EVE Search - Let strategic cruisers refit in space without a mobile depot

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Let strategic cruisers refit in space without a mobile depot

» 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 - 0 post(s)
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 10:49:07 - [1] - Quote The point of t3 strategic cruisers is not power, but versatility. As noted by devs, they should not be better than dedicated ships, but they should be able to fill many of their various roles. In the coming t3 balance, many of the current abilities and stats of t3 crusers will be nerfed, and rightfully so. However, their ability to fill multiple roles should be emphasised. One of the ways to do this should be to let strategic cruisers refit in space directly from their cargo bays, without having to use a mobile depot and the such. This will help the lone wolves using them immensely, because without a mobile depot their cargo bays will become free to carry alternative fits. Timers can be utilised to make sure this is not exploited. What say you?
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 420	Posted - 2017.04.18 11:04:39 - [2] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: The point of t3 strategic cruisers is not power, but versatility. As noted by devs, they should not be better than dedicated ships, but they should be able to fill many of their various roles. In the coming t3 balance, many of the current abilities and stats of t3 crusers will be nerfed, and rightfully so. However, their ability to fill multiple roles should be emphasised. One of the ways to do this should be to let strategic cruisers refit in space directly from their cargo bays, without having to use a mobile depot and the such. This will help the lone wolves using them immensely, because without a mobile depot their cargo bays will become free to carry alternative fits. Timers can be utilised to make sure this is not exploited. What say you? The limitation on the refits is there for a reason. It would be horribly overpowered otherwise and would be abused to hell by large fleets. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 11:12:20 - [3] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: The limitation on the refits is there for a reason. It would be horribly overpowered otherwise and would be abused to hell by large fleets. As noted in the OP, timers can be used to prevent this (allowing only one refit per several minutes, for example - maybe triggered by accessing a specialised refitting bay). The only benefit this should bring to a pilot is ease of use, plus some extra cargo space.
oiukhp Muvila School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 163	Posted - 2017.04.18 13:27:03 - [4] - Quote I actually think mobile depots should be put on a list of things to consider removing from the game tbh.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 420	Posted - 2017.04.18 13:34:11 - [5] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: The limitation on the refits is there for a reason. It would be horribly overpowered otherwise and would be abused to hell by large fleets. As noted in the OP, timers can be used to prevent this (allowing for only one refit per several minutes, for example - maybe triggered by accessing a specialised refitting bay). The only benefit this should bring to a pilot is ease of use, plus some extra cargo space. Refitting is limited to certain structures and ships already. There is no point in adding a exception just to save you 50m3 of space. Refitting your ship is a service that requires certain things. Either a station, a POS, a upwell-structure or a ship with a ship maintenance bay. A mobile depot is a way you pay for that ability. Be happy you can refit your tech 3 -cruiser in space at all. For many years you couldn't switch subsystems in space at all. It made living in wormhole-space quite interesting. Wormholer for life.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 2554	Posted - 2017.04.18 13:49:21 - [6] - Quote Just from the practical point of view. Refitting a module (module being a plug and play ship component) is one thing, but changing out subsystems changes the ships configuration completely. Just look at what changing modules does to the visual model of the ship - it's completely different. I'm not a big lore or realism gal, but come on, swapping subs on the fly is a bit much. Is it OK to change out subs via mobile depot? I would say sure, but only if you are the only ship on grid. Changing the configuration of the ship should take time and prevent you from doing anything but refitting subs. I'd say if you are pointed or in a warp disruption bubble - no swappy. What you suggest - changing subs on the fly on a whim would be way OP. The other part of it would be that changing subs quite often changes the slot layout of a ship. How would that work? The final part - the abuse part - every pvp t3 would have an interdiction sub and some wcs on standby as a get out of jail free card for most smaller pvp situations. That's a big NOPE from where I sit.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 13:56:23 - [7] - Quote Wander Prian, basically, what you are saying is "this is the way it currently is, so this is the way it should be in the future". But why exactly? I would like to understand why you think the current state of affairs is superior to my suggestion. I think that giving t3 cruisers the ability to refit in space a little bit more comfortably than other ships will make them feel unique without changing the balance of the game.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 13:59:55 - [8] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Is it OK to change out subs via mobile depot? I would say sure, but only if you are the only ship on grid. Changing the configuration of the ship should take time and prevent you from doing anything but refitting subs. I'd say if you are pointed or in a warp disruption bubble - no swappy. This sounds like a reasonable mechanism to minimise abuse. It can be applied to refitting without a depot as well.
Murkar Omaristos The Alabaster Albatross Sev3rance 274	Posted - 2017.04.18 14:00:42 - [9] - Quote oiukhp Muvila wrote: I actually think mobile depots should be put on a list of things to consider removing from the game tbh. No.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Singularity Expedition Services Singularity Syndicate 2133	Posted - 2017.04.18 14:04:20 - [10] - Quote For this to be reasonable the hull configuration would need to be fixed to however many highs/meds/lows/drone bay and the subsystems give % boosts to dps, reps etc alongside other effects such as drone bay, nullification etc. On top of this the maximum dps, reps, tank etc would need to be pretty much limited to the best in class tech II hull for each. In this case you could have the dps of a deimos, but also the drawbacks, but also could reconfigure to the eWar capabilities of a lachesis etc. To do this would need to mean carrying the modules in hold and therefore meaning a tech III carrying enough modules for say 3 configs should be putting 3 x the ISK in space whilst only having the utility of 1/3 of that ISK available. This could be achieved by making the subsystems behave as scripted modules. The 'scripts' would be created from tech III goods and would basically be data chips that can be loaded to reconfigure the focus of the subsystem. So the Drone Focus Chip would boost drone power on a proteus much like the Guristas bonus. Switch to the Hybrids Focus Chip then you get dps boost on hybrids with a corresponding decrease in speed/resists/whatever. The Focus Chips should be about as expensive as the current subsystems to keep the Tech III market relatively stable. This should give greater flexibility in the hulls but without the currently OP nature they have in certain configs

Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 2554	Posted - 2017.04.18 14:10:31 - [11] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: Is it OK to change out subs via mobile depot? I would say sure, but only if you are the only ship on grid. Changing the configuration of the ship should take time and prevent you from doing anything but refitting subs. I'd say if you are pointed or in a warp disruption bubble - no swappy. This sounds like a reasonable mechanism to minimise abuse. It can be applied to refitting without a depot as well. How would you address that my subsystem swap took away 2 high slots and gave me +1 mid and +1 low slots?? How do you prevent me (read as everyone in small gang pvp) from throwing on my cloaky and nullifier subs, adding a few wcs and leaving any fight that isn't going my way? Agreeing with my opinion is always great for my e-ego, but you need to address the real problems I presented.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 2555	Posted - 2017.04.18 14:16:01 - [12] - Quote Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: For this to be reasonable the hull configuration would need to be fixed to however many highs/meds/lows/drone bay and the subsystems give % boosts to dps, reps etc alongside other effects such as drone bay, nullification etc. On top of this the maximum dps, reps, tank etc would need to be pretty much limited to the best in class tech II hull for each. In this case you could have the dps of a deimos, but also the drawbacks, but also could reconfigure to the eWar capabilities of a lachesis etc. To do this would need to mean carrying the modules in hold and therefore meaning a tech III carrying enough modules for say 3 configs should be putting 3 x the ISK in space whilst only having the utility of 1/3 of that ISK available. This could be achieved by making the subsystems behave as scripted modules. The 'scripts' would be created from tech III goods and would basically be data chips that can be loaded to reconfigure the focus of the subsystem. So the Drone Focus Chip would boost drone power on a proteus much like the Guristas bonus. Switch to the Hybrids Focus Chip then you get dps boost on hybrids with a corresponding decrease in speed/resists/whatever. The Focus Chips should be about as expensive as the current subsystems to keep the Tech III market relatively stable. This should give greater flexibility in the hulls but without the currently OP nature they have in certain configs CCP can't seem to put an AB bonus on my enyo during the AF balance pass and you want all this to happen? What you speak of is a complete rework of T3, not a balance pass. It's too complex. I would prefer that CCP pulls off a reasonable balancing act and not redesign T3 into a whole new set of problems.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Singularity Expedition Services Singularity Syndicate 2133	Posted - 2017.04.18 14:22:16 - [13] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: blurb waffle etc... CCP can't seem to put an AB bonus on my enyo during the AF balance pass and you want all this to happen? What you speak of is a complete rework of T3, not a balance pass. It's too complex. I would prefer that CCP pulls off a reasonable balancing act and not redesign T3 into a whole new set of problems. Ahh I didn't say I wanted it, just suggested it as a way it could work. Best bet IMO is to simplify the current tech II system. Fixing the slot layout per hull and using scripted subs to achieve the same effects would do this. e.g. if a proteus has 5 high slots then a scripted offensive sub purely for hybrids would add say 20-30% dps, but drop max velocity (or whatever) due to rerouted power. Modelling the changes as scripts allows for easier switching out in code terms (reload times), and also allows for easier balancing by simply modifying the script % bonus.
Scialt Universal Sanitation Corporation 90	Posted - 2017.04.18 14:33:39 - [14] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Rhyme Bittern wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: Is it OK to change out subs via mobile depot? I would say sure, but only if you are the only ship on grid. Changing the configuration of the ship should take time and prevent you from doing anything but refitting subs. I'd say if you are pointed or in a warp disruption bubble - no swappy. This sounds like a reasonable mechanism to minimise abuse. It can be applied to refitting without a depot as well. How would you address that my subsystem swap took away 2 high slots and gave me +1 mid and +1 low slots?? How do you prevent me (read as everyone in small gang pvp) from throwing on my cloaky and nullifier subs, adding a few wcs and leaving any fight that isn't going my way? Agreeing with my opinion is always great for my e-ego, but you need to address the real problems I presented. I think this was addressed... it shouldn't be allowed if any other pilot is on grid. Or did I read that wrong.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 14:39:38 - [15] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: How would you address that my subsystem swap took away 2 high slots and gave me +1 mid and +1 low slots?? How do you prevent me (read as everyone in small gang pvp) from throwing on my cloaky and nullifier subs, adding a few wcs and leaving any fight that isn't going my way? The exact same way it is done today with mobile depots: 1. Moving the extra high slot modules to your cargo, or ejecting them if your cargo is full. 2. Using a timer (if I'm not mistaken), preventing you from refitting for several minutes after you were involved in combat in any way. Perhaps you think that some extra measures should be taken, and this may be correct. But it has nothing to do with my suggestion, because the problems you describe are related to refitting in space as a whole, not to refitting in space without a mobile depot specifically.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3304	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:00:43 - [16] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: The point of t3 strategic cruisers is not power, but versatility. As noted by devs, they should not be better than dedicated ships, but they should be able to fill many of their various roles. In the coming t3 balance, many of the current abilities and stats of t3 crusers will be nerfed, and rightfully so. However, their ability to fill multiple roles should be emphasised. One of the ways to do this should be to let strategic cruisers refit in space directly from their cargo bays, without having to use a mobile depot and the such. This will help the lone wolves using them immensely, because without a mobile depot their cargo bays will become free to carry alternative fits. Timers can be utilised to make sure this is not exploited. What say you? What nerf do you think CCP should apply to the entire ship to counter for such a buff since they are already perceived as overpowered without being able to freely refit without a fitting service?
Old Pervert Perkone Caldari State 50	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:16:25 - [17] - Quote Murkar Omaristos wrote: oiukhp Muvila wrote: I actually think mobile depots should be put on a list of things to consider removing from the game tbh. No. Yes. ~~ Regarding the OP, only if they nerfed each subsystem into the ground. Which they should be doing regardless.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:16:47 - [18] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: What nerf do you think CCP should apply to the entire ship to counter for such a buff since they are already perceived as overpowered without being able to freely refit without a fitting service? I think that they should make t3 ships slightly inferior to dedicated t2 ships - a bit less dps than hacs, a bit less scan strength than covops, and so on. I think that this is already being worked on in the coming rebalance that CCP mentioned in fanfest. My suggestion is not making t3 cruisers that much stronger, just easier to work with as multi-role ships, so I do not think a special extra nerf is necessary.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3304	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:20:35 - [19] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: What nerf do you think CCP should apply to the entire ship to counter for such a buff since they are already perceived as overpowered without being able to freely refit without a fitting service? I think that they should make t3 ship slightly inferior to dedicated t2 ships - a bit less dps than hacs, a bit less scan strength than covops, and so on. I think that this is already being worked on in the coming rebalance that ccp mentioned in fanfest. My suggestion is not making t3 cruisers that much stronger, just easier to work with as a multi-role ships, so I do not think a special extra nerf is necessary. They are alraedy supposed to be below T2 in their dedicated roles so that state will already balanced if we ever reach it. What you propose a a blatan buff to the ship so it should be countered by a nerf unless your goat is a thinly veiled "Make sure my ship is still OP after the long needed re-balance" request.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:28:21 - [20] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: They are alraedy supposed to be below T2 in their dedicated roles so that state will already balanced if we ever reach it. What you propose a a blatan buff to the ship so it should be countered by a nerf unless your goat is a thinly veiled "Make sure my ship is still OP after the long needed re-balance" request. As far as I know, this is not currently the case. Tengus, for example, seem to out-perform almost all other subcaps on many pve situations, the Proteus' dps matches that of several battleships, and so on. My personal goal, if you ask, is to have a lovely Legion that can go from highsec to null, do some pve signature sites there and come back - something I can't currently do because with the necessary modules, subsystems and mobile depot I have no cargo space left for loot. I assume that after the coming rebalance it will not perform as well as it does now, and I find it understandable.

Old Pervert Perkone Caldari State 50	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:35:06 - [21] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: They are alraedy supposed to be below T2 in their dedicated roles so that state will already balanced if we ever reach it. What you propose a a blatan buff to the ship so it should be countered by a nerf unless your goat is a thinly veiled "Make sure my ship is still OP after the long needed re-balance" request. As far as I know, this is not currently the case. Tengus, for example, seem to out-perform almost all other subcaps on many pve situations, the Proteus' dps matches that of several battleships, and so on. My personal goal, if you ask, is to have a lovely Legion that can go from highsec to null, do some pve signature sites there and come back - something I can't currently do because with the necessary modules, subsystems and mobile depot I have no cargo space left for loot. I assume that after the coming rebalance it will not perform as well as it does now, and I find it understandable. As he said, "supposed to be". As it stands they're already excessively stronger than their specialized counterparts in literally every way. CCP has said many times that fitting is supposed to be a strategic choice, not a tactical choice. You want to carry subsystems to refit in a station, feel free. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be a trade-off for your ability to swap between a wtfpwnmobile and a cloaky nullified bullshitmobile.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3304	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:39:01 - [22] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: They are alraedy supposed to be below T2 in their dedicated roles so that state will already balanced if we ever reach it. What you propose a a blatan buff to the ship so it should be countered by a nerf unless your goat is a thinly veiled "Make sure my ship is still OP after the long needed re-balance" request. As far as I know, this is not currently the case. Tengus, for example, seem to out-perform almost all other subcaps on many pve situations, the Proteus' dps matches that of several battleships, and so on. My personal goal, if you ask, is to have a lovely Legion that can go from highsec to null, do some pve signature sites there and come back - something I can't currently do because with the necessary modules, subsystems and mobile depot I have no cargo space left for loot. I assume that after the coming rebalance it will not perform as well as it does now, and I find it understandable. They are currently not balanced so you can't base your request for more power as a counter to the upcoming nerf. Once they get back in line to where they are supposed to be, then we can talk about giving them more options at some cost to be defined then and there.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 15:56:20 - [23] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: They are currently not balanced so you can't base your request for more power as a counter to the upcoming nerf. Once they get back in line to where they are supposed to be, then we can talk about giving them more options at some cost to be defined then and there. I think you are putting words in my mouth. I am not asking for a compensation for an upcoming nerf before it has landed. I am sure that CCP's perspective is wider than mine, and they know what to nerf and when. I just think that my suggestion enhances the playstyle that was intended for strategic cruisers to begin with - the playstyle that I would personally like to use. I also don't agree with your suggestion that re-balancing ships should be done seperately from changing their behaviour in other ways. It just doubles the devs' work.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 16:21:43 - [24] - Quote Old Pervert wrote: CCP has said many times that fitting is supposed to be a strategic choice, not a tactical choice. That is correct. With tactical destroyers we are able to change our ships every few seconds. I think that with strategic cruisers we should be able to do so every few minutes.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 420	Posted - 2017.04.18 17:01:50 - [25] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Old Pervert wrote: CCP has said many times that fitting is supposed to be a strategic choice, not a tactical choice. That is correct. With tactical destroyers we are able to change our ships every few seconds. I think that with strategic cruisers we should be able to do so every few minutes. You already can do that. No other ship can change as much as a tech 3 -cruiser. It still does not warrant the ability to switch your fit without a station/SMA/fitting-service or a mobile depot. Tech 3 -cruisers are already special enough. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 17:32:35 - [26] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: Tech 3 -cruisers are already special enough. In the talk in fanfest the devs said that people do not utilise the versatility of t3 cruisers as much as they want them to - they just make different copies to suit their needs. My suggestion is a step toward solving this problem.
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6409	Posted - 2017.04.18 17:52:22 - [27] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: Tech 3 -cruisers are already special enough. In the talk in fanfest the devs said that people do not utilise the versatility of t3 cruisers as much as they want them to - they just make different copies to suit their needs. My suggestion is a step toward solving this problem. Why is this a "problem"? If players do not want to make use of some configurations why is that a problem? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 18:02:52 - [28] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: If players do not want to make use of some configurations why is that a problem? No, but if players do not change their t3s configuration at all and prefer to have severalof them instead, one for each role, than it is a problem.
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6409	Posted - 2017.04.18 18:12:47 - [29] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: If players do not want to make use of some configurations why is that a problem? No, but if players do not change their t3s configuration at all and prefer to have severalof them instead, one for each role, than it is a problem. Why? Seems to be such players are doing it for convenience more than anything else. If I have say, 4 fits I tend to use and I don't want to spend time swapping out fits and I have the ISK to buy 4 distinct ships...who cares? Edit: And keep in mind part of the reason might be rigs. If I have fit A with T2 rigs fit, and if fit B uses different rigs it is a no-brainer I won't be changing the configurations and will own 2. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 18:18:09 - [30] - Quote I hope you are right, Teckos, but I think that if changing fittings is part of the basic ship's role, this process should be as painless as possible.

Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6409	Posted - 2017.04.18 18:23:43 - [31] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: I hope you are right, Teckos, but I think that if changing fittings is part of the basic ship's role, this process should be as painless as possible. Many players are ridiculously wealthy. CCP initially intended things like freighters and jump freighters to be corp and alliance level assets, yet many players have personal freighters and JFs in their hangars. So is it convenience and rigs driving this or is it something else? I can't think of any "something else", but then again that doesn't mean there isn't one. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.18 18:27:17 - [32] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: Tech 3 -cruisers are already special enough. In the talk in fanfest the devs said that people do not utilise the versatility of t3 cruisers as much as they want them to - they just make different copies to suit their needs. My suggestion is a step toward solving this problem. Had you actually bothered to listen to the presentation and not jump to conclusions, you would have heard Fozzie say it was due to rigs, hence they are thinking about allowing tech 3 -cruisers to unfit rigs without destroying them. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 18:31:50 - [33] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: Had you actually bothered to listen to the presentation and not jump to conclusions, you would have heard Fozzie say it was due to rigs, hence they are thinking about allowing tech 3 -cruisers to unfit rigs without destroying them. I did hear Fozzie, of course (and read the bit about the rigs before that). Still, I believe that the inconvenience involved in refitting a t3 cruiser in space hinders the pilots from doing so, and I see no good reason to preserve it.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.18 19:23:46 - [34] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: Had you actually bothered to listen to the presentation and not jump to conclusions, you would have heard Fozzie say it was due to rigs, hence they are thinking about allowing tech 3 -cruisers to unfit rigs without destroying them. I did hear Fozzie, of course (and read the bit about the rigs before that). Still, I believe that the inconvenience involved in refitting a t3 cruiser in space hinders the pilots from doing so, and I see no good reason to preserve it. Nothing is stopping any ship from refitting in space as long as they use a mobile depot or some other way of getting a refitting service. Tech 3 -cruisers do not need a special exception to it. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 20:21:53 - [35] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: Nothing is stopping any ship from refitting in space as long as they use a mobile depot or some other way of getting a refitting service. Tech 3 -cruisers do not need a special exception to it. I think they do, because unlike any other ship, refitting in space is an integral part of their intended role in the game.
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6410	Posted - 2017.04.18 20:35:20 - [36] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: Nothing is stopping any ship from refitting in space as long as they use a mobile depot or some other way of getting a refitting service. Tech 3 -cruisers do not need a special exception to it. I think they do, because unlike any other ship, refitting in space is an integral part of their intended role in the game. If it were intended why was it not added to the ship? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.18 20:41:03 - [37] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: Nothing is stopping any ship from refitting in space as long as they use a mobile depot or some other way of getting a refitting service. Tech 3 -cruisers do not need a special exception to it. I think they do, because unlike any other ship, refitting in space is an integral part of their intended role in the game. No it's not. The ability to change subsystems is the important part. You don't need to be in space for that. Being able to reconfigure your ship the way you need it is a very big advantage. They do not need a exception to be able to do it without a refitting service available. The limitations on refitting any ship in space are there for a reason. It balances out the advantage you get from being able to fine-tune your ship to the requirements. This applies to every ship in the game, not just tech 3 -cruisers. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.18 21:30:26 - [38] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: No it's not. The ability to change subsystems is the important part. You don't need to be in space for that. Being able to reconfigure your ship the way you need it is a very big advantage. They do not need a exception to be able to do it without a refitting service available. The limitations on refitting any ship in space are there for a reason. It balances out the advantage you get from being able to fine-tune your ship to the requirements. This applies to every ship in the game, not just tech 3 -cruisers. I'm not convinced, since the only advantage my suggestion grants to t3 cruiser pilots over the existing state of affairs is more place in their cargo holds. This is not big enough to cause serious balance issues. Remember that CCP referred specifically to refitting in space as a part of their vision for t3 cruisers, not for other ships; as long as such refitting is not feasible due to cargo space issues, only few people will do it.
Cade Windstalker 1377	Posted - 2017.04.19 01:39:58 - [39] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: I'm not convinced, since the only advantage my suggestion grants to t3 cruiser pilots over the existing state of affairs is more place in their cargo holds. This is not big enough to cause serious balance issues. Remember that CCP referred specifically to refitting in space as a part of their vision for t3 cruisers, not for other ships; as long as such refitting is not feasible due to cargo space issues, only few people will do it. This is patently false. Right now in order to refit in space you either need a mobile depot, which can't move, or a ship with a fitting service which will generally be slow, large, and not fit well into a Cruiser fleet composition. Even being able to swap out modules on the fly would give a T3C a ridiculous number of options for escape or escalation of a fight. Just a few off the top of my head: Speed tanking in PvE while refitting from tank to damage. De-aggressing to swap in Warp Stabs and a Nullifier to run away from basically anything but a focused HIC point. Swapping in a Cyno on the fly, whether you were trying to be bait and hid it in cargo or you just suddenly need backup without giving up a weapon or DPS first. Both would be pretty silly. Refitting around speed/range/damage on the fly while kiting. Disengaging and swapping the fits on your entire fleet to counter your opponents in less time than it takes to anchor a Mobile Depot. Seriously, refitting is stupidly powerful, that's why CCP have kept adding restrictions to it.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 04:22:40 - [40] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Even being able to swap out modules on the fly would give a T3C a ridiculous number of options Come on mate, I mentioned several times that refitting in space should not be available during combat or after it. This covers the cases you brought up.

Alderson Point Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 56	Posted - 2017.04.19 12:09:44 - [41] - Quote I get where you are coming from, honestly the depot mechanic does force one to find a safe, and take some risk of getting probed down, that's not altogether a bad idea, it forces one to think, to plan some, and get as quick as possible doing it. I would absolutely agree though with an improvement of cargo capacity, legions for example can have much more utility because they do not have to carry missiles or ammo, allowing for multiple fits. Hard to go on a deep cloaky roam carrying subsystems and fits with a hold full of antimatter or missiles.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 2562	Posted - 2017.04.19 12:34:04 - [42] - Quote Overall I would say this would be a pretty radical rework of the T3 mechanics. I guess in the end I would say all the CCP work probably isn't necessary. Yes - the strength of the ship class is versatility, but by the name it's intended for strategic (longer term) fitting adjustments. (tactical 'on the fly' are the strength of the tactical destroyer). This on the fly fitting just doesn't seem worth it. Here are my thoughts on why that is: 1. T3 cruisers weren't designed to be long haul deep space refittable scanning then combat then sneaking around platforms. That's not their designed role. I see where it might be beneficial and even fun to take a week long run through null doing all sorts of different roles, but historically few folks ever actually do that sort of thing. Is all the below effort worth it for a handful of guys to do this sort of thing - I'll say no and cite the needs of the many. 2. 'I could complete that escalation that is 8 jumps into hostile territory if I could re-do my subsystems on the fly' True, but I kind of feel that the point of those 8 jumps is to get folks moving around and to create player interaction opportunities. Add some risk to the reward and so on. Being able to go travel cloaky/interdicted, then find an empty system to refit, run the site and reconfigure for the trip home kind of goes against the design feature (the 8 jumps) of the escalation. 3. To get players to use it you would have to re-work how rigs work. That's a lot of effort. 4. Changing how subsystems from their current form to scripts is also a lot of work - not worth the effort in my view (see below) 5. T3 cruisers aren't cheap, but they aren't that expensive either. If you really need 3 different proteus fits you currently put in a small amount of time and effort and purchase 3 hulls, sub them out to your specs, rig them correctly and have at it. I don't see that as a bad scenario. Working for what you want gets you playing the game. Earning things is good for the soul. (I really don't want to hear about how a new bro can't afford 3 proteus. I don't care. A T3 cruiser is a very powerful ship that has very low skill requirements. I recommend them to newbros all the time due to the skill req vs. usefulness factor. If a newbro with low skills can only afford one of these very powerful ships - I think he should count his blessing, put the hull to work and earn more.) Overall - this would be a lot of programming to totally rework this class of ships (and rigs). The added utility would probably see little use. Most older players can easily afford and tend to purchase multiple hulls and for convenience of not constantly refitting will continue to do so. Players that can't afford multiple hulls just need to put their lone T3 cruiser to work so they can quickly have the iskies to buy more. added note: rigs are supposed to be expensive non removable enhancements to ships, so this idea kind of steps on the design basis for rigs also
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.19 13:10:43 - [43] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: No it's not. The ability to change subsystems is the important part. You don't need to be in space for that. Being able to reconfigure your ship the way you need it is a very big advantage. They do not need a exception to be able to do it without a refitting service available. The limitations on refitting any ship in space are there for a reason. It balances out the advantage you get from being able to fine-tune your ship to the requirements. This applies to every ship in the game, not just tech 3 -cruisers. I'm not convinced, since the only advantage my suggestion grants to t3 cruiser pilots over the existing state of affairs is more place in their cargo holds. This is not big enough to cause serious balance issues. Remember that CCP referred specifically to refitting in space as a part of their vision for t3 cruisers, not for other ships; as long as such refitting is not feasible due to cargo space issues, only few people will do it. Again, it's not about refitting in space, it's about being able to swap the subsystems and fit around so you don't need to get multiple ships to do different things. They already can change their fit in space, with the help of a depot, just like every other ship in the game. They do not need a separate exception to the rule. As someone who flies them for both PVE and PVP, they are already good enough with current mechanics. This is an unneeded change just to give you more space for loot/extra fits. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 14:24:32 - [44] - Quote Wander Prian, I think we both repeat ourselves now and bring no new arguments to the table. Alderson Point and Serendipity Lost - thank you for giving productive and thoughtful criticism, and for not being immediately hostile. I do not take this for granted :-) Alderson, I agree with what you say about the current depot mechanism being a challenge to the player. However, I think that gameplay-wise this challenge is not very interesting, nor it is fun - looking for an empty system is mostly a matter of spending time, not spending thought or making quick decisions, and when refitting is the point of the ship you are flying it becomes a turn-off - not because of the risk, but because of the time consumption. Serendipity, I would like to refer to several parts of your serious answer: Serendipity Lost wrote: T3 cruisers weren't designed to be long haul deep space refittable scanning then combat then sneaking around platforms. That's not their designed role. I see where it might be beneficial and even fun to take a week long run through null doing all sorts of different roles, but historically few folks ever actually do that sort of thing. Is all the below effort worth it for a handful of guys to do this sort of thing - I'll say no and cite the needs of the many. According to the latest CCP talk about rebalancing T3C in fanfest, this is indeed one of their designed roles. They actually describe it as an example. I think that they were not used like that historically due to their unintended limitations: rigs and cargo space. Serendipity Lost wrote: Being able to go travel cloaky/interdicted, then find an empty system to refit, run the site and reconfigure for the trip home kind of goes against the design feature (the 8 jumps) of the escalation. This is correct, and I have not thought about hs->ls(->ns) escalations when making my suggestion. However, I think that after the much-needed rebalance, T3Cs will not be able to take the tougher escalations anyway, and this partly solves the problem. Serendipity Lost wrote: You would have to re-work how rigs work. That's a lot of effort. Absolutely, but luckily CCP announced that they are doing just that :-) In their talk they said that T3Cs will be able to unfit rigs and re-use them.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.19 14:29:39 - [45] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian, I think we both repeat ourselves now and bring no new arguments to the table. Alderson Point and Serendipity Lost - thank you for giving productive and thoughtful criticism, and for not being personally hostile. I do not take this for granted :-) Alderson, I agree with what you say about the current depot mechanism being a challenge to the player. However, I think that gameplay-wise this challenge is not very interesting, nor it is fun - looking for an empty system is mostly a matter of spending time, not spending thought or making quick decisions, and when refitting is the point of the ship you are flying it becomes a turn-off - not because of the risk, but because of the time consumption. Serendipity, I would like to refer to several parts of your serious answer: Serendipity Lost wrote: T3 cruisers weren't designed to be long haul deep space refittable scanning then combat then sneaking around platforms. That's not their designed role. I see where it might be beneficial and even fun to take a week long run through null doing all sorts of different roles, but historically few folks ever actually do that sort of thing. Is all the below effort worth it for a handful of guys to do this sort of thing - I'll say no and cite the needs of the many. According to the latest CCP talk about rebalancing T3C in fanfest, this is indeed one of their designed roles. They actually describe it as an example. I think that they were not used like that historically due to their unintended limitations: rigs and cargo space. Serendipity Lost wrote: Being able to go travel cloaky/interdicted, then find an empty system to refit, run the site and reconfigure for the trip home kind of goes against the design feature (the 8 jumps) of the escalation. This is correct, and I have not thought about hs->ls(->ns) escalations when making my suggestion. However, I think that after the much-needed rebalance, T3Cs will not be able to take on the tougher escalations anyway, and this partly solves the problem. Serendipity Lost wrote: You would have to re-work how rigs work. That's a lot of effort. Absolutely, but luckily CCP announced that they are doing just that :-) In their talk they said that T3Cs will be able to unfit rigs and re-use them. Cargo space is a intended limitation, so is the fact that you need to use a mobile depot or some other refitting service. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 14:43:06 - [46] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: Cargo space is a intended limitation, so is the fact that you need to use a mobile depot or some other refitting service. Currently it is. I think that changing it with regards to T3Cs is beneficial.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.19 15:14:54 - [47] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: Cargo space is a intended limitation, so is the fact that you need to use a mobile depot or some other refitting service. Currently it is. I think that changing it with regards to T3Cs is beneficial. Again: They do not need nor warrant such a change. They work perfectly fine with current mechanics, as do all the other ships as well. There is no benefit to get from this except the perceived "QoL" fix, that would just take extra dev-time to implement another exception to a already complex ship-class. Judging by your killboards, all you think with this change is about the PVE-implications. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 15:18:22 - [48] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: They do not need nor warrant such a change. I think they do.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.19 15:57:36 - [49] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: They do not need nor warrant such a change. I think they do. I just love the arguments you have in defence of your idea.... You thinking something is needed does not mean it is. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 16:03:25 - [50] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: You thinking something is needed does not mean it is. It does not, but I work with what I have. So far you have only said that "things are like that now, and this means they should stay like that in the future". When you will post a valid argument, like the ones made by others in this thread, you will be entitled to a serious reply.

Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3309	Posted - 2017.04.19 16:16:53 - [51] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: You thinking something is needed does not mean it is. It does not, but I work with what I have. So far you have only said that "things are like that now, and this means they should stay like that in the future". When you will post a valid argument, like the ones made by others in this thread, you will be entitled to a serious reply. Our argument for why it should stay like that is that all ship are supposed to have limitation that force you to make choices. Why do you think T3C should completely avoid those choice by having refit in space power while also carrying lots of mods to be sure they can refit to many things? If you want to change the current design, you have to provide valuable reason as to why it should change. And no, because I think it should be is not a valid reason.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 16:34:57 - [52] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Our argument for why it should stay like that is that all ship are supposed to have limitation that force you to make choices. Why do you think T3C should completely avoid those choice by having refit in space power while also carrying lots of mods to be sure they can refit to many things? If you want to change the current design, you have to provide valuable reason as to why it should change. And no, because I think it should be is not a valid reason. Thanks! Now that's an argument. My reason is this: in all other ships, space re-fitting should be an extreme strategic choice: possible, but with great efforts. But for T3Cs, space re-fitting should be the way of living. For them it must be as least cumbersome as possible.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3309	Posted - 2017.04.19 16:38:38 - [53] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Our argument for why it should stay like that is that all ship are supposed to have limitation that force you to make choices. Why do you think T3C should completely avoid those choice by having refit in space power while also carrying lots of mods to be sure they can refit to many things? If you want to change the current design, you have to provide valuable reason as to why it should change. And no, because I think it should be is not a valid reason. Thanks! Now that's an argument. My reason is this: in all other ships, space re-fitting should be an extreme strategic choice: possible, but with great efforts. But for T3Cs, space re-fitting should be the way of living. For them it must be as least cumbersome as possible. And you are ok with the ship receiving an extra nerf bat swing after the upcoming balance to get that extra option? Because extra options are effectively power in this game so they would have to be brought down an additional peg or 2 after the currently intended balance to give room for more power. Like they did to freighter when they added options with low slots in case you need an actual example of options costing power.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 16:55:30 - [54] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: And you are ok with the ship receiving an extra nerf bat swing after the upcoming balance to get that extra option? Yes, I am. Pesonally I don't think that my suggestion is a very big force multiplier, but this is for CCP to decide. I want to use my 3TC everywhere and in as many roles as possible, and for that I am more than willing to make sacrifices regarding its efectiveness compared to dedicated ships.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 424	Posted - 2017.04.19 17:15:07 - [55] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: And you are ok with the ship receiving an extra nerf bat swing after the upcoming balance to get that extra option? Yes, I am. Pesonally I don't think that my suggestion is a very big force multiplier, but this is for CCP to decide. I want to use my 3TC everywhere and in as many roles as possible, and for that I am more than willing to make sacrifices regarding its efectiveness compared to dedicated ships. So like losing at least 50m3 of cargospace and limiting the ability to switch modules around into very specific circumstances? Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 17:23:37 - [56] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: And you are ok with the ship receiving an extra nerf bat swing after the upcoming balance to get that extra option? Yes, I am. Pesonally I don't think that my suggestion is a very big force multiplier, but this is for CCP to decide. I want to use my 3TC everywhere and in as many roles as possible, and for that I am more than willing to make sacrifices regarding its efectiveness compared to dedicated ships. So like losing at least 50m3 of cargospace and limiting the ability to switch modules around into very specific circumstances? No, since these very abilities are among the abilities that should define a T3C. I thought more of limiting their DPS, their tankiness and the like.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3311	Posted - 2017.04.19 17:30:57 - [57] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: And you are ok with the ship receiving an extra nerf bat swing after the upcoming balance to get that extra option? Yes, I am. Pesonally I don't think that my suggestion is a very big force multiplier, but this is for CCP to decide. I want to use my 3TC everywhere and in as many roles as possible, and for that I am more than willing to make sacrifices regarding its efectiveness compared to dedicated ships. So like losing at least 50m3 of cargospace and limiting the ability to switch modules around into very specific circumstances? No, since these very abilities are among the abilities that should define a T3C. I thought more of limiting their DPS, their tankiness and the like. When freighter were given agility/tank/cargo as option, what was nerfed was their base agility/tank/cargo. If you think CCP will change their way of viewing things, you have a though case to build.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 17:34:42 - [58] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: When freighter were given agility/tank/cargo as option, what was nerfed was their base agility/tank/cargo. If you think CCP will change their way of viewing things, you have a though case to build. I think what I say is quite logical: the versatility of T3Cs should be enhanced, and other abilities should pay the price for this enhancement.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3312	Posted - 2017.04.19 17:45:25 - [59] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: When freighter were given agility/tank/cargo as option, what was nerfed was their base agility/tank/cargo. If you think CCP will change their way of viewing things, you have a though case to build. I think what I say is quite logical: the versatility of T3Cs should be enhanced, and other abilities should pay the price for this enhancement. SO you would rather have nerf to DPS, tank, probe strength, mobility and EWAR I guess.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 17:51:02 - [60] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: SO you would rather have nerf to DPS, tank, probe strength, mobility and EWAR I guess. Yes, if this is necessary. Personally I think it is not, because with proper limitations on refitting in space (such as timers and combat timers) the power of a T3C should not be significantly boosted by the fact that it does not need a depot. But the devs know better.

Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 425	Posted - 2017.04.19 18:22:11 - [61] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: SO you would rather have nerf to DPS, tank, probe strength, mobility and EWAR I guess. Yes, if this is necessary. Personally I think it is not, because with proper limitations on refitting in space (such as timers and combat timers) the power of a T3C should not be significantly boosted by the fact that it does not need a depot. But the devs know better. So you would nerf the main selling points of the ship to add a unneeded gimmick? Change of the year.... Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 18:45:49 - [62] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: So you would nerf the main selling points of the ship to add a unneeded gimmick? Change of the year.... I do not think the main selling point of this ship should be its power, nor do I think that the ability to change fits easily is an unneeded gimmick. And who knows, this may indeed be the change of the year
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 425	Posted - 2017.04.19 19:21:56 - [63] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: So you would nerf the main selling points of the ship to add a unneeded gimmick? Change of the year.... I do not think the main selling point of this ship should be its power, nor do I think that the ability to change fits easily is an unneeded gimmick. And who knows, this may indeed be the change of the year Of course the main selling point of ANY ship is the tank/dps/EWAR it's going to bring to the table. It's not the "I can save 50m3 of space and not use a mobile depot", especially since you can already change your fit in space with minimal issues. And yes, it is a gimmick, since the restrictions you'd have to put on it to make it balanced would mean the only people who actively use this new "power" are site-runners who like to get into dangerous places in their nearly uncatchable fits and then change into ratting fits and are too lazy to get a mobile depot with them. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 19:27:41 - [64] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: yes, it is a gimmick There is an obvious contradiction in your argument. If this is only a gimmick, than the ship will not get nerfed because of it. If it is more than a gimmick, than it will be worth the nerf.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 425	Posted - 2017.04.19 19:39:56 - [65] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: yes, it is a gimmick There is an obvious contradiction in your argument. If this is only a gimmick, than the ship will not get nerfed because of it. If it is more than a gimmick, than it will be worth the nerf. It is a gimmick as every ship already can change their fit in space. That is what the mobile depot is for (as well as ships with the refitting service) Even if it is a gimmick, it is a powerfull ability that will need to be balanced by (likely) drop the cargohold size to keep you from being able to have too many items with you as well as limiting when you are able to change your fit. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 19:48:55 - [66] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: Even if it is a gimmick, it is a powerfull ability that will need to be balanced That's a contradiction in terms.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 19:54:01 - [67] - Quote By the way, I think that your idea about limiting the refitting ability by limiting carrying capacity is not bad. However, I think this needs to be done using a special refitting bay, not the regular cargo bay. This way it will be easier to tweak the number of possible configurations a single ship can carry without tempering with its cargo capacity. This will also enable an easy way to trigger refitting timers.
Cade Windstalker 1395	Posted - 2017.04.19 19:55:09 - [68] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: Even being able to swap out modules on the fly would give a T3C a ridiculous number of options Come on mate, I mentioned several times that refitting in space should not be available during combat or after it. This covers the cases you brought up. It does not, the current combat refitting timer is from when you shoot to a minute after you stop shooting. It says nothing about being in combat generally, and even if you completely restricted it while under any kind of combat timer it would still be stupidly powerful and half the situations on my list would still apply in some way shape or form.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 20:13:10 - [69] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Rhyme Bittern wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: Even being able to swap out modules on the fly would give a T3C a ridiculous number of options Come on mate, I mentioned several times that refitting in space should not be available during combat or after it. This covers the cases you brought up. It does not, the current combat refitting timer is from when you shoot to a minute after you stop shooting. It says nothing about being in combat generally, and even if you completely restricted it while under any kind of combat timer it would still be stupidly powerful and half the situations on my list would still apply in some way shape or form. These are valid points. I think that the restriction timer should be enhanced to cover all those situations, then.
Cade Windstalker 1396	Posted - 2017.04.19 20:18:43 - [70] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: Rhyme Bittern wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: Even being able to swap out modules on the fly would give a T3C a ridiculous number of options Come on mate, I mentioned several times that refitting in space should not be available during combat or after it. This covers the cases you brought up. It does not, the current combat refitting timer is from when you shoot to a minute after you stop shooting. It says nothing about being in combat generally, and even if you completely restricted it while under any kind of combat timer it would still be stupidly powerful and half the situations on my list would still apply in some way shape or form. These are valid points. I think that the restriction timer should be enhanced to cover all those situations, then. At which point we are back at the point of "do not allow refitting without a mobile depot or other external fitting service"

Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.19 20:26:18 - [71] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: At which point we are back at the point of "do not allow refitting without a mobile depot or other external fitting service" I don't think so. The problem with a depot is that it blocks (in a non-interesting way) the ability to multi-fit in general. Timers are a more fine-tuned way to control specific scenarios where unfair advantages appear.
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6413	Posted - 2017.04.19 22:01:03 - [72] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: You thinking something is needed does not mean it is. It does not, but I work with what I have. So far you have only said that "things are like that now, and this means they should stay like that in the future". When you will post a valid argument, like the ones made by others in this thread, you will be entitled to a serious reply. Choices in this game are very important. Should I use fit A or B? Kite or brawl? Your proposal removes the element of choice and as such removes an important element of the game. Further, it could make the ships over powered. Yes, I am aware of you limiting this to not include combat, but still it would make for a very powerful ship. CCP will almost surely first nerf T3Cs before giving them this buff. So you will not get what you are asking for. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.20 07:05:32 - [73] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Your proposal removes the element of choice and as such removes an important element of the game. Your other concerns were discussed several times in this thread, but this one is new and it is important. From listening to the dev talk I got the impression that CCP's vision concerning T3Cs is exactly that - a single ship that changes its role continuously, in-flight. I think that this actually enhances and intensifies the element of choice rather than remove it. Should I fit for pvp now and try to overcome the opponents in the system I just entered, or should I use my travel configuration and try to escape? Should I help my fleet as a support ship, a DPS ship or an EWAR ship? Is it safe for me to fit as a pve ship in this system? The fact that I make my choices in space rather than in a station does not mean I have less of a choice.
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6414	Posted - 2017.04.20 07:28:42 - [74] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Your proposal removes the element of choice and as such removes an important element of the game. Your other concerns were discussed several times in this thread, but this one is new and it is important. From listening to the dev talk I got the impression that CCP's vision concerning T3Cs is exactly that - a single ship that changes its role continuously, in-flight. I think that this actually enhances and intensifies the element of choice rather than remove it. Should I fit for pvp now and try to overcome the opponents in the system I just entered, or should I use my travel configuration and try to escape? Should I help my fleet as a support ship, a DPS ship or an EWAR ship? Is it safe for me to fit as a pve ship in this system? The fact that I make my choices in space rather than in a station does not mean I have less of a choice. Really, then why was that not what they implemented? And even if this is the case, trust me they will nerf it big time first. We have seen this time and time again. As for your "choices" the thing is you're "choices" are not constrained like they currently are, removing that constraint makes the ship more powerful necessitating an ex ante nerf before implementing these changes. Careful what you wish for...chances are it is going to be something that bites you in the ass, just as the changes to freighters have ended up biting idiot haulers in the ass. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.20 07:37:59 - [75] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Really, then why was that not what they implemented? And even if this is the case, trust me they will nerf it big time first. We have seen this time and time again. The point of this forum is to discuss ideas that are not implemented yet, but should (or should not) be. Regarding the nerf - read the thread. I have no problem with it if it comes, and things are already going to change drastically after the coming rebalance.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3318	Posted - 2017.04.20 12:23:53 - [76] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Really, then why was that not what they implemented? And even if this is the case, trust me they will nerf it big time first. We have seen this time and time again. If they had not gone back on their base idea that WH were not supposed to be populated permanently, T3 that can swap fit easily would of been the perfect ship design for that. Get in, fit for the content you spot there, run it and get out. A ship that really is a jack of all trade master of none would get used in place where getting the right ship is not exactly easy because of the relatively unknown portion of it. We're way past that point right now tho and there is no going back on that by now.
Cade Windstalker 1412	Posted - 2017.04.20 12:54:48 - [77] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: At which point we are back at the point of "do not allow refitting without a mobile depot or other external fitting service" I don't think so. The problem with a depot is that it blocks (in a non-interesting way) the ability to multi-fit in general. Timers are a more fine-tuned way to control specific scenarios where unfair advantages appear. It does not, the space required is fairly minimal on all but the smallest ships and those are already the ones most able to abuse refitting in space by swapping between travel and combat fits because their travel fits are so effective. For any other ship the 50m3 of a depot is a far lower impact than the space required for the fitting. What the depot does is require that you anchor something that can be shot and probed down and sit still in space while refitting. Both of these are mostly balanced trade-offs to the incredible power the ability to change your ship's capabilities on the fly gives you. In order for any kind of fiat self-refitting ability on a T3 to be balanced it would need to be balanced against a T3 simply using a mobile depot, at which point it's probably flat out worse than just using the mobile depot, because it doesn't have that small trade-off and invites abuse, so why implement it in the first place?
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.20 13:05:07 - [78] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: so why implement it in the first place? Mostly because of the fun factor. When you have to stop dead and anchor constructions in space in order to reconfigure a ship that its role is to be reconfigurable, you miss on the adventure potential that it should offer. My problem with the depot mechanic is not the risk involved in it, but the delay and the time consumption. The size of mobile depots is also not to be trifled with, considering that you need the cargo space for extra modules and extra sub-systems as well. It practically blocks T3Cs from becoming "adventure-into-the-unknown ships".
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 427	Posted - 2017.04.20 13:20:38 - [79] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: so why implement it in the first place? Mostly because of the fun factor. When you have to stop dead and anchor constructions in space in order to reconfigure a ship that its role is to be reconfigurable, you miss on the adventure potential that it should offer. My problem with the depot mechanic is not the risk involved in it, but the delay and the time consumption. The size of mobile depots is also not to be trifled with, considering that you need the cargo space for extra modules and extra sub-systems as well. It practically blocks T3Cs from becoming "adventure-into-the-unknown" ships. And what you keep missing is that in order to balance this "fun" mechanic, CCP will likely make you sit in space for 2-5 minutes and you are unable to do anything while the timer is running. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.20 13:27:13 - [80] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: in order to balance this "fun" mechanic, CCP will likely make you sit in space for 2-5 minutes and you are unable to do anything while the timer is running. One of the reasons I see for having this thread is so CCP becomes aware of our actual needs and wishes. I hope they find balancing mechanisms that do not involve hindrance of gameplay.

Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 428	Posted - 2017.04.20 13:58:40 - [81] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: in order to balance this "fun" mechanic, CCP will likely make you sit in space for 2-5 minutes and you are unable to do anything while the timer is running. One of the reasons I see for having this thread is so CCP becomes aware of our actual needs and wishes. I hope they find balancing mechanisms that do not involve hindrance of gameplay. 1) There is no need for this. Only you wishing for easier PVE 2) There is no way in hell this kind of ability would not be balanced by a timer you'd have to wait out in space, sitting still, while visible. The timer would likely be at least as long as the time it takes to anchor a mobile depot. If you want examples how CCP balancing works, look at freighters or capitals. What you seem to want is a tactical cruiser, that is able to change into whatever is needed with no meaningful choices. Wormholer for life.
Rhyme Bittern Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 25	Posted - 2017.04.20 14:07:47 - [82] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: There is no need for this. Only you wishing for easier PVE On the contrary, I want harder pve. And I want the ship that will let me attempt it.
Teckos Pech Amok. Goonswarm Federation 6414	Posted - 2017.04.20 21:57:59 - [83] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: Wander Prian wrote: in order to balance this "fun" mechanic, CCP will likely make you sit in space for 2-5 minutes and you are unable to do anything while the timer is running. One of the reasons I see for having this thread is so CCP becomes aware of our actual needs and wishes. I hope they find balancing mechanisms that do not involve hindrance of gameplay. Needs and wishes are kind of irrelevant when it comes to balance issues. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek 8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
James Zimmer D3RP Clan Elemental Tide 92	Posted - 2017.04.20 22:04:37 - [84] - Quote Rhyme Bittern wrote: The point of t3 strategic cruisers is not power, but versatility. As noted by devs, they should not be better than dedicated ships, but they should be able to fill many of their various roles. In the coming t3 balance, many of the current abilities and stats of t3 crusers will be nerfed, and rightfully so. However, their ability to fill multiple roles should be emphasised. One of the ways to do this should be to let strategic cruisers refit in space directly from their cargo bays, without having to use a mobile depot and the such. This will help the lone wolves using them immensely, because without a mobile depot their cargo bays will become free to carry alternative fits. Timers can be utilised to make sure this is not exploited. What say you? I'm all about simplifying things that require a lot of button clicks when they can take fewer button clicks, and this makes even more sense for a ship that's supposed to emphasize versatility. If I could ask for anything, I would say. 1. The ship must be stopped to begin refitting. 2. After you begin refitting, your ship can't do anything for 45 seconds. No weapons, no shield boosters, nothing. The time is lower than the 60 second mobile depot, because otherwise, this is actually a nerf in a way. 3. The game uses pre-refit stats until the refit is complete (to prevent people from instantly throwing on a stack of armor plates and shield extenders to extend their life). 4. There is a cool animation that shows the refit happening.
Wander Prian Art Of Explosions Hole Control 429	Posted - 2017.04.20 22:15:30 - [85] - Quote James Zimmer wrote: Rhyme Bittern wrote: The point of t3 strategic cruisers is not power, but versatility. As noted by devs, they should not be better than dedicated ships, but they should be able to fill many of their various roles. In the coming t3 balance, many of the current abilities and stats of t3 crusers will be nerfed, and rightfully so. However, their ability to fill multiple roles should be emphasised. One of the ways to do this should be to let strategic cruisers refit in space directly from their cargo bays, without having to use a mobile depot and the such. This will help the lone wolves using them immensely, because without a mobile depot their cargo bays will become free to carry alternative fits. Timers can be utilised to make sure this is not exploited. What say you? I'm all about simplifying things that require a lot of button clicks when they can take fewer button clicks, and this makes even more sense for a ship that's supposed to emphasize versatility. If I could ask for anything, I would say. 1. The ship must be stopped to begin refitting. 2. After you begin refitting, your ship can't do anything for 45 seconds. No weapons, no shield boosters, nothing. The time is lower than the 60 second mobile depot, because otherwise, this is actually a nerf in a way. 3. The game uses pre-refit stats until the refit is complete (to prevent people from instantly throwing on a stack of armor plates and shield extenders to extend their life). 4. There is a cool animation that shows the refit happening. 2) The timer would be longer as it's a special case thing 3) Probably not possible due to coding 4)100% not possible due to game-coding. Wormholer for life.
James Zimmer D3RP Clan Elemental Tide 92	Posted - 2017.04.20 22:34:27 - [86] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: 2) The timer would be longer as it's a special case thing 3) Probably not possible due to coding 4)100% not possible due to game-coding. 2. Difference of opinion, but you could do the same time or longer if you wanted 3. Actually, this is extremely possible, and probably easy. Your armor repper runs its entire cycle on one stat and then updates your armor stat at the end of the cycle, this is essentially the same thing, just updating more stats. 4. An animation is extremely doable. There are animations when you go into warp, or go into bastion. Even when you lock onto another ship there's an animation as your guns rotate to track that ship. You would just need tear down and build up animations for every subsystem in the game. It's a decent amount of work, but not at all impossible.
Cade Windstalker 1416	Posted - 2017.04.20 22:35:49 - [87] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: James Zimmer wrote: I'm all about simplifying things that require a lot of button clicks when they can take fewer button clicks, and this makes even more sense for a ship that's supposed to emphasize versatility. If I could ask for anything, I would say. 1. The ship must be stopped to begin refitting. 2. After you begin refitting, your ship can't do anything for 45 seconds. No weapons, no shield boosters, nothing. The time is lower than the 60 second mobile depot, because otherwise, this is actually a nerf in a way. 3. The game uses pre-refit stats until the refit is complete (to prevent people from instantly throwing on a stack of armor plates and shield extenders to extend their life). 4. There is a cool animation that shows the refit happening. 2) The timer would be longer as it's a special case thing 3) Probably not possible due to coding 4)100% not possible due to game-coding. #1 is also not actually possible due to coding, at least not in any meaningful sense. You can set your intended velocity to zero, and it will drop until CCP.Round gets bored and says it's zero, but once you've moved your ship you have a vector and a speed in space. Strictly speaking you could say "Velocity < 1" or whatever, but that would still make this worth less than a mobile depot in most cases, so yeah not a fan. Oh and none of Zimmer's suggestions here line up well with current refitting mechanics, at all.
James Zimmer D3RP Clan Elemental Tide 92	Posted - 2017.04.20 22:49:19 - [88] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: #1 is also not actually possible due to coding, at least not in any meaningful sense. You can set your intended velocity to zero, and it will drop until CCP.Round gets bored and says it's zero, but once you've moved your ship you have a vector and a speed in space. Strictly speaking you could say "Velocity < 1" or whatever, but that would still make this worth less than a mobile depot in most cases, so yeah not a fan. Oh and none of Zimmer's suggestions here line up well with current refitting mechanics, at all. Ok Cade, you got me I should have said less than a certain, low speed, or thrown a number out there like 5 m/s or something. However, we're not writing the code here, just ideas, and "stopped" conveys the idea just fine, unless the world has suddenly changed to the world of The Giver where we must use "precision of language". The mechanics I suggested are a bit different than current mechanics, but it's not dramatic, mostly just an added timer, and probably an animation over the module so you know how long you have left. I can't imagine that either of those would be that complicated. Besides, I'm not sure that a bit different is a bad thing. Why not put a time delay on ALL refitting in space? People swapping out guns faster than they can reload those guns always seemed a bit cheesy to me.
Cade Windstalker 1416	Posted - 2017.04.20 23:25:50 - [89] - Quote James Zimmer wrote: Ok Cade, you got me I should have said less than a certain, low speed, or thrown a number out there like 5 m/s or something. However, we're not writing the code here, just ideas, and "stopped" conveys the idea just fine, unless the world has suddenly changed to the world of The Giver where we must use "precision of language". The mechanics I suggested are a bit different than current mechanics, but it's not dramatic, mostly just an added timer, and probably an animation over the module so you know how long you have left. I can't imagine that either of those would be that complicated. Besides, I'm not sure that a bit different is a bad thing. Why not put a time delay on ALL refitting in space? People swapping out guns faster than they can reload those guns always seemed a bit cheesy to me. Like I said, it's a fun fact not so much a meaningful objection. I personally think this whole idea is deeply flawed and OP. And yes, what you're suggesting would be dramatically different than current mechanics, in that you would have the stats of the ship with those old modules persist while refitting. That would be a major change from how it works now. Never mind that you don't take into account things like active vs passive modules and similar. You can't refit with a weapons timer or while a module is cycling, so you can't refit a gun in lieu of reloading it.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 1142	Posted - 2017.04.21 10:16:33 - [90] - Quote At one point I've suggested something similar (still have a link to that, quite possibly, a trainwreck of an idea in my signature, loo lazy to remove it). Tbh I think that at this point CCP already know what they want of T3Cs, so these suggestions are, possibly, too late to the party. Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become



Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [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.