| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
FlightGlobal
   |
Posted - 2009.12.12 01:29:00 -
[1]
First: this is not so much an idea as a question, are there plans for more t3 ships and mire t3 modules? ESP ships to represent each class of ship (frig, destroyer, bc, bs and yesmining vessles, trade vessels and yes, maybe even capitals) and a wider selection of modules including t3 modules to allow redesign of t2 ship types (ie: a module for covert ops cloaking fits, warp bubble generators etc etc).
I realise the prices would have to get into line for this to work- lets assume this is the case and t3 cruisers and any further t3 ships/modules also represent true value in terms of isk, required building material and production etc etc.
Now if this has been announced and I missed it please tell me what is being discussedby ccp, what they are doing and when (links to dev forums etc would be good). If they haven't- why not?
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 01:32:00 -
[2]
ccp said on fanfest there will be t3 modules and frigates.
|
Eurzadahn
Gallente
Tenichigo Kaigun
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 01:40:00 -
[3]
They also mentioned T3 battleships (in the keynote I believe).
---------------------------------------------
Eurzadahn
Sovereign & Founder,
Tenichigo Kaigun
|
FlightGlobal
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 01:42:00 -
[4]
Any ideas on time frames? Months quaters years? any chance of it becoming more affordable! -Thanks guys keep posting! :)
|
hacksideways
Caldari
GRI Security
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 01:46:00 -
[5]
Isn't there supposed to be a 5th subsystem for the T3 cruisers? I'd think we'd want to get that out of the way before adding new ships.
-
 Originally by: Liz Laser
Exotic Dancers are cargo.
That's how we roll.
|
Drakarin
Gallente
The Abyssmal Spire
Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 01:52:00 -
[6]
Tech 3 battleships? Holy ****, say hello to the solopwn mobile. Admittedly a several billion dollar solopwn mobile, but still...
|
Direstorm
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 02:10:00 -
[7]
I want my T3 battleship to be able to launch fighter drones (only needs to launch 5), fit 8 missile launchers, and have t3 resists.
|
Eurzadahn
Gallente
Tenichigo Kaigun
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 02:16:00 -
[8]
Yeah, it tis in da works. Check out the video footage from Fanfest on Youtube. It is mentioned at least once.
---------------------------------------------
Eurzadahn
Sovereign & Founder,
Tenichigo Kaigun
|
FlightGlobal
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 10:26:00 -
[9]
Any idea on time scales? Love the idea of a battleship with a limited carrier ability! :)
|
Ap0ll0n
Gallente
Lone Star Joint Venture
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 18:28:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Drakarin
Tech 3 battleships? Holy ****, say hello to the solopwn mobile. Admittedly a several billion dollar solopwn mobile, but still...
There are no dollars in EVE..
|
|
|
Aloriana Jacques
Amarr
Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 20:21:00 -
[11]
Personally, I think the next t3 application should be to destroyers go bolster the ship class. Destroyers don't get enough love.
- - -
Aloriana Jacques - Skill Sheet
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 22:00:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 12/12/2009 22:02:41
Originally by: Aloriana Jacques
Personally, I think the next t3 application should be to destroyers go bolster the ship class. Destroyers don't get enough love.
Because making a 500mil isk destroyer to do the job of an AML Caracal is an awesome way to spend your ISK. Throwing new tech levels at problems is not a way of solving them.
|
Ahz
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 22:17:00 -
[13]
I don't understand what the point of T3 ships is. They do almost everything that the T2 ships do but they do it better. And the way the skill requirements are laid out players can skip T2 and got straight to T3.
They're making T2 obsolete.
Add to that the fact that T3 prices are falling fast. You can get into a T3 ship now for between 300 and 400 mil. At this rate they'll be within the range of T2 ships soon.
If the goal is to phase out T2 ships at some point I kind of understand. But to have yet another ship class lumped in with all the existing ships makes no sense to me.
That said the only area where I'd like to see more lego ships is in the super capitals. The idea that no two Titans or Motherships (when they exist) would be the same is really appealing.
|
Planetary Genocide
Gallente
CNK Manufacturing Co
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 22:24:00 -
[14]
I've got a thread for a t3 ORE mining ship written up, but if we're focusing on combat-only ships, then yes, we do need to find a new use for the destroyer. Right now, about the only things I've seen them used for is the new people running level 1's before cruisers, and as salvage boats.
______________
RAWRRR |
Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 22:30:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Because making a 500mil isk destroyer to do the job of an AML Caracal is an awesome way to spend your ISK. Throwing new tech levels at problems is not a way of solving them.
Actually, yes it is. By using t2 ships and ewar ships (hint: force multiplier*) a small group of players can effectively take on a larger group of players in direct combat.
So yes, throwing more money at a problem is, and should be, a viable solution. Another option is to pay somebody else to do your dirty work. Granted it's not like just buying a more expensive ship, in essence it's the same.
*: because of FALCON!
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 00:45:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Fille Balle
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Because making a 500mil isk destroyer to do the job of an AML Caracal is an awesome way to spend your ISK. Throwing new tech levels at problems is not a way of solving them.
Actually, yes it is. By using t2 ships and ewar ships (hint: force multiplier*) a small group of players can effectively take on a larger group of players in direct combat.
So yes, throwing more money at a problem is, and should be, a viable solution. Another option is to pay somebody else to do your dirty work. Granted it's not like just buying a more expensive ship, in essence it's the same.
*: because of FALCON!
Great job utterly missing the point there.
Let me put it another way; do you think an adequate fix for rockets would be implementing a 300mil isk rocket bonused ship?
|
Meeko Atari
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 00:54:00 -
[17]
I vote that CCP first address obsolete ships / ship bonuses before adding "MOAR" to the game.
just a concern that adding more and more ships to the line up will just leave things in game forgotten or useless.
Although T3 ships / modules would be cool i would like to see them put on a lower priority than current ships with bad bonuses or no role.
just my 2 isk
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 01:58:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Meeko Atari
I vote that CCP first address obsolete ships / ship bonuses before adding "MOAR" to the game.
just a concern that adding more and more ships to the line up will just leave things in game forgotten or useless.
Although T3 ships / modules would be cool i would like to see them put on a lower priority than current ships with bad bonuses or no role.
just my 2 isk
I'm with you on this. They spent all that development time on ships only a relatively small proportion of the playerbase are actually going to fly, let alone pvp with, when there's laughably worthless stuff all over which would benefit far more people with far less time investment.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |