EVE Search - Please Reduce Caldari Mass

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Please Reduce Caldari Mass

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nikolai Nuvolari	Posted - 2006.04.30 05:27:00 - [31] Originally by: Litus Arowar by giving them decent speed, but high weight, ABs and MWDs have less of an effect Um, no. We have crap speed AND crap weight. -------- Tom Thumb > for a nut case you rawk [04:21:15] Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw [07:38:53] Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
Niques Leutre	Posted - 2006.04.30 05:32:00 - [32] Originally by: Valea Silpha You assume that armor is just solid armor plating. With nano engineering and hyperadvanced materials... why does armor have to have all that much mass ? Caldari ships are just more roomy, no specific reason. Thats just the way they build them out there. Well, judging by the names of modules ('Steel Plates', 'Rolled Tungsten Plates', 'Reinforced Nanofiber Plates') I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume it's based on old-fashioned armour plates. And if Caldari ships are more roomy, how is it a the Caldari battleships are tiny (roughly 50%-75% the volume) of Amarr Battleships? To have the same mass but be that much smaller means their ships must have absolutely incredible density and little room at all. When you compare the size (volume) and mass, it seems Caldari have some kind of 'denser than steel' eletronic systems... which seem very implausable is all I'm saying. Caldari ships should have a more realisitc mass. ___________________________________ The fiercer the foe, the sweeter the salvage. The fatter the wallet, the bigger the smile.
Hoshi	Posted - 2006.04.30 11:51:00 - [33] Originally by: Litus Arowar this can't be a serious discussion... the reason caldari ships weigh more is cause of game balance... if they weighed less but had lower speed/agility, then MWDs and ABs would solve all problems The problem with that argument is that their current mass is balanced to pre mwd/ab nerf when you could run multiple mwds/abs. Back then ships like the blackbird and scorpion had the best potential to go fast because they had the largest number of midslots. So Caldari got a mass increase to counter this, then the mwds where nerfed but caldari never got their lower mass back. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selim	Posted - 2006.04.30 14:38:00 - [34] Caldari ships are supposed to be slow because they are long range.
Merin Ryskin	Posted - 2006.04.30 21:28:00 - [35] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 30/04/2006 21:29:55 Originally by: Selim Caldari ships are supposed to be slow because they are long range. Err, how does that work? If you're focusing on long-range combat and sacrificing close-range firepower and tanking to do it, your worst nightmare is getting pinned down at close range. So right after long-range weapons on your priority list is "enough speed to keep that range". The only plausible reason for it is game balance, and that's vastly over-estimated. Long-range sniping is far less unbalanced than the whiners claim. I mean, it even comes pre-nerfed by the fact that without a support ship tackling for you, you will score zero kills. Since you're so far out of warp scrambler range, the moment your target's tank begins to fail, they're warping out. And then there's the inevitable death if you get caught at close range, close-range tracking issues, etc. ================================================= As for the real point of the thread, some of these arguments are completely insane. There is absolutely no way Caldari ships can have those masses and obey the laws of physics. Like the example in the first post, there is absolutely no way a lightly armored frigate has more mass than a much larger and heavily armored destroyer. There's no roleplaying reason for it, and there isn't a game balance reason anymore, so it's time to get rid of this obsolete nerfing. The mass/agility order, as it should be: 1) Minmatar: speed/agility are a racial focus, so of course they should be best at it. 2) Caldari: smallest battleships, and all ship classes have the weakest armor. No armor = no mass = higher agility. 3) Gallente: armor, but not the most. So they get the middle spot, enough armor to add mass, but not so much that they lose all agility. 3) Amarr: heaviest armor = very high mass = lowest agility.
Meridius	Posted - 2006.04.30 21:40:00 - [36] Yeah lets boost the Kestrel, it really needs it _ __
Merin Ryskin	Posted - 2006.05.01 02:40:00 - [37] Originally by: Meridius Yeah lets boost the Kestrel, it really needs it Yeah, because you know, giving it better turn rate and fixing the completely absurd and unrealistic mass would really make it more powerful than it is. Or fixing the pathetic warp range which does nothing but annoy the pilot.
Cade Morrigan	Posted - 2006.05.01 02:54:00 - [38] Originally by: Meridius Yeah lets boost the Kestrel, it really needs it Yes, the Kestrel is a prime example of a ship that really could benefit from mass reduction without imbalancing it. The Scorpion would be a lot more bearable to fly if it didn't handle like a pair of Feroxes bolted together, and it wouldn't become "uber" with a mass reduction. -= Save the Gila! Fix its grid and cpu! =-
Audri Fisher	Posted - 2006.05.01 04:41:00 - [39] Drunk pigs move faster than a ferox. A timecode will get you video proof!
nahtoh	Posted - 2006.05.01 05:13:00 - [40] Originally by: Phish1 look, its a balance issue, live with it. Get through that thick skull, for issues that have been fixed in other ways...a mass decrease for rail platforms at least for chirst sake, you know the ones that do have actual range constrants and are affected the most by this collection of balance changes...there are cuisers that are faster on the helm than the harpy... And if its the shiled systems that are supposed to cause this then screw with the kahind ship sin the same fecking way... inquisitor mass 1500000 kg volume 28700 m3 (2500 m3 packaged) max velocity 270 m/sec kestrel mass 1700000 kg volume 19700 m3 (2500 m3 packaged) max velocity 260 m/sec Expain the differnce smart ass...less volume, more mass and slower...and apart from the damage type same bonuses... And for your reading plesure a small out take from the ammar description... "The Inquisitor is a fairly standard Amarr ship in most respects, having good defenses and lacking mobility." ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self
Reatu Krentor	Posted - 2006.05.01 06:51:00 - [41] Originally by: Idara Okay, reduce the mass of Caldari ships, and make Amarr the most massive. But...make a new "Attribute" for ships like "maneuverability" that reflects the power and number of thrusters on the ship. Caldari don't need to be very agile because they just lock and fire, but Gallente and Minnie ships need to be quite maneuverable. Mass would be: Amarr > Gallente > Caldari > Minmatar Maneuverability: Minnie > Gallente > Amarr > Caldari Or whatever. Caldari still shouldn't be able to be faster than a Minnie or Gallente ship simply because they don't need to be for thier weapons to work. that "maneuverability" attribute already exists, it's called agility, but it remains unchanged in the same class(frig, cruiser...) ussually(there are a couple ships that have a different agility mod to others in same class). Why it isn't changed ever, don't know, I just know it isn't. - phew! dodged the mods on this sig!
Hon Kovell	Posted - 2006.05.01 08:10:00 - [42] Stop using shield generators containing small black holes and your mass will drop greatly. You'll have paper thin defences for a few decades until you work the kinks out of the technology, of course.
James Lyrus	Posted - 2006.05.01 08:21:00 - [43] Originally by: Niques Leutre Don't forget battleships. Caldari battleship are roughly half the volume of Amarr ships... and when you factor in the fact Amarr battleships are made up of thick slabs of armour plates while Caldari are mostly electronics... The equal or greater mass of Caldari ships versus the other races' doesn't seem to make sense. Mass, well is a bit silly, having 'really heavy and slow'. Thing that always bugs me though, is that in terms of mass and volume, the Scorpion is right near the top of the list. And yet when you compare one with say, a Megathron, it looks about a quarter the size. Big and scary ships, should at least look big and scary :) -- We are recruiting We sell carriers.
Nikolai Rex	Posted - 2006.05.01 09:18:00 - [44] Perhaps the Caldari have crappy materials engineers and don't have the line on strong yet light materials that the Amarr do? Remember, material strength, while often related to density, is not exclusively attached to it. Google up spider goats if you want some more ideas about materials that are very strong relative to their mass.
Jon Xylur	Posted - 2006.05.01 10:16:00 - [45] Caldari are allready overpowered enough. Lets not make them even better, K? Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, and not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty - Cortes
Zyrla Bladestorm	Posted - 2006.05.01 10:24:00 - [46] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 30/04/2006 21:29:55 Originally by: Selim Caldari ships are supposed to be slow because they are long range. Err, how does that work? If you're focusing on long-range combat and sacrificing close-range firepower and tanking to do it, your worst nightmare is getting pinned down at close range. So right after long-range weapons on your priority list is "enough speed to keep that range". You've already answered yourself there, the dev's reasoning given at the time caldari were made heavier was that the longest range ships should be the slowest, so they couldn't just constantly outrange everything else in the game with no chance of being caught up to by the shorter ranged oponents. . ----- Apologies for any rambling that may have just occurred.
Drommy	Posted - 2006.05.01 11:18:00 - [47] no IF YOU AINT BLUE... YOUR GOO DARKSIDE INC
Retar Jore	Posted - 2006.05.01 11:49:00 - [48] ](combat) Your 12,900,000 kg Space Ship lands perfectly on I-Win Button, mashing for 866.6 damage..
Crellion	Posted - 2006.05.01 13:00:00 - [49] Caldari ships suffer from the (justified) hatred of the Raven (as it was pre-Cold War). The mass "balancing can not be justified in frig and cruiser classes and perhaps they should be addressed. The Raven is oc fine as it is. The "RL" and "logic" arguments dont apply to eve. If there was no actual balancing issues and it was all about looking good I d say increase the volume of Caldari ships to 120% of Ammar ones and there you have it... appearances and mass reconciled... but nobody really cares about that, or do you?
DoctorColossal Pervius	Posted - 2006.05.01 13:16:00 - [50] They have too much mass because Caldari thought they stole our technology but really we left some blueprints in easy reach for you to find with some serious design flaws built in. Relax. You've had some of the most overpowered no-brainer ships out there since well before I began my EVE career and they are still great. What do you want to do take any form of variation and culture away from each race? Get on and play!
Dust Angel	Posted - 2006.05.03 00:23:00 - [51] There is no logical reason that our electronics weigh more than the asston Amarr :( _____________________________________ Stressed out with empire politics? Sansha's Nation helps clear your mind.
Nafri	Posted - 2006.05.03 08:34:00 - [52] Originally by: Crellion Caldari ships suffer from the (justified) hatred of the Raven (as it was pre-Cold War). The mass "balancing can not be justified in frig and cruiser classes and perhaps they should be addressed. The Raven is oc fine as it is. The "RL" and "logic" arguments dont apply to eve. If there was no actual balancing issues and it was all about looking good I d say increase the volume of Caldari ships to 120% of Ammar ones and there you have it... appearances and mass reconciled... but nobody really cares about that, or do you? The caldari mass nerf had nothing to do with the Raven. When it happened the raven was irrelevant as ship, cause nobody was mission running . It happened cause you could fly about 5km/s with a blackbird easily. Back then Blackbird handeled like a frigate nowadays. The Scorp was superior cause it was soo agil and fast, together with the increadible tanks it was a super ship (there was a video where a scorp tanked a whole fleet for 10mins till reinforcement came). Also you could fit cruise missles on kestrels, making every other frigate pointless Summertime - Campingtime!
Spartan239	Posted - 2006.05.03 08:38:00 - [53] Originally by: Nafri Originally by: Crellion Caldari ships suffer from the (justified) hatred of the Raven (as it was pre-Cold War). The mass "balancing can not be justified in frig and cruiser classes and perhaps they should be addressed. The Raven is oc fine as it is. The "RL" and "logic" arguments dont apply to eve. If there was no actual balancing issues and it was all about looking good I d say increase the volume of Caldari ships to 120% of Ammar ones and there you have it... appearances and mass reconciled... but nobody really cares about that, or do you? Also you could fit cruise missles on kestrels, making every other frigate pointless ehm rifter? Originally by: Tamora its not the skills that make the eve player... its the smack that back him up
Eximius Josari	Posted - 2006.05.03 08:42:00 - [54] Superconductors are heavy. Sov 2.1 T2 BS
Talmssar	Posted - 2006.05.03 09:31:00 - [55] Originally by: Hoshi Originally by: Litus Arowar this can't be a serious discussion... the reason caldari ships weigh more is cause of game balance... if they weighed less but had lower speed/agility, then MWDs and ABs would solve all problems The problem with that argument is that their current mass is balanced to pre mwd/ab nerf when you could run multiple mwds/abs. Back then ships like the blackbird and scorpion had the best potential to go fast because they had the largest number of midslots. So Caldari got a mass increase to counter this, then the mwds where nerfed but caldari never got their lower mass back. This has been done to prevent double ab / mwd. Afaik it was done to all ships, right? I dont say that there isnt something wrong about ie kessie beeing more mass than dessies... I just prefer that all have good time here.
Nafri	Posted - 2006.05.03 10:26:00 - [56] Originally by: Spartan239 Originally by: Nafri Originally by: Crellion Caldari ships suffer from the (justified) hatred of the Raven (as it was pre-Cold War). The mass "balancing can not be justified in frig and cruiser classes and perhaps they should be addressed. The Raven is oc fine as it is. The "RL" and "logic" arguments dont apply to eve. If there was no actual balancing issues and it was all about looking good I d say increase the volume of Caldari ships to 120% of Ammar ones and there you have it... appearances and mass reconciled... but nobody really cares about that, or do you? Also you could fit cruise missles on kestrels, making every other frigate pointless ehm rifter? not enough missle bays :p most prefered kestrels Summertime - Campingtime!
K Shara	Posted - 2006.05.03 11:24:00 - [57] Yes Caldari need fixing mass wise. Its not right that my caldari hac can only do 700 m/s with an MWD on. lets look at the cruisres. Amarr Arbit 12.5 mKG (120 kM^3) 104 kg/m^3 Aur 12.25 mKG (115 kM^3) 103.8 kg/m^3 Maller 12.75 mKG (118 kM^3) 108 kg/m^3 omen 11.95 mKG (118 kM^3) 101.3 kg/m^3 Caldari Blackbird 14 mKG (96 kM^3) 145.8 kg/m^3 Caracel 13.75 mKG (92 kM^3) 149.5 kg/m^3 Moa 13 mKG (101 kM^3) 128.7 kg/m^3 Osprey 13 mKG (107 kM^3) 105.6 kg/m^3 Gallente Celestis 125 mKG (116 kM^3) 107.8 kg/m^3 Exeq 12.25 (113 kM^3) 108.4 kg/m^3 Thorax 12 mKG (112 kM^3) 107.1 kg/m^3 Vexor 11.25 (115 kM^3) 96.7 kg/m^3 Minmatar Bell 10.75 mKG (80 kM^3) 1.34 kg/m^3 Rupture 11.5 mKG (96 kM^3) 119.8 kg/m^3 Scythe 10.25 (89 kM^3) 115.2 kg/m^3 Stabber 10 mKG (80 kM^3) 125 kg/m^3 Perfectly balanced... NOT!!!! <><><><><><><><><> Contraband <><><><><><><><><>
Tachy	Posted - 2006.05.03 11:34:00 - [58] I just tried to imagine a few of the Caldari pilots I know with less CHIN. Btw. the shields are huge electromagnetic fields. The certainly mass is used to reflect the effect of those in the natural electromagneti fields all over the systems without adding jsut another variable into the database. --==*-- Megadon CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray
Jacinto Naysmith	Posted - 2006.05.03 11:59:00 - [59] Double/Triple the size of caldari ship models. Then it makes sense from a fluff aspect without changing game mechanics.
Dust Angel	Posted - 2006.05.03 21:42:00 - [60] Originally by: K Shara Yes Caldari need fixing mass wise. Its not right that my caldari hac can only do 700 m/s with an MWD on. lets look at the cruisres. Amarr Arbit 12.5 mKG (120 kM^3) 104 kg/m^3 Aur 12.25 mKG (115 kM^3) 103.8 kg/m^3 Maller 12.75 mKG (118 kM^3) 108 kg/m^3 omen 11.95 mKG (118 kM^3) 101.3 kg/m^3 Caldari Blackbird 14 mKG (96 kM^3) 145.8 kg/m^3 Caracel 13.75 mKG (92 kM^3) 149.5 kg/m^3 Moa 13 mKG (101 kM^3) 128.7 kg/m^3 Osprey 13 mKG (107 kM^3) 105.6 kg/m^3 Gallente Celestis 125 mKG (116 kM^3) 107.8 kg/m^3 Exeq 12.25 (113 kM^3) 108.4 kg/m^3 Thorax 12 mKG (112 kM^3) 107.1 kg/m^3 Vexor 11.25 (115 kM^3) 96.7 kg/m^3 Minmatar Bell 10.75 mKG (80 kM^3) 1.34 kg/m^3 Rupture 11.5 mKG (96 kM^3) 119.8 kg/m^3 Scythe 10.25 (89 kM^3) 115.2 kg/m^3 Stabber 10 mKG (80 kM^3) 125 kg/m^3 Perfectly balanced... NOT!!!! qft _____________________________________ Stressed out with empire politics? Sansha's Nation helps clear your mind.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.