Player Features and Ideas Discussion

You're plenty good at the first part..... but refining ideas also requires the second part.



The NSA works on a fighter tubes concept. It's not a single fighter, but a flight of fighters, launched and docked in what CCP chose to call a tube. Moving away from that would require rework of the code yes. Bonusing a BS hull to be able to fit the NSA would allow it to keep that carrier feel, keep the carrier/fighter code(with a minor amount of rework). I'm not sure where we got into the concept of individual fighters. The change I would consider here is a reduction in the NSA lock range and scan. Currently I think it goes out to like... 4000 or something, would need to double check, but if it were to be kept in much tighter that may help with reducing some of the concern with gate camping?




2 fighter tubes seems to be the best balance point to me, that way you don't need to put penalties on them, keep the carrier feel, and have some fighter choices. I could also make argument for 1 tube for Light fighters, then two others for support fighters, helping to keep that potential DPS issue in check. Could be 5% bonused for the 2 tube concept, or not bonused for the 3. These things all already exist on carriers. They have limits on what kind of fighters you can put in tubes. No new coding here, except for the actual coding for the ship, etc. Is there something about coding these I'm missing that you think would require major alteration of the fighter code?


Yeah, this thing needs to be big and slow. It's a mobile flight deck. Large sig, slow speed slow align.


I disagree on the fighter HP reduction, because as you've pointed out, they are not difficult to kill off. If they don't get HP bonused they shouldn't be all too much different than trying to deal with a gecko from a rattlesnake, albeit they're fighters. To stop them from being majorly bonused with FSU's, maybe keep the hull at 2 or 3 highs?




idea, assess, discuss.

1k dps is not 'extremely high' and those sacrifices would be built into the hull in terms of less tank, or slower, or other ways, up to and including not many slots. Further, once its fighters are dead, it does 0 dps. How is that not sacrifices? But you just go assume and be belligerent.

P sure two tubes of support fighters or 1 tube of lights and 1 tube of superiority doesn't break 2k dps. I haven't eft'd it, but pretty sure it doesn't.

The NSA provides the massive scan res bonus that allows carriers near instalock. You brought up gate camping concerns, I responded with possibly reducing the bonus it provided, and not having these lock out to 3700k. Your next move is to say you don't get it. Well played.

So if you limit the hull to two highs.... that's one for an NSA, then maybe 1 more for an FSU..... seems pretty limited to me...

So, everyone running off with this whole "pocket Carrier" concept seems to have missed one rather essential thing here.

You need a better reason for something to exist than "It would be cool! Why not?!?!". That's not an argument, it's a slow pitch asking to get fouled...

We already have EWar Battleships and it seems at least somewhat likely that the Black Ops BSes will lose their slightly ridiculous agility related bonuses in favor of BS EWar bonuses. EWar fighters could certainly use a second look, but they don't need a weird BS-sized hull for that, they need CCP to find the balance between massive range EWar and not-full-strength EWar.

@cade


1

There are only 2 ewar bbs and they are only a very niche ewar

2 there is only one blops with an agility bonus and it is useful.

3 blops have 0 need to gain ewar as that role is filed just fine by the recons

4 as a class blops are already incredibly well balanced so are all the ships used in a blops fleet. Each one has a particular role and no one steps on each others toes. They do all this and still maintain balanced in the overall meta. If there is any class that does not need a rework it's blops

Other than the laughably weak ecm fighters that balance is there the only problem is they are not worth losing 1/3 of your dps and valuable hanger space

I think 2 tubes maximum is enough, normal carriers have 3, escort carriers should be weaker.
Defender launcher is unnecessary.
It should have it's own skill that requires fighters first.
Definitely no NSA.
I think these should be T2 battleships, more expensive than the other two, but less base EHP.
I would like to keep the refit ability, but we could make these ships unable to use it, so they need to dock to refit.

except the speed bonus on the panther and agi on the sin are incredibly useful.

except that the widow is one of those nice E-war BBs it does something no other ship in the game does and that is an extremely powerful ECM burst. only an idiot fits this thing for full ECM rather than bridging a falcon who does the job much better and cheaper. Blops don't need E-war tacked on. Each blops has a role and each one does it incredibly well.

you say the sin an panther should just have those bonuses backed in and get new ones. this only shows that you do not understand how powerful they are. take them on their own and yeah they don't seem like much but combine them with the cloak bonus and you begin to see it. the sin can get into warp faster than your adv cruiser and it's almost impossible to de-cloak a panther that can begin to approach ab speeds cloaked this can then be combined with pulsed mwd cycles to rapidly re position at speeds over 3km/s.
[/quote]

the reason they are used more now is not because they are more affordable. there was a very slight balance tweak to them along with indirect buffs in the changes and additions of other mods to the game. and they are in an extremely good spot.

for the most part the only reason ppl think they need a ballance pass use an argument like "widow has ewar they should all have e-war" "sin has agi buff i dont understand it so it should change" "blops haven't seen a major pass yet so they should get one"


now nothing is perfict and im sure the bass stats could be more fine tuned but things as drastic as bonuse changes are not needed and would servve only as a way to risk upsetting the balance.

take for example if you gave them racial t2 e-war. the redeemer would become vastly more valuable than the other three followed by the sin. where as right now there is slightly more use of redeemer and widow but only because they tend to be the most attractive looking to new blops pilots. go and look at people who have flown them regularly for a while and you see an extremely even spread.