|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
482
|
Posted - 2015.09.06 17:05:26 -
[1] - Quote
-1
It seems you want to move your goods significantly faster when it's not possible to provide these bonuses without breaking the rest of the hauling range.
T1s: ~10s align 3 AU/s DSTs: ~18s align 3.3 AU/s Orca: 38s align 2 AU/s Freighters: ~40s align 1.4 AU/s
Since your proposal is so close to an Orca in terms of hauling capacity you're looking at trying to split hairs between the base align speed of an Orca versus a Freighter and possibly warping at an incredibly rapid 1.7AU/s.
Do you really feel it's necessary for a brand new ship class to be developed for those marginal gains?
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
485
|
Posted - 2015.09.07 02:30:18 -
[2] - Quote
Sigh so you've not used a DST as a hauling ship?
They can have almost 100 k m3 capacity if fitted for cargo - align quicker and can manage freighter level eHp in certain cases.
They're a damn hauling ship, what else are you gonna use it for?
Sigh.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
486
|
Posted - 2015.09.07 12:59:50 -
[3] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Sigh so you've not used a DST as a hauling ship?
They can have almost 100 k m3 capacity if fitted for cargo - align quicker and can manage freighter level eHp in certain cases whilst warping as fast as a cruiser.
They're a damn hauling ship, what else are you gonna use them for?
Sigh. sigh...hopefully people start reading some of the previous posts or for that matter at least the OP. Tell me what fitting gets 400,000 m3 of cargo in your DST and you got a deal, else it does me and eve, zero good for solving the problem at hand. My current round trip is 18 jumps, so if use your suggestion i get to.... 1. be restricted to 100.000 m3 capacity. 2. It would take me a total of 72 jumps, IF IM LUCKY but if the inefficiencies of breaking my load apart force me to take another round trip or two, then my total jumps required would be bump up to respectively: 90 or an awe inspiring 108 total jumps. Well at least you're accepting that DST's are actually haulers now - so I've rebuffed one of your fallacies already - now we're discussing how to deal with a quite specific problem of your own devising...
...for which there's already an obvious solution: agility fit freighters.
Now let's look at those for a minute, either we can shove on a full rack of inertia stabilizers for approximately the 25s align time that your new mini-freighter/massive-DST can achieve - OR - we can do a full rack of hyperspatial accelerators to get into the same ballpark as the 2.4AU/s warp speed you've proposed for this mini-freighter/massive-DST...
BUT what you can't do with a freighter is buff both those stats using just the three lowslots provided.
And if you follow this train of logic - buffing both would result in imbalance for the current hulls right? I mean who'd fly an agility fit freighter if you could have this new hull that nails both those categories and costs 20% of the price as you propose?
It's almost like CCP put these things called lowslots and modules into the game to allow customisation of the ship hulls for different circumstances and uses.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
487
|
Posted - 2015.09.07 16:59:13 -
[4] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Eli Apol wrote:
40k -> 100k -> 150k -> 320k+ seems more than a fair progression to me already.
It would be, if we were discussing a line up of T1 ships, instead of a bunch of relatively very expensive T2 Ships and capital ships.
So now we want cheap and disposable balance wrecking ships as well?
Yep this thread is going places.
e: adding quoting
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
487
|
Posted - 2015.09.07 17:00:39 -
[5] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Again, apples to apples and oranges to oranges, not the freighter class, the Orca. the DST or ANY OTHER SHIP THAT HAS EVER EXISTED IN EVE, can beat the new hauler at what it is designed to do.
Reread my previous posts for the arguments as to why this is true because im tired of rehashing the same statements.
I specifically said your new ship would BREAK the balance by being completely OP and better than the current lineups...which is exactly what your saying it will do as well....thanks logic.
e: removing too much quoting
e2: Anyways, have fun with your thread, I-1'd and can't be bothered to read the same boring reasons for you suggesting it over and over either. HF.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
487
|
Posted - 2015.09.07 17:06:52 -
[6] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Eli Apol wrote:So now we want cheap and disposable balance wrecking ships as well?
Yep this thread is going places. You sure do love fallacious arguments. Sadly, it seems your love for fallacious arguments doesnt seem to be going anywhere.
Well since I was adding some quotes to show who I was responding to I'm still here for one last post. You should really try an agility fit freighter - or better yet, use warp mods and then have a webbing alt so you insta-align.
It does exactly what you're requesting a new (redundant) ship for.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
487
|
Posted - 2015.09.08 03:54:59 -
[7] - Quote
Right... I've thought about this and I disagree hugely with how you guys are arguing this - but I've perhaps changed my tune which is why I'm returning.
Firstly I don't see why anyone in this thread considers the DST purely as 'the tanky one' - I use mine almost always fit for maximum cargo with pretty much zero tank (20k ehp) because it can use the MWD/cloak trick - which on T1 haulers requires fitting PG modules to use thus lowering their overall cargo even further - whilst managing more than double of what a T1 hauler can carry. DSTs are fantastic haulers just on this alone. The integral warp stability, ability to MJD and potential to brick tank them just makes them more valuable.
Secondly *pedant-alert* a fenrir @ minnie freighter 1 with 3x bulkheads only has 321,995 m3...not the 500k suggested as it's 'minimum' - basing your proposal around this initially might have made me more welcoming of the proposal as asking for something to fill 100-300 seems more reasonable to me than the thread title.
And thirdly, the main reason I've changed my tune. I started spreadsheeting some numbers based upon those points above that were mulling in my head - and maybe it's not such an unreasonable idea. My basis being an ORE battleship-sized freighter/hauler:
- 2 H / 3 M / 2 L, 3 rigs as it's T1 still.
- Base cargo 100,000 m3 +5% per ORE freighter level (336,481 m3 with max skills and using all rigs and lows)
- 25s align +5% agility per ORE freighter level (20s max skills, 12s with T2 rigs and lows)
- 2 AU/s (standard BS warp speed, upto 4.5 if you use all the rigs and shiny lows)
- Something like 150k EHP if fitted for max tank, like Orcas and Bowheads a large part of it would be structure HP and a DC2
- Maybe 30k EHP just from a couple of invulns (MJD/MWD + cargo/agility fit)
- Enough PG/CPU to fit an MWD, MJD (or LSE) in the mids with 2x invulns, DC2 + bulkheads for max tank along with probe launcher and cloak in high slots
- ~200m manufacturing cost after the market settles, roughly the same as T1 BS
So a 125k m3 hauler with either a 12s align OR a battleship's buffer tank OR a frigate's warp speed... ...or a 330k m3 hauler with 20s align AND a cruiser's tank AND a battleship's warp speed... ...or something in between the lot.
Looking at that I'm not sure if I would be tempted or not which is kind of why I've persuaded myself that maybe this isn't too bad an idea
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
|
|
|