Light Carrier

(DrysonBennington) #61

No, you didn’t read. I lost a carrier to three ships in Low. Trying to scramble the conversation again by cross indexing threads.

Go rest your head and take a nap.

(Wander Prian) #62

You lost your carrier to a cyno-loki, a dreadnaught and a supercarrier. 2 of those ships are designed to kill capital ships.
Did you have a cyno ready you could jump out in case of danger? Capital ships are not solo ships. They require backup and at least one cyno character from the pilot.

(HiddenPorpoise) #63

“What counters this ship?” is what we’re getting at. Everything you have laid out combines into a ship that has the advantage in all possible situations going so far as to be better than a carrier in most categories.

(Wander Prian) #64

Not to mention the “drawback” of making a corporation who owns one of these wardeccable. What happens when you move the carrier out of the corp? It would be laughably easy to be 100% safe from wardecs.

(Salt Foambreaker) #65

There is NO CHANCE it is a dumb idea eh?

(DrysonBennington) #66

100% free from war decs but not from Suicide Gankers which would become the remedy that you are complaining about.

Once the gankers start finding Capsuleers flying Light Carriers they will then and try and issue them Carrier Permits based on their already eccentric procedure of issuing mining permits. If the Light Carrier pilot doesn’t comply then they would get ganked obviously.

(DrysonBennington) #67

You are free too believe what you want to believe. Your belief however is not fact nor reality no matter how many posts you create saying something will fail so that you will be convinced of your own prophecy in being such a powerful being.

I also suggest you post with your most experienced PvP character to substantiate
such a valid knowledge based of PvP experience seeing as how Salt Foambreaker has only one loss back in 2016.

Salt Foambreaker, your credentials are laughable not even laughable but rather…non existent.

(Wander Prian) #68

Gankers are not a balancing factor for ANY ship in the game. That is not how this works. That is not a valid drawback for this ship. This is not going to be ganked any more than any other ship in the game. Most likely even less due to it’s insane attributes and abilities.

You even admit it’s 100% free from wardecs? Why the hell did you make it a drawback of the ship then???

(DrysonBennington) #69

It’s still gankable regardless of whether the Light Carrier is part of a corporation or not so there is no 100% free from anything.

Obviously you don’t know how Gankers work.

Gankers first work on the basis of pulling ISK from what ever high end ship they can. They first scan the ship for modules and if that ship has Officer modules fit, you can be certain that it will get added to their list of targets.

The second basis that gankers work from is harvesting tears from those they gank.

The third base is their permit gang.

And then the home base is the election by adoration of praising James 315 by being the protectors of High Sec.

I’m certain that the gankers would definitely take on a Light Carrier once they are found to be carrying Officer Modules from Null into High Sec to arm their NewBros. with. NewBros that would further expand the territorial grab or influence of Null based alliances in High Sec.

(Wander Prian) #70

This ship is not in any larger danger from gankers as any other ship in the game. Your chance of getting ganked depends on your actions, not the gankers. If you are stupid enough to move expensive materials in a ship that should not move them, you might get ganked. If you are a known salt-mine, you might get ganked. If you are foolish enough to pay for the permit, you might get ganked anyway.

A ship having a chance of being ganked IS NOT A BALANCING FACTOR.

So again: What are the drawbacks of this ship?

(DrysonBennington) #71

Uh okay Dilbert.

Code. for example ganks expensive ships for the loot and the tears. So yes a Light Carrier would be in more of a danger than lets say a freighter.

Your last kill was over two years ago. Pushing a pencil at a desk now? Maybe a station gunner?

I think you are scared that a Light Carrier would upset the balance for your precious Worm Hole Op.

So why aren’t you in W-Space any longer? Please do tell us that drama Wander Prian.

(Niriam DoT) #72

The only way I see it balanced by ganking would be to give this ships attackers suspect timer in highsec instead of criminal. That’ll work

(Wander Prian) #73

Even if I haven’t been actively playing for a while, I know more about the game mechanics and balancing than you, which is quite evident from your posts.

Again: Any ship in the game are on danger of a gank. You cannot use that as a balancing factor for your ship. You are saying that your light carrier gets to be OP because it can be ganked. That is not a valid reason. Your proposed light carrier is too good at too many things for it to be viable. It’s DOA.

Also: I am well aware how CODE and other gankers operate. I am also well aware how to avoid them. I’ve moved more expensive ships through their ganking areas than you have lost. I’ve lost my ships to a suicide gank 0 times. Just because you cannot get your head around how to minimize your risks, it doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be victims of stupidity.

(DrysonBennington) #74

You haven’t been actively playing in a while yet you still know whats going on in the game without being there?

You have invalidated any comments of relevance you might have had because you are simply trolling the forums and nothing more.

A normal carrier is the same as the Light Carrier, accept that it can’t go into High Sec.

So should we get rid of the carriers as well because they can do a lot of things that you don’t like?

(Salt Foambreaker) #75

So in the end this is just a allow carriers in high sec thread.

No, we should be removing caps from low, not adding them to high.

(Wander Prian) #76

If I was just trolling, I’d have attacked you, not your idea. All I’ve done is point out how bad this is from several different aspects. Your defence? “It can be ganked”. That’s not how balancing works in Eve. Feel free to prove my points wrong. I’m guessing you can’t do it with anything beyond ignoring them or by moving the goal-posts. I’m still waiting to a see a single bad side for this ship.

(DrysonBennington) #77

Balancing out the ganking mechanics to favor either side is in fact a balancing mechanic that the Light Carrier would provide.

As of now there really is no balance for a freighter pilot to defend against a gank in High Sec.

Typical response is fly with corp mates. Such a fleet is not always possible because some freighter pilots are solo operators based on their style of game play.

Pay the permit fee. Not a valid response either because the Gankers will simply gank the freighter later on if they like or if they deem somehow in the insane world they live in that the freighter permit hold has violated a term of the permit.

No the only balance to High Sec ganks is too provide freighter pilots with the means to move their solo operator Light Carrier / Hauler operations with an armed ship capable of defending itself with carrier based drones.

The draw back is that the Light Carrier wouldn’t be able to carry as much cargo compared too the freighter and would have to make numerous jumps through the gank zone to bring their cargo to a station thus putting them at greater risk, thus the balance of Risk vs. Reward is present compared to a freighter that can carry lots of cargo at one time. Such a R v R would thus create an unbalanced factor between the freighter and light carrier based on the amount of times the freighter has too jump compared too the light carrier to haul the same amount of cargo from point A to point B.

But when balanced out the R v R is still 50/50 each time the light carrier passes through the gank zone but is more likely to be ganked 75/25 because of how many times it has been present in the gank zone.

(Wander Prian) #78

Adding a new ship does not change how crimewatch works. Ganking will stay the same as long as crimewatch-mechanics are not changed. Your points are totally moot.

That is not how ship-balancing works. Ganking is not considered part of the ship-balancing, that is totally up to the players.

Ship balancing consists of the ship bonuses, the attributes, slot-layout, etc.

So I ask again:

What are the drawbacks of this ship?

(DrysonBennington) #79

By having the Light Carrier players will be to balance the efforts of gankers, which flying a Light Carrier against the gankers would be totally up to the Capsuleer. Players balancing their Light Carrier out to combat the High Sec ganker is also the second balance.

What are the drawbacks of this ship?

You keep asking this same question hoping to ‘white wash the discussion’.

Here is my question:

What can you add to make the Light Carrier more likable in High Sec?

If you can’t add anything too the conversation then you are doing nothing more than flaming the conversation with the same question over and over again with ridiculous CCP won’t do this or won’t do that which you expect to be an overriding decision on how people should post ideas.

If subscribers listened to your nonsense years ago when Eve Online first came out there wouldn’t be an Eve Online.

So unless you can add to the discussion without using Artificial Intelligence syntax, go back to your other character, the one in real life.

(Wander Prian) #80

So you are proposing a new ship just to “balance out ganking” ? You are admitting that there is actually nor real need for this ,except for your view that ganking needs to be balanced somehow and instead of doing that by changing the crimewatch-mechanics, you want to change it by adding an overpowered ship into highsec?

I keep asking the same question ,because you keep not answering it. You are trying to solve a player-problem by adding a ship that will cause nothing but problems (and won’t do what you want it to do.) You have an issue with a player-action or a game-mechanic and you are trying to solve it by adding a new ship, which won’t change the game-mechanics OR player behavior. For the ship to do what you want it to, it would have to be so overpowered (it already is btw), that it would be even bigger balance-problem than FAX are currently.

I can tell you with pretty high certainty that CCP won’t view your idea as a good one as I’ve been here for long enough to have seen these kind of ideas before. They didn’t get very far.

I’m not trolling or flaming. I am asking valid questions about the viability of your ship-idea. If I was mean, I’d make a point about your weird obsession with changing ganking, your “wars” against CODE and losses to suicide-gankers, but I’m not going there.