Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tribunal
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 16:26:00 -
[121]
Quote: The fact that Weapon upgrades 5 is REQUIRED for using a HAC.. makes its inclusion into the sp list a given
Personally, I do not think so. Why? Because advanced weapon upgrades and weapon upgrades are two skills that every player needs to have to compete. Weapons upgrade is not a skill that is only trained to 5 so that a player can use a HAC. Even if there was no HAC you know that you would have trained up weapons upgrade and then advanced weapons upgrade.
Placing skills as requirements that any and every player would/have train is inflating the true SP sink of flying a certain ship, even if it is required.
|
R31D
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 16:45:00 -
[122]
Originally by: xNashx The root of this problem is the price of a HAC. I think this BC/HAC debate is a player-made "artificial" problem. A "Battle Cruiser" and a "Heavy Assault Cruiser" (lets not get into "HAS") are pretty much the same title and the ships have similar manufacturing costs. Since the two ship classes should be about even, an average HAC pilot should be able to slaughter an average BC pilot because HACs require much skill to fly. However evenly matched pilots in a HAC and BC should be a close fight. This debate really only exists because it's NOT FAIR that a 22mil ship can stand up to a 75-140mil ship. It's really our own fault that we have these seemingly "uber" BC's, which, like many people have said, are not uber, just "finally useful".
xNashx
Quoted For Truth
Although HAC should win, it shouldn't be the slaughter most people think it should
Free bumpage for all |
Sobeseki Pawi
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 20:42:00 -
[123]
Next thing you know HACkers will be complaining about the T2 BCs, oh and the T2 BSes.
It's a fricking Cruiser on steriods. Get over it already.
~Captain Cutie, ISC Event Horizon
Biomass fears me.
Sovereignty 2.0 |
Weirda
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 21:30:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Tribunal
Quote: The fact that Weapon upgrades 5 is REQUIRED for using a HAC.. makes its inclusion into the sp list a given
Personally, I do not think so. Why? Because advanced weapon upgrades and weapon upgrades are two skills that every player needs to have to compete. Weapons upgrade is not a skill that is only trained to 5 so that a player can use a HAC. Even if there was no HAC you know that you would have trained up weapons upgrade and then advanced weapons upgrade.
Placing skills as requirements that any and every player would/have train is inflating the true SP sink of flying a certain ship, even if it is required.
isn't weapon upgrade 5 required for the skill, or some other dependant skill (think that what he mean). CBA to check, just trying to clarify this.
no comments on the rest of the thread other then ones posted earlier... except: better ships == better for the game...
and HAC price = demand + PRODUCTION TIME (the supply side of the demand... which isn't really an 8k unit vs a 5.1k unit as someone else said). -- Thread Killer (attempt to train verbosity from 4 back down to 1 -- failed) <END TRANSMISSION> |
Nathan Grey
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 21:47:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Weirda and HAC price = demand + PRODUCTION TIME (the supply side of the demand... which isn't really an 8k unit vs a 5.1k unit as someone else said).
HAC price = demand_supply_curve(slow_production) + material_cost
material_cost = running_POS_for_moon_mins + running_POS_for_basic_reaction + running_POS_for_adv_reaction + building_T2C + minerals (the cheap part) + morphite_prices + trade_goods (also cheap)
In short... a LOT of the extra cost is that ice isn't free. On top of that tidbit, the infamous Invisible Hand is going to push the cost of HACs way up due to the slow production and high demand that everyone and their dog^H^H^Hmining drones are familiar with. ----------------------------------
Industrialist. I build it. You buy it. You break it and buy another one. Market domination through ingue ferrogue. (I did this and could have stopped it.) |
Uggs386
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 02:32:00 -
[126]
Don't use rl economics to predict the change sin eve's market it is not possible as too many other factors are in place. The t2 bpo lottery completely screws up any rl economic comparison. The closest comparison one could make would be to an oligpolistic market. But even that wouldn't accurately represent the eve market.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 02:36:00 -
[127]
Yea, in real life there are far LESS sources of rare designs, thanks to patents. (heh)
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Hobblin I
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 02:43:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Tribunal
Quote: The fact that Weapon upgrades 5 is REQUIRED for using a HAC.. makes its inclusion into the sp list a given
Personally, I do not think so. Why? Because advanced weapon upgrades and weapon upgrades are two skills that every player needs to have to compete. Weapons upgrade is not a skill that is only trained to 5 so that a player can use a HAC. Even if there was no HAC you know that you would have trained up weapons upgrade and then advanced weapons upgrade.
Placing skills as requirements that any and every player would/have train is inflating the true SP sink of flying a certain ship, even if it is required.
Not true.
Ships can still be flown and flown well without weapon upgrades 5. Or Advanced weapon upgrades. BTW, no one is adding Advanced weapon upgrades (I'm not for sure).
The fact that without that skill at 5, YOU CANNOT EVEN ATTEMPT to fly a HAC, makes it a relevant skill to list in the sp training gap.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 02:54:00 -
[129]
Bit if you want to kick someones ass with a BC you do need it and a bunch of other skills - as far as an issue of 'fairness" goes the BC needs as many skill points as a HaC if it even wants to compete.
|
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 07:23:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Maya Rkell Yea, in real life there are far LESS sources of rare designs, thanks to patents. (heh)
That is innacurate.
You see, if a company has a sufficiently successful product, they reinvest some of the profits into additonal prodution lines. However, with the current state of Tech II, that is simply impossible.
The problem facing HACs is very simple: There are around 2-6 BPOs available for any HAC, and each one takes 35 hours to produce. The means, assuming all HACs were equal, and in equal demand, roughly 20-40 HACs are being produced a day.
According to CCP, Eve has something on the order of 80,000 unique players. Even assuming a quarter of them would be interested in one, we're looking at three years of continuous production before all interested parties have been supplied with even one Heavy Assault.
Harry Voyager ____________________ I'm not an idiot; I just play one on the forums. |
|
Randay
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 07:28:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Harry Voyager
Originally by: Maya Rkell Yea, in real life there are far LESS sources of rare designs, thanks to patents. (heh)
That is innacurate.
You see, if a company has a sufficiently successful product, they reinvest some of the profits into additonal prodution lines. However, with the current state of Tech II, that is simply impossible.
The problem facing HACs is very simple: There are around 2-6 BPOs available for any HAC, and each one takes 35 hours to produce. The means, assuming all HACs were equal, and in equal demand, roughly 20-40 HACs are being produced a day.
According to CCP, Eve has something on the order of 80,000 unique players. Even assuming a quarter of them would be interested in one, we're looking at three years of continuous production before all interested parties have been supplied with even one Heavy Assault.
Harry Voyager
wrong, there is only one bpo of every hac. not 2-6, silly. ------------------------------------------- "Det hSr kan betyda krig!" |
Lucian Alucard
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 07:48:00 -
[132]
Bc have always been horrendously underated. ......so say I Lucian Alucard of the blood line blah blah blah blah no one really cares anymore!
The best joke ever!!!! [url]http://www.livejournal.com/users/sweet__kitty/40953.html?mode=reply |
Perfektion
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 07:51:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Randay
Originally by: Harry Voyager
Originally by: Maya Rkell Yea, in real life there are far LESS sources of rare designs, thanks to patents. (heh)
That is innacurate.
You see, if a company has a sufficiently successful product, they reinvest some of the profits into additonal prodution lines. However, with the current state of Tech II, that is simply impossible.
The problem facing HACs is very simple: There are around 2-6 BPOs available for any HAC, and each one takes 35 hours to produce. The means, assuming all HACs were equal, and in equal demand, roughly 20-40 HACs are being produced a day.
According to CCP, Eve has something on the order of 80,000 unique players. Even assuming a quarter of them would be interested in one, we're looking at three years of continuous production before all interested parties have been supplied with even one Heavy Assault.
Harry Voyager
wrong, there is only one bpo of every hac. not 2-6, silly.
uhm. no. there are multiples.
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 11:21:00 -
[134]
in-case anyone was wondering, with BC 4 you essentially have a built-in shield-boost amplifier fitted for nothing (30% boost) - with BC5 it's a bit insane (37.5% boost!!)
Originally by: Chowdown We camp a lot
|
Khaldorn Murino
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 11:33:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Sarmaul in-case anyone was wondering, with BC 4 you essentially have a built-in shield-boost amplifier fitted for nothing (30% boost) - with BC5 it's a bit insane (37.5% boost!!)
Aye, the gally version gets the same thing for armour. Think id still rather have the resist bonus. :) -
Just a simple warrior.
|
TuRtLe HeAd
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 11:36:00 -
[136]
Whats changed that makes the cyclone better ? Because IMO it's currently the worst (Or the brutix its very close)
------------------------------------------------ I Pity the Fool ! |
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 11:42:00 -
[137]
Edited by: Sarmaul on 29/11/2005 11:43:52 try reading pages 1-5
1) invulnerbility fields being unnerfed 2) an extra mid slot 3) built-in shield boost amp at BC4 4) more pg/cpu 5) more shield/armour 6) damage controls
5x220mm IIs 3xNos (or 2 nos + 1 neut) AB/MWD Large Shield Booster Invul Field EM Hardener Large Shield Extender Damage Control II 3 lows of your choice EMP or Phased Plasma ammo
Originally by: Chowdown We camp a lot
|
TuRtLe HeAd
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 11:45:00 -
[138]
Thanks, You saved me filtering through alot of rubbish. Cheers dude.
------------------------------------------------ I Pity the Fool ! |
FoRGyL
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 11:47:00 -
[139]
all talk about HACs , don't u get like 5 mil more on a BC insurances then the hacs?
-out- ********************************************************* Pay or don't!
|
El Yatta
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 13:07:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Perfektion
Originally by: Randay
Originally by: Harry Voyager
Originally by: Maya Rkell Yea, in real life there are far LESS sources of rare designs, thanks to patents. (heh)
That is innacurate.
You see, if a company has a sufficiently successful product, they reinvest some of the profits into additonal prodution lines. However, with the current state of Tech II, that is simply impossible.
The problem facing HACs is very simple: There are around 2-6 BPOs available for any HAC, and each one takes 35 hours to produce. The means, assuming all HACs were equal, and in equal demand, roughly 20-40 HACs are being produced a day.
According to CCP, Eve has something on the order of 80,000 unique players. Even assuming a quarter of them would be interested in one, we're looking at three years of continuous production before all interested parties have been supplied with even one Heavy Assault.
Harry Voyager
wrong, there is only one bpo of every hac. not 2-6, silly.
uhm. no. there are multiples.
As stated in an old dev post, around the time HAC's come out, there are 23 of ALL T2 ship BPOs. If any become 'dead' - in inactive accounts, destroyed in a ship, trashed, they are added to the lottery again. ---:::---
|
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 13:11:00 -
[141]
Originally by: FoRGyL all talk about HACs , don't u get like 5 mil more on a BC insurances then the hacs? -out-
yes, because BCs are tech1 ships and therefor aren't sold at 600% above the base price like HACs.
A HAC really does only cost about 20-30m to build - remember that when you buy one for over 100m
Originally by: Chowdown We camp a lot
|
kebab v2
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 13:51:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Sarmaul Edited by: Sarmaul on 29/11/2005 11:43:52 try reading pages 1-5
1) invulnerbility fields being unnerfed 2) an extra mid slot 3) built-in shield boost amp at BC4 4) more pg/cpu 5) more shield/armour 6) damage controls
5x220mm IIs 3xNos (or 2 nos + 1 neut) AB/MWD Large Shield Booster Invul Field EM Hardener Large Shield Extender Damage Control II 3 lows of your choice EMP or Phased Plasma ammo
Thats an awsome setup.
"I made this sig while i should of been working" |
FoRGyL
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 15:30:00 -
[143]
Originally by: kebab v2
Originally by: Sarmaul Edited by: Sarmaul on 29/11/2005 11:43:52 try reading pages 1-5
1) invulnerbility fields being unnerfed 2) an extra mid slot 3) built-in shield boost amp at BC4 4) more pg/cpu 5) more shield/armour 6) damage controls
5x220mm IIs 3xNos (or 2 nos + 1 neut) AB/MWD Large Shield Booster Invul Field EM Hardener Large Shield Extender Damage Control II 3 lows of your choice EMP or Phased Plasma ammo
Thats an awsome setup.
not in PvP though, me personally need a scrambler.
otherwise fine =)
-out- ********************************************************* Pay or don't!
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 15:36:00 -
[144]
Originally by: FoRGyL
Originally by: kebab v2
Originally by: Sarmaul Edited by: Sarmaul on 29/11/2005 11:43:52 try reading pages 1-5
1) invulnerbility fields being unnerfed 2) an extra mid slot 3) built-in shield boost amp at BC4 4) more pg/cpu 5) more shield/armour 6) damage controls
5x220mm IIs 3xNos (or 2 nos + 1 neut) AB/MWD Large Shield Booster Invul Field EM Hardener Large Shield Extender Damage Control II 3 lows of your choice EMP or Phased Plasma ammo
Thats an awsome setup.
not in PvP though, me personally need a scrambler.
otherwise fine =)
-out-
swap out the extender for a 20k then
Originally by: Chowdown We camp a lot
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |