Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So what you're is saying these are just buffed frigates.

Yes and no I can turn that around and say that carriers are just oversized logi droneboats that never added anything new to the game. There's nothing a carrier can do that not a logi ship with a BC and a couple of BS's can do other than eliminating the use of lot's of other ship hulls in fleets, no?



Player fighters does add something new to the game.For example: it replace drones with players in fights, it makes the game more available to newer players since both Fighter pilots and Frigate pilots are more welcome in fleet fights, it allow players to fly 8 new saucy hulls and i'm sure it is appealing to a lot not so forum vocal EVE players.

Didn't say that. I said that all ships in the game can be boiled down to one ship that hauls, one that pin the target down, one that does damage and one that do mucho damage. Sorry i see that i forgot the logi ship in that list. All in all each race need no more than 5 ships available.

The differance between a cruiser and a HAC is basically more DPS and HP and could just as well be one ship if you know what i mean?

Obviously that would be pretty boring setup. Therefore we, players have lot's of ships at our disposal doing all sorts of damage and some funny EW flair to some and a few that hauls etc etc.

The fleets you seem to think of are the smaller scale, tailored roaming gangs etc. And player fighters would in no way change the game so they become obsolete.

No my core idea is to make sure that no ship is unwanted on the larger scale and even low skill players can play a big part. Player Fighters is just one idea how that could be done.

No. The difference between a HAC and a crappy cheap cruiser is viability. Some are fast, some have a nice tank, some have awesome range, DPS or tiny sigs.

Just because you can't see the difference between a sniper muninn fleet and a bunch of battleships doesn't mean there isn't one.


Of course that would be a pretty boring set up, that's why eve isn't set up that way. And the fleets I'm thinking of are not "small scale", fast tackle like frigates or ceptors are usually used even in the largest of fleets. And hac/t3 gangs etc. can usually be seen in enormous sizes in the right places.

Again, just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


It's a terrible idea of how that could be done. And why would we want to do it anyway? Giant frigate fights aren't fun, everything pops too fast. And is it really going to be interesting playing the role of DPS dealing drone?

"Ok, approach carrier and orbit at 500m while pressing F1. Oh you're dead already, sorry bro. Don't worry the other 300 of you guys might have better luck". Wow, job well done guys have a kill mail.

/rage

And that is what i ment by saying that this idea would meet in the middle. Mass use of capitals was never intended.





I never said sligthly buffed, i deliberately left details out of the picture. I never said that Carrier pilot would be forced to use them if they didn't want to. They could go drone all the way, players all the way or mix.

What would make a differance here is if a corp that can muster 50 carriers would be equal to a corp with 100 carriers as long as the fighters are around. Pilots from other ships that pops can try to get to the carrier in their pod and board a Fighter if they so please.

The statement "GTFO and bring a real ship" is worth noting. That players say that at all is a symptom of one of the main flaws in EVE's game mechanics.




Of course there are plenty of situations where smaller ships are useful and this idea would make them even more useful. I figure the Fighters would get to the carriers the same way all the other useful ships get to the fleet. And if not the jumping carriers can rely on the fighter drones they already are carrying. This is a carrier buff that oddly enough actually encourage smaller ships to enter the battle.

Again, yes as long as they are not in the same system as the carrier they work similar to frigates, interceptors in perticular, without the specific Intie bonuses.



It's clear you didn't understand what i ment, again you get stuck on details that wasn't very relevant. My bad.

Terrible idea or not i still think that all ships intended for battle should have more room in the fleets than they do now. Player Fighters would expand that room.

Maybe a better idea might be to give carriers clone bays. Then you could throw a bunch of frigates, SB, interceptors, and the like in the maintenance bay. Maybe limit the clone bays to in system availability only. On the other hand being able to clone jump or death jump into a carrier would do wonders to one's ability to find pvp.

This idea was to bring in an existing ship hull into the game with a new role on the battle field that replace drone with man. The idea that this is "just" a buffed tech 1 frig seem to have stuck. And i replied yes and no but i feel some more depth to that is needed.


I'd like to take the Vagabond as an example to clarify:

The Vagabond had some different HP, damage and resistances. The speed worked out to be a solopwnmobile (that later was caressed by the nerf bat somewhat) but all in all it is nothing more than a buffed tech 1 cruiser no matter how it is used.

Tech 3 cruisers the same but since they couldn't make them much more damage etc over tech 2, for obvious reasons, they had to make them tech 2 but different.


I could have said that i had an idea for a tech 3 frigate since that is basically what it is - tech 2 but different. However since the role is that of a fighter the existing fighter hulls is to me, the natural choice for the ship model. So call it a tech 3 Frig if it makes things easier to digest.

I have considered that. And also said that no carrier pilot would be forced to make use of piloted Fighters. You can skip it or go mix. If you want to bring "500 AFs, bombers, cruisers or tier 3 BCs" you absolutely should.
Again, who said they would be buffed slightly. The way the Fighters can be designed, the Cruisers and BC's and up, will be quickly destroyed by the Fighters unless they bring a good mix of the small stuff ment to kill the smaller stuff. Fighters are smaller than Frigates and it's smaller sig radius one of it's main defence.


You keep getting stuck on details that is not important... The only thing you need to think about is that all tech 2 is just buffed tech 1 with improved or somewhat different roles than the original.


You posted to confirm you missed the point again. I never claimed that they have no role. All ships have roles. Some are just better at it's role than others. What i said is that they are different.

One can argue whether they really filled a hole in the roles. I think CCP just brought them in to satisfy the playerbase hunger for something new and at the same time make tech 3 what all tech 1 ships was supposed to be since alpha but they couldn't implement at the time.


Apparently it was hard to digest. The similarity to tech 3 was "tech 2 but different" and it stopped there since they are not modular and not built with sleeper tech.



Ok, don't really know what i'm looking at here. It sounds to me that you feel like i somehow called you a noob and that i for some reason are against "noobs" in large fleet engagements.
Quite wrong. My idea is all about bringing in low skilled players, in small ships in larger fleets. I am not the one saying "GTFO and bring a real ship"
What i saw on those killboards was one skirmish between two small gangs and then on different occations two ganked mission runners. The way i see it is that everything is working as intended when it comes to small gangs. But my idea was never about skirmish or ganked missoin runners. Unless there are Carriers involved.



tl;dr: It is obious that you don't like my idea. And it is absolutely ok by me. What is not so ok is that you bring little constructive to the discussion. It just boils down to "Why!"
I think my intentions with the piloted Fighter are clear. And the feeling i get from you is that this idea intimidates you for unknown reason and that you are a person who must have the last word.
Me on the other hand are the OP and I am obliged to defend my idea for as long as possible. All you have to do if you don't like a post on any forum is just state,preferably in one post, that you don't like it, give a good reason why and then ignore it and i promise you it will go away.