| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1201
   |
Posted - 2014.04.02 02:59:00 -
[1] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:How about reducing all barge tanks abck down to sensible levels again, like you know when eve was good and not this brainless dross? Where going afk, botting or ISboxing was frowned upon and punished hard. You really are just milking this game dry now.
Sure, as long as Barges & Exhumers get the equivalent slot layouts of Cruisers & HAC's to balance it out. So they can choose to fit tank if they want rather than the current inability due to lack of slots. Frigates get more slots to play with.
Also the Covetor/Hulk should have an ore bay equivalent to the Procurer/Skiff, still not super large like the Retriever/Mack, but large enough to hold 2 minutes worth of mining at least. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1202
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 20:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
I believe while this is an improvement it is still the wrong way to go.
A direction I would like to see is instead dropping to just one mining barge.
Give that barge cruiser level fittings including slot layout. And just hard cap the strip miner number similar to command processors.
Add a few turret/missile slots to allow for self defence as well as interesting bait fittings.
4/5/5 or something like that, 3 Strip Miner cap, 3 Turret/Missile slots for those that want to bait fit.
EHP somewhere around an Unfitted Maller to start with on the barges.
This then means that players have a lot of slots to play with to create a diverse range of fittings rather than being hard wired by the hull with extremely limited fittings.
The remaining two hulls can then be re-purposed to other tasks.
For example. The Ore combat Cruiser. The Ore Gas Miner. The Ore Hauler ship. T2 Versions including a Covert Hauler. So industrialists can just train the Ore line of ships rather than being forced to train both Ore & racial lines. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1239
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 04:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
This is a PVP game. Player VS Player, What the barges need in this modern day of combat are more teeth on the barges. Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses. Keep them so that the Barges will mine all day But have the ability to Defend themselves. Increase the Lock time on some of them but buff there survivability. This way there is actual PVP involved when ganks occur.
Barges don't need more free tank. They need actual cruiser level fittings & slot layouts. hardcap the number of strip miners if you have to. Then you can actually make some choices & trade offs with Mining Barges, rather than the current extremely limited fitting options & ways to fit them. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1278
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 07:31:00 -
[4] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Anomaly One wrote:I find the nerf to the mack/retriever.. slightly annoying..
but I'm still gonna use them, really there's no point in using the hulk unless you are desperately trying to get ganked, and no..nerfing the mack/ret to make us use the hulk won't cut it. So what you're saying is that the Retriever & Mackinaw haven't been nerfed enough to balance them with the Hulk, even with the yield buff the Hulk just got? OK I'll flag that to the balance team, thank you for your feedback.
I think a more accurate point would be that the hulk shouldn't be the worst in 2 categories.
Worst tank, best yield. That state is possibly ok.
But worst ore hold isn't ok on top of that state.
If Ore Hold was equal to the Procurer/Skiff, you still can't idle in a hulk like you can with a Mack, but you actually get 2 full cycles without having to worry about emptying it.
TLDR Version. Either tank has to become better (Equal to Mack) or Ore Hold better (Equal to Skiff) to boost the hulk from dead last. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1280
|
Posted - 2014.04.27 19:55:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
it shouldn't have the worst tank, rather than it not having the worst ore hold. besides, a small ore hold promotes fleet use, a small tank doesn't.
every cargo module in the game reduces a ship's ehp. cargo expanders reduce hull hp, cargo rigs reduce armour hp etc.
it follows that logic that the hulk should have more tank than the mackinaw.
Combined with it's yield having the same ore hold as the skiff means it still takes less time to fill than the skiff. Someone can do the maths if they really care.
But either will make me happy from a design view for now. And we can see if equal in one aspect is enough to make all three barges see diverse use. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1341
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 23:58:00 -
[6] - Quote
Rowells wrote:
I hope I'm reading this wrong. Please tell me you are not asking for the Hulk to have the ore hold of the mack. you used a lot of commas in a weird order.
However, if I am reading this right: F*ck no. You might as well reprocess all other mining ships in the game before the crius changes.
Hopefully he just mixed up names and meant the skiff, so that Mack has the best hold but the other two have equal hold. That would make the Hulk not so frustrating to use. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1345
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 21:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
Just give barges cruiser levels of fitting, 5/5/5 slot layout, hard cap Strips to 3, and maybe a hard cap on MLU to 3 also.
Then let players fit them how they want. Stabs, Inertia, Prop Mods, Scanners, Tractor beams, Pop guns for dealing with rats, pure bait fits.......
Of course this would cause 2 of the types of barges to become invalid and have to be turned into oh..... A pure hauler for ORE, and maybe an actual combat cruiser for ORE. Maybe like a Drone bonused Cruiser with a secondary weapon system option.
Hey, that'd be awesome. Industrialists could then just train ORE rather than having to fill in the gaps with racials as well as ORE skills, we could laugh at no tank fits as fail because they really would have a choice, and players would have real fitting decisions to make since they would have enough slots, PG & CPU to actually fit a good range of things. |
| |
|