Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Okay it's well known that there is a huge overpowering advantage to carriers atm. Some think its fine. Most think it needs fixing.

I suggest we add a new bay for just fighters. I think ccp has figured out how to add new bays safely enough with out making the current bad code much worse. Fighters already seem to identified differently from the rest of the drones in the code. So (leap of faith here) this wouldn't be that hard to program.

Then I suggest changing the size of the drone bay on a carrier down to something more reasonable. 500m3? 1000m3. Lot better then the 100K atm.

While I'm at it. The second problem is remote repping. Many reasons why its good but many reasons why its bad. But my biggest complaint is that it makes alpha and EHP the number one fleet doctrine on the field. And that's boring. All those potential good ships in EVE never used.

I suggest a stacking penalty on remote repping. By the time the 5th(?) module tries to remote rep it should have almost no impact. We have stacking penalties for most other remote effects. I suggest the penalty be number of remote reps. Would mean logi's would still have a use but so would carriers and also more uses for the t3's with remote rep amount bonus.

Then I can see ships that have a local rep bonus being much more used in blobs. So when a 200 man gang fights a 100 man gang the fight may not be so predictable.

Also finally fix the target spectrum breaker, and make it more useful. But warning as is it would actually encourage more use of the drone assist fleets. You need to first fix that potential problem by making any ship with assigned drones have a great impact on the TSB. So 1 ship with 5 assigned drones = 2 ships to the breaker randomizer, 10 drones 3, etc.

I'll accept a stacking penalty on RR if you will accept a stacking penalty on dealing damage.


That 800th Megathron will do 0.00000001% damage.

It would be an incentive to bring fewer larger ships like Dreadnaughts, as well as ships with fewer bonused guns, like Marauders, or Pirate BS's.


See what I did there? I coated my ridiculous idea in thinly layered Pseudo-Science to appear legit.

Of course, my idea is incredibly terrible, but at a initial glance, my reasoning in sound.

I recall ccp mentioning they wanted to split the drone bays into fighters & drones some point in the past. Obviously it got lost in the noise. I assume they'll implement that with the capital rebalance (yes its bad to assume things).

Remote repping does seem a tad overpowered, and my time in nullsec showed you're right about alpha being essential to avoid great blobs of remote reps. To counter the slowcat fleets, cfc brought out fleets of nags, rendering the other dreads obsolete in the process. Stacking penalties on remote reps would result in more ship explosions, which is a good thing, and allows more diversity in ship doctrines, which is also a good thing.

Your comments suggest you've spent more time trolling the forums then getting into a 0.0 fleet. Because your logic doesn't work. Otherwise you'd know that what you suggest would happen if remote repping was nerfed already happens because there is no stacking penalty..

if you're going to do that - logi ships need to have a role bonus:
no stacking penalty to remote repair modules
atm, (one of) the problem(s) with slowcat fleets (apart from the use of sentries and drone assist) is that they can all RR each other more effectively (maybe not outright better) than logi ships since they are harder to alpha, so it's harder to clear the RR effects

A: You can't argue that what already happens is the same as what would happen, because otherwise you don't have an argument.

B: Having been in many fleets where the only thing that saved my ass was a large number of excellent logi pilots repping me as soon as I broadcast, I really do think I do understand. Take the Tribute war for example, where far smaller numbers of Zealot+Oneiros fleets were beating much larger Drake fleets on a regular basis, due to the combination of high resists and on the ball logis saving zealots. But hey, tell me more about how remote repping never saved anyone.

Of course, if you could only get 4 reps (one logi worth) onto a target before it was near useless, then all those times the logis saved me from the fire of 100+ drakes, the drakes would have instead killed me.

Logi and RRing in general being worthless = straight up brawl, where the side that brought the most warm meat wins.

Seems like the only thing that removing the ability for more than one Logistics ship to rep a single person effectively results in is fleets trading losing DPS ships back and forth until one side runs out. Which of course favors the side who brought the most people, regardless of individual skill or practice. Eh RZR?[/quote]

If your opinion is that RR is better for the game then provide some facts that support it.

Nothing your saying argues that keeping the RR the way it is now is better then nerfing it. All your saying is that you don't like the idea and here's some stupid made up arguments to support that. If you knew any EVE history you'd now that prior to the use of logistic support there were a lot of different fleet compositions that created far more variable fights in the game.

If the current system makes skills more important then numbers why did you lose most of the fights in Tribute? The solution to logi supported fleets is a bigger logi supported fleet. in fact they make it worse because logistics not only determine who wins but also that the winning side does so with very little loss. Your argument that raw dps would be the only determining factor to a fight only shows you don't know how to win a fight.

CCP has over and over again nerfed and buffed ships and modules that have favored one ship over another. ie supercaps, titans, drakes, falcons, hurricanes, etc. Logistic ships create the same problems.