Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Ha'Uler
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 18:49:00 -
[1]
Over at Scrapheap Challenge a reader of EON summarizes what the EON article on tech 3 says: SHC
No scans or anything please, that'd violate some copyright laws |
rValdez5987
Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 18:50:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Ha'Uler Over at Scrapheap Challenge a reader of EON summarizes what the EON article on tech 3 says: SHC
No scans or anything please, that'd violate some copyright laws
Huh? I havent even recieved my copy yet....... :( |
Asestorian
Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 19:20:00 -
[3]
Originally by: rValdez5987
Originally by: Ha'Uler Over at Scrapheap Challenge a reader of EON summarizes what the EON article on tech 3 says: SHC
No scans or anything please, that'd violate some copyright laws
Huh? I havent even recieved my copy yet....... :(
Well. I live in England and I am very important and that sort of thing. |
Tabare Vazquez
Uruguay Forever
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 19:27:00 -
[4]
- Five ship components needed. Propulsion, three mid sections (offence, defence, power core) and a sensor array (bridge type thing). - Each section determines separate abilities. Propulsion for speed, probably offence module for weaponry, etc, etc. Not been fully decided at time of writing.
While that sounds interesting, does anyone know when that EON issue went into printing? Would be kind of worrying if such elemental features of tech 3 had not been finalized by now. |
Asestorian
Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 19:29:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Tabare Vazquez - Five ship components needed. Propulsion, three mid sections (offence, defence, power core) and a sensor array (bridge type thing). - Each section determines separate abilities. Propulsion for speed, probably offence module for weaponry, etc, etc. Not been fully decided at time of writing.
While that sounds interesting, does anyone know when that EON issue went into printing? Would be kind of worrying if such elemental features of tech 3 had not been finalized by now.
It mentions "two months from now" quite a lot in the article. |
Elaron
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 19:44:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Asestorian It mentions "two months from now" quite a lot in the article.
Yeah, but they knew the publication date in advance, so writing the article from the perspective that it'll be published in January is unsurprising.
|
Asestorian
Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 19:54:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Asestorian on 08/01/2009 19:57:48
Originally by: Elaron
Originally by: Asestorian It mentions "two months from now" quite a lot in the article.
Yeah, but they knew the publication date in advance, so writing the article from the perspective that it'll be published in January is unsurprising.
I know, but the implication in the article is that that the information is relatively recent, although probably not completely up to date.
Edit: For instance, the writer ponders the fact that CCP only have such a short amount of time (aka, two months) to complete a lot of this stuff. But who knows really?
---
Originally by: CCP Atropos Destiny Balls
|
Kaahles
n0thing Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:02:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Tabare Vazquez - Five ship components needed. Propulsion, three mid sections (offence, defence, power core) and a sensor array (bridge type thing). - Each section determines separate abilities. Propulsion for speed, probably offence module for weaponry, etc, etc. Not been fully decided at time of writing.
While that sounds interesting, does anyone know when that EON issue went into printing? Would be kind of worrying if such elemental features of tech 3 had not been finalized by now.
I wouldn't worry about the fact that not all features are finalized. Usually there are numerous of ideas how to solve a problem / present a feature and nothing is finalized until release because before you finish final testing you can't say what's best. That's what testing is for ----------------------------- OMG THE SKY IS FALLING! Contract me all your stuff so I can save it! |
Zapatero
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:13:00 -
[9]
The article was written just before Christmas, very very close to deadline (hence the little dig in the intro from my production editor) :)
- Z EON | blog |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:29:00 -
[10]
Cruisers only? Hmmm... I wonder if we'll be able to build enough DPS/tank into them to take on BCs and BS solo? Then again, they'll only have cruiser cap (probably) so one heavy neut and they're dead.
Bah. I was really looking forward to T3 as something interesting and worthwhile to play with, but it's already looking grim. |
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:33:00 -
[11]
mine hasn't come yet : ( |
Junabi
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:50:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Cruisers only? Hmmm... I wonder if we'll be able to build enough DPS/tank into them to take on BCs and BS solo? Then again, they'll only have cruiser cap (probably) so one heavy neut and they're dead.
Bah. I was really looking forward to T3 as something interesting and worthwhile to play with, but it's already looking grim.
Yeah, it's not like there are any good cruiser-size ships, is it |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:51:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Junabi
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Cruisers only? Hmmm... I wonder if we'll be able to build enough DPS/tank into them to take on BCs and BS solo? Then again, they'll only have cruiser cap (probably) so one heavy neut and they're dead.
Bah. I was really looking forward to T3 as something interesting and worthwhile to play with, but it's already looking grim.
Yeah, it's not like there are any good cruiser-size ships, is it
well I for 1 understand where he is coming from. I mean what if you were looking forward to using these new ships in PvE for the epic missions. Sure they won't be the best, but hopefully a tech 3 ship can take on a level 4 mission. |
Asestorian
Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:54:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Junabi
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Cruisers only? Hmmm... I wonder if we'll be able to build enough DPS/tank into them to take on BCs and BS solo? Then again, they'll only have cruiser cap (probably) so one heavy neut and they're dead.
Bah. I was really looking forward to T3 as something interesting and worthwhile to play with, but it's already looking grim.
Yeah, it's not like there are any good cruiser-size ships, is it
Actually, if I remember correctly, he's a Battleship obsessive so it's no wonder he's a little disappointed. |
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 20:56:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Cruisers only? Hmmm... I wonder if we'll be able to build enough DPS/tank into them to take on BCs and BS solo? Then again, they'll only have cruiser cap (probably) so one heavy neut and they're dead.
Bah. I was really looking forward to T3 as something interesting and worthwhile to play with, but it's already looking grim.
On the other hand, I prefer cruisers!
Seriously, the balancing must be a nightmare. I'd guess the other ship classes will come later. |
el caido
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 21:00:00 -
[16]
Quote: Tech III = Tech I + Tech II; a ship that can fill any role you want, but only one at a time.
I think this already exists ... it is called an Ishtar.
Thanks for the link, hauler. |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 22:55:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Asestorian
Originally by: Junabi
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Cruisers only? Hmmm... I wonder if we'll be able to build enough DPS/tank into them to take on BCs and BS solo? Then again, they'll only have cruiser cap (probably) so one heavy neut and they're dead.
Bah. I was really looking forward to T3 as something interesting and worthwhile to play with, but it's already looking grim.
Yeah, it's not like there are any good cruiser-size ships, is it
Actually, if I remember correctly, he's a Battleship obsessive so it's no wonder he's a little disappointed.
Not really obsessed with battleships, just solo piracy. It just so happens that BS used to be the best tool in the shed for the job. Sadly, they were pretty much the only tool left, and after CCP changed everything with the QR patch, they've pretty much removed solo BS from the game.
Solo players, and solo lowsec pirates in particular now have very little left in the way of options for a workable ship to use around gates and stations while under sentry fire.
Anyway, I was hoping that T3 would bring some new and interesting toys for me to play with, but unless they're something amazingly spectacular in regard to their maximum performance specs, I don't see them being very worthwhile.
What I'm looking for in new content is something that will out perform existing ships once I invest the time and effort in skillpoints and ISK to use them. Every time new content gets introduced that doesn't to anything better than the existing ships, or doesn't fill a unique role then it's a waste of time.
I'm hoping that T3 cruisers will combine the firepower/tank of larger ships with the speed and lock time of cruisers. This would provide people like myself (hunters) with a ship that is good at hunting down and killing larger targets. But I really don't see this happening. They'll be introduced 'pre-nerfed' and they'll never amount to anything.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Marchocias
Silent Ninja's
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 22:57:00 -
[18]
Way to put a downer on the thread, dude! ---- Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa*coughcough*aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrr!! |
rValdez5987
Amarr 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 22:59:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Asestorian
Originally by: rValdez5987
Originally by: Ha'Uler Over at Scrapheap Challenge a reader of EON summarizes what the EON article on tech 3 says: SHC
No scans or anything please, that'd violate some copyright laws
Huh? I havent even recieved my copy yet....... :(
Well. I live in England and I am very important and that sort of thing.
Good point. Im a yank.
Confirming that America sucks and the last EON got here 3 weeks late. Also confirming that Im leaving America for good within the next 3 years (if they still allow me to leave at that time)
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 23:13:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 08/01/2009 23:12:57 Out of curiosity:
Does Tech-III do away with the flavors of the various race's ships?
I mean Gallente are drone dudes, Caldari missile dudes, Amarr laser dudes and so on.
While they say 12,500 possible ship combinations is it really more 3,125 for each race and no need to cross-train since every race can mix and match to do anything anyone else can?
That would kind of stink...I think. Dunno but each race being semi-distinct in what they do has always been fun. There'll be no more forum whines that (say) Gallente are imbalanced when really everyone is the same. Where's the fun in that?
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
|
Asestorian
Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 23:29:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Asestorian on 08/01/2009 23:30:43
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 08/01/2009 23:12:57 Out of curiosity:
Does Tech-III do away with the flavors of the various race's ships?
I mean Gallente are drone dudes, Caldari missile dudes, Amarr laser dudes and so on.
While they say 12,500 possible ship combinations is it really more 3,125 for each race and no need to cross-train since every race can mix and match to do anything anyone else can?
That would kind of stink...I think. Dunno but each race being semi-distinct in what they do has always been fun. There'll be no more forum whines that (say) Gallente are imbalanced when really everyone is the same. Where's the fun in that?
Good point. Unfortunately no information on that was given. We only know that each race gets their 3,125 combinations in their aesthetic style, and I would assume being unable to use components from other races. But beyond vague allusions to balance, non-obsolescence of older ships and how it all fits together we have very few details on just what the final product will give us.
Edit: Although thinking about it I can't imagine there being too many distinctions, simply because it's already going to be incredibly difficult to balance. But on the other hand that they're bothering with races at all instead of just giving standardised Tech III would indicate some thought into those kinds of differences.
---
Originally by: CCP Atropos Destiny Balls
|
DaDutchDude
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:03:00 -
[22]
Edited by: DaDutchDude on 09/01/2009 00:06:53 From the post on Scrapheap Challenge:
Quote: Talk about crew members or a ship being 'sentient' and thus maybe gaining 'experience' or somesuch that is lost when it's broken down. Whatever it is, it's talk of a ship learning and becoming better through some system.
I'm surprised nobody responded to this. It seems quite a deviation from EVE as I know it: it used to be that the threat a pilot could pose were dependent on: - time subscribed (more time mean more SP) - experience (being able to judge a fight better) This change would allow you to get better (well, your ship would) by grinding, which I think is new. Yes, you can already earn more money by grinding and spend it on a better ship, but still .... this would add a new dimension to EVE, and one I'm not so happy about. The casual gamer (like me) without several accounts and many hours to play is already at a disadvantage, and adding this would make a casual player even less competitive.
As to the remark about cruisers and wanting T3 to become OMGWTFPWN-mobiles: I don't think that will ever be the intention of the Devs. They want to give you more options to specialize, so you become better in that specific area. However, you will always have to sacrifice in other areas: like creating a ship based on a huge power core (allowing more guns) will probably be heavier, meaning the ship won't be super-fast (or something along those lines).
It sounds like T3 will facilitate further and richer specialization in a new way, but by no means intends to create ships that are superior to everything else. This means to every ship and tactic will be a viable counter-tactic and -ship. And to me, that sounds like a good thing.
However, getting the balance right will be a *****. If you make some setups uber-powerful, only those will be flown, making T2 & T1 unusable. However, if you pre-nerf too much, why would people (other then the New Toy Fetishists (TM)) invest time and resources on getting their hands on T3? Good luck on that one Devs! |
Tyr Vaantau
Amarr Disorder.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:29:00 -
[23]
The concept art that they showed off was really nice too, got to see Caldari, Minmatar, and Gallente concept designs and they looked good. For Minmatar it showed what looked like a sleeker, larger, Firetail (and something else next to it didn't look like any current designs), and for Gallente something roughly like a Moros with the engines of a Vexor and a pointier end.
No Amarr designs though...but I just imagined a floating cathedral to myself and that filled the gap. ------
|
Franga
Gristle Industries
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:38:00 -
[24]
Oh, very nice.
Also, I predict that t3 will be released in March and shall be balanced by mid 2010. ----------
|
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:38:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Franga Oh, very nice.
Also, I predict that t3 will be released in March and shall be balanced by mid 2010.
Balance is a lie.
Voluntold, New Webcomic
|
Armoured C
Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:49:00 -
[26]
i could unfornatually buy a copy of eon because although eve itself accept my visa as a credit card the eve store does not
since i paid my eve sub with it but the store aint having none of it
some bout not authorisation
anyone else having this problem
|
Zaknussem
Caldari Intrum Industria
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 02:35:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Zaknussem on 09/01/2009 02:35:49 Touching on two points here:
Quote: - Base chassis might get a name but the likelihood is that CCP aren't going to be insane enough to come up with names for all variations. Not really sure how this is going to work though. They might just use the component type names stuck together, creating "Hunter-Squirrel XE-4". Implication here that we get to name what we create.
I've been thinking about what could be possible "base" names for the T3 ships and my guesses are...Changeling for Amarr, Chameleon for Caldari, Loki for Minmatar and...no clue as to what the Gallente ship would be called. This assumes the theme is the ability to alter its appearance.
Also, there are plenty of opportunities here for players to gain a bit of recognition if they manage to come up with a good T3 setup and manage to market it as their original idea.
Quote: - Any other ships released in the expansion will be related to "True Exploration".
Anyone care to guess what this will result in? A T2 ship using one of the few remaining unused T1 hulls (like the mining frigate) or a brand new T1 ship? Possibly even several ships?
EDIT: Typo. |
Hamshoe
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 02:42:00 -
[28]
Originally by: rValdez5987 Also confirming that Im leaving America for good within the next 3 years (if they still allow me to leave at that time)
Dibs on your stuff.
|
No Homo
Gallente THE INTERNET.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 02:58:00 -
[29]
Originally by: MotherMoon mine hasn't come yet : (
thats what she said.
ooooooooh yeeeeeeeeah |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 07:38:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 09/01/2009 07:42:09
Originally by: DaDutchDude This change would allow you to get better (well, your ship would) by grinding, which I think is new. Yes, you can already earn more money by grinding and spend it on a better ship, but still .... this would add a new dimension to EVE, and one I'm not so happy about. The casual gamer (like me) without several accounts and many hours to play is already at a disadvantage, and adding this would make a casual player even less competitive.
I do not think it is anything to get in a fuss about.
First I think there would be distinct limits to just how much better a "well trained" crew would enhance your ship. This does not sound like you can train your crew to L70 while noobs are stuck. More I think a well trained crew might act like an Officer Mod at best and that's it (as an example) while most people might get their crew to faction mod or T2 mod level. It'd give you some advantage but like all of EVE each advantage is relatively minor by itself. It is in aggregate, when all your little +5% things add up, that you gain a notable advantage. And even then it is not necessarily an I-Win button.
Second anyone who uses their hyper-trained crew as an advantage in PvP are likely to lose their hyper-trained crew eventually. Presumably a hyper-trained crew, being equivalent to an Officer mod, is a valuable thing. How many people fly with Officer mods in PvP? (Almost none because you can and do die with some regularity if you PvP a lot.)
Of course I am totally guessing about the above. No one outside of CCP has a clue about it but I'd be shocked if our ships could "level" very much. What I speculate about above I think is far more in keeping with the EVE model.
I just wonder if this will make players even more risk averse than they already are. While trying to train up your crew I think pilots will be even more dodgy about engaging (which is saying something).
YMMV of course. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |