Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
to0onsi
AtlantiA French Corp Yulai Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 02:48:00 -
[31] - Quote
yeah please please restore the previous size now is smaller than hyperion and apocalypse :/.... he always had that size why reduce it now ?? he's the biggest BS, that's what makes it unique. |
Nephthiis
AtlantiA French Corp Yulai Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 02:54:00 -
[32] - Quote
please don't ruin it like the vaga |
Janet Patton
Brony Express
23
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 05:46:00 -
[33] - Quote
I think some of the rescaling was do to fitting the new launchers on ships.
The Rifter is huge now, it went from 56m to 139m... kinda ridiculous. I think they over did it on some ships.
Would really like to see some uniformity with ship sizes based on their class. Why do I have this sig? I don't smoke. |
to0onsi
AtlantiA French Corp Yulai Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 16:07:00 -
[34] - Quote
someone can just answer me why reduce the macha size ?! I need to understand why... |
RangerGord
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 17:13:00 -
[35] - Quote
ok, this explains why when i undocked in my dramiel to check out its newer much darker textures i could barely see the turrets... i was thinking, did they shrink the turrets that much? it just feels way too big |
Jerick Ludhowe
Toxic Waste Industries
100
|
Posted - 2012.07.22 17:29:00 -
[36] - Quote
to0onsi wrote:someone can just answer me why reduce the macha size ?! I need to understand why...
It's been answered like 20 times between this and other threads.
|
to0onsi
AtlantiA French Corp Yulai Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 10:45:00 -
[37] - Quote
but in this case must be changed the unpackaged size he's the only BS who take 595K m3 before it makes sense... |
Nevigrofnu Mrots
Goonswarm Federation
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 11:50:00 -
[38] - Quote
If we are correcting sizes...
looking at capitals, dreads are good, caldari carriers size needs to double and all supers should double or triple in size, specially the caldari one...
|
Carola Kessler
Lost Sisters Of New Eden Freelancer Coalition
31
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 11:53:00 -
[39] - Quote
Nevigrofnu Mrots wrote:If we are correcting sizes...
looking at capitals, dreads are good, caldari carriers size needs to double and all supers should double or triple in size, specially the caldari one...
That was what i was referring to, Sizes from Capitals are to small, in relation to the noncapital ships, so technically the downsizing from the Machariel wasn't necessary, just a scale up in sizes for the Carriers and Super Carriers would've done the job just saying.
sincerly
Carola Kessler |
Sellendis
The Ares project
149
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 14:32:00 -
[40] - Quote
Correct, downsizing the Mach was pointless. Archon is bigger than Wyvren and almost same size as Nxy, and thats a carrier we are talking about. Carriers need to get bigger, not BS to get smaller. |
|
EVEplexx
TPlexx Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:12:00 -
[41] - Quote
Carriers simply need to be larger. Nothing more, nothing less. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2298
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 03:24:00 -
[42] - Quote
Let me be the first to remind you, size doesn't matter. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
68
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:38:00 -
[43] - Quote
I approve of this. Make it 1912m
Even Hyperion is 1698m
|
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
68
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 09:28:00 -
[44] - Quote
Machariel on TQ is currently 1936m:
http://www.netsky.org/eve/MacharielTQ.png
|
Sellendis
The Ares project
150
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:08:00 -
[45] - Quote
Since i hardly think they will listen to community for once, i took a crapload of pictures. From time when Machariel was most impressive looking BS, no one forgets first time they see one on undock. Usually in a small frigate, but then the sense of scale kicks in.
Now i pulled next to an Apoc ingame, and its just....not with that intimidating look.
So CCP, please restore Mach to 1.9km. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
493
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:24:00 -
[46] - Quote
I do support making Carriers larger.
300 extra meters would be a good start. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Toxic Waste Industries
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 13:42:00 -
[47] - Quote
Spc One wrote:I approve of this. Leave it at1936m as it currently is on TQ. Even Hyperion is 1698m
Hyperion is far too big as well tbh.
|
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
69
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:06:00 -
[48] - Quote
Can we get dev response on this please ?
|
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
69
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:42:00 -
[49] - Quote
Real Size Comparison:
http://www.netsky.org/eve/macharielTQ1.png http://www.netsky.org/eve/macharielSISI.png
|
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
287
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 21:48:00 -
[50] - Quote
As I've never really been fond of the Machariel I can't say my opinion counts a whole lot on this topic.. but you gotta admit it was pretty huge the way it was. It's not a cap ship. lol
I've flown next to a machariel in my providence and it nearly dwarfed me... perhaps a less dramatic reduction would be in order... but it probably did need some reduction. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
|
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
69
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 05:43:00 -
[51] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:As I've never really been fond of the Machariel I can't say my opinion counts a whole lot on this topic.. but you gotta admit it was pretty huge the way it was. It's not a cap ship. lol
I've flown next to a machariel in my providence and it nearly dwarfed me... perhaps a less dramatic reduction would be in order... but it probably did need some reduction. Well Machariel was designed that way. So it's a huge ship, i don't see any reason for changing it now. It was this way since it came out.
It is a special ship after all.
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
319
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 10:21:00 -
[52] - Quote
I always liked the Mach's gigantism. Please set it back :3
It made it such a good bumping ship... |
Carola Kessler
Lost Sisters Of New Eden Freelancer Coalition
35
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 10:38:00 -
[53] - Quote
Still no Dev reply on this topic.....its start to get frustrating.
HEY CCP Devs Wake up and give us some feedback!!!
sincerly
Carola Kessler |
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
28
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 11:46:00 -
[54] - Quote
Fun fact: 85% of all players complaining about this are highsec carebears who are mad because their space ***** has shrunk, the other 15% are people who fear they will fail their bumps because the ship is slightly smaller.
Both should just HTFU the change is sensible.
(and I doubt we need a dev response for this)
|
Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
187
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 11:57:00 -
[55] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:The Machariel has to be ithe biggest Subcapital in EVE, everytime I undock with my Mach, I think: lol watch that small Orca down there... No but seriously, for me its ridiculous to switch the size of ships every 3 Months...first i was like, omg My maelstrom is 600m long...then i was like, wow its 1500m long, and now you wnat the Maelstrom with 1484m to be longer than a machariel? That is not how i should be... Wow - they have really been doing all those changes? What a waste of time and effort. It also shows that they really don't have any long term vision or plan. Just seemingly random changes for arbitrary reasons. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Toxic Waste Industries
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 13:01:00 -
[56] - Quote
Spc One wrote:Barbara Nichole wrote:As I've never really been fond of the Machariel I can't say my opinion counts a whole lot on this topic.. but you gotta admit it was pretty huge the way it was. It's not a cap ship. lol
I've flown next to a machariel in my providence and it nearly dwarfed me... perhaps a less dramatic reduction would be in order... but it probably did need some reduction. Well Machariel was designed that way. So it's a huge ship, i don't see any reason for changing it now. It was this way since it came out. It is a special ship after all.
Tons of things have been originally designed one way and then changed further down the road. This is an mmo and using the argument of "that's how it was designed originally don't change it" is a fail at best....
2km mach was unimmersive. The fastest most agile bs with a small sig being like 2x the size of the average bs was stupid looking, period. Furthermore all this crap about it being jove so it should be HUGE does not even make sense...
|
Arduemont
Malevolent Intentions Ineluctable.
258
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 14:01:00 -
[57] - Quote
Makes sense that the Mach should be smaller. Especially since its one of the fastest Battleships going. Not only that, but the large turret models will look more bad-ass on a smaller hull.
Those people saying that because its jove it should be big, are actually brining up a pretty good argument for it being smaller. If a Jove frigate is roughly inequivalent to most other races battleships, the why isn't the Mach the size of a frig? |
Garviel Tarrant
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
19
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 15:22:00 -
[58] - Quote
The machariel is the fastest and most agile battleship.
Making it smaller makes all the sense in the world. |
Marcus Gord
Preta Light Industries Naraka.
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 22:34:00 -
[59] - Quote
The Mach has been huge for how long now? Only now it's a problem and it needs to be downsized? Come on.
If they're going to do this to the Mach, are they going to make the other half of the Aeon too? Perhaps make the Wyvern fly forwards? (You know it looks like it flies backwards!)
People have already talked about Carriers/Supercarriers and their sizes too.
At least be consistent. |
Jiji Hamin
Aliastra Gallente Federation
79
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 00:08:00 -
[60] - Quote
If you yall are going to make it smaller than make it so it counts as being smaller when stuffed in a carrier so that two can fit in a carrier hanger like other BSes of that size kthnx. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |