Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

I think the real question you need to be asking is why would you want to use them anymore?

Why would you want to do such a horrible thing to carriers? For a start 2 of the 4 carriers would be unable to use their "bonus to ewar" - Mid slots on shield carriers are needed for shield not rubbish Gimmick bonus's. When considering things like hull bonuses you need to take support ships into consideration too - Devs can't do it so it is up to players to not suggest silly things Devs might think are good.

Reason no carrier can have an ewar hull bonus - Fax's suck unless in triage and even then they won't rep as much as a triage archon does now. So if your happy to see your carrier killed by a few assault cruisers while your deciding which one to jam, good for you but please don't risk forcing it on those who want carriers to be useful on a battlefield.

I can see it now - Capital remote sensor dampener - 100,000 pg 65 cpu. Do you really want to give up 1/5th of your PG for an ewar module? You can be as sure as, Bob lives, Devs won't give ewar bonuses without also giving the "benefit" (benefit = huge drawback) of capital ewar modules.

Carriers are about fighters (see that devs, carriers need fighters) - Don't risk screwing them worse than Devs already have by suggesting silly things.

Sorry if this is a bit harsh - But Devs have screwed carriers enough, please don't add to their demise with silly suggestions. Get on SISI and try to fit out carriers with what is available, you'll find it is just one compromise after another.

Yeah about Haw's - Interesting concept, until you are Haw fit and Dreads that aren't land on grid - Then you die a nice slow death with no way to refit to defend yourself - Devs thought that one out nicely, suicide Dreads are nearly as bad as Carriers.



Devs like adding new things (which is good) but really just don't think their usefulness through very well.

Dreads and Carriers both got PG and CPU nerfed, yet Every new Capital module has high CPU and PG requirements.
Try fitting a triple extender buffer fit (recommended for buffer tanking) on a shield carrier

No, the shield resistances are still the same on every ship:

Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 20 / 40 / 50

So I think we are on crossed paths here - You seem to be talking about A dread fit with Haws, where I am looking at possibly squads of them in a fight. So your not just losing 1 blap dread who should not have been alone to start with - Your going to lose a fleet of them AND none have the capability to fight back, they literally just sit and wait their turn to die.
Of course there is the rare occasion where a bunch of Haw fit Dreads may kill a Dread that is fit to fight capitals but I wouldn't be betting on the survival of my dread on that outcome.

There was no capital shield extenders or neuts or many other new capital modules either - But if Devs were to give carriers hull bonuses to Ewar, you can be sure Capital sized mods would be right there at the same time.
Simple fact is - Devs do not want carriers to be good at anything, except to have the ability to create lossmails for their owners. That one they will surpass every other ship in Eve.

Triple extender Chimera - My apologies, I hadn't played around with the Chimera in a while, when I 1st tried you couldn't fit it. Now all you need do is drop the DSU's to the best meta so you have enough CPU.
2.5 million EHP is nothing to be sneezed at - As long as you've got Fax's (one won't rep enough to keep you alive long) close by.
Shame about the shield doctrines really - They would have a lot to offer, 1 if done right, 2 the Archon wasn't just better at everything than the Chimera.

You right, Fax's are in terrible shape - But I've given up on those (as it seems have Devs)

It is a shame Devs are unable to think outside the box and couldn't make capital warfare something other than - Get as close to the Fax's in fleet and stay put till you die or win.
Emergent game play, strategy, tactics - Yep capital fights will have it all - Land on grid (emergent) anchor up, bubble up (strategy) kill stuff till you die (tactic)....

CCP has designed a whole new meta for capitals - That requires exactly the same things it did before. More in fleet and on grid is the only reliable offense.
Supers will be great except - They will never get used unless you know you have the enemy outnumbered by at least 2 or 3 to 1.

Now all that is needed to refit a blap dread is tank, a mobile depot, a friendly carrier or nestor and refit.
In a week it would require a whole different set of guns AND tank mods.
Only problem is - You can't carry a spare set of guns so no matter what happened with refitting, your screwed. *Except for the Naglfar, it is capable of carrying 2 guns to refit.


Combat refitting aside - The existing meta is, everyone as close together as possible - Nothing changing there, in fact it will be more crucial than ever before.

Yes Fanfest is the priority, so any real "fixes" will likely come a few months from now, if not longer. CCP like the "wait and see how this plays out", then we will make slight adjustments if needed. Fax's - Don't really have a decent starting point for the "wait and see" period, which renders all the other changes pretty mute.

To do a capital upgrade like this, it has to incorporate more than just micro management and nerfed EHP. It requires a whole new thinking on how capitals could and should be used.

I always admired game developers as being extremely smart, creative, out of the box thinking people - Why is CCP being the exception to this rule with capitals?

There are so many possibilities, so many opportunities - All wasted.

untill release i'm still going to have faith but once the 27th hits it will be lost we all know how long it takes ccp to come back to ships after a pass

Random question for you. Mainly relating to the static blob meta.
What if they removed the stationary penalty from Siege & Triage? (& Bastion to match as a result also but irrelevant to caps)
So they are about being local tank rather than remote tank, but don't lock you into a single place.
They would have to be vulnerable to webs & tackle if that was the case obviously, but since CCP now have the ability to vary resistances to different things like that, they could actually do that.

I know it doesn't solve the carrier problem still, but it solves the stationary blob at least. Which means Carriers can be mobile with FAX escorting them.

Cheers, was an interesting thought brought on by the comments about stationary meta. I think increasing the warp range has to occur with carriers the way they are. And isn't the lock range cap going away, or are they just giving carriers & citadels a special exception to that.

Hmmm, What if fighters could short warp on the battlefield only? Avoids them being too fast when chasing something, they warp to 100 from their target then fly the rest of the way or something like that. While we are on mobility ideas.

The fighter speed seems ok once they are inside that range belt for chasing things, but getting across the battlefield seems the issue?

Then they can also warp back to the carrier at the same range for recall, so not instant recall, but not wait 10 minutes either.
Interdiction immune to get through bubbles could be a possible.
Makes interceptors and the like really matter for locking down fighters to kill them to prevent warp.
Might be restating an idea mentioned in the thread but didn't think I'd seen it yet.