These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Figther assist nerf
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Fraternity.
#21 - 2015-02-27 02:06:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Ncc 1709
posting in other thread
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#22 - 2015-02-27 02:20:24 UTC
Ilaister wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It's not about risking the carrier (and you'd know this if you were familiar with what the poster you were replying to was talking about). People won't rat with carriers because of the risk of losing the fighters, the carrier will still be safe but the fighters would be lost if you had to warp quick (you'[re already aligned).

That means fewer carrier ratters, which means fewer juicy targets in null anoms (BS ratters have MJDs). CCP is repeating an aspect of the anom nerf 4 years ago, but trying to fix one thing they are creating a situation where LESS conflict/kills will happen.


It seems quite clear to me - he won't 'risk the carrier in the anom ratting with drones' as an alternative to assigning fighters from just outside shields.


This is what I was talking about, a lack of direct knowledge about how things work. Ever since CCP made it where fighters get bonuses from drone mods, fighter ratting has been the norm. Assigning fighters to another ship is less efficient. Taking away the ability for fighters to warp means a high chance of financial loss,which means people will switch to pirate and T1 BSs to rat, and the smart ones will realize that it's so much less isk per hour that you might as well do high sec lvl 4 missions or put a bomber alt In faction warfare.

End result, fewer carriers ratting, key content creation situation damped down. It will end up being a smaller version of the anom nerf. of 2011.

Quote:

More experienced cap killers than I can tell you better but from what I've seen, local, not MJD is the real lifesaver; whatever hull you're ratting in.


I don't think you're understanding the situation at all.

Quote:

To the OP - my corp last jumped on a ratting carrier with approx 13b of T3s and logi. It was bait. Many brave wormholers lost SP that day. Your argument is flawed.


This fighter overnerf will have a bad effect on null for the reason I mention above (it's also gonna shaft a few lvl 5 mission blitzers too lol, but they will keep at it because losing 200 mil every once in a while in a 500 mil an hour activity is no big deal). Maybe not disastrous, but bad and unnecessary.
Aknan
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2015-02-27 02:22:35 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It's not about risking the carrier (and you'd know this if you were familiar with what the poster you were replying to was talking about). People won't rat with carriers because of the risk of losing the fighters, the carrier will still be safe but the fighters would be lost if you had to warp quick (you'[re already aligned).

That means fewer carrier ratters, which means fewer juicy targets in null anoms (BS ratters have MJDs). CCP is repeating an aspect of the anom nerf 4 years ago, but trying to fix one thing they are creating a situation where LESS conflict/kills will happen.


There's way over 50,000 pod pilots and way less than 5,000 systems out in null (See Dotlan if you have difficulty adding up numbers) .

Even if there were 5,000 systems out in null, that's 100 people per system, not counting Wormholes!

If they don't want to fight, they don't want to fight.

Carriers acting like they are one man armies of battleships, doing missions and plex solo does nothing to pressure blobs into breaking up to create content.

Absolutely zero.




i said before i dont use carrier for farming in any way posible

i farming in ishtar and im happy abouts the changes on it and would hop more nerf on it.


but sorry mate you look's like knowing fast nothing in pvp and you speak about things you dont know i think or you are the real coward dont speaking with your real account.
https://zkillboard.com/character/241523665/
https://zkillboard.com/corporation/1705112014/

sorry but this show me you are more a troll speaking about somthing you dont know if you where a pvp player knowing wath he is doing i wouldent laugth but now ....
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#24 - 2015-02-27 02:26:17 UTC
Aknan wrote:
Commander Spurty wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It's not about risking the carrier (and you'd know this if you were familiar with what the poster you were replying to was talking about). People won't rat with carriers because of the risk of losing the fighters, the carrier will still be safe but the fighters would be lost if you had to warp quick (you'[re already aligned).

That means fewer carrier ratters, which means fewer juicy targets in null anoms (BS ratters have MJDs). CCP is repeating an aspect of the anom nerf 4 years ago, but trying to fix one thing they are creating a situation where LESS conflict/kills will happen.


There's way over 50,000 pod pilots and way less than 5,000 systems out in null (See Dotlan if you have difficulty adding up numbers) .

Even if there were 5,000 systems out in null, that's 100 people per system, not counting Wormholes!

If they don't want to fight, they don't want to fight.

Carriers acting like they are one man armies of battleships, doing missions and plex solo does nothing to pressure blobs into breaking up to create content.

Absolutely zero.




i said before i dont use carrier for farming in any way posible

i farming in ishtar and im happy abouts the changes on it and would hop more nerf on it.


but sorry mate you look's like knowing fast nothing in pvp and you speak about things you dont know i think or you are the real coward dont speaking with your real account.
https://zkillboard.com/character/241523665/
https://zkillboard.com/corporation/1705112014/

sorry but this show me you are more a troll speaking about somthing you dont know if you where a pvp player knowing wath he is doing i wouldent laugth but now ....


Exaclty who said I was a pvp player?

God damn, people is smoking that good green leafy tonight and I'm sitting here sober. pass it damn it.
Aknan
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2015-02-27 02:36:50 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Commander Spurty wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It's not about risking the carrier (and you'd know this if you were familiar with what the poster you were replying to was talking about). People won't rat with carriers because of the risk of losing the fighters, the carrier will still be safe but the fighters would be lost if you had to warp quick (you'[re already aligned).

That means fewer carrier ratters, which means fewer juicy targets in null anoms (BS ratters have MJDs). CCP is repeating an aspect of the anom nerf 4 years ago, but trying to fix one thing they are creating a situation where LESS conflict/kills will happen.


There's way over 50,000 pod pilots and way less than 5,000 systems out in null (See Dotlan if you have difficulty adding up numbers) .

Even if there were 5,000 systems out in null, that's 100 people per system, not counting Wormholes!

If they don't want to fight, they don't want to fight.

Carriers acting like they are one man armies of battleships, doing missions and plex solo does nothing to pressure blobs into breaking up to create content.

Absolutely zero.






OK, WTF are you smoking tonight? It's Puff puff pass, not puff puff keep puffing.

sorry look at the wrong persone... to many anger.. i shuld go sleep 4 am
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#26 - 2015-02-27 02:43:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Aknan wrote:


sorry look at the wrong persone... to many anger.. i shuld go sleep 4 am


lol All good.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#27 - 2015-02-27 02:48:03 UTC
Aknan wrote:
1) removing the assist totaly get carrier use less for farming in assist
2) removing the assist totaly make figther totaly use less: you make more dmg with usal drones
3) carrier had a big nerf before for jumping so it's use less for travel mouve your assets

Let me say those a different way:

1) Added some risk to farming with a carrier.
2) Getting carriers on grind to apply their damage.
3) Made Jump Freighters more relevant and valuable.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Zekora Rally
U2EZ
#28 - 2015-02-27 03:50:34 UTC
An Ishtar change would be much much more welcomed than this change than only a handful of people really care about.
HarlyQ
harlyq syrokos investment station
#29 - 2015-02-27 06:17:24 UTC
I must be ratting wrong with my 27 carrier pilots then since I never use fighters. I must look into this.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#30 - 2015-02-27 06:32:57 UTC
What the heck is going on here... fighters and ratting?!

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#31 - 2015-02-27 06:36:56 UTC
CCP, We need to have Communication bumped from I to IV to use the forums.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2015-02-27 07:52:49 UTC
maCH'EttE wrote:
Aknan wrote:
...

I did not understand one word of what you wrote, but what I did understand is your tears, and I dont give a f.

there were lots of words which you could translate with google if you're not friend with English.... Cool

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#33 - 2015-02-27 08:41:57 UTC
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Im just going to tag this thread as 'fighter nerf thread #2' and release it back into the wild.



Hopefully the predatory ISD will take pity upon this timid baby deer of a thread.




Maybe it'll breed with the other one and spawn more.

Then the ISDs will have to fly around in helicopters and cull the herd.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Lan Wang
African Atomic.
OnlyFleets.
#34 - 2015-02-27 09:13:47 UTC
i never seen anyone ratting in anoms using the assist i dont understand the hype, can someone explain what the major nerf is here? i get a hell of alot more damage using fighters than any other drone

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Yarda Black
UK Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2015-02-27 09:33:16 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
i never seen anyone ratting in anoms using the assist i dont understand the hype, can someone explain what the major nerf is here? i get a hell of alot more damage using fighters than any other drone


The nerf is less about ratting and more about me assigning fighter to you while you're in a frig shooting people. Using my assigned fighters while me and the the carrier itself are 5 meters away from a POS shield at the other side of the solarsystem.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#36 - 2015-02-27 10:01:03 UTC
There's no reason to remove both fighter assist and the fighter warp mechanic.
Without fighter assist, the mechanic that people were complaining about is dead, so why does fighter warping need to be removed?

It's the only thing that fighters have that really sets them apart from the other drones that a carrier can use. Beyond that they're just glorified and tanky heavy drones.
Ma'Baker McCandless
The McCandless Clan
#37 - 2015-02-27 10:02:12 UTC
Aknan wrote:

i said before i dont use carrier for farming in any way posible


Aknan wrote:
1) removing the assist totaly get carrier use less for farming in assist



There are no military units in the DMZ
Anthar Thebess
#38 - 2015-02-27 10:11:26 UTC
First of like i very like all changes.
This is good direction , and i have 4 carrier characters - so it will affect me in big manner.
The only thing what i think should be left alone is warping fighters , but only when following a carrier - and only because fighters and fighter bombers should be a bit different.

So when someone will leave the grid they will not follow him, but if the carrier will leave the grid , they will drop the aggro and follow the carrier.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#39 - 2015-02-27 11:18:32 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
First of like i very like all changes.
This is good direction , and i have 4 carrier characters - so it will affect me in big manner.
The only thing what i think should be left alone is warping fighters , but only when following a carrier - and only because fighters and fighter bombers should be a bit different.

So when someone will leave the grid they will not follow him, but if the carrier will leave the grid , they will drop the aggro and follow the carrier.

I think that's fair.
Desimus Maximus
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#40 - 2015-02-27 17:16:24 UTC
I understand your desire for refunded sp.. Itty V, Orca skilling time anyone?

Also... too many do not understand the true role of capital ships, or sub-caps for that matter.

Carriers are meant to be support, namely Battleship support. I'll take 2 triage carriers and 10 BS against 100 cruisers and frigates any day of the week. This is the carrier's purpose. BS reps and droning down sub-capitals if necessary.

Dreads. Pure and simple, ridiculous amounts of focused dmg on structures and other capitals. I would argue that structures are #1 and Titans #2.. every other capital #3

Titans. Despite Jump Fatigue they still offer power projection and system sov insurance.
Previous page123Next page