Player Features and Ideas Discussion

adding ships for the sake of adding ships causes nothing but balance issues.


just look at how OP you tried to make it

I think expanding use of good gameplay functionality is a good thing and that to a certain extent new shiny ships sell subscriptions.

As for skills the cost is large and the training time is fairly large, you also pretty much need the lot before stepping into one.

Previous posters idea was probably overpowered doesn't mean there isn't some value there in the idea.

your right we should also have a BB sized dooms day


carriers as they are right now are a ship built to support capital fleets and supers by removing sub caps off the field. this is balanced by their vulnerability to other capitals. you give this functionality to a sub cap and you will have a monster even if you limit it to only one fighter group. Don't get me wrong i see where you are coming from. I was disappointed when they decided not to give fighter bombers to carriers when they did the pass. These are a lot of fun to use but there are not many times i can go out in my wyvern; but i recognize why carriers could not use these and understand that sometimes balance has to come before gameplay.


issues ballance wise right off the bat

even one flight of light fighters can get to 1kdps with out giving up much in the form of tank or dps

these things would totally make standard carriers useless particularly if they were the standard ~150 mill of a battleship. you could field far more of these for the same price and they would be able to kill off the fighters of any carrier with ease.

they would hard counter any other drone boat making drone boats far less viable in most areas of the game

another issue is the NSA either these ships can't use it meaning they will be largely useless in small numbers or they can making them the new go to ship for gate camping WT.



the only way i could see these being balanced at all is if there were heavy restrictions placed on them

sig and speed slightly worse than normal BBs

tank of T1 cruiser

reduced fighter HP

this would mean you would have to warp these in at range and use them similar to ABCs

even then a few hyper-spacial rigs and they will still mow down small and solo gangs in LS, be use widely in HS wars and be a nightmare in large numbers.

that said when you have to put heavy penalties onto an idea you probably should rethink the idea in the first place

In Star Wars Rebels there is a Tiny Carrier that can simply drop 1 flight of light fighters. It's a well thought out boat for deploying Tie's a long way from home. 4 ties, dropped from below the ship. With a couple of main guns. Simples.


A support Carrier could have 4 tubes, and simply launch 4 light fighters. Whilst being BS size.


Interesting.



I figured that a heavy drone boat ( 7 drone capability specialist ) would have a similar punch, but if CCP were to allow limited Fighter Tubes in high sec that could also do the job.


:)

Thing is there are about 20 different ways to do this.

Could go T1 new BS hull, T2 BS, capital, hell there are even ways a BC hull argument could be made....

Then you would decide on NSA on subcap hull possibilities or no

Then there are arguments for everything from 1 tube to 5.....


Then you have all the arguments for how does it behave... does it sit and tank, does it try to avoid a fight, etc etc etc.....




What that all really means is by the time you get done looking at all those options there is someone who is going to have a problem with every single one. Rather than nitpicking the particulars of one out of a multitude of ways this concept could work, why not just a 'Do it CCP' or 'Don't do it CCP'?

you're right why work to find a workable idea either don't do it or just toss it in and spend who knows how many resources trying to balance it after

Because sitting here arguing over specifics of a concept CCP and maybe the CSM will ultimately decide on is a far less useful use of energy than gathering support for a concept and getting CCP's attention that it's something we want, and letting... IDK, the game dev's decide on the specifics of it? Then giving feedback and critiques after it hits the test servers.... *shrug* that's not at all sensible, we should sit here and keep arguing over whether it has 2 tubes or 3, is red or blue, and how many fish are on it, right?

the more people manage to flesh out the idea the more cpp and csm will have to work with just




HEY I WANT A LIGHT CARRIER PLZ!!


isn't going to go anyplace.


if you have better things to do then talk about it then don't lol no one is making you. just go I WANT ONE TOO!!! and be on your way

pointing out why an idea doesn't work is just as valuable as posting the initial idea.

just posting an idea then another idea will not get you a refined idea.

some people post ideas others poke the holes they see in them. were any of my counter points in this thread meritless?

how do you plan to make an idea better if you don't first get down to what is wrong with it?

if i was just saying

"no that's dumb" or "nah" i would get where you are coming from but i generally have been explaining why X wont work.

hell i even pointed out the problems with the idea i put out.



as for how many tubes i'm not sure on this at all. on the one hand making it morel than even one tube means you will have to add in extra code to limit the number of fighters in each tube and who know how hard that could be. At the same time making it only one tube detracts a bit from the micro management though for the most part this only ever comes into play with superiority fighters. And this isn't even a problem just for balancing DPS. a DPS reduction on the hull seems at first like a good idea until you remember how much fighters cost.



EDIT:

one thing that may be able to work and a role they could fill is BB sized E-war. give them 2-3 support fighter tubes and bonus to their racial E-war fighters. Hell this could kill two birds with one stone and add an actual role for the rather pathetic E-war fighters. this would work particularly well if they added in the other four E-war types to fighters.


maybe give them 3 total tubes either 2-3 support and one light fighter tube with a 100% reduction in damage from Attack fighters. this would also give us a sub cap counter to drone fleets. though again the 12 superiority fighters would hike up the cost so not sure how many would use