EVE Search - New Minnie destroyer... o.O

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

New Minnie destroyer... o.O

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Burhtun Pacific Mining and Manufacturing Co-operative Nox Draconum 20	Posted - 2012.10.01 05:29:00 - [31] - Quote Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too. attempt to make it look cool: http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg
Skippermonkey Tactical Knightmare 1472	Posted - 2012.10.01 11:46:00 - [32] - Quote Burhtun wrote: Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too. attempt to make it look cool: http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg Thats just as 'bad'. there needs to be more going on than just a rectangle box The new stabber and tempest models are great... something resembling them plz TK is recruiting
Jerick Ludhowe Toxic Waste Industries 160	Posted - 2012.10.01 13:06:00 - [33] - Quote Burhtun wrote: Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too. attempt to make it look cool: http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg Very well done m8! Got to love it when the players take it upon themselves to produce some quality concept art. That being said I think a total scrap of the original concept would do you better.
Panhead4411 Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge 213	Posted - 2012.10.01 14:20:00 - [34] - Quote Jada Maroo wrote: It's a bit worrying about the lack of response and the dismissiveness of the earlier dev reply. The model is so bad that people were speculating that it was a dev troll over at FH. It's eerily similar to the "we don't believe you" responses we all got while telling them the Uni Inv was a busted up piece of junk while it was still on SiSi... http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready...
Hiram Alexander Seraphim Securities 251	Posted - 2012.10.01 21:55:00 - [35] - Quote Burhtun wrote: Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too. attempt to make it look cool: http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg Actually that's quite impressive, compared to the current offering (in my opinion). It's perhaps a touch too 'stubby' looking, compared to the length of the other new destroyers, but still a world of an improvement to what we have.

CCP Goliath C C P C C P Alliance 968	Posted - 2012.10.02 00:00:00 - [36] - Quote Panhead4411 wrote: Jada Maroo wrote: It's a bit worrying about the lack of response and the dismissiveness of the earlier dev reply. The model is so bad that people were speculating that it was a dev troll over at FH. It's eerily similar to the "we don't believe you" responses we all got while telling them the Uni Inv was a busted up piece of junk while it was still on SiSi... It's really not at all. We've never had this early level of public testing before, and it's important to focus on the features that we ask for feedback on, not the ones we explicitly don't. I wasn't being dismissive in the slightest, just trying to keep people focused on what was the subject of the tests - ship balancing. CCP Goliath \| QA Director \| @CCP_Goliath

Roll Sizzle Beef Space Mutiny 1103	Posted - 2012.10.02 01:39:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Goliath wrote: Panhead4411 wrote: Jada Maroo wrote: It's a bit worrying about the lack of response and the dismissiveness of the earlier dev reply. The model is so bad that people were speculating that it was a dev troll over at FH. It's eerily similar to the "we don't believe you" responses we all got while telling them the Uni Inv was a busted up piece of junk while it was still on SiSi... It's really not at all. We've never had this early level of public testing before, and it's important to focus on the features that we ask for feedback on, not the ones we explicitly don't. I wasn't being dismissive in the slightest, just trying to keep people focused on what was the subject of the tests - ship balancing. Your ad department thinks its fit to print Same with Facebook WIP images. It's not just testers searching the data. You have put this hull in full view of everyone for a early level of public scrutiny. Someone in there is expecting us to look at it.
Eckyy EVE University Ivy League 33	Posted - 2012.10.02 01:53:00 - [38] - Quote I kinda like it, reminds me of an ant lion.
Krell Kroenen Miners In Possession Brothers of Apocrypha. 43	Posted - 2012.10.02 03:57:00 - [39] - Quote CCP Goliath wrote: It's really not at all. We've never had this early level of public testing before, and it's important to focus on the features that we ask for feedback on, not the ones we explicitly don't. I wasn't being dismissive in the slightest, just trying to keep people focused on what was the subject of the tests - ship balancing. Dismissive or nay your statement still has that feeling. Also I believe that players can give both ship balancing feed back and be able to critique ship models with out to much trouble, but maybe I am overstating the general player population's ability to multitask. It just seems logical that the earlier something displeasing can be pointed out the more likely it can be tweaked before it goes live. But it seems given the press roll out, the Minmatar destroyer is going to go live as is. Which reveals why no feedback is desired about it's appearance, not now nor in the future. All you had to do is just tell us that it was set in stone and that there was no interest in changing it.
Morgan North The Wild Bunch Electus Matari 84	Posted - 2012.10.02 06:25:00 - [40] - Quote in this link : http://www.eveonline.com/retribution/new-ships-new-roles/ It doesn't look too bad. I'dstill prefer the redesign proposed. But, yes... right now its probably moreinteresting to build up its stats, a new model might eventually... be done.

DeBingJos Avalon Project Shadow Rock Alliance 401	Posted - 2012.10.02 06:26:00 - [41] - Quote Don't touch the new mimatar destroyer! It is fine as it is! The people that want to fly beautiful ships can go amarr or gallete! Ungi ma+¦urinn ++ekkir reglurnar, en gamli ma+¦urinn ++ekkir undantekningarnar. The young man knows the rules, but the old man knows the exceptions.
Rek Seven Probe Patrol Project Wildfire 438	Posted - 2012.10.02 10:32:00 - [42] - Quote I like the look of the Minmatar destroyer. The Gallente destroyer, on the other hand, looks terrible... I guess it's just down to personal taste. They see me trolling, they hating...
Jerick Ludhowe Toxic Waste Industries 163	Posted - 2012.10.02 14:35:00 - [43] - Quote CCP Goliath wrote: It's really not at all. We've never had this early level of public testing before, and it's important to focus on the features that we ask for feedback on, not the ones we explicitly don't. I wasn't being dismissive in the slightest, just trying to keep people focused on what was the subject of the tests - ship balancing. That doesn't change the fact that the matari destroyer is ******* disgusting looking... Just because you're "not looking" for a review on the new destroyer does not make the feedback people are giving you any less productive. I understand that you're looking for feedback on balance however the way ships look also have a huge impact on the willingness to fly said ships. I'd advise you and the art department to pull your heads out of your arsses and realize that this matari model is bad, just plain bad.

CCP Huskarl C C P C C P Alliance 72	Posted - 2012.10.02 15:41:00 - [44] - Quote Hey As the Art Director I just wanted to you give you a quick heads up on what thoughts went into designing the new destroyers. All of them are heavily influenced by historical military machinery and of course the ships functionality plays a big role in the design process as well. Yes the design of the new Minmatar destroyer would probably not fall under the category of sleek, elegant and pretty anytime soon. And i will gladly admit that its sort of like a flying brick or a Russian WW2 tank with solar panels but that's exactly what we what we thought would make it an interesting and cool addition to the EVE universe and hopefully appealing to some good portion of the players. Plus the texture work on it is one of the best I've seen on a Minmatar ship yet. Here are some interesting examples of strange (and not always pretty) but very functional military designs: KV2 SuperHind BartiniBeriev Type45

Anabella Rella Gradient Electus Matari 258	Posted - 2012.10.02 15:58:00 - [45] - Quote Thanks for the response CCP Huskarl. I guess that answers that question. The "plow on a brick" look is completely intentional and here to stay. Got it. What you want is irrelevant, what you've chosen is at hand.
Warde Guildencrantz TunDraGon 94	Posted - 2012.10.02 15:59:00 - [46] - Quote CCP Huskarl wrote: Hey As the Art Director I just wanted to you give you a quick heads up on what thoughts went into designing the new destroyers. All of them are heavily influenced by historical military machinery and of course the ships functionality plays a big role in the design process as well. Yes the design of the new Minmatar destroyer would probably not fall under the category of sleek, elegant and pretty anytime soon. And i will gladly admit that its sort of like a flying brick or a Russian WW2 tank with solar panels but that's exactly what we what we thought would make it an interesting and cool addition to the EVE universe and hopefully appealing to some good portion of the players. Plus the texture work on it is one of the best I've seen on a Minmatar ship yet. Here are some interesting examples of strange (and not always pretty) but very functional military designs: KV2 SuperHind BartiniBeriev Type45 But none of those are nearly as ugly as the moa...so we getting a remodel of it? :P btw use this for the model: http://th08.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/f/2010/279/7/a/caldari_peregrine_battleship_by_cosmos6173-d306g3s.jpg
OlRotGut 35	Posted - 2012.10.02 16:26:00 - [47] - Quote I actually like the model for the destroyer. I like them all. Not sure what the fuss is all about as there are definitely uglier ships currently in New Eden. Lol.
Roll Sizzle Beef Space Mutiny 1105	Posted - 2012.10.02 16:31:00 - [48] - Quote CCP Huskarl wrote: Hey As the Art Director I just wanted to you give you a quick heads up on what thoughts went into designing the new destroyers. All of them are heavily influenced by historical military machinery and of course the ships functionality plays a big role in the design process as well. I love the rear of the Minmatar destroyer. I can see the tank influence, but I see the US Civil War Ironclads. Its the whole transition to wingy bits for me though that makes it fall apart. The difference between the destroyer and the other unorthodox military vehicles you posted is the fact the real world ones flowed into themselves like it was meant for the craft. For me, going from spindly satellite panels on skinny toothpick rails into a brick just doesn't flow. Others seem to have a problem with the block "turret" bridge. So we all don't feel the same way about the ship as a whole, but its obvious the most discontent comes from the flow of different styles on a single ship.
Lors Dornick Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet 251	Posted - 2012.10.02 16:38:00 - [49] - Quote CCP Huskarl wrote: Yes the design of the new Minmatar destroyer would probably not fall under the category of sleek, elegant and pretty anytime soon. And i will gladly admit that its sort of like a flying brick or a Russian WW2 tank with solar panels but that's exactly what we what we thought would make it an interesting and cool addition to the EVE universe and hopefully appealing to some good portion of the players. Thank you, it's intentionally utilitarian and spartan, ie it's Minmatar.
MeBiatch Republic University Minmatar Republic 598	Posted - 2012.10.02 17:02:00 - [50] - Quote CCP Huskarl wrote: Hey As the Art Director I just wanted to you give you a quick heads up on what thoughts went into designing the new destroyers. All of them are heavily influenced by historical military machinery and of course the ships functionality plays a big role in the design process as well. Yes the design of the new Minmatar destroyer would probably not fall under the category of sleek, elegant and pretty anytime soon. And i will gladly admit that its sort of like a flying brick or a Russian WW2 tank with solar panels but that's exactly what we what we thought would make it an interesting and cool addition to the EVE universe and hopefully appealing to some good portion of the players. Plus the texture work on it is one of the best I've seen on a Minmatar ship yet. Here are some interesting examples of strange (and not always pretty) but very functional military designs: KV2 SuperHind BartiniBeriev Type45 hey bro... i am one of the few who actually love the new ship look... reminds me of a civil war ironclad Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point? -áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...

Karl Hobb Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium 663	Posted - 2012.10.02 17:45:00 - [51] - Quote CCP Huskarl wrote: Yes the design of the new Minmatar destroyer would probably not fall under the category of sleek, elegant and pretty anytime soon. And i will gladly admit that its sort of like a flying brick or a Russian WW2 tank with solar panels but that's exactly what we what we thought would make it an interesting and cool addition to the EVE universe and hopefully appealing to some good portion of the players. Plus the texture work on it is one of the best I've seen on a Minmatar ship yet. Please pass on to the artist(s) that the new Minmatar and Caldari destroyers look great. Nothing Found
PinkKnife L F C Ethereal Dawn 225	Posted - 2012.10.02 17:53:00 - [52] - Quote Can you please explain the balls on the Gallente destroyer, was the Thorax not phallic enough?
Covert Custard Covert Technology 0	Posted - 2012.10.02 18:12:00 - [53] - Quote PinkKnife wrote: Can you please explain the balls on the Gallente destroyer, was the Thorax not phallic enough? For my money, it looks like the Gallente Destroyer is a mini carrier. The balls could be EWAR related, or, if I am super lucky it could be drone control pods ^_^ Finally a "Gurdian-Vexor" you'd not be afraid to undock in!!!
Covert Custard Covert Technology 0	Posted - 2012.10.02 18:18:00 - [54] - Quote CCP Huskarl wrote: Hey As the Art Director I just wanted to you give you a quick heads up on what thoughts went into designing the new destroyers. All of them are heavily influenced by historical military machinery and of course the ships functionality plays a big role in the design process as well. Type45 The Type 45 is an epic looking destroyer, as is the new Gallente dessy that I have seen. I rolled Gallante, fly mainly Caldari as I like the look more (Rokh = OMG , the Naga = OMGWTFamazing ^_^) But the true "dark horse" of the new Dessy's is the Caldari.... it looks egg zachery like a U-boat.... I really hope it will be a "run silent, run deep" type ****
Midnight Hope Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 40	Posted - 2012.10.02 18:42:00 - [55] - Quote CCP Huskarl wrote: Hey Yes the design of the new Minmatar destroyer would probably not fall under the category of sleek, elegant and pretty anytime soon. And i will gladly admit that its sort of like a flying brick or a Russian WW2 tank with solar panels but that's exactly what we what we thought would make it an interesting and cool addition to the EVE universe ... I understand where you are coming from (the Caldari one looks like a u-boat)...but I'm still not sold on the idea...and it is certainly not growing on me. TBH, tanks never really attracted me much...or I would be playing World of Tanks instead of EVE.
Dex Tera Clann Fian Transmission Lost 47	Posted - 2012.10.02 19:03:00 - [56] - Quote i dont fly minmatar and il be brutaly honest ccp the new minmatar desto looks like S**T fix it so i dot have to waste ammo on an ugly ship when i put it out of its missery
Roll Sizzle Beef Space Mutiny 1108	Posted - 2012.10.02 19:43:00 - [57] - Quote Dex Tera wrote: i dont fly minmatar and il be brutaly honest ccp the new minmatar desto looks like S**T fix it so i dot have to waste ammo on an ugly ship when i put it out of its missery Not really inducive to the cause. What part is disliked and why? "the whole thing" does not really tweak the hull that we are obviously going to use. Yet there is a slim slim slim chance it could still be tweaked.
Anabella Rella Gradient Electus Matari 261	Posted - 2012.10.02 20:09:00 - [58] - Quote Lors Dornick wrote: Thank you, it's intentionally utilitarian and spartan, ie it's Minmatar. Spartan doesn't go hand in hand with ugly. The Hurricane, Hound, new Tempest and new Stabber are sparse and definitely Minmatar yet, attractive designs. They have a flow to them where the flying tank doesn't. I think Roll Sizzle Beef hit the nail on the head when he mentioned the jarring lack of transition from the angled, almost stylized, solar panels on the front to the main body. It goes from spindly to BAM, this brick with yet another small brick stuck on the top. There's no flow and the profile just doesn't look like anything else in the Minmatar ship lineup. It strikes me more as related to the ORE barges than a Matari warship. Oh well, it doesn't matter. CCP wants this design and this is what we'll end up with even though opinions in these forums are running about 5 to 1 against it. What you want is irrelevant, what you've chosen is at hand.
Callic Veratar Power of the Phoenix 252	Posted - 2012.10.02 20:14:00 - [59] - Quote The thing that irks me about the new destroyer is that it's so similar to the new Hound. Changing the orientation of the hull or the direction, attachment or angle of the fins at the front would give it it's own feel. Sails like the Thrasher, Cyclone, Maelstrom, or Hurricane would give it a unique feel from the Hound.
bassie12bf1 Militaris Industries 32	Posted - 2012.10.02 20:40:00 - [60] - Quote I'm gonna have to see and fly this destroyer to really say anything about it.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.