Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 18 post(s) |
HiddenPorpoise
BG-1 The Craniac
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 23:35:00 -
[691] - Quote
Marcus Harikari wrote:iteron should keep highest cargo space because of those of us who trained gallente indy to 5 to fly iteron5 Ite is actually better than bestower at every role; I'm fine with it being very slightly smaller. The only real advantage the bestower actually has is it can fit a warpstab for a smaller loss of cargospace. That's offset by it being slowest and easiest to kill by far. Sigel is the thing to fly on that line. |
Emrys Ap'Morgravaine
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
58
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 03:53:00 -
[692] - Quote
Mostly I really like it.
My only issue is the Iteron IV having the ore bay with the ability to haul all types?
I'd suggest splitting it down a bit, giving the iteron IV the storage bay for one type, and moving the other 2 types to other races.
So some sort of tanker looking thing for hauling gas.
As for the ice, could make a flying heatsink thing for each race, with 'x' amount of storage, but with some sort of storage bonus if moving their racially specific ice? |
chillore
Small Flat Sharing Group
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 04:54:00 -
[693] - Quote
Denidil wrote:CCP Rise wrote:As far as the Orca - Because it does things other than have an Ore hold, I'm not super concerned about the overlap with the Iteron Mark whatever, but I'll check with Fozzie/Ytterbium to see what they think about it. Good :D The Orca and Rorqual are big arse mining capitals and thus should really have ore bay far in excess of a tech 1 industrial. Especially since the Mackinaw's bay is only 5km3 less than the Orcas now. Orca really should have 300,000m3 to 400,000m3 and the Rorq should have like 1,000,000m3. They're big, slow, and they're ORE ships.
Well, thats a good point to be considered. |
DurFea
Tri-Fleet Asset Management
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 09:34:00 -
[694] - Quote
I've been wishing for a reconfigurable Tech-3 Industrial for a long time.....
ORE Reconfigurable Industrial Ship Required Skills:
- ORE Reconfiguration Specialization
- ORE Industrial V
- Advanced Spaceship Command III
Subsystems:
- ORE Engineering Systems
- ORE Propulsion Systems
- ORE Industrial Specialization Systems
- ORE Cargo Specialization Systems
- ORE Command Specialization Systems
Engineering Subsystem options would include subsystem modules that vary between CPU and POWER GRID, or standard CARGO BAY and STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY, or a subsystem module for COVERT RECONFIGURATION.
Propulsion Subsystem options would include modules for HIGHER NORMAL VELOCITY, GREATER AGILITY, FASTER WARP SPEED, INTERDICTION NULLIFICATION, or JUMP DRIVE.
Industrial Subsystem options would include subsystem modules for supporting ASTEROID MINING, GAS CLOUD HARVESTING, ICE MINING, SALVAGING, or CLONING (possible DUST 514 tie-in)
Cargo Subsystem options would include EXPANDED CARGO BAY, ORE & ICE BAY, PI & Command Center BAY, POS MODULES & TOWER BAY, CORPORATE HANGER BAY.
Command Subsystem options would include subsystem modules to support fitting various mining gang-links with additional bonuses, or perhaps ship-based bonuses similar to mining gang-links but would increase with each additional Tech-3 ship in the fleet -- more ships working together, the bigger the bonuses.
The visual model for the ship could look like various configurations between an Orca and an Iteron with different cargo bay arrangements along a central fuselage structure.
Just my 2-isk, food for thought. |
Vayn Baxtor
Ultra High Ping Crew R O G U E
60
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:31:00 -
[695] - Quote
Just my take on T3/Subsystems. The subsystem-'system' in general would really make the game interesting, but I find that these selections specifically are "too good", if not, a bit overpowered. T3 ships in general are more of a curse than a blessing.
Cloaking and Interdiction-Nullifier are things that should be mutually exclusive to begin with - but that is not really worth complaining abou here.
In terms of an "If we would get a T3 industrial vessel", that it should feature some new and unique things and not the cookie cutter stuff. Plus, it is likely that such a T3 vessel will be huge and have a sluggish align time. Doubt the nullifier will really help whatsoever.
But it would cool to see a T3 industrial vessel nonetheless. As said by many people already, Industrial Shpis in general could really become very useful if they have the specific special bays. The current problem here of course is that CCP said specific racial Indys to have special bays, hence the debate and complaints.
One decent solution would be to introduce subsystem-bays, in my opinion, as well as introducing an ORE vessel (T3 or whatever Tech of your liking). Wish we could actually see subsystems become a vital function to T1, T2 and T3 - opening doors to versatility while ensuring no cookie cutter and overpowering principles.
An ORE T3 vessel would at least help migate the complaint of "Why Gallente, and not xyz?". Plus, the standard industrials could focus more on being stepladders on an Industrial branch of whatsoever while avoiding this frequent "stepping on other ships' feet" situation we keep having.
([b]and ffs finally have the possibility of getting Indy hulls as combat variants like a real "battle badger" etc" ) Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
The Renner
Canadian Operations Yulai Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 23:56:00 -
[696] - Quote
Not sure if it's been answered yet, but are there plans to let one of the special bay iterons haul moon goo? |
Number One Everything
Icanhazcheezburger
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 04:14:00 -
[697] - Quote
CCP Rise, could you update the first page with the changes mentioned later? I really would rather not go through all 35 pages to check all the changes. I know about the one on page 13, but it would be nice to update the first page because that's the post everyone is going to see and base their opinions on. |
Saja Chou
Die Grauen Waechter Graue Legion
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 16:07:00 -
[698] - Quote
(sry for the bad english also sry if i write like a noob XD)
i see the Problem in the to many iteros and the missing role for a 3. hauler also the missing ship on 2 factions
so why dont give this 3.hauler in the game? for the start take one of the hulls paint and call it different and the graficers put the hull or changes later in the gme.
Switch one iteron to ore (the 4?) give it a other Cockpit and paint it yellow XD and sry but put one iteron out of the game Switch the ships how has owned to this one that match the stats mostly
and now do some fancy stuff with the 3.haulers why dont build a mini orca only f++r t1 and ore?
faction haulers: small shiphangar max for a cruiser but only t1 ships you can also only equip t1 ships on it not that big cargohold but as a special: not to scann (for those who dont have a cloaky to carry expensive stuff) moderate fleethold dronebay
ore hauler: shiphangarsize for exhumers/barges can equip Sub capital ore ships nice orehold fleethold big enough for a full hulk fit also with t1 Strip or cloaky? drone bay
and on top some realy fancy role Bonus to the ships good aktiv tank and resi Bonus? maybe can go in warp also with a t1 cloaky but than the cloak goes off? per Level Little warpspeed and align bonus so he can ran away t1 frigs? for the ore: can equip a command module, tractor Bonus, shield/Amor logi Bonus maybe can equip in larger range (for the miner crystals)
it is about bring some movement in this class to the game and solve the "to many iteron" Problem or also dont realy have i great idea for those. if there are no 3.role now you can point on, put it later in. meanwhile build the 3.hulls and Change the one moved to ore. and for a while sit out the Players hatestorm to steal there iterons XD |
Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 18:21:00 -
[699] - Quote
Eladaris wrote:Parrot47 wrote:Those of us that have fitted cargo expanding rigs on our current Ity II-IV should have them removed (not destroyed) since I am assuming that cargo expanders will not affect the specialized bays.
These are expensive (12Mil+ per ship) rigs that are now going to be worthless on them. Totally wrong actually. As pointed out elsewhere the rigs / expanders in the lows combined with high skills will net you a massive boost in your cargo hold. This is most important in the Itty for PI, because that extra cargo space will allow you to carry a pair of Command Centers. It won't give you the bang for the buck that hanging them on your old ships gave, but it's plenty of reason for them to avoid a refund. No.
Rigs and expanders on the Iteron II - IV only affect the tiny cargo hold, not the specialised hold. |
Ted Cisse
Industry and Investments NZAU Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 06:22:00 -
[700] - Quote
What I would love is to have 1 of these 3 options:
1- a ship specially designed for transporting minerals or 2- have a special mineral bay inside the freighters or 3- have some kind of cargo container designed for freighters that would be used exclusively for hauling more minerals.
So example:
Mineral cargo expanded (50% bonus in capacity)
Container Vol: 450 000 m3 Mineral Capacity Vol: 675 000 m3
So basically the Idea is for the player to have the choice to either go for full expanded mineral capacity or half/half.
Trading is a known and supported profession in eve but for a mineral traders the profession is heavily disadvantaged specially if you trade in hi-sectors and there's a couple of reasons for that:
1-A freighter class ship is supper slow even if you have all the skills completed and you're manually flying your ship. 2-Multiple stations to stop and the distances can be very far...30 jumps and more sometimes. 3-Hi-sector minerals value is very low...specially titanium and pyrite and to compensate for this you need to sell bigger quantitys
Thank you for reading :) |
|
starman smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 14:09:00 -
[701] - Quote
A large number of existing industrials are fitted with cargohold rigs, which generally cost much more than the hulls. The Odyssey change which reduced training for Itty V already somewhat reduced the value of all other cargo rigged industrials. It seems to me that cargohold rigs will be near worthless on the proposed hulls with specialized bays. For these (Itty II, III, IV, and Hoarder), would it be possible to have installed cargo rigs removed to cargo when the change occurs?
Edit: I see now this was already suggested...
Eladaris wrote:Totally wrong actually. As pointed out elsewhere the rigs / expanders in the lows combined with high skills will net you a massive boost in your cargo hold. This is most important in the Itty for PI, because that extra cargo space will allow you to carry a pair of Command Centers.
It won't give you the bang for the buck that hanging them on your old ships gave, but it's plenty of reason for them to avoid a refund. So those that feel this way can just plug the rigs back in. Problem solved. |
Aerchois
K.O.R.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 21:56:00 -
[702] - Quote
I suggest that a new low slot "Cargohold Alteration" module be created instead of re-creating ships with various specialty cargoholds. Limitations and bonuses would include prohibiting the use of more than one "Cargohold Alteration" module at a time and each type of module would change the capacity and cargohold type based on the specific role. I believe that this would allow for less racial imbalance.
starman smith wrote:A large number of existing industrials are fitted with cargohold rigs, which generally cost much more than the hulls. The Odyssey change which reduced training for Itty V already somewhat reduced the value of all other cargo rigged industrials. It seems to me that cargohold rigs will be near worthless on the proposed hulls with specialized bays. For these (Itty II, III, IV, and Hoarder), would it be possible to have installed cargo rigs removed to cargo when the change occurs? Edit: I see now this was already suggested... Eladaris wrote:Totally wrong actually. As pointed out elsewhere the rigs / expanders in the lows combined with high skills will net you a massive boost in your cargo hold. This is most important in the Itty for PI, because that extra cargo space will allow you to carry a pair of Command Centers.
It won't give you the bang for the buck that hanging them on your old ships gave, but it's plenty of reason for them to avoid a refund. So those that feel this way can just plug the rigs back in. Problem solved. To answer starman smith, refunding Cargohold Optimization rigs would not be in keeping with the past decision to not refund them for both Mining Barges and Exhumers when the original change occurred for Ore Holds. |
Chastity Lynn
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 14:23:00 -
[703] - Quote
+1 to the changes.
One thing is for sure. Most will have one of each type industrial ship ( at least for gallente) and maybe one more race.
Name change is not that important and I for one do support it. Overall a step in the right direction. |
Tenchi Sal
Dust Bunnies 514
177
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 15:07:00 -
[704] - Quote
So with all these changes, is hauling going to become Iteron Online? As it stands, theres no reason at all anymore to use anything other then Iterons. They now have the best ore haulers and best PI haulers. With the rebalance, most of the other ships are pretty well balanced against their counter parts so the few k difference in cargohold space isnt worth training into another race.
All new players to the game will simply train Gallente and ignore the other races. The best bonuses shouldnt have been given only to one race. The hoarder should have at least received the Ore bonus. Good job in "balancing" these ships. |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling Care Factor
266
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 17:50:00 -
[705] - Quote
It would be nice to have seen the amarr ones get abit of something towards combat as well, or at least to run away with, maybe some sort of boost to using jam drones? |
Lilliana Stelles
815
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 18:01:00 -
[706] - Quote
Why no POS bay? (moon goo, modules, fuel and control towers) Seriously? You have a bay for everything else ... I mean, who needs a special "ammo bay"? Incarna from 2009. 3 Years later and what we have doesn't look half as good as this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n41s1Iox18A |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling Care Factor
266
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 18:10:00 -
[707] - Quote
Though as a side note, when these changes hit, I will be taking this old Badger II that's been collecting dust for who knows how many years now, name it "Sansha's Trojan Horse" and fitting an ASB, Laser, and HAM to it! |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling Care Factor
266
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 18:18:00 -
[708] - Quote
Also, I do agree, to keep the game from becoming a matter of pretty much everyone training into Itty's and nothing else, you should swap out the Itty IV Ore Hold with the Hoarder Ammo Hold. The other thing I'd like to point out is I don't think too kindly of the special Holds being larger even before adding in the Cargohold space then the largest sized Industrials of each race can even begin to think about getting with top skills and fittings... I think that the special Bay Hold ship bays should only add up to an equivalent amount, after adding in modified with fittings and skills cargobays. |
Emiko P'eng
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:53:00 -
[709] - Quote
Overall nice idea!
But why are the Gallente & Minmatar getting new capacities and not the Caldari or Amarr, at least add an ore carrier version of the Badger & Bestower you do not need a massive graphic overhaul for that!
Also you have also effectively just made the ORE Primae pretty much redundant! |
Vayn Baxtor
Ultra High Ping Crew R O G U E
63
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 02:44:00 -
[710] - Quote
I lost track a bit on what is actually still open that Caldari or Amarr could tackle on.
I mean, there's ore, ammo, PI, "stuff". Somebody mentioned the necessity of a moon-goo hauler. I don't know how effective that could be as moon goo is indeed quite "specialized" (if not even more than PI commodity bay).
I suppose this is why a ship (t3 or whatever) with modular bays is very attractive. You could then actually adapt the ship to the given situation rather than trying to field a flotilla of different Industrial Ships.
Just theorycrafting.
[quoteAlso you have also effectively just made the ORE Primae pretty much redundant![/quote]
Yeah, makes me quote "What a Shame" meme :( Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
|
Emiko P'eng
50
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 08:34:00 -
[711] - Quote
Vayn Baxtor wrote:I lost track a bit on what is actually still open that Caldari or Amarr could tackle on.( Good call, it is mainly about wasting skill points, having to learning yet another ship type.
With the secondary point a few players still like to Role Play, so wouldn't be found dead in a opposing factions ship. |
DED Capsuleer
DED Drug Enforcement Department
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:15:00 -
[712] - Quote
Reduce it to 2 industrials per race. 1 for stuff and then give each race a speciality bay. Something you can build upon for T2, Freighters and Jump Freighters.
Yes you are going to have to retire a few industrials, but do it right, instead of continuing the 'Itty' mistake any further. |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
104
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 16:19:00 -
[713] - Quote
Parrot47 wrote:Those of us that have fitted cargo expanding rigs on our current Ity II-IV should have them removed (not destroyed) since I am assuming that cargo expanders will not affect the specialized bays.
These are expensive (12Mil+ per ship) rigs that are now going to be worthless on them.
Am I alone on this? Not asking for compensation, just to unfit the current rigs....
Since we the players are not able to anticipate these changes that are implemented, I feel like this in not a grand request, and is in-fact a rather basic expectation.
I would champion this, but then I want them removed from my hulk's too. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4346
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 22:08:00 -
[714] - Quote
Pelea Ming wrote:Also, I do agree, to keep the game from becoming a matter of pretty much everyone training into Itty's and nothing else, you should swap out the Itty IV Ore Hold with the Hoarder Ammo Hold. The other thing I'd like to point out is I don't think too kindly of the special Holds being larger even before adding in the Cargohold space then the largest sized Industrials of each race can even begin to think about getting with top skills and fittings... I think that the special Bay Hold ship bays should only add up to an equivalent amount, after adding in modified with fittings and skills cargobays. I think in many cases you are correct, but I also feel that a fairly large percent of people using T1 haulers are hauling modules, goods, and other items that will not fit into the more specialized bays. 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. |
Vayn Baxtor
Ultra High Ping Crew R O G U E
63
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 22:35:00 -
[715] - Quote
Emiko P'eng wrote:Vayn Baxtor wrote:I lost track a bit on what is actually still open that Caldari or Amarr could tackle on.( Good call, it is mainly about wasting skill points, having to learning yet another ship type. With the secondary point a few players still like to Role Play, so wouldn't be found dead in a opposing factions ship.
I never had problems with skill training. I mean, yeah, long time ago I always wanted this and that ship but now it's like "Oh, 3+ months etc? pff". Bit a mix of curb-your-enthusiasm and "got what I like". But that's just me. I respect each to their own.
Enough about my ramble. As said many times, I think the Industrial Ships in general are just too narrow with their selections or traits. While these changes WILL HELP A LOT, we can see that it still makes new problems. Surely, nobody can please everybody. That's impossible.
Yet I just find don't know if we (or in this case, you all) should just simply take it as it. Not that I'm saying that discussions suck, but it looks like it it too complicated for the simplest of suggested solutions. Programming of course requires resources and we on the other side are pretty much just barking and posting letters of rage.
I'd really love to see all hulls have their true uses, but it looks like ALL of them need some more beef. If we want to be picky with Caldari and Amarr, then yeah, there has to be some more things done.
/edit
Nevertheless, in terms of hauling, I really REALLY think there needs to be something more done. Realtime/authentic-logistics is cool. Makes EVE real. But I simply stumble many times upon being forced to rely on JF pilots and such who simply are literally OVER-STRESSED. And I can't help because I don't have the billions. That is just me, but I'm sure others know about this situation.
There is really a necessity for a way to haul frigates/destroyers/cruisers and ammo like baggage. It is not all too easy to do that with the current Haulers as they are. Personally, if they had a lot more of HP to suck up dmg if tackled, that would be nice (but yeah, soon we're to hear the lamentations of pvp-gentlemen who gank in highsec........dot dot dot).
All that said, there should still be some ideas to squeeze in for these Industrial Ships. Maybe we should focus on that :). Go me. Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
YuuKnow
Terra-Formers
818
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 13:12:00 -
[716] - Quote
I like the changes.
While your at it, can you get the art team to remake the Iteron. That thing is butt-ugly.
yk |
Ronny Hugo
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 20:12:00 -
[717] - Quote
THis looks great, I mean I could probably find something to nitpick about, but perfection is unattainable, this is more than close enough. My bestower is given new life! But for future reference, I'd just make it simple and make all the industrials have hull HP only, it seems that's how they would be unless someone physically added shield extenders and/or armor plates. |
Amariku
Orbus Syndicate United Systems Alliance Navy
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 23:56:00 -
[718] - Quote
Finished reading the whole thread, and Wow...
Ok so first things first. CCP Rise, this is a far better proposal than the first balance pass. Good job and I hope that someday you and the art guys can get around to adding some new industrial ships that are just as unique as the specialized ones that the Gallente are getting.
Ok so some popular arguments that have been discussed are that the specialist haulers are OP and that the Gallente are getting special favors, treatment, and/or a leg-up over the competition, the list of accusations goes on and on. Several people have made valid claims that this will just cause various min-maxers, number-crunchers, theory crafters, and EFT warriors to gravitate towards the Gal industrial line for their "beneficial advantages". Here is a 2 bit piece of wisdom from an old pen and dice roller... this sort of thing will always happen and unless you want everything to be carbon copies that do the exact the same things, you are not going to stop people from finding the path of least resistance with the greatest gain. In Eve it's called optimization, risk assessment, cost-benefit analysis, or any other "buzzword" that someone has coined take your pick they all mean the same thing. Just ask any D&D player to tell you which class is better and you'll get a threadnaught equivalent explanation of percentages and probabilities.
So lets look at the advantages of these specialists have. Keep in mind I'm just listing a few of the biggies.
+They haul a lot (over 60k in specialized bay capacity) +You only have to train one racial industrial skill to get access to them (Gall for the itties and Minnie for the hoarder) +They can fit a decent tank without sacrificing their cargo capacity +They'll be relatively cheap (unless someone screws the market over) +Easy for new players to make use of them in a short time after rolling their toon
Ok there is some pretty good advantages here. Now lets look at the downside.
-The specialized cargo bay is limited to only carrying that item type (ie. Mineral Bay=minerals and so on) -The specialized bay can be increased through skill (just like the other industrials) but can not be enhanced with cargo expanders, astro rigs, or GSC's (which the generic cargo carrying industrials). -You don't need a ship scanner to have an idea of what could be in them, only to know if they are empty or not. "Hey look an Itty mark 2, it must have a crap ton of minerals. Locking target for ganking." -You can only fit so much on one of those ships for a tank. -You can't carry courier contracts in a special cargo bay which means no super obfuscating plastic wrap. -They are stated like the other super haulers.
Hmm interesting that have quite a number of disadvantages too.
For a moment, lets not talk about these specialist ships. Think for a second what this represents. CCP said it himself, this is something he wanted to do initially. Couple that with the rumors of something big coming down the pipe in the near future for the industrialists of EVE. Things like building a your own Jump gates. Now lets postulate and theorize on this. Is it possible that they may just design and model new industrials later on down the road for that are specialized for tasks that haven't been invented yet. Hmm, makes your mind boggle and wonder of the possibilities.
The Art team is busy now sure, but who is to say that the next ship design contest leans towards new industrials. If they did design new industrials and add them later as things are now, we would probably see one for Amarr and three for Caldari. But that just one possibility.
So stop looking at it as an imbalance. Try looking at it as CCP experimenting with this new idea. There are many possibilities with this concept.
Oh well my 2 isk I guess. |
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
108
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 08:35:00 -
[719] - Quote
CCP Rise:
What I find astonishing is, that the art team is too busy to change a few haulers - and it wouldn't even have to be a complete redesign, you could move one each of the spare Iterons to Amarr, one to Caldari and simply use recolored versions of their existing haulers, so every faction has 3 haulers, one for tank, one for cargo and one with a special bay.
Yet at the same time, that very same art team finds the time for the identical job - recoloring/retexturing 2 existing hulls - for two ships that only a handful of people will ever benefit from - and only as a trophy, not to fly them.
P.S. From a player's perspective I like the fact that i will only ever have to skill into one race's industrials. As a designer the lack of any balance therein makes me cringe. |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:22:00 -
[720] - Quote
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Rise:
What I find astonishing is, that the art team is too busy to change a few haulers - and it wouldn't even have to be a complete redesign, you could move one each of the spare Iterons to Amarr, one to Caldari and simply use recolored versions of their existing haulers, so every faction has 3 haulers, one for tank, one for cargo and one with a special bay.
Yet at the same time, that very same art team finds the time for the identical job - recoloring/retexturing 2 existing hulls - for two ships that only a handful of people will ever benefit from - and only as a trophy, not to fly them.
P.S. From a player's perspective I like the fact that i will only ever have to skill into one race's industrials. As a designer the lack of any balance therein makes me cringe.
Your astonishment surely arises from your absolute and total ignorance of size, man hours, and current work load of the art team. You arrogantly assume to know more about what the art team can and can't do in any given time frame and also know more about what they are or aren't doing with their time currently.
Please accept that this will always be true and stop being whiney about CCP not currently dedicating time on new industrial ship models and be happy that even after 10 years, EVE Online is still an amazing game and that maybe, JUST maybe, CCP has a clue how to do the whole game development thing. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |