Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zurrar
Gallente Universal Exports FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 05:54:00 -
[1]
With out nerfing them! How you say? How the hell does ccp keep everyone happy? read further!
The current issue with carriers is they are the do all ships of eve. But how to change this, with out affecting everyone who skills for them?
The current issue with motherships- cost vs effectiveness. The cost of a ms outweighs the performance by far.
Capitals need more options. both in fitting and in effectiveness. This should start with the mainstay of almost any capital capable corporation- the carrier.
Heres the proposal- Reduce fighters dmg and m3, increase tracking. This makes fighters a better option to heavy drones, but still a capital only option. Balancing these to be effective at taking out battleships and somewhat bcs' but struggle with cruisers (webbed or not). But what does this do to the carriers effectiveness against capitals? it completely makes them worthless! Now your screaming 'WHY THE HELL DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT, YOUR COMPLETELY F*$KIN NUTS!'. I am not :).
Add Bombers (not stealth bombers they dont go cloaky!). These are large (very large) fighters that are armed with that factions dread weapons! These bombers would be firing citadels, x-large ion blasters, x-large autocannons, and x-large giga beams! They would be slow, easy to counter, and have high hp- BUT, very size limiting, and very ineffective against anything smaller than a carrier. What does this do? It makes motherships very capable against other caps, makes carriers choose to either fit specifically for anti-cap or anti-support, or mix for less effectiveness.
Now your saying 'that just adds to the lag! and makes dreads more vulnerable to carriers!', well thats kinda the idea. As far as lag, what is lag .
Another option is make bombers like frigates, allow the owner to fit them with various weapons! Energy neuts, heavy lasers, heavy torps. Either way, i think this would be a major addition to carriers!
second ADD TECH 2 CAPITAL STUFF ALONG WITH FACTION!
/discuss! |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 06:18:00 -
[2]
while i would support change in the fighter department, it'd go the other way; everybody is probably sick and tired of me mentioning my 65m scimitar but if that one has trouble, how are "real" cruiser signatures faring any better? well and unless i stand _still_ in it (yes 0 m/s) i cant tank fighters. sure i could MWD but that negates the existance of remote repping pretty soon. afterburners are the worst one can do against fighters. so actually i'd want fighters to not have the 125m signature resolution (same as heavy drones and now mediums, too) due to the same reasons medium drones werent supposed to ruin frigates like they did.
i would support some hostile drone working like mining drones though; going back and forth with some payload - "bomb repeatedly" x_X
but if it's about the purpose of the carrier; it's one heck of a remote repper. except for basilisk/guardian combos, logistics ships can't do that great of a job on the battle(ship)field. the guy in the 2-transporter-scimitar might just as well have picked a tempest with just as much remote repping. on that level, only carriers really make a difference and the dimension makes me say that their entire stand doesnt need a do-over. i could live with a revision of the triage module though. |
Zurrar
Gallente Universal Exports FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 06:20:00 -
[3]
meh, ive seen otherwise. i dont use fighters against cruisers, just t2 hammerheads. |
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 06:25:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 12/01/2009 06:26:16
Just stopping by to say that you'd need a Titan to carry parasite craft that fit x-l weaponry. Compare the size of a Dread's guns to a Carrier hull plz.
Moms need gang bonus upgrades, not combat bonuses. If people wanted combat bonuses on their carriers or moms they'd fit drone control units instead of gang-assistance modules. |
Zurrar
Gallente Universal Exports FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 06:28:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Zurrar on 12/01/2009 06:28:41 its an idea :P and how does a battleship+cruisers fit inside it o_0
|
Spike 68
Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 07:48:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Spike 68 on 12/01/2009 07:51:03
Originally by: Zurrar
The current issue with carriers is they are the do all ships of eve.... ...Capitals need more options...blah blah
I stopped reading after you contradicted yourself in the first halfway composed thought.
|
Anile8er
Solstice Systems Development Concourse
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 08:26:00 -
[7]
Actually he is on to a good point.
Carrier need more options when it comes to fighters. I actually propose there be 3 classes:
Interceptor- low hp, fast (4500m/s), point/web, good tracking, very low dps.
Space superiority- similar to what is in game now.
Heavy fighter/bomber- same hp current fighters, slow (1200m/s), siege luancher torps.
|
Zurrar
Gallente Universal Exports FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 10:05:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Spike 68 Edited by: Spike 68 on 12/01/2009 07:51:03
Originally by: Zurrar
The current issue with carriers is they are the do all ships of eve.... ...Capitals need more options...blah blah
I stopped reading after you contradicted yourself in the first halfway composed thought.
annnnnnnd where do i contradict myself in saying CAPITALS (not just carriers o_0) need more options?!
currently caldari have lets see... citadels or... citadels... oh lets take off one citadel for a gun of sorts o_0.
so please, again? how did i contradict myself? |
Gilgamesh1980
The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 10:12:00 -
[9]
while I think the siege launcher idea is pretty rediculous, jsut going by the sheer size of munitions, there would be a lot of potential for alternative fighter types, as I agree, the one fighter type, is a tad boring sometimes, especially after that insane skill path, but it needs to be treated very carefully.
a thought would be to keep the current fighters as they seem to work quite well, however, bring in some slightly bigger guns with a lot of caution.
some like a bomber would be a cool feature, but I wouldn't go with siege weapons, especially because without the siege part they suck anyway, but maybe something like a smaller version of the current bombs, which could work quite well i think, dumbfire weapons, that can cause half decent damage to BS and cap ship sized ships, however also limiting their ammo capacity to maybe 2 to 4 bombs, before they have to return to the carrier and reload, this would also look pretty cool imho, seeing these crafts going on bombing runs
The carrier used to be insanely overpowered jsut over a year ago, where it coudl stand fights against fleets solo, so I think any change to this needs to be done very carefully |
Varrakk
Phantom Squad
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 10:37:00 -
[10]
I believe there should be Supercapital Sized modules. Right now, Motherships only got a bigger buffer over their Carrier counterparts. Either give them better repair modules or a repair amount bonus.
More options for Fighter types is very welcome. Especially the Bomber class. And I wouldnt say no to a nimbler variation as well.
The change to officer webs made mothership extremly vulnerable against HIC's.
On a different note, the cargohold restriction on ships can be lifted. Theres no need to use Carriers for hauling with the addition of Rorqual and Jump Freighters. Its just silly that cyno ships cant have ozone in their cargohold. And HIC/Dics cant have anchorable bubbles in theirs. Commonly used items for their roles. |
|
Xindi Kraid
Cerulean Sky Fire Industries
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 11:39:00 -
[11]
Different sized figters woould be nice for carriers |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 12:03:00 -
[12]
FighterBombers sound sexy but it would be way overpowered to give a mothership, say, 10k dps versus dreads. Carriers/MS have the remote rep ability already. |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 12:15:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 12/01/2009 12:15:40 Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 12/01/2009 12:15:14
Originally by: Sokratesz FighterBombers sound sexy but it would be way overpowered to give a mothership, say, 10k dps versus dreads. Carriers/MS have the remote rep ability already.
I wouldn see that as overpowered, a mom costs 13b to make and add all the hassle to it as well compared to builind a dread in lowsec, moms currently have not much going for them apart from the super capital tag.
Those bombers could also be around 25m a piece so loosing them a doomsday as example would hurtyour wallet quite a bit. |
Gimora
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 14:12:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 12/01/2009 12:15:40 Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 12/01/2009 12:15:14
Originally by: Sokratesz FighterBombers sound sexy but it would be way overpowered to give a mothership, say, 10k dps versus dreads. Carriers/MS have the remote rep ability already.
I wouldn see that as overpowered, a mom costs 13b to make and add all the hassle to it as well compared to builind a dread in lowsec, moms currently have not much going for them apart from the super capital tag.
Those bombers could also be around 25m a piece so loosing them a doomsday as example would hurtyour wallet quite a bit.
This culd actaly be a good idea :) "supercapital modules" for supercapitals And bigger figthers that to more dmg,
As said before a mom can only carry 5 more figthers then a carrier can. And the web nerf hitt the moterships hard, so give them a web range bonus, or somthing simelar.
|
Caffeine Junkie
Atomic Battle Penguins
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 14:29:00 -
[15]
Carriers:
I think they are pretty much fine as they are, a carrier should be a swiss army knife, it does a multitude of tasks but is a master of none. There are better ships for just about every role, but no other ship can do so many things.
The only minor change I would like to see is a slight increase in fighter damage, or some other kinds of fighters, as the OP suggested, maybe different sized fighters for different scenarios, and make them a bit small (or drone bay bigger). Maybe add a 60 second delay to clear the flight deck between recalling and the next flight leaving to add a little spice to things.
Motherships:
I agree with the OP, MS are far far too expensive for the benefit over carriers. I also would like to see MS role changed to something other than "a slightly bigger harder carrier". There are a number of options, but the first thing that needs to happen is to make them harder to tackle. Before the introduction of heavy dictors they were immune in low-sec which was silly. However the idea that a ship costing 50b inc fittings can be tackled by a couple of ships costing 150m isn't right either. Particularly now that a HIC can tackle from beyond the range of even the top officer webs.
One suggestion I would float is to make a Mothership do what is says on the tin, make it a mobile base of operations, increase the size of the ship maintenance by a factor of at least 10x, and either allow it to jump with pod-pilots on-board, or allow it to fit a jump-portal generator like Blacks Ops and Titans.
The idea of this is simple, then a mothership can be used to bridge in and then support a reasonable size gang for an extended period in hostile territory. By support I mean, resupply, repair and refit, not necesarily front-line operations. And if CCP really wanted to make them cool, give them a covops cloak ;-)
Few final things: - MS should require Carrier V, JDC V, Fighters V too many noobs have them atm. - T2 Capital Modules pls CCP (and faction if you can) - More variety in fighters / cap modules / capital fits in general pls.
CJ
There are many places in this game where battles are fought and won, EFT isn't one of them. |
Omarvelous
Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 14:48:00 -
[16]
I think someone wants more love for hot dropping cap ships on people.
Carriers/moms are capital logistics - dread are capital pew pew.
Blurring the line makes it pointless to fly anything else other than carriers. |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 14:49:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Omarvelous
I think someone wants more love for hot dropping cap ships on people.
Carriers/moms are capital logistics - dread are capital pew pew.
Blurring the line makes it pointless to fly anything else other than carriers.
I full agree, but Motherships need *something* to set them apart. |
Anile8er
Solstice Systems Development Concourse
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 15:39:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Anile8er on 12/01/2009 15:40:14 Okay first, what I meant by siege torps was the same torps a raven/phoon would use. In game you can fit a similar sized module on a frig class ship (I.E. stealth bombers).
Second I dont think it would or should boost a mothership to 10k dps. I would say 4k +/- would be a fair number for a Nyx.
Also keep in mind this "larger" fighter would be useful only against larger ships, would be slow, bigger sig radius, very vulnerable to drones/gunfire/missiles, and wouldn't have a huge HP buff.
|
Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 15:50:00 -
[19]
Adding different classes of fighters is an interesting idea, but I wouldn't take it to the extremes that the OP did. If you do this you would have to keep them roughly the same size, or at least similar in size, as current fighters in order to force a carrier pilot to choose their fighter loadout in advance; if you let carriers load full flights of all fighter types, they'd be overly flexible in terms of their offensive abilities.
I do also agree that motherships need 'something' to make them really worth their huge expense. Maybe release a less-powerful (i.e. shorter range and/or more fuel consumption) titan-esque jumpbridge that moms can use? They also need their model scales fixed; right now they're roughly the same size as Dreadnoughts yet they're supposedly too big to dock in stations. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne |
Caffeine Junkie
Atomic Battle Penguins
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 15:56:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Bronson Hughes
I do also agree that motherships need 'something' to make them really worth their huge expense. Maybe release a less-powerful (i.e. shorter range and/or more fuel consumption) titan-esque jumpbridge that moms can use? They also need their model scales fixed; right now they're roughly the same size as Dreadnoughts yet they're supposedly too big to dock in stations.
I don't have numbers in front of me, but I am reasonably sure that most dreads and the Chimera will out-tank a Nyx.
There are many places in this game where battles are fought and won, EFT isn't one of them. |
|
Kjetilen
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 15:57:00 -
[21]
The moterships where good and "balanced" in 0.0 before(the way a 20bil isk ship shuld require a trap to be killed) But inn low sec they where teribly owerpowerd so hic's where introduced. With the mast majorty of normal figths in eve now having atlest one dictor and one hictor in them a motership or supercap is no longer imune to all e-warfare, a dictor bubble or a hictor point\bubble wil stop them from jumping out.
So give them atlest a new bonus since the old one is not "working" give them one web range bonus atlest:
But now it's opposite the hic can tank a lot more dmg then a battleship, and has a huge HP buffer! With the "webnerf" a motership has a max webrange off 20km (with the best officer web) A hictor can point a supercap @30km max with skils @
other idea is to give them more tank\hp buffer wich is also nice, but does not give them a specific role. "bombs" whuld be a idea, but it's supose to be a bigger carrer, not a "dd" Abilty to fitt supercapital sice guns is another fun idea. whuld be awsome, and giving them more flexibilty shooting pos's etc. ECM burst where intrudesed to give the mom "more use" but it's not realy working anymore. Paying 15bil isk to be alowed to use a module that breaks the lock of each ship evry 15 minutes?
|
Mag's
MASS
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 15:57:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Omarvelous Post....
I full agree, but Motherships need *something* to set them apart.
This tbh.
Motherships have had a steady nerf bat applied to them for awhile now, and the lastest officer web range nerf was another large nail in the MS coffin.
The most annoying part of CCP relentless side swipe nerfs, is the fact that to fly one of these ships well, takes a very long skills set training time. Then to have the rug pulled from under you regularly, gets rather tiresome, at best.
One idea, pooled on these forum awhile ago, was to give Motherships immunity against Nos/Nuets. With that and a buff to repping, could give them back edge they lost. |
Caffeine Junkie
Atomic Battle Penguins
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 16:01:00 -
[23]
Also if we are talking about different types of Fighters, lets have some sentry drone style ones so we can take part in the POS bash :) |
Caffeine Junkie
Atomic Battle Penguins
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 16:04:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Mag's
One idea, pooled on these forum awhile ago, was to give Motherships immunity against Nos/Nuets. With that and a buff to repping, could give them back edge they lost.
Love this idea, however 5-6 spider-tanking Wyverns with a 7.5% per level Shield Boost bonus and immunity to being neuted, would be practically unkillable. |
Gimora
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 16:08:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie Edited by: Caffeine Junkie on 12/01/2009 15:59:13
Originally by: Bronson Hughes
They also need their model scales fixed; right now they're roughly the same size as Dreadnoughts yet they're supposedly too big to dock in stations.
I don't have numbers in front of me, but I am reasonably sure that most dreads and the Chimera will out-tank a Nyx.
This is actaly true A Chimera with t2 fitting wil tank 4,3k dps A Nyx with t2 fitting wil tank 3,3k dps!
Just to add in since you wil newer see a t2 fittet nyx i hope... A Nyx with officer\dedspace fitting will tank 4,5k dps (only 200more then a chimera with t2 fitting)
|
Adelene Jorensen
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 16:18:00 -
[26]
Make carriers reflect their name more. They could have more of a role as mobile bases. Make a new fighter ship class for players to fly and make them small so you can fit a lot of them in the corp hangars.
You could have two types, each with a fixed MWD button and a weapon button. One could should torps. One could shoot guns in an anti support role. Give them the ability to warp to the carrier controlled fighters so they can help hunt support and fleeing craft.
Make them about a durable as an Assault Frigate with no rep ability. Make their DPS kinda suck, like 150-200dps Make them cost like 15mil each and you can load like 30 onto a carrier that way when people get knocked out of a fight they can grab one of these and keep going.
|
Mag's
MASS
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 16:20:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Mag''s on 12/01/2009 16:23:37 Edited by: Mag''s on 12/01/2009 16:20:38
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie Edited by: Caffeine Junkie on 12/01/2009 16:08:14
Originally by: Mag's
One idea, pooled on these forum awhile ago, was to give Motherships immunity against Nos/Nuets. With that and a buff to repping, could give them back edge they lost.
Love this idea, however 5-6 spider-tanking Wyverns with a 7.5% per level Shield Boost bonus and immunity to being neuted, would be practically unkillable without 100 dreadnoughts, and if they drop into Triage Mode you are going to be there until they run out of stront (which will be after your dreads do).
It could be in the form of a new module, a high slot item, that gives you Nos/Nuet immunity when activated. When it's running, you cannot be remotely repped.
Edit: This would be an MS only module.
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
Caffeine Junkie
Atomic Battle Penguins
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 16:28:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Mag's Edited by: Mag''s on 12/01/2009 16:23:37 Edited by: Mag''s on 12/01/2009 16:20:38
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie Edited by: Caffeine Junkie on 12/01/2009 16:08:14
Originally by: Mag's
One idea, pooled on these forum awhile ago, was to give Motherships immunity against Nos/Nuets. With that and a buff to repping, could give them back edge they lost.
Love this idea, however 5-6 spider-tanking Wyverns with a 7.5% per level Shield Boost bonus and immunity to being neuted, would be practically unkillable without 100 dreadnoughts, and if they drop into Triage Mode you are going to be there until they run out of stront (which will be after your dreads do).
It could be in the form of a new module, a high slot item, that gives you Nos/Nuet immunity when activated. When it's running, you cannot be remotely repped.
Edit: This would be an MS only module.
Interesting idea but i'm not sure its practical as a Mothership by itself is a dead mothership, in 0.0 at least, and CCP have a tendancy to gear the game towards working as a team and away from solo play.
There are many places in this game where battles are fought and won, EFT isn't one of them. |
Mag's
MASS
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 16:32:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Mag''s on 12/01/2009 16:32:43
Originally by: Caffeine Junkie
Originally by: Mag's It could be in the form of a new module, a high slot item, that gives you Nos/Nuet immunity when activated. When it's running, you cannot be remotely repped.
Edit: This would be an MS only module.
Interesting idea but i'm not sure its practical as a Mothership by itself is a dead mothership, in 0.0 at least, and CCP have a tendancy to gear the game towards working as a team and away from solo play.
Yea I understand the whole team thing and lets face it, you'd be mad to run an MS alone. But as the MS has be hit with so many nerfs, we need to give them an edge, whether my idea is that edge or not. They sure need something.
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
Omarvelous
Destry's Lounge
|
Posted - 2009.01.12 17:53:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Omarvelous on 12/01/2009 17:52:54 If you guys want more bang for your buck for a mothership - just ask for a ccp price reduction on materials to make one.
Many of the potential buffs I see here would make them OP and greatly boost large alliances able to field them in large groups.
If it tanks a few times better than 1 carrier, or throws out 2x more fighters & has some ewar immunity that carriers don't have - maybe drop their price to 10 bil in materials?
Or you could allow motherships to use warp disruption field generators (scripted only)....
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |