+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? (/showthread.php?tid=137644)
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Omicron - 04-02-2016
Stop balancing carriers according to their supposed role, instead balance them to fulfill combat role aka pvp. It's easy to justify a faction building a carrier on top of their current one (Liberty, Rheinland, Order etc.) to increase its capability in carrying more and more assets into battle, spreading its influence or simply bridging a gap, such as new light carrier to accompany already existing heavy counterpart battleship (or other way around). You can be very creative with it.
In short, make term "carrier" merely a name that explains its INRP'ly higher aptitude for basing snub operations away from installations than other vessels in its faction line.
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Impyness - 04-02-2016
(04-02-2016, 03:45 PM)Omicron Wrote: Stop balancing carriers according to their supposed role, instead balance them to fulfill combat role aka pvp. It's easy to justify a faction building a carrier on top of their current one (Liberty, Rheinland, Order etc.) to increase its capability in carrying more and more assets into battle, spreading its influence or simply bridging a gap, such as new light carrier to accompany already existing heavy counterpart battleship (or other way around). You can be very creative with it.
In short, make term "carrier" merely a name that explains its INRP'ly higher aptitude for basing snub operations away from installations than other vessels in its faction line.
like the geb
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Omicron - 04-02-2016
Having 2 light battleships is kinda redundant I know but I am in touch with some modeller who may make it not the case in the future.
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Hannibal - 04-02-2016
i'm curious..how bad/often was the crash from docking module script?
since we don't have anyone to replace the code could we use it again until we do?
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Omicron - 04-02-2016
From what I know, the docking module script produced 100% of cases where jumpholes locked themselves into infinite loop, making everyone stuck inside of them and not being able to traverse to any system short of jumpdrive or dying (and thus spawning on last docked base). It wasn't much about actual crashing the server.
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Epo - 04-02-2016
(04-02-2016, 04:01 PM)Omicron Wrote: From what I know, the docking module script produced 100% of cases where jumpholes locked themselves into infinite loop, making everyone stuck inside of them and not being able to traverse to any system short of jumpdrive or dying (and thus spawning on last docked base). It wasn't much about actual crashing the server.
Well, if it's only that, I can live with it and I'd prefer DMs back fully operational. Most likely there was something more that convinced big guys to turn it off
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - SnakThree - 04-02-2016
(04-02-2016, 04:06 PM)Epo Wrote:(04-02-2016, 04:01 PM)Omicron Wrote: From what I know, the docking module script produced 100% of cases where jumpholes locked themselves into infinite loop, making everyone stuck inside of them and not being able to traverse to any system short of jumpdrive or dying (and thus spawning on last docked base). It wasn't much about actual crashing the server.
Well, if it's only that, I can live with it and I'd prefer DMs back fully operational. Most likely there was something more that convinced big guys to turn it off
Each and every case of infinite jumping animation resulted in staff having to actively initiate server restart.
How about we not go back to those times when it was daily thing that interrupted so many roleplay.
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Jack_Henderson - 04-02-2016
(04-02-2016, 02:57 PM)Impyness Wrote: >dock 4 shared fighters on an LN carrier
>Poke the chat asking people to log them as you fly into leeds
Listen to the rage/confusion/insane laughing when they undock 100k below the sun in California.
That was at least my experience when we tried docking bays on convoys with the same intention of calling for fighters via shareds.
The theory is cool, I agree fully, Impy.
It's just that - with Alley gone - it will never work.
Therefore we might as well just find another way of making the class useful.
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Xenon - 04-02-2016
(04-02-2016, 11:12 AM)Thunderer Wrote: So, why do we need carriers in Discovery?
Carriers are intended to operate with the main fleet and usually provides an offensive capability.
We use them single and that's why you might find them useless, Because carriers are just 1 out of many pieces composing a fleet.
RE: Why do we need carriers in Discovery? - Titan* - 04-02-2016
changee their heavy guns to capital repairer slot
add repair guns carrier can mount to capital repair slot
light repair for snubs
heavy repair for capships
light one should have 2k range and 5k proj speed
beam like proj effect
heavy one should have 4k range 1k proj speed
beam like proj effect but more width
light repair should repair 3k hp of the snubs
15s reload
heavy repair should repair 500k hp of the capships
15s reload and hard to hit allied capships that TSing from 3 or 4k cos 1k proj speed
light carrier and medium should have only 1 capship repairer slot
heavy carrier should have 2 capship repairer slot
so you can mount 2 capship repairer or 1 capship and 1 snub repairer or 2 snub repairer to your heavy carrier
so carriers will support ships in battle and hostile fleet will try to destroy the carrier first