Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 18 post(s) |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
1483
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:21:00 -
[331] - Quote
I think our art guys are awesome. Its more about where we want their attention than how much attention they have.
I chatted with Fozzie about the Orca and neither of us feel that any change is necessary for either ship. The Orca does so much more than haul Ore that there really isn't much tension between them. |
|
Kaeden Dourhand
T.O.R.
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:29:00 -
[332] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I chatted with Fozzie about the Orca and neither of us feel that any change is necessary for either ship. The Orca does so much more than haul Ore that there really isn't much tension between them.
Understood, and agreed. Just wanted to know for sure |
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
33
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:29:00 -
[333] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I think our art guys are awesome. Its more about where we want their attention than how much attention they have.
I chatted with Fozzie about the Orca and neither of us feel that any change is necessary for either ship. The Orca does so much more than haul Ore that there really isn't much tension between them.
Oh I almost see a threadnaught coming.
If the following is addressed, it would be fine:
Fuel block hauling, refined ice hauling, pos module hauling. |
Gevlin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:40:00 -
[334] - Quote
Oh oh oh....
Horder now with ammo bay... The new Goon alt suicide ship.. LOL
I would love to see larger ammo explosion when this explodes,,, maybe having the effect of bomb going off killing the pod pilot in the process.... Would make this ship more nerve racking to fly.
The new Goon Newbie suicide ship.. LOL
Just had to say it. Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again. |
Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
40
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:40:00 -
[335] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I'm going to increase the skill bonus per level for all the special bay haulers from 5% per level to 10% per level, and reduce the base bays to give basically the same potential bay size as before. This means you will still get an improvement at level 1 over any normal hauler, but you have to invest SP to make the difference quite as big.
Here's some updated math for anyone curious about how the general haulers now compare to the specialized ones, with and without GSCs, at all five skill levels (edit: including T1 cargo rigs and full T2 expanders for the generalists):
31207 / 32693 / 34179 / 35665 / 37152 -- Iteron V, without GSCs 32929 / 34497 / 36065 / 37633 / 39201 -- Bestower, without GSCs 40207 / 41693 / 44079 / 45565 / 47952 -- Iteron V, with GSCs 41929 / 44397 / 46865 / 48433 / 50901 -- Bestower, with GSCs 45100 / 49200 / 53300 / 57400 / 61500 -- Hoarder (Ammo) 46200 / 50400 / 54600 / 58800 / 63000 -- Iteron IV (Ore) 47300 / 51600 / 55900 / 60200 / 64500 -- Iteron II (Minerals) 49500 / 54000 / 58500 / 63000 / 67500 -- Iteron III (PI)
So even with GSCs the specialized bays are always bigger than the biggest general bays at the same skill level, but not by much in some cases.
Also, I just noticed that the Iteron III and IV rhyme with their new specialties: three for P, four for ore; was that intentional, CCP Rise you sly dog? |
Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
252
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:43:00 -
[336] - Quote
Swiftstrike1 wrote:New names for the iterons with special roles plz. They are no longer merely the 3rd or 4th version of the same ship after all :) No, the names are fine. You only need look at them to see that they're still versions of the Iteron family - just with different subdivision of their cargo space. |
Kaeden Dourhand
T.O.R.
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:46:00 -
[337] - Quote
Taleden wrote:Also, I just noticed that the Iteron III and IV rhyme with their new specialties: three for P, four for ore; was that intentional, CCP Rise you sly dog?
by that logic, it should've been two for goo. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
179
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:55:00 -
[338] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I think our art guys are awesome. Its more about where we want their attention than how much attention they have.
I chatted with Fozzie about the Orca and neither of us feel that any change is necessary for either ship. The Orca does so much more than haul Ore that there really isn't much tension between them.
The problem is how WELL it does other things that boost and haul ore. These two things should be the main purpose, and the secondary functions should have other ships as competitors. Ideally the Orca should be only used for boosting and long range mineral/ORE transport. The Rorq should be a solution to import/export via the compression role. Also it should be made possible to compress in highsec also. Thus making compressed ORE the best solution and removing the needs for 425mm work arounds. Some BPO for compressed minerals might be a good second tier solution, thus making ORE bay and Mineral Bay in Industrials in general really useful.
A concept that was mentioned in discussion was to make low sec "safe" for neutrals during incursions. Thus allowing temporary opening up for import and export in the period of the event. So the winning faction would spawn security. This would also be linked to the permanent FW location. Not sure where this idea originate, but the temporary access to low sec might be a really useful way of spreading and populating it in a more organic way. The added import/export benefits would be a bonus feature.
|
Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
252
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 13:56:00 -
[339] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Renaming strikes me as messy, but I'll bring it up with our story department and see what their opinion is. The names are fine.
Leave them as they are, there is no conceivable reason to change them. |
Ersahi Kir
Infinite Mobility SpaceMonkey's Alliance
202
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:02:00 -
[340] - Quote
Taleden wrote:Ersahi Kir wrote:The sigil simply fails to be the tanky industrial because of slot layout. The simple reality is industrials are shield tanks because cargo low slots and cargo rigs are disharmonious with armor tanking. After playing around with the numbers a little it really looks like the the specialty of the sigil is lost under real build conditions. What happens if you drop a single cargo expander for a DCU2? The Sigil's higher hull HP might push it ahead again. But in principle I share your concern, which is why I mention the cargo expander problem every time I post in this thread. Also note that there's no need for math, I put the modified ship stats into PyFA so you can play with fittings directly: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=253003
If you drop a cargohold expander II for a DCU2 you will get more hp, but in that case you could drop the cargo expander from all the other hulls and add a DCU2 and get pretty much the same result.
The problem that I was pointing out is that all the shield HP's are very close together for the industrials, and when you add in the extra mid slot(s) for hardeners the other ships will pull away in EHP over the sigil. The sigil doesn't distinguish itself as a tanky industrial until the cargo amounts get small enough that it can use all 6 lows for an armor tank (800 mm plate, 4 hardeners/eamn, dcu2). Once the m3 that need to get hauled gets much over 2625 the sigil role just falls apart because it has to switch from a armor tank to a shield tank, but it lacks the slots to get good shield resists.
The badger niche of highest max cargo is retained across similar configurations, the wreath niche of fastest remains across similar configurations, but the sigil niche of highest ehp falls apart at very models m3 totals (~6k m3 I think). That's the problem I have with the current sigil slot layout. |
|
Azrin Stella Oerndotte
The Nommo Insurance Fraud.
74
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:06:00 -
[341] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Today's update:
We are going to go ahead and bump the unpacked volume on the Hoarder significantly (up to 400000) to avoid any major issues with compression. This gives it the same packed volume to cargo ratio that the Iteron V has currently.
Can you promise that all those SMA's with hoarders inside of them won't explode?
Poor WH people, not that I see much use for it in WH's. |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
320
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:07:00 -
[342] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Today's update:
We are going to go ahead and bump the unpacked volume on the Hoarder significantly (up to 400000) to avoid any major issues with compression. This gives it the same packed volume to cargo ratio that the Iteron V has currently.
One of the most recent posts mentions increasing the bonus per level from skills for the special bay haulers, and I was thinking the same thing. I'm going to increase the skill bonus per level for all the special bay haulers from 5% per level to 10% per level, and reduce the base bays to give basically the same potential bay size as before. This means you will still get an improvement at level 1 over any normal hauler, but you have to invest SP to make the difference quite as big. This seems especially appropriate since these ships don't have to sacrifice lows to reach the same capacity.
I talked with our story team about renaming and they are going to think about it and get back to me. As I said before, there are problems with both sides so I've just left it in their hands and will report back to you guys as soon as I know more.
As always, thanks for the feedback o/
edit: Also I want to acknowledge all the ideas around converting the special bay haulers to ORE, or any other similar solution. I completely understand where you're coming from but this simply isn't possible. It would either require an enormous investment by our art teams, which we don't feel is worthwhile, or would mean some kind of hacky re-texturing type approach, which we feel is ultimately bad for the game (we have standards okay). This is why we were originally hesitant about giving anything exciting to all 5 Iterons, we knew we didn't like where it would leave us in relation to this stuff. I'm glad that most of you seem to be able to cope with it as it stands though. Thanks for the update. Any thoughts on giving the Sigil/Bestower an additional turret hardpoint so Amarr pilots don't have to be left out on lolpvp Industrial fleets? The other races each have some capability (BBadger, Iteron, Hoarder) but not Amarr.
|
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
320
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:12:00 -
[343] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Today's update:
edit: Also I want to acknowledge all the ideas around converting the special bay haulers to ORE, or any other similar solution. I completely understand where you're coming from but this simply isn't possible. It would either require an enormous investment by our art teams, which we don't feel is worthwhile, or would mean some kind of hacky re-texturing type approach, which we feel is ultimately bad for the game (we have standards okay). This is why we were originally hesitant about giving anything exciting to all 5 Iterons, we knew we didn't like where it would leave us in relation to this stuff. I'm glad that most of you seem to be able to cope with it as it stands though. 1 - We understand very well that the Art teams have zero time available and that changing industrial hulls is not worthwhile. 2 - We are willing to compromise with you and CCP that changing hulls will never happen. 3 - We are willing to accept these hulls like they are in other line and just have the NPC symbol changed for now. 4 - We are willing to wait for a new "non-hacky" re-texturing / paint job say 1-2 years from now, when the Art team finds time to come back to them. Just do it right, give these ships to Interbus, compromise. We accept the art problems and what comes with them. Please just put these ships in the correct and logic place were they belong from now on. No, "we" are not.
The changes being proposed are fine; all the industrials are good (and bad) for various tasks and in their own right. It doesn't make any sense to attach the special-bay ships to the ORE Industrial skill considering that it takes 15 minutes to train into Gallente/Minmatar Industrial for the specialized bay.
Please don't speak for "we" when its obvious that not everyone in the community agrees with your viewpoint.
|
Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
40
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:30:00 -
[344] - Quote
Ersahi Kir wrote:If you drop a cargohold expander II for a DCU2 you will get more hp, but in that case you could drop the cargo expander from all the other hulls and add a DCU2 and get pretty much the same result.
No, not the same result: notice that every "tanky" hauler now has twice as much hull HP as either shield or armor, and that a DCU2 adds 60% hull resists. That means the Sigil's 2400 hull HP becomes 6000 EHP, while the Badger's 2060 only goes up to 5150 under the DCU2. That gap only gets wider when you add in skills or other fittings that increase hull HP. The bigger threat to the Sigil's niche might be the Iteron, whose 2600 hull HP goes to 6500 with a DCU2.
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6549
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:33:00 -
[345] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote: 3 - We are willing to accept these hulls like they are in other line and just have the NPC symbol changed for now.
It's fine that you can accept that, but we can't and won't. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
253
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:42:00 -
[346] - Quote
Kali Maat wrote:No more pride to fly the longest train ship in the game (iteron V) when it will only require gallente indu at lvl1 to fly it I don't understand the future tense here - Gallente Indy Lvl 1 is all that's required now.
Quote:The length of the Iteron model should be tied to your skill lvl. (in complete logic with the cargo capacity expansion per lvl) pls like this post to vote for this cool idea The flaw in that logic is that the Iteron IV is ttwice as wide as all the others. |
Tiber Ibis
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:44:00 -
[347] - Quote
I would rather see the specialised bays on the ore ships actually. So +1 for that. But this is a good compromise anyway. Would it be possible if that option could be looked at further down the line though Fozzie or Rise? |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1214
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:52:00 -
[348] - Quote
Tiber Ibis wrote:I would rather see the specialised bays on the ore ships actually. So +1 for that. But this is a good compromise anyway. Would it be possible if that option could be looked at further down the line though Fozzie or Rise? Version 2.0 came about because 4 ships were going to be shelved, many said give them special bays. CCP listened and now you cry because you want these ships shelved again and 4 new ships made for ORE. I like the specialized bays for Gallente and Minmatar, both of those races have more versital ships through out there line up and this adds to there racial flavor. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Tiber Ibis
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:08:00 -
[349] - Quote
I'm not crying. I just think the ore ships need a look in on these new specialised bays. Perhaps we could create an ore ship which has multiple specialised bays, although at lower levels than the specialised t1 racial ships. |
Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
253
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:18:00 -
[350] - Quote
Anela Cistine wrote:The Itty III has a planetary materials bay, which is great, is that able to hold Command Centers? If not, could you make the standard bay a little bigger so the ship can hold at least 1 command center?
It seems silly for a newbie to have to buy a ship to launch his command centers, then immediately sell that ship and buy a different ship to actually run his planets. Cargo expanders. |
|
Kiori Misoku
Blue Cloud Components Limited
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:25:00 -
[351] - Quote
Much Better!
I like it a lot.
Now they all feel like they have purposes again instead of the massive redundancy that was seeing before. |
Elder Ozzian
Frozen Dawn Inc Arctic Light
66
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:31:00 -
[352] - Quote
How about fuel ? What ship I am supposed to use for hauling... 1. Jump fuel, 2. Pos fuel, 3. Siege/Triage/Industrial Core fuel? I disagree! |
Abus Finkel
Caldari Capital Construction Inc.
16
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:35:00 -
[353] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Abus Finkel wrote:I see no reason for anyone to train anything other than Gallente industrials if this goes through. Why use any other races if Gallente can do the same plus much more. For hauling needs outside of the special bays you will generally get better performance from options other than Gallente. For a new player they can spend around 23d 16h to get Gallente Industrial V and get 37152m3 general purpose cargo 64500m3 minerals 67500m3 PI 63000m3 Ore
Or they can spend the same time getting for example Amarr Industrial V and get 2049m3 more general purpose cargo 25299m3 less minerals 28299m3 less PI 23799m3 less Ore
Choosing anything other than Gallente seems like a waste of time to me. |
Ersahi Kir
Infinite Mobility SpaceMonkey's Alliance
202
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:35:00 -
[354] - Quote
Taleden wrote:Ersahi Kir wrote:If you drop a cargohold expander II for a DCU2 you will get more hp, but in that case you could drop the cargo expander from all the other hulls and add a DCU2 and get pretty much the same result. No, not the same result: notice that every "tanky" hauler now has twice as much hull HP as either shield or armor, and that a DCU2 adds 60% hull resists. That means the Sigil's 2400 hull HP becomes 6000 EHP, while the Badger's 2060 only goes up to 5150 under the DCU2. That gap only gets wider when you add in skills or other fittings that increase hull HP. The bigger threat to the Sigil's niche might be the Iteron, whose 2600 hull HP goes to 6500 with a DCU2.
You need to look at similar configurations though, and that's what you're failing to do. For my purposes a 'similar configuration' for the industrials is when they're roughly at the same m3 of cargo (the badger will always have the slight lead but they'll be in the same general area of m3 cargospace). The thing is that the badger essentially gets 2 "free" low slots worth of base cargo over the sigil, and the wreath/iteron get 1 "free" low slots worth of base cargo over the sigil. So when you normalize the structure hp to account for this you get these numbers:
sigil 1536 structure hp 4267 m3 cargo
badger 2060 structure hp 4875 m3 cargo
wreath 1800 structure hp 4590 m3 cargo
iteron 2080 structure hp 4303 m3 cargo
assumptions: hull upgrades 0 industrial skill 5 using cargo expander II lows to 'normalize' the numbers
Now the thing is that after this point the m3 cargo and structure hp remains proportional for every cargo expander II you add. For every cargo expander II you add the structure hp will go down 20%, and the m3 cargo will go up 27.5. Adding a dcu2 after this point to all the ships actually favors the other tanky ships over the sigil because the sigil lost 36% of it's structure getting into the same ballpark cargo size. And with the way these ships are set up the shield buffer takes over because having a rough base 6k hp before resists are taken into account outweights the hp provided by a dcu2. Not to mention that the other ships can get higher shield resists because they have extra mid slots to fit hardeners.
So I think my point still stands. The sigil is only the highest hp tanky industrial at very low m3 cargo. Once you have to start using cargo expander lows/rigs the sigil quickly loses it's place as the most tanky hauler as it has to switch from armor/hull tank to shield tank, where it gets outclassed by ships that can get higher resists on the largest buffer (shield). This seems to go against it's niche, which is why I'm bringing it up here. |
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
440
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:42:00 -
[355] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Unforgiven Storm wrote: 3 - We are willing to accept these hulls like they are in other line and just have the NPC symbol changed for now.
It's fine that you can accept that, but we can't and won't.
That is a shame, I was seeing this has a solution to fix the racial advantage that now the Gallente will have and an open door for in the near future we could be given a ship freighter (to freight assembled ships around using gates).
Keeping them on the race lines, basically kills that dream, because if having ONE SF was a very little small "maybe", keeping the ships in the racial lines means for sure we will never have one, because if you do one for a race you are forced to do 3 more to cover the remaining races and having in account the art depart problems that will not happen, ever.
...
In MY opinion we were so close to a perfect industrial re-balance that it hurts my heart not getting there. I'm clearly loosing my time by pressing this issue.
Good job, you did all you can. I understand your limitations. Test 1, 2, 3... |
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
440
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:46:00 -
[356] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:Unforgiven Storm wrote:[quote=CCP Rise]Today's update:
] No, "we" are not. The changes being proposed are fine; all the industrials are good (and bad) for various tasks and in their own right. It doesn't make any sense to attach the special-bay ships to the ORE Industrial skill considering that it takes 15 minutes to train into Gallente/Minmatar Industrial for the specialized bay. Please don't speak for "we" when its obvious that not everyone in the community agrees with your viewpoint.
It was an abuse to use the word we, yes, sorry all for that. Anyway I had a reason to ask for these changes, I posted something in a blog, my reasoning is in there, maybe you agree with them and change your opinion... or maybe not
http://thelazypilot.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/much-better/ Test 1, 2, 3... |
Purps
Anatidae Rising
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:51:00 -
[357] - Quote
Doesn't the PI hauler kind of step on the Primae's toes? |
Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
40
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:57:00 -
[358] - Quote
Purps wrote:Doesn't the PI hauler kind of step on the Primae's toes? Look again at the Primae's PI hold size. I don't think there's any ship in the game that doesn't step on the Primae's toes, if you think the Primae's toes are about efficiently hauling PI goods. It's a collector's item, not a ship. |
Flux Astraeus
InterSun Freelance Moon Warriors
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 16:21:00 -
[359] - Quote
Can I ask why you nurfed the Mammoth when everyone here across both threads when this topic began said that it was an awesome Indi and probably the best looking in its class?
|
Elfi Wolfe
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 16:22:00 -
[360] - Quote
I like the current plan. Lore wise the Gallente are the traders so the have more trade ships. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |