Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Just this. Please just fix problems when you find them. Don't do a bunch of unnecessary stuff. Post things like "Skynetting is bad!" Then address skynetting. I love EVE, but your entire game smacks of a beta test. I understand you are offering an unfinished product, but please instill some faith in us players that after years and years of this stuff you are getting close to figuring this stuff out. Do we really need Drifters, or do we need you to get your act together and just finish the game you have been making for a decade?

Wasnt an attack at you, you are posting with a main, or an alt i suspect as its in goonswarm, not some rando corp with 1 player in it or whatever with a forum sig saying something along the lines of "alt poster, cause yes", unlike the others that keep replying.

And yeah. bubbles shoul dmake the super have to chose. I'm very much agreeing with you. I was trying to bring up the whole "well supers / carriers could do x" which puts them at risk while still doing what they do. I could see groups getting a competent wing of people that have the sole job of get in there and find these guys. Hell i'd finally have a use for the broadsword sitting around.

Also yes, thats why I can now turn on my cell and stuff the entire time of the flight. They still want you in airplane mode. At least in the USA.

I started to say, "Why not just make the carrier have to be ongrid to assign fighters...", but....well...I backspaced and deleted the rest of my discussion on that, because...I don't know. There's definitely a lot of opportunity for comedy there. It doesn't matter if something is risky or doesn't seem very viable in a lot of situations, someone is going to try it, and maybe even find a way to do it well. Or die horribly trying. :)

And don't remove the ability of fighters to warp. Pilots who don't want it can just uncheck "attack and follow". And if they don't, well, that's their problem.

Hey CCP. I have an idea. How about you stop screwing with OUR game. Fighters have been able to warp around with carriers since the beginning and they have been able to assist other players in fleet for at least as long as I have been playing this game. If you're trying to ruin the game, so far, you're doing a great job of it. Keep it up and no one will be playing Eveonline.

In regards to the Carrier, the current tactics employed are inline with Carrier Philosophy.
( I.E. That Carriers are not meant to be on the same grid as another hostile ship.)
They are meant to operate away from any direct combat. The Link below demonstrates how Carriers are meant to be deployed. If you wish to remove a Carrier's sole role, then remove it from the ship line up, and replace it with something that isn't a Carrier. If not, then keep it the same, and keep in mind the fact that Carriers trumped the Battleship for a reason.






http://lexingtoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/aircraft-carrier-invulnerability.pdf


Regards,
Ahmburg

yeah. thats what im talking about, go head and bump me. I wont care. Skynet basically has three configurations for pvp.

Home defense: In a border system. The people getting skynetted are generally smaller groups, frigs and what not that are just out on a roam and we have decided to gatecamp with a skynet super. Super in a safe aligned won't generally care and will just sit there all day. even if a dic or two comes in, the gate camp just warps to super, kills pointy guy and then goes on with their lives. Lots of these fights are going to happen on regional borders, and either you'll not have to worry about cynos due to range, or have to lock down that one gate. Also since the changes that were made to the capitals a few patches back, you tend to have this system be the home system of the alliance. IE you have a big beehive just waiting for someone to yell super tackled and they all undock.

Home defense random system: something like a situation where a r64 or a CSAA got hit. This is going to be set up in advance and there will be a big fleet over here anyways. if you catch one of the supers, your fleet is going to warp to it and hit it. our fleet will then probably: eat your now unguarded dreads in siege > go to super > kill your points on super while leaving our own logi back to rep tower while you are distracted.

Attack Skynet: Lol, will most likely just be the supers entering system either though a cyno on your stick to try and get bumps. or jump though the gate and warp to someone cloaked 10km away from your own skynet to try and get bumps. Then we will just put the supers on field.

i don't want to see fighter warp removed at all in quite a few cases. carrier have a very unique role on the battlefield nowadays. that warping ability makes them separate from all of its capital brothers. carriers become very useful for system defense which is one of the few things they are good at as a capital.

Yeah, carriers were uninteresting and worthless before skynet. They have absolutely no unique features about them except to enhance gate camps.

It's bad enough these days so many people are skittish and unsportsmanlike about jousting space ships, but you seem to want a risk free way to add an absurd amount of DPS to gate camps. If you aren't going to put your chips in the pot, you shouldn't be able to win big with them.

I think removing fighter assist is fine. It was a fun, but broken, mechanic... mostly fun because it was broken.

I would like for fighters to retain warp ability. More for uniqueness and RP, but also for balance. That's why they're manned... right? If we removed warp-ability, then we would be sacrificing people for something drones could accomplish.

By your justification, there shouldn't be power without corresponding risk. Taking a low mobility carrier or super on to the field and attacking on the same grid is pretty risky. Having fighters able to warp follow would give more tactical options and balance out the risk better. After the fighter/fb scan range nerfs, they are more niche then ever.

Good Idea mate