| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Lore Varan
Caltech Shipyards
   |
Posted - 2008.10.29 15:08:00 -
[151]
Crane badly needs more grid to fit a mwd.
Was ok before with the +2 warp and good agility.
But for 0.0 bubble camp gate running it must use mwd which atm is a major pain to fit.
|
Rev Russ
Caldari
Nanoprints
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 15:27:00 -
[152]
Love the changes!! I think I am going to wet myself 
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 15:45:00 -
[153]
 Originally by: Electric Fox
I'd like some more discussion on the shield/armor tanking split on the deep space transports. Fitting plates reduces manuverability and fitting shields increases sig radius which bring their own drawbacks. Reduced manuverablilty means it takes longer to warp, providing more time for a tackle and increased sig raduis means you get locked faster. The former affects you for every jump allowing people to try and catch up with you or organise a trip down the pipe. The latter only affects you when you're engaged.
Secondly, the Occator and Impel respectively have 6 and 7 low slots whilst the Mastodon and Bustard each have 5. Using up lowslots for armor plates reduces the Occator and Impel's capacity to fit warp core stabs, cargo expanders, nanos or inertia stabs. The respective 1 and 2 mid slots on the Occator and Impel can only be used for afterburner, MWD, cap chargers, cap batteries - basically less useful stuff. Meanwhile, the Mastodon and Bustard, while only having 3 mid slots providing less slots for shield extenders have 5 free low slots for the aformentioned usefulness.
The bottom line to this point is that if you're only going to give these ships the power grid to fit up to 2 battlships sized shield extenders/plates then it won't make much difference. Otherwise, the Armor tanking ships are going to have to juggle the balence of their low slots whilst the mid slots don't get used for very much.
Oh, fantastic change to the blockade runners by the way. I no longer regret that Viator purchase! I used to do complexes in a Viator as it was allowed through the acceleration gate whilst t1 indies weren't. It now also fills the role of cloaking loot/salvage storage to accompany mates on complexes. Warp in, cloak, wait for all the rats to be killed, have someone else salvage, decloak, scoop jettisoned salvage, recloak, onto the next acceleration gate.
This. The way things are now the smart thing to do with the low slots and rig slots on the blockade runners is to fill them with agility, speed, fitting, and mass reduction mods. The mids are always filled with a shield hp buffer or resists. CCP, after your changes the slots will still be used that way.
Do any of you fly these things. Do you seriously expect peeps flying the "armor tankers" to make their blockade "runners" bricks by fitting plates in the lows?
As to the give more pg to the Caldari Blockade Runner crowd, just fit a MAPC ffs. I have to fit a PDS on my Viator to squeeze a mwd on it. At least you have more slots to supplement your shield tank. Each of the blockade runners has a disability to overcome when you look at them. The Amarr blockade runner has two gaping shield resists and very few mids with which to tank. The Minmatar has fewer non-high slots and a largely useless extra high slot as well as not much pg. You have to be creative and adaptable to overcome each ships drawback.
As to the Deep Space Transports, I have not used them. Not sure exactly what the idea is with them. Considering their lack of agility, is the +2 warp strength even worth anything (HIC out-moded that for them too). Don't see them being used as alternate blockade runners. Don't need tanking hauler in 0.0 as the belt will already be tanked. Impel if it's being used is simply stuffed with expanded cargos since it will overtake an Itty V. Don't really care much for them. But if I did I surely would not be fitting plates to the "armor tanking" ones. If you really expect and believe people will fit plates on an Impel, you might want to give it some more agility and speed as the "shield tankers" will not suffer as much from a slight sig radius increase from shield expanders.
You need to examine and analyze more how these ships are used and will be used instead of stubbornly insisting on unrealistic backstory ideas of racial differences in ships.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 15:49:00 -
[154]
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 29/10/2008 02:36:18
This is the dumbest ideas CCP has come up with yet. And I'm skilled up to use both Caldari and Gallente T2 haulers.
The ships are hard enough to catch already. And now you just want them to be able to be used with impunity? Does CCP just want everyone except those in combat ships to operate in complete safety?
I know that the developers and game design guys aren't idiots, so that must mean that they're doing this on purpose, just to **** us off. WTF is wrong with you people?
Trying to be constructive:
Now when anyone (me) wants to move high value cargo (billions in officer mods) through empire, or anywhere else for that matter, I just hop in my Crane or Viator and go. Nothing can stop me, you can't see me, I fit a couple stabs for good measure, unless I lag out on a session change, I'm unstoppable.
How is this good gameplay CCP? Eve wasn't safe enough for the moron Carebears that couldn't figure out how to not be killed, so you had to hand them a solution on a plate? The dev team doesn't make any sense anymore.
Typical of you really. For someone who hates carebears as much as you, you certainly whine as much as one, if not more.
To CCP: 2 thumbs way up!
I find it amusing that all the seasoned PVPers are against this change, while all of the incompetent carebears (Caldari?) are all for it.
Removing risk from Eve is always bad. This is no exception. It further mitigates risk and makes everything easier for the stupid and inept, and this directly hurts those that are smart and imaginative. But I'm sure you wouldn't know what that's like, now would you?
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
[Vid] I M M O R T A L
|
Miss Marketing
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 15:54:00 -
[155]
MMMMOAR Carebears Online. Seriously CCP did you fire everyone that worked on the game 2-3 years ago and replaced them with people from Hello Kitty?
|
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:02:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I find it amusing that all the seasoned PVPers are against this change, while all of the incompetent carebears (Caldari?) are all for it.
Removing risk from Eve is always bad. This is no exception. It further mitigates risk and makes everything easier for the stupid and inept, and this directly hurts those that are smart and imaginative. But I'm sure you wouldn't know what that's like, now would you?
Your childish taunting isn't helping your point. Did it ever occur to you that if you acted like an adult, people might listen? Oh and gee thanks for tarring all and sundry (anyone who disagrees with you) as incompetent carebears and especially anyone who's Caldari. What do you do for an encore, call those of a given race stupid in real life?
Grow up. Talk sensibly. Someone might listen.
___
My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Environmental Effects
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:10:00 -
[157]
CCP, sorry for tone of last post. Overall I do like the addition of the cov ops cloak to replace the largely useless +2 wcs bonus for the blockade runners (because of HICs). It will need to be tested. Cov ops frigs still die to proper and skilled gate camps in 0.0. Expect the same or more will happen to cov ops blockade runners.
On the whole there is an advantage (as there probably should be, although whether it should be so pronounced? meh) to the cov ops ship in 0.0 due to it's agility and speed. However, in low sec no bubbles increase that advantage for the cloaker. The yarr crowd needs to wait for testing. I doubt the new blockade runner will be as fast as a cov ops frig. But I do agree the Blockade Runner while having an advatage should not get a free pass in low sec.
For the record, I've worked both sides of the gate equation, so don't flame me, piwates pwease 
|
Jin So
Red Mercury Incorporated
Equilibrium.
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:12:00 -
[158]
Very Nice, some industry love
|
Jogvan
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:13:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I find it amusing that all the seasoned PVPers are against this change, while all of the incompetent carebears (Caldari?) are all for it.
Removing risk from Eve is always bad. This is no exception. It further mitigates risk and makes everything easier for the stupid and inept, and this directly hurts those that are smart and imaginative. But I'm sure you wouldn't know what that's like, now would you?
You racist bastard!
Anyway, I enjoy pirating and blowing up haulers but honestly 99% of the time blockade runners get through losec camps and the +2 warp core strength to DST wont change anything because everyone has HICs.
Love these changes, especially the ability to use BO bridge
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:23:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Jacque Custeau
Edited by: Jacque Custeau on 29/10/2008 13:39:06
Originally by: El'essar Viocragh
Oh, and while we're at it:
GIVE THE PROWLER ITS BLUE DISCO ENGINE BACK!
Seriously.
QFT. The Neon lights are a MUST!
I use blockade runners all the time, I can't say that I like the changes. I would have preferred the following:
1. Blockade runner speed, agility and mass stay the same after the patch (i.e they dont get nerfed)
2. Blockade runners get the stealth bomber cloak velocity bonus, not the cov ops II cloak.
Might be a solution.
Would have to keep the +2 wcs bonus though. BR needs something more. Cov ops cloak swap may be too powerful. But as things are now BR trading the useless tanking bonus for the stealth bomber speed bonus and keeping the wcs bonus might be just the fix.
|
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:26:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 29/10/2008 16:29:52
As to the original topic, the changes are certainly interesting and worth playing out on Sisi to see what works and what doesn't.
However, it seems to me that this continued balancing act between hauling and gatecamps is symptomatic of a deeper problem. We have empire, with vast low-end mineral supplies, a massive trade network, and a heavy manufacturing/research base. We have 0.0 with demand for that which empire produces, and 0.0 and low-sec providing moon minerals and reactions for that production. We have haulers trying to move items around, and pirates/enemies trying to stop them. Both sides are playing to win, and a good system will allow, on average across EVE, both sides to win around 50% of the time (over-simplified).
We have cloaks and probes, gatecamps and gatecamp runners, blockade runners and heavy interdictors, all of which seem to be all-or-nothing ventures. There's no gradation, no continuum, no tech- or skill-based way to vary one's chances. The cry of the gatecamper is often 'use scouts' which misses a fundamental issue - scouting and finding a gatecamp is different from going through it, which, if the gatecamp is sensibly placed, is often the only choice.
What I'd really like to see is going back to the drawing board and asking some fundamental questions: 'what should pirates prey on in low-sec/enemies prey on in 0.0' 'how should haulers/miners avoid pirates' 'how should pirates find haulers/miners'. Listen to the replies in this thread: it's all about extremes - do X and you're invulnerable, do Y and you can always catch them, change Z will make A impossible etc. I'm not seeing an overall result that implies there is player or even EVE-skill involved.
I don't mind, indeed I approve of, systems where player thought in advance determines your chances of survival (how you fit your ship, what route you take, whether you've scouted) but I think what is lacking are any ways to vary the outcome at all. We've plumbed the depths of player ingenuity and come up with 'cloak+MWD coasting' along with 'lots of points or interdictor, and huge gatecamps'. Now I think players can be quite ingenious which implies we're lacking real flexibility and tools to be ingenious.
Edit: Oh and a fairly obvious point - whilstever the really rich & organised can jump-freighter goods around, this rather makes any hauling changes a tad redundant in terms of really affecting logistics.
___
My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Environmental Effects
|
DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes
Arcane Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:27:00 -
[162]
I think I like the blokkade runner changes.
Whilst I welcome the DST buffer changes i'd like to see some added agility, the main issue with using them in 0.0/lowsec is the huge support requirement (if done properly 2 scouts in front, 2 scouts in the back, mobile scout team to keep eye on adjacent systems, websupport to help get into warp, logistics and regular protection), this all boils down to the long time they take clearing a gate. Right now it's far safer and easier to do capjumps then using a DST.
- - -
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
|
Matrix Skye
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:34:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I find it amusing that all the seasoned PVPers are against this change, while all of the incompetent carebears (Caldari?) are all for it.
Removing risk from Eve is always bad. This is no exception. It further mitigates risk and makes everything easier for the stupid and inept, and this directly hurts those that are smart and imaginative. But I'm sure you wouldn't know what that's like, now would you?
I'm sorry but aren't you the same guy *****ing, screaming and kicking that your "BLASTERS WON'T WTFPWN ANYMORE!!!11! OMG!!1? Not that I think yours is illegitimate, just that it's funny how it's a rightful complaint when it's your own whine, but when it's teh eevil carebearz "it's a stupid moronic whine from idiots who can't play".
Your circular reasoning is simply, ******ed. Good day :).
Originally by: Ki An
PS. You're full of vitrol and hate... You're socially inept... You're so completely impotent in game... spewing venom over everyone...
^^ One of my "fans"  . |
Esmenet
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:43:00 -
[164]
Now you are invulnerable while hauling in empire/low sec.....
|
Waxau
Mortis Angelus
The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:49:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Jogvan
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I find it amusing that all the seasoned PVPers are against this change, while all of the incompetent carebears (Caldari?) are all for it.
Removing risk from Eve is always bad. This is no exception. It further mitigates risk and makes everything easier for the stupid and inept, and this directly hurts those that are smart and imaginative. But I'm sure you wouldn't know what that's like, now would you?
You racist bastard!
Anyway, I enjoy pirating and blowing up haulers but honestly 99% of the time blockade runners get through losec camps and the +2 warp core strength to DST wont change anything because everyone has HICs.
Love these changes, especially the ability to use BO bridge
Im looking forward to the bridge ability too tbh, but it truly is dampened by allowing carebears another 'warp to zero' or 'concord buff'. The game is a game of risk, and these ships are currently a real challenge to catch. With these changes, all that will happen, is a challenge is removed, aswell as risk. Might not break eve as such, but certainly changing it from what its currently based on. It being a "cold, harsh evironment"
|
Aarin Wrath
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:55:00 -
[166]
Edited by: Aarin Wrath on 29/10/2008 16:59:43
Wow great changes CCP.
I love the BR changes. They will become very hard to kill now.
(Even though with their current agility they are just as hard to kill)
The skiff and Procurer changes are very good. I would recommend perhaps +1 Warp Core strength on the Procurer. That may make it abit more usefull for ninja miners.
Good job ccp. Keep it up! 
Edit: I would like to add that added utility bonus of Blackops ships is very nice to see. This will make logistics through enemy lines much easier.
|
Jada Ronin
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:01:00 -
[167]
all looks good for the indy players ... how about some mining riggs? now that we can move rigged ships about in the orca some good riggs for a hulk would be great
|
Signati
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:06:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Esmenet
Now you are invulnerable while hauling in empire/low sec.....
We already were. No one has EVER killed my crane, and ive done runs thru low sec weekly, and runs thru Null sec quite often.
Anyone who says a bubble wont catch them now tho... wrong. Ive seen Cov ops frigs get killed in large bubbles because they couldn't get out before getting found. a BR is gonna be easier to find thats for sure.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:11:00 -
[169]
Great news!
Especially the changes on the blockade runners plus their ability to use covert ops portals now.
Excellent idea.
|
Meiyang Lee
Gallente
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:12:00 -
[170]
Lovely changes, love my blockade runner now, will love it with those changes.
Hopefully the align time won't be nerfed that much, since I quite like its speedy warping.
The DST changes might make it useful too, if it gets a little help with its agility (because they are very slow to align already, those plates won't help)
|
Jamaican Herbsman
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:21:00 -
[171]
Finally! Ty ccp
I wonder if any player knew that skiff already had a hidden +2 warp strenght. But now that i think of it, i've managed to warp away once or twice while npc's had scramble already on me. Thought it was bug or desynch
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:58:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Matrix Skye
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 29/10/2008 02:36:18
This is the dumbest ideas CCP has come up with yet. And I'm skilled up to use both Caldari and Gallente T2 haulers.
The ships are hard enough to catch already. And now you just want them to be able to be used with impunity? Does CCP just want everyone except those in combat ships to operate in complete safety?
I know that the developers and game design guys aren't idiots, so that must mean that they're doing this on purpose, just to **** us off. WTF is wrong with you people?
Trying to be constructive:
Now when anyone (me) wants to move high value cargo (billions in officer mods) through empire, or anywhere else for that matter, I just hop in my Crane or Viator and go. Nothing can stop me, you can't see me, I fit a couple stabs for good measure, unless I lag out on a session change, I'm unstoppable.
How is this good gameplay CCP? Eve wasn't safe enough for the moron Carebears that couldn't figure out how to not be killed, so you had to hand them a solution on a plate? The dev team doesn't make any sense anymore.
Typical of you really. For someone who hates carebears as much as you, you certainly whine as much as one, if not more.
To CCP: 2 thumbs way up!
I find it amusing that all the seasoned PVPers are against this change, while all of the incompetent carebears (Caldari?) are all for it.
Removing risk from Eve is always bad. This is no exception. It further mitigates risk and makes everything easier for the stupid and inept, and this directly hurts those that are smart and imaginative. But I'm sure you wouldn't know what that's like, now would you?
Well its always been possible to move materials with minimum risk - capitals, jump bridges, stabs, jump freighters - heck a pilgrim with some cargo expanders! I wouldn't call any of these particularly imaginative.
If anything a blockade runner with the proposed changes are MORE likely to encourage risk taking by using these vessels rather than alternatives - not less.
C.
Originally by: Tarminic
Your continued whining is somewhat diminished by your continued willingness to give your money to CCP.
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar
Aeden
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:59:00 -
[173]
AAA changes CCP !!!!
Fetchez la vache !
|
Jehovah Cooper
H A V O C
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:15:00 -
[174]
I love these changes. This definitely gives the blockade runner AND the black-ops a whole new role related to (low-volume) logistics capability.
I *do* see the downside for low-sec gate campers, block-runners are now completely untouchable. Maybe the ship shouldn't be able to warp cloaked for a couple of minutes after engaging the cloak?
The other transports I still don't really see the use of. Yes 2 pts is nice and this does begin to make a compelling case for using it over an itty 5 (even though its still smaller) but its still totally busted by a HIC. The tanking bonus is meaningless unless you are facing a total fail camp you will never be able to get back to the gate before you pop. I guess it does provide some protection against hi-sec ganking though there has already been a lot of ner***e on that front.
|
Anig Browl
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:16:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Ishina Fel
...the fact that the Procurer is matched, if not outclassed, by ships which require much less skillpoint investment, namely the Caldari and Minmatar mining cruisers. Is this by design? If so, the Procurer could really use some form of added perk that might make it useful, such as sharing the Skiff's +2 warp strength bonus.
Good point. I just picked up a Procurer out of curiosity (I started training for the Orca and figured I might as well look at mining barges) and it's pretty weak. Maybe a touch extra cargo space or something?
I think the mining barges in general are slightly unbalanced. You need Mining Barge 1, III and V coupled with Astrogeology III, IV and V respectively to fly the Procurer, Retriever, and Covetor. Which is fair enough by itself, but once you've got the Covetor you can train for the Hulk (Exhumers III) in less than a day - obviously the latter ship/skill cost more ISK, but you get 2x the cargo space, 3 more medium slots, a fat tank (2 x HP + 37.5% to all shield resists) and 10% better yields...it'll pay for itself within 24 hours or so. Seems like the Covetor has no reason to exist - you might as well just use your Retriever one more day and then buy a Hulk, assuming you're not in pursuit of Mercoxit or Ice.
This seems harsh on 'junior' miners - it takes about a month to go from the Tier 2 to Tier 3 mining barge, but there's no real payoff - just mining Veld for a couple of hours per day will yield enough for the Exhumers skillbook and the Hulk.
As for the transport ship changes, they sound pretty good...definitely more role-focused and better balanced, making the the transport ships skill more desirable by far. Not so much fun for gankers, but smart solo pilots had ways to protect themselves in an industrial already.
One weak point: once you've trained transport ships I, there's no reason to train farther unless you want a little extra cargo, especially now that the active tanking bonus is gone. How about requiring Transport Ships III or IV to get into the Freighters, and giving those ships a couple of slots in return?
|
Carniflex
Caldari
StarHunt
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:19:00 -
[176]
Pretty good. The new bonuses for tech 2 industrials make a lot more sense than old active tanking ones that were never used anyway. With those changes it would even make sense to train the skill above level 1.
However - I can understand the reasoning of giving 2 deep space transport shield and 2 armor hp bonuses - but perhaps it might make sense to give them all shield extender bonus or perhaps to them all both bonuses, as in most situations low slots in those ships are used for extenders.
|
Anig Browl
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:21:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Helison
Let¦s see if the Orca fills the current hole between industrials and freighters, but I think that their is still place for another ship (can also be a boosted and transformed deep space transport).
I'm optimistic, although I'd happily lose all the command (mining link) bonuses in exchange for the ability to carry a BS or fit a little more offense/defense.
|
SugarFr33
Warped Mining
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:24:00 -
[178]
Looks good to me
|
Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:33:00 -
[179]
Really good changes tbh!
|
Tabare Vazquez
Uruguay Forever
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:43:00 -
[180]
The Crane has been given five more powergrid on sisi.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |