EVE Search - Ammo Bays for combat ships

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Ammo Bays for combat ships

» 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)
seppesai Tactically Applied Manufacturing 0	Posted - 2014.11.24 00:57:55 - [1] - Quote After spending years focusing on the industrial side of the game my wife and i decided to give missions a go. i never would have thought about this if she wasnt constantly running out of ammo or not able to loot because she had too much ammo. but since indy pilots have gotten all kinds of love lately i was thinking it would be nice to add a ammo bay that was separate from the cargo bay so that people could carry enough ammo to get things done and still be able to completely loot a mission.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 470	Posted - 2014.11.24 01:06:53 - [2] - Quote Since the both of you are industrialists, may I point you to the ORE Industrial skillbook which unlock the Noctis ship? This is the boat you were looking for. signature
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 405	Posted - 2014.11.24 01:15:43 - [3] - Quote I was actually thinking about this earlier today. I think a charge bay like this would be a great addition to the game, especially to ships like strategic cruisers that need to carry quite a lot of subsystems and a mobile depot in their cargo bay.
Sera Kor-Azor Viziam Amarr Empire 16	Posted - 2014.11.24 01:22:09 - [4] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Since the both of you are industrialists, may I point you to the ORE Industrial skillbook which unlock the Noctis ship? This is the boat you were looking for. Also, fly Amarr. Use lasers. No ammo. Better damage. I think the ammo bay for combat ships is a good idea. It makes sense. The Minmatar Hoarder is a hauler with an ammo bay, even though it isn't a combat ship. Why shouldn't combat ships have them as well?
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1706	Posted - 2014.11.24 01:25:43 - [5] - Quote Combat ships limited cargo space is a balance thing, as it restricts the combat life of certain types of tanks that use cap boosters for example, meaning that a cap booster is not always the superior choice of tank option. If Combat ships were to get an ammo bay, this would have to cut into their general cargo bay by the same amount in order to not unbalance things. (Cap Boosters coming under Ammo). I'd much rather being able to split any cargo bay into 2 partitions, and then I can loot into one, while I keep my ammo and paste and the like in the other, so I can select all and move to hanger easily.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 656	Posted - 2014.11.24 01:45:17 - [6] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Combat ships limited cargo space is a balance thing, as it restricts the combat life of certain types of tanks that use cap boosters for example, meaning that a cap booster is not always the superior choice of tank option. If Combat ships were to get an ammo bay, this would have to cut into their general cargo bay by the same amount in order to not unbalance things. (Cap Boosters coming under Ammo). I'd much rather being able to split any cargo bay into 2 partitions, and then I can loot into one, while I keep my ammo and paste and the like in the other, so I can select all and move to hanger easily. Exactly this. If CCP added on space for a ammo bay without reducing main cargo bay, it's a buff to everyone who uses large amounts of ammo/cap boosters. If CCP adds on space while reducing the cargobay to compensate, it nerfs all ships that DONT use tons of charges, especially ships that may swap out modules frequently like scanners, carry extra drones + depots (most ships should do this is you have spare space), or fill their cargo with things like LO for cyno fuel, or bombers stuffing spare cargohold with LO and topes for black ops. In general it reduces the tactical loadouts that you can bring along, by taking part of the ships cargohold and saying "ammo only here". -1
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 629	Posted - 2014.11.24 01:53:08 - [7] - Quote Not supported. Balancing your cargo hold is part of the game. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Sera Kor-Azor Viziam Amarr Empire 17	Posted - 2014.11.24 02:08:10 - [8] - Quote Has anyone tried using the new T2 Deep Space Transport with the docking bay for five ships? I figure this would be the perfect ship to take along for looting missions. Shoot the rats in a PVE ship. Warp to transport. Take out Noctis. Salvage. Warp to transport. Drop loot. If a mission ganker warps in, switch your PVE ship for a PVP ship. There is room for five fitted ships inside, which means a PVP and PVE ship for two people, as well as one industrial (i,e. Noctis). These ships can also be refit inside the bay. They don't take up cargo space either. Orcas would work well for this too. Apparently Orcas are tanky enough to solo some Level 4 missions. There are deployables you can use now as well. Before there were deployables, people use to anchor Giant secure containers for storing ammo and loot. However, lasers don't use ammo. The tech 1 crystals last forever. Whenever I hear someone complaining about carrying ammunition in their cargo, I tell them to cross-train into Amarr ships. Even from a lore perspective, a Minmatar loyalist would likely know how to fly Amarr ships if (s)he 'stole it' from the Amarrian slave owner.
Rosira Warframe Industry And Salvage Fortis Et Certus 3	Posted - 2014.11.24 02:12:03 - [9] - Quote As mentioned above what you want is a Noctis. Outside if that pick your flavor of Destroyers and use them in the same capacity. Workout the comftable number of missions you can do in x time to also allow for salvage. Even if you fill your cargo with ammo there should be enough left after combat to pick up mission critical items.
Barbara Nichole Cryogenic Consultancy 655	Posted - 2014.11.24 03:33:24 - [10] - Quote wonderful, a new way to nerf combat ships... Seriously do you remember the trouble we suddenly had with some ships after they added fuel bay.. with not being able to hold enough fuel for a round trip? just let it draw from a large cargo bay.. because it is not going to turn out well if it gets divided off. -á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á- [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 1994	Posted - 2014.11.24 12:48:40 - [11] - Quote you realise this is would mean cargo capacity for all combat ships would be reduced right? Use two ships, have a specialised mission runner, run 2-4 missions depending on how fast you can run them. make book marks for each room. come back to those bookmarks in a specialised salvage and looter ...profit. 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"
Ceawlin Cobon-Han Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 36	Posted - 2014.11.24 19:45:21 - [12] - Quote Drones, my son! DRONES!! They have already their own hold.
FireFrenzy Satan's Unicorns 86	Posted - 2014.11.24 20:06:04 - [13] - Quote that or don't loot:) That's how i run my, jump clone standing generator, eh, missions
Lugh Crow-Slave 229	Posted - 2014.11.24 20:30:29 - [14] - Quote all this would do is limit you since cargo sized is balanced they would just remove space from your regular bay and make it so only charges could be placed there not give you more space
Ralph King-Griffin Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 7081	Posted - 2014.11.24 20:36:09 - [15] - Quote Just get a marauder "I'm also quite confident that you are laughing and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers." =]I[=
Iain Cariaba 644	Posted - 2014.11.24 20:39:43 - [16] - Quote seppesai wrote: After spending years focusing on the industrial side of the game my wife and i decided to give missions a go. i never would have thought about this if she wasnt constantly running out of ammo or not able to loot because she had too much ammo. but since indy pilots have gotten all kinds of love lately i was thinking it would be nice to add a ammo bay that was separate from the cargo bay so that people could carry enough ammo to get things done and still be able to completely loot a mission. Please, you run missions. It's not like you can't simply look at the other and say, "oops, I need to get more ammo, way here for a minute while I go get more," then have to jump [I]maybe]/I] one system over and reload. Note, I ran missions for years with Caldari boats, and not once did I ever have an issue of not enough ammo or enough hold space for loot. Running the mission and looting the mission are two separate activities. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 216	Posted - 2014.11.24 22:00:33 - [17] - Quote You could also try out with one of you bringing a Hoarder (Minmatar industrial) precisely because of its Ammo Bay. One of you shoots while carrying little ammo and loots as much as possible; the other one brings the ammo and loots too. But as stated before, a Noctis would help you too, because of tractor beam range/speed bonuses and salvager bonus.
Bitterbeeley Gutless Runaways 0	Posted - 2015.02.05 19:46:51 - [18] - Quote I think the best idea is to enable partitions within your cargo hold... no ajustments of current sizes just the ability to separate as I think this would save a lot of time when emptying cargo at station whilst maintaining the fittings, ammo and alike that you want to keep onboard
Lugh Crow-Slave 668	Posted - 2015.02.05 20:20:34 - [19] - Quote Bitterbeeley wrote: I think the best idea is to enable partitions within your cargo hold... no ajustments of current sizes just the ability to separate as I think this would save a lot of time when emptying cargo at station whilst maintaining the fittings, ammo and alike that you want to keep onboard cargo containers Fuel block colors
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 560	Posted - 2015.02.05 22:27:29 - [20] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: I was actually thinking about this earlier today. I think a charge bay like this would be a great addition to the game, especially to ships like strategic cruisers that need to carry quite a lot of subsystems and a mobile depot in their cargo bay. That I get. So why not change the mobile depot so that you can put your subsystem and modules in the depot and carry that depot with you but only have access to the stuff inside it when you online it in space? You would have to wait a minute before it is anchored in space to use the fitting service so why not restrict the same for the access to the cargohold of the depot until it is online? Ohh okay while writing I can see how that can become problematic, so in addition to the cargohold access, you can only scoop reinforced depots that are empty or they ( the reinforced depots) would drop a can with your stuff inside. signature
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 224	Posted - 2015.02.05 23:00:24 - [21] - Quote seppesai wrote: i was thinking it would be nice to add a ammo bay that was separate from the cargo bay so that people could carry enough ammo to get things done and still be able to completely loot a mission. Just fly Amarr? Problem solved...
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.05 23:43:35 - [22] - Quote I like this idea. It makes perfect sense as long as it's balanced. The way to go is this and an ammo size rebalance. Increase size from every every ammo available so it's not worth to carry it on a small cargo bay and reduce the cargo space slightly to compensate for the new available space. As a bonus we may get rockets with a feasible size. +1 for specialized cargo compartments I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Grezh Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 30	Posted - 2015.02.06 00:10:50 - [23] - Quote Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: Drones, my son! DRONES!! They have already their own hold. Exactly my thought, if ccp could add a drone bay then they could also add an ammo bay where your modules can only load from the ammo bay. Adding a secondary bay would also add greater ease of balance for ships since secondary bays don't get increased with expanders (would be possible to make a ship not be able to cyno without giving it a cripplingly small cargohold).
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 992	Posted - 2015.02.06 00:26:57 - [24] - Quote Grezh wrote: Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: Drones, my son! DRONES!! They have already their own hold. Exactly my thought, if ccp could add a drone bay then they could also add an ammo bay where your modules can only load from the ammo bay. Adding a secondary bay would also add greater ease of balance for ships since secondary bays don't get increased with expanders (would be possible to make a ship not be able to cyno without giving it a cripplingly small cargohold). Except that drone bay needs to be separate to prevent spawning a seemingly infinite spew of drones from ships with large cargobays. Split bays into regular and ammo bays though removes player choice about what they want to bring. Sometimes I may bring an entire cargo hold of ammo. Sometimes I may bring no ammo at all, but fill my entire cargo with drones, depots, paste, drugs, replacement modules, liquid ozone, etc. So since CCP wont be magically adding new ammo bays without reducing the size of the old bays at least somewhat, I am 100% completely and totally opposed to this idea.
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 02:01:25 - [25] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Grezh wrote: Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: Drones, my son! DRONES!! They have already their own hold. Exactly my thought, if ccp could add a drone bay then they could also add an ammo bay where your modules can only load from the ammo bay. Adding a secondary bay would also add greater ease of balance for ships since secondary bays don't get increased with expanders (would be possible to make a ship not be able to cyno without giving it a cripplingly small cargohold). Except that drone bay needs to be separate to prevent spawning a seemingly infinite spew of drones from ships with large cargobays. Split bays into regular and ammo bays though removes player choice about what they want to bring. Sometimes I may bring an entire cargo hold of ammo. Sometimes I may bring no ammo at all, but fill my entire cargo with drones, depots, paste, drugs, replacement modules, liquid ozone, etc. So since CCP wont be magically adding new ammo bays without reducing the size of the old bays at least somewhat, I am 100% completely and totally opposed to this idea. I honestly don't think anyone ever flies a combat ship without ammo intentionally. Unless ofc, it's a drone boat. It does not make sense to deprive a combat ship from ammo in favor of anything else. On the other hand, if someday we get an exclusive bay for ammo, nothing would stop you from putting extra ammo on the cargo bay instead of other cargo. I'm all up for flexibility, but ships must be suited to fulfill their roles before anything else. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 122	Posted - 2015.02.06 02:36:09 - [26] - Quote Sera Kor-Azor wrote: Also, fly Amarr. Use lasers. No ammo. Better damage. Not always true, lasers are better for some npc and worse for others. The best overall mission ships are the missile or drones ships with the ability to tailor you dmage type to the specific NPC. But his is not always about what is best it is about what you enjoy flying so if you like laser boats please fly them. Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: Drones, my son! DRONES!! They have already their own hold. True and drones are an excellent option for missions. The Rattlesnale and both Domis are excellent missions ships. FireFrenzy wrote: that or don't loot:) That's how i run my, jump clone standing generator, eh, missions An excellent idea if you are into missions for standings. However if you are into them for fun or ISK then looting and salvage can be an excellent part of running missions. I always found this to be the best option for missions. One fly a combat ship, pull the missions, kill them and book mark the rooms. The other can then follow the book marks and salvage/loot out the remains using a Noctis once the missions are turned in. To break boredom switch roles every few missions. Another option would be to both fly the mission and then both switch to salvage/loot ships. I am on the fence with your idea for ammo bays. If the cargo holds could be set up so that weapons cannot draw from them, and you cannot transfer items from cargo to ammo hold then I cannot see how this would break the balance of any of the ships.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 993	Posted - 2015.02.06 02:38:56 - [27] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Anhenka wrote: Grezh wrote: Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: Drones, my son! DRONES!! They have already their own hold. Exactly my thought, if ccp could add a drone bay then they could also add an ammo bay where your modules can only load from the ammo bay. Adding a secondary bay would also add greater ease of balance for ships since secondary bays don't get increased with expanders (would be possible to make a ship not be able to cyno without giving it a cripplingly small cargohold). Except that drone bay needs to be separate to prevent spawning a seemingly infinite spew of drones from ships with large cargobays. Split bays into regular and ammo bays though removes player choice about what they want to bring. Sometimes I may bring an entire cargo hold of ammo. Sometimes I may bring no ammo at all, but fill my entire cargo with drones, depots, paste, drugs, replacement modules, liquid ozone, etc. So since CCP wont be magically adding new ammo bays without reducing the size of the old bays at least somewhat, I am 100% completely and totally opposed to this idea. I honestly don't think anyone ever flies a combat ship without ammo intentionally. Unless ofc, it's a drone boat. It does not make sense to deprive a combat ship from ammo in favor of anything else. On the other hand, if someday we get an exclusive bay for ammo, nothing would stop you from putting extra ammo on the cargo bay instead of other cargo. I'm all up for flexibility, but ships must be suited to fulfill their roles before anything else. You mean besides all logi ships, and all ships that can be fit for multiple purposes that may or may not use ammo such as ECM Griffin/Rook/Falcon/Tengu/Scorpion, all recons which frequently fill their highs with smarties/cloaks/neuts but sometimes fit guns/launchers, all the drone boats which have both gun slots and drones but often don't fit guns, all the t2 scanning frigates which have gun slots and sometimes use them on hunting fits, Astero and Stratios which like having an open cargo for exploration loot, neuting ships like the Curse, Pilgrim, Geddon, Bhaalgorn, all HIC's, and all ewar ships with turret/missile slots? So like half the *** ships in the game that may or may not have a need for ammo depending on their fitting? Any particular reason all of these ships deserve to lose a portion of their cargobay to be reserved for ammo that they may or may not actually need depending on fit? That they would rather have for other uses? There's no compelling reason to add in a ammo only bay unless you want it because you think the overall available volume for fitting stuff will increase (not a good reason), and plenty of downsides to removing part of the primary bay to accommodate the new ammo bay, especially in regards to the vast number of ships that might not need ammo depending on their fits.
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 11:36:48 - [28] - Quote Anhenka wrote: You mean besides all logi ships, and all ships that can be fit for multiple purposes that may or may not use ammo such as ECM Griffin/Rook/Falcon/Tengu/Scorpion, all recons which frequently fill their highs with smarties/cloaks/neuts but sometimes fit guns/launchers, all the drone boats which have both gun slots and drones but often don't fit guns, all the t2 scanning frigates which have gun slots and sometimes use them on hunting fits, Astero and Stratios which like having an open cargo for exploration loot, neuting ships like the Curse, Pilgrim, Geddon, Bhaalgorn, all HIC's, and all ewar ships with turret/missile slots? So like half the *** ships in the game that may or may not have a need for ammo depending on their fitting? Any particular reason all of these ships deserve to lose a portion of their cargobay to be reserved for ammo that they may or may not actually need depending on fit? That they would rather have for other uses? There's no compelling reason to add in a ammo only bay unless you want it because you think the overall available volume for fitting stuff will increase (not a good reason), and plenty of downsides to removing part of the primary bay to accommodate the new ammo bay, especially in regards to the vast number of ships that might not need ammo depending on their fits. Ships will not lose a significant part of their cargo. They will gain a new dedicated ammo hold. Ships with support roles uses less ammo unless they're solo, therefore they may have a smaller ammo hold, and a smaller or no cargohold reduction at all to compensate. Drone boats too, since their primary weapon system will not be compromised. The same goes for covert ops frigates. The Astero and Stratios are drone boats too, and their other weapon system is lasers, so no relevant cargo change is needed. The major change would be for dedicated combat ships that would have the chunk of their cargo that used to carry ammo removed in favor of a dedicated ammo bay. The reason for that is a better organization of assets, the available volume for other things should not change significantly. None of the arguments presented in this thread is as practical as a dedicated ammo bay. The last thing you need during a combat situation is a clumsy inventory management. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Debora Tsung Die Woge des Wahnsinns Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere 1472	Posted - 2015.02.06 11:50:36 - [29] - Quote Ammo bays for combat ships seems like a nice idea. If the normal cargo space gets reduced at the same time, there'll be no more Battleships being used as glorified super tanked haulers. Stupidity should be a bannable offense. Fighting back is more fun than not. Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Zepheros Naeonis TinklePee 16	Posted - 2015.02.06 15:34:37 - [30] - Quote Sera Kor-Azor wrote: Has anyone tried using the new T2 Deep Space Transport with the docking bay for five ships? I figure this would be the perfect ship to take along for looting missions. Shoot the rats in a PVE ship. Warp to transport. Take out Noctis. Salvage. Warp to transport. Drop loot. If a mission ganker warps in, switch your PVE ship for a PVP ship. There is room for five fitted ships inside, which means a PVP and PVE ship for two people, as well as one industrial (i,e. Noctis). These ships can also be refit inside the bay. They don't take up cargo space either. You must be confusing the DST for something else, because it can not do what you are describing. Not even close.
Phaade Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF 306	Posted - 2015.02.06 15:47:27 - [31] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Combat ships limited cargo space is a balance thing, as it restricts the combat life of certain types of tanks that use cap boosters for example, meaning that a cap booster is not always the superior choice of tank option. If Combat ships were to get an ammo bay, this would have to cut into their general cargo bay by the same amount in order to not unbalance things. (Cap Boosters coming under Ammo). I'd much rather being able to split any cargo bay into 2 partitions, and then I can loot into one, while I keep my ammo and paste and the like in the other, so I can select all and move to hanger easily. Good point, but ammo is not something you take tons of in a combat ship. It might eat up about 1/10th of your bay, unless you're doing some long range operation or structure bashing.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 848	Posted - 2015.02.06 16:27:54 - [32] - Quote So just a little eve history lesson. Many expansions ago, this ammo in the cargo hold problem was brought up often. CCP addressed the problem by making ammo 10X smaller. Yeah that's right, ammo used to be 10 times the size is it now. Whatever ammo problem you may be experiencing very small. I'm not a big fan of RL analogies, but here's one. The current day attack submarine. A good amount of it's internal space is devoted the the storage, handling, aiming and shooting of primary weapon. Aircraft carriers - it's a big floating hangar with a big honking plane launch and retrieval area. Most current Navy vessels (ships you live in while on a mission) don't have a lot left after you take away their propulsion and shooty shooty. Cargo space isn't really a design priority. How ships are built: Determine primary function (shoot hybrid ammo at stuff). Construct primary weapon system. Construct primary support systems around that. Add secondary support stuff (maybe a drone bay?). Add a propulsion system to get it to where it needs to be at the desired speed and what not. Add a place for the crew to eat sleep and work (no consideration for a tennis court). Add the minimum ammount of storage space for said ship to complete it's mission. It's clear you want an ammo bay to free up some cargo space. I don't see you asking for the associated reductions in speed, agility, and hull integrity (hull HP) that would naturally go with said change. I really don't have an opinion one way or the other, just a bit of history (I'm fairly confident on the 10x reduction, but couldn't find the ancient patch notes) and some thoughts on the costs of your request.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 997	Posted - 2015.02.06 16:34:17 - [33] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: So just a little eve history lesson. Many expansions ago, this ammo in the cargo hold problem was brought up often. CCP addressed the problem by making ammo 10X smaller. Yeah that's right, ammo used to be 10 times the size is it now. Whatever ammo problem you may be experiencing very small. I'm not a big fan of RL analogies, but here's one. The current day attack submarine. A good amount of it's internal space is devoted the the storage, handling, aiming and shooting of primary weapon. Aircraft carriers - it's a big floating hangar with a big honking plane launch and retrieval area. Most current Navy vessels (ships you live in while on a mission) don't have a lot left after you take away their propulsion and shooty shooty. Cargo space isn't really a design priority. How ships are built: Determine primary function (shoot hybrid ammo at stuff). Construct primary weapon system. Construct primary support systems around that. Add secondary support stuff (maybe a drone bay?). Add a propulsion system to get it to where it needs to be at the desired speed and what not. Add a place for the crew to eat sleep and work (no consideration for a tennis court). Add the minimum ammount of storage space for said ship to complete it's mission. It's clear you want an ammo bay to free up some cargo space. I don't see you asking for the associated reductions in speed, agility, and hull integrity (hull HP) that would naturally go with said change. I really don't have an opinion one way or the other, just a bit of history (I'm fairly confident on the 10x reduction, but couldn't find the ancient patch notes) and some thoughts on the costs of your request. Shhh.... don't spoil their dream that CCP will add an entirely new ammo bay without taking anything away. That there will be no reduction in main cargo bay or stats to compensate. For CCP giveth, but CCP does not taketh away. Right?
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 16:40:19 - [34] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: So just a little eve history lesson. Many expansions ago, this ammo in the cargo hold problem was brought up often. CCP addressed the problem by making ammo 10X smaller. Yeah that's right, ammo used to be 10 times the size is it now. Whatever ammo problem you may be experiencing very small. I'm not a big fan of RL analogies, but here's one. The current day attack submarine. A good amount of it's internal space is devoted the the storage, handling, aiming and shooting of primary weapon. Aircraft carriers - it's a big floating hangar with a big honking plane launch and retrieval area. Most current Navy vessels (ships you live in while on a mission) don't have a lot left after you take away their propulsion and shooty shooty. Cargo space isn't really a design priority. How ships are built: Determine primary function (shoot hybrid ammo at stuff). Construct primary weapon system. Construct primary support systems around that. Add secondary support stuff (maybe a drone bay?). Add a propulsion system to get it to where it needs to be at the desired speed and what not. Add a place for the crew to eat sleep and work (no consideration for a tennis court). Add the minimum ammount of storage space for said ship to complete it's mission. It's clear you want an ammo bay to free up some cargo space. I don't see you asking for the associated reductions in speed, agility, and hull integrity (hull HP) that would naturally go with said change. I really don't have an opinion one way or the other, just a bit of history (I'm fairly confident on the 10x reduction, but couldn't find the ancient patch notes) and some thoughts on the costs of your request. This change was made before specialized bays. Maybe if back then devs had the option to crank into every ship an specilized ammo bay, they'd prefer it to reduce ammo to ridiculous sizes. A single rocket has half a cm btw. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 16:46:25 - [35] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Shhh.... don't spoil their dream that CCP will add an entirely new ammo bay without taking anything away. That there will be no reduction in main cargo bay or stats to compensate. For CCP giveth, but CCP does not taketh away. Right? Are you the same guy I was arguing with 2 posts ago? There MUST be a cargo hold reduction to ships who get a big ammo hold. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 997	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:12:54 - [36] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Anhenka wrote: Shhh.... don't spoil their dream that CCP will add an entirely new ammo bay without taking anything away. That there will be no reduction in main cargo bay or stats to compensate. For CCP giveth, but CCP does not taketh away. Right? Are you the same guy I was discussing with 7 posts ago? There MUST be a cargo hold reduction to ships who get a big ammo hold. In which case we are back to my position that if it's a give and take for cargo amounts, that a dedicated ammo bay is a direct nerf to people abilities to choose what they want to bring with them. I also completely fail to see why a secondary bay that I need to click over to in order to check my ammo levels is a usability improvement or makes it easier for me to see what ammo I have at a glance as compared to it being in my normal cargo bay. Opening up my cargo allows me to instantly check my ammo, boosters, paste, drugs, and all my other junk at the same time. Why would I want to have to open up my cargo and looks at everything but ammo, then go and open up my ammo bay to check my ammo? Sure I could ignore the ammo bay and stuff everything in the main cargo so I don't have to take extra time clicking around midfight, but now I would have a smaller overall bay if I don't use it. Unless the change increases the total amount of cargo space, I can see absolutely no use for a dedicated bay, and several downsides. I still don't actually see any gameplay improvements mentioned as a reason here. There's all sorts of arguing over how it should be implemented, but there's a decided lack of WHY it should be implemented being talked about. The OP was some mission runner who was complaining about his inability to manage his own ammo in his cargo due to looting too much or not bringing enough ammo, but never actually proposed any why reasons. Neither of his problems would be solved with an ammo bay. Bads will still not remember to bring enough ammo. Bads will still loot all sorts of low value junk and then whine they cant hold everything. They will whine even more now that they have a smaller cargobay they can fill with mission loot junk.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 850	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:46:36 - [37] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: So just a little eve history lesson. Many expansions ago, this ammo in the cargo hold problem was brought up often. CCP addressed the problem by making ammo 10X smaller. Yeah that's right, ammo used to be 10 times the size is it now. Whatever ammo problem you may be experiencing very small. I'm not a big fan of RL analogies, but here's one. The current day attack submarine. A good amount of it's internal space is devoted the the storage, handling, aiming and shooting of primary weapon. Aircraft carriers - it's a big floating hangar with a big honking plane launch and retrieval area. Most current Navy vessels (ships you live in while on a mission) don't have a lot left after you take away their propulsion and shooty shooty. Cargo space isn't really a design priority. How ships are built: Determine primary function (shoot hybrid ammo at stuff). Construct primary weapon system. Construct primary support systems around that. Add secondary support stuff (maybe a drone bay?). Add a propulsion system to get it to where it needs to be at the desired speed and what not. Add a place for the crew to eat sleep and work (no consideration for a tennis court). Add the minimum ammount of storage space for said ship to complete it's mission. It's clear you want an ammo bay to free up some cargo space. I don't see you asking for the associated reductions in speed, agility, and hull integrity (hull HP) that would naturally go with said change. I really don't have an opinion one way or the other, just a bit of history (I'm fairly confident on the 10x reduction, but couldn't find the ancient patch notes) and some thoughts on the costs of your request. This change was made before specialized bays. Maybe if back then devs had the option to crank into every ship an specilized ammo bay, they'd prefer it to reduce ammo to ridiculous sizes. A single rocket has half a cm btw. A signal flair on a submarine takes up around half a quarter of a m3 to store. That's a signal flair. It just makes a pretty light and doesn't pack the ooompph to hurt anything. A 'rocket' that does space ship damage only taking up 1/2 m3 is pretty gracious. You're not shooting box rockets. They are long, have fins and if not protected could break or even explode. Look at current day missile holders. They are pretty big. Just pointing out it's not a case of pickle or a can of peas. It's a rocket. "What do rockets do?" "Rockets explode!!" (look of extreme serious suddenly washes over both Buzz and Woddy' faces)
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:51:09 - [38] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: Anhenka wrote: Shhh.... don't spoil their dream that CCP will add an entirely new ammo bay without taking anything away. That there will be no reduction in main cargo bay or stats to compensate. For CCP giveth, but CCP does not taketh away. Right? Are you the same guy I was discussing with 7 posts ago? There MUST be a cargo hold reduction to ships who get a big ammo hold. In which case we are back to my position that if it's a give and take for cargo amounts, that a dedicated ammo bay is a direct nerf to people abilities to choose what they want to bring with them. ... Unless the change increases the total amount of cargo space, I can see absolutely no use for a dedicated bay, and several downsides. I still don't actually see any gameplay improvements mentioned as a reason here. There's all sorts of arguing over how it should be implemented, but there's a decided lack of WHY it should be implemented being talked about. The OP was some mission runner who was complaining about his inability to manage his own ammo in his cargo due to looting too much or not bringing enough ammo, but never actually proposed any why reasons. Neither of his problems would be solved with an ammo bay. Bads will still not remember to bring enough ammo. Bads will still loot all sorts of low value junk and then whine they cant hold everything. They will whine even more now that they have a smaller cargobay they can fill with mission loot junk. This is what I replied to you before: Van Beyus wrote: Ships will not lose a significant part of their cargo. They will gain a new dedicated ammo hold. Ships with support roles uses less ammo unless they're solo, therefore they may have a smaller ammo hold, and a smaller or no cargohold reduction at all to compensate. Drone boats too, since their primary weapon system will not be compromised. The same goes for covert ops frigates. The Astero and Stratios are drone boats too, and their other weapon system is lasers, so no relevant cargo change is needed. The major change would be for dedicated combat ships that would have the chunk of their cargo that used to carry ammo removed in favor of a dedicated ammo bay. The reason for that is a better organization of assets, the available volume for other things should not change significantly. None of the arguments presented in this thread is as practical as a dedicated ammo bay. The last thing you need during a combat situation is a clumsy inventory management. Regardless of the OP motivations I think this is a great idea. Why? It makes the ammo system consistent with drones, wich will serve to reinforce ship roles. Plus it gives us a more organized inventory. I can't actually believe you're serious about having trouble clicking on an icon just to check you ammo levels. If you're that worried about it you may just leave the cargo window opened. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:54:39 - [39] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: A signal flair on a submarine takes up around half a quarter of a m3 to store. That's a signal flair. It just makes a pretty light and doesn't pack the ooompph to hurt anything. A 'rocket' that does space ship damage only taking up 1/2 m3 is pretty gracious. You're not shooting box rockets. They are long, have fins and if not protected could break or even explode. Look at current day missile holders. They are pretty big. Just pointing out it's not a case of pickle or a can of peas. It's a rocket. "What do rockets do?" "Rockets explode!!" (look of extreme serious suddenly washes over both Buzz and Woddy' faces) It's not half a meter. The rockets in EvE Online takes up half a CENTIMETER. That's 5mm3. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 997	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:55:55 - [40] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Regardless of the OP motivations I think this is a great idea. Why? It makes the ammo system consistent with drones, wich will serve to reinforce ship roles. Plus it gives us a more organized inventory. I can't actually believe you're serious about having trouble clicking on an icon just to check you ammo levels. If you're that worried about it you may just leave the cargo window opened. Hold on a second. Are you proposing that you would have an ammo bay that you would be unable to load ammo into while in space? Because that's the reason that drones have a separate bay in the first place.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 997	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:00:05 - [41] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: A signal flair on a submarine takes up around half a quarter of a m3 to store. That's a signal flair. It just makes a pretty light and doesn't pack the ooompph to hurt anything. A 'rocket' that does space ship damage only taking up 1/2 m3 is pretty gracious. You're not shooting box rockets. They are long, have fins and if not protected could break or even explode. Look at current day missile holders. They are pretty big. Just pointing out it's not a case of pickle or a can of peas. It's a rocket. "What do rockets do?" "Rockets explode!!" (look of extreme serious suddenly washes over both Buzz and Woddy' faces) It's not half a meter. The rockets in EvE Online takes up half a CENTIMETER. That's 5mm3. 1M3 is 100 cm * 100cm * 100 cm = 1,000,000 cm3 volume. .005 m3 per rocket = 200 rockets per M3. 1,000,000 cm3 / 200 rockets = 500 cm3 per rocket. While it's still a laughably small volume to be "realistic", it's quite a bit more than half a centimeter.
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:01:11 - [42] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: Regardless of the OP motivations I think this is a great idea. Why? It makes the ammo system consistent with drones, wich will serve to reinforce ship roles. Plus it gives us a more organized inventory. I can't actually believe you're serious about having trouble clicking on an icon just to check you ammo levels. If you're that worried about it you may just leave the cargo window opened. Hold on a second. Are you proposing that you would have an ammo bay that you would be unable to load ammo into while in space? Because that's the reason that drones have a separate bay in the first place. No, unless they are big enough so it's not a gameplay issue. That's a different idea we could discuss though. With a dedicated cargo space capable of holding huge ammounts of ammo maybe it shouldn't be possible to refill it unless you're using a maintenance bay or mobile depot. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 850	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:02:32 - [43] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: A signal flair on a submarine takes up around half a quarter of a m3 to store. That's a signal flair. It just makes a pretty light and doesn't pack the ooompph to hurt anything. A 'rocket' that does space ship damage only taking up 1/2 m3 is pretty gracious. You're not shooting box rockets. They are long, have fins and if not protected could break or even explode. Look at current day missile holders. They are pretty big. Just pointing out it's not a case of pickle or a can of peas. It's a rocket. "What do rockets do?" "Rockets explode!!" (look of extreme serious suddenly washes over both Buzz and Woddy' faces) It's not half a meter. The rockets in EvE Online takes up half a CENTIMETER. That's 5mm3. I had no idea we were already cheating w/ super tiny magic ammo. No to this idea (it's already rediculous)
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:07:36 - [44] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: A signal flair on a submarine takes up around half a quarter of a m3 to store. That's a signal flair. It just makes a pretty light and doesn't pack the ooompph to hurt anything. A 'rocket' that does space ship damage only taking up 1/2 m3 is pretty gracious. You're not shooting box rockets. They are long, have fins and if not protected could break or even explode. Look at current day missile holders. They are pretty big. Just pointing out it's not a case of pickle or a can of peas. It's a rocket. "What do rockets do?" "Rockets explode!!" (look of extreme serious suddenly washes over both Buzz and Woddy' faces) It's not half a meter. The rockets in EvE Online takes up half a CENTIMETER. That's 5mm3. 1M3 is 100 cm * 100cm * 100 cm = 1,000,000 cm3 volume. .005 m3 per rocket = 200 rockets per M3. 1,000,000 cm3 / 200 rockets = 500 cm3 per rocket. While it's still a laughably small volume to be "realistic", it's quite a bit more than half a centimeter. I may be wrong on that. I always mess up volume conversions. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 998	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:09:11 - [45] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: Regardless of the OP motivations I think this is a great idea. Why? It makes the ammo system consistent with drones, wich will serve to reinforce ship roles. Plus it gives us a more organized inventory. I can't actually believe you're serious about having trouble clicking on an icon just to check you ammo levels. If you're that worried about it you may just leave the cargo window opened. Hold on a second. Are you proposing that you would have an ammo bay that you would be unable to load ammo into while in space? Because that's the reason that drones have a separate bay in the first place. No, unless they are big enough so it's not a gameplay issue. That's a different idea we could discuss though. With a dedicated cargo space capable of holding huge ammounts of ammo maybe it shouldn't be possible to refill it unless you're using a maintenance bay or mobile depot. In which case there's no consistency with drones, and no reinforcements of ship roles. Or I should say that there is reinforcement of what you think a ships proper role should be, but since we have already established there are many fits that don't use ammo on hulls that can use ammo, it's a change that negatively impacts all the people that don't fit them the way you think they should be fitted.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Snuffed Out 7278	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:11:30 - [46] - Quote Not Supporting this idea. I would like to keep the flexibility of choosing what goes into my cargobay without being pigeonholed. Also... as I expend ammo, I gain cargospace. This means I can carry more loot. I like things the way they are now. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. "How did you veterans start?"
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:15:55 - [47] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: Regardless of the OP motivations I think this is a great idea. Why? It makes the ammo system consistent with drones, wich will serve to reinforce ship roles. Plus it gives us a more organized inventory. I can't actually believe you're serious about having trouble clicking on an icon just to check you ammo levels. If you're that worried about it you may just leave the cargo window opened. Hold on a second. Are you proposing that you would have an ammo bay that you would be unable to load ammo into while in space? Because that's the reason that drones have a separate bay in the first place. No, unless they are big enough so it's not a gameplay issue. That's a different idea we could discuss though. With a dedicated cargo space capable of holding huge ammounts of ammo maybe it shouldn't be possible to refill it unless you're using a maintenance bay or mobile depot. In which case there's no consistency with drones, and no reinforcements of ship roles. Or I should say that there is reinforcement of what you think a ships proper role should be, but since we have already established there are many fits that don't use drones, it's a change that negatively impacts all the people that don't fit them the way you think they should be fitted. An amarrian laser ship for example could have a smaller ammo bay. It's reinforcing it's role of laser ship. It's not a negative impact unless you want to deviate the ship from it's role, like people who used battleships to mine. It's not about the way I think they should be fitted, it's about the ship's purpose. The ammo on a combat ship shouldn't have to compete with other types of cargo. The ship is meant for combat, therefore it MUST have space for ammo. It's not up to the pilot to chose that, it was built that way. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 998	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:25:20 - [48] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: It's not about the way I think they should be fitted, it's about the ship's purpose. The ammo on a combat ship shouldn't have to compete with other types of cargo. The ship is meant for combat, therefore it MUST have space for ammo. It's not up to the pilot to chose that, it was built that way. Ships have bonuses. Ships do not have purposes. The purpose of a ship is however you want to use it. A smartboming Rohk is every bit as valid a fit as a railgun Rohk. A drones only Ishtar or Dominix is just as valid as one that uses it's gun slots. A large neut Curse is just as valid as a close in brawling missile Curse. Ships do not have purposes. They can bit fit however you want, and every fit is valid. Some work better than others, but it's not your place to decide which one is more "proper" by restricting the cargobay of the fit that doesn't use ammo.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Snuffed Out 7279	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:36:38 - [49] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: It's not about the way I think they should be fitted, it's about the ship's purpose. The ammo on a combat ship shouldn't have to compete with other types of cargo. The ship is meant for combat, therefore it MUST have space for ammo. It's not up to the pilot to chose that, it was built that way. Wholeheartedly disagree. Part of what make EVE so fun is that despite the "roles" that all ships have... you are not FORCED to fit/use it specifically "that way." Some examples: - I can fit a Vexor for Remote Repair duty. No weapons, no combat drones... just RR mods and RR drones. I wouldn't be using any ammo aside from capacitor boosters... but, because my ammo bay is designed for holding hybrid charges, I cannot hold that many cap boosters to make the fit work. And I cannot transfer cap boosters between cargo and ammo bay... because that would defeat the whole purpose of an ammo bay in the first place. So now the Vexor is limited to combat only... no "special" setups. The same holds true for the Vexor Navy, Ishtar, Dominix, and Armageddon. - I've used RR Confessors. - I've seen Autocannon or Neut-fit Mallers. Anemic to no DPS... but they have a helluva tank and powerful capacitor. - I have seen Tech 1 Industrial ships used for combat. Their strongest point is that they will NEVER run out of ammo or cap boosters... meaning that if they can find something they can engage, they can fight almost indefinitely. Having to balance cargo vs. ammo for the fit of their choosing is definitely something players should have to consider before undocking. It is all about what tradeoffs you (not the system) are personally willing to make. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. "How did you veterans start?"
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:38:39 - [50] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: It's not about the way I think they should be fitted, it's about the ship's purpose. The ammo on a combat ship shouldn't have to compete with other types of cargo. The ship is meant for combat, therefore it MUST have space for ammo. It's not up to the pilot to chose that, it was built that way. Ships have bonuses. Ships do not have purposes. The purpose of a ship is however you want to use it. A smartboming Rohk is every bit as valid a fit as a railgun Rohk. A drones only Ishtar or Dominix is just as valid as one that uses it's gun slots. A large neut Curse is just as valid as a close in brawling missile Curse. Ships do not have purposes. They can bit fit however you want, and every fit is valid. Some work better than others, but it's not your place to decide which one is more "proper" by restricting the cargobay of the fit that doesn't use ammo. The bonuses are related to their purpose. If there was no purpose definition we wouldn't have ship classes at all. They would all be just blank hulls and we'd fit the modules for all our purposes. You'd have to choose number of slots, base powergrid, cpu, hardpoints, etc. You're not citing any deviating purpose on your examples. Smartbombing is combat. Dominix and Ishtars are meant to have an hybrid weapon system like a ton of other combat ships and the Curse fitting variations you cited does not take it away from it's role wich is recon. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:42:32 - [51] - Quote ShahFluffers wrote: Van Beyus wrote: It's not about the way I think they should be fitted, it's about the ship's purpose. The ammo on a combat ship shouldn't have to compete with other types of cargo. The ship is meant for combat, therefore it MUST have space for ammo. It's not up to the pilot to chose that, it was built that way. Wholeheartedly disagree. Part of what make EVE so fun is that despite the "roles" that all ships have... you are not FORCED to fit/use it specifically "that way." Some examples: - I can fit a Vexor for Remote Repair duty. No weapons, no combat drones... just RR mods and RR drones. I wouldn't be using any ammo aside from capacitor boosters... but, because my ammo bay is designed for holding hybrid charges, I cannot hold that many cap boosters to make the fit work. And I cannot transfer cap boosters between cargo and ammo bay... because that would defeat the whole purpose of an ammo bay in the first place. So now the Vexor is limited to combat only... no "special" setups. The same holds true for the Vexor Navy, Ishtar, Dominix, and Armageddon. - I've used RR Confessors. - I've seen Autocannon or Neut-fit Mallers. Anemic to no DPS... but they have a helluva tank and powerful capacitor. - I have seen Tech 1 Industrial ships used for combat. Their strongest point is that they will NEVER run out of ammo or cap boosters... meaning that if they can find something they can engage, they can fight almost indefinitely. Having to balance cargo vs. ammo for the fit of their choosing is definitely something players should have to consider before undocking. It is all about what tradeoffs you (not the system) are personally willing to make. True, you can do that, but is your RR Vexor as effective as a RR Exequror? If you tell your FC you're going to be logi of a 50 men fleet with it what do you think his response will be? I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:45:50 - [52] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: A signal flair on a submarine takes up around half a quarter of a m3 to store. That's a signal flair. It just makes a pretty light and doesn't pack the ooompph to hurt anything. A 'rocket' that does space ship damage only taking up 1/2 m3 is pretty gracious. You're not shooting box rockets. They are long, have fins and if not protected could break or even explode. Look at current day missile holders. They are pretty big. Just pointing out it's not a case of pickle or a can of peas. It's a rocket. "What do rockets do?" "Rockets explode!!" (look of extreme serious suddenly washes over both Buzz and Woddy' faces) It's not half a meter. The rockets in EvE Online takes up half a CENTIMETER. That's 5mm3. 1M3 is 100 cm * 100cm * 100 cm = 1,000,000 cm3 volume. .005 m3 per rocket = 200 rockets per M3. 1,000,000 cm3 / 200 rockets = 500 cm3 per rocket. While it's still a laughably small volume to be "realistic", it's quite a bit more than half a centimeter. I may be wrong on that. I always mess up volume conversions. I did the math and you're right. It's not unreasonable to assume it's a 20x5x5cm rocket. Not realistic but at least it's not magically small either. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 998	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:53:31 - [53] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: Anhenka wrote: Van Beyus wrote: It's not about the way I think they should be fitted, it's about the ship's purpose. The ammo on a combat ship shouldn't have to compete with other types of cargo. The ship is meant for combat, therefore it MUST have space for ammo. It's not up to the pilot to chose that, it was built that way. Ships have bonuses. Ships do not have purposes. The purpose of a ship is however you want to use it. A smartboming Rohk is every bit as valid a fit as a railgun Rohk. A drones only Ishtar or Dominix is just as valid as one that uses it's gun slots. A large neut Curse is just as valid as a close in brawling missile Curse. Ships do not have purposes. They can bit fit however you want, and every fit is valid. Some work better than others, but it's not your place to decide which one is more "proper" by restricting the cargobay of the fit that doesn't use ammo. The bonuses are related to their purpose. If there was no purpose definition we wouldn't have ship classes at all. They would all be just blank hulls and we'd fit the modules for all our purposes. You'd have to choose number of slots, base powergrid, cpu, hardpoints, etc. You're not citing any deviating purpose on your examples. Smartbombing is combat. Dominix and Ishtars are meant to have an hybrid weapon system like a ton of other combat ships and the Curse fitting variations you cited does not take it away from it's role wich is recon. Please explain to me how forcing a Dominix to have an ammo bay reinforces is role as a drone based combatant, or how a Neuting Curse role is reinforced by having an ammo bay. Or how an ammo bay helps reinforce a smartbombing Rohk. "Combat" is a incredibly vague term that includes every type of combat regardless of if it uses ammo or not. Saying it is a "combat" ship and thus needs an ammo bay is a massive generalization and completely incorrect when it comes to many ships that often have no need for ammo whatsoever. P.S: A Curse is the non cloaky Recon vessel. While it bay be called a Recon, nobody in their right mind uses one to perform reconnaissance.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Snuffed Out 7279	Posted - 2015.02.06 19:01:14 - [54] - Quote Van Beyus wrote: True, you can do that, but is your RR Vexor as effective as a RR Exequror? If you tell your FC you're going to be logi of a 50 men fleet with it what do you think his response will be? An RR Vexor won't be as effective as an RR Exequror... true. But that isn't the point behind such a fit. The point is that you are lulling the enemy into a false belief that you are not packing any RRs at all... causing them to miscalculate what ships, tactics, and numbers will be necessary to kill you. That's the metagame behind ship fits. That is why ammo bays would not be a good idea. They put an extra restriction on ships, further limiting what "special fits" they might be capable of. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. "How did you veterans start?"
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 850	Posted - 2015.02.06 19:10:22 - [55] - Quote ShahFluffers wrote: Van Beyus wrote: True, you can do that, but is your RR Vexor as effective as a RR Exequror? If you tell your FC you're going to be logi of a 50 men fleet with it what do you think his response will be? An RR Vexor won't be as effective as an RR Exequror... true. But that isn't the point behind such a fit. The point is that you are lulling the enemy into a false belief that you are not packing any RRs at all... causing them to miscalculate what ships, tactics, and numbers will be necessary to kill you. That's the metagame behind ship fits. That is why ammo bays would not be a good idea. They put an extra restriction on ships, further limiting what "special fits" they might be capable of. I can't speak for everyone, but I don't do a lot of pre engagement pvp math. If I see a ship I can engage, then I do it. In all honesty, if someone is calculating the this and thats you mentioned, then he'll probably be zooming in and looking for blasters and rails and smell out your deception. His exequror point is valid. Your 'sneeky RR vexor' isn't. Possible and realistic are not synonyms.
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 998	Posted - 2015.02.06 19:13:31 - [56] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: ShahFluffers wrote: Van Beyus wrote: True, you can do that, but is your RR Vexor as effective as a RR Exequror? If you tell your FC you're going to be logi of a 50 men fleet with it what do you think his response will be? An RR Vexor won't be as effective as an RR Exequror... true. But that isn't the point behind such a fit. The point is that you are lulling the enemy into a false belief that you are not packing any RRs at all... causing them to miscalculate what ships, tactics, and numbers will be necessary to kill you. That's the metagame behind ship fits. That is why ammo bays would not be a good idea. They put an extra restriction on ships, further limiting what "special fits" they might be capable of. I can't speak for everyone, but I don't do a lot of pre engagement pvp math. If I see a ship I can engage, then I do it. In all honesty, if someone is calculating the this and thats you mentioned, then he'll probably be zooming in and looking for blasters and rails and smell out your deception. His exequror point is valid. Your 'sneeky RR vexor' isn't. Possible and realistic are not synonyms. I don't know about you, but I rarely have the luxury of waiting around while scouts on grid methodically visually search each enemy for novelty fits. And that's why they work.
Amarisen Gream The ArK's Hammer ArK Alliance 63	Posted - 2015.02.06 19:38:08 - [57] - Quote I must say I think that an ammo bay would be super nice. (and i'll state it again and again.) it is limited to the balance that CCP can give the ship. Lets take Frigates. If they changed them to say 100-400m3 cargo 10-50m3 Ammo 5-50m3 Drone Amounts would very depending on the ship. i.e Enyo - Cargo 100m3 - Ammo 50m3 - Drone 5m3 Ishkur- Cargo 150m3 - Ammo 25m3 - Drone 25-50m3 (skill based) xoxo Amarisen Gream
Van Beyus Hedion University Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.02.06 19:39:29 - [58] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Please explain to me how forcing a Dominix to have an ammo bay reinforces is role as a drone based combatant, or how a Neuting Curse role is reinforced by having an ammo bay. Or how an ammo bay helps reinforce a smartbombing Rohk. ... Doing some quick head math to see if you can break the RR tank of the logi they have though is incredibly common. And is often done far in advance from a scouts D-scan while you travel towards the enemy gang. But I don't take into account random vexors potentially also packing extra RR when deciding engagements. The Dominix role is already reinforced by the hull bonus. Adding an ammo bay to it, or the Curse, just tells that it is an hybrid platform and can use other kinds of weapons. The purpose, or role, of a ship is what it's most efficient at. You can fit and use a battleship to mine if you want, it's just not as effective as a mining barge. Reinforcing roles is not a bad thing. It paradoxically assures the diversity. If you could fit any ship to anything you want hulls would mean nothing. If you see a RR Vexor, for example, you know it does not have a range bonus and can focus fire on ships that are far away from it first. That's part of the strategic aspect of the game. I'm not online most of the time, but I won't change this signature when I do just to make your life easier.
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 123	Posted - 2015.02.07 04:52:23 - [59] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: The current day attack submarine. A good amount of it's internal space is devoted the the storage, handling, aiming and shooting of primary weapon. Aircraft carriers - it's a big floating hangar with a big honking plane launch and retrieval area. Most current Navy vessels (ships you live in while on a mission) don't have a lot left after you take away their propulsion and shooty shooty. Cargo space isn't really a design priority. Not really all that relevant but this one needs some corrections. Actually cargo space is a huge consideration in the design of modern war ships. Not cargo in the normal sense of hauling packages of stuff from a to be but cargo none the less. A Nimitz class aircraft carrier holds roughly 3 million gallons of jet fuel and thousands of tons of food stuffs and other consumables needed by the crew and of course the ammo storage areas. All of this requires a rather large set of specialized cargo holds. Your other example of an attack sub still has pretty massive cargo holds. When they set sail they have EVERYTHING the need for a 60 day deployment in storage. With a crew of roughly 100 people the food alone for 60 days would take up a significant amount of space.
Grezh Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 30	Posted - 2015.02.07 09:32:34 - [60] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Hold on a second. Are you proposing that you would have an ammo bay that you would be unable to load ammo into while in space? Because that's the reason that drones have a separate bay in the first place. In all honesty there is no sense in having an ammo bay without making it like the drone bay in that fitting services are required to replenish it. Separating ammo and cargo allows for a divide between combat capabilities and longevity away from supplies. CCP could easily give every ship in the game an ammo hold the size of its current cargohold and if they also make module only be able to load from the ammo hold this change would change very little in their combat capabilities, it would however give players the choice as to what they should put in their cargohold, whether its additional ammo to restock when you can plop down a depot or you could leave it empty for spoils of war. To have any space for loot the current 'choice' is either use a fit that requires very few charges or be gimped in any engagement you encounter as your ship is at less then full potential with your fit.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.