). Their "weapons" cost alot of credits Force Heal 3 wont help you sh1t when you get chased/kd'd out of a Doctor/combat medics stimpack range. Maybe you should try and grind a Jedi first before you ask for it to get nerfed it may have looked impresive when you saw 6 Jedi being shuttled in on 20 riflemen but it doesnt always end like that, if those Riflemen belonged to any decent jedi killing alliance then the jedi would be in for a very bad day. Play a Jedi first before you suggest people making changes to it. The similarities I tell you!
j4zz	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:33:00 - [43] Edited by: j4zz on 20/01/2008 09:34:41 Originally by: Verx Interis stuff Originally by: Verx Interis are u stupid or something , really dude u clearly never been in fight 20 bs vs 6 carriers, if tactics is right those 6 carriers will bite the dust very quick against bs fleet , really dude stfu and go whine about something u got a clue nub
A wiseman Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:34:00 - [44] i'll support nerfing the carrier's combat ability when you can disable a bs weapons with smartbombs
TheEndofTheWorld	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:47:00 - [45] Edited by: TheEndofTheWorld on 20/01/2008 09:47:08 Edited by: TheEndofTheWorld on 20/01/2008 09:46:56 It is too easy, quick and effective to jump carriers into combat. Add a 15minute pvp delay, whenever a carrier jumps..
Sinder Ohm Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:51:00 - [46] Originally by: TheEndofTheWorld Edited by: TheEndofTheWorld on 20/01/2008 09:47:08 Edited by: TheEndofTheWorld on 20/01/2008 09:46:56 It is too easy, quick and effective to jump carriers into combat. Add a 15minute pvp delay, whenever a carrier jumps.. If you cant warp your BS away (you should be aligned in the first place) by the time a carrier locks you, you shouldnt be in lowsec/0.0 in the first place. *signature removed - please email us to find out why (include a link) - Jacques([email protected])
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:57:00 - [47] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Originally by: Sinder Ohm Jedi do have natural preditors, have you ever trained a Master Pistoleer/Fencer? I do and trust me once you have a Jedi knocked down he aint going anywher(not to mention the Pistoleer/Fencer's insane dodge which the Jedi wont hit). Their "weapons" cost alot of credits Force Heal 3 wont help you sh1t when you get chased/kd'd out of a Doctor/combat medics stimpack range. Maybe you should try and grind a Jedi first before you ask for it to get nerfed it may have looked impresive when you saw 6 Jedi being shuttled in on 20 riflemen but it doesnt always end like that, if those Riflemen belonged to any decent jedi killing alliance then the jedi would be in for a very bad day. Play a Jedi first before you suggest people making changes to it. The similarities I tell you! I lol'd. Every single game: A is broken, so nerf B. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Auron Shadowbane Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2008.01.20 11:14:00 - [48] I can't say how much of a fail OP and hisideas are... If you can't kill carriers dropped onto your ass you either fail or your oponent was just better prepared which results in YOU FAIL again. spider tank is really hard without target lock (ecm to speak ti out for the dumbest of the dumb). and the damage isnt THAT good. about twice as much as an as well skilled battleship pilot. and I wonder if you would cry out too if I'd drop 6 domis used to work together and spider tank on your 20 noob-cruisers. it's the same here. domi has twice as dps, spidertank and about quad the tank (due to lar = 2*mar and better resists) while costing 10-20 as much as the cruiser. you crybabies really get on my nerves. if you get jumped by capitals you cry "nerv!", if you get outnumbered you cry "blob!" if you get outsmarted by fitting xyz (be that ew, spidertank or even stupid simple dps) you cry "hax! nerv"...
Tauranon Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.01.20 11:52:00 - [49] Originally by: Demarcus 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. I don't think real life dreadnaughts are a good analogy for dreadnaughts in EVE. Almost every battleship built after the HMS Dreadnaught itself, was classified as a Dreadnaught. All the term really means is a battleship that carries only 1 caliber of main weapon. The point to dreadnaughts was by not having to spot 2 sizes of main weapons, it was easier to carry out long range gunnery. Incidently the all-big weapon layout, coincided with the introduction of turbines, which gave them other advantages (speed, more weight left for armor etc), which made them better at being battleships than pre-dreadnaughts. The ingame dreadnaughts are like some sort of giant armored space trebuchet, that incidently throws a large enough rock to sink a battleship, should one get trapped in front of the rock.
Victor Khisander	Posted - 2008.01.20 11:57:00 - [50] So you want to tell me that after a year of patient training, paying(!) and working for the sake of flying a carrier you, who never used to fly such a ship, are going to show us a reason why this ship has to be nerfed? I stopped taking you serious as soon as you told us that you have absolutely no idea how it is to be in a carrier. This ship has never been considered to be a full scale combat ship, this fact has never been proven wrong in the past. Take a closer look at the bonuses and you will realise, that those ships are made to SUPPORT their fleet and NOT to be the main damage dealing source. There is no chance that this ship alone will ever outdamage a well configured fleet of BSs or even BCs if those people know what they are doing. You on the other side belong clearly to those kind of people, who lack both the will to adapt AND the brainpower to use what is available, in a way that it can be called "effective". But i won¦t hold you back in your effort to prove yourself a pathetic human beeing, unwilling to overcome your own weaknesses. Nerf us as much as you will, your lack of knowledge and willpower will allways fail and cannot be buffed by as many nerfs as you can think. Want some cheese to your whine?
Hirokishi Gallente Delta-Fr	Posted - 2008.01.20 12:14:00 - [51] Carriers online ? I'd rather say this is Calimero online...
Beth Dei Gallente 242nd Front	Posted - 2008.01.20 12:17:00 - [52] There are many clearly defined roles for the carriers, the problem is most of them suck and are only done because CCP makes us. Destructible station services, for instance. They add ever so slight dimension to roaming gangs, and hours of repping work for the defenders. And POS warfare. Jesus. Show me someone who enjoys the current mechanics. Because of the overall sovereignty system, capitals are a requirement to compete. Without them, you're screwed. If you're going to drop 2-3B ISK on a ship, would you rather have something you can use once every few weeks, or something that has some day to day application? Yeah. This is why there's lots of carriers. CCP cannot have it both ways. Either they want these massive engagements involving hundreds of people (if perhaps not all in the same system), with skirmishes mandated by POSes/Outposts/Supercapitals/etc, or they want small gangs and capitals to be rare. BS/BC is not a very appropriate comparison to BS/Carrier. It's more akin to BS/Frigate. I am not trying to be insulting at all when I say this, however, I don't think you really know what you're talking about. How often do you deal with capitals, either against them or with them? Disclaimer: I haven't been in a capital ship yet. I have shot at a few and people I associate with use them a lot, however. Nothing I've said here is original, others have said these things far more eloquently in the past. No new arguments are being made by either 'side', it seems. Everyone just knows they're right. I just hope CCP will perhaps see that the problem isn't necessary with the ships or the pilots, but the mechanics behind their use. Un**** POSes and sovereignty and perhaps the problem will fix itself.
Stella Sinn The Scope	Posted - 2008.01.20 12:24:00 - [53] And to think CCP wants to reduce build cost LAWL ---- Durka Durka!
Kvaell Minmatar Terra Incognita Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.20 12:32:00 - [54] Originally by: Sinder Ohm Carriers do have natural preditors, have you ever flown a heavy dictor? I do and trust me once you have a carrier locked down he aint going anywher(not to mention the heavy dictors insane tank which the carier wont break). I haven't got a carrier and would agree that carriers do die rather quickly although +10 of them are a pain in the behind, when you can't send your own in (They create massive lag too) For the HIC vs Carrier: Wouldn't it be possible for the carrier to use ECM drones and jam you and flee? He should have enough of them to make that within a minute or two to create that jam get away.
astowv Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 12:39:00 - [55] I think we should nerf carriers. They should only be able to tank a frig. They cant fight, no drones. They should be able to use 2 small shield transfers at lvl5, and then, wait, i think you can bump stuff with them. Make them smaller so they cant do that either. And in fact, just make them INSTAPOP whenever Verx enters local. Do the same with dreads, that way they aint versatile at all. WTFBBQJIZUZCHRISTWHINE. Want some cheese ? ----
Nooto Panta-Rhei Phoenix Allianz	Posted - 2008.01.20 12:59:00 - [56] omg someone got kille by a carrier and now the ships must be nerved. shut the **** up if ya never flew a carrier in regular ops. man i'll never understand why such noobs cry around about ships they never used in ops. it's like omfg!!!!!1111elevenone nerv teacher they gave me too much homework go away troll play with your lovely bantam in a 1.0 and dont cry about the big ships.
Sunabi Caldari Defiance Corp Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.01.20 13:04:00 - [57] Carriers are good at everything - how about we just double the price? Yeah, I just bought one
Zarin	Posted - 2008.01.20 13:09:00 - [58] Originally by: Verx Interis 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. Since trinity I don't use my carrier at all... They already hit it with the nerfbat of crappiness. It can't haul anymore so the only time to take it out is to pew pew things, which it doesn't do really any better than a BS. You do realise that now a carrier is capable of hauling about 10,000m3, less with long range fuel. Pretty much, get a rorqual, jump freighter or even a standard hauler and go the old fashioned way, it will be infinitely qicker. So they have taken away the ability of carriers to haul cargo, I think that has pretty much settled the issue.
Hohne Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 13:31:00 - [59] 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. If you are setup for anti-carrier a fleet of 20 can take down 6 carriers without breaking too much of a sweat. Remember when they jump in they have 29% cap (at max skills). It doesn't take very much to break that and damps + ECM stops them from remote repping, add a little Nos/Neut combo and they will go down like a sack of bricks. They are really not that good, it's mostly fear that causes people to run. 1vs1 a carrier will die to a BS if the BS is setup right. And you think fighters can actually track cruisers ? Heavies or even Meds work alot better. Fighters even have trouble tracking BS's that are moving at a pace. (albeit they still do 'some' damage, just not as much as heavies would).
Oniko Sengir The Illuminati. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.20 13:37:00 - [60] OMG SWISS ARMY KNIFE!
Kiiikoooloool	Posted - 2008.01.20 13:48:00 - [61] Edited by: Kiiikoooloool on 20/01/2008 13:50:06 It would be interesting if carriers were designed for a smarter use than dps disher. In real life, carriers are used to project firewoper. How i imagine a use for them? - Less drones damage, not more than 2 dominix - the carrier should carry a HUGE amount of fitted frigs (assault, interceptors, bombers, electronic attack frigs, covert ops...) - the mother ship should do the same as the carrier but be able to send more T2 cruisers. - pilots are able to respawn, upgrade clone and jumpclone in the carrier. - the carrier should give bonuses to frigs linked with it. How to use this? Well players are docked in the carrier, the carrier jump, then the players undock a T2 frig from it. If the player get poded in action, respawn back in the carrier, upgrade the clone and go again. The different racial carriers should give bonus to - caldari > ewar frigs - gallente > dunno, maybe assault frigs - minmatar > interceptors ? - amarr > bombers my 2 isks Imagine the hell of a carrier in a nearby system sending wolf packs, wave after wave.
Skjorta	Posted - 2008.01.20 14:52:00 - [62] Edited by: Skjorta on 20/01/2008 14:52:24 Omg, nerf battleships too because they can remote rep, have drones, put out dps, and tank. Well pretty much all ship classes, since they can be used in different ways...and that's just heresy. Carriers are part of the front line capital force, designed to go into ship to ship combat. That means dps, tank, and remote rep...just like every other smart sub cap fleet. It can do it better than a BS, sure, and it damn well should, but it's by no means invincible like you proclaim them too be.
Setana Manoro Gallente Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2008.01.20 15:09:00 - [63] 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. Funny, a Moros well trained does from Ogre's II more dps than most carriers do with fighters out. I think someone calculated 1600 DPS from a Thanatos with 15 fighters, and Gall Carrier 5 with Fighters 5. A moros does 1100 DPS with just 5 Ogre's II. Then you add the blasters, because despite having the guns with the smallest range of the close-range persuasion, Gallente also have the ones with the best tracking, so that if you manage to put a Moros within 20km of it's target, and have it triple webbed, your gonna pop it in 2 volley's. Then again, the same is true for the other dreads. :)
Ovek Gallente Cosmic Fusion When Fat Kids Attack	Posted - 2008.01.20 15:12:00 - [64] Capital ships have always been a stupid concept. Bring back normal combat.
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.20 16:21:00 - [65] Originally by: Verx Interis Something where you have to "rig" your carrier to a certain role and it costs a lot to rig to another role might work. This seems like a fair idea. Much better than simply nerfing the carrier into nothing more than an anti-battleship thing. Originally by: Setana Manoro Funny, a Moros well trained does from Ogre's II more dps than most carriers do with fighters out. I think someone calculated 1600 DPS from a Thanatos with 15 fighters, and Gall Carrier 5 with Fighters 5. A moros does 1100 DPS with just 5 Ogre's II. Then you add the blasters, because despite having the guns with the smallest range of the close-range persuasion, Gallente also have the ones with the best tracking, so that if you manage to put a Moros within 20km of it's target, and have it triple webbed, your gonna pop it in 2 volley's. Then again, the same is true for the other dreads. :) But a solo dread won't have three webifiers fitted. Even if it did, most of its enemies would still have falloff from outside of web range. The 1100 DPS figure of Ogre II's with max skills may be accurate, but not against smaller, faster ships that can outpace the drone. Presumably the interceptor tacklers can clear off aggressing Ogre II's from the larger ships in the fleet, if the larger ships can't already do the job with smartbombs and drones of their own. That said the Moros is the best dread in terms of self-defense. Nobody can really argue that.
Malarki X Caldari Ad Astra Vexillum Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.01.20 16:45:00 - [66] Originally by: Verx Interis 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. And here we have a good insight from a carrier pilot ... I say we should nerf Titans ! They can make jump bridges and use Doomsday - clearly one of these has to go ! Never used a Titan, never will, but it is clear I have good grasp on the matter ... LOL
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 17:56:00 - [67] Okay I need to clarify something. One: I was not killed by a carrier recently. I just had a thought, after someone mentioned captials online. Here is how I know carriers need to be changed: People use them whenever possible, because they can do almost anything. This is in game, not on paper. People with dreads only use theirs when they're shooting a POS or station, with a few exceptions. Yes, I know that 20 battleships specifically designed to kill carriers will kill them. I said that several times. But 20 battleships that aren't expecting it will have problems. Yes, I could beat 6 carriers with 20 BS. But it wouldn't do as well against 20 other BS desgined to kill BS. As for warping out when the Carriers drop in, a few tackling Interceptors or a good Interdictor pilot will keep the BS from running away. All I asked for is a discussion, not that carriers be nerfed. I'm seeing in game that carriers are used way more than any other capital ship, and in some cases, as much as battleships. Imagine if Dreadnoughts didn't lose all that tracking and could move in siege mode. Do you think that would be good? -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:17:00 - [68] Originally by: Victor Khisander So you want to tell me that after a year of holocron grinding, paying(!) and working for the sake of becoming a jedi knight you, who never used to play such a profession, are going to show us a reason why this profession has to be nerfed? I stopped taking you serious as soon as you told us that you have absolutely no idea how it is to be a Jedi. This profession has never been considered to be a full scale combat class, this fact has never been proven wrong in the past. Take a closer look at the bonuses and you will realise, that those players are made to SUPPORT their squad and NOT to be the main damage dealing source. There is no chance that this class alone will ever outdamage a well configured fleet of Teras Kasi or even Master Fencers if those people know what they are doing. You on the other side belong clearly to those kind of people, who lack both the will to adapt AND the brainpower to use what is available, in a way that it can be called "effective". But i won¦t hold you back in your effort to prove yourself a pathetic human beeing, unwilling to overcome your own weaknesses. Nerf us as much as you will, your lack of knowledge and willpower will allways fail and cannot be buffed by as many nerfs as you can think. Want some cheese to your whine? For added comedic value never insult some ones intelligence on the internet without running spell check first if people don't understand that capitals = jedi yet then I'm doing something wrong
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:31:00 - [69] Originally by: Skjorta Edited by: Skjorta on 20/01/2008 14:52:24 Omg, nerf combat medics too because they can use area stims, use mind poison, and tank. Well pretty much all professions, since they can be used in different ways...and that's just heresy. Jedi are part of the front line raiding force, designed to go into man to man combat. That means dps, tank, and healing...just like every other smart non jedi squad. It can do it better than a Combat Medic, sure, and it damn well should, but it's by no means invincible like you proclaim them too be.
Kiiikoooloool	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:34:00 - [70] Edited by: Kiiikoooloool on 20/01/2008 18:34:08 the game you speak of isn't dead yet ? maybe it is a symptom of a critical issue
Aram Thracius Amarr Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:40:00 - [71] Originally by: Amarria Black A is broken, so nerf B. quoted for truth and weren't they nerfed once already ? btw, if you need logistics get a jump freighter or 3 Aram Thracius - Eve University
Shan Juan Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:47:00 - [72] Take those dreads you only use for POS shooting and drop them on the carriers instead of whining for nerfs.
Khanid Kutie I R Teh Poasting Alt Corp	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:49:00 - [73] Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? nothing, he's just whining...like most people do these days
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:59:00 - [74] Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? I don't fly a carrier. Never have... That's your problem. Talking about something you have no clue about. Carrier is a solo-pwnmobile? Ridiculous. A lone carrier in 0.0 is dead meat, and with the HIC same in low sec. Killing fighters is not such a difficult task if you know what you are doing. And then the carrier is quite defenceless, won't you think so? Or do you really suggest that you should fight 1-vs-1 with a non-capital ship against capital ships and win?! Your so called analysis is completely wrong, so any conclusions are not based on reasoning there. If you want to make a real analysis say what exactly is imbalanced and how: for example that the gallente carrier can do xxx dps and has yyy tank and weakness a,b,c and so on. THAT would be an analysis. Just saying that "Most people probably already know this. Carriers are too versatile.", "Carriers can do a lot of things very well..." and "Too many people use Carriers in all the possible ways..." are just rabble-talk and stupid commonplaces without any thought. If that is all your 'analysis' then this thread better gets locked. "We see Carriers dropped on groups of battleships..." So? You get pwnd and don't know how to fight carriers and now want carriers to be nerfed? Maybe instead get some better anti-carrier support! "The BS outnumber the carriers almost 4 to 1, and lose." Support ships? Flying around in BS only maybe not the best idea? Lacking some good FleetCommanders maybe? The brute force approach is not always the most successful one...
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.01.20 19:12:00 - [75] Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? I don't fly a carrier. Never have... That's your problem. Talking about something you have no clue about. Jedi is a solo-pwnmobile? Ridiculous. A lone rebel jedi knight in theed is dead meat, and with the Master Teraskasi/Fencer same in Coronet. Using KD's and mind poison is not such a difficult task if you know what you are doing. And then the Jedi is quite defenceless, won't you think so? Or do you really suggest that you should fight 1-vs-1 with a Master Rifleman against a Jedi Knight and win?! Your so called analysis is completely wrong, so any conclusions are not based on reasoning there. If you want to make a real analysis say what exactly is imbalanced and how: for example that the Jedi Knight can do xxx dps and has yyy tank and weakness a,b,c and so on. THAT would be an analysis. Just saying that "Most people probably already know this. Jedi are too versatile.", "Jedi can do a lot of things very well..." and "Too many people use Carriers in all the possible ways..." are just rabble-talk and stupid commonplaces without any thought. If that is all your 'analysis' then this thread better gets locked. "We see Jedi Shuttled in on groups of riflemen..." So? You get pwnd and don't know how to fight Jedi and now want Jedi to be nerfed? Maybe instead train fencer or teras kasi! "The Riflemen outnumber the Jedi almost 4 to 1, and lose." Support classes? Training in Rifles and carbines only maybe not the best idea? Lacking some good Squad Leaders maybe? The brute force approach is not always the most successful one...
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 19:21:00 - [76] Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 19:22:35 Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Zeba So what do you propose CCP do to fix this imbalance? I don't fly a carrier. Never have... That's your problem. Talking about something you have no clue about. Carrier is a solo-pwnmobile? Ridiculous. A lone carrier in 0.0 is dead meat, and with the HIC same in low sec. Killing fighters is not such a difficult task if you know what you are doing. And then the carrier is quite defenceless, won't you think so? Or do you really suggest that you should fight 1-vs-1 with a non-capital ship against capital ships and win?! Your so called analysis is completely wrong, so any conclusions are not based on reasoning there. If you want to make a real analysis say what exactly is imbalanced and how: for example that the gallente carrier can do xxx dps and has yyy tank and weakness a,b,c and so on. THAT would be an analysis. Just saying that "Most people probably already know this. Carriers are too versatile.", "Carriers can do a lot of things very well..." and "Too many people use Carriers in all the possible ways..." are just rabble-talk and stupid commonplaces without any thought. If that is all your 'analysis' then this thread better gets locked. "We see Carriers dropped on groups of battleships..." So? You get pwnd and don't know how to fight carriers and now want carriers to be nerfed? Maybe instead get some better anti-carrier support! "The BS outnumber the carriers almost 4 to 1, and lose." Support ships? Flying around in BS only maybe not the best idea? Lacking some good FleetCommanders maybe? The brute force approach is not always the most successful one... Please tell me where I said carriers are a solopwnmobile. Yes you have some theories of things, how to fight carriers. But the fact is, in game, I see people dropping carriers on enemy fleets and it works. Otherwise people wouldn't do it. In game, I see people using Carriers for a lot of things. I only made claims of what I had seen in game. I was asking other people, people who do fly carriers, how they thought carriers should be changed. But it seems that the self interest of having such a powerful vessel overrides the ability to see that it must be changed. It is very clear CCP is going to change Carriers. If people can't agree on what to change, CCP will just take away everything, or do something that everyone disagrees with. Originally by: Shan Juan Take those dreads you only use for POS shooting and drop them on the carriers instead of whining for nerfs. As I've asked, what made this whining? Is pointing out that a change is imminent whining? CCP already changed Carriers hauling ability, and the only reason they can still use 15 fighters solo is because people whined against that change. Something is going to change. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
SiJira	Posted - 2008.01.20 19:41:00 - [77] are we back in 2007? Trashed sig, Shark was here
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 20:49:00 - [78] Originally by: SiJira are we back in 2007? Huh? -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Kruel Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2008.01.20 21:07:00 - [79] Well the way things are looking, another year or so and carriers will be the standard for every pilot. Instead of pirates camping gates in battleships, you'll see 20 blinky carriers sitting on the gate ready to put the smack down on your hauler.
Orb Lati Minmatar Cold-Fury Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 21:11:00 - [80] If any thing the only reason every body says that Carriers are to effective or unbalances is because Dreadnoughts are so uneffective. I would love dreadnoughts to have a role in fleet combat. Give them a flak (or missile smart bomb) area effect weapon and use them to disburse blobs. "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
NeoTheo Caldari Species 5618 Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.01.20 21:14:00 - [81] 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. yes good luck on ECM'ing 6 carriers, not having the fighters/drones auto agress the ECM ship and BBQ the f*** out of it in SECONDS. carriers need a nerf, sorry its VERY TRUE. for the record, i have a alt who can fly them, they are OP and need nerfing.
NeoTheo Caldari Species 5618 Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.01.20 21:17:00 - [82] Edited by: NeoTheo on 20/01/2008 21:17:02 just to re affirm my post with something usefull, i would have it so that once a ship Cyno's in it CAN NOT agress or lock anything for 30 seconds (or deploy drones). this way hot dropping dissapears and carriers are used as a strategic tool, not a hot drop and BBQ weapon. (id also do the same for any player logging in, IE you cant undock for 30 seconds, just to stop the LOGONSKI traps.) /Theo.
Kiiikoooloool	Posted - 2008.01.20 21:31:00 - [83] Originally by: Orb Lati If any thing the only reason every body says that Carriers are to effective or unbalances is because Dreadnoughts are so uneffective. I would love dreadnoughts to have a role in fleet combat. Give them a flak (or missile smart bomb) area effect weapon and use them to disburse blobs. Flak guns, yeah!!! Barrage artillery and so on. Great idea
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 22:38:00 - [84] Originally by: Orb Lati If any thing the only reason every body says that Carriers are to effective or unbalances is because Dreadnoughts are so uneffective. I would love dreadnoughts to have a role in fleet combat. Give them a flak (or missile smart bomb) area effect weapon and use them to disburse blobs. Actually, I think this would be very interesting. Capital flak cannon.. Sounds cool. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 22:43:00 - [85] Edited by: Verx Interis on 20/01/2008 22:43:39 Originally by: NeoTheo 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. yes good luck on ECM'ing 6 carriers, not having the fighters/drones auto agress the ECM ship and BBQ the f*** out of it in SECONDS. carriers need a nerf, sorry its VERY TRUE. for the record, i have a alt who can fly them, they are OP and need nerfing. Big point. It'll take the BS at least 6 seconds to lock the Carriers if they get them as soon as they jump in, and by then the Carriers will have drones out to auto-aggro. Then even if there's more jammers the fighters will go on rampages killing things. Edit: Once again, forgot to edit this into the first post.. I fail at the edit button. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.01.20 22:55:00 - [86] Originally by: Kiiikoooloool Originally by: Orb Lati If any thing the only reason every body says that Carriers are to effective or unbalances is because Dreadnoughts are so uneffective. I would love dreadnoughts to have a role in fleet combat. Give them a flak (or missile smart bomb) area effect weapon and use them to disburse blobs. Flak guns, yeah!!! Barrage artillery and so on. Great idea The idea is to stop alpha ships from dominating
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.20 23:03:00 - [87] Originally by: Kruel Well the way things are looking, another year or so and carriers will be the standard for every pilot. Instead of pirates camping gates in battleships, you'll see 20 blinky carriers sitting on the gate ready to put the smack down on your hauler. I'll believe it when I see it. There's enough carriers in circulation now that if they made such great gatecamping ships we'd see them used as such already. I'm constantly going around low sec and never see this. Sure it happens once in a while, but it usually ends with a post in C&P about how some idiot in a carrier got scrammed at a gate and killed by pirates.
Kerfira University of Caille	Posted - 2008.01.20 23:07:00 - [88] One thing I think CCP should do to limit capitals in the game is prohibit character trading. Currently, capital characters don't leave the game when their players get tired of it, but get sold and the ISK from them passed on to mates, or gets transferred to friends. If character trading was not allowed, there would only be the capital characters in game who'd earned the right to fly them by training a year or more for it. 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.
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.01.20 23:08:00 - [89] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Originally by: Kruel Well the way things are looking, another year or so and carriers will be the standard for every pilot. Instead of pirates camping gates in battleships, you'll see 20 blinky carriers sitting on the gate ready to put the smack down on your hauler. I'll believe it when I see it. There's enough carriers in circulation now that if they made such great gatecamping ships we'd see them used as such already. I'm constantly going around low sec and never see this. Sure it happens once in a while, but it usually ends with a post in C&P about how some idiot in a carrier got scrammed at a gate and killed by pirates. /set autopilot rancer also I'm pretty sure carrier kill threads are dead
Ryan Scouse'UK omen. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.20 23:15:00 - [90] how about get a carrier & join them or stop the whine.. really I am sick to death of the changes CCP keep making to EVE they have already nearly killed the joy out of this game already.. stop making them change the game even more..
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.20 23:38:00 - [91] Originally by: Ryan Scouse'UK how about get a carrier & join them or stop the whine.. really I am sick to death of the changes CCP keep making to EVE they have already nearly killed the joy out of this game already.. stop making them change the game even more.. That's my point, CCP is going to nerf Carriers to death unless we can agree on what we want them to do, but nobody can, as you can see here. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Draeca federation navy taskforce	Posted - 2008.01.21 00:02:00 - [92] Originally by: Orb Lati Give them a flak (or missile smart bomb) area effect weapon and use them to disburse blobs. Anyone remember those cinematics in Homeworld 2 where the Dread in obliterates a small fleet of fighters before firing it's main weapon on that frig or destroyer? Something like that would be awesome. A Moros with flak blasters, firing a thick barrage of antimatter towards the enemy frigblob..
sanctimoniousness	Posted - 2008.01.21 00:09:00 - [93] Originally by: Ryan Scouse'UK how about get a carrier & join them or stop the whine.. really I am sick to death of the changes CCP keep making to EVE they have already nearly killed the joy out of this game already.. stop making them change the game even more.. So in otherwords; Hi newplayers, STFU for 1 whole year until you can fly a carrier, then you can play eve. Kthxbai. I don't like change, and I'm sick to death of change. Even if something is horribly broken, lets not change it. Because change sucks amiright? Seriously. FACTS speak louder than OPINIONS.
sanctimoniousness	Posted - 2008.01.21 00:19:00 - [94] 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? At least make the carriers use a support fleet, instead of dropping onto any midsized fleet and forcing a full retreat or destroying them. Carriers should be on the front lines of the battlefield, but they should need support. They require space holding corporations to build, they are the fruits of the efforts of a group of players, they should therefore supplement groups of players, i.e. be part of a mixed fleet, not 6 carriers and a cyno-alt.
Concordokken Plox	Posted - 2008.01.21 00:22:00 - [95] Originally by: sanctimoniousness They require space holding corporations to build Hi, last time I checked, I can build a carrier in low-sec.
Troye Gallente Strix Armaments and Defence	Posted - 2008.01.21 00:24:00 - [96] Originally by: sanctimoniousness 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? At least make the carriers use a support fleet, instead of dropping onto any midsized fleet and forcing a full retreat or destroying them. Carriers should be on the front lines of the battlefield, but they should need support. They require space holding corporations to build, they are the fruits of the efforts of a group of players, they should therefore supplement groups of players, i.e. be part of a mixed fleet, not 6 carriers and a cyno-alt. I'm a carrier pilot myself and this seems the most logical "balance", as people have said their problem is they can own any size of ship. It dosnt realy make sense from abackstory sense though, how do you explain a huge drone boat being able to use advanced fighters but not simple Ogres or Hammerheads? _______________________________________ "Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics...Even if you win, you're still ******. "
Troye Gallente Strix Armaments and Defence	Posted - 2008.01.21 00:28:00 - [97] Originally by: sanctimoniousness So in otherwords; Hi newplayers, STFU for 1 whole year until you can fly a carrier, then you can play eve. Kthxbai. Seriously. FACTS speak louder than OPINIONS. I waited 2 years before I got in a carrier, I wouldnt consider the time I spent traing for it as "not playing EVE". Part of the joy of EVE is it's long term payoff, if you want instant gratification wow is that way ---> Seriously. Do you know what your talking about? _______________________________________ "Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics...Even if you win, you're still ******. "
sanctimoniousness	Posted - 2008.01.21 00:32:00 - [98] Originally by: Concordokken Plox Originally by: sanctimoniousness They require space holding corporations to build Hi, last time I checked, I can build a carrier in low-sec. Last time I checked, POS's can be seiged. When I say 'space holding' I mean a corporation that can defend their space, not soverignity.
Dr Paithos Minmatar Republic Deep Space Institute	Posted - 2008.01.21 01:07:00 - [99] Originally by: sanctimoniousness Originally by: Concordokken Plox Originally by: sanctimoniousness They require space holding corporations to build Hi, last time I checked, I can build a carrier in low-sec. Last time I checked, POS's can be seiged. When I say 'space holding' I mean a corporation that can defend their space, not soverignity. er you can build caps in npc stations unless something has dramatically changed anyway nice troll op a++

CCP Mitnal	Posted - 2008.01.21 01:43:00 - [100] Cleaned. Please remember that pyramid quoting is considered spam and subject to warnings. When quoting someone use relevant quote(s) only and remove the excess. Thank you. Mitnal, Community Representative EVE Online CCP Games Email/Netfang

Gyle Caldari Knights of Chaos Chaos Incarnate.	Posted - 2008.01.21 02:56:00 - [101] Edited by: Gyle on 21/01/2008 03:00:31 Originally by: Verx Interis 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. Poorly constructed argument. You obviously missed the 300 pages of forum outrage where everyone already put these points to bed. BTW Dread pilots come out on most capital ops these days since they are very good at shooting at other caps, not to mention they can be excellent anti-BS if you know what your doing. I suggest you need more experiance in and around capitals. If you had you would know that all it takes is one arazu to completly disable a carrier. PS this should probably be in the development forum
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.21 04:35:00 - [102] Originally by: Gyle Poorly constructed argument. You obviously missed the 300 pages of forum outrage where everyone already put these points to bed. BTW Dread pilots come out on most capital ops these days since they are very good at shooting at other caps, not to mention they can be excellent anti-BS if you know what your doing. I suggest you need more experiance in and around capitals. If you had you would know that all it takes is one arazu to completly disable a carrier. PS this should probably be in the development forum Carriers are very excellent anti-BS without having to know what you're doing. And since damps changed, I doubt one Arazu can disable a carrier. The fact is, in game, Carriers are used way more than other capitals, for many different roles. Are you trying to say you don't see that? Or are you playing a different game? -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Steve Hawkings	Posted - 2008.01.21 04:41:00 - [103] waa waa waa i dont have a carrier and everyone else does.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.21 04:49:00 - [104] Originally by: Steve Hawkings waa waa waa i dont have a carrier and everyone else does. Can I ask where I said I wanted a Carrier? I'd rather not have a Carrier, mostly because it seems everyone else has one. I didn't even suggest anything that would let me get a Carrier any faster than normal.. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Wylker Caldari Pyrrhus Sicarii	Posted - 2008.01.21 05:02:00 - [105] Edited by: Wylker on 21/01/2008 05:02:56 Originally by: Verx Interis Originally by: Steve Hawkings waa waa waa i dont have a carrier and everyone else does. Can I ask where I said I wanted a Carrier? I'd rather not have a Carrier, mostly because it seems everyone else has one. I didn't even suggest anything that would let me get a Carrier any faster than normal.. Well you're basically beating the same incorrect argument over and over then when someone tries to explain to you why you're wrong you just say "no thats not right". For example: One Arazu can very easily knock a carrier down to a lock range of about 18km. Or it could make a carrier take an hour to target a cruiser. A single Falcon basically ruins any carrier's day. Carriers can easily be tackled and killed by a few battleships. The biggest problem with carriers is everyone that doesn't know what the hell they are talking about whining over and over on eve-o. By the way, you missed a 900 page thread about this around 4 months ago that people at CCP actually cared about. Try eve-search you still may be able to post there. You may want to read it first though so you can see why your OP is stupid. Heres a ninja edit for you: The only place where carriers/moms are a massive problem is when you have 300 of them in once place. And that has nothing to do with the design of the ships. That is about the cluster's inability to deal with it. The only other POSSIBLE issue is with massive spidertanks, but that problem is pretty easily solved with ECM.
Arctic Monkey Caldari Leinenkugel's Honey Weiss	Posted - 2008.01.21 05:04:00 - [106] 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. The tactic of dropping carriers on a BS fleet is a valid tactic. Why not use superior fire power when you are able to. Carriers take a lot longer to train for and should be superior to BS's. There has been enough nerfing of the carriers we don't need more. There has to be some incentive to fly them.
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2008.01.21 05:23:00 - [107] Originally by: Arctic Monkey 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. The tactic of dropping carriers on a BS fleet is a valid tactic. Why not use superior fire power when you are able to. Carriers take a lot longer to train for and should be superior to BS's. There has been enough nerfing of the carriers we don't need more. There has to be some incentive to fly them. What nerfing? So they can't haul anymore. That's all I can think of. CCP is going to nerf them more, whether or not you like it. Someone has to figure out what would be the best way to do it ot everyone is going to be annoyed. -----sig-starts-here------ Witty stuff goes here
Mr TriX Gallente The Collective	Posted - 2008.01.21 10:03:00 - [108] Warning: Experienced carrier pilot I will start off with saying it is a reward to spend all the time and isk to fly a carrier. I will also say I have been flying a carrier for over 3 months now and I still have yet to use it enough to recoup the time and money I spent on it. Let me be the first to say with any good experience, carriers can't "do it all". They can pretend to, but dropping 6 carriers on anything is a large risk unless you have decent support for them. I will also say that yes they are effective against the average battleship fleet, I have been in many gangs where we have successfully killed carriers with ships smaller then battleships. With very little losses I will add. A recent event where we bumped a carrier over 45km away from his 6+ other carriers to kill him. The reason we took very little losses is because the other carriers could not launch fighters because we quickly dispatched them with our HACs/etc. We even jammed several of carriers to prevent them remote repping. Damps are highly effective against carriers in lock time alone. Well tanked BS with smartbombs can easily distract fighters/drones while ECM ships jam them. I've had more success killing capital ships while in BS and hac gangs than with using my carrier. If anything I think carrier damage should be increased. Being able to dish out only a little more damage than dps battleship and costing 10+ times more? Add to that a few small ships can render my carrier DPS Null. Sure I can carry 200+ light-heavy drones. But you put a damp/ecm on me and start killing drones I then have no control over what or who they attack. If you get locked when my carrier is damped you simply warp out and back in and you get another 2 minutes of free time while I try to lock you if its even possible. As for ship maintainance bay. Thats not very useful itself unles your using carriers to bring battleships and other ships to a remote location for restocking. I have never seen or heard of anyone flying upto a carrier in battle to grab a new ship. Your pod would never last that long. A boost to fighter damage and a little more reduction to tracking to make the dps vrs battleships similar, yet the damage to capital ships greatly enhanced. Then carriers would be much better used in fleet combat of killing other carriers. Reducing the effect of "Carriers Online". I agree carriers are used to much. But the majority of them that use them loose them by stupidity. Flying around solo hauling. Mining in belts. Camping gates with few support. Rightly so they lose them. Maybe while boosting carrier damage vrs capitals, you could increase carrier cost a little to reduce the amount of them in game. One other change could be to somehow make dreads more able to counter carriers. Isn't their jump range less then carriers? (I haven't trained for dread). So to review, carriers are very vulnerable without support or large number of carriers. They cost alot and don't do all that much damage for their size/class. They are versatile yes, but at great risk. They could use a boost in damage and cost to build. Their ability to kill frigates is still limited by the max speed of light drones. Cruiser class ships have no problems killing fighters/drones and losses are expected - Its a carrier after all! Cost of loosing all fighters vs loosing a few cruisers very similar. Hope this sheds some light on this topic from someone who hardly ever gets a chance to use his carrier.
Princess Jodi Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2008.01.21 17:40:00 - [109] OP, your entire post is just utter garbage. 1> You don't fly a Carrier. Please STFU about something you are't qualified to discuss. 2> CCP nerfed the hauling ability, and while you may not think that was important it totally destroyed the Logistics Carrier. 3> The simplistic proposals you suggest were hammered so far up CCP's ass that they are still trying to get them out. BTW: ZuluPark is that you? 4> Should a further nerf occur, the only 'accepted' solution proposed so far is the Super-Rig idea for things like Ship Maint bays, extra Fighters, etc. Read 'Features and Ideas' sometime. 5> Even if there is a further nerf, there needs to be some ability to maintain/enhance current abilities. For example, I'd gladly trade Ship Maint Bay and Corp Hangar for more Fighters or immunity to EW. 6> Most of all, you are discounting the YEARS of training needed to be a good Carrier pilot, and forgetting that it can all crash down on you because of one Warp Scrambiling Frig.
Dirtee Girl Omega Enterprises Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.01.21 18:57:00 - [110] Carriers have already been nerfed the prices of carries and dread is comming down so soon everybody will have them are they usefull yes , are the amazingly usefull no , will they change the world (o0) yah ... why ? because every single carrier fight i have been on has been two things Long - exciting i personnally have never seen a better pvp engagement than carrier fights because you got time to think to adapt to maneuver to employ so many features of this game offence defence logistics maneuver all in one fight no 10 mins then it's over it can got for over an hour , now im not going to say the op has no idea but honestly you gotta see it , fly it and fight it before you can comment/judge * *
Lelulie Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.01.21 19:10:00 - [111] Edited by: Lelulie on 21/01/2008 19:13:18 Originally by: Dirk Magnum The drone bonus on the Moros is good but it still won't put out truly lethal DPS against a group of opponents. 900dps Ogre IIs, 500dps Hammerhead IIs, 300dps Hobgoblin IIs isn't lethal? ------------------------------------
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.01.21 19:20:00 - [112] Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 21/01/2008 19:21:14 Originally by: Lelulie Edited by: Lelulie on 21/01/2008 19:13:18 Originally by: Dirk Magnum The drone bonus on the Moros is good but it still won't put out truly lethal DPS against a group of opponents. 900dps Ogre IIs, 500dps Hammerhead IIs, 300dps Hobgoblin IIs isn't lethal? Not against a smartbombing battleship being protected by both drones and supporting interceptors. Even with added HP the Moros's drones are going to get killed before they destroy all of the Moros's attackers. I probably should have clarified in my original post that the Moros is fully capable of defending itself against an ill-prepared or undermanned gang, and obviously it has a huge tank and effective HP level, but when it's drones are dead that's it. Barring it's having multiple webifiers fitted and an opponent who stays in web range, the capital turrets aren't going to be a factor in a fight against sub-caps. edit: and I won't post in this thread any more if someone can point me to even a single killboard entry of a solo dreadnought owning a gang of sub-caps.
Buxaroo Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.21 19:21:00 - [113] Originally by: Mr TriX Warning: Experienced carrier pilot I will start off with saying it is a reward to spend all the time and isk to fly a carrier. I will also say I have been flying a carrier for over 3 months now and I still have yet to use it enough to recoup the time and money I spent on it. Let me be the first to say with any good experience, carriers can't "do it all". They can pretend to, but dropping 6 carriers on anything is a large risk unless you have decent support for them. I will also say that yes they are effective against the average battleship fleet, I have been in many gangs where we have successfully killed carriers with ships smaller then battleships. With very little losses I will add. A recent event where we bumped a carrier over 45km away from his 6+ other carriers to kill him. The reason we took very little losses is because the other carriers could not launch fighters because we quickly dispatched them with our HACs/etc. We even jammed several of carriers to prevent them remote repping. Damps are highly effective against carriers in lock time alone. Well tanked BS with smartbombs can easily distract fighters/drones while ECM ships jam them. I've had more success killing capital ships while in BS and hac gangs than with using my carrier. If anything I think carrier damage should be increased. Being able to dish out only a little more damage than dps battleship and costing 10+ times more? Add to that a few small ships can render my carrier DPS Null. Sure I can carry 200+ light-heavy drones. But you put a damp/ecm on me and start killing drones I then have no control over what or who they attack. If you get locked when my carrier is damped you simply warp out and back in and you get another 2 minutes of free time while I try to lock you if its even possible. As for ship maintainance bay. Thats not very useful itself unles your using carriers to bring battleships and other ships to a remote location for restocking. I have never seen or heard of anyone flying upto a carrier in battle to grab a new ship. Your pod would never last that long. A boost to fighter damage and a little more reduction to tracking to make the dps vrs battleships similar, yet the damage to capital ships greatly enhanced. Then carriers would be much better used in fleet combat of killing other carriers. Reducing the effect of "Carriers Online". I agree carriers are used to much. But the majority of them that use them loose them by stupidity. Flying around solo hauling. Mining in belts. Camping gates with few support. Rightly so they lose them. Maybe while boosting carrier damage vrs capitals, you could increase carrier cost a little to reduce the amount of them in game. One other change could be to somehow make dreads more able to counter carriers. Isn't their jump range less then carriers? (I haven't trained for dread). So to review, carriers are very vulnerable without support or large number of carriers. They cost alot and don't do all that much damage for their size/class. They are versatile yes, but at great risk. They could use a boost in damage and cost to build. Their ability to kill frigates is still limited by the max speed of light drones. Cruiser class ships have no problems killing fighters/drones and losses are expected - Its a carrier after all! Cost of loosing all fighters vs loosing a few cruisers very similar. Hope this sheds some light on this topic from someone who hardly ever gets a chance to use his carrier. Shaddup you, logic has no place in this thread
Xilimyth Derlin The Funkalistic SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.21 19:29:00 - [114] Couldn't this just be as simple as: Step 1) Remove Carrier's ability to launch standard drones Step 2) Create 2 more variants of fighters for Anti-Frigates/Cruiser Anti-Battlecruiser/Battleship combat (still taking up the fighter's space though) Step 3) ??? Step 4) Profit? The Carrier then makes some sacrifice for loading up for 'small ship combat' but no longer has near-endless waves of em. (Oubviously having the fighters be better armored then standard drones)
Skraeling Shortbus Caldari The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.01.21 19:36:00 - [115] Originally by: sanctimoniousness So in otherwords; Hi newplayers, STFU for 1 whole year until you can fly a carrier, then you can play eve. Hi, I have been in the game for over a year and have yet to step into a carrier, whoops there goes your argument. Love to the Assault Frigate!
Dirtee Girl Omega Enterprises Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.01.21 19:37:00 - [116] Originally by: Dirk Magnum edit: and I won't post in this thread any more if someone can point me to even a single killboard entry of a solo dreadnought owning a gang of sub-caps. bye * *
Howling Jinn Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.	Posted - 2008.01.21 20:21:00 - [117] Originally by: Dirtee Girl Originally by: Dirk Magnum edit: and I won't post in this thread any more if someone can point me to even a single killboard entry of a solo dreadnought owning a gang of sub-caps. bye how hard is it to read? that dread is not solo..
Blade Bleed	Posted - 2008.01.21 20:48:00 - [118] Op, you have no flippin clue what your talking about.
Thorek Ironbrow Ironbrow Industries Co. Empire Research	Posted - 2008.01.21 21:15:00 - [119] Can Dreadnoughts not kill Carriers then? Because that's what I always thought I'd do with one. _____________________________ Thorek Ironbrow of Ironbrow Industries Co. Part of the Empire Research Alliance Look us up in Nomaa or Itamo to join!
Dramaticus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.21 21:54:00 - [120] Given even a remotely lag-free enviroment, support fleets will crunch carriers. RSDs and ECM to break the remote rep circle jerk, bump the carriers out of range, apply DPS and repeat.
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.01.21 22:47:00 - [121] Originally by: Princess Jodi 6> Most of all, you are discounting the YEARS of training needed to be a good Carrier pilot, and forgetting that it can all crash down on you because of one Warp Scrambiling Frig. Nerf training requirements then. This repeated arguement that someone has taken forever to get trained up for ship X, therefore CCP better not touch it is really disturbing. It's at least antithema to a well balanced MMO. I rambled on about that specific topic here: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=623523 Short story being: CCP is screwing themselves by creating such long term training goals in that players will whine all the louder when it comes time to balance. Players are screwing themselves when they choose the long training path then think they can scream, "I trained for YEARS" when it comes time for balance. You took a gamble when you decided to train "for YEARS" for a more powerful ship. Take responsibility for that and accept that you took a risk when considering you knew ahead of time that all things in the game get changed eventually. So... carriers smerriers. I don't care if they get nerfed or not. But quit throwing that "I trained for YEARS" arguement out there. Because if that's a valid arguement, then it can only mean that the current Eve skill training design is destined to unbalance the game due to players having too much sway over change decisions. --- If you can make one heap of all your winnings, And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss, And lose, and start again at your beginnings, And never breathe a word about your loss -Rudyard Kipling
XoPhyte Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.22 00:20:00 - [122] Edited by: XoPhyte on 22/01/2008 00:25:30 Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: Princess Jodi 6> Most of all, you are discounting the YEARS of training needed to be a good Carrier pilot, and forgetting that it can all crash down on you because of one Warp Scrambiling Frig. Nerf training requirements then. This repeated arguement that someone has taken forever to get trained up for ship X, therefore CCP better not touch it is really disturbing. It's at least antithema to a well balanced MMO. I rambled on about that specific topic here: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=623523 Short story being: CCP is screwing themselves by creating such long term training goals in that players will whine all the louder when it comes time to balance. Players are screwing themselves when they choose the long training path then think they can scream, "I trained for YEARS" when it comes time for balance. You took a gamble when you decided to train "for YEARS" for a more powerful ship. Take responsibility for that and accept that you took a risk when considering you knew ahead of time that all things in the game get changed eventually. So... carriers smerriers. I don't care if they get nerfed or not. But quit throwing that "I trained for YEARS" arguement out there. Because if that's a valid arguement, then it can only mean that the current Eve skill training design is destined to unbalance the game due to players having too much sway over change decisions. Sigh. Thats not the way it was designed. When eve was released there were no battleships. The players who trained up their uber cruiser skills wanted something else, so the battleship was born. Then players trained up battleships, got bored and then carriers were released as something else to keep older players occupied. Not many MMO's (or any games) can keep players interested for YEARS on end. Eve accomplishes this by giving players something to strive for. The day that there is nothing left to strive for is the day that the game loses interest and players leave. In most any company retention > sales. It's not counterstrike where on day one everyone is equal. And your whole argument regarding long training times is a risk that players take, and therefore can be screwed and players should just "accept it" is just ludicrous tbh. Yes there are needs to "balance" the game. If this impacts players that have spent over a year of their time working for that goal, and now that goal isn't worth squat, they absolutly have a right to complain and to use that point in their arguments.
Gyle Caldari Knights of Chaos Chaos Incarnate.	Posted - 2008.01.22 17:16:00 - [123] Edited by: Gyle on 22/01/2008 17:19:34 Originally by: Verx Interis What nerfing? So they can't haul anymore. That's all I can think of. CCP is going to nerf them more, whether or not you like it. Someone has to figure out what would be the best way to do it ot everyone is going to be annoyed. Dude you have no idea. First of all that is a massive nerf. ccp's issue with them was their "do all" ability. Now they have nearly knackered 0.0 logistics just to stick their nerf in. 0.0 is a much more logisticaly throttled place since the change and since a lot of peeps havent got their rouqual's yet many are making use of jumper dreads. Sorry to Shatter your illusions about the future but it is highly unlikely they will be nerfed again, in any capacity, any time soon. I heard as much from zuluparks mouth at eve fest when i spoke to him at length. Their decision might have had somthing to do with the 400 page thread about it and the petition that i started with 71 pages of signatures. Bottom line is man from a combat perspective they are perfectly balanced and ccp now understands this. The fact that you dont have one doesnt mean that their stregths are dispraportionate to their isk value and/or the training time it takes to pilot them. With the new dictors both carriers and motherships are dying at an expanaential rate and are incredably vulnerable if significant fleets do not acompany them. If anything motherships are in a desperate need of a boost. Repost that if you like but please make no statemants about what you think ccp are going to do! PS If you think popular opinion is with you, check this out!!
Xtreem Gallente Knockaround Guys Inc. Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.22 17:32:00 - [124] just check killboards, alot of carriers are lost each day, they are needed in eve and actually a good thing, if someone hot drops 10 carriers on ur 10 bs all the bs die then you are doing somthing like mining, becuase there easy to get away from, but alot harder for carriers to get away from support squads.. seriously you obviously dont have the FC to deal with the situation, i had a titan hot dropped on me while in a gang, most of us died, does not mean there overpowered its just there use, the carrier is designed to be as it is, and should stay as it is.
Bane Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.22 19:47:00 - [125] Originally by: Conrad Rock Dev already said they would nerf fighters by reducing their scan resolution so as to not make them useful against cruiser sized ships, maybe even remove auto the aggro feature. Source for this?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one 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.