+- 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: Carriers (/showthread.php?tid=165631)
Pages:
1
2
Carriers - Gardarik - 11-06-2018
As the thread name suggests, it is another carrier discussion. Not a discussion, to be honest, but rather an inquiry.
So the patch with changed carriers has been around for a while and people had an opportunity to try out the altered carriers mechanics. I laid my hands on carriers not immediately after the patch with my faction getting the offdom and ID allowing to fly one. After six month I finally got Tempest just to discover how useless it is. A huge (appr. 700 metres) practice target for hostile caps with a smaller practice target that can be launched every 60 sec to be destroyed in the first few seconds of its flight. Heavy carriers, like Tempest, are too big to maneuvre effectively while having no punch against hostile caps. Moreover, the core is just laughable for such a big ship, barely sustaining the fire of four prime turrets.
To say the least, I was frustrated. After witching to Tempest for RP reasons from a Hurricane, the gameplay just felt dull. The arguments for the current balance of carriers are known:
- carrier should be distinctive from battleship class;
- carrier is a support ship and should not have immense firepower.
Well, support ship is cool. In a group fight. Large group fights that occur quite rarely given the current population of the server. Also, those group fights are quite irrelevant to me as a primarily RPPvE player with ping over 280 and stable 8% data loss. hence, most of the time carrier pilots are flying alone (with a drone, pardon). To do missions in that flying practice target? Quite a waste of time: even gunboats can easily overwhelm you since you don't have sheer firepower be it missiles or any other heavy turrets. Drones get shot by NPCs in the first 10 seconds of their existence, their range is quite small, and their respawn time - too long. The ship type is just not fun to play at all.
(Predicting the question "Why wouldn't I switch to a different ship?" I answer - I like the RP status of a carrier/BS as a mobile base that fits my gameplay, biggest ships are the most convenient to fly given my ping, and I don't want to switch to a different faction for just doing missions as I play the chosen faction only).
As my friends left Disco due to different reasons (for example, two consecutive disappearances of a POB without a trace that he had been working on for weeks) and the realisation of general boredom with the current developments the irritation with my ship is being the final nail. Sometimes I just have an urge to log for 20 minutes to do a mission and experience some kind of a simple combat and maybe spontaneously interacting with someone during it, but current Tempest and other heavy carriers are just useless.
At any rate, please forgive my pessimistic subjective grumbling. The initial purpose of the post, the inquiry, is: can we expect carriers to be changed in observable future?
RE: Carriers - Banned player t202085 - 11-06-2018
(11-06-2018, 05:16 PM)Gardarik Wrote: Something, something something, : can we expect carriers to be changed in observable future?[/b]
Carriers have always been a tricky one, they kinda feel like a redundant class in Disco I personally can't see a way of making them viable without being game breaking, I'd like to see more longrange glass cannon ships, like a 10 k missile boat with super low armour
RE: Carriers - Gardarik - 11-06-2018
(11-06-2018, 05:21 PM)Silverlight Wrote:(11-06-2018, 05:16 PM)Gardarik Wrote: Something, something something, : can we expect carriers to be changed in observable future?[/b]
Carriers have always been a tricky one, they kinda feel like a redundant class in Disco I personally can't see a way of making them viable without being game breaking, I'd like to see more longrange glass cannon ships, like a 10 k missile boat with super low armour
As we were joking - corvettes. Super heavy GB with either a few slots of cruiser weapons (similar how BCRs used to be) or with special long range missiles to be like missile cruisers IRL. Corvettes are OP. Jokes aside, carriers are indeed redundant. Unless docking module are fixed it is better to return them to being a subtype of BS. Or maybe a BS with heavy slots for special carrier-only missiles. Not an expert, can't suggest.
RE: Carriers - Tenacity - 11-06-2018
Just replace docking bays with extra specialty weapon hardpoints that would make sense on a carrier: point defense guns and anti snub missiles. Carriers are supposed to be great at area denial, keeping space superiority for their fleet by shutting down enemy fighters and bombers.
Either that or some kind of area effect repair weapon so they can heal their own fighters
RE: Carriers - LaWey - 11-06-2018
That problem of current carriers, devs just cut core to 6kk to all carriers, disregard how much they big or how much guns they keep. Also aboslutely bad hardpoints placement, guns arks become problem even more when you havent much core to shoot.
RE: Carriers - Laz - 11-06-2018
I'll say what I always say to these threads. In my personal, unpopular, opinion, I think carriers are a redundant and pointless class. They only serve a purpose in roleplay, and it's been established, since vanilla, that Battleships can serve the same purpose. In my eyes, I think the game would be better off without Carriers as I don't see them bringing anything positive to the game's landscape. I honestly see them being used to ruin snub fights more than anything else, but that's a non-argument really.
As a side note: I also don't see docking modules as a beneficial thing for Discovery, hence why I've not even looked at attempting to fix them.
RE: Carriers - LaWey - 11-06-2018
Quote:As a side note: I also don't see docking modules as a beneficial thing for Discovery, hence why I've not even looked at attempting to fix them.Have sense as refit hangar, for switch bombers\fighter before\in battle for shift balance. There just were plenty of times when i really wanted something like that in long range raids\expeditions.
RE: Carriers - Geneva Shipping Platform - 11-06-2018
Why not making carriers real carriers , reducing theyr firepower and increasing the amount of drones? i dont even know if thats possible tho)
Or make them support ships for real giving the choice:
1-long range weaponry at the cost of survivability
2-drone bay "Swarm like at the cost of survivability and heavy weapon hardpoints(maybe making a weapon that fires drones or something like that)
3-Greatest repair ship maybe create repair weapons that mount on the heavyest hardpoints in the ship or maybe even a area repair weapon repairing all ships in 1 k range.
Just a few ideas.
RE: Carriers - Tenacity - 11-06-2018
Here, another suggestion that was already brought up before:
Add a command like /conn, where you type like /rebase *carrier name* and your ship is transferred there to be able to undock at the carrier's location. Flhook would have to check the target ship type to ensure it is a carrier and has the same id as your faction, and it would have to check your ship type to ensure you're in a snub craft.
RE: Carriers - Lythrilux - 11-06-2018
In an ideal world we'd just rice up carriers with considerably more secondaries than their battleship counter parts. Unfortunately, this causes problems for the server when attempted.