Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1836
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 11:32:00 -
[31] - Quote
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:Maybe due to bias and personal interest (being attacked or disliked usually leads to a defensive position, because the points he bring up aren't really valid and only partly related. Or perhaps the general community isn't able to understand a concept that requires more than one mathematical equation to properly reconstruct in their mind. I've always understood that people don't get the concept of giving cargo expansion a stacking penalty or why, mathematically, not having it doesn't make sense, but I'm finding it difficult to come up with any ways to explain it that very many of you can even comprehend.
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:Further more does he only seem to argue for T1 basic industrials .... I believe other ships can use cargo extenders, yet they are totally neglected. I'm trying to focus on a few ships. The more I try to involve in this discussion, the more convoluted it becomes, and the faster attention spans run out.
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:You can't compare specialized cargo with general cargo in such a general way as to argue a direct connections including values relations. ... The argument of Iteron V vs Epithal is a strawman fallacy. I'm not comparing specialized cargo with general cargo. I'm saying both are broken, and I am also offering a singular solution that fixes both with no further major changes needed for balancing.
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:If you talking increasing general cargo in general, that is another issue. I don't believe I even hinted at that.
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:If you are talking cargo extenders in general, you haven't really amde that discussion either. I don't know how I can make it any clearer. When I'm talking about giving a stacking penalty to cargo expansion, I'm talking about cargo expanders in general. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1836
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 11:34:00 -
[32] - Quote
Beta Maoye wrote:Epithal is fine. Only need a few destroyers to do the job in high sec. Don't try to nerf it to the ground that a frigate can do the trick. What, 4 or 5 destroyers? That's almost enough to gank an Orca. I'm not suggesting nerfing it THAT hard, but at max cargo capacity (currently quite a lot), it shouldn't also be super tough. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Fer'isam K'ahn
None Of One
395
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 12:06:00 -
[33] - Quote
Us not understanding might be the point, yes.
If you are just asking for conformity - giving cargo expanders a stacking penalty, then do so. - Oh, you did. Basically that can be done, and why not, if you can take the balance hit to low slots and cargo with an increase of expander bonus that is. If, sure, but say that and argue that, cause everything you said so far is unrelated to that argument.
Neglecting all possibilities, especially when mentioned, in regards to universal balance of affected items and exploits is bad arguing... so think about all the extremes first.
An you do compare the different cargo bay types and try to valuate their size and importance, constantly. I am only allowed 5 quotes ... so why bother ... you can backtrack your own posts. Join the BIG Lottery (see Bio ingame), oldest and only non-profit Lottery in EVE, every second Monday. Wire ISK to BIG GAMES for tickets ! Join the Channel, have fun, being a lucky winner is optional ,)
|
Beta Maoye
36
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 12:57:00 -
[34] - Quote
A cargohold of 60K cubic meter is more juicy than that of 30K cubic meter. It is reasonable to take some efforts to get that larger cargohold. No need to nerf. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1275
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 13:06:00 -
[35] - Quote
I think OP misunderstood the whole point of these ships. Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1237
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 13:33:00 -
[36] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: I'm not comparing specialized cargo with general cargo. I'm saying both are broken, and I am also offering a singular solution that fixes both with no further major changes needed for balancing.
They are already balanced. There is no need for change. There is no need for a solution because they are NOT broken. |
Absolutely Not Analt
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
78
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 13:36:00 -
[37] - Quote
Altrue wrote:I think OP deliberately misunderstood the whole point of these ships.
FTFY. I am also starting to get that niggling little voice in the back of my mind telling me this whole thread is an elaborate troll.
Eve is a multi player game.-áAnd you are the content. - Ralph King-Griffin Being meh at two things is not better than being great at one. - Lugh Crow-Slave
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1238
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 13:49:00 -
[38] - Quote
We all want a Mackinaw which can mine over 81k m3 of ore before it has to dock... Before rigs...
116k m3 ore bay on an orca is fun too I guess. |
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
647
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 14:18:00 -
[39] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:What choices? In my suggestion, you'd have to make a choice between how much tank you want vs. how much hauling capacity you want. In the currently existing lineup, you can either get both with no choice to make, or you can have either tank -or- hauling capacity with no middle ground. So I guess general cargo vs a specialized hold isn't a choice then? |
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
647
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 14:20:00 -
[40] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:What, 4 or 5 destroyers? That's almost enough to gank an Orca. lol wut |
|
Leoric Firesword
Dark Fusion Industries
76
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 14:31:00 -
[41] - Quote
yummy delicious tears.
as others have said, it's fine.
It's called choices, you can choose what you do. |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
219
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 15:04:00 -
[42] - Quote
Jezza McWaffle wrote:While industrials are weak enough in their current format the specialized bays do need tuning down as ATM the Epithal in particular is ridiculous. Why is the problem specialized bays when the only hauler I see getting called is the Epithal? Seems to me it's just the Epithal that needs adjusting. |
Ms Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 16:36:00 -
[43] - Quote
OP lacks the skill to kill an Epithal, so comes to the forums to request that they be nerfed.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1836
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 17:07:00 -
[44] - Quote
Ms Forum Alt wrote:OP lacks the skill to kill an Epithal, so comes to the forums to request that they be nerfed. I fly Epithal, and have sustained heavy fire in one. Never lost it.
And you'd be pretty lucky to gank it with fewer than 4 destroyers, even in lowsec. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1836
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 17:13:00 -
[45] - Quote
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:Us not understanding might be the point, yes. If you are just asking for conformity - giving cargo expanders a stacking penalty, then do so. - Oh, you did. Basically that can be done, and why not, if you can take the balance hit to low slots and cargo with an increase of expander bonus that is. If, sure, but say that and argue that, cause everything you said so far is unrelated to that argument. Neglecting all possibilities, especially when mentioned, in regards to universal balance of affected items and exploits is bad arguing... so think about all the extremes first. An you do compare the different cargo bay types and try to valuate their size and importance, constantly. I am only allowed 5 quotes ... so why bother ... you can backtrack your own posts. As I have mentioned before (and is made abundantly clear by the content of posts on both this and my other thread), any time I go into any significant level of detail on secondary effects, people lose focus and can't read my entire sentences through. This leaves me shrinking my points down as tiny and simple as possible, to see if I can get people to simply admit that step 1 is true. But they will frequently ask "but have you even considered step 2?" and my tireless response will be "yes, I already talked about it earlier in the thread, and nobody could even read the whole thing before jumping to baseless conclusions about it." I've been down this road before, and I'm getting tired of it.
If you guys aren't grasping the concept of my post, why do you feel the need to respond to it?
If you can grasp one of my simple questions, why not give it a simple answer and don't assume I haven't considered the secondary effects when you're unwilling to read about my considerations of the secondary effects? Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
689
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 15:39:00 -
[46] - Quote
I see the problem....can't get someone to lock an industrial down for you to pop. Can't bump it so it has to realign. Can't fit a cruiser for more sensor booster to lock faster and more DPS then 4 destroyers. Really, can't see what the problem is about destroyer a crappy Iteron 1 or 2 with another name and finally given a use. Always hated the look of that thing.
Also, could stop complaining about the cargo expanders and ask for some mid slots to be removed, maybe reduce the total amount by 10k m3 cargo space (amount might of been chosen just because huge amounts always turn into smaller products, even CCP is human at some base point and to many trips = just point click to jump gates and harvesting mats). It would make far more sense then your pointless kvetching, but from my understanding of your complaint and CCP's logic....lowsec and null produce better then high sec so that means.....maybe its better to have a harder to catch ship that carries more, providing more targets, and more kill mails. Seems your just more incompetent to catch a ship and blow it up....I just don't get the logic CCP has behind "specializing" the industrials when they could of just added more cargo space, min/max a decent amount of mid/lows depending with decent non-moon like align times and call it a day....an ammo industrial? an industrial with drones? I just don't get it, but still favors Gallente/Iteron 5 training |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1836
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 17:15:00 -
[47] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Also, could stop complaining about the cargo expanders and ask for some mid slots to be removed, maybe reduce the total amount by 10k m3 cargo space (amount might of been chosen just because huge amounts always turn into smaller products, even CCP is human at some base point and to many trips = just point click to jump gates and harvesting mats). It would make far more sense then your pointless kvetching You missed my point entirely. Lowering its base cargo capacity not only lowers how much it can haul in a max tank setup, it also lowers its cargo when its fit for a max cargo setup. I'm arguing for a change that will make a difference in hauling capacity depending on how strong its defenses are. The specific amount it hauls isn't even on the table.
I'm arguing to give more power to the industrialist.
Aqriue wrote:I just don't get the logic CCP has behind "specializing" the industrials when they could of just added more cargo space, min/max a decent amount of mid/lows depending with decent non-moon like align times and call it a day....an ammo industrial? an industrial with drones? I just don't get it, but still favors Gallente/Iteron 5 training They didn't want to spend valuable development resources just yet to add new industrials. I feel it's something they should strongly consider doing eventually. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
730
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 17:39:00 -
[48] - Quote
As so many others pointed out, working as intended. You really should have considered a reverse psychology on this one, OP.
Rather than cry nerf, ask for a Buff. The Bustard has 5000 base cargo with 3 low slots. It's very tempting to fill them with expander rigs and modules too and get total haul to over 100K with a Bustard. If the T1 specialist haulers had enough base to stack on, people would do it. |
Fer'isam K'ahn
None Of One
400
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 17:41:00 -
[49] - Quote
So you are still promoting 'specialized cargo bays expanders', ... this will not happen, since it will for instance destroy all mining vessels without a heavy revamp for the benefit of ... nothing. And they said already they won't do it, all this jammering for nothing.
I agree with conformity for lore text, for most modules, where it makes sense, but not for all just out of principle. In this case it makes no sense and isn't worth the effort, not only 'devs time' but throwing everything over the cliff and forcing everyone to reconsider, re-buy, re-fit and change their outfits, for yous adding it to the list of 'stacking penalty = true'.
So, should cargo expanders also work on drone bays, ship maintenance, fleet hangar ? It's all for 'cargo' Join the BIG Lottery (see Bio ingame), oldest and only non-profit Lottery in EVE, every second Monday. Wire ISK to BIG GAMES for tickets ! Join the Channel, have fun, being a lucky winner is optional ,)
|
Iain Cariaba
303
|
Posted - 2014.09.10 21:13:00 -
[50] - Quote
Apparently OP needs small, monosyllabic words to understand the concept behind the specialized cargo bays, but that's expected from TEST.
1. Max expanded Itty V can hold roughly 35k m3 of any cargo you care to put into it. 2. Max Epithal can hold roughly 65k m3 of only planetary commodities.. 3. The highlighted portions are the balance.
Sorry about the miltisyllabic words, I tried to keep them as small as possible. Disclaimer: My opinion does not necessarily reflect that of my corp or alliance. My opinion is my own, and if you don't like, that is your problem. |
|
Angeal MacNova
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
192
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 00:22:00 -
[51] - Quote
All this talk about planetary commodities holds. What ever happened to the Primae? |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1839
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 02:00:00 -
[52] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Apparently OP needs small, monosyllabic words to understand the concept behind the specialized cargo bays, but that's expected from TEST.
1. Max expanded Itty V can hold roughly 35k m3 of any cargo you care to put into it. 2. Max Epithal can hold roughly 65k m3 of only planetary commodities.. 3. The highlighted portions are the balance.
Sorry about the miltisyllabic words, I tried to keep them as small as possible. A perfect example of someone standing right next to my point without even seeing it. Let's further examine this:
* Itty V with maximum tank can hold 7,250 m3 of any cargo you care to put into it. * Epithal with maximum tank can hold 67,500 m3 of only planetary commodities.
Don't spend too much time on the highlighted portions, or you might miss the obvious discrepancy right next to them. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2616
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 03:39:00 -
[53] - Quote
I still don't see what the problem here is. Maybe this particular trade-off is too complicated for you to understand? |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1839
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 03:50:00 -
[54] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:I still don't see what the problem here is. Maybe this particular trade-off is too complicated for you to understand? "this particular tradeoff" which people keep bringing up isn't my point of contention at all. I'm trying to make it as clear as possible. I don't understand what you guys are missing here.
Itty V has to give up tank, align, warp stabs, and all that fancy stuff to get max cargo. Epithal can get max cargo without giving up any of that. And don't try to tell me their tank values are too dissimilar for comparison. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
222
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 04:06:00 -
[55] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Itty V has to give up tank, align, warp stabs, and all that fancy stuff to get max cargo. Epithal can get max cargo without giving up any of that. And don't try to tell me their tank values are too dissimilar for comparison. And in return, the Epithal only has to be completely useless at anything except for the narrow job of PI hauling. |
Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
733
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 04:08:00 -
[56] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:I still don't see what the problem here is. Maybe this particular trade-off is too complicated for you to understand? "this particular tradeoff" which people keep bringing up isn't my point of contention at all. I'm trying to make it as clear as possible. I don't understand what you guys are missing here. Itty V has to give up tank, align, warp stabs, and all that fancy stuff to get max cargo. Epithal can get max cargo without giving up any of that. And don't try to tell me their tank values are too dissimilar for comparison.
The Gallente got all the spec hulls because Itty 5 was dethroned.
Bestower - Amarr industrial 5, Six expanders, Three T1 rigs, 13x GSC has over 50,000 Universal cargo. Caldari are still superior at 'end game' in hauling. Mini got shafted. All their industrial hulls should have the Warp speed doubled. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1839
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 04:33:00 -
[57] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Itty V has to give up tank, align, warp stabs, and all that fancy stuff to get max cargo. Epithal can get max cargo without giving up any of that. And don't try to tell me their tank values are too dissimilar for comparison. And in return, the Epithal only has to be completely useless at anything except for the narrow job of PI hauling. The important trade-off here, as several have pointed out already, is that the Epithal hauls more than the Itty V due to being specialized. This is how CCP envisioned it. It is the purpose of specializing them. They aren't supposed to have vastly different applied defenses. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1535
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 04:45:00 -
[58] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: A perfect example of someone standing right next to my point without even seeing it. Let's further examine this:
* Itty V with maximum tank can hold 7,250 m3 of any cargo you care to put into it. * Epithal with maximum tank can hold 68,050 m3 of only planetary commodities.
Don't spend too much time on the highlighted portions, or you might miss the obvious discrepancy right next to them. Oh and Max cargo Epithal can hold 69,710m3 of planetary commodities but it's a small difference.
And you are still going the wrong way. The Max Tank normal industrial should be buffed, not the specialist ones nerfed. If the max tank itty V could hold 25-30k of anything, and the max cargo could hold 50k of anything And the max cargo Epithal could hold 15-20k of anything + 70k of PI
Then there would be no issue.
So lets give ALL industrials at least 5k base cargo, and a specialist hold or a fleet hanger. So they can ALL carry a decent amount when fitted for tank, and can all carry loads when fitted for cargo. Lets actually buff the industrial role in space. It's not like Indy pilots are already nerfed by having no weapons after all. |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
159
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 04:59:00 -
[59] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: I'll put this in as few words as possible: how can both extremes be okay if being in the middle is not better?
I'll return the favor: Specialization versus generalization.
The middle ground is easier to shoot at. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2616
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 05:08:00 -
[60] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Komi Toran wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Itty V has to give up tank, align, warp stabs, and all that fancy stuff to get max cargo. Epithal can get max cargo without giving up any of that. And don't try to tell me their tank values are too dissimilar for comparison. And in return, the Epithal only has to be completely useless at anything except for the narrow job of PI hauling. The important trade-off here, as several have pointed out already, is that the Epithal hauls more than the Itty V due to being specialized. This is how CCP envisioned it. It is the purpose of specializing them. They aren't supposed to have vastly different applied defenses. Ocih wrote:Mini got shafted. All their industrial hulls should have the Warp speed doubled. Speak for yourself. I'll fly Minmatar any day. That sweet align is the best.
This whole post is silly. The trade-off you think is important is the only one you're capable of seeing and that's where the problem is. Open your eyes and this whole thread goes away. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |