open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog, Nozh on Carriers Redux, Part II
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 ... : last (38)

Author Topic

Septacore
Caldari
From Outer Space
Posted - 2007.10.28 16:04:00 - [931]
 

mhhhh also dont get it.
If you do the changes make them cheaper otherwise its not worth flying that thingy anymore

I think you guys over ccp look to much at statistics. go and make a billion yourself and you will find out something.



Baron Greycloak
Posted - 2007.10.28 20:36:00 - [932]
 

Well, its not April first, so this is not an april fools joke....

Master of all trades without refitting? What a joke. Overpowered in combat? Even if this were true, it IS a CAPITAL ship! A caldari carrier takes months to train for and probably 2+ bil for the skills, ship and mods. For that cost in time and money it should be even stronger than it currently is, IMO. You could buy 300 or more cruisers for that cost, but you dont think it should be able to kill them?

If these changes do come into effect, can I have my skill training time and money back, I will put it towards HACs and go kill me some carriers. Thanks!

twit brent
The Scope
Posted - 2007.10.28 23:27:00 - [933]
 

I havent undocked my carrier in like a month because i know that if i fly it by itself it will get BBQ'd.

Sun Jang
Posted - 2007.10.29 00:06:00 - [934]
 

Edited by: Sun Jang on 29/10/2007 00:06:42
CCP is now being run by my wife who also wants me to quit.

Melwitax
Posted - 2007.10.29 00:20:00 - [935]
 

First of all, if you look at real carriers, they are just about the most versatile weapons platforms ever designed. So why would carriers that have a 20,000 year technological advantage be less useful then their modern equivalents?

Lest we forget too, there are serious limitations to carriers. They can't enter empire space, they can't move from system to system by themselves. They can't be used in most complexes or dead space areas. They are major targets. They require fuel. They are 10x more expensive then any battleship in the game. There are limited variations on the modules that they use. Oh and motherships can't dock, so once you have one you pretty much can't use anything else anyway.

That being said, the way to balance carriers isn't to nerf them, instead Eve should take an approach that real militaries do (who after all can't appeal to devs when a new weapon poses a dangerous threat to the balance of power), develop weapons and systems specifically designed to counter this threat. Anti-fighter weaponry, repper disruptors, etc. Develop items that are specifically designed to put carriers in the scrap heap and make these items far less expensive then the ship they are fighting and you will see a dramatic decline in carriers as the default ship of Eve.

The second way to balance carriers is to deliniate between fighters and drones. As things stand, by leaving just one fighter out of the drone bay, a carrier pilot makes room for literally hundreds of drones of all types. Even though a pilot can only fly 15/25 at a time, he has enormous reserves to call upon. In addition it gives the pilot a huge number of options in the combinations of craft he can select from. By making the bays of carriers "fighter bays" which is to say that they can not hold drones you accomplish the goal of limiting the versatility of carriers without being unneccesarily complex.

You can then offset some of the pain by enlarging the size of fighter bays and varying the types of fighters available. You can have everything from light fighters to counter interceptors, to bombers for POS and cap-ship engagements, logistics, e-war, command fighters, you name it, there would be enormous options, but there wouldn't be room to hold them all (unlike the current system).

You could even impose a system of command points like you see in RTS games. A carrier pilot with max'd skills would be able to launch the full compliment of 15 fighters, but only 5 bombers. If then a pilot wanted to attempt multiple actions simulateously like launching fighters to escort the bombers he could launch 3 bombers for a total of 9 points and six fighters for 6 points. Which effectively means he's taking a penalty for trying to do 2 things at once.

Like it or not, carriers and cap ships in general are the end game of Eve. The time, the effort, and the expense make them too prohibitive to be anything else. Make changes to them as needed to prevent their abuse, but avoid changes that will make people not want to use them or a lot of people won't stick around to see all the riches that the Eve universe has to offer.

My 2 cents.

- Mel

Lord Warlock
Caldari
Founder's of the Dominion
The Dominion Empire
Posted - 2007.10.29 01:31:00 - [936]
 

Ok CCP you are going too far. You designed a ship, then many many players have spent a good year plus to train the skills needed to be good in this ship and all its support skills, for the WAY YOU designed it. Are you CCP telling me i have paid you my hard earned money from work so that i may just waste my time? Why dont you next time think before you leap and nerf the ship to how you want it before you ever release it. Are you CCP also telling me a carrier in the real world has a limited capacity to deploy its fighter planes if its alone? That it cant provide as much support if alone? That it cant transport as much stuff if alone? I dont post on the forums very often and i have let other nerfs(balancing) slide with out posting but with this changing a ship you designed, that required so many hours days weeks and months to train up for in excess of a year, i wont be quiet. I have several carrier/MS capable accounts and if you change how this ship operates to the extent your saying you will have ruined your creditablity and the ability of your players to trust you. Who will want to ever again invest such time into training for a ship that any day you just might change? Do remember in the end we are who pays you, we are who keeps CCP in business. You are not a diversifided company you have EVE and its card game. If you **** off the vet players and all who trained for this ship and we leave and EVE gets a bad name on gamer forums what exactly will you have? An EVE universe full of chinesse isk farmers? Dont after all this time since they have been out change the carrier, if you had done so shortly after it was out before people spent so much time training for it that would be different but IMHO its been this way too long to be changing it now. You change a ship i trained for this long i will never have confidence in CCP again and will have to reevalutate if i wish to continue paying a company i have no faith in, just like myself and others will never play another EA game due to how they treated the EnB players. Alot of the nerfs in the last year pardon my french have just **** all over us the veterans of this game, Characters creation getting a boost, but what did i get? How far would i be now if i would of had that extra kick into my learning skills from the start? When i went to train the 2nd teir of learning skills i had to have the first teir to lvl 5, now its only lvl 4. I can understand you wanting to attract new players but try to do so with out nerfing the ones you have. If your so worried about everything being ballance why not nerf 3 of the races get rid of them have 1 race then we can all fly identical ship snad live in cookie cutter houses in a big development and be happy litte minions. Dont make us lose faith and trust in you CCP leave the carrier and other capital class ships alone. I think alot of peopel would rather see the money we pay you go to fixing bugs glitches and server/node stability. You have a good game dont ruin it by over thinking. Carriers and motherships die rather easily look at your own forums and news articles they aren't the "end all ship" you seem to think they are.

BECKARD
Posted - 2007.10.29 03:30:00 - [937]
 

CCP Staff, you are noobs, quit your jobs and find a new line of work, your services are no longer desired by the EVE community, thanks for all you have done, see yourself to the door, good bye, don't come back. And now can we get some NEW developers in to simply maintain the codebase and work on lag issue and database issues only, no more features, nerfs or good intentions leading us all to your generic noobified hell you want us all to be in...

Krissie
dearg doom
Posted - 2007.10.29 03:34:00 - [938]
 

WTF is wrong with CCP, fire these guys already, its NOT FUNNY ANYMORE...the joke is over, fire them, seriously, no more noob devs with their WOW mentalities. Get a real job, go design for MRS PACMAN, where you can balance that game to death as much as you like...

Deon
Posted - 2007.10.29 03:35:00 - [939]
 

I agree fire these devs, we need a new crew in that respect the community, not these noobs, its like they have to constantly be nerfing something to justify their existance, just FYI, you existance is not justified, or appreciated, cease to exist, thanks

Kol Skywalker
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.10.29 03:43:00 - [940]
 

Edited by: Kol Skywalker on 29/10/2007 03:49:01
NERF THE NERF BAT

Come on, you're killing your own game!








HYT gangster
Minmatar
Purgatorial Janitors Inc.
Avarice.
Posted - 2007.10.29 03:44:00 - [941]
 

Well Well Well time to sell the old carrier i think. cause i bought it as a big ass hauler. worked on skills and it became a bad ass fleet ship.

Well looks like its going to be a big hauler again.
cause who? in the right mind is going to give 200+mill in fighter's out to some dumbass fleet member.

also the hole "HEY YOUR A CARRIER REP ME" in gang's/ Fleet's is anoying and from what i see most dread's are taken down by carrier's.

It's a capital ship its suposed to be a big nasty as mofo.
Dread's are pritty useless unless taking out a pos or other dread's.
Carrier's had more role and more use in combat.
Yes carrier's do have a bit much power. but there cheap.
Would you:
A) fly a mach (800mill Faction ship) into a fleet.
B) A carrier (1.4-1.6bill fitted) into a fleet.

I chose B and i guess that is one reason ccp are nerfing them becasue more and more people are flying them.

but that also means there is more people going "ROOAAARRRRR IM BIG IM BADASS IM TANKED OH BUGGER IM DEAD" did ccp want more pew pew ? well there is alot more and its alot bigger. carrier's are easy to kill as it is.

so why take the fun away by nerfing them so less people use them.
your only taking the fun out it not only for the carrier pilots. but for the small/ medium gang's that own them.

And tbh from what i see. if there is carrier's in 1 fleet and not in the other fleet. the other fleet is running. so its balanced already ( not always like that but yeah)
so yeah its like "HEY mister fc dude they have carrier's" FC say's " OH CRAP LETS RUN GUYS WARP YOUR SELF'S CAUSE IM ALREADY OUT"

FC " ok lets regroup we got some carrier's lets go teach these guys alesson"

THEN things go boom then bigger things go boom.

if your going to nerf somthing for fleet's then nerf dictor's there more deadly than carrier's

Nixxxs
Posted - 2007.10.29 04:34:00 - [942]
 

Edited by: Nixxxs on 29/10/2007 04:56:31
#1 had I spent 249+ days learning to fly one of these I would probably want to kill some of ccp. [Lifetime NRA member]

#2 Changes or ideas like this should have been figured out before the game release not 4 years latter it just makes this game look more betaish.

#3 honestly If you have wonderful ideas like this I hope in 2-3 years you have eve2 on the horizon..? Use these ideas for that not change core mechanics today

#4 Going to cover micro management its a bad idea fire a few developers they are way to active. Stop changing rules or the things people have worked really hard to gain I have said this before it is moves like this that will lose you tons of money and players. If you feel carriers are that much of a problem please create a new class of ship that is anti carrier =)
Rather than nerf them after half a year of skill training my lord I would be angry almost makes me want to quit now before you do something similarly stupid to one of the ships I am going to spend nearly a year training on, If I spend a year training skills I have earned the right to be uber, that doesn’t mean I can kill a group of players alone, but I shouldn’t be like omg 3 frigates …I need Backup…my carrier is going to pop =)


#5 over all I think the eve staff has way too much energy and enthusiasm, I feel they should start work on eve2 to quell that problem =)


At last a real world example of how horribly wrong what you have done is. You work for ccp right? in 3 days its payday right? And the head dude calls you into his office for a meeting. He explains to you that he made mistake about your current rate of pay and that he was lowering it and you wouldn’t receive any at the amount he had told you would start off at …would you quit or say sure thing boss? Exactly


Ps: Who am I? Someone who has played online games starting at 1998. Merdian59 Was my first and I have played just about everyone created. I have watched this nerf word pop up it is a disease that never is cured once it starts as everything you do has an effect or outcome upon the world you created. Even ones you don’t know or foresee and this nerf will be the cause of 5 more in the future that you didn’t even realize you created. Nerfing should be reserved for horrible exploits or bugs not because you feel this is slightly imbalanced. Because the other side now shifts at the change and if your calculations where even off by 1% you have again caused more imbalance. Simply put in gods green earth life isn’t perfect or fair and your game will never be ether leave well enough alone

Galenea Moreau
Galactic Operations
Posted - 2007.10.29 05:34:00 - [943]
 

So Anyway, I've now read all the initial response to Zulu's blog and i've just finished reading through the responses to this one.

Do I think that Carriers and Moms need balancing, generally no and I speak as someone who has been on the recieving end of Selene's officer smartbombing MS. Am I biased, yep you can be sure of it but only because I've spent the better part of a year scrimping and saving to get the skills and isk to buy a carrier.

CCP tell us that it's too good at too many things so I though i'd have a look at the things my carrier is too good at.

Primary Damage Dealer.

Ok as things stand we are competant damage dealer definitely a step up from the BS until people take out our damage delivery system so I suppose we are competant in the same way as an Ishtar or Domi is and we suffer from exactly the same problem i.e. kill our drones and we are effectively a big target only about 1500% more expensive, Carriers are already a huge isk sink because of the costs of the fighters as well

Does it have a Huge tank. Well yes I suppose it does. A well tanked Chimera will have HAC resistances but then again so will a Rokh but then again it's supposed to have. Is it unbreakable no not in the slightest just like a BS it can be defeated by a small group of smaller ships.

Combat Logistics Ship

Yep we are a reasonable logistics ship in the same way an Osprey is. In the general scheme of things however we can't match up to true logistics ships as we can't rep enough ships quickly enough to make a difference. The one class we are able to rep effectively is capitals which leads us to one of the main complaints people have about carriers and their spider tanks. Sorry CCP but if we can't repair the smaller ships then what's left for us to rep?

Which of course brings us on to the triage module. Yah not the greatest idea ever implimented. For something that's supposed to be pretty much the opposite of the siege module it's not cutting it. The training time for it is obscene in comparison with it's damage dealing partner and it has the glaring oversight in respect of the cap usage which pretty much renders it's use to a move of desperation to save a mothership or titan as it's a death sentence for the carrier using it in combat.

Fleet Support Ship

Yep I can't say it isn't a decent fleet support ship, no smaller ship has the ability to transport fitted ships ready for use although the mothership does it better as you would expect of a ship 30 times the price. Personally I don't have a problem with removing the ability to keep items in the holds of stored ships although I think a slight increase in the size of the corp hanger may be in order to balance out the extra ammo and fittings required to cope with this role now they can't have them in their own cargo holds.


Deep Space Jump Hauler

Ok this I believe is a role it should never have gotten and is too good at it. It won't be as good as the new jump frighters and rightly so but this is something that doesn't fit with the design philosophy of the ship so I'm happy to see that nerf'ed to death. I know people will hate me for that because it'll make their haulage operations so much more difficult but I simply can't justify the carrier having that role. Do I want to loose it. No of course not. I have cargo to haul too after all


CCP's Current Fix

Without doing massive amounts of quotations it seems to sum up as remove most of the carriers abilities and add in modules to choose the ones you want to have back but not changing the slot layout to give you somewhere to put this module. Sorry guys but for the same reason that triage doesn't work if you do it like that you risk breaking the carrier completely.

If the carrier is a Swiss Army Knife then just remove the tools it wasn't supposed to have and leave us a ship that's still usable and that people aspire to fly,

Much Love,

G.x

Bellator Militaris
Caldari
Freelancers Coalition
Joined Brotherhood
Posted - 2007.10.29 06:58:00 - [944]
 

Once it was a new and exciting game...and then they tweaked it to a slow bleeding death....thanks CCP. Sad

Bellator Militaris
Caldari
Freelancers Coalition
Joined Brotherhood
Posted - 2007.10.29 07:14:00 - [945]
 

Originally by: Juwi Kotch
Well, I must say, the proposed changes make sense to me. It is understandable that many whine when their favourite toy is going to be nerfed, but all in all, it will be good for the game play, the role play, and the overall balance.

So a YES from me. And I will continue with my plan to train for a carrier some time next year.

Juwi Kotch

You are a fool.

Lazuran
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2007.10.29 09:15:00 - [946]
 

Check the 0utbreak losses for yesterday (Sunday) to see what happens to a "solowtfpwnmobile" in lowsec (officer/deadspace/faction fitted carrier, 5b+ worth) when it flies solo and gets noticed and tackled by 1 HAC ...

But OK, it's not like I believe CCP's poor excuses for nerfing the carriers.

PS. and fix the broken forum code already

Damned Force
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2007.10.29 09:48:00 - [947]
 

No answer from our loved devs, so from history we can know we can do what we want they would implement this nerfs!

Maybe if we kidnapping them?? Twisted Evil

Sovereign533
Caldari
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2007.10.29 10:52:00 - [948]
 

yes you are totally right (never thought i'd say this)
the carrier IS a swiss knife. BUT it's made of bad quality.

yes it can fight, but it will not survive on it's own, nor kill anything smart.
yes it can haul, but it won't take anything big, you use a freighter for that.
maybe the only thing it IS good for, is support, remote repping stuff.

Jita TradeAlt
Posted - 2007.10.29 11:30:00 - [949]
 

No one complained about the "jack of all trades, master of none" nature of carriers, not once. Yes they're powerful, but they're also extremely vulnerable to anyone who knows what they are doing. Primarily damps and ewar will shut them down extremely quickly and their dps is very easy to get rid of by killing their fighters. Everyone knows this and its why they're well-balanced as it is. They're sitting ducks without support so it isn't like you're not encouraged to bring friends as it is.

I'll admit that they're solid logistical tools, but the alternatives are not viable and killing them off as logistical ships will just kill off any smaller corps trying to step into 0.0 so you cant be nerfing that.

In any case, i probably didn't even have to write this post since at this point you'd be insane to actually go through with any of these nerfs since pretty much everyone, from new players to the ones that have spent up to a year training and getting the isk for the things, agree that they are fine.

Crassus Silverwolf
Caldari
Liberty Forces
Posted - 2007.10.29 11:42:00 - [950]
 

Ok chaps I have asked Eve TV to look into this & hold CCP to account. Please add your voices to that thread to drive home the need for them to follow this up on behalf of the community.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=621789&page=1

I hope that your voices in EVE TV, asking for them to act, will keep the pressure on CCP to drop this idea.

Fly safe

Jaleera Kaisin
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
Insurgency
Posted - 2007.10.29 12:23:00 - [951]
 

Just some numbers to give some perspective on this:

CCP recently advised that there are 10,000 carriers currently "in play". A direct skill path to carrier (carrier 1, Fighters 1 base capital modules etc) takes a year of training time including prerequisites and assuming you train nothing else.

That is 10,000 MAN YEARS of training time which potentially becomes less useful with one stroke of a brush.

As a comparison lets look at the change to NOS (Assuming Heavy T1 NOS min skill required to use)

150,000 players x 3 days = 1,200 Man years of training - an impact on the order of 10% of that of a major carrier change

. . .just some food for thought

Saithe
Caldari
Posted - 2007.10.29 12:41:00 - [952]
 

Edited by: Saithe on 29/10/2007 12:51:04
BRING THE CHANGE! i dont give a rats ass what anyone thinks. carebears trying to kill a carrier cant kill it and get owned, so they ***** and whine. conclusion: ccp changes carriers. now, everyone *****es and whines about a PROPOSED change that is being tossed around the table. it hasnt happened, and it doesnt mean its GOING to happen. CCP is being kind in SHARING their inner ideas with YOU the community. i personally agree with this, because carriers should NEVER be a solopwnmobile. instead, they should sit in packs of 7 or 8, maybe more. their combined support is what makes a carrier lethal. carriers are NOT damage dealers, thats what DREADS are for. hell, if anything, increase the dreads drone bay to hold 5 fighters. also, i believe i saw on the test server just last night, this wonderful carrier counterpart, called a jump freighter. if you think about it, its basically a carrier with no guns or drone bay, and a bigass cargohold. so, as i always say, LESS QQ MORE PEWPEW. stfu you whiners, be grateful that ccp is generous enough to share what the contemplate amongst themselves with us. also, if you still need further proof, examine this:

Originally by: CCP kieron
It is obvious that the last Dev Blog concerning some proposed changes to Carriers was the equivalent to kicking the proverbial ant hill. The community's response to potential changes to a favorite ship has been more fierce than we expected. However, that does not change the core idea behind the change to Carriers, that one ship should not be able to do everything and do so effectively without penalty.


ps: die language filter Twisted EvilYARRRR!!Twisted Evil

Jita TradeAlt
Posted - 2007.10.29 12:47:00 - [953]
 

Originally by: Saithe
BRING THE CHANGE! i dont give a rats ass what anyone thinks. carebears trying to kill a carrier cant kill it and get owned, so they ***** and whine. conclusion: ccp changes carriers. now, everyone *****es and whines about a PROPOSED change that is being tossed around the table. it hasnt happened, and it doesnt mean its GOING to happen. CCP is being kind in SHARING their inner ideas with YOU the community. i personally agree with this, because carriers should NEVER be a solopwnmobile. instead, they should sit in packs of 7 or 8, maybe more. their combined support is what makes a carrier lethal. carriers are NOT damage dealers, thats what DREADS are for. hell, if anything, increase the dreads drone bay to hold 5 fighters. also, i believe i saw on the test server just last night, this wonderful carrier counterpart, called a jump freighter. if you think about it, its basically a carrier with no guns or drone bay, and a bigass cargohold. so, as i always say, LESS QQ MORE PEWPEW. stfu you whiners, be grateful that ccp is generous enough to share what the contemplate amongst themselves with us. also, if you still need further proof, examine this:

Originally by: CCP kieron
It is obvious that the last Dev Blog concerning some proposed changes to Carriers was the equivalent to kicking the proverbial ant hill. The community's response to potential changes to a favorite ship has been more fierce than we expected. However, that does not change the core idea behind the change to Carriers, that one ship should not be able to do everything and do so effectively without penalty.


ps: die language filter Twisted EvilYARRRR!!Twisted Evil
Decent troll, twisted and pirate gave it awa though, voted 3/5

Saithe
Caldari
Posted - 2007.10.29 12:53:00 - [954]
 

Originally by: Jita TradeAlt
Originally by: Saithe
BRING THE CHANGE! i dont give a rats ass what anyone thinks. carebears trying to kill a carrier cant kill it and get owned, so they ***** and whine. conclusion: ccp changes carriers. now, everyone *****es and whines about a PROPOSED change that is being tossed around the table. it hasnt happened, and it doesnt mean its GOING to happen. CCP is being kind in SHARING their inner ideas with YOU the community. i personally agree with this, because carriers should NEVER be a solopwnmobile. instead, they should sit in packs of 7 or 8, maybe more. their combined support is what makes a carrier lethal. carriers are NOT damage dealers, thats what DREADS are for. hell, if anything, increase the dreads drone bay to hold 5 fighters. also, i believe i saw on the test server just last night, this wonderful carrier counterpart, called a jump freighter. if you think about it, its basically a carrier with no guns or drone bay, and a bigass cargohold. so, as i always say, LESS QQ MORE PEWPEW. stfu you whiners, be grateful that ccp is generous enough to share what the contemplate amongst themselves with us. also, if you still need further proof, examine this:

Originally by: CCP kieron
It is obvious that the last Dev Blog concerning some proposed changes to Carriers was the equivalent to kicking the proverbial ant hill. The community's response to potential changes to a favorite ship has been more fierce than we expected. However, that does not change the core idea behind the change to Carriers, that one ship should not be able to do everything and do so effectively without penalty.


ps: die language filter Twisted EvilYARRRR!!Twisted Evil
Decent troll, twisted and pirate gave it awa though, voted 3/5


1) im not a troll
2) i posted with my main

Rinaldo Titano
Caldari
Caldari Elite Force
Apocalypse Now.
Posted - 2007.10.29 13:02:00 - [955]
 

Originally by: Saithe
Originally by: Jita TradeAlt
Originally by: Saithe
BRING THE CHANGE! i dont give a rats ass what anyone thinks. carebears trying to kill a carrier cant kill it and get owned, so they ***** and whine. conclusion: ccp changes carriers. now, everyone *****es and whines about a PROPOSED change that is being tossed around the table. it hasnt happened, and it doesnt mean its GOING to happen. CCP is being kind in SHARING their inner ideas with YOU the community. i personally agree with this, because carriers should NEVER be a solopwnmobile. instead, they should sit in packs of 7 or 8, maybe more. their combined support is what makes a carrier lethal. carriers are NOT damage dealers, thats what DREADS are for. hell, if anything, increase the dreads drone bay to hold 5 fighters. also, i believe i saw on the test server just last night, this wonderful carrier counterpart, called a jump freighter. if you think about it, its basically a carrier with no guns or drone bay, and a bigass cargohold. so, as i always say, LESS QQ MORE PEWPEW. stfu you whiners, be grateful that ccp is generous enough to share what the contemplate amongst themselves with us. also, if you still need further proof, examine this:

Originally by: CCP kieron
It is obvious that the last Dev Blog concerning some proposed changes to Carriers was the equivalent to kicking the proverbial ant hill. The community's response to potential changes to a favorite ship has been more fierce than we expected. However, that does not change the core idea behind the change to Carriers, that one ship should not be able to do everything and do so effectively without penalty.


ps: die language filter Twisted EvilYARRRR!!Twisted Evil
Decent troll, twisted and pirate gave it awa though, voted 3/5


1) im not a troll
2) i posted with my main



We both know that the changes would be implemented. Maybe not the fighter change, but the cargo change sure and some other major nerfs too. And we know this would happened even 99% of the community would vote against. We saw this more times already. And the thing that devs stopped the communication with us here shows that this would come with Trinity 2. Every time if they have no arguments for the nerf, they simply stop communicate and implement the nerf. They very very occupied to make this nerfs.

Nerfs are bad and sometime needed, but such major nerfs, which completely removes one or more type of usage of a ship are bad. And even make worst, that is not a ship u can fly after 2-3 month. U invest a lot of money and time to something which than would not work as it should.

For example u wait till u would 18(in US 16)y old, go to the driving school, u finish it, and u buy a nice expensive car. Than the government comes and say all cars was bad designed so from now with your driving license u can use from tomorrow a bicycle, which would cost the same as your car. Would u be happy??????

Andarvi
Caldari
InNova Tech Inc
Posted - 2007.10.29 13:17:00 - [956]
 

Well just to add my 2 cents to the thousand of replies this blog has already collected...

As stated several times already:

DPS:
The carriers damage dealing capabilites are not the problem, as there are many ways to deal with it. A top DPS fitted Thanatos (yes CCP you actually have to refit your carrier to get top DPS, fancy that..) will have the DPS of 4-5 t2 fitted battleships, while costing twice as much as said 4-5 battleships... don't really see a problem here.

LOGISTICS:
The triage module is a joke and a self defeating module, if there ever was one.. lower the activation time to 1 or 2 minutes and it might actually have a use, but in its current form it is useless.
Ah, yes in a normal fleet setup (the one I'm supposed to be able to do everything with a carrier, according to you), my cap with 4 repair modules running lasts about 30 seconds. Trully a master of logistics I am.

Hangar and Maintenance bay:
So it can transport a couple of cruisers and frigates +modules to support your gang Shocked
Of course, if you're transporting them you will go into battle at the same time and risk giving them to your enemy, if you get killed.

Cargo transport:
That is the only point I'll concede. I can jump around a lot of stuff with any of the above setups (there is again the problem of going into battle at the same time, but let's not drag it in here). It was probably unintended and one of your main problems with carriers.

I would say that a large part of carrier pilots uses their carrier for transporting goods trough low security space.

If you really want to fix that (and make room for your new fancy jumping freighters), lower jump range by %, depending on the weight of all the cargo a carrier carries. (including all the cargo in the maint. bay, of course)

Lazuran
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:09:00 - [957]
 

Originally by: Andarvi

DPS:
The carriers damage dealing capabilites are not the problem, as there are many ways to deal with it. A top DPS fitted Thanatos (yes CCP you actually have to refit your carrier to get top DPS, fancy that..) will have the DPS of 4-5 t2 fitted battleships, while costing twice as much as said 4-5 battleships... don't really see a problem here.



The max. DPS of a Thanatos is 1875, that is about 1.5 times the DPS of a T2 fitted gank Battleship, or the DPS of a Blasterthron plus a Hurricane.


Xeen DuWang
Dark-Rising
Veritas Immortalis
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:40:00 - [958]
 

Edited by: Xeen DuWang on 29/10/2007 14:46:25
I have an alt that was made to fly a carrier.... With this change I dont see the point anymore.

This actually has me ****ed off. No other nerf yet has dont that. What are you people at CCP thinking.

People were complaining about being unable to stop a MOM in low-sec and you come up with this... Seriously, think a little.

Stormdeath
modro
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:46:00 - [959]
 

Edited by: Stormdeath on 29/10/2007 14:48:24
Okay when I read this blog here is what I heard

Blah blah blah us at CCP think Blah blah CCP gods Know better how something should work than the people that pay and play do. Blah Blah CCP is Gods Blah Blah CCP will do what they want.

Okay did I miss anything?

Come on CCP. This thing with Carriers you guys have has come directly from the changes you guys made to POS warfare. Really, you did not think that when you moved POS mods outside the shield someone would get a bunch of carriers together and work over the guns on a POS? While using there repping ability to Tank the guns. Bet that came out of left feild

Okay I am going to introducing you to the GOLDEN RULE.

Those with the GOLD make the rules. Incase you have missed it the ones that play and pay for eve are the ones with the GOLD.

Have you ever thought about how much training and time it takes to get a carrier or even a mothership and fly them right. With the skills taken to the proper lvl? Like a year and a half. Plus about 2-3b isk for Carrier and 20b isk for a Mothership. There has been times when I have lost a BS to a MOM or Carrier and was pretty ****ed about it but in the end it comes down to the fact that THEY Earned that Ability. Now becuase "CCP Thinks" (which is my opion is a new development they must have snuck in therein the last patch) there is a problem and the ship is too veristile it is time for it to have it's manhood cut off.

There is a new patch you should work on it is called

"The Customer is always right v1.0"

MURDA MIKE
Posted - 2007.10.29 15:46:00 - [960]
 

i dont like the idea of changing the carrier i mean in eve u train and train and even when your done u end up having to train some more to tie up the loose ends and thats fine but when we do we should get what we deserve it takes alot of money and skillpoints to use a carrier, the right way, so like most things if you want some thing good u have to work for it so u shouldn't limit the ones who worked hard plus i mean come on its a carrier fighters are ment to be like tactical surgical intruments if u deprive a carry of that then really its just a hive with no bees i mean its nice to have a ship and be able to forget about being in a corp or group and it just being u and your ship for some people thats all they want they want to be loners in space capable of taking care of themselves making isk and tactically able to handle any threat that might come about i mean by the time u fly carrier u have fitted a FAIR share of ships maybe pilots deserve the break think about it if not atleast make some kinda of lone wolf class capital ships for players who want to be their own entity e.i. a renowned bounty hunter or maurader of the stars lol just a thought


Pages: first : previous : ... 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 ... : last (38)

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