| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Thorgril
   |
Posted - 2005.08.16 14:46:00 -
[1]
I can understand that there are different control towers for different races. It is a fine idea and it works fine with the ice distribution storyline etc.
However, since there are no restrictions on how a POS is outfitted with weapons it doesn't make sense that the towers have different attributes when it comes to power and CPU.
At the moment a large Caldari tower gives 1500 more CPU than a minnie tower. This makes it possible to fit an extra silo and moon harvester.
This is an unfair adwantage at the moment and it needs to be sorted out ASAP.
Suggestions:
1, make CPU/power output of all towers the same.
2, make it possible only to fit racial weapons on tower and implement proper attributes for guns/launchers. Guns CPU = 0 at the moment...
Persoanlly I think suggestion 1 is enough.
If the racial approach is taken then the common modules (refinery etc) must be racial as well. Otherwise a Caldari tower without weapons still has an adwantage.
/Thorgril |
Baldigan Joackim
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 15:05:00 -
[2]
hum ... reallly .... no
1 500 cpu less, far mroe Power grid .... each CT are speacial, don't thing all in Production. Ct can do MORE things.
The bad point of min Med CT it she can't use 3 Silo, 1 med Reactor, the other stuff is fine for me ....
you can buy a caldari CT, but prepar to haul more stuff ... it's you'r choice.
|
Jessa
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 15:12:00 -
[3]
how is this an unfair advantage? Its not like minmatar players are restricted to using minnie towers only, and so on.
And based on your argument, should we also make the control tower power output the same? after all, the minnie tower gets twice the ammount of PG output than the caldari tower does, and can therefore fit more guns and stuff... ohnoes!
The tower stats are based on racial preferences, caldari favour shields and electronic warefare which are cpu intensive, so they get the most cpu, minnie weapons require large ammounts of power, so they have more PG, and so on and so forth.
Diversity is an important part of eve, there are no racial restrictions for guns and other modules on ships (though its widely inadvisable to fit lasers on a megathron, and blasters on an apoc), so why should there be racial restrictions on starbases?
your argument is flawed.
|
James Lyrus
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 19:49:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Jessa
how is this an unfair advantage? Its not like minmatar players are restricted to using minnie towers only, and so on.
And based on your argument, should we also make the control tower power output the same? after all, the minnie tower gets twice the ammount of PG output than the caldari tower does, and can therefore fit more guns and stuff... ohnoes!
The tower stats are based on racial preferences, caldari favour shields and electronic warefare which are cpu intensive, so they get the most cpu, minnie weapons require large ammounts of power, so they have more PG, and so on and so forth.
Diversity is an important part of eve, there are no racial restrictions for guns and other modules on ships (though its widely inadvisable to fit lasers on a megathron, and blasters on an apoc), so why should there be racial restrictions on starbases?
your argument is flawed.
You're not restricted in choice of towers, but the thing that makes a _major_ difference is length of supply lines. It's a far tougher job running a tower that's not using 'local' ice product.
I don't mind Caldari towers having more CPU - I don't _have_ to use 'em. I do mind Amarrian towers not having enough CPU on their medium towers to run 3 silos and a medium reactor.
They're tools for different roles you say, and I quite agree. But I still loathe the fact that in order to run a tower in a region where the local ice isn't the right kind, your supply lines get drastically longer.
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 20:01:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Vishnej on 16/08/2005 20:02:27
Would it improve the situation somewhat if they added a lower class of ice that yielded 25-50% of the normal isotopes, but was spread uniformly over the eve-verse? It would preserve the role of the freighter, but give you a major disadvantage to mining in the wrong region.
|
Thorgril
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 12:40:00 -
[6]
Jessa: I agree that racial difference is great, but in this case is should either be implemented properly or removed.
Power and CPU should be the same since there are no racial differences other than that.
For ships it works since the guns have different power7cpu needs and different hardpoints.
POS guns do not have proper power/CPU stats and the towers have no hardpoints or slots at all if you like.
This means that if you set up a large Caldari tower without guns you can have 6 silos, 6 coupling arrays and 6 harwesters.
This is not possible with a Minnie tower.
And since the silos etc are not racially different and there are no harpoints/slots that makes sure that you can only ever fit 2 silos(whatever) to any POS.
I am not against any race and I am pro the differences, but in this case it is at best very poorly implemented and it should be rectified.
And you are obviously right trhat a Minnie tower can fit a lot more guns than a Caldari tower! This is not fair either. E.g. the current implementation is not balanced at all and it should be fixed!
/Thor |
Winterblink
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 13:45:00 -
[7]
It's called balance. It's like if you had a four-way see-saw and four kids all with varying weights from twig to fatty. If you put twig across from fatty you're going to have to give him some weight to keep him from being shot into the air. Fatty won't need much to balance against the other three because he already has some advantage in weight as it is.
Trust me. You do NOT want four towers that all do the same thing. Go back and look closely at the tower attributes as they pertain to each individual race. It does make sense, because towers are not meant to be general-use.
___winterblink/warp_drive_active/eve_nature_vraie// |
James Lyrus
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 13:49:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Winterblink
Trust me. You do NOT want four towers that all do the same thing. Go back and look closely at the tower attributes as they pertain to each individual race. It does make sense, because towers are not meant to be general-use.
Agreed.
Different tools for different jobs.
But when your tools eat 10km3 of race and therefore region specific fuel each month, it becomes a lot less practical to choose the right tool for the job.
|
Winterblink
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 14:33:00 -
[9]
Originally by: James Lyrus
Agreed.
Different tools for different jobs.
But when your tools eat 10km3 of race and therefore region specific fuel each month, it becomes a lot less practical to choose the right tool for the job.
Probably why they don't restrict you from putting up towers in another race's region using another race's towers. :)
___winterblink/warp_drive_active/eve_nature_vraie// |
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 15:30:00 -
[10]
As an Amarr user, I'll tell ya minmatar have nothing to whine about. I think Caldari has 50% more CPU than us.
On the other hand, the grid on my CT allows me to deathstar this thing like an angry god on crystal meth. CCP balanced L towers when they gave Amarr 5500 CPU. Now we can do all complex reactions with silos, although with zero spare CPU in the Amarr case (which I accept, not complaining).
BUT!!!!
The medium towers won't be balanced until they all have minimum 3K CPU. That's the minimum to react a simple with silos, with no extra.
And no, I don't care about coupling arrays, I use them when I have to (for example running 2 simples at a L Amarr tower) but it's crap that Amarr mediums running a simple reaction have to be maintained twice a day while everyone other race can do it twice a week.
Just another lousy 250 tf on the Amarr medium tower please CCP. The L and small are fine.
BW
Originally by: Mistress D'Malice
POS outputs where fine...its the fuel that needed the help.
Originally by: Nyxus
A Vagabond or Deimos is like a rabid wolverine and the web is your arm holding it away f |
Winterblink
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 15:35:00 -
[11]
The tradeoff there is that you're not having to power a large tower, much less pay for one.
___winterblink/warp_drive_active/eve_nature_vraie// |
BlueSmok
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 16:28:00 -
[12]
I agree in general, but I disagree that making all the towers have the same stats.. What fun is that? What I propose is that they introduce Arrays which mimic the Co-processor and Reactor control unit modules of ships. This would allow Minmatar tower users to sacrifice their PG for more CPU and the reverse for Caldari Towers to get more guns online. This is most logical step and in line with current game ideology.
*
Laws to suppress tend to strengthen what they would prohibit. This is the fine point on which all the legal professions of history have based their job security.
Bene Gesserit Coda |
Winterblink
|
Posted - 2005.08.17 17:44:00 -
[13]
Originally by: BlueSmok
I agree in general, but I disagree that making all the towers have the same stats.. What fun is that? What I propose is that they introduce Arrays which mimic the Co-processor and Reactor control unit modules of ships. This would allow Minmatar tower users to sacrifice their PG for more CPU and the reverse for Caldari Towers to get more guns online. This is most logical step and in line with current game ideology.
If you want more guns, use a Minmatar station. Want more cpu for reactions, go Gallente. Use the tower with advantages and bonuses that fit the job you're trying to do.
___winterblink/warp_drive_active/eve_nature_vraie// |
Jorev
|
Posted - 2005.08.18 00:47:00 -
[14]
With freighters in game, the logistics of non-local fuel supply are of less importance.
Buy up a lot of caldari fuel and transport one big load with a hired hauler (like marie sklodowska for example) if you don't have any other hauler access.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |