Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 151
12-02-2010, 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by claydermunch View Post
err... i already made my point clear. earlier in this thread and another even.


Why build a carrier when you can summon holographic battleships that hurt?
Or if you really need fighters: why not a squadron of holo fighters?


The Tech is there, we are using it. Sci officers get to summon holographic battleships.
One would think that this path of technology gets primary attention from the engineering corps.

yknow. because it can summon ******n battleships out of thin air? ships that fire torpedoes? and phasers? And are actually quite bothersome if you skilled into holotech?
yknow?
Summonable Holoship = better than any sort of carrier you could ever come up with, and you can NEVER explain away the fact we are actively using a tech that allows sci officers to summon a small fleet of holoships.


If i were the head honcho of Starfleet, ANY admiral, engineer or other kind of dude coming into my office proposing a carrier in light of this summon holo fleet tech, would get led behind a shed to be mercykilled because the sheer amount of stupidity that officer apparently has contracted is not curable at that point.

yknow.



holoships = better than fighters (fluff wise)

Id pump all resources needed towards a project that produces ships that summon holoships at will.
Because its seriously awesome.

screw carriers.
your proposal is to put in more ships that can summon holo ships? So another copy and paste effort? How about something unique? Holo ships are still pets in my eyes and they are still actively taking up resources to generate and view on screen. No thanks..no more pet spam..

It gets hard enough to work with 3 or more carriers spamming pets and on top of that the klinks spam mines as well..with feds spamming mines and fed sci ships calling in holo ships the game client becomes laggy and yesterday alone when I was in a Pre-made we ran into this issue a couple of times and good lord the amount of lag we had was insane...people rubber banding all over the place

Enough is enough! NO more pets no TY. Give us a battle ship that can do all 3 roles like the carrier full fills (DPS/Tank/Support) cuz right now the feds do not have such a ship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 152
12-02-2010, 11:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katic View Post
I'm tired of typing up responses to these Fed Carrier demands and/or KDF Carriers are OP threads, so I'm just going to let StormShade answer for me:


If you want to beat Carriers, here's an example on how to do it.
we really need to sit down and hammer out what makes a ship OP. If it cannot be killed and cannot be hurt when your whole team is firing on it and focusing on it, then yes its OP. In that regard the carrier is NOT OP.

However the carrier does introduce in an imbalance which should not exist. No ship should be able to full fill (DPS/Tank/Support) all in one package. No fed ship does this, and i would like to requote what faithborn said a while ago and here it is:

Quote:
Carrier teams, on the other hand, suffer no drawbacks from Diminishing Marginal Utility. On the contrary, they get STRONGER when you put more of them in. 5 carriers is better than 4 carriers is better than 3 carriers. Lets look at why:

•Carriers can easily be set up in a very defensive and team oriented build - Using interconnected and synergetic bridge officers (i.e.: lots of cross healing and self tanking ability) the carrier can easily be a "tough-as-nails" ship to destroy. Similar to cruiser heavy teams, they are often ignored in favor of other, softer, targets of opportunity.

•Carrier pets become stronger the more of them you have - while 1 carrier may take 3 waves to assemble 1 compliment of fighters, 5 carriers takes one wave to assemble 1.66 complete compliments of fighters. Additionally with pets, like all DPS, there is a breaking point in which kills become significantly easier to attain through raw damage. The more carriers you bring the easier it is to reach that breaking point.

•Damage comes on autopilot - Yes, you need to target your opponent and launch them, but after that the npcs do all the work while you are free to heal your teammates and move into position. No need to coordinate 2+ escorts or raptors to move into position while healing them. No liabilities with more fragile links in the klinkball.

•Numbers game - with a full compliment of carriers, the pets reach the point where they can easily be considered your offense. Compare them to zerglings, a few of them will easily get smashed and blown up but if you produce them faster than your opponent can kill them the numbers add up. Oh, and they don't count as points either, so you don't actually have to worry about keeping them alive.
So as faith born said, a well setup defensive oriented cruiser heavy team may (not for certain) have the survivability of a well setup defensive oriented carrier heavy team, but the one thing the curisers will suffer from is DPS which the carriers will not thanks to pet spam.

People keep wondeirng why there are often threads of carrier is OP and this that and the other, the reason is simple as this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obelus

BoPs + Carrier. The problem here is you've given the side with the best offensive/defensive escort the toughest support ship.
So no, no ship is OP, but there is an imbalance currently.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 153
12-02-2010, 11:56 AM
Quote:
However the carrier does introduce in an imbalance which should not exist. No ship should be able to full fill (DPS/Tank/Support) all in one package. No fed ship does this
Cruisers fill this definition just fine and do excell at all three in combat, as has been seen by any who pvps.
The carrier is not OP.
Carrier teams, suck because of the lag cuased by the huge amount of pets and the targeting horror that brings to combat. Unfortunately the concept of an "all one type of ship" team already exists for other vessels and to limit the carrier is unfair to those who play it - unless one is going to limit multiples of all ships in combat to a set number.

Carriers can easily be set up in a very defensive and team oriented build - as can any ship if sacrifices are made in other areas of function and does not point to any OP nature in the design of the carrier.

•Carrier pets become stronger the more of them you have - Once again a sucky thing to encounter in pvp due to lag and targeting issues, but numbers have always been a huge advantage in combat. Not an OP design though as it is only true the more carriers one has on one's team.

Damage comes on autopilot - I hardly call the constant watching of pets and switching of targets for them as autopilot, but yes the advantage of the carrier (any carrier) is the stand-off approach to combat they can attain. The definition of a carrier I would think. Lauch fighters and stand back to be the CNC for them and the rest of the team involved. Good tactical use of the carrier, but hardly OP.

•Numbers game - This is the one advantage a carrier truelly has, it can brings numbers to the match to overwhelm a enemy in combat.

The carrier is no more OP than any other vessel in the game, but its pets do cause a problem and I feel that they are the only thing about the vessel that needs a rethinking.
Fewer pets, better control of them and no need to slot them in the UI to use them would go a long way to achieving a sense of balance that some feel is needed.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 154
12-02-2010, 01:40 PM
It's probably no use but I'll say it anyways: There was a big PvP match between two of the most successful KDF PvP fleets, one of which showed up with an all-carrier group. Which lost. Badly. To a bunch of cruisers and BoPs.

As StormShade mentioned, the devs are convinced the carrier is balanced, and not without reason. Adapt your tactics, play as a team, and stop trying to tackle a carrier like any other ship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 155
12-03-2010, 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roach View Post
Cruisers fill this definition just fine and do excell at all three in combat, as has been seen by any who pvps.
The carrier is not OP.
.
Nope they do not, as an active cruiser pilot i know this all to well, you either sacrifise survivability for dmg or vice-versa, you never get all 3 in one like you do in the carrier. Even if you went with an assault curiser or advanced assault cruiser your survivability is not the same as that of a star cruiser. If you went with the star cruiser your DPS is not the same as that of the former. The carrier does all of the 3 in one package where as no fed ship does this.

SInce i fly tac in a Vo'Quv i know that for certain the tanking capability of my carrier is far superior to any assault cruiser the feds possess. On top of which the DPS it outputs, it sure is damage on autopilot as Faithborn himself said once you have a bunch of them togeather. After you choose a target your pets are focused on it and all you have to do is sit back relax and offer support to the pets and position yourself carefully to support other team-mates. After playing my carrier i just got bored of it, i can see why many people choose to play this ship after the ship patch happened. We faced off against a pre-made fed team with a pug carrier team and we still chased them all over the arena map and beat them 15-4.

As faithborn said the carriers donot suffer from diminishing marginal utility that all other ships suffer from in the game. If you can build a team of carriers with the proper BO synergy, you can make any fed team beg for mercy.

Also the carriers are not OP, an op'd ship to me is something that cannot be killed, but they do create an imbalance which should not exist in the first place.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 156
12-03-2010, 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerubian_Assasin1
SNIPPED.
My experiences in pvp have shown me otherwise.
Until or if I experience what you claim to have experienced in pvp, I can only move from my own knowledge.
The carriers are not imbalanced in and of themselves and the pets are the only aspect in need of a change.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 157
12-04-2010, 05:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roach View Post
My experiences in pvp have shown me otherwise.
Until or if I experience what you claim to have experienced in pvp, I can only move from my own knowledge.
The carriers are not imbalanced in and of themselves and the pets are the only aspect in need of a change.
I actually disagree with this, if you consider the pets just one more collective entity, and assign someone with Aoe skills to handle them, pets cease to be an issue.

Imagine this Scenario: Two Carriers, Two Bops, and a Battle Cruiser VS Two Cruisers, a Science vessel, and Two Escorts. So long as the Cruisers tank/heal, and the Science Vessel Spams AoE & lockdown powers, the two Escorts can focus fire on the Carrier and Battle Cruiser, ignoring the BoPs, and the Feds will win.

The Bops won't be able to DPS the Escorts with the healing from the Cruisers and will themselves have problems with the AoE from the Science Vessel, the pets won't be able to stay in battle long enough to make a difference because of the AoE and scatter volley/BfaW from the Escorts or Cruisers, and the Carrier and Battle Cruisers won't be able to DPS anything either.

Two well planned teams, but even with the KDF Carriers and battle cloaks and uni slots on the BoPs and the better maneuverability of their Battle Cruisers, and so long as the Feds know what they're doing the KDF has little chance of success.

On the other hand, that same fed team vs two Battle Cruisers and three BoPs is in trouble. Statistically, both factions are even matches, it's the skill levels of the players and team make-ups which determine who wins or loses.

And Klingons have far more practice working together and making the best of a poor team make-up then the Feds do.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 158
12-05-2010, 05:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katic View Post
I actually disagree with this, if you consider the pets just one more collective entity, and assign someone with Aoe skills to handle them, pets cease to be an issue.
That's the crux of the problem - too few times are there actually escort players who deign themselves to clear out the fighters with their spreadfire cannons, instead preferring to go for some player ship because he wants to have a kill on his scorecard.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 159
12-05-2010, 11:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katic View Post

Two well planned teams, but even with the KDF Carriers and battle cloaks and uni slots on the BoPs and the better maneuverability of their Battle Cruisers, and so long as the Feds know what they're doing the KDF has little chance of success.

On the other hand, that same fed team vs two Battle Cruisers and three BoPs is in trouble. Statistically, both factions are even matches, it's the skill levels of the players and team make-ups which determine who wins or loses.

And Klingons have far more practice working together and making the best of a poor team make-up then the Feds do.
I'm not proposing a drastic change to the pets to satisfy the criers of "its OP".
I honestly think that the pet summoning and controls that were used in City or Villians for the master mind would work well here for carriers.
>
Make the fighters unspam-ible but give them the abilty to be summoned at a key stroke. This way you get your "X" amount of fighter pets upon activation and retain them through heal support or can resummon them to battle if thier numbers get too low. Boost the fighter in hull/shields or speed related defense to offset the non-spam them and make thier numbers thier biggest asset.
Also I believe that fighters should have more choices that come in different configurations and types such as Bomber, Strike fighter, anti-torpedo, etc.
>
Keep your BoPs the same as the fighters with no changes to thier summoned numbers as they should be just about balanced out, with maybe a slight decrease to the damage range of thier torps. Keep them on the same rules as the fighter as for as resummoning.
>
Increase the Carriers Pet usage by giving them more combat choice to launch from thier launch bays such as ECM/ECCM ships, Breaching pods, and other non-fighter related carrier support vechiles.
All these pets should be launchable from the carrier with a key stroke but the numbers of pet types said carrier should be controlled by level range from Captain to Max so as it should not be possible to launch every type of pet without sacrifice.
Give each pet (type) finer control aspects so the player can assigne a single pet, two or a group to targets and can individually each pets demeanor by single or group aspects. So some pets, say the fighters, can be set to a hostile attack demeanor that makes them rush to chase and kill prey, The BoPs can be given a semi support role of helping the carrier if its attacked or attacking prey that gets too close to it, etc.
The particulars of how the system could work are beyond my ability to ldescribe completely but the concpet is sound and works very well in other games (CoV) to balance out Pet classes against the other class types.

I in no way support any nerfs or changes to the carrier as a vessel itself but do feel the pet mechanics for it could use a change.

For those who will cry out about the targeting issue that so many pets and the other player summoned NPC's in combat, I say fix the targeting issue so those who use TAB to target can set preferences to ignore pets and the like and have it focus soley on Player piloted vessels. Certain considerations for "confuse" abilities would have to be made of course. I personally think people are expecting too much form a "target player only" command setting as it will lead to a forced ignoring of pets and the like in combat and the complaints will linger.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 160
12-06-2010, 12:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valias
It's probably no use but I'll say it anyways: There was a big PvP match between two of the most successful KDF PvP fleets, one of which showed up with an all-carrier group. Which lost. Badly. To a bunch of cruisers and BoPs.

As StormShade mentioned, the devs are convinced the carrier is balanced, and not without reason. Adapt your tactics, play as a team, and stop trying to tackle a carrier like any other ship.

I find it unsurprising that an all-carrier team lost to an opposing Cruiser/BoP team, as the Carrier's greatest weakness is an opponent that can cloak. Without the ability to target a foe, the Carrier cannot launch fighters, thus, the Cruiser/BoP team simply coordinates a massive alpha strike on a single Carrier, de-cloaks, the Carriers spam their first wave of deployables, the targeted Carrier gets hammered (most likely into oblivion), then the Cruiser/BoP team disengages, re-cloaks, waits for the deployables to de-spawn (if necessary, kiting them away from the Carriers and destroying them), then lathers, rinses, and repeats.

Carriers, on an individual basis, are not, fundamentally, overpowered; they have some quirks that introduce some potentially frustrating elements to PvP gameplay, but many of the misconceptions surrounding the Carriers comes from a lack of understanding of both how Carriers operate and how to counter those operations.

Just like any other type of ship, as you add more of the same type of ship to a Match, the more effective they become. Ever fought against a 5-Cruiser team, filled with 'competent' Cruiser Captains, each of which knows how to both Tank and Cross-Heal? How about fighting an all-Science Vessel team (personally, I think it's the scariest type of PvP team out there)? Ever fought a full, pre-made team of BoP's? In all of those cases, each additional ship of a similar class can multiply the effectiveness of all the other ships of that same class...

Is the Carrier's Force Multiplier more significant than other classes (e.g. does each additional Carrier make all the other Carriers more effective, by a greater margin than, for example, adding a Cruiser makes all other Cruisers more effective)? Possibly, though I would contend that it is quite comparable to the Force Multiplier of (in particular) Science Vessels and BoP's, perhaps moreso than Cruisers or Escorts, but not necessarily overpowered.

Are there improvements that could be made to reduce the major complaints about Carriers? Probably, with the most likely solution being to reduce the number of pets, buff them to a comparable level of power, and grant the Carrier Captain a greater degree of control over the pets; which would serve to alleviate some of the problems with lag, without compromising the Carrier"s role or ability to fulfill that role.

Just my 2 EC,
-Big Red


<hands Roach a plate of Nachos> Brought these for you... Did you bring the popcorn?
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:37 AM.