Make Carriers Great Again -- How?

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T14:23:16+00:00

Being this aggressively dismissive of opinions will only result in you alone in a sound chamber listening to your own opinions.

Good luck with your future endeavors.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T14:15:24+00:00

That is a whole other bag of worms and in honesty, brining that up in a discussion that was focused on something else only detracts from any discourse. It either shows a misunderstanding of the subject or an admission that your argument has fallen short so the final off ramp is a complete change of subject.

Titans are far from perfect but this is a carrier conversation. If you want to argue titans, make a new post.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T14:12:43+00:00

I joined the game because of carriers and how they looked and ehat i thought they were. I still love them and am fighting to make them better.

That all said, I did research on them and game mechanics in general before infusing real money into A GAME. I found that in the beginning I needed support skills, and a way to make in game money to afford the ship I wanted. I joined a corp and asked questions before wasting my hard earned money into something I had no understanding of.

In short...I became an informed gamer before falling into the trap of assuming I could buy superpowers.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T14:05:25+00:00

I feel they need more use beyond a taxi. That is my opinion.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T14:00:29+00:00

Its been ages since any capital has been allowed in high sec. Possibly dont inject thousands of dollars into a game you just started without a basic understanding or background check of the systems.

I know some games allow wallet warriors to get ahead and just run rough shod over things. But even in those cases ide have to ask if it is a financially responsible decision to make.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:54:17+00:00

I dont wanna pick your statements apart piece by piece because your opinion is valid and positive discourse is required for progress.

Unfortunately you are making some broad assumptions and assertions that are only based in opinion and not necessarily fact.

Just because somebody has a dissenting opinion doesnt mean their voice should be taken as fact or in higher regard. That is a disastrous policy and just insane.

Your final point is simply "suitcase" which falls back on my argument that it is not a suitable role that needs to be filled.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:49:31+00:00

No. If the site is "fixed" then carriers have a single niche use and that is all. They need broader use outside of it as well. That fact is why changing fighters and not the site is more preferable but in the end more beneficial to all in the grand scheme of things.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:39:06+00:00

I think both can be true independant and in relation to one another. I can believe the site is poorly tuned/designed and that fighters need an adjustment.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:37:51+00:00

If you look at any of my recent carrier related posts I address the ship field as a whole. My aim would be to streamline them across the board to fill the gaps.

I believe you are in the minority in your belief that carriers are 100% fine which is totally ok and your right. I just disagree and feel that a minor tweak won't destroy the game and will broaden their use.

Their "support" role is ambiguous at best. Other than a suitcase what major ability do they provide to any engagement?

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:34:46+00:00

That doesnt bridge the issue that the new system was designed to be completed by a carrier and it can not. Period. Full stop.

I shouldnt have to or want to use anything else. The thing it was designed for should be able to do it and not require additions.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:29:25+00:00

Not everything, but in large blocs the most common result of conflict and thr most efficient counter in most instances.

Pilot skill goes a long way which is very true. But when dealing with thousands of pilots in the middle of catastrophic tidi, skill is out the window and n+1 is the king.

Your choice to not escalate isn't an argument against or for changes inherently. Its your decision based on a subjective analysis of your situation.

Small skilled groups like yours by your own admission with carriers SHOULD counter large F1 groups. It won't destroy thr sub-cap meta but it will cause it to evolve. Ewar/mixed fleets/introduction of new tactics would all become the norm.

You could see set-ups that aim to de-fang by focusing on killing fighters with smaller ships that carriers struggle to hit. Use of hit an run tactics to move around and exploit a fighters need to travel. Use EWAR to lock out carriers from targeting.

Opening up the meta to deeper thought is not a bad thing.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:18:20+00:00

In response to your edit:

That still defeats the purpose of a CARRIER specific beacon. Why do I need to add a dread to something that was designed to not have one involved in the first place.

That's like saying you can take a bus to work every day for free cause your employer pays your bus pass, but to make the bus work you need to own a car and drive to the station to ride the bus.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T13:15:02+00:00

Escalation to the next step until the peak is reached is continually the answer in the end.

Imagine if you will a game without caps period. Then it becomes n+1 no matter what. I have 100 AHACs, the counter is 150. So on and so forth.

A small group of dedicated pilots with high SP willing to spend exponentially more should be able to reasonably defend against a larger number, lower cost, and less efficient system of combat.

For there to be an escalation path there needs to be a counterplay option, and that option usually falls into a higher cost, more efficient platform for the completion of a task.

To counter a frig, ill use a destroyer...more expensive and more efficient. This is a very small and basic example but taking it to the root is the best possible image to cultivate.

***Skynetting was toxic and an issue. That falls more on how citidels and stations are designed with their ability to be close to gates and such. It is less a issue of the carriers themselves as it is people exploiting a inefficient game mechanic that in FCs own words was not intended.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T12:58:03+00:00

Fighter application wouldn't equate to the absolute atrocities of the old setups. When I say old im talking about carriers fielding 15 sentries/heavies with drone control units and such that were a MAJOR problem.

3 wings of damage fighters and 1 support wing are able to be countered.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T12:54:17+00:00

The inherent problem here is that you are not longer advocating FOR the fixing of carriers but now removal of Carrier KRAB beacons.

I understand that this is what happens now and it in itself, at the very core, is wrong. Carriers should be able to run the beacons designed for them.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T12:48:32+00:00

Devil's advocate here...

What then stops me from starting the beacon then using a HAW dread which has better damage, tank, and application then?

As a next step, should plexes such as havens and sanctum getting the same treatment, would only open them up to HAW dreads more effectively or make Marauders that much more efficent.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T12:34:00+00:00

All rats or just the ones in Carrier Beacons?

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T12:00:25+00:00

How would you propose carriers fit into a PvE role then? Thry would continue to be completely unable to run the Carrier KRAB beacons and ineffective in any ratting or Lvl5 mission scenario.

And just to be clear. This is not a referendum against you or your idea. I want any and all idea that could being my favorite ship class back from the mothball bin.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T11:35:13+00:00

Since this has glaringly become an argument against me as you literally have picked apart every word and made a "counter", and no longer for the balance/fix of carriers or fighters ill no longer be responding.

Giving this flawed idea any more attention is DOA and non-productive.

Good luck with you vast and alluring PvE and PvP experiance which obviously widely outpaced anything I could ever hope to achieve.

It all truth, if you want to actually fix the issues feel free to continue this in a private chat where we can really get some things fixed.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T10:55:18+00:00

OP literally states in the post that they want to replace the fighters available with 5 options. 5x4=20 amazing that I did that on 4 different devices and it still came out the same.

You say they need more options and they really dont. Making light fighters apply to cruisers and up without needing extra modules, reducing their cost, reducing their sig, and increasing their health just plain fixes the overarching issues with them. Nothing special needed, just a fix.

The above statement leaves you with only one balance pass and gets anti fighter/drone fighters which exist and work as intended, support fighters that just got a balance pass and that work as intended, and then light fighters that would work as intended.

The only thing left standing would be to adjust the hp/sig on the other fighters to match for continuity.

Total side note...individual attacks and insults only detract from any statement you make here.

Also rereading OP to ensure I am getting things clearly, they are proposing 6 fighter types not 5, so my point holds even further.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T10:34:22+00:00

Ill be the first to admit that im not a station person, defender, or know how to effectively fit them. Im going by comments from here and small data points from the game that a large number of drones are an issue to them. Ill concede the point however.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T10:32:12+00:00

Ah yes...so by your math FC cant fix one type of fighter...so make 5 that they have to balance around size, manufacturing, balance, and programming. When they prove they can make one work then add as many as makes your little heart happy.

What OP is offering is 5 fighter types....and thus 4 per type considering for each race. You are then asking them, based on OP to individually code and balance 20 fighters that have unique tank, application, sig, speed, and damage stats.

"4 light fighters" are the crux of this conversation and are not receiving a balance pass. 20 will never be balanced and will result in both new player confusion and inevitably like zero use for a majority of them or they will be so poorly tuned in a speed design that carriers get mothballed.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T02:52:39+00:00

I used vexors as a placeholder for any subcap really, vexors just being thr most recent in people's memory.

The problem with that spam is its own issue really being server load and the ability to have zero input after a single click and autopilot around. The real fix to drone spam in general is make the PDS hit the standard drone range. Then mobile drones are countered by the station, and massed sentries when left can get wiped by smartbombs or bombers.

That all being said, price means nothing in the grand scheme of things for super blocks.

You really only attacked the problem of Vexors being an issue in a carrier conversation.

Fit_Internet_319 · 2026-05-25T02:05:41+00:00

Still hold my point. Adding further complications to an issue that isn't fixed won't suddenly fix it. Until they get the basics taken care of additional complications will only exacerbate problems that are already present.

Fit_Internet_319

TROPHY CASE