These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

New cargo container - Ship carrier
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#21 - 2016-02-04 15:24:35 UTC
Being that this is LS you're concerned with I'll still say bowhead. Cut through empire w/ the bowhead and then make the last few jumps w/ transports or just stage out of HS and make your move into LS from the nears HS station. If being -10 is holding you back, well (agree or not) it's a consequence of choices you've made. -10 is supposed to have drawbacks. ( I don't want to argue the merits of -10 and what it does in this thread - that's a whole different can of worms)

There aren't that many LS areas that are so deep that moving the mass of ships via empire/bowhead doesn't remove most of the work.

4 years from now when SOV, capitals and blue coalitions are all fixed (fingers crossed) and jump fatigue fades from searing wound to distant memory, then this may be a good idea. The merits of the idea aside - your timing is just bad.

Personally I didn't / don't like the bowhead period, but now that it's in the game - you might as well use it.
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2016-02-04 17:09:19 UTC
Thorian Baalnorn wrote:
So anyway, while i feel this would be used if it was already an option, i just don't see it being something that gets enough support on it. And i doubt CCP will want to mess with it until after they are done with sov stuff. they might very well have plans for some sort of jumpable ship hauler or even something like this in the future. I just dont see it happening in the next couple of years.

This is a serious issue that I did recognise. This thread came about after I started to get involved in the Capital feedback discussion following a return to this game after a 10 month break. Then realised that too much momentum had built up and my suggestions had come too late to get on the train.

So I looked for a much simpler solution, which married up existing code, that of containers and Ship Hangers. A stand alone solution that can be tweaked or simply removed from the game if exploits make it unusable or OP. Without the disturbance of having to carry out a rebalance to a set of ships and then roll them back if it creates problems. Specifically to allow time strapped developers in CCP to produce a quick fix.

I don't consider myself that nomadic, but possibly I've been spoilt by the previous behaviour of carriers before Jump Fatigue came into existance. What I am frustrated about is that the suitcase Carrier, an important and useful utility, was an unintended casualty of nerfs intended to deal with force projection and I believe something like this is needed to rectify that situation. The feeling of being trapped in a system by a lack of logistic options, is a game breaker for some players and played a significant part in my recent absense from the game.
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2016-02-04 17:21:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Trant
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Being that this is LS you're concerned with I'll still say bowhead. Cut through empire w/ the bowhead and then make the last few jumps w/ transports or just stage out of HS and make your move into LS from the nears HS station. If being -10 is holding you back, well (agree or not) it's a consequence of choices you've made. -10 is supposed to have drawbacks. ( I don't want to argue the merits of -10 and what it does in this thread - that's a whole different can of worms)

There aren't that many LS areas that are so deep that moving the mass of ships via empire/bowhead doesn't remove most of the work.

4 years from now when SOV, capitals and blue coalitions are all fixed (fingers crossed) and jump fatigue fades from searing wound to distant memory, then this may be a good idea. The merits of the idea aside - your timing is just bad.

Personally I didn't / don't like the bowhead period, but now that it's in the game - you might as well use it.

Another suggestion for the Bowhead! I can't believe you people suggesting the Bowhead aren't trying to troll me. The Bowhead is a joke. I wouldn't use it even in high sec, I'm convinced CCP only came up with the idea as an April Fools joke, then the big high sec ganking lobbyists convinced them to actually release it.

But in case you are serious, I'm not talking about predominately high sec with a final dash into low. I'm talking low sec to somewhere else. Several low sec jumps without a strong defensive force for a small corp or even an individual.

As for using it with a Titan (another post), now that really is a troll.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#24 - 2016-02-04 21:10:02 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
The suitcase Carrier was an intentional target for jump fatigue. It was not just an innocent bit of collateral damage. Suitcase Carriers were a fundamental part of force projection prior to Phoebe.

If you do not want to wait for significant jump fatigue timers, you pay a high price for the convenience of using a Jump Freighter or a Titan with a Bowhead or Freighter to move your stuff. That is not trolling, it is just how it is.

Or you just stockpile ships all over the place and use a travel-fit Interceptor to move.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#25 - 2016-02-05 01:37:11 UTC
I prefer sling shotting my cargo to the next system using the advanced Trebuchet module...but hey what do I know?

+1
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2016-02-05 10:56:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Trant
FT Diomedes wrote:
The suitcase Carrier was an intentional target for jump fatigue. It was not just an innocent bit of collateral damage. Suitcase Carriers were a fundamental part of force projection prior to Phoebe.

I thought we had established that logistic carriage is not force projection.

I'm not aware that suitcase Carriers were an intentional target for Jump fatigue. Combat Carriers dropping directly into a fight were, but the Jump Fatigue changes couldn't nerf one without the other.

This suggestion is a simple method of moving the supply logistics role of the suitcase carrier to a supply logistics vessel where it should belong and be Jump Fatigue/Range penalised as per supply logistics, not combat vessel.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#27 - 2016-02-05 14:11:06 UTC
Force projection is not just hot dropping. Part of the goal was to make it harder for 10,000 players to load up their Carriers with ships and deploy from Tenal to Delve in a matter of hours.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2016-02-05 15:46:34 UTC
I have to agree that moving fitted subcaps without a clone vat bay isn't really much in the way of force projection. At best it allows subcap fleets to have more backup ships. The worst force projection in this game involves fleets who don't generally lose ships much. You want to nerf force projection, make it take time to jump in a capital ship, make it take time to activate capital weaponry. PL and other large nullsec groups can hotdrop small groups without much subcap backup because they can destroy the small fleet before it has time to bat an eye. Make the hotdropping fleet telegraph a bit more and this won't be the case--at least without a bit of work sealing off the exits.



I am opposed to the container having such a high ratio of internal space to external size, but like Danica Princip said, I think fitted ships should just be able to go straight into cargo and I would venture further and say they should be able to carry anything they want in their own cargohold. CCP has mentioned this is firstly a coding issue but I am confident that with their ongoing efforts to upgrade the code of the game, that this can someday be made a reality. As far as banning the use of putting filled industrials in ship maintenance arrays, I think that's just a matter of adjusting the volume of the ship. I'd make it simple and go for a 10:1 ratio--assembled ships are about 10x their packaged size and the max cargohold of an industrial should be about 10% of its volume. That way, filling your SMA with industrials is at best converting your SMA into a cargohold, and that's not hugely game-breaking.

I think also the Bowhead's capacity should be increased. It holds barely more ships than a carrier yet its entire purpose is carrying fitted ships. It can only hold two battleships.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#29 - 2016-02-05 18:23:18 UTC
I've run my 3b incursion bowhead through low, with a full incursion load... Use webs and maybe some links and you're fine, you can get all those ships off grid in under 5 seconds...
Iain Cariaba
#30 - 2016-02-06 00:02:02 UTC
FireFrenzy wrote:
I've run my 3b incursion bowhead through low, with a full incursion load... Use webs and maybe some links and you're fine, you can get all those ships off grid in under 5 seconds...

But, that takes effort, which we obviously can't have in EvE.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#31 - 2016-02-06 10:55:32 UTC
it takes 5 seconds, 6 if i actually bother to have the webs d-scan...
Previous page12