Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

LOL if you think nobody will sell out to get the shiny prizes.

http://imgur.com/akb596b

Just waiting for tuesday pm to do that !!

-9 accounts in total

Have fun guys

Thanks for the fish

210x the isk investment of a VNI to make about 4x the isk they make while also not being able to multibox and afk it, 10x the isk investment to make about 25% more isk than a carrier ratting, and you still apply shittily to AB armor cruisers down.

lol get ****** CCP. ITT garbage company doesn't understand balance.

i know worth a try

First off, I'm going to say this: I've never been one for carrier ratting. I just don't enjoy the idea of ratting and fielding that much isk for an activity I can do easier for far less work.

From a PvP stand point though, Carriers have been in a dire state for a while now and this will further knock them down. I can't comment on the supercarrier side of this change, but I will say it's probably quite over the top.

As many people have said here, EVE is in the middle of probably the largest cold war since its release (at least for me it feels this way), entities are scrounging for as many resources as they possibly can, so that when the next great war kicks off we can all jump in our ships and give the boot to whoever needs it the most without worrying so much about our wallets.

I do a lot of theorycrafting, as I'm sure many other posters here do. I also do a lot of testing, both on TQ and on SISI/TD when the time allows it. I can catergorically tell you that carriers are already weak. As a carrier pilot, you spend ridiculous amounts of time training into this fabled ship, only to see it go through so many balance passes from being an effective cap killer and logistics platform that required skill and finese into an effective subcap killer where we saw them being used solo for some interesting content to whatever the hell they are now.

I agree a carrier shouldn't be able to solo a competent gang. I agree there must be counterplay so I could somewhat forgive the initial nerf carriers faced after the changes and the introduction of the NSA to both the baby carrier and the supercarrier. BUT, going from being able to effectively fight off small gangs of ships with a lone carrier to being locked down by a single griffin? You can't be serious. Not only can my fighters not track said griffin, but now they can't even lock him so who cares.

I can't see any scenario where it isn't better to drop 5 HAW dreads on a gang than to drop 5 carriers on the same gang. FAX are supposed to be DPS support ships. Why would anyone commit a carrier in a capital fight when they can't hit the broadside of a barn without bucket loads of tracking? Plus, a dread will always be better than a carrier in a capital fight. Oh, and not forgetting the fact a dread also has a fleet hanger and SMA, so the ONE thing carriers had sacred isn't even there to persuade people who just want a suitcase, when you can get a dread far quicker for that purpose.

Oh and while I'm on about support; if I wanted to be a giant capital bhaalgorn, I'd fly an ACTUAL bhaalgorn. Even with these changes coming to pirate faction ships, a few bhaalgorns will still probably be cheaper than a carrier and equally if not more effective?

Now; from a PvE perspective, heres my two cents:

- Nerf the ratting bounties?
- Make anoms respawn slower, forcing people to move systems, hence making ratting more risky and active.
- Incursions? Think about those, just saying.
- Oh, and improve NPC AI and increase rat EHP?

And quite frankly, if someone has spent the best part of half a year training to sit in this ship and wants to use it for ratting, they should make more than Mr Alpha in a free account VNI. You're forgetting the sheer amount of effort that goes into training and piloting a carrier -- even just for ratting, god forbid those people be rewarded for their invest to the game, cmon guys.

TLDR: Are you sure CCP? Might wanna review the PvP side of EVE.

:same:

As a few others have said, changing the sites/anoms would make more sense in terms of fixing the issue.

I am not in favor of adding gates to prevent carriers/supers from Haven's or Sanctums but either

A) adding higher level sites in 0.0 for capitals to run
B) something that I didn't see mentioned, scale the difficulty up in the upper tier sites (Havens/Sanctums).
option B would maybe solve the issue of tons of AFK VNI/Ishtars running Havens. they would be forced to do lower level sites which would have less income and would make the capitals take longer to finish the sites. Both of which would slow down the inflow of ISK without effecting the overall abilities of the carries for PvP, etc.

these seem like better solutions that more accurately address the problem presented (too much isk generation) and also add more challenging game play

Oh boy they had to do it.
Not as bad as the whole Incarna update with all those **** ups and bad decisions. But hey! you're getting there!
Even CCP needs tears sometimes and this is how they do it.

But why nerf the fighters? You affect both PVP and PVE capability of the ship. You could have just done some better research or come up with a better solution if you're main problem is ISK making. And I can't possibly imagine that the CSM I voted for agreed with these drastic changes.

I just don't get it, could be me being a dumb ass or you are not explaining enough details why you made these changes the first place. So many questions and frustration.

Either the anomaly will let carriers/supers generate more ISK/hours because of the rats included or the carrier/supers will just continue running the current ones.

So I'm guessing these Devs never post or respond to these ever? Seriously CCP you should really read the msgs here loads of good ideas maybe it's time to actually listen to the customer base hmm? o7 CCP o7 R.I.P Eve by the sounds of things