| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Sgt Ocker
Last Bastion of Freedom
222
   |
Posted - 2014.05.20 10:54:00 -
[271] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs.
Sorry I misunderstood your response.
I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable
My opinions are mine.
-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care.. |
Sipphakta en Gravonere
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
607
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 11:29:00 -
[272] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs. Sorry I misunderstood your response. I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable
If these rigs had an agility drawback, haulers don't really have an interesting choice to make. In terms of value: Cargo=EHP>>align time.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
Sgt Ocker
Last Bastion of Freedom
222
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 12:20:00 -
[273] - Quote
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs. Sorry I misunderstood your response. I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable If these rigs had an agility drawback, haulers don't really have an interesting choice to make. In terms of value: Cargo=EHP>>align time.
It isn't about interesting choices, it is about losing a massive amount of cargo capacity on a ship designed to carry cargo.
Where is the interesting choice about losing 1/3 or more of your cargo capacity?
Bulkhead is having its drawback changed from agility to cargo capacity - Another not so interesting choice for JF pilots to make.
My opinions are mine.
-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care.. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1566
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 21:40:00 -
[274] - Quote
meaningful choice =/= choice u like
and thats the point. thats what makes it meaningful and interesting
and 2x things about losing 1/3 of ur cargo
1) even with no skills u dnt lose 1/3
2) with skills u half ur penalty
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Sgt Ocker
Last Bastion of Freedom
224
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 01:40:00 -
[275] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:meaningful choice =/= choice u like
and thats the point. thats what makes it meaningful and interesting
and 2x things about losing 1/3 of ur cargo
1) even with no skills u dnt lose 1/3
2) with skills u half ur penalty
Current cargo capacity is being reduced with the introduction of rigging for Freighters.
You will have less cargo capacity to start with, fitting hull rigs and bulkhead further reduces cargo capacity.
Orca
No modules = 37,500 m3
Cargo Optimization ll X 2 + Cargo Optimization l X 1 + Expanded Cargohold ll = 100,951 m3
Hull HP rig with max skills = 5% cargo reduction X 3 = 15% reduction (without stacking penalty)
Bulkhead ll = 11% cargo space reduction.
So we have max skill cargo hold capacity of 37,500 m3 minus 26% = 28,000 m3 +- a bit.
Freighters will have base cargo reduced to = 100% of current capacity with cargo optimization rigs and modules fit.
Using Orca as the example, fit for max cargo, the fittings = roughly 3X base cargo
A max skill Rhea 367,900 m3. Reduce base cargo to = 100% of current using Cargo Optimization rigs and modules = roughly 122,750 m3 base max skill cargo hold.
Fit for Hull tanking, you have base cargo hold of 122,750 - 26% for fitting drawbacks, you end up with a Jump Freighter with a cargo hold of around 92k m3. Or just big enough to carry the fuel needed to move it about and a couple of packaged frigates and fittings..
My opinions are mine.
-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care.. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2216
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 02:06:00 -
[276] - Quote
This is going to kill my hull repping Vexor fit since it won't be cap stable without a cap booster - and I can't fit any cap boosters in my cargohold because of these stupid cargo reduction penalties to hull rigs and reinforced bulkheads.
/troll |
Captain Finklestein
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 03:21:00 -
[277] - Quote
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs. Sorry I misunderstood your response. I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable If these rigs had an agility drawback, haulers don't really have an interesting choice to make. In terms of value: Cargo=EHP>>align time.
Not when I'm web-warping my freighter to avoid being ganked by your alliance.
With a nomad set it may be a moot point, but without one losing significant agility will prevent insta-webwarping. |
Draconus Lofwyr
UK Corp
RAZOR Alliance
102
|
Posted - 2014.05.24 21:07:00 -
[278] - Quote
with the changes to the freighter/jf to now use lowslots instead of the proposed rig slots, are these still being released? if so, is there any chance to also introduce a capital hull repairer module? this would allow the rorqual the possibility of hull tanking.
|
Charlie Firpol
Noob Mercs
Monkeys with Guns.
206
|
Posted - 2014.05.26 11:36:00 -
[279] - Quote
These rigs and the change to bulkheads is still going to come right? It will make my hulltanked algos so much more awesome (even though that is barely possible) |
Thorado
Rim Collection RC
Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 19:28:00 -
[280] - Quote
Like the idea in principle
Not seen anything on the usefulness of the hull repair modules. Are these likely to be fixed so as to be useful/effective and how about making them low slot modules as in the case of armour reppers.
Similarly are there likely to be rigs affecting the amount and speed of the repair modules. |
|
|
MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
335
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 22:17:00 -
[281] - Quote
Are the hull rigs and blueprints seeded on Sisi? I can't seem to find them.
Edit: Found the blueprints. It seems the Carthum Conglomerate is the NPC seller. Still don't see the rigs themselves seeded though.
MDD |
Jayden Thomas
Collapsed Out
Shadow Cartel
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.30 23:53:00 -
[282] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote::
Let us know what you think!
-Fozzie
I like the idea of hull tanking. But with one DC2, you're looking at 60% resists across the board. For some ships, this may be a bit OP (caps, supers?) I really don't like the idea of hull rigs. Hull isn't a defensive system, it's... YOUR HULL.
I think there should be a penalty system in place for damage taken to the hull.
If my Thanatos is at 10% hull, it can do anything and everything it could do at 100% hull. This is cool and awesome, but way too.. for lack of a better word: forgiving. This is HULL damage. The damage is going straight into the hull of my ship and, yup those would be flames coming out the back.
If my thanny is at 10% hull, I would expect the warp drive to be inactive. Maybe the jump drive is inoperable? Maybe an engine fire is slowly burning the remaining hull away.
Maybe some ships become fragile at low armor and can't use weapon systems anymore. There needs to be a downside to using your ship's unshielded and unarmored hull as a defensive system. Just bouncing ideas off of you.
J |
Reppyk
The Black Shell
579
|
Posted - 2014.05.31 04:32:00 -
[283] - Quote
Jayden Thomas wrote:If my Thanatos is at 10% hull, it can do anything and everything it could do at 100% hull. Well, try to eject from it and tell us what happens... I hope you are at 11% hull.
I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK.
-áI AM A LOWSEC GANKER, HIGHSEC SCUM, NULLSEC BASTARD, WORMHOLE INVADER.
Welcome to, welcome to, welcome to my scramble. GÖÑ |
Cyrek Ohaya
Perkone
Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2014.06.01 11:12:00 -
[284] - Quote
Gallente is already too good, we don't need something like this. |
Etheoma
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
7
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 00:13:00 -
[285] - Quote
The Sinister wrote:Fozzie i would really like to see an improvement on the Hull Repers thoo cause they are not even to close to been effective.
When you say there not effective what exactly do you mean because if you means it would take days to rep up a Titian and it takes a little too long for BS's etc then yeah sure.
If you mean you want them to be used in pvp then no... Just no...
Structure is frame of your ship obviously your not going to be able to fix that quickly or energy efficiently, thats what armour plates and armour reppers are for.
Because plates are a lot less of a complex structure so easier to rep and there not the foundation of your ship the reason why structure is so weak is because if one part breaks there's a high likelihood that your ship will break in half.
I assume you were either joking or meant the first thing though. |
Gregor Parud
554
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 13:50:00 -
[286] - Quote
Troll Domi is go. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2246
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 15:35:00 -
[287] - Quote
FYI: The downsides of hull tanking:
1. Cannot active tank - hull reppers suck.
2. Cannot receive optimal remote reps - Remote hull reppers suck AND resists will never go above 60%.
3. To fix hull damage you either need to : a)spend inordinates amounts of time getting RR'd (hull reppers suck, remember?), or b)pay an expensive in-station bill. (Shields regenerate for free, armor can get rr'd pretty quickly). You will be heading to station and repping after every fight.
4. Harder to run cap boosters since cargo hull will be shrunk by quite a bit.
5. Loot? The dude in the shield tanked ship has more cargo than you.
If you're going for EHP*dps zerg tactics... you still won't beat out shield tanks on smaller ships - but you will gain a midslot.
You will beat out armor tanked ships, but the armor tanked ships will lend themselves to being RR'd much more easily.
|
Charlie Firpol
Noob Mercs
Monkeys with Guns.
214
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 11:48:00 -
[288] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:FYI: The downsides of hull tanking:
1. Cannot active tank - hull reppers suck.
2. Cannot receive optimal remote reps - Remote hull reppers suck AND resists will never go above 60%.
3. To fix hull damage you either need to : a)spend inordinates amounts of time getting RR'd (hull reppers suck, remember?), or b)pay an expensive in-station bill. (Shields regenerate for free, armor can get rr'd pretty quickly). You will be heading to station and repping after every fight.
4. Harder to run cap boosters since cargo hull will be shrunk by quite a bit.
5. Loot? The dude in the shield tanked ship has more cargo than you.
If you're going for EHP*dps zerg tactics... you still won't beat out shield tanks on smaller ships - but you will gain a midslot.
You will beat out armor tanked ships, but the armor tanked ships will lend themselves to being RR'd much more easily.
Ah, dont argue so much about the pros and contras of hulltanking, in the end it will stipp be subpar. But it wont be as bad anymore and it will still be a hell of a ride. |
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
158
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 02:38:00 -
[289] - Quote
Increasing Hull repper's speed would be a great idea. Not sure that it would really make hull tanking more viable, but it would make repairing your ship a bit cheaper when you get out in structure and fixing uncapped guns on a POS would be worthwhile then.
Its such a massive pain in the but to repair hull damage to POS modules since remote hull reppers blow so badly.
We've shot our own incapped guns and put up new ones since it was faster and almost cheaper since we could do something else to make back the isk value of the OH so expensive guns. Ratting in high sec or mining veldspar with a newbie frog would cover the cost in the time it takes to rep them back up.
Maybe a slow self repair to hull from internal nanites or whatever works for lore purposes
Hull rep boosts module for command ships maybe |
Death Awaits Eyedol
Taurus Quantum Technologies
Taurus Quantum Dynamics
2
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 11:39:00 -
[290] - Quote
Any idea when these will be coming out? |
|
|
Masao Kurata
Z List
55
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 14:58:00 -
[291] - Quote
Death Awaits Eyedol wrote:Any idea when these will be coming out?
Three weeks ago. |
Death Awaits Eyedol
Taurus Quantum Technologies
Taurus Quantum Dynamics
2
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 15:51:00 -
[292] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Death Awaits Eyedol wrote:Any idea when these will be coming out? Three weeks ago.
odd I can't find "Transverse Bulkheads" anywhere... |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3460
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 16:37:00 -
[293] - Quote
Death Awaits Eyedol wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:Death Awaits Eyedol wrote:Any idea when these will be coming out? Three weeks ago. odd I can't find "Transverse Bulkheads" anywhere...
Funny. Lots of other people are buying and selling them.
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/marketdisplay.php?typeid=33894®ionid=10000002
(bah. the forum's breaking the link. C&P to make it work)
Woo! CSM 9!
http://fuzzwork.enterprises/
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Death Awaits Eyedol
Taurus Quantum Technologies
Taurus Quantum Dynamics
2
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 16:45:00 -
[294] - Quote
bonus ty very much... just had to take of the "s" at the end @_@ bulkhead (singular) |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |