| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
   |
Posted - 2008.01.15 22:53:00 -
[1]
This is a two part idea.
The first idea I had was that it would be cool to have a module that goes in a high slot and grants you the ability to construct items in a ship. Due to the fact that that kind of machinery would take up a large amount of space then using the module should reduce the cargo capacity of the ship it is installed in. With the reduction in cargo capacity and the requirement to hold both the raw materials and the finished product I think only large sips would have the opportunity to o this but even a carrier might be small.
This leads me to my second proposition: A level 2 tech freighter that has the power capacity and a hardpoint slot (or two) to put these manufacturing plants. my reason for doing this is that machinery takes up quite a bit of place and I can't imagine putting it fitting in an industrial or carrier if its the kind of stuff that requires a station normally.
You would only be able to produce one item per module and would have to install a blueprint into it to manufacture before starting it up and it would stop either when you tell it to, be it manual or after a pre-set number of runs, or would auto cancel if you run out of material or cargo space (if you put more materials in faster than they are used up).
Some additional things that could work with this would be a refinery module and research modules which would operate on a similar principle. I can imagine someone parking a mobile refinery in a busy area and make some money off miners by charging for refinery service thus saving the miners trips. A refinery module could possibly be allowed on mining barges so long as cargo space permits.
In all cases the trade-off would be the loss of cargo space potentially lowering the profit generated by selling one cargo load for removing the cost required for renting factory space at a station and added mobility.
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Xangetzu Kenirou
Gallente
Southern Cross Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 22:59:00 -
[2]
well a carrier is most suited to act like a station, having a corp hanger and a ship maintenence array. what if instead, when fitted the module changes the SMA around. instead of having 1 million m3.... you have 500,000 m3. this is something worth refining and expanding on. as it is sometimes living in deep space, doesn't allowfor stations to grant production spots, then again you could always use a pos. some people might not want to take that option however
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 23:24:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Xindi Kraid on 15/01/2008 23:24:01
POSs are very expensive and require the support of many players to build, support and protect and as such can't be undertaken by single players or small corporations. A POS would provide a great deal of capitol and would be the only way to fabricate ships larger than shuttles and frigates and to manufacture multiple things, while a in-ship factory would provide mobility by being able to take your services to the customer it would also be considerably cheaper and thus more open to smaller groups. Another advantage is the ability to work in high-sec space.
The reason I picked the freighter was that the whole point of having a mobile factory is the option to sever total reliance upon a station and only a freighter has the massive amount of space to be able to hold the materials required to stay away from a station from any great period of time; a carrier would have ample space for cargo but a freighter has 50x the space and could operate for a few days before having to head to home base and you could even carry your stuff with you . A carrier would still be tied to its home base to carry the materials and any other small craft you happen to own. Capitol ships aren't allowed into High-sec space anyway. You would want to manufacture more than one item and since most items don't use exactly the same materials you would fill up cargo space merely due to the variety of required materials.
My thought had been to have the equipment remove 100,000 cargo space and have 2-4 high slots available on a tech 2 freighter leaving you with over 300,000 of cargo space remaining.
I suppose it could b allowed on capitol ships but it would leave industrials and the proposed freighters with an advantage due to their increased mobility and would leave the tech 2 freighter the only ship able to produce ships. There could be multiple factory modules. Some that take up a very small area and can only make ammo, ones for module production and one for ship production.
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
LordArcher
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 23:46:00 -
[4]
I think it would have to reduce the cargo by a static number rather than a dynamic. and definitely it would work. and you could have different levels. so for example an industrial ship might be able to equip the lowest level and build ammo on the run. imagine how handy that would be! a carrier could equip a medium one, be able to build small and medium weapons, maybe frigates.
and then a T2 freighter, which i think the class of it would be "mobile factory" would be the equivalent of the mining barge. the large level mobile factor having a CPU drain so high no ship could equip it. and the mobile factory would have a 99.5% less drain then all other ships. same trick that CCP used to keep the mining barge the only one able to use strip miners. Be able to build anything that the finished product could fight into the hanger. probably say more along the lines of 4 of the finished products could fight into the hanger (plus the minerals) because the product also has to fight inside the factory while under construction.
The thing is that the reason these are usually restricted to stations is the have a HUGE power drain. so obviously, not just any ship could fight it. which is perfect if you ask me.
The other features would rock! having mobile refinery, mobile research. and with all that it could usher in an era of EVE where there are Nomad corps. drifting thought 1.0 to 0.0 space. hehe. awesome.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 00:02:00 -
[5]
Some nice ideas. /signed
C.
 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 07:21:00 -
[6]
Originally by: LordArcher
The thing is that the reason these are usually restricted to stations is the have a HUGE power drain. so obviously, not just any ship could fight it. which is perfect if you ask me.
That was one reason for pitching this idea for a specialized platform. I figured that you couldn't hook a factory to just any ship in the same way you can't put spec ops cloak on just any frigate. The freighter seemed to make the most sense as it has ample space that would be required for it and its a non-combat vessel and thus makes more sense than using a carrier or titan that's going into battle Specialized equipment = specialized platform.
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Reggie Stoneloader
Teikoku Trade Conglomerate
Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 15:24:00 -
[7]
I'd be enthusiastic about putting these things on industrial ships. CPU-hungry, inefficient modules that are specialized, like POS arrays, for manufacturing ammunition or a certain type of module, that anchor the ship when in use (seige mode) and can be used by T1 or T2 industrial ships would scratch the itch nicely, in my opinion. I'd add a refinery module, too.
Crusades: Security Status |
YouGotRipped
Gallente
Ewigkeit
Galactic Research
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 15:31:00 -
[8]
Edited by: YouGotRipped on 16/01/2008 15:37:38
Edited by: YouGotRipped on 16/01/2008 15:34:41
How about a Death star? hahah
You obviously have no idea what this game is all about.
It is precisely the fact that factories have a fixed location in space that makes warfare less rigid and gives more options as to how to bring down an alliance.
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 16:57:00 -
[9]
How does knowing EXACTLY who to attack where make warfare less rigid?
God forbid you have to get a scount to find your target first.
For me it would be more fluid because you will actually have to employ teamwork. Bombarding a station is one thing. You know where it is and what it is defended by since the defenses are also fixed. A mobile factory on the other hand would require you to find it first and thus you never know what you are getting into. They can always jump out of system if they suspect an attack.
Being more mobile would make gameplay more fluid because you have to find your target first and would also make the economy more fluid by having goods ghange places more. One day the cheapest goods are in one system but tomorrow the factory has moved elsewhere
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
LordArcher
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 22:51:00 -
[10]
this wouldn't nix stations. Think about it. You can't do everything from that little factory. Sure you might be able to build as high as Battle ships. but you still can't build titans, or freighters or other large ships. maybe not even station structures. You would still need stations.
And This really gives young corps a chance to make it out into low sec earlier in the game. With a mobile factory or mobile something else. they can jump out into low sec space and then return to high sec later until they earn enough to stay out there. I think it is a good idea.
|
|
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 10:01:00 -
[11]
That was the general idea. Add options escpecially for smaller corps and singles who can't afford a POS
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Xavia Cameron
Caldari
Southern Cross Incorporated
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 10:30:00 -
[12]
Also, just to be sure.. You plan for any production jobs to stop once the ship goes offline, or cloak. If its making thinks it needs to be findable.
Also, depending on use You should have two versions.
1. T2 Freighter-esc ship that you suggested. Give nomads a chance in EVE, this thing would pair well with a roqual.
2. New Tier carrier. Builds cruisers and below, and modules.. Quickly and inefficiently. Remove a little bit of the home-field advantage. Oh, and tanks a fair chunk.
(Don't we already have an industial reconfig mod? just change it to enable a ships prod lines (aswell as roquals compression))
--
Fix Clone Vat Bays
Fix Local
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 21:55:00 -
[13]
Well my plan was for the ship not to be able to fit any combat modules cloak included so the only cloaking would be from the gate byt its s short period of time it would be annoying if it cut off your production every time you flew through a stargate
As for producing offline I actually don't know wich one would be better but I think most people would probably want it to be when the ship is outside of the station only. After all if you can produce while docked why not just use the station's resources. If you abandon your ship in the midle of nowherethough I suppose it could stay online but thats a bad idea becuase somone could take it and no ammount of insurance would cover the cargo
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 22:45:00 -
[14]
Originally by: LordArcher
The thing is that the reason these are usually restricted to stations is the have a HUGE power drain. so obviously, not just any ship could fight it. which is perfect if you ask me.
Unless they also introduce space intensive power units.
A good sized industrial can have close to 20,000m3 worth of cargo space (with expanders). From an in-game perspetive I don't see why you couldn't throw in a 5,000m3 reactor in there.
Quote:
The other features would rock! having mobile refinery, mobile research. and with all that it could usher in an era of EVE where there are Nomad corps. drifting thought 1.0 to 0.0 space. hehe. awesome.
That would be wonderful. With the Roqual EvE seems to finally be adding in some infrastrure for true nomadic corporations. A module like this would go a long way twoards that game play option.
Though one of the big things here (and the flaw of the Roqual) is that so far the focus seems to be on adding bigger ISK sinks for already large/powerful corperations. With the nomads, I think this would be an exelent place to try developing a 'from the ground up' tree. Starting with a set of 'small' modules for groups that only have access to regular industrial ships and then adding bigger and better versions as people advance through that path.. similar to how bigger warships get added as people grow into them.
I would actually get really exited about good nomad support in this game. Bigger and badder battleships and multi-billion isk capital ships are so unobtainable (esp if one isn't going the 'massive alliance' route) that I end up just yawning at them.
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.20 00:21:00 -
[15]
Well the idea is to have a space requirement to the factories so the 5,000m3 reactor would be part of that but there would still be a CPU requirement.
There could be multiple sizes of factory module but an industrial could only mount one small factory and still have enough cargo space available for the materials and finished product.. The tech 2 freighter would be able to hold multiple modules and be able to produce more stuff that the industrial sized module (ships and factory modules).
Also the module itself when packaged would still take up a significant amount of space so you can't use frigates to move these things. That means make sure you have at least an industrial before buying one
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.22 07:29:00 -
[16]
To the top
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Nemtar Nataal
|
Posted - 2008.01.22 08:24:00 -
[17]
Honestly, If you want a factory module you should apply it to the platfrom where its most sooted.
The Rorqual is so fare the closest you are going to get to a mobile industrial platform. If you want a factory module and i would admit it would be cool as hell, I think that module should be applyed to Rorqual or another ship commisioned by ORE.
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.22 10:30:00 -
[18]
ORE is a mining company. They would make sense for a mobile refinery but none for a factory. Perhaps they could make a unique class of ship devoted to manufacture in a similar way to how ORE ships are devoted to mining
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Reggie Stoneloader
Teikoku Trade Conglomerate
Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2008.01.28 07:14:00 -
[19]
Maybe this could be applied to the Jump Freighter. It's got the bay for it, and would justify its existence as a complement to the Rorqual.
Crusades: Security Status |
JagerX
|
Posted - 2008.01.28 08:45:00 -
[20]
/signed. (Awesome ideas)
|
|
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 10:20:00 -
[21]
<--- Thread Necromancer
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
Morcam
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 13:55:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Morcam on 09/02/2008 13:59:39
A specialized ORE cap ship, much like the rorqual, could be great for this. Also, a counterpart to the rorqual could be incredible, perhaps making a pair that can be used individually, but can be combined in a mining operation for extreme mining power. One able to compress, the other able to refine compressed ore. Each giving a mining bonus, but when combined, giving much larger bonuses. Just an idea.
|
Xindi Kraid
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 06:05:00 -
[23]
That does sound interesting. One issue is space. The refinery would have less capacity that the miner woulddn't it?
--Bird of Prey: Forum God
1. War
2.
3. Profit |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |