+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: The Carrier Update (/showthread.php?tid=121752)
RE: The Carrier Update - larzac - 10-14-2014
as always, there will be possibility for abuse, but if people use it nice, there shouldnt be too much problem. the only thing that i would advise is that you can jump only on ships that are log.
RE: The Carrier Update - AshHill07 - 10-15-2014
Here's hoping this applies to docking modules and not just carriers, this might add a use for them since they've been a bit useless since they were introduced, well, unless you count the free hull damage repairs for snubs that's about it.
But like all things, we won't really know if its balanced or how abused it'll be until its live, so at least give it a shot.
RE: The Carrier Update - Flash™ - 10-15-2014
This idea seems rather "can be abused" in a way. I had a idea for Carriers, or Docking Modules overall. I don't know if it's possible to do, but spawning stronger NPCs such as Bombers would be interesting in a battle between capital vessels. So for example, you can spawn 2 NPC Bombers per 1 Docking Module. Using bombers as a example, since you would usually see those coming out of a Carrier to engage other capital vessels.
To not have this abused, could set a time limit on spawning them, like every 45 minutes, you can spawn the NPCs. This way, if you join a Battle, and you have..say 2 Docking Modules. You can spawn them at any time, but after you do, you can't spawn them for another 45 minutes. Of course ( if possible ), you could choose what snubcrafts you would want to be spawned.
As for "good" NPCs, they would have like a uau 4-5 armor, 15-20 regens, class 10 shield, energy cannons ( if bomber ), and Snac/Nova. If Nova. give it like 30 ammo.
Anyway, theres my idea that popped into my head at 9 PM xDD. This does seem like it could take too much time, or overall hard to do.
RE: The Carrier Update - Govedo13 - 10-15-2014
I find the current carriers useless.
I prefer to have 1 more snubcraft or 1 more bomber in my group instead of carrier.
In general there is better solutions then the proposed one. Just reduce the carrier damage output vs cruisers and battleships and add carrier specific guns that offer proper point defence (think of 4.85 working solaris). Reduce their shields and HP to battlecruiser levels while buffing their speed a bit to sit in between BC and BS (100)
By doing so you make carriers defenceless by battleships, but brutal vs Snubs. This create metagame and the need of bombers to protect the carrier with novas and Snacs vs Battleships and Cruisers.
This would give the incentive to snubs to be around the carrier at first place, THEN you can do your teleport thing. Otherwise better take bomber or snub or even cruiser or GB instead of carrier.
Spawning Defence NPCs at fuel cost is also solid idea.
RE: The Carrier Update - Alley - 10-15-2014
(10-15-2014, 11:15 AM)Govedo13 Wrote: I find the current carriers useless.
I prefer to have 1 more snubcraft or 1 more bomber in my group instead of carrier.
In general there is better solutions then the proposed one. Just reduce the carrier damage output vs cruisers and battleships and add carrier specific guns that offer proper point defence (think of 4.85 working solaris). Reduce their shields and HP to battlecruiser levels while buffing their speed a bit to sit in between BC and BS (100)
By doing so you make carriers defenceless by battleships, but brutal vs Snubs. This create metagame and the need of bombers to protect the carrier with novas and Snacs vs Battleships and Cruisers.
This would give the incentive to snubs to be around the carrier at first place, THEN you can do your teleport thing. Otherwise better take bomber or snub or even cruiser or GB instead of carrier.
Spawning Defence NPCs at fuel cost is also solid idea.
About NPCs : We discussed it between devs and two things came out of it.
First, some are not really happy with the idea of spawning NPCs in a PVP battle. They want to promote player interaction and not NPC interaction. Providing snubs a way to join a fight without flying 500k is in our opinion a way to promote that.
Second, you can't define a target for the snubs, so you'd have situations like guardians attacking a bs and upholders attempting to bomb a lf.
RE: The Carrier Update - Praetor - 10-15-2014
I would welcome this.
There is a certain belief within the community members that we can accurately predict what will happen whenever a new change is discussed.
Sadly,the only way to know anything is to conduct in-game Trails and then decide.
Kudos to the Dev team for taking initiatives like these in the first place.
exit()
RE: The Carrier Update - SnakeLancerHaven - 10-16-2014
As said before, just imagine all the inRP recon missions. The Leader of a Faction could log in his Carrier go to a certain Location, other members might be at work in that time or at school right when they come back they'd have to oppurtunity to insta join the Leader, which would make their life easier too, but just in a snub.
Hell, the Leader could move on to the Location and be like, allright 2 Fighters undock and search the Area, could be realy useful and awesome.
Also keep in mind, Freelancer don't have Carriers, nor Pirates, I don't see any abuse of this. For all I care this could be done for Official Faciton ID's, but then again some officials use the indie ID and don't have a different ID for their own, so it might confuse. But still since it's not available for Freelancers and Pirates, aswell as various factions which can't use a Capital Ship anyway, I don't see an abuse problem in here.
RE: The Carrier Update - Vredes - 10-16-2014
Carriers are supposed to be large, make them bigger.
RE: The Carrier Update - Siren Stone - 10-16-2014
And now to begin the SRP for a PLR Carrier... I wonder if we could somehow manage getting the previous Liberty Navy Carrier design... That was a good design... *Wanders off thinking of which char should be taken prisoner first.*
RE: The Carrier Update - Rani - 10-17-2014
I approve of this idea.
However, I believe that if abuse of it is really possible (right now I don't see how it is), a rule should be made to prevented it, and not decided on case by case basis. Maybe the people who feared abuse should give a detailed description of the possibilities of abuse that they see. The ones I could think of aren't really different from just having ships parked in different places, or waiting to F1-in in space at the right moment.