| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
mucklavee
Minmatar
The Shadow Order
SMASH Alliance
   |
Posted - 2008.05.21 09:11:00 -
[31]
yeah i was kinda upset when i found out the cheetah was changed to the probe hull it looked way better as the vigil, now if i want to step in the cov ops i will be stepping into a ship that looks like a mentally challenged jawa built out of legos or train up for the buzzard or anathema
|
Tharrn
Amarr
Epitoth Fleetyards
Vigilia Valeria
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 10:32:00 -
[32]
I for one am very happy as the Magnate modell absolutely kicks ass. Even more so in the black and silver Khanid colors. I love it!
Now recruiting! |
|
CCP Atropos
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 10:53:00 -
[33]
As I said in another thread on exactly this topic:
"The Maulus based Helios model and Vigil based Cheetah models are both essentially wrong. They aren't Tech II version of the astrometrics frigates. With the introduction of the Magnate as the long missing Amarr frigate, we can right all these wrongs and fix them to be based from their correct predecessors."
Whilst I can understand that some people prefer X ship model over Y, the Helios and Cheetah were using the wrong models. Now they aren't. You can argue the pros and cons of their looks back and forth all you want, but unless there's a technical reason for changing them back, they will stay as Imicus/Helios, Probe/Cheetah, Magnate/Anathema and Heron/Buzzard.
Ships in game will update to show the Imicus hull when Empyrean Age is released, and invention will now use the Imicus for building Helios'. And similarly for the Probe/Cheetah.
|
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 11:13:00 -
[34]
any chance of doing us a favor and getting the cool spiky dish on the cheetah added to the hyena now that the model is gone?
just say it's the web senor amp
|
XLR Eight
Viziam
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 11:46:00 -
[35]
Edited by: XLR Eight on 21/05/2008 11:49:09
 Originally by: CCP Atropos
"The Maulus based Helios model and Vigil based Cheetah models are both essentially wrong. They aren't Tech II version of the astrometrics frigates. With the introduction of the Magnate as the long missing Amarr frigate, we can right all these wrongs and fix them to be based from their correct predecessors."
Isn't there another simple solution to keep everyone happy? Like switching the hulls between the Maulus <-> Imicus and that way we could keep the Helios?
|
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 12:49:00 -
[36]
Not really, as the Keres is still there. You'd have to swap both Maulus/Keres and Imicus/Helios to keep consistent.
One problem may be that of these 4 Gal ships the Helios may actually be the most used, by older chars who have trained up CovOps and cloaking IV, and has thus invested a bit of effort in getting a Helios.
BTW I think that I am liking the T2 imicus hull helios a lot, very clean design.
|
matt way
Southern Cross Incorporated
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 13:29:00 -
[37]
This change makes me sad  I loved my Helios..
|
Scouteye
Locasta Tactical
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 14:00:00 -
[38]
What does this mean for a fitted helios etc in a hanger after the patch.
Will we wake up and find the hull changed but the same module layout or a differant module layout?
I'm thinking of people with rigs fitted for a specific fit the hull is no longer capable of.
|
Shionoya Risa
The Xenodus Initiative.
Overclockers Podpilot Services
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 14:08:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Scouteye
What does this mean for a fitted Helios etc in a hanger after the patch.
You get an ugly ship instead of a decent looking one. Nothing more, nothing less.
-----
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 15:20:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 21/05/2008 15:23:06
Originally by: CCP Atropos
As I said in another thread on exactly this topic:
"The Maulus based Helios model and Vigil based Cheetah models are both essentially wrong. They aren't Tech II version of the astrometrics frigates. With the introduction of the Magnate as the long missing Amarr frigate, we can right all these wrongs and fix them to be based from their correct predecessors."
And the point we're trying to make is that they were "wrong", but wrong in a GOOD way. Who cares if it's inconsistent, it's no more inconsistent than the Nighthawk/Onyx being based on railboat hulls, the Eos using the Brutix hull instead of the Myrmidon, etc. The inconsistency is entirely a benefit, we get a much better looking model, and there are no balance issues caused by the difference in T1 hull. It's not like we're talking about the Maulus hull giving 500% more dps than the Imicus hull, making them inconsistent and unbalanced, the two options are exactly the same balance-wise.
Quote:
Whilst I can understand that some people prefer X ship model over Y, the Helios and Cheetah were using the wrong models. Now they aren't. You can argue the pros and cons of their looks back and forth all you want, but unless there's a technical reason for changing them back, they will stay as Imicus/Helios, Probe/Cheetah, Magnate/Anathema and Heron/Buzzard.
But why make the change? The majority of the players prefer the old model, and absolutely nothing is accomplished by changing them. If you don't change the stats of the ship, the looks are the only thing to talk about!
The simple fact is that all covert ops frigates are virtually identical in performance. The only real reason to prefer one over the other is for their appearance. In my case, I trained Gallente Frigate V because I wanted the existing Helios model. Nerfing it to a horribly ugly Imicus hull makes those two weeks a complete waste. Why needlessly annoy your paying customers like that?
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 15:42:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Pac SubCom on 21/05/2008 15:44:26
It is a good change. I'm looking forward to my new Cheetah! The Helios doesn't look too bad either now.
---------------
∞ TQFE
|
Farrah Jun
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 16:07:00 -
[42]
Well, guess I better cancel that 30 day maulus BPC run that I had to wait 20 days to get a slot on then....
|
Rooker
Lysian Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 16:14:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Rooker on 21/05/2008 16:15:05
Originally by: CCP Atropos
Whilst I can understand that some people prefer X ship model over Y, the Helios and Cheetah were using the wrong models. Now they aren't. You can argue the pros and cons of their looks back and forth all you want, but unless there's a technical reason for changing them back, they will stay as Imicus/Helios, Probe/Cheetah, Magnate/Anathema and Heron/Buzzard.
Gahhh.... DIAF
WTS: Helios
WTB: Amarr Frigate skillbook 
--
Let Us Avoid Systems Via Autopilot |
Ezekiel Sulastin
Central Research Nexus
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 16:20:00 -
[44]
BPCs are a valid issue. Looks aren't. If you trained a ship specifically for the looks of it rather than the capabilities, you are a blithering fool and I would love to have all your stuff when you quit.
----
WTB Armor Nerf Hardener II, 10^100 isk OBO |
Letrange
Chaosstorm Corporation
Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 16:32:00 -
[45]
*sigh*
Please tell me you fixed the stats on the cheetah as well then. If it's based on the probe (which makes sense bonus wise) make it able to fly drones and have a bigger cargo bay (oh yea I really want that cargo bay for more probes).
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 16:48:00 -
[46]
Originally by: CCP Atropos
As I said in another thread on exactly this topic:
"The Maulus based Helios model and Vigil based Cheetah models are both essentially wrong. They aren't Tech II version of the astrometrics frigates. With the introduction of the Magnate as the long missing Amarr frigate, we can right all these wrongs and fix them to be based from their correct predecessors."
Whilst I can understand that some people prefer X ship model over Y, the Helios and Cheetah were using the wrong models. Now they aren't. You can argue the pros and cons of their looks back and forth all you want, but unless there's a technical reason for changing them back, they will stay as Imicus/Helios, Probe/Cheetah, Magnate/Anathema and Heron/Buzzard.
Ships in game will update to show the Imicus hull when Empyrean Age is released, and invention will now use the Imicus for building Helios'. And similarly for the Probe/Cheetah.
Well, I'm not -that- bothered by the change, more disappointed. You're making what is essentially a fluff change. You want consistency between the hulls of the T1 and T2 ship roles, at least in this case. I don't personally see this as important, but fine. And some people seem to like it. So since it sounds like a done deal, and most of the arguments against it have been given already, I'm just going to add one thing that I'm not sure has been mentioned:
You're bringing in one fluff consistency and losing another: the continuity of the last, what, three years?
Please consider this next time you think about such a change. It may seem silly, but it's a credit to your graphic design that players can become so attached to something as non-functional as the looks of ship that spends most of its time cloaked.
Thanks.
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Kagura Nikon
Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 16:52:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin
BPCs are a valid issue. Looks aren't. If you trained a ship specifically for the looks of it rather than the capabilities, you are a blithering fool and I would love to have all your stuff when you quit.
the looks are the most important thing! ALWAYS! Only loosers pay attention on stats mainly.
You buy a car 90% of time based on how it looks also!
-------------------------------------------------
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Grarr Dexx
Naval Protection Corp
Carpe Universitas
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 17:01:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin
BPCs are a valid issue. Looks aren't. If you trained a ship specifically for the looks of it rather than the capabilities, you are a blithering fool and I would love to have all your stuff when you quit.
the looks are the most important thing! ALWAYS! Only loosers pay attention on stats mainly.
You buy a car 90% of time based on how it looks also!
Guess I belong in that 10%
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Central Research Nexus
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 17:28:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin
BPCs are a valid issue. Looks aren't. If you trained a ship specifically for the looks of it rather than the capabilities, you are a blithering fool and I would love to have all your stuff when you quit.
the looks are the most important thing! ALWAYS! Only loosers pay attention on stats mainly.
You buy a car 90% of time based on how it looks also!
Ah, but I'm not fighting something in my car, and the performance characteristics that matter are getting from point A to point B - if you need extra speed and all, chances are you're looking at those characteristics and emphasizing them in your selection. Not to mention, CDL-notwithstanding, you're able to drive any model of car from most any manufacturer without spending time doing racial training.
Conversely, you do spend time training for each race in Eve, and the statistical abilities for fitting and ship bonuses become very important. Choosing a ship merely on looks in such a case is stupid if you know there is a more effective ship for the job that you could have trained for.
----
WTB Armor Nerf Hardener II, 10^100 isk OBO |
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 17:56:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin
Ah, but I'm not fighting something in my car, and the performance characteristics that matter are getting from point A to point B - if you need extra speed and all, chances are you're looking at those characteristics and emphasizing them in your selection. Not to mention, CDL-notwithstanding, you're able to drive any model of car from most any manufacturer without spending time doing racial training.
Conversely, you do spend time training for each race in Eve, and the statistical abilities for fitting and ship bonuses become very important. Choosing a ship merely on looks in such a case is stupid if you know there is a more effective ship for the job that you could have trained for.
Ah, but since you're not fighting anything in EVE either, only pretending to, looks are as valid a reason as any for many.  YMMV, obviously.
The other thing is that CovOps are -relatively- uniform because of their abilities and specialized role, so a lot of people do seem to have chosen them based on looks rather than on the marginal differences in function.
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Ice Globe
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 17:59:00 -
[51]
I don't see what all the complaining is about, the ship is probably going to be cloaked most the time anyway 
______________
|
Gaogan
Solar Storm
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 18:48:00 -
[52]
While you guys are at it, how about dropping one of the useless mid slots for a third high slot so you can actually fit the full cloak/probe/cyno combo like all the other cov ops can?
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 19:11:00 -
[53]
it's not fluff really, it's not being added to the game.
it's just how the game work, you take a probe, you invent a better one.
|
Cyber Claw
InNova Tech Inc
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 19:17:00 -
[54]
the helios is also NOT getting the imicus drone bay or bandwidth, and what use 5 mids on a covps with no ew bonus
I don't care who you are, or where you come from, or what you want, but if you threaten my COFFEE, I'll kill you.
"He's dead, Jim." -a doctor, not a miracle worker |
Manfred Rickenbocker
The Elliance
Delta.Green
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 19:40:00 -
[55]
As long as they FINALLY give the Helios the third high (cloak, covert-cyno, probe launcher) Ill be happy.
------------------------
Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Cyber Claw
InNova Tech Inc
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 20:11:00 -
[56]
no 3rd high, same slots as b4
:(
I don't care who you are, or where you come from, or what you want, but if you threaten my COFFEE, I'll kill you.
"He's dead, Jim." -a doctor, not a miracle worker |
Lareon Denery
Project Aquarion Valkyrie
Deus Ex.
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 21:23:00 -
[57]
I'm a bit disappointed of this change. Prober is my primary role in EVE and do it with a look-like-Imicus ship is... brrrrr, terrible.
Well, this isn't a disaster anyway but... :/
Then... time to finish my Caldari Frigate rank. And time to sell my Helios :(
|
Tek'a Rain
Collegium Mechanicae Holding
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 22:37:00 -
[58]
Did it at least get a change/boost to the dronebay? Because Creodrone making a ship with a SMALLER bay then its t1, but still having useless drone bonus would be even sillier then this change! |
Zeba
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 23:06:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Scilent Enigma
I guess reprocessing my poor Cheetah before it is defiled and train for the Amarr Covert Ops is the only thing left to do...
Why in the world would you want to get rid of a cov ops that goes as fast as an interceptor? Plus going 800+ms cloaked is no joke. |
VicturusTeSaluto
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 23:11:00 -
[60]
Oh, hell no. The imicus model sucks.
Change it back already. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |