open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Capital Ships and Ordnance, New Dev Blog by Oveur
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7

Author Topic

Variable1
FinFleet
Raiden.
Posted - 2007.05.13 20:22:00 - [121]
 

Originally by: John McCreedy
John McCreedy says 'sensible stuff'...



Fair enough. I agree with you. I guess my point is, Titans aren't broken alone, and thus you can't nerf them alone. The whole cap warfare/pos warfare thing has to be taken as a whole and reshaped, not just one part of it that is maybe more visible on the battlefield (or not :P).

Bein Glorious
SAKUMA DROP
ANAHEIM ELECTRONICS Alliance
Posted - 2007.05.13 20:38:00 - [122]
 

Originally by: Variable1
Originally by: John McCreedy
John McCreedy says 'sensible stuff'...



Fair enough. I agree with you. I guess my point is, Titans aren't broken alone, and thus you can't nerf them alone. The whole cap warfare/pos warfare thing has to be taken as a whole and reshaped, not just one part of it that is maybe more visible on the battlefield (or not :P).


I disagree with this entirely. Even if everyone had infinite resoures, every single skill trained to the max, and there was either no sovereignty system at all or sovereignty worked perfectly, Titans would be still be overpowered.

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.05.13 21:43:00 - [123]
 

Edited by: Yaay on 13/05/2007 21:45:57
Edited by: Yaay on 13/05/2007 21:42:13
As a carrier pilot, I'm very concerned about any proposed changes to this ship. First and foremost, assigning fighters isn't overpowering. Fighters do terrible damage when the carrier isn't using them directly.

Carriers are at a huge disadvantage on the battlefield right now. They are pretty weak on their own defensively, yet in a group, they work quite well. They're still succeptable to jamming though, so that makes groups counterable.

Offensively, fighters are insainly weak and stupid defensively. I don't know many carrier pilots who like to assign fighters out to other players without a huge level of trust. Most pilots I talk to hardly ever willingly assign fighters. 200 mil of uninsurable, stupid and defensively weak gear on the field isn't my idea of fun or smart. Smart Bombs own fighters, especially on other capital ships.

Fighters also love to leave the battlefield to chase which is a joke. I'd rather have the option for my fighters to pursue, because 9 times out of 10, it's lost damage ability. Not only that, but enemies warp back to thier POS which means all their friends get to gang bang your fighters until they're recalled. If they do stay on the battle field, recalling them is impractical because they slow boat back to a carrier.

If you're planning on making carriers more logistics oriented, fine, but they better get some kind of ability to fight back.

Personally, I'd rather see their HP increased to greater than that of a dread, and fighters fixed. More HP means more reason to use them on the front lines. Smarter fighters is even more incentive. Even the ability to send fighters to safe haven would work. Why can't we have the control to warp them out to a planet or point in a system.

Also, Pilots who have remote control of fighters need a better read out of their status. Not being able to see the damage they're taking without locking them up is absurd. Half the fighters lost on a daily basis is due to the crappy fighter overview.

Stop trying to Nerf carriers into a roll that nobody wanted them for in the first place and fix their problems first. Do I like the ability to remote repair, YES, but not at the cost of my fighters. Carriers are out of balance, just not the way you make it seem.

John McCreedy
Caldari
Eve Defence Force
Posted - 2007.05.13 22:50:00 - [124]
 

Originally by: Bein Glorious
Originally by: Variable1
Originally by: John McCreedy
John McCreedy says 'sensible stuff'...



Fair enough. I agree with you. I guess my point is, Titans aren't broken alone, and thus you can't nerf them alone. The whole cap warfare/pos warfare thing has to be taken as a whole and reshaped, not just one part of it that is maybe more visible on the battlefield (or not :P).


I disagree with this entirely. Even if everyone had infinite resoures, every single skill trained to the max, and there was either no sovereignty system at all or sovereignty worked perfectly, Titans would be still be overpowered.


They are overpowered, yes but that doesn't detract from the fact that they're just one link in a chain of problems for Alliance warfare. However the fix needs to start somewhere and at least pre-Titan, as horribly boring as it was before, Alliance Warfare was balanced. Right now it's not balanced.

CCP keep asking the quesiton, "How do we stop blobbing?" where as the question that should be asked is "What incentives can we give Alliances not to blob?". Instead of punishing us for blobbing by way of things like a Titan's DD Weapon, give us a reason not to Blob by introducing a more strategic level to warfare Smile


Bein Glorious
SAKUMA DROP
ANAHEIM ELECTRONICS Alliance
Posted - 2007.05.13 23:26:00 - [125]
 

Originally by: John McCreedy
Originally by: Bein Glorious

I disagree with this entirely. Even if everyone had infinite resoures, every single skill trained to the max, and there was either no sovereignty system at all or sovereignty worked perfectly, Titans would be still be overpowered.


They are overpowered, yes but that doesn't detract from the fact that they're just one link in a chain of problems for Alliance warfare. However the fix needs to start somewhere and at least pre-Titan, as horribly boring as it was before, Alliance Warfare was balanced. Right now it's not balanced.

CCP keep asking the quesiton, "How do we stop blobbing?" where as the question that should be asked is "What incentives can we give Alliances not to blob?". Instead of punishing us for blobbing by way of things like a Titan's DD Weapon, give us a reason not to Blob by introducing a more strategic level to warfare Smile


I agree that encouraging smaller-scale warfare spread out over multiple systems is a better strategy to stop "blobbing" than punishing players who want to have fun working together as a team, but Titans aren't anti-blob. They never were. Saying that just because a gigantic smartbomb killed a hundred ships means it "killed the blob" is false. It killed the players, but those players still need to work together to accomplish anything, which the doomsday sure as hell didn't fix.

The only effect that Doomsdays have on blobs is a) the side with a Titan (or Titans) can blob all they want while the other side can't or b) The side without a Titan has to out-blob the Titan-owning side with capital ships. Now you're not only back at square one, where people exaggerate that "the only way to win is with more numbers", but you've escalated it to the point where you need both more numbers and more expensive and less intricate ships. Doomsdays make the game go literally backwards in PvP complexity.


There’s one kind of “blob” that doesn’t get mentioned so much, and it’s the “fifty guys chasing down one other guy” blob. Sometimes its just people who don’t want to give a guy a fair fight at all because they don’t want to even give him a chance, or because they want him to go away and stay away. But this can also be because of one deeper problem: imbalance.

When nanoships were about at their worst a few months ago, I was in a gang trying to hunt down about a dozen some people who were hanging around near our home systems putting us all at risk. These guys were in nanophoons, nanodomis, vagabonds, crows, and so forth, all going over 12km/s, and in addition to that they had a guy in a battlecruiser giving them gang bonuses for more speed on top of all that. There was no possible way we or anyone else could ever catch even a single one of them without a “blob” of our own, since one person would never have enough midslots to both put points on them continuously and keep them webbed long enough to kill them.

So yeah, here’s a cause for blobbing that the devs should look at: overpowered ships and tactics. Nothing frustrates people more than overpowered and broken mechanics, and that forces people to make huge gangs because there’s no way to confront it without a blob.

Sorry if I came off as a little sassy there, but seriously, nothing in this game annoys me as much as imbalance, not even lag. I hope these new balance guys that CCP are hiring can deal with balance issues at least a little bit faster than CCP has in the past.

p.s. buff amarr

Ishina Fel
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2007.05.14 02:31:00 - [126]
 

Dear Oveur,
Because some things just cannot be said often enough, allow me to point out again in a few words what I feel the most important comments made previously in the thread.

1.) The implications of a cloaked Titan. Being on the grid unnoticed. Being immune to probing. Is there delay on firing the Doomsday after uncloaking, just like there is a targeting and recloaking delay? Why can a frigate sized module (1 MW, 30 CPU) completely remove a mid-sized moon from view anyway? That ship class even has its own gravity well described in the chronicles, after all...

2.) Warp-in blobification. Unless CONCORD now enforces a 20 minute cease-fire all over New Eden during which both fleets maneuver freely before opening fire, we need formation warping. The current gangwarp mechanic automaticlly constructs a tightly packed blob out of any formation that the fleet was in before entering warp. Either predefined formations, or a function to "remember" the current distribution of ships in space would be fine.

MasterDecoy
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2007.05.14 03:20:00 - [127]
 

Originally by: DeadProphet
honestly, if you remove the remote DD (which IMO you should) then you don't need to increase the warm up period.

because then the titan would never kill anything. by the time he's loaded and presses the button - most of them have hit warp, if you increase the timer, they'll all get out, except under exceptional circumstances.

a nerf too far IMO.



wouldn't that break up 'the blob' then?

BluOrange
Gallente
The OZ Hunters and Mercenary Association
Black Scope Project
Posted - 2007.05.14 03:49:00 - [128]
 

Originally by: MasterDecoy
Originally by: DeadProphet
honestly, if you remove the remote DD (which IMO you should) then you don't need to increase the warm up period.

because then the titan would never kill anything. by the time he's loaded and presses the button - most of them have hit warp, if you increase the timer, they'll all get out, except under exceptional circumstances.

a nerf too far IMO.



wouldn't that break up 'the blob' then?


No. Tactical dispersal does not break up the blob. All those pilots are still in the same system as each other, still lagging the hell out of each other and their opponents.

Strategic dispersal is the way to break up the blob. This means giving pilots reasons to be in different systems as each other, achieving different things simultaneously. One step in that direction that the devs seem to be taking is the system scanner POS modules that haven't been talked about much, and the implied nerf to local.

If your opponent has to use a sensor net to know what's going on in their space, then simultaneous strikes on different parts of the sensor net will be a useful strategy. Since those parts of the sensor net will be in different systems to each other, THAT would break up the blob.

Kusotarre
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2007.05.14 04:02:00 - [129]
 

I've only read through the first page of comments, so if this has been addressed sufficiently, I apologize.

Rob Blaine and Oveur, I think you've got it wrong.

Reduced anchor time for bubbles and removal/nerf of remote DDD will do nothing to make titans anything less than the invincible cloaking planets they are right now.

Consider what happens right now. Titan warp in or uncloaks and DDDs, all support dies or warps, titan cynos or warps out. Or, it remote DDDs. Either way, it's unkillable, because all support is cleared from the field and has zero chance to bump or bubble or cap neut.

Here is what every single DDD ignition will look like if you simply reduce bubble anchor time: Titan warps in or uncloaks, DDD, clears all support, and then cynos or warps out. It will come in at range, so no ship capable of carrying a decent sized bubble will be fast enough to get there, and if by some huge fluke it can, the DDD kills it. And, if there is the doubly improbably fluke that a ship can get to the titan, tank the DDD, and anchor the bubble before the titan warps (this is effectively impossible), then the titan will have already started the warp sequence, and it will get away anyways. Unless you're going to argue that some ship is going to approach the titan from 200km away, bump it, anchor the bubble, while tanking the DDD and smartbombs... titans will remain invincible.

Titans will never die while built and piloted by an online player until there is a way to get support onto the titan. I maintain that the only way a titan will become killable is with a small period of immobilization after a DDD ignition (60 seconds would be fine) and a way for support to be able to tank DDD (an explosion velocity would work, if be clumsy realism-wise).

In short:

Reduced anchor times for bubbles and longer warm ups do absolutely zilch to address the invulnerability of titans.

BluOrange
Gallente
The OZ Hunters and Mercenary Association
Black Scope Project
Posted - 2007.05.14 04:10:00 - [130]
 

Regarding titans, I have had a little experience with titan warfare - specifically, the day that D2 set up a titan on the ec-p8r -> Saranen gate and turned on a bunch of officer smartbombs. The rumor is that the pilot went AFK while running that lethal solo gatecamp. That's broken.

Similarly, using the DDD remotely allows a risk-free use of the Titan - I don't believe that EVE was ever supposed to be risk-free. I do accept that jumping a titan in and having it be lagged to death by the fleet battle would be a Bad Thing - perhaps 'remote detonate' can be replaced by 'jump and detonate', allowing titan pilots to set a kind of autopilot that allows them a use of the DDD while their lagged client works on catching up.

I note that BoB is indeed in the best position to continue titan deployments if they become riskier and want to make it clear that I don't accuse them of being motivated by self-interest when expressing opposition to increased risk for titans.

I still don't see why any warship should have inherent warp core stabilization - it makes logical sense for blockade runners to have that ability, it's what they're for. There's no compelling case to give that ability to other ships. I don't believe that the argument "It would be too dangerous and nobody would use them" is a very good one - if the titan becomes a tool that is used sparingly and cautiously, then fine. In the event that the risk does massively outweigh the reward, I'd rather see increased reward than decreased risk. As Agony officers remind every pilot, "Don't fly what you're not willing to lose."

And lastly, on bombs - it seems that they can't actually be launched, they can only be dropped (and they don't have any momentum or anything, either). That will make them very difficult to use. But a sufficiently skilful pilot should be able to achieve something useful with a bomb, and a squad of stealth bombers has some very interesting options.

To CCP: What I'd like you to learn from this experience is that secrecy and vague hints feed paranoia, whereas open communication builds confidence.

Narciss Sevar
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.05.14 06:40:00 - [131]
 

Edited by: Narciss Sevar on 14/05/2007 09:36:41
Titans

A major problem that contributes to titans being broken is the Cloak. At the moment any ship can fit a 1mil module and go afk 23/7 in a safespot risk free with no chance of being found. Something titan pilots exploit to their advantage, how can you kill a ship that cannot be found? All other problems like remote DD and stopping it leave the battle seem to have been covered in other posts.

Carriers and Triage

Stopping assigning fighters seems spot on. Make people put their expensive toys at risk if you want to use them. Though i have reservations about triage, how much better are these ships going to tank with that module? This module if given EWAR invulnerability seems to be a get out of jail free card for using a carrier in smaller combat. Warp in and engage and if things look to be going against you stick triage on and wait for reinforcements, as if smaller gangs(20 or so) don't already have enough trouble killing carriers, even solo ones.

Motherships

They are currently invincible to the vast majority of eve currently this is fundamentally wrong. Battleships were once the solopwnmobile, but battleships were nerfed because CCP said that's not what they want in this game. I think the immunity to EWAR really gives them this ability. They have massive tanks, massive attack capability's that can literally destroy and tank a whole fleet of ships by themselves which is reason enough to spend 20+bil on one. Personally i believe more options are needed to hold this ship class down for support to come and help kill it, rather than the just spam bubbles and bump options that are available now.

Bozse
Reikoku
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2007.05.14 07:08:00 - [132]
 

Originally by: Narciss Sevar

They have massive tanks, massive attack capability's that can literally destroy and tank a whole fleet of ships by themselves which is reason enough to spend 20+bil on one.



I'll make a wild guess here and say that u never flew a carrier nor a mothership.

The mothership has about the same tank as a carrier, more HP and some better choices when it comes to fitting, the EW immunity is what makes it worth the 20b. I do agree that some way to hold them shuld be put in but not at the expense of the EW immunity.

Tradesman Mcgee
Caldari
Posted - 2007.05.14 07:31:00 - [133]
 

About time some of the imbalance of Titans is looked at. Looking good, keep it up.

Narciss Sevar
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.05.14 08:06:00 - [134]
 

Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar

They have massive tanks, massive attack capability's that can literally destroy and tank a whole fleet of ships by themselves which is reason enough to spend 20+bil on one.



I'll make a wild guess here and say that u never flew a carrier nor a mothership.

The mothership has about the same tank as a carrier, more HP and some better choices when it comes to fitting, the EW immunity is what makes it worth the 20b. I do agree that some way to hold them shuld be put in but not at the expense of the EW immunity.

The ability to break anyones lock on you seems a fair exchange. Someone jamming you/dampening you? Break their lock.

Antiope
Posted - 2007.05.14 09:17:00 - [135]
 

alot of nice stuff has been posted,

Titans

I would nerf them to hell and back, let's play the risk vs. reward

Doomsday costs what, couple mill, change that, a titan shouldn't sit in a choke point system and doomsdaying single BS, create Doomsday Charges which are NPC sold and cost 1-2 billion a shot, now you need to choose whisely to use the Doomsday unless you are f**king rich.
Remove Remote Ability is a step in the right direction.
Now the big Nerf part, jumping a titan into a 99% hostile system to Doomsday and get out, there is no risk vs reward. Create the same as siege mode with the doomsday device, you are sitting there for 10 mins in a sort of siege without the tanking possibilities. Bring a Carrier or MS Squad to protect the titan, that's what triage could be used for properly apart from POS Boosting. That's risk vs reward, and not a titan with 20 sec to full cap recharge which can jump into system doomsday and jumpout within 34 seconds.

Arvo Henderson
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2007.05.14 09:24:00 - [136]
 

Originally by: BluOrange

No. Tactical dispersal does not break up the blob. All those pilots are still in the same system as each other, still lagging the hell out of each other and their opponents.

Strategic dispersal is the way to break up the blob. This means giving pilots reasons to be in different systems as each other, achieving different things simultaneously. One step in that direction that the devs seem to be taking is the system scanner POS modules that haven't been talked about much, and the implied nerf to local.

If your opponent has to use a sensor net to know what's going on in their space, then simultaneous strikes on different parts of the sensor net will be a useful strategy. Since those parts of the sensor net will be in different systems to each other, THAT would break up the blob.


Listen to the man. He's made quite a few points.

Danthomir
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.05.14 10:08:00 - [137]
 

Edited by: Danthomir on 14/05/2007 10:10:19
Edited by: Danthomir on 14/05/2007 10:09:37
Bla bla carrier bla bla dread bla bla remote doomsday. What about the little guy? Capitals, and supercapitals especially, are the parallel to the "omg he's ten levels higher than you, just lie down and die" mechanic prevalent in most RPGs. (A mechanic that, I might add, EVE is mostly free of. \o/) Reward for a ton of effort, good. Ewar/scrambler/bubble immunity with plenty of tank and damage, not so good.

I wish (super)capitals were created as weak, then buffed, not the other way around. Okay, done whining - WTB carrier-ready char.

Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2007.05.14 10:52:00 - [138]
 

Sigh why do i have the feeling CCP is going to brake the game again...
IN the old day`s we waited for months on changes..
And now the game changes so fast its hard to adept..

Typhado3
Minmatar
Posted - 2007.05.14 11:11:00 - [139]
 

all sounds good but I got a bit to say

Triage module oooohhh I like the sound of it.... but got a couple things.

quote thingy's
You'll get all the juicy details later in another blog, but this applies to Carriers, Motherships and probably to Logistics ships as well.
quote thingy's
like the sound of that. though I think it's wierd for any non capital ship to get a siege style module.


ok I'm a logistics pilot who has had experience in various types of fleet battles while flying logistics and I have a few things to say on the triage module. targets lockable and lock speed are very nice bonuses. I'd also like to say I think it's well balanced and I do not think it should be given a cap boost.

I say no cap boost cause this thing needs a weakness, if we had carriers with capital transfers that could run non stop a carrier could effectively make almost all bs's untouchable. a carrier could transfer 6000 shield hp every 2.5 sec with 2 shield transports and a triage module which would probably be enough to hold tank even if you where primary (yes it depends on size of hostile fleet, res of tank, number of carriers repping etc.). If that sort of thing where able to last forever we would run into problems.

I am also getting the feeling that tacklers are going to die a lot more. If bombs are like smart bombs in the fact size doesn't matter they will do massive damage to tacklers. Also carriers wouldn't wanna waste massive amounts of cap repping frigs when they could be saving a bs so more death to tacklers. And since we will now have enough time to warp out even if we are primaried people may be inclined to shoot tacklers so they can actually warp out. But since ccp is planning on dragging carriers onto the battlefield with their massive ship holds which can be packed full of replacement tacklers this may work out.

typhado

ArchenTheGreat
Caldari
Pulsar Nebulah
Army of Lovers.
Posted - 2007.05.14 11:36:00 - [140]
 

The hardest thing about Titans and Motherships is their immunity to scrambling. I think there would be a lot less whining when people could keep those ships in place long enough to kill it.

On the other way we need to help younger players and let them join fleet battles. Let's solve both problems at once and introduce tech1 ship with relatively low skill requirements but specialized in scrambling of supercapitals. It should be vulnerable to other ship classes (or at least one of them, like interceptors or destroyers).

Louis DelaBlanche
An Outlying Variable
Posted - 2007.05.14 12:27:00 - [141]
 

Nice to see the "powerball" has becomes CCPs latest blob scapegoat. Powerballs simply exist coz the FC presses gangwarp. & generally the bs' in said powerball start spreading out quite fast (unless warping into a fight) so as to get into optimal ranges. Id like to hear a (good) ecplination for y powerballs have deserved the attention theyve been getting of late. Personally it just sounds like a deflection tool to distract from more serious blob problems that would take more effort to solve.

Bombs sound like a kewl idea, but so did mines. & werent they great? & the ms' being able to use remote ECM seems random n pointless tbh; if u got bombs u dont need a supercap being able to do remotely what will most likely be the only thing gangs will use bombs for; ECM.

Also, will these things be usable next to gates? I hope not, coz that means the fleet jumping into the system (that doesnt have acess to a jumpbridge) is at an instant disadvantage; & alliance warfare will involve even more hours waiting.

All in all though, some pretty neat sounding ideas in this blog. But unfortunately, like Tuxfords before yours, it reads like CCP havent witnessed largescale 0.0 warfare in months except in fraps & server code. Then again. As unfortunate as a number of previous introductions to warfare have been. most ppl are still playing. I doubt thatll change with these; though theres only so frustrated someone can be before they have had enough.

Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
Posted - 2007.05.14 12:42:00 - [142]
 

Edited by: Rodj Blake on 14/05/2007 12:40:25

Titans need vulnerable exhaust ports that can only be hit by noob ships, tbh.

Wataru Amnesia
Amarr
Taurus R and D Inc
Posted - 2007.05.14 13:30:00 - [143]
 

maybe an additional idea to the smart Stealth-bomber tactic:

Introduce a Logistic Vessel with the abilitie to prevent remotely DD with deploying a kind of jammer at the Cyno?

Most of the probs of unbalance seems to be easily resolved with logical implementation of Logistic-warfare.

Just my 2 cents

Bozse
Reikoku
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2007.05.14 14:29:00 - [144]
 

Originally by: Narciss Sevar
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar

They have massive tanks, massive attack capability's that can literally destroy and tank a whole fleet of ships by themselves which is reason enough to spend 20+bil on one.



I'll make a wild guess here and say that u never flew a carrier nor a mothership.

The mothership has about the same tank as a carrier, more HP and some better choices when it comes to fitting, the EW immunity is what makes it worth the 20b. I do agree that some way to hold them shuld be put in but not at the expense of the EW immunity.

The ability to break anyones lock on you seems a fair exchange. Someone jamming you/dampening you? Break their lock.


So braking 1 guys lock on u when ur dampened and jammed by 5 is worth 20b to u , im sorry but that's just silleh.

Narciss Sevar
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.05.14 14:54:00 - [145]
 

Edited by: Narciss Sevar on 14/05/2007 14:52:54
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar

They have massive tanks, massive attack capability's that can literally destroy and tank a whole fleet of ships by themselves which is reason enough to spend 20+bil on one.



I'll make a wild guess here and say that u never flew a carrier nor a mothership.

The mothership has about the same tank as a carrier, more HP and some better choices when it comes to fitting, the EW immunity is what makes it worth the 20b. I do agree that some way to hold them shuld be put in but not at the expense of the EW immunity.

The ability to break anyones lock on you seems a fair exchange. Someone jamming you/dampening you? Break their lock.


So braking 1 guys lock on u when ur dampened and jammed by 5 is worth 20b to u , im sorry but that's just silleh.


It is AoE aim for the biggest group. Wink

You talk about it as if your gonna be using it solo? I thought that is what we trying to get rid of here. It's a capital ship and should be used in a fleet, not a solopwnmobile.

Kweel Nakashyn
shadow and cloaking
Yggdrasill.
Posted - 2007.05.14 15:22:00 - [146]
 

Edited by: Kweel Nakashyn on 14/05/2007 15:22:48
At OP : I'm asking these question to CCP about DDDDDD (that's six D, you forgot "and Destruction") :
- cyno out just after Do the DDDDDD is okay with you ?
- 20m per shot of DDDDDD is okay ?

About other factors :
- What about cloaked Titan at gates we'll soon see ?
- If you nerf all these things do you think the price is too much (not the construction times and/or ressources but the bill of materials) ?
- I think ship made specifically to shoot Titans are missing : what do you think ?

cu :)

Rail Duke
The Likely Lads
Posted - 2007.05.14 15:42:00 - [147]
 

Motherships cannot be killed in lowsec.

Bozse
Reikoku
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2007.05.14 15:52:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: Narciss Sevar
Edited by: Narciss Sevar on 14/05/2007 14:52:54
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar

They have massive tanks, massive attack capability's that can literally destroy and tank a whole fleet of ships by themselves which is reason enough to spend 20+bil on one.



I'll make a wild guess here and say that u never flew a carrier nor a mothership.

The mothership has about the same tank as a carrier, more HP and some better choices when it comes to fitting, the EW immunity is what makes it worth the 20b. I do agree that some way to hold them shuld be put in but not at the expense of the EW immunity.

The ability to break anyones lock on you seems a fair exchange. Someone jamming you/dampening you? Break their lock.


So braking 1 guys lock on u when ur dampened and jammed by 5 is worth 20b to u , im sorry but that's just silleh.


It is AoE aim for the biggest group. Wink

You talk about it as if your gonna be using it solo? I thought that is what we trying to get rid of here. It's a capital ship and should be used in a fleet, not a solopwnmobile.


No im not talking about solo use but both u and i know that if there is a chance to dampen / jam a MS that will be top prio hence it will be organised to be just that. The smal benefits over a carrier besides the EW immunity isn't worth 20b and imo a 20b investement (not to mention the time and effort to build one) shuld be able to fight / support throuout the fight without interuptions.

So a way to scramble sure if it's balanced but imo all other EW is a no no.

Narciss Sevar
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.05.14 16:09:00 - [149]
 

Edited by: Narciss Sevar on 14/05/2007 16:14:08
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar
Edited by: Narciss Sevar on 14/05/2007 14:52:54
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar
Originally by: Bozse
Originally by: Narciss Sevar

They have massive tanks, massive attack capability's that can literally destroy and tank a whole fleet of ships by themselves which is reason enough to spend 20+bil on one.



I'll make a wild guess here and say that u never flew a carrier nor a mothership.

The mothership has about the same tank as a carrier, more HP and some better choices when it comes to fitting, the EW immunity is what makes it worth the 20b. I do agree that some way to hold them shuld be put in but not at the expense of the EW immunity.

The ability to break anyones lock on you seems a fair exchange. Someone jamming you/dampening you? Break their lock.


So braking 1 guys lock on u when ur dampened and jammed by 5 is worth 20b to u , im sorry but that's just silleh.


It is AoE aim for the biggest group. Wink

You talk about it as if your gonna be using it solo? I thought that is what we trying to get rid of here. It's a capital ship and should be used in a fleet, not a solopwnmobile.


No im not talking about solo use but both u and i know that if there is a chance to dampen / jam a MS that will be top prio hence it will be organised to be just that. The smal benefits over a carrier besides the EW immunity isn't worth 20b and imo a 20b investement (not to mention the time and effort to build one) shuld be able to fight / support throuout the fight without interuptions.

So a way to scramble sure if it's balanced but imo all other EW is a no no.

So because it is a big dangerous ship it shouldn't be EWARed? Blow up the EWAR with your support fleet, break the ewars lock and stick your fighters on it. Use some tactics rather than some invulnerability.

And this whole small benefits over a carrier is a bunch of crap. They have over double the drone bay, almost double the cargo bay, over double the HP, more slots, longer lock range, double the sensor strength, massive hangers, clone bays, more fighters and more warfare link modules. They are 10x better than carriers, they just shouldn't be a solopwnmobile.

Bozse
Reikoku
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2007.05.14 16:13:00 - [150]
 

Mehh let's just agree to disagree and call it a day as neither of us will convince the other.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7

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