open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Devs, is there a plan for carriers?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

Author Topic

Kinsy
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2006.12.05 15:58:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Parallax Error
I reckon fighters should be aiming engage around 7.5-10km, still in web range but just further enough out to allow them to hit a bit better.

YEA so then you dont get bumped by the feckers, sounds good to me!

Rest of the changes sound good. But.

Make them scramble-able. They have a warp drive and can follow you anywhere, why can't you stop them leaving when they get there?

Illegal
Caldari
Wolvenholm
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:01:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Tuxford
Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.


Personally im of the opinion the 99% reduction for warfare links bonus on carriers and motherships should be replaced with something that makes them "all warm and fuzzy inside"

I forsee carriers with warfare links as commanders in gangs only for the command bonus of the module, not because the player is an actual gang leader, and thats not what you intended for the new system exactly, is it?

FalconHawk
Amarr
Shadow Rebellion
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:01:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Rawthorm

Actualy I did loose 9-10 over the space of a few days. In anycase there is nothing to stop the inhabitants of that system getting their own mothership to counter mine.


argh come on you know that us cuddly carebears have no souvereignity to build that thingy :) and since you disrupt our only income we wonīt have the iskies to buy it Laughing but beware, iīm only (how much does it cost?20bil?) 19.5bil short atm

Ange1
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment.
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:07:00 - [64]
 

Edited by: Ange1 on 05/12/2006 16:07:34
Originally by: FalconHawk
but please leave an option to kill them in low sec systems when one of this silly nyx pilots (yeah igno itīs aimed at u Rolling Eyes ) starting to lock down a system completly.
itīs realy not too much fun to live in a deadend system when a mothership or carrier is camping the gate the whole time and you simply have not enough dreads around ... and not all corps can easily field 10+ bs pilots with neuts.


You know most of the time our Nyx is out in 0.0 space killing people, not low sec. There is a way to kill or at least neutralize a Mothership's ability to do serious damage, I've seen people fight our Nyx with some measure of success on several occasions. If you lack the firepower, then look for a way to rob it of its teeth at the very least. Killing a Mothership - whether you have interdictors to be able to hold it or not - will require a sacrifice on your part in ships unless you have an extremely efficient method of killing a Mothership without a single loss.

I'm sorry if it ruins your agent running time, but you have to learn to adapt and deal with threats like this, not whine about nerfing them so you can continue agent running in relative peace. You're just lucky there are only a couple Motherships in pirate hands at the moment. At least you can just dampen a Carrier to make it useless and its easy from there.

Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:15:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Tehyarec
Regarding lock times, I always found it annoying that big ships have so stupid locking times. Without a sensor booster, a BS locks a frig in maybe 15 seconds roughly. It's silly. As if a big ship wouldn't have more powerful sensor systems to acquire locks fast. I guess it's to prevent instalock'n'pwning small ships, but currently the times are just too long. Especially for capitals.


When you double the maximum lock range of a ship, the volume of space being scanned is increased eightfold.

On top of that, as we can see from the recent WCS nerf, having a strong warp field interferes with your ability to lock targets. I imagine that the bigger your ship is, the larger the base interference from its warp core.

FalconHawk
Amarr
Shadow Rebellion
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:21:00 - [66]
 

hehe sure i know where it is most of the time ange1 and i have never said something about to nerf it (did i?), my post were just to remind tux that some ppl use the ships he tries to boost all the time not for the things he has in mind. Motherships, Carrier and Dreads are simply not in the game for gate ganks and are already pretty hard to kill (and iīm not talking about 1 carrier vs. 10+ bs with neuts). Itīs a fleet combat ship and so the new shiny plan of tux should reflect it that way and not boosting itīs solo abilities.
And donīt worry, i can live with 5 days without agent running, itīs quite boring anyway Cool

shivan
Drunken Wookies
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:33:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: Tuxford

Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1.


I can agree with this, I was using my carrier to warp into LV and V gate camps to break them up. I lost my carrier about a week before Kali 1 was out, but a solo carrier set up like a giant vamp domie works wonders against a6 bs or less gate camp.

Caesium
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2006.12.05 16:40:00 - [68]
 

What I'd like to see changed :

Increase drone bay size on all carriers by 40,000m3

If fighters don't get drone bonuses because they are not drones then they should be on a separate control pool from drones.

There should be an option in overview to display the target the drone/fighter is engaged on.

There should be an option in overview to display the nearest celestial body the fighter is at. (why the hell can the fighters follow people into warp but not tell me wtf they went to?)

Carriers should have the ability to warp to their fighters as should people who have delegated control.

As mentioned above some sort of bonus to lock time of gang/alliance/corp assets (more of a global change really)

Of course fix the status updates for the fighters, hp etc.

We have warp to 0 now, why don't fighters warp back at 0 when they come back from remote locations? make it an option?

When a target is over 150km from me the fighters should be able to warp to it, they can follow people to safe spots with no book marks via uber fighter magic, they should be able to warp to targets > 150km via same juju.

Capitol webbers/scram/sensor upgrades. Capitol ships need more capitol modules. we shouldn't have to use the same small stuff that small ships use it makes no sense that some tiny ass sensor array that fits on a frig is being used on a capitol ship. Make them expensive 50-75m a module, make them far more effective, hell make them require t2 components. And no, officer web/scram are not capitol modules they are battle ship mods.

I'd like to see Some method of still telling fighters to attack a person without having them targeted. we keep hearing how fighters are fighters, manned ships not drones! they can warp 20au away and have no issues attacking something the carrier obviously can not target. this would make jammers/damps still disable some functionality on a carrier (neut/web/scam) but not completely screw it over.

Additionally balance amongst the carriers is out of wack, in the case of the archon and chimera. 80,000m3 is too small of a drone bay. 14 fighters is 70k, technically you can run 15 fighters for 75k. the last 5 k is going to be various drones. This leaves the carrier with 0 replacements for it's fighters and no way to diversify it's damage types. I can understand the gallente carrier getting a larger bay, but it shouldn't be the only one with the ability to carry spares or partially change it's damage output types.

I'm sure there is a few things I've missed touching on, am at work and not much time.


CCP Tuxford

Posted - 2006.12.05 16:44:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: FalconHawk
hehe sure i know where it is most of the time ange1 and i have never said something about to nerf it (did i?), my post were just to remind tux that some ppl use the ships he tries to boost all the time not for the things he has in mind. Motherships, Carrier and Dreads are simply not in the game for gate ganks and are already pretty hard to kill (and iīm not talking about 1 carrier vs. 10+ bs with neuts). Itīs a fleet combat ship and so the new shiny plan of tux should reflect it that way and not boosting itīs solo abilities.
And donīt worry, i can live with 5 days without agent running, itīs quite boring anyway Cool

Its not "Tuxford's grand plan of capital ships" its "CCP's plan", and the point is obviously not to make them solopwnmobiles.

FalconHawk
Amarr
Shadow Rebellion
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:05:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Tuxford

Its not "Tuxford's grand plan of capital ships" its "CCP's plan", and the point is obviously not to make them solopwnmobiles.


hard to say it, but ... i realy start to like you Shocked

Drutort
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:31:00 - [71]
 

I don’t care how the plan is… all I want is that capital ships not be handicapped by 1 single ship, that’s all, its ridiculous period… each capital ship thus far but carrier has unique abilities or bonuses that help it do its job very well… sadly you can not call carriers very good logistics ships or haulers as other ships do that job better IE mothership, even dreads or freighters. Capital reps you say? Well ya if few people in a fleet fight have damps all they do is put it on a carrier or if more carriers are there… that’s it boom the whole carrier fleet is useless and completely vulnerable now.

Does that sound fair? I think something is broken, the promises of having linking between gang and insta locking your gang members was stated but we have yet to see something like that… and carriers should have capital range in the 100km not messily 45km with lvl4 that is pathetic and insult to capital.

fighters? dont get me started on that one Rolling Eyes right now you cant even use the can trick anymore as they do not attack anything that belongs to you... how pathetic is it now to watch your fighters pop 1 by one as they crawl to your drone bay... oh might i add that now they dock 1 by one.. taking from anywhere 1-4 sec each... by that time if you have 10+ fighters your bound to lose few fighters just by them drying to dock at your carrier as if you dont have multiple docking bays on a ship design to host drones.

Drutort
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:36:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: Caesium
What I'd like to see changed :

Increase drone bay size on all carriers by 40,000m3

If fighters don't get drone bonuses because they are not drones then they should be on a separate control pool from drones.

There should be an option in overview to display the target the drone/fighter is engaged on.

There should be an option in overview to display the nearest celestial body the fighter is at. (why the hell can the fighters follow people into warp but not tell me wtf they went to?)

Carriers should have the ability to warp to their fighters as should people who have delegated control.

As mentioned above some sort of bonus to lock time of gang/alliance/corp assets (more of a global change really)

Of course fix the status updates for the fighters, hp etc.

We have warp to 0 now, why don't fighters warp back at 0 when they come back from remote locations? make it an option?

When a target is over 150km from me the fighters should be able to warp to it, they can follow people to safe spots with no book marks via uber fighter magic, they should be able to warp to targets > 150km via same juju.

Capitol webbers/scram/sensor upgrades. Capitol ships need more capitol modules. we shouldn't have to use the same small stuff that small ships use it makes no sense that some tiny ass sensor array that fits on a frig is being used on a capitol ship. Make them expensive 50-75m a module, make them far more effective, hell make them require t2 components. And no, officer web/scram are not capitol modules they are battle ship mods.

I'd like to see Some method of still telling fighters to attack a person without having them targeted. we keep hearing how fighters are fighters, manned ships not drones! they can warp 20au away and have no issues attacking something the carrier obviously can not target. this would make jammers/damps still disable some functionality on a carrier (neut/web/scam) but not completely screw it over.

Additionally balance amongst the carriers is out of wack, in the case of the archon and chimera. 80,000m3 is too small of a drone bay. 14 fighters is 70k, technically you can run 15 fighters for 75k. the last 5 k is going to be various drones. This leaves the carrier with 0 replacements for it's fighters and no way to diversify it's damage types. I can understand the gallente carrier getting a larger bay, but it shouldn't be the only one with the ability to carry spares or partially change it's damage output types.

I'm sure there is a few things I've missed touching on, am at work and not much time.




ya capital ships remind me of the days when BS came out and they lacked some of the BS modules and people were still using frig and cruiser sized guns and or other modules... its fine so long as you have your own class modules... but when you have no option thats when its pathetic... and waiting for kali 2,3 or whatever to fix carriers is just not acceptable, because i do not see were it is stated heavy changes like that are going to be done... each of those areas will have its own new items features added that will require extensive amount of fixing and carriers should be in the plan of being fixed NOW not later with all the other stuff... they will get the shaft once again

Kat Jupiter
Warspite Developments
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:45:00 - [73]
 

What if you reduced everything on a fighter by a factor of 5, save its damage.

20% of its HP, 20% of its space, and 20% of its cost

Still couldnt use them in other ships, could carry lots of spares, and they wouldnt be compleatly out of whack, i mean, they are really small, have the HP of a cruiser, thats pretty big (comparitivly with HP) and cost an exorbatant ammount of money. at those prices, you could afford to have ALOT of them, actually lose some and it not feel like you lost the fight, and people could actually kill them when they are chasing them.

Right now it feels to me like a lauch ******s in battlecruisers when i launch my fighters

R0ze
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:50:00 - [74]
 

/signed
.. and the whole scene could be improved just by implementing few of the requested features. In my opinion primary would be - mwd back to drone bay and fighter damage status being displayed always.

Retseldog
Corsair Fleet
Posted - 2006.12.05 17:59:00 - [75]
 

A carrier shouldnt be completly at the mercy of 1 ship...

As exampls a Lachises with 3 damps and a disruptor is capable of holding a carrier down with its lock range <10km ....Is this right?.....NO!!!!

Motherships with their immunity to EW are fine IMO... and carriers should have this ability....

Immunity to EW and instalock on own gang members ( for repping) would go along way to seeing Carriers used alot more in the frontlines......The HP buff is nice and gives them longlevity. but even a million HP's arent enougth if one ship alone can make the carrier useless...




R0ze
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:04:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Retseldog
A carrier shouldnt be completly at the mercy of 1 ship...
Immunity to EW and instalock on own gang members ( for repping) would go along way to seeing Carriers used alot more in the frontlines......The HP buff is nice and gives them longlevity. but even a million HP's arent enougth if one ship alone can make the carrier useless...


Although the imunity would be nice to carrier users I dont agree fully on your statement.. There should be some counter tactics/ships .. And if you want those gang boosts (lock speed /repp range) bonuses why wouldn't the Lachesis be able to render the carrier a bit useless??? In case of a gang it would make the Lachesis user as primary target anyway (the same goes for all specialised ships).

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:10:00 - [77]
 

I know people will complain about this. But you do realize there are ECCM modules in the game, right? If you KNOW the weakness in your setup... fix it! Mount some anti-ECM gear. You start with 80 points, so it'll take a fair amount of ECM modules to jam you to begin with. A single T2 ECCM will boost you to 128 points. And that will take several Scorpions full of race specific ECM gear to lock you down.

If you fit only kinetic resistance mods and complained that the Amarrian guns we doing too much damage to you, people would laugh you off the forums. There are a lot of different ways to take down a ship in this game... that's why you aren't supposed to fly around solo.

Ravelin Eb
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:11:00 - [78]
 

at the moment carriers are just very expensive toys tbh. the only ones i encounter are safespotted and we enjoy popping all the fighters he assigns. even with the 400% hp increase we killed one last night in about 6 minutes with just a cruiser/BC gang. they are still very vunerable to this sort of attack and without massive support are useless in close up combat. i havent got one myself due to the vast amounts of money needed for what is essentially a mantlepiece object, but i would like to see some sort of changes to make them more useful than what they are in thier current state.

Rafein
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:11:00 - [79]
 

I think the the HP change, and the gang change, needed the command ship to be on the grid for bonuses to be given, that is the role of Carriers. Command ships that last a while, and support

Parallax Error
Amarr
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:23:00 - [80]
 

Originally by: Bagehi
I know people will complain about this. But you do realize there are ECCM modules in the game, right? If you KNOW the weakness in your setup... fix it! Mount some anti-ECM gear. You start with 80 points, so it'll take a fair amount of ECM modules to jam you to begin with. A single T2 ECCM will boost you to 128 points. And that will take several Scorpions full of race specific ECM gear to lock you down.

If you fit only kinetic resistance mods and complained that the Amarrian guns we doing too much damage to you, people would laugh you off the forums. There are a lot of different ways to take down a ship in this game... that's why you aren't supposed to fly around solo.



All of which is completely beside the point, people are saying that a Carrier is too easy to nullify with Remote Sensor Dampeners.

Don't go off on a rant when you have not actually read the points people are making, it can make you look somewhat foolish.

Ange1
Gallente
The Establishment
Establishment.
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:25:00 - [81]
 

I think giving Carriers the immunity to EW like Motherships, may throw the scales the other way and make them too powerful. Mini-motherships as it were. If you gave the Carriers this ability, the only real difference between them is the storage size, HP and the number of Fighters deployed. 1.5Bn for a Carrier compared to 20Bn for a Mothership, you should expect some major differences between the two.

Perhaps a bonus can be added that severely reduces the effectiveness of EW modules per level of Carrier. So perhaps at level 5 Carrier, a Dampner would lose 90% of its effectiveness for example. You'd need a feck load of Dampners then to stop it locking you and ECM mods would rarely jam it.

R0ze
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2006.12.05 18:33:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: Rafein
I think the the HP change, and the gang change, needed the command ship to be on the grid for bonuses to be given, that is the role of Carriers. Command ships that last a while, and support
They kinda have allready warfare link CPU reduction bonus..
So you can practically use them as command ships. With decent skills and mindlink wouldn't be that too much diference between fleet comand ship +3% bonus (unleast cmdship LVL5 :) ).

Princess Jodi
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2006.12.05 20:43:00 - [83]
 

First of all, I love my Carrier, and honestly don't want to fly anything else. At least till I can afford a Mothership.Cool

I've used them on the front lines since I got them, primarily by warping into a battle and sending 14 Fighters after a single BS, then warping out. That one BS is either gonna have to leave system, or be destroyed.

Assigning Fighters is just not an option for me. I have spent too many fights sitting in a POS or safespot watching pilots not using my Fighters or trying to get someone to assign Fighters to after the first contoller gets blown up. Not to mention that only 5 Fighters won't kill most ships, and therefore just become targets themselves.

Sitting in safespot or POS is just plain BORING, not to mention a bit cowardly when your buddies are getting blasted to bits.

Jamming of a Carrier is quite simply too easy. A Carrier shouldn't have to use up valuable slots just to make it hard to Jam. If any ship had such an obvious weakness in RL, it would be fixed. Not to mention that a Jamming ship actually should be lit up like a Christmas Tree, and therfore be easy prey for things like a HARM-Missile defense system. Hell, the Carrier is big enough to triangulate on any ship with just a telescope on its bow and stern.Idea

I'm not sure of the new 'Drones don't become self-aware' patch fix, but if it means that drones don't automatically pick a new target when one is destroyed, then I HATE it! I had actually hoped that Fighters would have the same ability, and auto-engage nearby hostiles, as that would help the 'Carrier being jammed' issues somewhat.

Other than that: Make Fighters Warp Back to Bay. Fix Fighters and Drones getting Stuck on each other (yes, it is better, but 14 Fighters almost always gets 2 stuck on themselves.) Give us a way to recover lost Fighters after a disconnect. Make Fighters get Gang Bonuses. Let Fighters target Wrecks.

Oh, and it would be sweet if your Fighters orbited you in a V-Formation.Smile

ProphetGuru
Gallente
Evolution
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.12.05 22:51:00 - [84]
 

I'd like to see some AOE stuff added to carriers and dreads. Both of these ships could be so much more involved in regular combat. Portable shield generators hardened by racial ship type would be an amazing carrier function and propmote fleet diversification.

How about dreads that can mount aoe weapons.. not insane dmg of course, just something to contribute. Make it not get the siege bonus if you have to... or whatever. You could be very original with the effects of these aoe's Imagine a nagalfar launching a web bomb from 80km away, slowing the opposing fleet. A Rev launching an ion blast that disrupts all electonic (medslot) items for 15sec... or whatever.


Malthros Zenobia
Posted - 2006.12.06 01:27:00 - [85]
 

I'll be honest, I was reading the OP but when he said he hopes capships get back into mission/compex running, I decided the OP is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Carriers have their purpose, they are large logistics/fleet ships, they can assign fighters to gangmates to give them some extra wtfpwnage DPS (AF or INTY with 5 fighters is EVIL), you can use them to re outfit in space, with the HP boost they can sit on the lines and soak up some insane damage as well.

Not sure what else you want. A Carrier already has quite a few roles, one of which players gave it: Uber indy.Razz

Merrick Solipsus
Shadows Of The Requiem
Eternus Imperium Alliance
Posted - 2006.12.06 01:35:00 - [86]
 

What I mean by getting back into missions, is someday I would like to see Capital level missions where a group of carriers/dreads is needed. Could be very interesting.

Merrick Solipsus
Shadows Of The Requiem
Eternus Imperium Alliance
Posted - 2006.12.06 03:53:00 - [87]
 

Tux, if you stop by again could we please get some info on fighters not MWDing back?

Even just a "yes we know its a problem" would help. As it sits now it seems that CCP is purposly avoiding the problem.

Audri Fisher
Caldari
Burning Bush Enterprises
Posted - 2006.12.06 07:51:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: Tuxford
Short answer is, yeah we have a plan. Its quite cool, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

Carriers are being used by some on the frontlines even before the Kali 1. They should work out a bit better after the patch with increased hitpoints and boost to capital remote armor repping/shield boosting modules. Personally I think they need more fancy thingiemajiggies to get them on the frontlines, and the "plan" gives them that.


What we vae now are escort carriers. we need fleet carriers.
Instead of fighters, they use Bombers. Slower, but much tougher than fighters, they pack a hell of a punch against Battlecruiser sized targets and up. Instead of remote repair bonuses, they need offesive bonuses. teir II would be nice, as motherships are teir III.

CCP Tuxford

Posted - 2006.12.06 08:34:00 - [89]
 

Originally by: Merrick Solipsus
Tux, if you stop by again could we please get some info on fighters not MWDing back?

Even just a "yes we know its a problem" would help. As it sits now it seems that CCP is purposly avoiding the problem.

I looked into it, seems a number of drones are behaving this way. I thought it would be an easy fix but apparently its bigger than I thought. There is a bug report about it and lets hope it gets fixed asap.

Audri Fisher
Caldari
Burning Bush Enterprises
Posted - 2006.12.06 08:56:00 - [90]
 

easy solution, get mission, relase drones, agro everything in room. turn reppers on, go afk. Laughing


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only