When they’re getting rid of POSes wholesale by taking their functions and putting them into brand new structures because POS code is (as they’ve mentioned themselves before), and I’m only slightly paraphrasing here- “a massive cluster-■■■■ 5 cheese orgy of spaghetti code,” we as players dont need specific knowledge of the code base. Not when CCP itself basically says the code is extremely suboptimal and likely didnt follow reasonable coding practices (ie commenting what stuff does so proceeding coders know wtf you did with the code).
It doesn’t have to be news to be a solid argument against a shitty, low-utility idea that appears to appeal to about one person. The fact that things are abused doesn’t mean you just forge ahead with bad ideas that have obvious abuse potential.
Guess you’ll just have to learn to live with a bowhead and a jump clone.
Oh yea, the other thing, if you dont want people to know what ships you have coming, you can also achieve that with a damn cyno. Light it, then have a titan bridger shotgun your entire fleet into the fight. Viola, instant bloating of local combat space and no warning of what was on standby to wreck things.
I guess we have a different definition for abuse there.
I intended it as some new game mechanic introduced and it was expected/intended for a certain type of usage and players finding about 10 different things to actually do with it.
And, if we talk about abuse potential, every game mechanic in EvE can/could/will be abused in some form or way that was neither planned nor intended.
Well, that’s the nature of an idea. Some will like it, some will not.
I like my idea and I think the gameplay would benefit from it. You don’t and that is your god given right.
You know about opinions, right ? If not, google “opinions are like meme”.
You have criticism, you’re welcome to put real solid arguments up for a change.
I can understand that a potential feature/idea ( not mine specifically ) cannot be introduced because older code has to be analyzed/refractored/updated and whatnot.
It just marks the code as feature complete and in need of optimization.
That’s CCP internal and it’s a pitty that they have to spend so many manhours on it.
All that has nothing to do with discussing an idea ( any idea ), sadly.
Your idea has been dragged left, right and center through the mud, both here and in the 2352352357235 other posts with exactly this same kind of idea.
You’ve proven with posting it in the first place that you did not do your due diligence,
you have failed to provide any meaningful reasons why this should ever be implemented at all,
you fail to understand why this could never work without a major code rewrite (and nobody of us needs to look at the code for that. The basic understanding of game mechanics is more than enough. Something you appear to be lacking as well).
All I got from your responses is that you don’t understand jack ■■■■ about game mechanics and don’t have much of a clue about software engineering either. Not to mention that you’ve proven yourself incapable of thinking beyond a basic level.
If you want a official CCP response on this, you should do what you should have done in the first place. Look for similar topics with an idea like this instead of posting it yet again.
The devs won’t bother reading this thread just to repeat what everyone else in here already told you.
It has everything to do with it actually. Does this… thing, for lack of anything more accurate to describe it, have enough potential promise to add or improve content and the like to the game IN A WAY NOT ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR BY THINGS ALREADY IN THE GAME* to dedicate the perceived high amount of manhours needed to put it in the game? So far, no. That means it’s kinda wishful thinking to bother discussing something that, as it stands now, is so far below “bottom rung” priority, it probably isnt even worth the digital space it occupies on the forum server.
Unfortunately, you’re also being stupidly obstinate about legitimate criticism being given by others. Quite frankly, if someone doesnt like an idea as it is, it isnt THEIR responsibility to add/change the idea so that they do like it. Why would they? Far better, and more simplistic to point out “this is why it isnt going to work” and let you, the person behind the idea, do the appropriate footwork. Additionally, CCP dev manhours are far more valuable actually spent improving the game than personally reading and replying to each and every F&I thread.
So, to also reiterate what you’re clearly willingly ignoring- how does this improve upon the function and gameplay already in the game that is served by the cynosural field generators and related fleet-assist modules? A group of modules, mind you, that dont require new skills, dont require ship designs, dont require balancing passes, dont require months of internal testing, dont require fundamental code changes for a singular feature, dont require making sure ■■■■ doesnt break every time you press a button, and most of all, can be fit on expendable ships worth less than a 20th to 20000th of even the most basic combat capital ship someone can buy.
TLDR: It cant. Try again.
edit: in short, you’re also suggesting the creation of a capital ship that is utterly ■■■■■■■ worthless in combat, yet attempts to do the same exact thing a TITAN CAN DO. You know? Land on grid, turn on clone bay, vomit out pods that can jump in ships from the titans ship bay? Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooor that a titan can shotgun an entire subcap fleet to a cyno? Both of which keeps the fleet out of local until it’s too god damn late to do anything.
To which I am telling you, that has been proposed in those exact words at least half a dozen times before. CCP has even responded to people asking questions about this sort of thing at Fanfest. The answer is “Legacy Code says no”.
They would, you’re talking about a ship transporting players like a Station.
Okay, you have a right to your skepticism, but CCP’s the one you need to convince here, so you might want to do some digging. All the people you’re shooting down out of hand have been around F&I for years and are generally pretty keyed into the things CCP says about how the game works and what it can or can’t do.
What you’re proposing is in the realm of “things it can’t do without significant re-architecting of core code and the changing of basic assumptions made when that code was written”.
Much like any potential plans for Valkyrie integration, the problem you’re looking at here is that there’s no situation where it’s not more effective to put those same pilots into capital ships of their own.
Beyond that… it’s already somewhat possible: use a titan with a clone bay.
Finally: Fighters aren’t drones, within the game’s setting. They’re piloted by people. So, to that degree, carriers are just like modern carriers: they transport and launch smaller, piloted craft that are faster, more highly maneuverable, and can’t travel the same distances unaieded.
Why is everybody pretending that the pilots are all on the same ship ?
You can, if you have tractor beams, pull one or more containers behind you for ages.
Anchoring/connection a ship to a carrier with the use of tractor beams and a repulsor field ( to keep it in place ) is what I propose.