EVE Search - Tech 3 Industrial Cruiser

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Tech 3 Industrial Cruiser

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.17 21:25:00 - [1] Citizens of Eve!!! I present to you, my proposal for a T3 industrial cruiser. These ideas are a compilation of features from various other proposals, players, and the current T3 subsystems. Industrial Subsystems: Ore Yield û 25% bonus to mining laser yield and +5,000m3 ore hold per level (5 turrets) Harvesters Efficiency Optimizer û 10% decreased duration of gas harvesters and +5,000 m3 gas chamber per level (5 turrets) Corporate Sharing û 10% increase to mining drone yield and +5,000m3 corporate hangar per level (no turrets; 50m3, 25mbit ) Covert Ops Reconfiguration û 20% bonus to mining laser yield and 10% increased cargo capacity per level; 100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use (3 turrets) Defensive Subsystems: Adaptive Shielding û 5% bonus to all shield resistances per level Amplification Node û 10% bonus to booster effectiveness per level Industrial Processor û 5% bonus to effectiveness of mining foreman gang links per level; 99% reduction in CPU need for Gang Link modules Signature Optimizer û 5% reduction in signature radius per level Engineering Subsystems: Augmented Capacitor Reservoir û 5% bonus to capacitor capacity per level Capacitor Regeneration Matrix û 5% reduction in capacitor recharge rate per level Power Core Multiplier û 5% bonus to power output per level Harvester Capacitor Optimization û 5% reduced capacitor usage of Mining Lasers and Gas Harvesters per level Electronic Subsystems: Harvester CPU Efficiency Gate û 5% reduction in CPU penalties of mining upgrade modules per level Obfuscation Manifold û 20% bonus to ECM target jammer strength per level Emergent Locus Analyzer û 10% increase to scan strength of probes per level and 20% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams per level; -99% reduced CPU need for Scan Probe Launchers Dissolution Sequencer û15% bonus to ship sensor strength per level Propulsion Subsystems: Interdiction Nullifier û 3% increased agility per level; Immunity to non-targeted interdiction Intercalated Nanofibers û 5% increased agility per level Warp Core Optimizer û +1 warp core strength per level Chassis Optimization û 5% bonus to max velocity per level _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.17 21:26:00 - [2] Some key points to take away: All numbers are rough figures just to give an idea of the possible bonuses. The mining bonuses have been fleshed out to some degree to make them competitive but not on par with that of a hulk. All configurations that emulate a role that has a specialized ship for the role will be inferior to their specialized cousins, though may have some unique features. For instance, the Industrial Command Processor gives a 5% bonus to effectiveness per level but can only fit 1 link without needing command processers to allow for more gang links. Some potential unique features: covert ops miner (between retriever and covetor mining capabilities) cruiser sized refitting service ECM defense (strength equivalent to that of kitsune with current bonus) interdiction nullification immunity to probing (theoretically with the signature radius reduction subsystem + sensor strength bonus subsystem, the ship would need two ECCM modules to become immune, variable on base sensor strength and signature radius) bonused gas harvester Numbers for max skilled mining setups: Osprey/T3 covert ops = 564m3/min (3x Miner II) Retriever = 754m3/min (2x T2 strips and T2 crystals) T3 miner = 1057m3/min (5x Miner II) Covetor = 1131m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) Hulk = 1240m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) In closing: I think these subsystems will allow for a unique and versatile ship. Furthermore, should T3 one day be able to change subsystems at POSs, the T3 industrial will truly come into its own in terms of versatility and adaptability. In addition to potentially being an industrialistÆs wet dream, this ship will also provide yet another juicy target for pirates abound. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.17 22:51:00 - [3] Originally by: Archeas I actually like this setup, even with the covert ops since you've effectively made it possible while not over powered since it doesn't receive as much bonuses as the "Ore Yield" setup. It also doesn't have as much cargo space, so trips would have to be made. And still comes under the Hulk, which makes sense since the Hulk was made for mining, and this is not. Though it is possible to mine and give yourself bonuses at the same time, it's still somewhat of a decent setup. I assume the "corporate sharing" would meant to be used as a booster/hauler? Perhaps that subsystem could increase the corporate hanger by 10,000 m3 per level, and the cargo hold by 8% per level - Role bonus: -10% agility (since the sub system would add a certain mass to the cruiser. I think that would bring that particular sub system up to par with what people may use it for. I like this idea because it fits into what we already have while not being overpowered, just versatile. I tried to make most/all of the subsystems bonused with moderation. At one point I actually had the ore yield subsystem bonuses for 20km3 ore bay per level. Reason corporate hangar isn't 10km3 per level is because the orca has a 40k m3 corporate hangar and I didn't want to overshadow that. I did not include modifiers to things like slots/mass/agility/etc to each subsystem because frankly that would be a ton of work and quite ridiculous . A few questions I have for readers: I personally do not like the warp core optimizer subsystem; anyone have something that could replace it? Same goes for the engineering subsystems, I feel like 3 out of 4 subsystems affecting capacitor is kind of meh and boring. Any ideas? Thanks for the replies so far guys! _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.18 06:52:00 - [4] Originally by: WarlockX Edited by: WarlockX on 18/01/2010 03:23:50 Interesting, except they sound more like a t3 Hauler then t3 cruisers since they are going to be bigger then battleships with those huge bays. You also forgot to add low slots, mid slots. Slot modifiers, are as I stated, a bit much for me to balance out on my own. As for Tech 3 haulers...they will be big but not too big. I imagine base cargohold would be no more than 600m3. If you go with the corporate sharing and lets say 5 low slots with 5x T2 cargoholds and 3x T2 cargo rigs you will get somethingl ike another 3500m3. Add this to 25k m3 corporate hangar (lvl 5 industrial subsystems) and you get about 28k m3. a nice hauling amount but nothing too extraordinary. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.18 06:56:00 - [5] Originally by: Killljoy Nice idea but replace the corporate sharing ones drone stuff with something to do with mercoxic. I was intending for the 2 mining bonuses ones to affect deep core miners as well. If that seems dumb/not practical I could see a 5th subsystem. I kind of like the corporate hangar subsystem. I basically imagine it that you could take one of these along with other T3 ships for sleeper ops. It would be agile and have some nice advantages (agile, space for spare mods/subsystems) and if T3 are one day allowed to swap subsystems at a corporate hangar, would allow for some great adaptability on the fly. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.18 19:17:00 - [6] Originally by: Dark Drifter and max miner hard points should be no more than 3, can you give a reason for this? If you look at my second post I show that even with 5x Miner II on the subsystem with the 25% bonus to yield per level, it is still out mined by a covetor/hulk. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.19 21:34:00 - [7] Originally by: Newtonius Rex In general I like this idea, a lot! I have been toying with this idea for a while, but never got anywhere near the detail the OP has :) T3 ships can be configured to very specific roles and the T3 Indy should be the same, I always thought in lines of the following: 1) Mining Gas or Ore 2) Boosting 3) Hauling 4) Salvage/Hacking/Code-breaking With this in mind, the only change that jumps out is the mining bonus on the cov ops subsystem. I would change this to a bonus to code breakers and analysers (possibly. Thanks for the support About the covert ops subsystem: the reason I made this for mining is because mining barges tend to have difficulty getting into areas with good ore due to limited survivability. The cloak was to give the ship a chance to get to the good stuff, while sacrificing efficiency in mining. Now granted, with the bonuses I gave it, you could simply use a cheap T1 osprey to do the job. Perhaps this subsystem should be given the bonus of its ore counterpart and the ore one should be bumped up to be between covetor and hulk? Thoughts? Balanced? Overpowered? More related to your note about salvage/hacking/codebreaking: In all honesty "most" of those sites can be done in smaller craft/current T3 rather easily, they just lack the bonuses. I personally would like to see a line of SOE ships that specializes in this, but perhaps I can come up with another subsystem for the T3 industrial that caters to these professions. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.19 21:45:00 - [8] Edited by: XXSketchxx on 19/01/2010 21:47:11 Ore Yield subsystem has had its bonus modified from 25% to 30%. This places its yield slightly above the covetor (a Tech 1 ship) but below the hulk. The covert ops subsystem has had is bonus modified from 20% to 40%. This places its yield above that of a retriever, but below a covetor. Corporate sharing has had its bonus reduced from 5,000m3 per level to 2,500m3 per level. This is to prevent it from being used primarily for hauling: its main purpose is resupplying fleet members and providing a place to refit. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.20 21:10:00 - [9] Up to the top for more discussion/support/nonsupport? _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.22 04:03:00 - [10] Originally by: Santiak Excellent ideas, my good man. Just a slight sidenote, are you suggesting an entirely 5th strategic cruiser? Or are you proposing adding more subsystems to the current ones? One could more or less make the Industrial Subsystems replace Offensive subsystems if fitted. And add the 3 unique subsystems you suggest from the other catagories to the current pool - perhaps adding a targeting penalty to the Warp Core Optimizer to deter people from making nigh uncatchable, yet viable, PvP setups. But it's just a thought :) Again, good idea - hope it gets noticed. I was suggesting simply a new ship. However, adding these as new subsystems would be interesting, though I think might complicate things a bit. Thanks for the support

XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.22 14:12:00 - [11] Originally by: justin666 i love how the carebears just tryed to justify a minning ship to have a convert ops cloak lol it would mean 0 risk minning so good luck with ccp going with that guys..... 0 risk huh? not really, but it definitely helps access hard to get to roids I was thinking though that I don't like the idea that the miner could simply stay at range from all roids around them and when someone warps in, cloak...so I was thinking... How about an activation delay? I.e. 30 second delay to activating cloaking device after miners have deactivated. PS: if you are at all competent as a pvper you should love this ship. It means more carebears going to risky areas. Most carebears can't survive outside of high sec for crap and will die horribly. Just look at the number of PVE T3 ships that are destroyed all the time. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.22 16:45:00 - [12] More edits Added a 30 second activation delay to cloaking after deactivating miner(s). This is to prevent miners from too easy of getaways. The covert ops cloak is designed to help enable travel through and into hostile areas, not to allow immunity. Comments? Suggestions? Thanks for the support so far. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.22 21:04:00 - [13] Originally by: RalShae Marques Edited by: RalShae Marques on 22/01/2010 18:56:27 I cannot endorse such a ship. While I agree there is a need to make low-sec mining more accessible, A ship as described is a bit overkill. Instead, I propose a simple piece of ship equipment. I propose a "Probe counter-measure" (I'm terrible with names) This device would consume a high-slot AND turret. I imagine a AWACS-like dome as the graphic. While on-line, it would mask all electromagnic signatures of your ship from probes. But the ship would still be visible, and targetable, from any nearby ship. It would have similar power/cpu demands as a mining laser. It would need to be active (like a laser or weapon) to be affective. While on-line (wether active or not), the ship could NOT jettison cargo. This would allow a ship to move into a asteroid belt and conduct ninja mining. But would be invisible to all the PvP probe-and-ransom players out there. They could still conduct such operations, but would have to manually visit the belts. They'd just have to work a little harder. You'd still have to hazard the potential gate/station campers. Still have to worry about cloaked ships camping out in the belts. No new ship would need to created. No counter-balance designed. You want to put it on a Hulk and give it a try.. have at it. I appreciate your contribution to the thread but adding an entirely different module proposal to a thread that sorta has a similar purpose... On topic, the proposed ship is definitely intricate and complex; overkill as you put it. That's kind of the point. As it is now, there are haulers, mining barges, exhumers, blockade runners and transports. Oh and the orca/rorqual. Less than 10 classes of ships for the industrialists. This ship is designed to give industrialists something more to play with, something to toy around with and have some new, unique features. I understand your sentiment but your [negative] point is sort of my [positive] point for this ship. Complexity is good; combat characters have access to a wide range of abilities and ship, why can't industrialists? PS. I suggest making a separate proposal for your module idea. While I do not particularly agree with how you introduced it, you may find you get some support. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.01.25 19:19:00 - [14] Random bump for the day. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.03 22:23:00 - [15] Edited by: XXSketchxx on 03/02/2010 22:25:36 Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii Originally by: XXSketchxx Citizens of Eve!!! I present to you, my proposal for a T3 industrial cruiser. These ideas are a compilation of features from various other proposals, players, and the current T3 subsystems. Strategic = Industry/Infrastructure/Economy Tactical = Military. Strategic Cruisers are clearly industrial ships. Thank you for that constructive post. To all the others, thanks for the bumps. @ Sigras: I understand your concern. I guess the big difference would be cargo capacity: the covert subsystem should be balanced such that even when fit for max cargo, it still does not have as much cargo space as the lowest of the blockade runners fit for max cargo(caldari/minmatar?) _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.04 16:55:00 - [16] Edited by: XXSketchxx on 04/02/2010 16:56:04 Bumping this again. As Sigras noted, CCP has stated that no ship shall out mine the Hulk. Additionally, note why; more minerals into the system is a bad thing. Yes this will be expensive like the current T3; but you aren't paying for it to be better than a hulk/orca/blockade runner, at least not in their specialized fields. You are paying for the options and the unique features it provides. I remember seeing that other T3 industrial idea a while back; I will have to look at it closer for the number crunching it provides. Eventually I would like to dive into slot layouts but that is a ton of work (working out what the slots would be like with all the different combinations). _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.06 16:01:00 - [17] bump for the weekend. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.07 19:13:00 - [18] Update: -Introduced slot layouts (nearly directly based on tengu) -Introduced base cargo capacities. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.08 04:51:00 - [19] Originally by: Rogerano Cov-ops on this ship is inappropriate. It usually takes more than 30 seconds for a ship to align, warp, and land. This means that an attacker will probably arrive at your location after you've cloaked. And that is in a perfect world. In the real world an attacker must load local grid, narrow your ship down to an astral body, warp, land, target your ship, and get a point on. This cannot be done in less than 30 seconds. But that's by-the-by. A cov-ops cloak is inappropriate no matter the activation delay. Assuming this ship can align and warp in < 20 seconds, it's a simple matter - if local acquires another peace-loving citizen of EVE - for the pilot to warp away from the belt to a prepared safe spot and cloak. So yes, the cloak does provide immunity. If you want to ninja-mine, get a burst. Much cheaper. You could do the same with a hulk though really, as long as you have a station/safespot/POS to warp to. Having the activation delay makes things a bit trickier . The point of the covert ops cloak is to provide easier transit to dangerous areas. Thanks for the input though. Positive and negative (with good reason) is always welcome. If the covert ops cloaking device were to be removed, what would you replace it with? _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.09 16:32:00 - [20] Originally by: Sigras Additionally I ran the numbers, and even with T2 expander rigs, the MAX cargo space you can have on one of these with bubble dodging and covert ops cloak is 2,425.95 m^3 or about 3 minutes of mining. . . You can bring blockade runners if you want but they can't bubble dodge. . . This is a key part of the proposal. With the covert ops setup, yes you can get to your mining spot relatively easily and mine relatively safely. But, mine less than a T1 covetor (10mi?) and you have a tiny cargohold, meaning you will either have to jetcan and come back with a hauler, or drop to a station/POS. Point being, there will be plenty opportunities of vulnerability. Now you could use the ore yield subsystem and get performance slightly better than a covetor, though less than a hulk, but on the upside have an ore bay of potentially 25,000m3 (just less than 1 jetcan). But, you lose the safety of the cloak. Honestly, I don't think the cloak is unbalanced; current T3 cruisers can be fit to get into hostile areas safely to rat/plex, while losing some efficiency (less damage = slower ratting). Why shouldn't miners be able to do the same (but with less effectiveness). _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?

XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.10 04:03:00 - [21] Originally by: Sigras I do have a few questions for the OP though. . . 1. Why does the industrial processor get a low slot? I would rather see it get a mid slot for two reasons. a. A mid slot would potentially allow for command processors. b. It makes the signature optimizer the only choice to add a low slot limiting the ability to mobile boost/harvest/haul 2. Why does the Emergent Locus Analyzer get a 99% reduced CPU need for Scan Probe Launchers bonus? The core launcher, which is what I'm assuming it was designed for, only takes up 10 CPU, and I'm not sure this thing should be able to use combat probes. . . Seems a bit out of the ships role. Just my thoughts To answer all your questions in one go: Laziness A very good point about the probe launcher; I am definitely going to adjust that subsystem. I will take a look at the slot layouts. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.10 13:22:00 - [22] Thanks for the support guys. I appreciate the critiques. To address a few: Why no strip miners? I wanted the ship to have short cycle timers to force the pilot to be active. Also it is a cruiser sized vessel, strip miners are for dedicated mining barges and exhumers. Ore yield vs. covert ops Janeth if you look the covert ops subsystem does not provide the 25k m3, that is the ore yield (no cloak). The covert ops subsystem barely provides a few thousand m3 when configured for max hauling capacity. Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuulk Sorry, but I simply do not want to make a hulk replacement. The hulk should remain the premiere ore stripper. You can get some decently competitive ability with the ore yield subsystem, but I do not think it should mine as much and definitely not more than a hulk. Mercoxit/Ice bonuses Someone mentioned this before. The yield bonuses on both the ore yield and covert ops subsystems apply to all ores, including mercoxit. As for ice, I thought about making a subsystem for it, but I wanted the cycle durations for this thing to be small. Perhaps there can be a push in technology that introduces Ice Miners, which mine smaller chunks of ice that simply yield less product? I'd rather not dive into that realm but if someone else wants to take the lead be my guest Keep it coming _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.12 17:34:00 - [23] Bump for the end of the week. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.17 13:55:00 - [24] Originally by: Beatson Signed. Personally I see a T3 indy ship provide less yield than the hulk but provide enough tank that it can't be taken down by a ship with fittings totalling 10-15mil. If configured properly and fit well, the T3 industrial cruiser can do this. Quote: Regarding the ice mining, perhaps you can replace the Rapid Deployment sub-system with one benefiting ice mining? If anything it will be made into a new subsystem. I am reluctant however as I do not like the idea of putting ice harvesters on a cruiser. I was considering working out numbers for new modules + new, small chunks of ice; Ice Miner I and II to start. If someone wants to expand on this it'd be great, or provide reasons why ice harvesters would be okay... _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.18 19:27:00 - [25] Originally by: Veliria A true ninjaminer would be a welcome addition, as it gives mining an aspect that isn't mindblowingly dull. The yield wouldn't really matter all that much, but cargohold would, it would be a waste to get deep into enemy/WH space with only 500m3 of cargo to fill with ore. Maybe something closer to about 2000-3000m3 at lvl 4/5 so it can really be fun and still profitable to ninja mine. Fit for max low slots gives 7 slots. With the covert ops subsystem, that's 50% bonus to 500m3 base plus potential for 7 Expanded Cargohold IIs, 2 T2 cargo rigs and 1 T1 cargo rig, giving approximately 6800m3. Even sacrificing a few slots for mining upgrades lets you maintain a decent cargohold. Should be enough to get you by. Thank you for bringing this up though. It forced me to see the potential for 7 low slot configuration which could potentially result in one of the mining subsystems or even both better than a max yield hulk (strip miners + T2 crystals and 2 mining upgrades). I might have to tweak some yield bonuses after I check some numbers. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.18 20:27:00 - [26] Okay, so contrary to my previous belief, Mining Laser Upgrades are not stacking penalized. However, they do hit CPU pretty hard. After some calculations, it is clear that while a 7 low slot configuration may seem problematic in the fact that 7 MLU IIs would boost the mining of the Ore Yield configuration considerably, being able to do so should be impossible. The ship should be able to fit 1-2 MLUs on it, at which point it is still outmined by a Hulk and only slightly outmining a covetor (when 2 MLUs are in place versus the covetor's max potential of 1). Fitting 3 MLUs should IMO be possible if you fill the remainder of the ship's low slots with Co-Processors, but even then the ship it outmined by a Hulk with 2 MLUs. So basically, as long as mining yield is balanced around CPU output, the ship should retain its position behind the Hulk in terms of mining yield. The Covert Ops configuration is not an issue, as it takes 7 MLUs to just about come close to the Hulk's max yield with 2 MLUs and this will not be possible due to CPU limitations. Tl;dr CPU usage increase should balance extensive MLU usage and keep the mining yield hierarchy intact. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.19 02:04:00 - [27] Originally by: Destruction Theory I agree. However, covert cloak is going JUST a bit too far. /Signed Care to explain your opinion why its too far? Current T3 can be fit "decently" for PvE content and have a covert ops cloak. Why shouldn't a "ninja miner" be as viable as a "ninja plexer" _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.19 18:53:00 - [28] Originally by: Veliria First off all it should be a pain to scan down, it can't fight, it's expensive, a tank won't matter much if you can't fight back so all it can do is mine and run, so making it hard to scan down would force the opponent to try to find the target via the site, rather than the ship. dissolution sequencer + signature optimizer + ECCM modules Quote: Industrial purposes should be given a CovOps cloak as an option. I think the 30 second delay on it should be modified, taking off 3 seconds per level of the subsystem skill. If you do get scanned down, 30 seconds is a bit much. I'll think about this. I rather like the delay. It forces the pilot to be actively using the d-scanner and be ready to leave at a moments notice. Quote: The warp core stab subsystem is a bit out of place. If you get targetted, odds are they aren't alone and they'll find you again. This is going to be changed to a mass reduction bonus. I never liked this subsystem (read a comment I made on the first page). Mass reduction bonus fits in much better. Quote: Instead, I'd propose a subsystem that boosts MWD and AB speed. It allows for more practical use of using a Cloak and MWD combo to get out of a bubble. I also considered this, but wasn't sure how much people would really want to fit an ab or mwd. I can see how it'd be useful though; I always fit a mwd on my blockade runners. Quote: I'd love to see a Drone Mining bonus somewhere along the line as well. One of the subsystems had this initially but I modified it. I'll look into it, but honestly mining drones are pretty meh anyway. Quote: The Engineering subsystems seem a little redundant. I agree Quote: Maybe some systems aimed towards improving mining laser range, reducing the damage done to crystals, ore scanner and maybe that mining drone bonus. Some good ideas. I particularly like the mining laser range one; could be very handy. Quote: Just a few thoughts Much appreciated _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.19 19:18:00 - [29] *Update* Augmented Capacitor subsystem has been replaced by Mining Laser Field Enhancement (10% bonus to range of mining lasers and gas harvesters per level). Harvester CPU Efficiency Gate has been given another bonus; 20% increase to range of survey scanners per level. Warp Core Optimizer has been removed. It has been replaced by the Hull Construction Reconfiguration (5% reduction in mass per level). Chassis Optimization has been boosted from 5% to 10%. This subsystem is meant to benefit both users of afterburners and microwarpdrives. There are currently no plans for adding mining drone bonuses. I am still looking for ideas for the ice mining subsystem. All ideas welcome. Thank you to all who have contributed so far. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.19 22:11:00 - [30] Edited by: XXSketchxx on 19/02/2010 22:11:19 Originally by: Veliria Sounds good, but hopefully not all midslots will be taken to achieve an unscannable ship. Atleast one mid should be free for an ore scanner or MWD. a tengu can be made unprobable with dissolution sequencer (and electronics subsystem 4), 2 mid slot ECCM and 1 low slot ECCM this would be doable with the T3 industrial as well, and when you throw in things like sensor implants, skirmish warfare boosts, x-instinct boosters, and halo implants, it is very much viable to achieve an unscannable ship and maintain functionality Quote: On that I'd have to disagree, Mining Drones actually bring in a good amount of ore and they do so every 1 min. From what I can tell they bring about as much as 50-60% of a strip miner (which cycles in 3 mins) if you park close to a roid. Add a mining bonus to that and you get some decent secondary support. I'll look into it. No promises though; the mining subsystems can already do fairly well on their own. Quote: One more thing, what about Mercoxit? If the T3 ship is going to use regular turret miners, the Modulated Deep Core Miner II is what I'd use. I used them on my Rokh before I got my Hulk very effectively and from what I can tell they can mine Mercoxit very effectively. Seeing as how regular miners can't mine it (I think) and the Deep Core Strip Miner has less yield when compared to a Modulated Strip Miner, what would the yield be like when compared to a Skiff or Hulk? /me runs to Excel. I'll check some numbers. May need to make some adjustments. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?

XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.19 22:43:00 - [31] Okay. Some conclusions: Max skilled skiff, MDCSM with T2 crystal ~824m3/min - lower than both the Ore Yield and Covert ops Subsystem Therefore, Ore Yield and Covert ops will not provide bonus to Deep Core Technology. Instead, I designed a new subsystem: Deep Core Extraction - 25% bonus to Mercoxit Mining Crystal Yield multiplier and +2000m3 Mercoxit Storage Bay per level; 3/0/0 (3 turrets); 350m3 cargo What this means: 633m3 per minute Yield when fitted with MDCM and Mercoxit Crystals and a 10k m3 storage bay for Mercoxit ore. Thoughts? Too modest? Unbalanced? Will it work? Still looking for input on the Ice Yield Subsystem. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.20 01:26:00 - [32] Originally by: Veliria Yeh seems good, seeing you could fit more MLUs on it than you could on a Skiff. Theoretical max MLU's that should be able to be fit on one of these is 3 (with very little CPU left). Skiff can fit 2. T3 industrial with Deep Core bonus and 3 MLU will still mine less than a Skiff with 2 MLU. However, as it stands, with only 3 MDCM IIs you may be able to fit a couple more MLUs than intended. Therefore, I am dropping the bonus down to 7.5% per level and increasing turret slots to 5. This puts the T3 Industrial at 644m3/min which can be increased to 834m3/min with 3 MLUs in comparison to a Skiff with base 827m3/min and 982m3/min with 2 MLUs. Quote: Ice would be problematic as you need Ice Harvesters for that (which are strips) and a single unit is 1000m3. As well, Ice Mining isn't really all that useful on this ship, Ice does not appear in WHs and in 0.0/Low-sec you're better off mining ABC or Merc. I agree that its problematic. The only practical solution I see is a complex one; introduce Ice Miner I, II and named variants, and smaller chunks of ice that yield smaller amounts of product. Its a complete overhaul and could have some very negative effects on the ice market. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.20 01:47:00 - [33] Minor Modification: Added a 50% reduction in mining laser optimal range for the Deep Core Extraction subsystem. Why? Well theoretically this would go in conjunction with a "boost" to those Mercoxit gas clouds that form. It would mean you have to be closer to the rocks (i.e. in more danger) and thus have to fit a tank. You also don't get the reduced chance of gas cloud forming so, be prepared . Hopefully this provides some nice distinction from the Skiff. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.20 19:08:00 - [34] Originally by: Veliria There is one thing I would like to add to this then. If you decide to mine Merc over Ark (given your new stats), such a change would mean you're putting yourself in more harms way than you would mining regular ore. Mercoxit isn't hugely more profitable than Ark (if it even is), but mining Merc should still remain practical. Seeing as Mercoxit means you only need one specific ore type, why not make the subsystem a tiny bit more towards a ninja miner? You could say that the 50% range reduction also reduces the CovOps cloak delay of 30 seconds by 50%. That way you can ninja mine Mercoxit up close (still having to beware of the gas) but being able to GTFO out a little quicker for being so close. The Mercoxit subsystem is independent of the covert ops. The Mercoxit one will not be getting a bonus to cloaking. Remember that you could always fit a regular cloaking device, provided you have the spare high slot and you can also counteract the range reduction via the appropriate engineering subsystem. Ideally, you could then use the interdiction nullifier subsystem + an improved cloak to move around null sec. Find a system you like, mine away. Hostile enters? Get safe and cloak. The fat mercoxit bay will allow reasonably prolonged ventures. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.02.21 15:34:00 - [35] Originally by: Veliria I don't know the value of Merc and Ark by memory, but why would one mine Mercoxit if mining Ark was 20-40% more profitable. Mercoxit ofcourse also only appears where ABC also appears, so it's always a contest between them. Whether or not Mercoxit is top dollar ore really isn't how the subsystems should be balanced; that is more an inherent problem with the current ore supply. Also, mercoxit appears in the northern regions of kspace whereas arkonor (and I think bistot) do not. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.02.28 18:44:00 - [36] Bump for love/hate _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.03.03 16:20:00 - [37] Updated second post with skill requirements: Skill Requirements O.R.E Strategic Cruiser [Rank 5]: Advanced Spaceship Command 5 O.R.E. Industrial Subsystem 1 Mining 5 Astrogeology 3 O.R.E. Defensive Subsystem 1 Shield Operation 5 Shield Management 3 O.R.E Engineering Subsystem 1 Engineering 5 Energy Management 3 O.R.E. Electronics Subsystem 1 Electronics 5 Survey 3 O.R.E. Propulsion Subsystem 1 Navigation 5 Evasive Maneuvering 3 _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.03.03 16:23:00 - [38] Taking input from readers: What should the bonus be for the ship skill (tentatively "O.R.E Strategic Cruiser)? _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.03.03 19:30:00 - [39] Originally by: Lone Provider So I'm guessing this is still using the original T3 Hull in use now, just with new Subsystems? No. Ideally it would be a new hull with all new subsystems. While some subsystems are very similar to the current ones, most have been tailored to fit O.R.E.'s needs. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.04.18 21:51:00 - [40] Thanks to Sigras for keeping this thread alive. I had been having trouble posting due to technical difficulties but have found a temporary work around. As for the T3 Industrial, we still need a bonus for the ship skill. I'll be honest I haven't put much thought into it myself but any ideas would be welcome. Annnnnnnnnnnnnd, up to the top. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?

XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.06.12 20:25:00 - [41] Edited by: XXSketchxx on 12/06/2010 20:30:17 Originally by: Eclorc IMHO, the ore yield should not exceed the Retriever's capabilities, and certainly not exceed the Covetor. Those ships still have a role to play, and should continue to do so, and for experienced, as well as nOOb miners. A few things to note here. Both of those ships are T1 mining barges. They have little to no defensive capability and in the retriever's case, take very little training. Additionally, they have much longer cycle times (strips vs. miners). The Covetor also maintains its role as a cheap, efficient miner, and the Retriever as a nice stepping stone in the mining profession. Quote: Cargo bay size shouldn't exceed that of a Badger 1 either, smaller would be better even with cargo expanders fitted. Haulers exist for a reason, and if you make a mining ship able to interdiction-nullify and carry as much as an Itty5, then what is the point of Transport ships? A few things to note here. First, again, the T1 vs. T3 argument. Additionally, the actual cargohold of no T3 industrial cruiser combination competes with Transport ships. The Ore Yield Subsystem can have a max of 25,500m3 cargo (before expanders). The actual cargohold can probably be expanded to...a few thousand? Ultimately what you get is a ship that can sit in a belt mining for a while, but not afk, as the pilot must constantly transfer ore from the cargobay to the orebay. And just barely mining more than a covetor (still under a hulk). As for an interdiction nullifying miner carrying as much as an Itty 5, I believe I addressed this before as well. Originally by: xxSketchxx Fit for max low slots gives 7 slots. With the covert ops subsystem, that's 50% bonus to 500m3 base plus potential for 7 Expanded Cargohold IIs, 2 T2 cargo rigs and 1 T1 cargo rig, giving approximately 6800m3. Even sacrificing a few slots for mining upgrades lets you maintain a decent cargohold. Should be enough to get you by. Less than my prowler so it doesn't obsolete the blockade runners by any stretch. As for the mention about the potential of this becoming a new falcon. It definitely doesn't have anywhere near the capability to be competitive with the falcon, though I'll admit it would make battle industrial gangs a tad more interesting (albeit expensive) Finally, still looking for a bonus for the "Strategic Cruiser" ship skill. So far we have agility and minor mining bonus boosts as nominations. Any other ideas? _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.06.17 13:21:00 - [42] To the top. We can have T3 industrial?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.06.18 17:30:00 - [43] /me breathes life into thread
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.06.25 13:40:00 - [44] Originally by: Clansworth Edited by: Clansworth on 25/06/2010 03:44:56 Originally by: XXSketchxx Osprey = 564m3/min (3x Miner II) Retriever = 754m3/min (2x T2 strips and T2 crystals) T3 Covert Ops = 846m3/min (3x Miner II) Covetor = 1131m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) T3 miner = 1175m3/min (5x Miner II) Hulk = 1240m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) Not really fair to compare T2 Strips w/ T2 Crystals, to plane Jane Miner II's. Using MDCM II's, with T2 crystals, the numbers are instead as follows: Osprey = 658m3/min (3x MDCM II and T2 crystals) Retriever = 754m3/min (2x T2 strips and T2 crystals) T3 Covert Ops = 987m3/min (3x MDCM II and T2 crystals) Covetor = 1131m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) Hulk = 1240m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) T3 miner = 1371m3/min (5x MDCM II and T2 crystals) Which, while cool, DOES make them overpowered... Looking into this issue with the bonuses. Bit of a note though: I am not a game dev nor am I perfect. I think the general concept is clear: T3 miner should be below Hulk but slightly above Covetor. I am investigating the bonuses now, but please understand the above hierarchy.
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.06.25 15:04:00 - [45] Edited by: XXSketchxx on 25/06/2010 15:06:08 So I completely forgot about Deep Core Miners (I thought they were only for Mercoxit), so I have had to refine the bonus for the Ore Yield Subsystem a bit. Previously it had a bonus of 30% to yield per level; this has been modified to 25% per level. The covert ops subsystem maintains 40% to yield per level, but only 3 turret points. This change produces the new hierarchy: (Assuming max skills, no MLU II, no implants, no command bonuses). Osprey = 656/min (3x MDCM II, T2 crystals) Retriever = 755/min (2x T2 strips and T2 crystals) T3 Covert Ops = 981m3/min (3x MDCM II, T2 crystals) Covetor = 1132m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) T3 miner = 1226m3/min (5x MDCM II, T2 crystals) Hulk = 1302m3/min (T2 strips and T2 crystals) *Op has been updated to reflect changes; thank you to Clansworth for your attention to detail.*
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.06.29 18:34:00 - [46] Originally by: Morgan Morrow The Primae model would have made an awesome hull for a T3 industrial,it's what I thought when I first undocked with it. I nearly jumped for joy when I saw the Primae model. Then I read the details, slumped in my chair, and grabbed another beer .
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.06.29 18:35:00 - [47] Originally by: Badmin Originally by: XXSketchxx bonused gas harvester This ^ I actually despise the idea of a bonused gas harvester ; gas is already ridiculously easy to harvest. But, gotta give the people what they want (within reason).
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.07.17 22:18:00 - [48] Originally by: Sigras +1 I was just about to bump this. Thanks Sigras. Sadly CCP will probably not even consider an idea like this for a long long time
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.08.01 21:05:00 - [49] ECM bonus is staying . Its a great defensive mechanism and that is one of the most important things about the T3 industrial: survival. Also, leaving the command subsystem as well. It will only be able to run one link without destroying cpu throwing on command processors (same concept as current T3, more boost, 1 link base). The drone idea is pretty interesting. I have come up with this as a result: Base: 50m3 drone bay and 50mbit bandwidth O.R.E Industrial Cruiser Skill Bonus: Can deploy 1 additional mining drone per level.
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.08.01 23:10:00 - [50] Originally by: Sigras Edited by: Sigras on 01/08/2010 22:57:26 Edited by: Sigras on 01/08/2010 22:55:20 Well the problem I have with that is that ccp has long ago taken steps to remove >5 drone capabilities from ships (the removal of the guardian-vexor, the change to drone interfacing. . . ) I suggest +20% drone mining yield per level or 20% speed increade per level so you don't have to be sitting on the rock for Max efficiency edit Now that I think of it this may also unbalance the mining yield for some of the subsystems. . . IIRC the reason for limiting drone deployment was to reduce lag. I don't really see this as an issue in regards to mining A velocity bonus to drones would be interesting. I still rather like the +1 mining drone, so let's see what others have to say, but a velocity bonus is definitely on the table as well. Thanks for the ideas

XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.08.31 19:12:00 - [51] True Sight, I really think you missed some of the important parts of the thread but regardless I'd like to address them for any readers: 1. Low sec miner: This ship has so much potential here with the current subsystems. Potential to be agile, fast, small sig, decent tank, ECM defense, cloak, ore yield, etc. Be creative. This ship as laid out fills this role (and ninja 0.0 miner) pretty well. 2. POS deployer: No need for a specific bay. Covert ops haulers can already ninja towers up like this, The covert subsystem + max cargo fit should be able to do something similar in regards to ninja setting up a small staging tower. 3. Salvager: I'll consider something like this. Honestly I would prefer to see a T3 industrial frigate with this bonus . Maybe that's something I'll start working on... 4. Ice Miner: We discussed this in the first few pages and as it is now, its simply rather unfeasible. Ice mining require ice harvesters which can only be fit to barges due to their size. I would rather stick to the idea that the Industrial Cruiser can only fit "Miner" size modules. If an "Ice Miner" module akin to the Miner I and its variations were implemented, new chunks of ice would also need to be established with corresponding product yields. All in all I considered this area too specialized/complicated for me to tackle. Sorry To the guy 2 posts up, sorry but a jump drive is out of the question currently. I have proposed a few times that the current T3 should have a 5th propulsion subsystem in the form of a base .5 or 1LY jump drive system (with severe drawbacks). If something like that were to happen I'd be cool with it being on this ship as well. For what its worth, the covert ops reconfig subsystem would allow the Industrial Cruiser to utilize black ops portals @Sigras, thank you again for keeping this thread alive via bumps/references. These things do not go unnoticed and I greatly appreciate it. Annnnnnnnnnnd, bump to the top.
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.10.24 02:47:00 - [52] To address a few things. 1. I want a separate ship. That is what this thread is for. As Sigras, pointed out, why can't ORE have a T3? 2. I am keeping the 5k m3 ore bay per skill level subsystem. This subsystem essentially results in a dedicated ORE hauler. The miner can't simply be afk either because the cycles are short and the mined ore goes in the cargo hold and must be transferred. The same goes for the gas harvester subsystem. The idea is that these ships have specialized cargo holds (this being their limitation) but are capable of being in the belt/gas cloud for extended periods of time (without relying on a jet can). Bump for a while. Thanks for all the support.
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.11.14 15:34:00 - [53] Bumping this to the top. Has ORE started development on this yet CCP?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.11.18 21:56:00 - [54] Okay folks, a few responses to make: Originally by: DetCord Saisio What about reducing the rate of "fire" for the tech III mining turret? This would be on par with current tech III vs tech I ship damage per second. I am new to game, but... I hear the tengu strategic cruiser (t3) has comparable damage output per shot as the drake battlecruiser (t1). Tengu's faster cycle rate makes damage output about double. Why not use this same type of increase for tech III mining ship? I'm honestly not entirely sure what you are saying here. Honestly I think some false assumptions about the tengu vs. drake are leading you to make a comparision that isn't needed. No offense meant. Originally by: Markus Reese awesome renders I like these. We need to talk more. Evemail me in-game if you have a chance please. Originally by: Jayne Rayne ò Ice yield û between hulk and mack...ò Drone Bandwidth û This is intended to possibly have 10 mining drones Two things I wanted to pull out of your idea. The first has been addressed but I'll reiterate here. I decided not to do ice yielding because of the problems it would create. This ship is not intended to use modules as large as strip miners or ice harvesters, and thus the problem here is creating new modules similar to Miner IIs and their modulated versions and additionally create new products for them to pull out (smaller pieces, i.e. not 1000m3). I deemed this to be a bit too much work and thus ice mining is not observed here. In regards to drone bandwidth, take a look at the second post in this thread. Quote: Some hull info Base: 50m3 drone bay and 50mbit bandwidth O.R.E Industrial Cruiser Skill Bonus: Can deploy 1 additional mining drone per level. As you can see, it is already possible to get up to 10 mining drones with maxed skill. Originally by: Horizonist Afk, worth the price and cloak Afk - use a hulk. Seriously, the point of this ship is not to assist afk miners. It is to encourage active miners and the bold. Worth the price - A lot of the subsystems on this ship focus on survivability. You should be able to get a pretty decent tank on one. There is an option for ECM to help jam a tackler. Increased agility means you align faster when escaping. Interdiction nullifier + covert ops means you can get to your favorite ninja mining spot very easily. Covert ops subsystem needs a draw back. Look at the current T3 for reference in this regard. I imagine it similar to how I use the covert ops in my tengu - enough to get me into position, maybe do some of the work but optimally switch out to the subsystem that does the job properly. You'll note that the covert ops configuration only does slightly worse than a covetor, and a T3 industrial will be much easier to get max skills for and have more potential low slots for upgrades. The cloaking delay was put on after some discussion about people simply being able to immediately cloak and warp out if the system goes red. I agreed with the poster that pointed this out; something needed to be done. If you are smart though you still won't be caught (hop safes until the timer is gone). Originally by: HeliosGal if youre adding a tech 3 gas miner with bonus yeild use low end and c1 components to keep it cheap Why? Thats it for now. Thanks for the feedback. Bump to top.
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.12.20 17:07:00 - [55] Originally by: a newbie Very well thought out, I love the idea and it definitely has my vote. One thing that I get an utter laugh is the people who complain about T3 being overkill. Umm.. IT COSTS AS MUCH AS A FACTION BATTLESHIP. YEAH IT SHOULD BE OVERKILL. clears throat Anyhow, it's like people complaining that .50 cal snipers should never be used against people because its too inhuman. YOUR AIMING TO KILL THE GUY! I honestly don't think it makes a difference WHAT you use. RE T3 in this regard, if you are spending a fortune on a ship, your not doing it to have it work HALF as good. It better work 10x better and wipe your rear side while at it. The OP thought this out very well and if I was flying one of these, or killing one, my backside would feel exceptionally clean. YES all the way. This post made me smile. Thanks for the support all. Leaving today for a small holiday vacation. Bump until the New Year. Happy Holidays all!
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2010.12.29 19:24:00 - [56] To the top!
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.01.15 16:43:00 - [57] Bump
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.02.09 11:55:00 - [58] Bump
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.02.11 11:45:00 - [59] To the first page...
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.03.06 14:21:00 - [60] March Bump

XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.03.06 16:34:00 - [61] Edited by: XXSketchxx on 06/03/2011 16:37:19 Originally by: Naomi Wildfire No idea if said, but dont forget the offensive subsystems for pvp'ers ;) Yeah... Thats not gonna happen. Its an industrial ship. At most its offensive capabilities are the combat drones it could potentially field (which is not insignificant mind you) and the ECM it could field. I suppose with 3 of the 4 offensive subsystems you could throw on 5 turrets and get some damage mods in the lows as well Battle T3 Industrial?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.03.11 15:08:00 - [62] Front page please.
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.08.12 20:36:00 - [63] Originally by: Frank Truck +1 on the idea No way on the covert ops though, especially if this implies being able to equip the Covert Ops Cloak. Covert ops...does in fact imply covert ops cloak. This has already been debated in this thread but please elaborate; why are you against it?
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2011.08.12 21:23:00 - [64] Originally by: Newt Rondanse Originally by: XXSketchxx Originally by: Frank Truck +1 on the idea No way on the covert ops though, especially if this implies being able to equip the Covert Ops Cloak. Covert ops...does in fact imply covert ops cloak. This has already been debated in this thread but please elaborate; why are you against it? But... that would Obsolete the Prowler! This has been addressed in this thread. The base cargo of the covert ops subsystem would be 500m3. Even with dedicated lows to expanded cargo, this would still not touch the dedicated blockade runners in terms of cargo capacity.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.