Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4359
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 21:32:00 -
[91] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:As has been pointed out the buffs to the other races meet our requirements just fine for now. And you'll have to excuse the rest of us for believing a CCP developer over your fears as far as plans for the future go. If by your requirements you mean having devs spend time making the other races industrails not suck compared to the itty 5 only to still need to train for gall indy then sure. One last thing, there is a big difference between fear and having skepticism over something when hard data points the opposite direction of what someone tells you. Eve sure has no shortage of people believing the BS that others tell them (*cough* any alliance today *cough*... I'm sure adding yourself to their lot won't really change anything either way. If by "not suck" you mean superior, sure.
Actually, as far as ship balancing and adjusting their track record has been superb... or is that another fact you chose to ignore because it doesn't support the point you are trying to make... To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Valterra Craven
40
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 21:40:00 -
[92] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:If by "not suck" you mean superior, sure. Actually, as far as ship balancing and adjusting their track record has been superb... or is that another fact you chose to ignore because it doesn't support the point you are trying to make...
If by superior you mean marginally better, sure
Actually, I agree with you that their track record on ship balance since the Incarnia debacle has been superb. Its the fact that it was awful for 8 years before then is what I chose to not ignore because it supports the point I am trying to make. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4359
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 21:54:00 -
[93] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:If by "not suck" you mean superior, sure. Actually, as far as ship balancing and adjusting their track record has been superb... or is that another fact you chose to ignore because it doesn't support the point you are trying to make... If by superior you mean marginally better, sure Actually, I agree with you that their track record on ship balance since the Incarnia debacle has been superb. Its the fact that it was awful for 8 years before then is what I chose to not ignore because it supports the point I am trying to make.
How about we compromise on "a viable alternative".
I'm well aware of how these things were handled in the past, I think we've both been here since the beginning (or before). I'm right there with you on being dissatisfied in how things were iterated on in the past... but I have a fairly high degree of confidence in the team that is currently handling issues of this nature. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Radgette
EVE Irn Bru Distribution
39
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 21:57:00 -
[94] - Quote
god damn those names ><
you do realise noone is gonna call them that right. well maybe some noobs
I'm kind of confused though:
you go through the modules removing the different names saying it's hard for noobs to remember all the new names then you add a bunch of new names to the indy ships :P
Surely the normal "Iteron" should keep it's name as it is the progenitor of the class, a mark 5 with no mark one or reference to it seems strange also I understand changing the names of the ships getting dedicated bays to differenciate but the Itty 1 is just a standard hauler so ye no idea why your renaming it. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1118
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 22:03:00 -
[95] - Quote
Why not just delete the iteron 2-4? All those ships.. its just a bit silly =/ BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
1719
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 22:12:00 -
[96] - Quote
Now we just need a cov-ops version of the Hoarder.
I'm sure the stealth bomber pilots of the world would love a /large/ resupply ship to bring them more bombs.
Steve Ronuken for CSM 9!-á I'm starting early :) Handy tools and an SDE conversion Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Max Zerg
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 22:59:00 -
[97] - Quote
Dear CCP
please, reconsider using " Miasmos " as the spaceship name this, with no doubts, is the offensive term second: term miasmos definitely refers to hazard ( greek +++»+¦-â+++¦ ) - filth, pollution first: it commonly refers to pooping |
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
110
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 23:00:00 -
[98] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Natasha Maraska wrote:So are any other of the other races getting any love on this? That's nice for Galls and ok for Cald, but everyone else only having 2 haulers and no specializations? Seems like forcing purists to have to buy and train more skills just to be equal... I discussed this a ton with the community in the Features and Ideas feedback threads linked in the Dev Blog. If you're interested in it I recommend looking through some of the posts in those threads.
Your main arguments were continuity and artists' time though.
Since continuity will be thrown overboard with the renaming anyway, what about my earlier suggestion of moving one of the former iterons each over to Caldari and Amarr respectively?
You'd end up with a very neat setup with each race having 2 general and one special purpose hauler at minimal investment.
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3875
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 23:13:00 -
[99] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Quote:The most recent example? Freighters used to require Industrial V to fly - now only Industrial III is required - making Levels 4 and 5 now wasted points if you never intended to fly Industrials or Transports.
The racial industrial skill also increases cargo bay size and speed, hardly wasted points.
Consider for a moment who needs big haulers: the most common use I have seen is for shuttling ore back and forth from mining operations. Sure, you could use a second Orca, but if you have a junior miner their options were to fly a Retriever and haul using that (nice big ore bay) or train to fly the Iteron V, configure for maximum capacity, and haul using that.
With this new set of industrials, nothing much has changed. Just use the specialty Gallente ore hauler rather than the Iteron V. Nothing changes.
I understand where you are coming from, but when thinking about hauling capacity you have to think about which ships are best for the hauling role you are about to perform. For some people (the "racial purists") there is only the slight pang of knowing that "cross-training" to Gallente would net them 15k m3 more ore hauling capacity over their Bestower. For everyone else, the specialty haulers mostly being under one racial banner make it easy to figure out which way to go: train Gallente for the most options. Train Caldari for maximum general cargo capacity. Train Minmatar if you really need to haul ammo around the place in a rusty metal box.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Xindi Kraid
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
588
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 23:45:00 -
[100] - Quote
Now even less reason to fly a Primae. We could still use a specialized ship hauler.
|
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
297
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 00:24:00 -
[101] - Quote
I'm sorry for not following the discussion etc
The only question I've got is:
Like with T2 cruisers being made slightly redundant by T1 cruiser changes, doesn't this set of changes make the T2 Industrials kind of redundant and overpriced for their 'roles'?
Perhaps if you could list the maximum cargo capacities (with full sets of expanders) for all the haulage types, and contrast that with the T2 haulers I'd comprehend better...
But right now, I'm feeling my rather pricey T2 rigged Occator and Viator just became rather obsolete... Or am I wrong?
Cheers. |
Tiberius Mal
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 01:38:00 -
[102] - Quote
and thus it was that the war was won. The Gallente, fielding fleets of drone spewing ASB + CAP booster/stable + Drone Damage Amplifying industrials did BLOT OUT THE SUNS and rain hell on their enemies... |
stoicfaux
2951
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 02:53:00 -
[103] - Quote
Is anyone, aside from industrial affectionados, actually going to call them by their names? Personally, I'm going with: * Iteron I (or Small Iteron) * Mineral Iteron * PI Iteron * Ore Iteron * Badger II
I appreciate the effort in naming them, but... no.
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
370
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 03:49:00 -
[104] - Quote
Not a fan of renaming, but I'll adapt. Eventually . Remove insurance. |
Jennai
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 05:00:00 -
[105] - Quote
Esna Pitoojee wrote:WTF no. Bring back Badger Mk. II.
Badger 2 should be the one that keeps the name. if someone is talking about badgers, everyone assumes they mean Mk2 because the Mk1 is garbage. |
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
188
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 06:13:00 -
[106] - Quote
Quoting this for future reference:
Zaknussem wrote:Also, InterBus should have the haulers, not ORE.
ORE = Outer Ring EXCAVATIONS
Industrials don't do excavation, they haul stuff and that's where the InterBus comes in. Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
188
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 06:22:00 -
[107] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:If you don't have the resources to do something correctly the first time, then don't waste time on it till you do.
If the human race had followed that rule we would still live in caves. Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3112
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 06:54:00 -
[108] - Quote
New roles are great, and the names as well! Good job
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
1720
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 08:56:00 -
[109] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Is anyone, aside from industrial affectionados, actually going to call them by their names? Personally, I'm going with: * Iteron I (or Small Iteron) * Mineral Iteron * PI Iteron * Ore Iteron * Badger II
I appreciate the effort in naming them, but... no.
PieTeron.(Cherry?) Steve Ronuken for CSM 9!-á I'm starting early :) Handy tools and an SDE conversion Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
698
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 09:28:00 -
[110] - Quote
Excellent.
You are now my number one CCP Dev after the horrible fall of CCP Fozzie from 1st place.
There can be only ONE.
Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-) |
|
Kniht
Explorer Corps Disavowed.
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 09:34:00 -
[111] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:(lots and lots of spew)
How do I block you on the forums? |
Ottersmacker
Genos Occidere
389
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 09:37:00 -
[112] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:So what about the special edition industrials, e.g. Iteron Mk IV Quafe Ultra Edition? Will they have their legacy names or will they all be "Miasmos Quafe Ultra Edition", "Miasmos Quafe Ultramarine Edition", etc.?
I'm really just curious, since I don't use industrials. Sounds much more compelling it it would be kept as a Mark IV Quafe/??/?? - the Iteron V will be the only Iteron and my guess would be that item descriptions will perhaps reflect each of the former iterations being converted into something more specialized (~"the 3rd prototype by ... ended up as .."), so having a preserved special edition Mk IV almost makes it sound like some relic (think of it like having the Jesus fresco by Martinez before it's "restoration" - sorry for the terrible analogy, because i really really like the indy changes, but you get the idea) i just locked an open door.. strange, yet symbolically compelling. |
Photon Ceray
Caesar Lile Directorate
91
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 10:52:00 -
[113] - Quote
To be honest, t1 inudstrials aren't worthy of being named after greek gods and stuff, these names should be reserved for PVP ships.
Also, the names will create some confusion, especially for newer player.
It's fine giving them special names, but make the names more intuitive and related to what the ships do, because not all people read the dev blog and even those who did still don't know latin and will forget what the names stand for 10 mins after reading.
I hope you at CCP won't get stuck over the names of ships, that didn't take from the development budget - I hope, if it did then you need to hire me instantly and i'll be naming everything for you!. |
Tiffenay
Synchrodyne Holding Synchrodyne
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:01:00 -
[114] - Quote
I really like these changes. Now lets hope these specialized bays are adequate to the task. |
MisterNick
The Sagan Clan Pax Romana Alliance
242
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:19:00 -
[115] - Quote
The name change is going to be a pain in the arse, and Battle Tayra just doesn't have the aliterative goodness, but first world problems, we'll get used to it.
I like the specialised bays, and anticipate coming up with a bait fit for the Itty 1 "Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom." |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6697
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 11:35:00 -
[116] - Quote
MisterNick wrote:The name changes are going to be a pain, and Battle Tayra just doesn't have the aliterative goodness, but first world problems, we'll get used to it. I like the specialised bays, and anticipate coming up with a bait fit for the Itty 1
Of the Badger and Tayra, the Badger is the far superior battle hauler. So the Battle Badger isn't going anywhere. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 12:48:00 -
[117] - Quote
GÇ£CCP Rise, why are you balancing industrials, they are fine, go do something important like deleting falcons from the game (I kind of agree with you)GÇ¥
Was this just a joke and the Falcon here is CCP Falcon - like the first few posts seemed to suggest - or is there a feeling that the Caldari Recon ship is OP and needs such significant change that it won't continue as we think of Falcons now? I'm kinda training up two characters to use Falcons at the moment :( . If Ewar is calmed down to the point where it's more effctive to just bring another combat ship. . . I'm just worried. I know a lot of people hate ECM drones too. If we are concerned that being silenced by ECM is frustrating because people just want to pew pew - so we see ECM as a frustrating mechanic - or just EWar in general - so make it much less potent - then I see a significant part of the game being wiped out so that all we have left is DPS vs Tank. I'm already seeing people complaining that damps and disruptors are OP because unlike ECM they don't have a chance to fail - but if we don't like ECM too. . .then that's bleak for anyone who likes and somewhat needs EWar to live in lo-sec. Or are we just concerned about the Falcon Hull being OP and ECM being OK?
Other than that worry I love the new ships :) . |
Enilonee
21
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 12:49:00 -
[118] - Quote
Photon Ceray wrote:To be honest, t1 inudstrials aren't worthy of being named after greek gods and stuff, these names should be reserved for PVP ships.
Also, the names will create some confusion, especially for newer player.
It's fine giving them special names, but make the names more intuitive and related to what the ships do, because not all people read the dev blog and even those who did still don't know latin and will forget what the names stand for 10 mins after reading.
I hope you at CCP won't get stuck over the names of ships, that didn't take from the development budget - I hope, if it did then you need to hire me instantly and i'll be naming everything for you!.
Please CCP, listen up!
Also rename the Caracal into "That Light Missile Cruiser" - I can't remember it's name for the life of me! |
Valterra Craven
46
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 14:33:00 -
[119] - Quote
Sable Moran wrote:Quoting this for future reference: Zaknussem wrote:Also, InterBus should have the haulers, not ORE. ORE = Outer Ring EXCAVATIONSIndustrials don't do excavation, they haul stuff and that's where the InterBus comes in.
Yeah because Caterpillar doesn't simultaneous make the dump trucks to move the ore that the excavators just pulled out of the ground... *eyeroll* (http://www.cat.com/cda/layout)
Digging up ore is pretty freakin pointless if you can't move it anywhere. |
Valterra Craven
46
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 14:36:00 -
[120] - Quote
Kniht wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:(lots and lots of spew) How do I block you on the forums?
How do I block you from Eve? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |