open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Questions For Carrier Pilots
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

Leonidas Rex
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2007.10.23 10:59:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Shevar
Originally by: Leonidas Rex
For me it seems like carrier pilots think that just because they spent alot of time and have alot of skills in carrier related branches that their ship (carrier) should be the ultimate fighting machine, I find this a bit egocentrical at best. I have invested alot, no ****loads of skills in BS and other skills and I can get killed by a carrier quite easily..

...

the carrier might be hiding in some belt somewhere, dispatching fighters to another part of the system,


So 3 cruisers should be able of killing a battleship? Since they obviously invested loads in their t1 cruisers (yes cruisers specifically setup to kill a lone bs can do it, but so can 3 battleships most likely kill a carrier).

But considering you are talking about "hiding in a belt assigning fighters" kinda shows you know less about PvP then an average monkey (albeit your english is better).


Thanks for the insult, suddenly I respect you more and feel such an urge to answer! Ah.. just kidding ^^
I wont even dignify your post with an answer, I'll just smile and shake my head a bit Rolling Eyes

Evil Scientist
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:04:00 - [32]
 

well to fill out the questions aswell:

1: Support, attack, defence, POS fueling, 0.0 transporting
2: Imposible to say since it all depends on the gangs ships, fitting and how it complement each other.
3: Same as 2, but 3 bs should be doable solo 5 bs perhaps 10 no, unless ofc none of them know how to fit a bs :).
4: Yes and no, it all depends on composition.
5: I actually thing the fighters could deal alittle more damage, but it levels out with the amount you can launch. i do however compared to the price think they are to easy to kill a few large smart bombs and you lose a **** load off isk in fighters. Witch brings me onto another i think prices on fighters are to much. For instance a you can launch up to 25 fighters on ms but if you have to delegate all that out, that is pretty much gives someone else control over several 100 millions of youre isk. And all you can do is hope you dont lose it all.

6: The carriers role is fire support and then logistic support.
7: As it is now the ship is versatile and can do both roles both fire support and logistic support .

8: I would change my carrier by selling it.

The problem with it is carriers own max firepower is cut down to 33% and a ms down to 20% they will simply lose their abillity to defend them self. But i guess increase fighter damage, increase fighter shield/armor/hp or and increase the carrier repair amount so it can last longer, decrease fighter cost and increase dronebay

Karazack
The Littlest Hobos
En Garde
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:05:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: Karazack on 23/10/2007 11:28:57
1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).

- beefing up friendly gangs in firepower and remote repair support
- jump hauling ships and equipment



2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?

3: 1
5: 2
10: 4
50: 45
(assuming equal skills of support each time and also equal ship type distribution in case of the bigger fights)



3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?

- if the 5 make mistakes I should be able to kill all of them
- if they know what they are doing I would need luck to kill any (just like it is on TQ now, people can just warp out, kill fighters, damp and jam the carrier etc.)
- if by "winning" you mean surviving long enough for my friends to show up and rescue me, then yes a carrier should be able to survive 5 non-capital attackers for a good while



4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

no, sp and money alone shouldnt allow for that. however there should be a considerable reward for high skill and isk investments, a balance between effort/risk and reward


5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?

just right, their firepower is not that impressive compared to certain BS but their tank and logistics function makes up for that


6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

- beefing up friendly gangs in firepower and remote repair support
- jump hauling ships and equipment
- providing replacement ships to gangmates that lost their vessel



7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?

a carrier or a group of carriers is an asset to a gang/fleet for its offensive and (projected) defensive combat abilities and an asset to a corp/alliance due to its logistical abilities

so in short: yes

motherships however are a different thing, their role is imho to be a giant carrier (same role) that serves as centerpiece of a fleet, their use as invulnerable solo-pwn mobile in low sec is not right


(continued 3 posts below)

Okkie2
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:05:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Enkryption
Edited by: Enkryption on 23/10/2007 08:50:47
A lot of carrier pilots seem to think this change will be the absolutely worst change ever in Eve. I would like to know why you think this change will be so terrible after answering a few questions.

1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).


PvP usually in small gangs. 0.0 transporter
Quote:

2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?


It all depends on the gang, usually 3 can be done and 5 can get very tricky.
Quote:

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?


A well balanced gang (damage/EW) of 5 ships will most probably a tie (i'm dampened and can't lock them long enough, they don't have the damage to kill me)
Quote:

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?


Nope, a carrier should be a frontline support ship capable of defending itself. A cap-ship should not own everything just because it costs a lot of isk/sp's
Quote:

5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?


They are a support ship and thus shouldn't be able to have a lot of DPS. IMHO they should have a bit more DPS (the same as BS is a bit low for a 1.5-2bil ship)
Quote:

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?


Frontline support for small/large gangs.
Quote:

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?


Nope, it's supporting capabilities are not enough to use them on the frontlines. It really needs a fix to triage mode.
Quote:

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)


A carrier would be sitting even more at a POS assigning fighters and repping gang mates who manage to warp away after primairied. Therefore it needs a better support role, so fix triage mode (Most fights don't last 10 mins)

As far as i can see the main problem atm are the MOMs in lowsec. Therefore fix that (fighters don't work in lowsec, make them vulnerable to ecm, don't let them enter lowsec) This would also give a meaning to lowsec, atm there's too little difference in safety between 0.1 and 0.4.

Alerion
Freelancer Union
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:05:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh
Originally by: Druadan
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Originally by: ISD Valorem


*Click*

Valorem


Can we keep this one open please.




Pwned. Valorem you can't lock Dev alt threads.


Wow you totally stole that first guys joke, good job.

Seriously now, post constructively or not at all.




Hehe, well I didn't intend to be nasty. I find it very encouraging that CCP
really takes the effort to listen to the players and this thread did get a lot more constructive than the other one.

I'm a carrier and dread pilot myself and although I'd prefer that carriers weren't changed in this way I would adapt I suppose. I don't field my carrier for combat at the moment, partly because I have no need for it but also because I simply risk too much for too little fun. And I felt the need to get some additional skill sup before I dare fight with it. The proposed changes would make it even less fun as a combat ship though.

However it is a very useful ship as one can tell from the many responses here! It simply has so many interesting uses. I don't think it is overpowerd though, it can deter minor gangs from attacking home bases of people and such but if you bring it to the front you risk a lot and need a lot of support to stay safe and do good.

Karazack
The Littlest Hobos
En Garde
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:06:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Karazack on 23/10/2007 11:18:08
(for points 1-7 see 3 posts above)

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)

- triage mode skill requirements reduced to logistics IV
an additional skill time sink of one month isnt good for a mod the nerfed ship needs to function properly, at the same time make triage effect scale up with logistics skill (20% of current effect per level) to reward those that already trained it to 5 or want to do that

- leave control of 5 drones in triage mode, disallow launching more then 5 and assigning them

- increase cap recharge in triage mode by 25%

- decrease triage cycle time considerable, maybe to 5mins or even 1min



my most important (and complicated) idea :

- allow PRE-ASSIGNING of fighters to gang mates, also allow pre assigning a replacement controller, drones in excess of 5 that dont have a controller assigned (or left) wont launch or return to the carrier asap

in fact make assigning fighters a process that takes place PRIOR TO LAUNCHING THEM, however you can re-assign the 5 fighters you are controlling yourself after launch as well as fighters that are returning to the carrier after losing their controller (and backup)

would work like this:

Carrier pilot can control 12 drones due to skill and DCUs
5 he can control himself
he assigns 4 fighters to gang member B with member C as backup
he assigns 3 fighters to gang member D with E as backup
assigned fighters retain the thanatos damage bonus

NOTE:

this takes place before combat over the fighter interface (which needs to be vastly improved for that ofc)

all that is needed for pre assigning is that members B-E are in gang and dont have fighters directly assigned already (assigning a member as backup for two fighters groups is possible however)


combat example:

So the carrier now jumps into combat, screen loads, pilot clicks launch button

12 fighters come out, 5 he can directly control, the others are immediately controlled by the pre-assigned pilots (if those are not present in system not all fighters launch ofc) over an interface that displays fighter health properly for a change ofc ;)

during the fight pilot B gets shot down, his fighters go under control of pilot C

later pilot D gets shot down, however pilot E was assigned as backup controller of another fighter group whos controller also died already so the fighters return to the carrier who cant launch them again unless he loses some of the 5 he directly controls or assigns them to a new pilot

Druadan
Syrus Speculations
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:08:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Druadan on 23/10/2007 11:11:11
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Originally by: Druadan
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Originally by: ISD Valorem


*Click*

Valorem


Can we keep this one open please.


Pwned. Valorem you can't lock Dev alt threads.


Wow you totally stole that first guys joke, good job.

Seriously now, post constructively or not at all.
I was placeholding while I prepped my post, but the ******edly low character count means I have to make one post spread over two actual posts, that are now far apart. Just because ''that first guy'' made the joke doesn't mean I'm not allowed to express that I, too, think this is Zulupark's main, or alt, or whatever. Mr T. pities you.


Continued from post #22

Originally by: Enkryption

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?
To provide firepower using fast, mobile, high-damage fighter craft that traverse the battlefield to engage the enemy at close-quarters. Secondarily, to provide theatre logistics, by which I mean actual logistics, not your lolreps crap.

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?
Somewhat. It is capable, but far too vulnerable to dampeners.

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)
It sounds like a sarcastic answer but if this drone change came into effect the next change to carriers would be to reverse it. You will have fundamentally changed the carrier's role. We're not interested in your broken idea of the triage mode or turning the carrier into a big tank. Without its offensive capability, it is a block of metal, and it needs to be able to project that offensive capability entirely by itself.

I'd appreciate it if people would answer the questions truthfully, honestly, and accurately. Thanks.
No problemo, any time.

Edit: Keep in mind about number 8. I am not interested in whether you would quit and/or park your carrier and never use it again. I am interested in what you would change about the carrier if this drone change did come into effect (check the triage change). Select from the list or add your own please! Saying you're going to quit isn't helping any situation.

Rawne Karrde
Bre-X Interstellar Shipyards
Ejectile Dysfunction
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:09:00 - [38]
 

1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).

Hauling and a few POS shield boosts.


2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?

Gang of 3: I had two tacklers
Gang of 5: I had 3 tacklers
Gang of 10: I had 6 tacklers
Gang of 50: never tried.

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?

1 vs 5 against bs's i think is reasonable considering cost of the ships. 1 v 10 i think it should be more even. anymore than that the carrier should loose.

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

Honestly when I read this first thing i though was "designed role" is what for carriers? CCP seems to have started one way, then tried to get these on the front lines, now they seem ready to nerf them back to POS. People use them as haulers, I mean really what are they really good for?

5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?

I think carriers are broken. Its sad when they are relegated to so much hauling. Being a person who spent a year maxing out drone skills and having things like fighters 5 and gallente carrier 5, i can't say i'm too happy with the further nerf to drones. Solo "firepower" i've found is not really that big with a carrier. I've fought 2 month old raven pilots 12 at a time and had no kills when i was solo as they kept warping out. once i got a few tacklers hanging around they all got sent to the clone vats, but it took support. so solo, i find carriers are really just asking to die honestly. even with their tanks they die very quickly these days when "solo". Look at the forums and killboards, how many carriers are slaughtered ratting in 0.0 or smoked when solo in low sec. Its a lot.

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

I think they should mimic the roles of terrestrial carriers. They should have high defensive capabilities like flak cannons and other defenses. They should be able to carrier more equipment internally. I'm not asking for more cargo space, but the ability to hold more material as a supply base of sorts. IF what ccp is aiming at for this change is to make carriers more about groups, I'd say why not make fighters pilotable by corp/alliance mates. allow a pilot to board and have his skills also affect that fighter. Also allow the pilots int he fighters to dock and jump with the carrier pilot.

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?

I think carriers are more just glorified haulers rather than the bulwarks of fleet defence they should be.

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)

After playing with triage for only a short time on sisi before it even came ingame, I can honestly say i never took a second look at it as it just seemed to be totally broken. Those with more combat experience may have found it useful, but imho, i think its a waste of code to start so i couldn't honestly give you any useful feedback on this.

Evil Scientist
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:13:00 - [39]
 

Leonidas Rex

Wasnt trashing it or any but dont forget the max skilled carrier pilot also need max skilled bs with the exception of gunnery skills

So those skills i listed come after you have trained all the bs skills with the exception of gunnery skills

Mister Xerox
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:14:00 - [40]
 

*whistles*
Everyone thinks /this/ is a dumb idea?
So were missile changes? Drone changes? NOS changes? CCP is a master at coming up with some epically idiotic ideas and managing to pull (a few) of them off.

Now, I don't fly carriers, I'm barely out of a cruiser, but I sympathize. OTHER changes should be put through, the 5 drone limit will put Carriers smack in the 'long range logistic transport' role and freeze it there with the same utility as a Procuror.

Here's a few suggestions for adjustments:

Reduce fighter cost by 70%. Increase their sig radius by 100%.

Lowsec sentries intierdict to 200km (perfect lowsec balance - fighters can still be deployed, but no more idiot smartbomb caps on gates w/o the high risk of any little tackler pinning it there, but snipe caps can still do their thing just fine beyond 200km).

As for lag... I don't see why fighters lag any more than drones, so what's the big deal?

If you are serious about this massive change then enhance what they can actually *do*. Since they're intended to be logistics platforms, enhance those capabilities to make them the more useful. Increase self-repair and remote repair range along the same lines as logistic cruisers. Introduce logistic 'fighers' (or all roles, as drones now enjoy) & enhance them in the same manner as logistics cruisers.

VeNT
Minmatar
Freelancer Union
Unaffiliated
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:24:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Rawne Karrde

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

I think they should mimic the roles of terrestrial carriers. They should have high defensive capabilities like flak cannons and other defenses. They should be able to carrier more equipment internally. I'm not asking for more cargo space, but the ability to hold more material as a supply base of sorts. IF what ccp is aiming at for this change is to make carriers more about groups, I'd say why not make fighters pilotable by corp/alliance mates. allow a pilot to board and have his skills also affect that fighter. Also allow the pilots int he fighters to dock and jump with the carrier pilot.



best idea ever,
carriers should be about providing the means for other people to do loads of damage, maybe have pilots be able to jump in a fighter and have one or two as wingmen rather than their own ships, also the jumping thing sounds uber too

Sarah Aubry
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:25:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Steini OFSI

(stuff)

Include a delay in launching each fighter (15 or 20 seconds), as well as in calling them in (again 20 seconds for each figher, remember bailing out of fight might be smart but you'd have to leave fighters behind, victory for the other side to some extent), it would make the logistical aspect of a carrier even more important, you'd rather hold ground with it than engage unless you expect the battle to be long, against a small gang they could shoot each fighter you put out unless you have support or can repair it effectively. Other changes might be nescesary as well to accomodate for this (more hitpoints on carrier and drones, base warp strength of +1).

Motherships should ofcourse be able to launch perhaps 3 fighters at once and such, just throwing out ideas wich involves the victory over a carrier pilot should rather be the fact that he lost fighters rather than his sihp.


^ This, if it was balanced by increase in fighter dps & hp.
Also, Carriers/moms need 2 types of fighters, interceptors and bombers. The interceptors are for defending against drones/other fighters at range. The bombers are anti battleship/capital.

The delay in launching and returning (RP purpose can be to clear the runway - you do know your carrier has a runway right? :), will balance the increased versatility and damage, as carriers/moms couldnt just drop into a fight and instantly lay waste to their targets. However, once their fighters are out they would be quite lethal.

Next, increase lock range to the entire grid, and allow the fighters to travel that range. Balance this by giving them fuel (not fuel that we have to manage or reload) so that they can only be out in space for x long before they have to return and refuel.

Perhaps make "MWD" an option we can toggle, it will burn up their fuel quicker but they can return faster/get to target quicker. They will automatically return to refuel when running low if you do not pay attention they may be too low to mwd back.

This turns a carrier into a TRUE projected force platform. IMHO Motherships should be able to field 2x - 3x as many fighters as carriers.

LOW SEC FIX: Carriers/Moms can only launch 2/5 fighters in low sec as personal protection. (RP - more would be seen by the empires as a hostile act and punished...etc)

LOW SEC FIX 2: Gates are protected by normal sentrys as well as capital sentrys, it should be a pain to tank them but not impossible.

LOW SEC FIX 3: Gates equipped with capital warp scrambling batterys (only to scramble capitals). If you set a successful trap vs a low sec camping capital, you would now have enough time to kill it.

burning raven
omen.
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:27:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: burning raven on 23/10/2007 11:31:49
i dont feel i should need any support what so ever to use my ship, what other ships REQUIRE support? none.

sure if you go without support you put yourself at risk, oh crap that cannot be right these are solo wtf pwn mobiles right? until of course you bump into any ship that has sensor dampners - hardly 'solo wtf pwn mobiles' all you people that are saying they are, just get a clue or go back to picking flowers in WoW

edit:

for the delay in launching returning fighters, there already is a delay when i return my 20 fighters it takes 20 seconds or so for all of them to recieve the return command, if you make it launch one every 20 seconds then each fighter would be launched and popped over the 5+ minutes it would take to launch them all.

Jimblob
Bargain consumables
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:28:00 - [44]
 

Edited by: Jimblob on 23/10/2007 19:45:58
Walk a mile in a carrier.
Better yet pay me to come up with solutions to the apparent problems.


Sarah Aubry
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:30:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: Sarah Aubry on 23/10/2007 11:30:57
Originally by: VeNT
Originally by: Rawne Karrde

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

I think they should mimic the roles of terrestrial carriers. They should have high defensive capabilities like flak cannons and other defenses. They should be able to carrier more equipment internally. I'm not asking for more cargo space, but the ability to hold more material as a supply base of sorts. IF what ccp is aiming at for this change is to make carriers more about groups, I'd say why not make fighters pilotable by corp/alliance mates. allow a pilot to board and have his skills also affect that fighter. Also allow the pilots int he fighters to dock and jump with the carrier pilot.



best idea ever,
carriers should be about providing the means for other people to do loads of damage, maybe have pilots be able to jump in a fighter and have one or two as wingmen rather than their own ships, also the jumping thing sounds uber too


This ^ also :D

Create a new hanger (for balance purposes) that allows other players to dock with carrier and jump with it. Even if its only a few frigates, or 1 cruiser or something. THIS WOULD BE AWESOME FUN and get noobs a lot more involved in capitals ops too!

WIN

Edit: seriously CCP, do something like this, seriously ftw.

Jonas O'Fall
SPIRAL ENTERPRISES
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:34:00 - [46]
 

1) -Assigning fighters to gate camps (while dual-boxing with my alt in a 'ceptor at the camp)
-Front-line combat at POSs
-Hauling stuff from 0.0 to Jita and back

2) 0 / 2 / 5-6 / 15+

3) 1 v 5 - yes
1 v 10 - no
Able to pwn 1-2 BSs or 3-4 BCs or 6+ T1 cruisers solo

4) Yes

5) Too little given the risk of losing it, the enemy's moral boost and the boot I'd get from my corp if I lost it.

6) To lead the fleet into battle and destroy the enemy's non-capital ships while repping the friendlies.

7) For the most part

8) Triple fighter/drone damage for those controlled directly by the carrier pilot (but no bonus for those delegated). Double shield/armor repping amount.

Quel Thalas
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:35:00 - [47]
 

1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).

Support, attack, deffence, POS fueling, Complex running, 0.0 transporting

2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?

Depends on situation, everyting from 1 to hmmmm more

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?

Should be able to protect my self while delegating fighters, but dont use it for solo work, alliance operations is where its found.

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

Not sure what you are asking. Should i be able to blob low sec, NO (just make it so carriers and mothersships cant launch fighters in 0.4-0.1) would fix alot of the gank probs

If we take the word carrier and simply look at it in RL then we have. 1 big ship that can "in theory" take down alot of ships (jets + air to sea misiles) boom ships

It also have the potantional to take down some enemys by its personal deffences, but again, it will have some support to avoid loosing it, and it can be sunk, just like in eve where they also blow up.


5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?

Its perfect the way it is right now

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

Support for attacks / deffence

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?

YES

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)

Would park it somewhere and would take it out when they changed it back. the proposed changes makes it werry hard for small alliances to field any cap ship fleet, if they didnt change it back i would be angry that i had trained up for it, be angry that i used 2 + BIL on it and proberbly take a break from eve until i found out what to do next ingame (yes sounds drastic but i have used so many hours and isk getting to it that it would be a massive push back for me)

My milestones in eve have been

BC-hac-recon-domi-thanatos

with changes it would be

bc-hac-recon-domi-(some months wastet skills)-black ops





shinoda
Trojans
Pride - Honor - Duty
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:41:00 - [48]
 

I fly carrier for over 1 year now. Used it for POS warfare, gang support, covering mining Ops and what not...

Reducing the amount of controlable fighters to 5 means nothing to me. The few times I jumped right into a battle between 20-40 men sized fleets I did not really make a difference with my fighters. If I don't want to sacrifice my tank I can not fit sensor boosters (I fly Chimera.) so I lock rather slow. By the time I lock a BS the rest of the fleet has killed 2. By the time my fighters reach their target another one has gone down. By the time my fighters killed that BS a 4th is gone. After that, for each one I kill, the fleet kills 2... given they don't shoot the ones I locked or sent my fighters at.
Effectively I am left killing support ships like BC's and cruisers. For that job I don't use fighters though. I either use conventional T2 drones or a combo of webbers and sentries.

Reducing the amount of controlable drones to 5 is in my opinion the deathblow to what carriers should be: Frontline logistics.
Noone in their sane mind would fly a 1bil (absolute minimum) ship that can't kill nor get away from a tackling frigate!
A single interceptor could hold a carrier down with ease. Especially so with the comming interceptor changes. He'd just scram you and kill whatever drones you send at him.
I am able to control 13 drones right now and still an interceptor is a dangerous opponent. I need a combo of energy vampires, webbers and light drones to scare it away.
Can I kill it? No, I can't... he has the choice to leave the area whenever he wants because, seriously, who fits a scrammer on a carrier? That'd be low sec gankers if at all.

The picture of the all mighty carrier that non-carrier pilots like to draw is warped!
It's warped by people who get killed by stupidity, inexperience or overconfidence when encountering capital ships.

I helped tackling a Mothership... we were 8 frigs and 2 interdictors. We suffered 1 loss because the pilot didn't watch his orbit, bumped into an asteroid and the drones caught up with him. We simply warped away when he sent his drones at us.
That Nyx was held in place for almost 30 minutes before a battleship gang arrived to kill it. Despite of his skillpoints, his 30bil isk ship and 20+ controlable drones he never had a chance to get out alive!

Can you imagine how he felt?

Would you want to be in his position?

Do you seriously ask for making carriers and motherships even more vulnerable to tackling frigates?

Rusty PwnStar
Centus Inc.
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:44:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Enkryption


8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)



Well it does seems as though you're intent on pushing this through, with or without our support.

What we need from you, the the reasons for this change in the first place. What brought you to think there was an issue with carriers and ms?
How can we possibly comment and help change ideas when every carrier/ms pilot and his dog, thinks there is no problems with them as it stands.

How can you possibly protect yourself with the new changes, even with a triage buff?
How does changing any of this help in anyway, like I said, what is the issue?

Constance Noring
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:45:00 - [50]
 

1. 2. 3.

I think the carrier should be durable enough to not get destroyed vs small gangs. Solo damage output should be moderate, the 5 fighters at a time sounds about right. To unleash full potential, 2-3 support ships should be present.

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

Yes, but isk and sp should not correlate with pew pew potential linearly, they should increase exponentially.

5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?

I think they have too much solo potential. I'd like to see CCP go ahead with their proposed changes to force some variety and teamplay, and then perhaps boost fighters somewhat.

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

Currently logistics and support. I think the support role (repping and assigning fighters) should be emphasized, particularly if there's a jumping freighter in the works to take over the logistics role.

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?

Yes, although I'd prefer it to be less of a solo ship and more of a gang ship. And by gang ship I mean that there should be one carrier for every x ships, not that everyone in the gang should be flying one.

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)

Possibly improve fighters slightly. More importantly though, I think we need UI improvements to make assigning fighters more manageable. On the gang window, display how many fighters/drones each person is currently controlling, or at the very least add a new broadcast button for requesting more fighter support.

Ceo Crypsis
Caldari
Crypsis Inc.
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:49:00 - [51]
 

1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).
Hauling Ship, Fleet Fight, repping stuff

2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?
don't field carrier alone for a gang of 3, it's a call of gank if they play fine.

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?
Fitted for solo i probably can kill 4-5 bc, 3-4 bs

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?
look @yaay response

5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?
really fine firepower, aka : can't take small ship with feighters, can evade fighter in a bs. I think it's good.

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

Repping, support & protection of other capitals (aka dread in siege mod)

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?
no , look @ triage mode, other is fine

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)

I've do somes test with triage mode, you can obtain pretty good repair
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
BUT :
A> You are a sitting duck during 10 mins, have 0 firepower, big malus for short gain
B> in fleet fight : Insta lock on target is not used in lagged fight, can't be remoted in fight is a call to be destroyed
C> in middle range fight (20-50 vs 20-50 regular with carrier support) : 10 mins is too long, 2 carrier not in triage mod are REALLY better than them for remtoe rep / offensive.
B> It's not sustainable, even with an avatar withou completly gimping you'r setup (remote rep eat caps)

triage mod need a complete rework to have advantage to use them, maybe the guys who invent them could explain his usage in realllistic situation ?



Grainsalt
Lorentzian Traversable Corporation
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:51:00 - [52]
 

1. Gang support (repping using shield reps), projecting firepower, shield maintenance and armour maintenance bots (you need to control alot of these personally), clearing the field (faction smarties and then a large dose of fighters) before friends come in (being alone). Jumping goods. Just to add this is done in 0.4 mainly so no I can't assign fighters.

2. If I get it right or don't mind losing my carrier (they are easy to kill) then none (smarties and fighters). If I am doing something important, A couple of EW ships are my friend. The bigger their gang gets then it stays pretty much constant.

3. Currently 2 or 3 ships can kill a carrier if you know what you are doing so .. that kind of answers that one.

4. Yes and No.. Depends on the ship type. A carrier cant really kill an EW ship and they cost peanuts so it is a leading question.

5. About right at the moment. They are fairly low in firepower, enough to get you out of trouble but unless the opponent is totally dumb you aint gonna pwn alot of players in one solo.

6. See 1. (But I don't use carriers in 0.0 for large fleets but small gangs)

7. Carrier is fine as it is, not sure about motherships though.

8. I would change the carrier by not flying it and fly a basilisk instead.. At least I would have control then and not worry so much when my ass gets killed.


bldyannoyed
Estrale Frontiers
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:51:00 - [53]
 

1: Hauling, frontline small gang combat support ( 2 x remote rep,2 x heavy neut, light armor or passive hull tank, sensor boosters)

2:With my setup against 3 BS I would expect to drive them off, using heavy drones and neuts anything that loiters inside scramble range too ong take moderate damage ( 600dps with ogre II's) and heavy neuting, ususlaly forcing them to warp away or pop. Against 10 i iwould at least need 2 or 3 heavy EWAR boats or i woudle xpect to be damped, jammed and dead in short order.

3:See above. 1v3 i would like to think i could at least escape from, depending on EWAR. Against 5 I would like at least not to be defencless. Against 10 I would expect to have no chance at all.

4:No.

5: Currently Carriers have the perfect amount of solo firepower.

6: Frontline combat support and logistics ( untill the jump freighters come in )

7: Yup ( never used triage tho but i hear it sucks )

8: I would sell mine. I will not fly a billion isk ship into combat that will be incapable of defending itself, should it end up alone, against a single well setup battlecruiser. Hell, even a tech1 cruiser would be able to tank my DPS and keep me pinned down untill more backup arrived to finish me off. I know you want a constructive change but i cant think of anything that would persuade me to fly a totally defencless logistics platform into a fight when i could just fly a logicstics cruiser. Sorry.

El'jonson
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:51:00 - [54]
 

1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).

Bit of everything, thats why I choose a carrier above a dred its a 'jack of all trades'.

2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?

Depends alot on the situation.

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?

Just as above the ships types, mods and pilots sp as well as how well the attacking force works together.

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

Well as a general rule yes, ofcoure there are exceptions and tactics play a part. However this is the way EVE works if it wern't for the fact that it takes time and isks what is the point in playing to aquire skills and isks.

5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?

I agree with the majority on this that both carriers and MS are well balanced. Perhaps MS camping gates in low sec is a bit strange but as the devs always like to point out there is no good or evil in EVE, its low sec live with it.

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

Varies from moving high value cargo, setting up pos and both defence or attack. What makes carriers in RL and in EVE so valuable is the fact that they can fullfil a varity of roles.

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?

Mostly yes, if you want to do anything to carriers make mods that when fitted make them specialize in one role rather than lots.

tirarge mod fix it so the carrier could still launch normal drones in defence and is invunerable to ew, maybe a heavy and ligh fighters that can kill capital and smaller ships easier however in order to use them u must fit a mod that kills tank and corp cargo.

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)

If this change went ahead it basically renders the carrier defencesless and unusable due to lag in some situations. As has been pointed out the lag in large or even med sized battles makes this idea unworkable. If the lag was fixed completly and this was done to the carriers it basically strips 2/3 of their firepower when being used where a suport fleet is unavaliable or really unnecessary such as undocking or moving the carrier around or if all the delegated fighters have been lost through combat or as can happen server drops. So I would expect the carrier to be given firepower to replace this maybe 1 capital launcher and 4 large.

Grainsalt
Lorentzian Traversable Corporation
Posted - 2007.10.23 11:57:00 - [55]
 

Oh and just 1 point.

If a titan warps in ontop of a carrier with it's fighters assigned to other people, how long do you think it will take to get you fighters back and docked before you lose them all to a DD blast..

Actually scrub that.. a smartbombing bs can do just as bad. Keep the fighters under your own control by choice please, at least you have a chance to save your ONLY real offensive weopon.

Rule All
Posted - 2007.10.23 12:04:00 - [56]
 

First, Hi Zulupark

Second, I aint gonna flame 'much' although god knows how tempted I am, I just hope that CCP is not looking for an easy answer using this thread because they too careless and lazy to go through the 875967 pages threads written in protest, which btw contain ALOT of constructive posts (yes alot of flame but for once I agree with those!)

Quote:
zulupark's alt talking cluelessly again


IF you are honestly looking for answers you will find ALOT of good ones HERE:
answers to worst devblog EVER

and thank you NOT for dedicating your time to listen to your players

Bianca Reeves
Stardust Heavy Industries
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2007.10.23 12:12:00 - [57]
 


1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).

Mostly logistic stuff. hauling small ships from a to b. also assinging fighters to gang mates fro time to time. but mostly Logistics (tbh iīm not a friend of all that cap blobbage. i prefer to fly BS in fleets with an other account ^^)

2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?

depends what ships those peeps are flying. I think for me, i would everytime have the same number of support which the enemy is fielding

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?

i think carriers shouldnīt be solo pwnmobiles. But yes they should be able to kill a bs without problems.

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

solo > no. With aprociate support > yes

5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?

Fighters are easy to kill. but overall the dmg of carriers is enough how it is.

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

Support

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?

Partially.

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)

The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep?

this sounds cool overall. a bit tweaking on cap use for remote stuff would be cool especially for remote shield transferes.
But atm carriers are good how the are.


even if my answers suggest i welcome teh NERF. I donīt. With this nerf, carriers WON`T be able to defend itīs self anymore.

so far
Bibi out


Rusty PwnStar
Centus Inc.
Posted - 2007.10.23 12:12:00 - [58]
 

Edited by: Rusty PwnStar on 23/10/2007 12:13:05
1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).

Support, repair, pos work (shield rep) fleet defence and self defence when needed.

2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?

That totally depends on the given situation, but if you are to take one into battle or an op, then support is a must.

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?

Another question that depends on the situation, but I do know that the main worry for MS and Carrier pilots is dictors.
But if faced with a situation of being alone, then I would want to fight as many as I could.

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

No, but as has been shown time and time again, these ships die, infact MS kills are fast becoming a none event, carrier passed that point along time ago.

5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?

You seem to focus on the solo aspect a little too much, but as it stands, they are fine, hence the lack of understanding where these changes came from.

6. What do you believe a carriers role is?

It fits perfectly in the roles it's used for now tbh.

7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?

Yes, why change what isn't broken, they work well as is.

8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)


I really still cannot fathom the need for change, but if it did change, I honestly wouldn't use mine.
No amount of triage buffs could help against a foe, when you are unable to protect yourself.
5 normal drones, simply does not cut it.

There, I caved in.

Sovereign533
Caldari
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2007.10.23 12:16:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Enkryption
Edited by: Enkryption on 23/10/2007 08:50:47
A lot of carrier pilots seem to think this change will be the absolutely worst change ever in Eve. I would like to know why you think this change will be so terrible after answering a few questions.

1. What do you use your carrier for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).

moving of ships and equipment,
boosting of POS modules,
assignigh fighters to friends,
dive head first into battle cause i can look better after my fighters when i do it myself

Originally by: Enkryption
2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your carrier for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?
a gang of 3? they will just hold me for their friends, i won't be able to kill them, but they won't have enough firepower to kill me...
5, might be very dangerous, if there is 1 dictor and the rest damage dealing battleships. chances are i'm cooked then, since i probaly can't kill them...

Originally by: Enkryption
3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?
no, i won't be able to win in 1vs5. locktime is very long, fighters are slow, and it's probable that the ppl holding me in place will be fast dictors or ceptors. i might cook a stationary cruiser in a single blow with my fighters, or a very slow one. but if he's smart, and sees fighters comming at him, he just warps.

Originally by: Enkryption
4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?

look, CCP wants carriers and motherships at the front of the battle. so they increased the mothership and carrier HP. and it worked, we brought the fighter fielding beasts to the front line, cause they CAN change the tide of war. but if they can only be handy when they assign fighters, they stay at the pos. also, why should 2bil of ships (2 fighters) out-perform 24bil of ship (1 mothership)

Originally by: Enkryption
5. Do you believe carriers have too little (solo) firepower, too much, or just enough?
just enough

Originally by: Enkryption
6. What do you believe a carriers role is?
support a fleet and defend itself (up to an extend)

Originally by: Enkryption
7. Do you believe the carrier achieves this role through it's current abilities?
yes

Originally by: Enkryption
8. What would you change about the carrier if this drone change came into effect? Increased Repair Range? Increased Repair Amount? A Triage buff to allow control of the 5 fighters/drones you're able to deploy? The ability to control 5 additional fighters/drones if Triage Mode is activated? Less Cap needed for self rep/remote rep? (add what you believe would be a change worthy of the suggested drone change)
well, nothing, i'd stay at a pos all the time then...

Originally by: Enkryption
I'd appreciate it if people would answer the questions truthfully, honestly, and accurately. Thanks.

Edit: Keep in mind about number 8. I am not interested in whether you would quit and/or park your carrier and never use it again. I am interested in what you would change about the carrier if this drone change did come into effect (check the triage change). Select from the list or add your own please! Saying you're going to quit isn't helping any situation.
and no, i'm not going to quit, i'm not not going to let my carrier dust off, i just won't throw it into the heat anymore. no use for it...

Jin Entres
Malevolent Intervention
Posted - 2007.10.23 12:18:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Enkryption

A lot of carrier pilots seem to think this change will be the absolutely worst change ever in Eve.
Uh-uh, you're certainly right about that one.

Quote:
I would like to know why you think this change will be so terrible after answering a few questions.

Sure thing, seems reasonable. Except for the fact that you're posting on an alt. Rolling Eyes But let's ignore that..

I'm going to substitute every instance of the word 'carrier' with the word 'mothership' in your questions.
Quote:

1. What do you use your mothership for? Name all the activities you use it for (ALL activities).


1. Logistics. I use it to jump stuff around.
2. POS shield & station services repairing. I use it to watch proverbial space grass grow.
3. Battlefield firepower. I use it to fight in small and mid-sized engagements (that is to say, with tolerable lag) to kill stuff with my 20 fighters (and maybe rep some friendlies if I'm lucky, but rarely to any useful extent)
4. POS scramblers. I use it to keep POS aggression for friendly capitals to warp out, because I can't be scrambled.
5. I eat cake on the bridge and feel superior in my huge flying epeen (you asked for ALL activities, afterall..)
6. I used to use it to provide support for bigger engagements aswell and going 1v30 because I could warp out, but I'm too scared in my pants to do that anymore since one or two competent dictors can make my day with relative ease.

Quote:

2. How much support do you feel you should need when you field your mothership for combat when going against a gang of 3? A gang of 5? A gang of 10? A gang of 50?


Depends on how many dictors that includes aswell as how heavy the rest are. I know my 20b ISK tank can sustain about 7500 DPS, which is roughly 10 close-range battleships or 2-3 dreads, so anything close to or more than that and I'll require support.

Obviously there's also the risk consideration of more getting jumped on you, so intelligence of surrounding systems, cyno jammers etc would impact my decision aswell. I would never go against 50 without support, however.

And in fact, we kind of have a policy never to go anywhere in a mom without support.
Quote:

3. Do you think you should be able to go 1 vs 5 and win? How about 1 v 10? In other words, how many people do you believe you should be able to kill alone taking ship types into consideration. How many BS/BC's/Cruisers/Etc?


In the mothership, I expect to take on 10 battleships and win. If I kill 6 to 8 and lose 20 fighters, economically the losses are about even.
Quote:

4. Do you believe that you should be able to kill a large amount of ships simply because you spent a lot of money and skill time for the ship, regardless of it's designed role (this does not just include carriers)?


My role is to kill ****. That's why I'm in a big frickin' expensive-ass ship that's main utility is killing stuff. If it was not able to do that, I would not have invested money or skill time for it. If there's another designed role for it, it is unable to fulfill that. Until it can, yes I believe that my investment in it's abilities is reasonable.

I do not expect, however, to be able to kill a large amount of ships. I only expect to have the capacity to do so. Actual consequences should depend on strategy such as intelligence, teamwork, co-ordination and luck of course. But my investment should represent a strongly favoured position. I have both the capacity to kill lots of ships, and lose something worth lots of ships.


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