Two Weapon Carrier??
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
06-09-2011, 10:06 AM
This sounds like a disguised nerf to me...there is a cap on the number of fighters you can have active at any one time...and if that cap does NOT change, then you could have 10 million hangers...it just would not matter...because you can only have 18 fighters active.
That means that these extra hangers would essentially be useless...because the actual number of fighters you could have active would not change. About the only benefit you might see is that you could theoretically replace fighter losses faster...but the truth is that if you want to get rid of fighters...shoot down the carrier. Very much cost efficient.
And consider this...if carrier spam is not a problem...then adding two more bays...and increasing the cap to say...24 fighters, does what exactly? It gives carrier pilots the pre-nerf cap, but at the expense of practically all of the carrier's weapons. Sheesh. That sounds like a major nerf to me.
However, since we are on the topic of carrier weapons...I do have some ideas that I think could enhance carrier play. It seems to me that carrier weaponry is not treated properly at all. Our carriers are big platforms...and I think that they deserve weapons that are unique to big capital ships....things like...
1. A spinal mount or railgun. Something that throws big chunks of iron at a very, very fast speed...that does a LOT of damage if it manages to connect...
2. Long-range self-guided drones -- ship killers.
3. Close-in support weapons that act as anti-mine and anti-fighter (MVAM, Saucer, Scorpion, and even ships that get too close...like 2 klicks or so) weapons.
4. Advanced weapons electronics that allow targets to be engaged and fired on with main carrier batteries at extended ranges...perhaps 15 k or so.
5. "Heavy" versions of our beam weapons that do more damage than regular sized beam weapons, and perhaps have a bit more range as well.
I am sure that there are other ideas...but the point is that carriers are truly unique platforms...and they should have weapons that no other ship is large enough to even mount...and those weapons should directly complement fighter operations. As such..the carrier could be a long-range combat support vessel, providing heavy fire at extended ranges during a fleet action.
I think you get the idea...
I also think that...
1. If SPAM is not a problem..then carriers should be returned to their pre-nerf fighter and BoP caps...also, the launch rates should probably be looked at again, with the intent to make them cycle a bit faster.
2. Fighters, BoPs, and any "pet" that is launched from a carrier platform should be able to be controlled directly by the player.
3. More hangar diversity.
4. Damage buffed for both fighters and BoPs
5. An increase in the acquisition and launch ranges...perhaps from 15 to 25.
Just some thoughts....I know that if all of this got implemented, there would be heck to pay, since quite frankly, some of this is overpowered, and I know that...but that does not dismiss the fact that these are good starting points for ideas. I especially like the idea of carrier-only weaponry. I think that would do a great deal to make this class of vessel far more attractive to players, and it would do a lot for the game, as well.