These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123
 

My ratting carrier got tackled .. well done CCP
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
W33b3l
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2016-05-01 20:37:21 UTC
Pandora Carrollon wrote:
I'm not all that familiar with captials so this is kind of a silly question...

Is this the proper balance?

Should a carrier or other capital ship just be able to quickly down something close in size? (I would think a battleship would qualify as a capital ship just from the modern definition of a capital ship. Maybe it doesn't apply in EVE.)

As a relation, in a modern wet Navy, a carrier is most certainly vulnerable to even a cheap diesel submarine. This is whey they have large escort fleets to sweep the seas and skies clear of threats before they can land on the carrier.

If carriers are intended to be able to fly solo and be highly dangerous, then yes it sounds like it's balanced. If they are supposed to have a need for logistic or support ships around them, it sounds like the pendulum may have swung too far the other way.

So I guess the real question is, what is the intent of these super capital ships?



Game wise I believe so, although I've never flown one.

As for the modern day comparrison, think of it this way. A space ship can not sink. One good hole in even the largest of boat on the water and blurb blurb blurb down to Davey Jonses Locker.

A space ship just continues to float there being able to use any functional systems until it explodes (in game) or if "real life" until the guns are to damaged to fire and or the crew dies..... Or is explodes.
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#42 - 2016-05-03 19:57:18 UTC
Game balance wise, the song we goons sing is that subcaps must have an effect on capital gameplay.

The lowered hitpoints is ccp's attempt to do this, but they also drastically increase capital ships effectiveness on subcaps. It's easier to kill frigates in carriers and dreads than it is in battleships. Also the aoe weapons on titans ignore things like sig radius.

Pre-citadels, goon war philosophy is that you can't have unsupported caps on the field. We only used ours when we had subcap supremacy. Now maybe you can have unsupported caps, but no one has done it on a strategic level. Also supercapitals still can't tackle each other so well without bubble support.

How the Imperium and PL/NC interprets the mechanics is what will dictate the meta in mass combat.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
Yang Aurilen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#43 - 2016-05-04 02:57:18 UTC
W33b3l wrote:
Pandora Carrollon wrote:
I'm not all that familiar with captials so this is kind of a silly question...

Is this the proper balance?

Should a carrier or other capital ship just be able to quickly down something close in size? (I would think a battleship would qualify as a capital ship just from the modern definition of a capital ship. Maybe it doesn't apply in EVE.)

As a relation, in a modern wet Navy, a carrier is most certainly vulnerable to even a cheap diesel submarine. This is whey they have large escort fleets to sweep the seas and skies clear of threats before they can land on the carrier.

If carriers are intended to be able to fly solo and be highly dangerous, then yes it sounds like it's balanced. If they are supposed to have a need for logistic or support ships around them, it sounds like the pendulum may have swung too far the other way.

So I guess the real question is, what is the intent of these super capital ships?



Game wise I believe so, although I've never flown one.

As for the modern day comparrison, think of it this way. A space ship can not sink. One good hole in even the largest of boat on the water and blurb blurb blurb down to Davey Jonses Locker.

A space ship just continues to float there being able to use any functional systems until it explodes (in game) or if "real life" until the guns are to damaged to fire and or the crew dies..... Or is explodes.



It's like there isn't any walls inside a ship to prevent one hole in the hull someone was using as a replacement for women to sink the entire ship.

Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
Jennifer Maxwell
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#44 - 2016-05-04 02:58:36 UTC
Elnia Arthie wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Elnia Arthie wrote:
Tackled a Thanatos with two interceptors, both nearly died within seconds to his Firbolg I (!).

Quite ridiculous that a carrier can 1) lock them up so quick and 2) is able to hit them so hard.



Yea, it's ridiculous that a combat capital ship can actually defend itself against ships trying to hold it down so it can be killed. The nerve of that guy doing that...next time he should just give up and die!


Ever heard about those giant combat ship the US Navy doesn't send out alone because they can't do **** against small stuff? It's crazy, just like there could be roles or something and you could not be good in every role with one single ship.

A real life carrier is most certainly not defenseless against another ship. Even alone, it can and will do massive damage if not outright murder any other ship it's put against simply because it can launch fighter after fighter after fighter, all of which will have a full load of ordinance capable of doing heavy damage to all aspects of a modern ship of any size. And if the carrier was truely in danger, the fighters would more than likely risk their lives to destroy the offending ship, because carriers hold thousands of crew aboard them, and if you're a pilot you have a duty to protect those people to the best of your abilities.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#45 - 2016-05-04 05:22:16 UTC
Warships of pretty much all types are ridiculously vulnerable to small boat attack when operating in high traffic littoral areas. However that's in large part due difficulty of differentiating between civilian craft and hostile craft. The whole business is largely considered an antiterrorism/force protection issue rather than a deficiency in the combat characteristics of particular ships.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2016-05-04 07:38:08 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Good news! Since carriers can blap subcaps with ease all the "pro PvPer's" are now using them in station games.

I'm guessing this is one of those unintended consequences?

CCP how about raising the redock timer for aggressors to about 30 mins instead of 1? Better yet do away with combat altogether when escape is a single click to insta dock.


I'm not sure insta-locking carriers capable of alpha'ing ceptors is a good idea.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#47 - 2016-05-04 12:06:19 UTC
Don't get to excited these things are new and ppl are still using old tactics on them. Thoughs of us who did everything we can to break these on sisi have found just how weak they are to very simple set ups.it won't take long for the rest of Eve to as well.

Also small tip for interceptors use superiority fighters they do better dps even after the reduction. They also have a much greater range making it very hard for the interceptor to keep point and out of their range (impossable with a single omni fit)

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
marVLs
#48 - 2016-05-04 15:13:12 UTC
I think that's awesome, now capital ship is a real capital ship, and its worth flying them for more players.

It was so dumb mechanic to such a big, skill intensive and costing a lot could be killed by anything... Now more peps will want them, even those PVE players because they have a chance to defend themselfs, or at least have some fun killing few dudes before die.
That's the perfect strategy for CCP, more players in null, more engaged, more isk sink, more fun.

Damn i myself want carrier now soo badly and im sure i will move to null or wh corp to fly them both in pvp and pve Bear
Previous page123