These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Alternative fix to fighter nerf
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Luc Chastot
#1 - 2017-06-10 23:24:47 UTC
Restrict access to all sites except Forlon Hubs, Gas Havens and Sanctums. That should decrease ticks by a decent margin; maybe make some other minor adjustments to bounty payouts and/or NPC hitpoints.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Axure Abbacus
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2017-06-10 23:32:29 UTC
It might be a good idea to double post the idea in the "lol'd-we're nerfing your stuff" Upcoming Features forum. If you are loud enough maybe the fighter Nerf won't be too extreme but the fighters will be getting the pipe soon.

It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#3 - 2017-06-11 12:42:59 UTC
In PVP the fighter nerf affects all carriers equally. No one gains or loses advantage. FC's will need to adjust their doctrines to account for the reduced dps but the playing field is level.

In PVE the fighter nerf is essentially the only way CCP could reduce the dominance of carriers without impacting people running the sites with different classes of ship. Increasing the likelihood that NPCs will target fighters will make it a lot harder to multibox since you will need to micromanage your fighters to keep them alive. Proper thing!
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2017-06-12 18:01:15 UTC
Quick disclaimer, I don't own a carrier; I'm training into one now for doctrine, but I've got nothing to gain at the moment from a ratting perspective by un-nerfing carriers. I've also recently discovered a new way to do PI (my secret, I'm sure others out there are doing it too) that makes tens of billions of isk a month. I haven't started it yet but the math is quite encouraging.

I disagree entirely that "the only way" is to nerf carriers. The OP's suggestion to restrict access to certain sites would be overboard as well, because then carriers couldn't rat at all.

That said, they could offer a compromise.

Allow carriers into 10/10s. They're already on super-farm status with RR Sins and similar. Getting the carriers out into the 10/10s might encourage them to get tackled by roams more often, which in turn could lead to more groups doing capital escalations.

This would of course be coupled with the un-nerfing of carriers.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#5 - 2017-06-12 18:05:20 UTC
Batlec's bountyless capital escalations are the best idea I've heard so far.

Gated anoms are a horrible idea, bounty reduction hurts too many other groups of people. Capital escalation mechanics already exist and could easily add an additional HP buffer for carrier ratting without impacting other uses of carriers.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#6 - 2017-06-12 22:37:22 UTC
Luc Chastot wrote:
Restrict access to all sites except Forlon Hubs, Gas Havens and Sanctums. That should decrease ticks by a decent margin; maybe make some other minor adjustments to bounty payouts and/or NPC hitpoints.


There are no mechanics in place to do this and it will require an entire revamp of anoms to allow this mecanic.
Cade Windstalker
#7 - 2017-06-12 23:06:13 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Luc Chastot wrote:
Restrict access to all sites except Forlon Hubs, Gas Havens and Sanctums. That should decrease ticks by a decent margin; maybe make some other minor adjustments to bounty payouts and/or NPC hitpoints.


There are no mechanics in place to do this and it will require an entire revamp of anoms to allow this mecanic.


I think he's talking about putting acceleration gates on them so you can't bring in a Carrier or Dread.

That said, I don't think it's a good idea. You're basically saying "lets restrict Carriers to only the worst sites", but that creates its own problems. Just for a start it assumes that that's enough to sufficiently contain the issue. On top of that it also assumes that no one will figure out any tricks to raise efficiency from just those sites, which is a big "if" in a game like this. Lastly, and probably most importantly, it has the potential to make it so that a Carrier literally can't run because the only sites left are gated sites.

If CCP wanted to make Carrier ratting flatly impossible or not feasible they could, but that's clearly not their objective. They simply don't want it to be so amazingly good and profitable compared to other available options to the point that it's a massive faucet negatively impacting the rest of the economy.