EVE Search - Bloggers #24, Vacation is over and more about rigs

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Bloggers #24, Vacation is over and more about rigs

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.10 23:32:00 - [61] Edited by: Bhaal on 10/08/2006 23:33:15 Originally by: Phoenix Jones Edited by: Phoenix Jones on 10/08/2006 22:58:39 I swore I saw something like this on the Features and Idea's Forum. Someone did create a thread about making ship implants as a method for customizing a ship. ANd I swore it was me.... lord if I can find the post though... Edit: AHAH I did find it!!! http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=357764 I do like the new name though.. rigs. It works. Sorry to burst your bubble, but I had a very similar idea last year, see my post on this page: Bhaal's Computer Core I can't seem to find the original thread that was several months b4 that one. I came up with the idea to get rid of insta's, but hey, Rigs are pretty damn close to my idea... In any event, I welcome this new content... And I'm sure someone thought of this modding idea even before me... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero
Kornelia Shedim Amarr Nightghosts Inc	Posted - 2006.08.10 23:36:00 - [62] Originally by: The Enslaver Err, one thing that gets me. Were rigs not originally supposed to be something that you got from ship hulks as loot? I personally think that was a much better idea... Not quite. With hulks you will be able to loot like normal, and also salvage. Salvaging requires a new skill and a special module. When you activate this module it will extract material from the hulk that can then be used in conjuction with a Rig BP to create a Rig. Rigs themselves cannot be looted or salvaged since they are destroyed when the ship is destroyed. :) All in all, I am really looking forward to seeing what Rigs will do for us and our ships. :) -------------------------- Kornelia Shedim Gringo Extrodinaire
Noriath	Posted - 2006.08.11 02:10:00 - [63] Originally by: Maya Rkell Anyway, as I've said before, I think this is just asking for a lot more pointless ganking and metagaming via rig fittings. Wow, amazingly enough I find myself agreeing with Maya on this one, I think only being able to make rigs from destroyed ships is going to affect this game adversely in the long run, takes the creation of valuable items out of the hands of industrialists and puts it in the hand of gankers. Question about rigs: Does not being able to remove a rig from a ship mean that you can't remove it without destroying it, or that you can't remove it at all?
Skalt	Posted - 2006.08.11 02:24:00 - [64] Personally, I'm not too fond of this "new battle doctrine." If anyone else watched the Alliance finals, they should recognize that what this game needs is more firepower, not more armor and repairing. Otherwise, we end up with long, slow tanking matches that go nowhere and really aren't all that exciting. Certainly tanking is more useful in very large encounters, but it's just so much cooler to fly in, blow up all kinds of @#$%, and then race out with huge flames spouting from your tail.
Logan Xerxes Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.11 03:30:00 - [65] Ahem A little slow on the draw CCP I expect a nice little collection of things in my 9-98OU hanger cough Caldari Uberness cough "Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion." -Sun Tzu
Logan Xerxes Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.11 03:32:00 - [66] Originally by: Skalt Personally, I'm not too fond of this "new battle doctrine." If anyone else watched the Alliance finals, they should recognize that what this game needs is more firepower, not more armor and repairing. Otherwise, we end up with long, slow tanking matches that go nowhere and really aren't all that exciting. Certainly tanking is more useful in very large encounters, but it's just so much cooler to fly in, blow up all kinds of @#$%, and then race out with huge flames spouting from your tail. have you ever been in a fleet fight? Anyone who has will tell you there's already enough firepower these days. "Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion." -Sun Tzu
Locke Ateid Minmatar Outrider Fleet Command	Posted - 2006.08.11 04:20:00 - [67] Just to give us Minmatar something to have all the over races scream NERF!!?!!! I think CCP should give all Minmatar ships 8 rig slots, a billion calibration, and everyone else just 3 rig slots. Finally making the Minmatar ships the most versatile and the best at something worth wild. Finally making all that duk tape and scrap metal we've been using for all these years actually useful.
xeom Obsidian Sins	Posted - 2006.08.11 06:00:00 - [68] Originally by: Noriath Originally by: Maya Rkell Anyway, as I've said before, I think this is just asking for a lot more pointless ganking and metagaming via rig fittings. Wow, amazingly enough I find myself agreeing with Maya on this one, I think only being able to make rigs from destroyed ships is going to affect this game adversely in the long run, takes the creation of valuable items out of the hands of industrialists and puts it in the hand of gankers. Question about rigs: Does not being able to remove a rig from a ship mean that you can't remove it without destroying it, or that you can't remove it at all? WOW SO YOU CAN MAKE MONEY WHILE PVPING INSANE! This isn't going to change much.Industrialist are gana start ganking people and putting down there barges in groves.All its providing now the people that pvp can put a little bit of coin in their pocket. CCP where are our t2 shield power relays? \| Join[..SIN]
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.08.11 08:11:00 - [69] Originally by: Gierling Also, Am I the only one that can forecast several hundred million isk costs on the agility and cargo bonus rigs due to frieghters. (Yeah theres gonna be one that gives 20% Agility for like 20% scan resolution or something narf like that and it will go on EVERY freighter, mark my words). Freighters have no slots, so what makes you think they'll be allowed any rigs? Originally by: Noriath I think only being able to make rigs from destroyed ships is going to affect this game adversely in the long run, takes the creation of valuable items out of the hands of industrialists and puts it in the hand of gankers. But the gankers won't be able to just roll up to the hulk and pick the components out of it. They're going to need the right salvaging skills and modules fitted. Lets put it in current-game-mechanic terms. If every ship destroyed spawned a small ark roid, how many gankers would start mining? How many would drop a few guns for Miner II's? Or would you get industrialists and gankers working together to make best use of the oppourtunity? While the gankers will be the initial source of generating the resources, they'll need a skilled industrialist to convert it into something useful. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Par'Gellen Gallente Low Grade Ore	Posted - 2006.08.11 12:12:00 - [70] Wow lots of people claiming this was their idea... That's ok though because we all know Al Gore invented the Internet.
Cycerin Strikebeam Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2006.08.11 12:32:00 - [71] I hope there will be rigs for the more special stuff like drone bay size ETC. ---
Noriath	Posted - 2006.08.11 12:45:00 - [72] Originally by: Matthew But the gankers won't be able to just roll up to the hulk and pick the components out of it. They're going to need the right salvaging skills and modules fitted. Lets put it in current-game-mechanic terms. If every ship destroyed spawned a small ark roid, how many gankers would start mining? How many would drop a few guns for Miner II's? Or would you get industrialists and gankers working together to make best use of the oppourtunity? While the gankers will be the initial source of generating the resources, they'll need a skilled industrialist to convert it into something useful. I still don't think that under a system like that creating rigs by acctually flying into an unpredictable and dangerous PvP zone will produce the cheaper merchendise then simply blowing up insured ships yourself, which I consider a stupid mechanic. Need a bunch of tech 2 rig parts? Nuke some Logistics cruisers, they are only 20-30 mils now... shrug
Andargor theWise Disbelievers of Fate	Posted - 2006.08.11 14:01:00 - [73] Will all ships have the same number of rig slots, but variable Calibration, or will both vary? Give resistance ones please. Originally by: Par'Gellen Wow lots of people claiming this was their idea... That's ok though because we all know Al Gore invented the Internet. You mean you've never noticed that most threads in General are about "I'm teh kewl"? Navel gazing is the national sport here. -
MysticNZ Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.11 17:44:00 - [74] Seems the weather is much like New Zealands at the moment. -=====-
Vanlade Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2006.08.11 20:01:00 - [75] Originally by: Skalt Personally, I'm not too fond of this "new battle doctrine." If anyone else watched the Alliance finals, they should recognize that what this game needs is more firepower, not more armor and repairing. Otherwise, we end up with long, slow tanking matches that go nowhere and really aren't all that exciting. Certainly tanking is more useful in very large encounters, but it's just so much cooler to fly in, blow up all kinds of @#$%, and then race out with huge flames spouting from your tail. Get a clue, the alliance tournament was in no way representing what real PvP is like. - Vanlade
Lago Morph BIG R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.11 23:31:00 - [76] I just hope tractor beams will continue to work on these new wrecks. It'd be a shame to lose these still young marvels of looting just because there are big hulks of wreckage instead of pristine widdle cargo cans.
Nicoli Voldkif	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:46:00 - [77] Originally by: Kldraina Personally, I'd prefer it if T2 ships had less calibration to represent how much they have already been altered and optimized. Also, I prefer to not have the gap between T1 and T2 grow any more than necessary. Yeah if CCP gives more Calibration and/or slots to T2 ships its going to really screw the game balance up. I'd rather not see the HAC or CS become the solo pwnmobile in the game.
Luigi Thirty Caldari FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.08.12 05:08:00 - [78] I need to train up Science to V I guess so I don't get left behind when all this Invention stuff happens.
Pottsey Gallente Dissonance Corp Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.12 12:00:00 - [79] ôRigs will have a bonus effect, but also a detrimental effect (for instance, boosting shield recharge rate, but reducing max speed).ö Woohooo Passive shield tanking love. ThatÆs a great idea even with the downside like less speed. Perhaps I can even break my old shield recharge record of 37 seconds. Passive shield tanking guide, click here.
Phoenix Jones	Posted - 2006.08.12 12:54:00 - [80] Well I'm claiming that CCP does read the Suggestion Forum. Is this my idea.. far from it. I'm just happy CCP is developing it. Every item and function of this game can be claimed by just about anybody here. It doesn't mean they should get credit for it just for thinking it up (well that does depend but in this case, no). ---------------The Low Sec Issue------------- Gatecamps that kill all who pass with no remorse and in many cases, no possible way of retaliation, is not PVP.
Rigsta Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2006.08.12 20:42:00 - [81] Originally by: Phoenix Jones Well I'm claiming that CCP does read the Suggestion Forum. Is this my idea.. far from it. I'm just happy CCP is developing it. Every item and function of this game can be claimed by just about anybody here. It doesn't mean they should get credit for it just for thinking it up (well that does depend but in this case, no). I invented EVE. ----------------------------------------------- CRY HAVOC! And let slip the combat drones! To meander aimlessly towards your target... Perhaps stopping for a picnic along the way... And then turn
Wesley Harding	Posted - 2006.08.12 21:24:00 - [82] You know some penalities are way harsher on some ships then on others. Like a speed bonus that hurts shields doesn't mean crap to an armor tanker, but means alot to a shield tanker. Penalities just make junk content. I think it'd be best to make stuff just a little under or overpowered then totally useless 90% of the time.
Bhaal Minmatar M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.12 21:56:00 - [83] Originally by: Phoenix Jones Well I'm claiming that CCP does read the Suggestion Forum. Is this my idea.. far from it. I'm just happy CCP is developing it. Every item and function of this game can be claimed by just about anybody here. It doesn't mean they should get credit for it just for thinking it up (well that does depend but in this case, no). I'm not saying CCP used my idea. Just pointed out to you that you were not the only one to think of this type of thing, as I did as well last year. I'm sure many others had similar modding ideas as well... No one can claim credit except the DEV's at CCP. ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE My Hero
Shittake RONA Deepspace CORE.	Posted - 2006.08.13 09:32:00 - [84] Hmm . . rigs . . How about a rig which allows you to attach Mod Strip Miner 2s to your Carrier? And then another rig which gives you a bonus on mining laser yield? And of course that third rig which allows you to put those mining forman mods in your mid/low slots instead of the highs? :) I think I may have just made a few of you mad by even suggesting it - sorry :(
Wesley Harding	Posted - 2006.08.13 11:43:00 - [85] Originally by: ****take Hmm . . rigs . . How about a rig which allows you to attach Mod Strip Miner 2s to your Carrier? And then another rig which gives you a bonus on mining laser yield? And of course that third rig which allows you to put those mining forman mods in your mid/low slots instead of the highs? :) I think I may have just made a few of you mad by even suggesting it - sorry :( That sounds pretty cool. Though maybe rigs could be made so that they give a ship bonus that's smaller then typical ones while using certain modules? Like grant 2.5% RoF boost to launchers on ships that don't ordinarily have bonuses to missles? And you make it so that rig bonuses don't stack with existing ship bonuses?
Alekto Erinys Platinum Investments	Posted - 2006.08.14 00:57:00 - [86] Originally by: ****take Hmm . . rigs . . How about a rig which allows you to attach Mod Strip Miner 2s to your Carrier? And then another rig which gives you a bonus on mining laser yield? And of course that third rig which allows you to put those mining forman mods in your mid/low slots instead of the highs? :) I think I may have just made a few of you mad by even suggesting it - sorry :( I lol'ed, but wouldn't it be funny if there were a rig which granted an extra turret or missile slot? I know that these are gonna come heavily pre-nerfed, but I think that more kinds of rigs we have, the more interesting gameplay will become. They should just toss a bunch of different kinds in there and remove the ability to manufacture the ones that are really imbalanced once it becomes clear which those are. I'm mean, they can't be removed from your ship, right? They'd get phased out through ship destruction pretty quick.

Oveur	Posted - 2006.08.14 09:25:00 - [87] Since Clover is on his way back from Gen Con, I figured I'd throw in a couple of thoughts. Dev blogs are intentionally vague about the specifics about features, simply because we haven't decided on the details yet, but I can tell you what's been passing through my (and others) mind lately. Gap between Tech 1 and Tech 2 going to increase with Rigs? Well, we've been having the same discussions internally for some time and this is something we want to prevent. Rigs themselves can increase it, and we're aware that they can, but we also have the power to do the exact opposite. As some bright people have pointed out, the solution could simply be to have more Rig slots on Tech 1 than Tech 2, while the "calibration" ability of Tech 2 is higher. It's also the individual balancing of the Rigs themselves which can counter this, especially the difference between the tech levels, the fact that Tech 2 Rigs are "Inventable" countering the prices, making it more interesting to utilize Tech 2 Rigs on Tech 1 ships to create more flavor. Anyways, just some thoughts on the gap matter and Rigs. I'd also like to point out that the ingredients from Rigs come from both NPC ships and Player ships. Elite NPCs and Tech 2 ships drop Tech 2 ingredients and the amount of NPCs killed vs. Player ships killed should ensure that the main flow of ingredients should come from NPCs. Blowing up your ships to get ingredients, well, I can see where the thought comes from but we also thought about that. You are not going to get Rig ingredients from salvaging a single ship that makes it worth it to blow it up. Oh, this was also something which some people got wrong. Salvaging gives you the ingredients to build Rigs, not the actual Rigs. Rigs can' be removed, but are destroyed by it. Same happens when you repackage. You are "permanently" rigging your ship towards a style you prefer to play, except you can remove the Rig if you decide to use something else. I realize this may sound strange, but think of it like this. It's going to be hard to peel the sticker of I think that's about it ... oh wait, on Invention, it applies to all Tech 2, ships and the like. However, they are inefficient blueprint copies, wou will always be able to get better efficiency with originals, that's where the edge lies. How easy/hard/impossible it will be to "invent" something, that's still being messed with, but easy it shouldn't be. You'll get to try it out when we open up Kali for public testing, it's still only in closed testing, if you'd like to get in there, apply for ISD Senior Producer EVE Online

Seleene Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.08.14 12:03:00 - [88] Edited by: Seleene on 14/08/2006 12:04:30 I absolutely love that this will not be as easy as people assumed. I admit that my other primary concern was the ability to "rig" your ship based upon a particular situation. Nice to hear that once you make a choice that you have to stick to it! Originally by: Oveur I realize this may sound strange, but think of it like this. It's going to be hard to peel the sticker of The fact that you managed to pimp Blinky and that it's actually a very accurate depiction of a planned feature earns you five out of five evil faces. EDIT - that is still my favorite WDA ever. - Latest MC Movie - Nation Building
Sorela Gallente	Posted - 2006.08.14 19:34:00 - [89] Originally by: Oveur I think that's about it ... oh wait, on Invention, it applies to all Tech 2, ships and the like. However, they are inefficient blueprint copies, wou will always be able to get better efficiency with originals, that's where the edge lies. Originally by: Soniclover To get a blueprint for tech II Rig you need to invent it. ItÆs the only way to get your hands on them. I'm a little confused by this. Soni is implying tech 2 BPO's for rigs won't even exist right? Just tech 2 "invented" bpc's? Yet your statement says you get better efficency with bpo's. Is invention a new thing that applies to other T2 stuff as well maybe? Is this the new name for reverse engineering?
Darkenral	Posted - 2006.08.15 02:43:00 - [90] I think giving T1 ships a bigger boost vs T2 ships via rigs would be awesome for the game in general. $.02 Dark

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.