EVE Search - Tech 3 info in EON

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Tech 3 info in EON

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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! ---- Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacoughcoughaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrr!!
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!"
Fergus Runkle Minmatar Truth and Reconciliation Council	Posted - 2009.01.09 10:28:00 - [31] Originally by: Armoured C 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 I had a similar issue, seems my CC company has low opinions of anything Eve related. Once I paid my sub the CC company but a block on the card until I range them up and confirmed that yes it really was me that did that transaction and yes I really do want to send money to those people. Best advice is ring your CC company.
Dianalexia	Posted - 2009.01.09 11:13:00 - [32] Edited by: Dianalexia on 09/01/2009 11:13:42 Niceee, sentient ships . I imagine them like characters, only having a limited number of skills, strictly tied to the components from witch they are build! This way, you can have a very specialized ship, without being an UBERPWN mobile. Very nice thing!
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.01.09 12:44:00 - [33] Originally by: Karina Harington on Scrapheap Challenge thread This is going to make gang warfare fun... FC: What have they got? Scout: 7 Falcons, 3 Zealots, a Phobos, 2 ButtMunchers, a *****Wagon and a PimpMustafa FC: WTF?! Omg I can't wait for that. I think it'll be more like. FC: What have they got? Scout: 7 falcons, 3 zealots, a photos, 2 hubbamushas, 1 bubbamusha, 3 mushamushas, a fringledon, a donhubbamush. a boobbubbla, a hubbahubbafark and a farkboing, oh and a boingboob.
Reverend Mayhem Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.01.09 13:02:00 - [34] Cruisers only? They'll have to be damn good to be worth the price on something so fragile.
Coros Spark. Ignition.	Posted - 2009.01.09 13:13:00 - [35] Will T3 Cruisers _destroy_ T2 Commands in a slugfest?
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.01.09 13:26:00 - [36] Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 09/01/2009 13:28:48 Originally by: Coros Will T3 Cruisers _destroy_ T2 Commands in a slugfest? I think that's incredibly unlikely. From what they've said, I think like HAC's but more specialised, such as HACS with less dps then any other HAC tech 2 or 3, but faster then any other, or a vice versa setup. Then balanced configs that prob have a very average dps thats outmatched to something like a zealot or caracal and a very average tank that's outmatched to something like a sacrilege.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.01.09 13:27:00 - [37] Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 09/01/2009 13:27:24 double post, sorry, lagged.
Bartholomeus Crane Gallente The Crane Family	Posted - 2009.01.09 14:42:00 - [38] I would be very surprised if the T3 ships didn't include some new balancing parameter. Something like the power part having a certain value for the other parts to use. Something like power. You can then spend that power either on the engine part, the offence part, the defence part, or the bridge part. This could be balanced against the CAP the power part provided. For example a high CAP part providing less power for the other modules. Otherwise, players are only going to use the biggest parts in the five categories with standard cookie-cutter fits. Did the article say anything about that?
Faife Federation of Freedom Fighters	Posted - 2009.01.09 17:21:00 - [39] Originally by: 5pinDizzy FC: What have they got? Scout: 7 falcons, 3 zealots, a photos, 2 hubbamushas, 1 bubbamusha, 3 mushamushas, a fringledon, a donhubbamush. a boobbubbla, a hubbahubbafark and a farkboing, oh and a boingboob. wtb boobbubbla.
Marcus Tedric Gallente Tedric Enterprises The Star League	Posted - 2009.01.09 17:37:00 - [40] On the æships crew experience in timeÆ issue û I had a different view and that it was not related to grinding; so staying within the æacceptedÆ EVE system. I read this as more a small disincentive to repeatedly dismantling and rebuilding your ship(s). Once you have chosen and put together your 5 modules and ædesignedÆ your ship then it becomes a single entity (much like when you do when you assemble a ship now and donÆt repackage it). When, for example, it has been together 100days (in real time û not space time) then itÆs something like 1% æbetterÆ, with a maximum of 5% after 500days û ergo only 0.01% better per day. This is real, without being overly dramatic and could even be applied to all the ships currently in EVE and not just the new ones! It even provides something new in the market world as there would be a whole new market via the Contract system for ætrained crew shipsÆ. On a separate note û and being somewhat experienced in permutations and mathematics û can someone tell me where this number of 3,125 comes from? I can easily see that itÆs 5^5 û or 5x5x5x5x5 û but IÆm running out of probability areas (unless IÆve missed something basic û itÆs been a while!) 1 û Races? x5 2 - Ship types/sizes (Frig, Destroyer, Cruiser, BC, BS) per race? x5 (T3 starts with just Cruiser in March) 3 û Hull sections x5 (the only one we are now sure of) 4 û Choices per race of module type? x5 (again, weÆre now fairly sure of this) 5 - ????? (CanÆt think of anything û so whatÆs the 5th?)
Soporo Caldari The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.01.09 18:25:00 - [41] Edited by: Soporo on 09/01/2009 18:27:29 Regardless, for those who get into one before anyone else, I strongly reccomend holding cloak till the rest of the fleet appears as any "New Shiny" will be primary for a long time to come. You know how humans are: Sees New/Strange/wtf?! fear/uncertainty/curiosity* OMFG KILL IT QUICK! (rip it open and see what falls out!) As for varying levels or experience of crews I would imagine (hope) that they will be purchaseable like any other ship part. N00b, Green, Regular, Veteran, L33t, etc.
Kesper North Caldari Epiphyte Mining and Exploration Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2009.01.09 21:16:00 - [42] Originally by: Marcus Tedric I read this as more a small disincentive to repeatedly dismantling and rebuilding your ship(s). Once you have chosen and put together your 5 modules and ædesignedÆ your ship then it becomes a single entity (much like when you do when you assemble a ship now and donÆt repackage it). When, for example, it has been together 100days (in real time û not space time) then itÆs something like 1% æbetterÆ, with a maximum of 5% after 500days û ergo only 0.01% better per day. This is real, without being overly dramatic and could even be applied to all the ships currently in EVE and not just the new ones! It even provides something new in the market world as there would be a whole new market via the Contract system for ætrained crew shipsÆ. This would also lend itself to people buying more ships in general - one to use, and one or more to sit in the hangar accruing XP. Or, people may simply not fly their T3 ships until they have advanced sufficiently. I could envision them using an event-based leveling system, though, based on number of kills or number of engagements survived, that sort of thing. That would force people to get out there and use their ships in order to advance them, rather than buying them up and leaving them to sit in a hangar.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.01.09 21:31:00 - [43] Originally by: Kesper North Originally by: Marcus Tedric I read this as more a small disincentive to repeatedly dismantling and rebuilding your ship(s). Once you have chosen and put together your 5 modules and ædesignedÆ your ship then it becomes a single entity (much like when you do when you assemble a ship now and donÆt repackage it). When, for example, it has been together 100days (in real time û not space time) then itÆs something like 1% æbetterÆ, with a maximum of 5% after 500days û ergo only 0.01% better per day. This is real, without being overly dramatic and could even be applied to all the ships currently in EVE and not just the new ones! It even provides something new in the market world as there would be a whole new market via the Contract system for ætrained crew shipsÆ. This would also lend itself to people buying more ships in general - one to use, and one or more to sit in the hangar accruing XP. Or, people may simply not fly their T3 ships until they have advanced sufficiently. I could envision them using an event-based leveling system, though, based on number of kills or number of engagements survived, that sort of thing. That would force people to get out there and use their ships in order to advance them, rather than buying them up and leaving them to sit in a hangar. Event based leveling: people sit around and blow up alts to level their ships. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
small chimp	Posted - 2009.01.09 22:05:00 - [44] Is it so that t3 will only be cruiser sized? Or are there battleship sized ships also? I really would like to have a t3 pimped missionboat. :u
Asestorian Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2009.01.09 23:05:00 - [45] Originally by: small chimp Is it so that t3 will only be cruiser sized? Or are there battleship sized ships also? I really would like to have a t3 pimped missionboat. :u Well done for reading the link. It says right there that there will only be Tech III cruisers in this release. Any other Tech III ships are unconfirmed at this time and should not be expected. --- Originally by: CCP Atropos Destiny Balls
Caiman Graystock Caldari	Posted - 2009.01.09 23:09:00 - [46] Originally by: Marcus Tedric On a separate note û and being somewhat experienced in permutations and mathematics û can someone tell me where this number of 3,125 comes from? I can easily see that itÆs 5^5 û or 5x5x5x5x5 û but IÆm running out of probability areas (unless IÆve missed something basic û itÆs been a while!) 1 û Races? x5 2 - Ship types/sizes (Frig, Destroyer, Cruiser, BC, BS) per race? x5 (T3 starts with just Cruiser in March) 3 û Hull sections x5 (the only one we are now sure of) 4 û Choices per race of module type? x5 (again, weÆre now fairly sure of this) 5 - ????? (CanÆt think of anything û so whatÆs the 5th?) The mag says '12,500 possible combinations'. Divide 12,500 by the number of playable races in EVE and you get your answer. Then you realise, after taking the time to read this sentence, that you have actually wasted your time, because this somewhat long sentence is not actually part of my post, it is my signature.
Max Mem	Posted - 2009.01.10 00:22:00 - [47] T3 = WoW welcome to WoW NOW the future is here :)
Grave Tidings	Posted - 2009.01.10 00:51:00 - [48] Somebody explain to me why the hell I should have to buy a magazine from a company supposedly unaffiliated with CCP in order to get this kind of information? I think one subscription, paid to CCP, should be enough, especially considering the numbers of us that have been around since day fricken one.
Sniper Wolf18 Gallente A Pretty Pony Princess	Posted - 2009.01.10 01:23:00 - [49] Do not like the "sentient ships" thing, screams WoW to me. If its about a 1-5% increase, it wount bother me, but anything more and it'll be stupid.

CCP Atropos C C P CCP	Posted - 2009.01.10 01:42:00 - [50] Originally by: Caiman Graystock Originally by: Marcus Tedric On a separate note û and being somewhat experienced in permutations and mathematics û can someone tell me where this number of 3,125 comes from? I can easily see that itÆs 5^5 û or 5x5x5x5x5 û but IÆm running out of probability areas (unless IÆve missed something basic û itÆs been a while!) 1 û Races? x5 2 - Ship types/sizes (Frig, Destroyer, Cruiser, BC, BS) per race? x5 (T3 starts with just Cruiser in March) 3 û Hull sections x5 (the only one we are now sure of) 4 û Choices per race of module type? x5 (again, weÆre now fairly sure of this) 5 - ????? (CanÆt think of anything û so whatÆs the 5th?) The mag says '12,500 possible combinations'. Divide 12,500 by the number of playable races in EVE and you get your answer. 5 parts required for the ship, of which there are 5 variations. This gives: 5^5 = 3125 There are 4 races of ships, giving a total number of unique variations as: 3125 * 4 = 12500, as I understand the current lineup.

Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.01.10 01:54:00 - [51] Originally by: CCP Atropos Originally by: Caiman Graystock Originally by: Marcus Tedric On a separate note û and being somewhat experienced in permutations and mathematics û can someone tell me where this number of 3,125 comes from? I can easily see that itÆs 5^5 û or 5x5x5x5x5 û but IÆm running out of probability areas (unless IÆve missed something basic û itÆs been a while!) 1 û Races? x5 2 - Ship types/sizes (Frig, Destroyer, Cruiser, BC, BS) per race? x5 (T3 starts with just Cruiser in March) 3 û Hull sections x5 (the only one we are now sure of) 4 û Choices per race of module type? x5 (again, weÆre now fairly sure of this) 5 - ????? (CanÆt think of anything û so whatÆs the 5th?) The mag says '12,500 possible combinations'. Divide 12,500 by the number of playable races in EVE and you get your answer. 5 parts required for the ship, of which there are 5 variations. This gives: 5^5 = 3125 There are 4 races of ships, giving a total number of unique variations as: 3125 * 4 = 12500, as I understand the current lineup. Of which probably 12 or so will be worthwhile. Sorry to be so cynical after you guys have worked so hard on the new content. TBH I really hope that it revolutionizes Eve and that it breathes new life into the game.
Gojyu Ever Flow Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.01.10 01:54:00 - [52] Originally by: CCP Atropos Originally by: Caiman Graystock Originally by: Marcus Tedric On a separate note û and being somewhat experienced in permutations and mathematics û can someone tell me where this number of 3,125 comes from? I can easily see that itÆs 5^5 û or 5x5x5x5x5 û but IÆm running out of probability areas (unless IÆve missed something basic û itÆs been a while!) 1 û Races? x5 2 - Ship types/sizes (Frig, Destroyer, Cruiser, BC, BS) per race? x5 (T3 starts with just Cruiser in March) 3 û Hull sections x5 (the only one we are now sure of) 4 û Choices per race of module type? x5 (again, weÆre now fairly sure of this) 5 - ????? (CanÆt think of anything û so whatÆs the 5th?) The mag says '12,500 possible combinations'. Divide 12,500 by the number of playable races in EVE and you get your answer. 5 parts required for the ship, of which there are 5 variations. This gives: 5^5 = 3125 There are 4 races of ships, giving a total number of unique variations as: 3125 * 4 = 12500, as I understand the current lineup. Of which 4 permutations (one per race) are worked out to be mathematically superior and the other 12496 never see the light of day
Vaedon Roid Ripper Industries	Posted - 2009.01.10 03:37:00 - [53] Originally by: Gojyu Of which 4 permutations (one per race) are worked out to be mathematically superior and the other 12496 never see the light of day Oh, I doubt that. I imagine it will be very easy to make ships that mine better than others, some that tank better than others, others that have higher DPS than others, a few that scan faster than others, one or two that salvage more efficiently than others, a handful that remote rep better than others.... you get the idea. Unless you only play Eve one way. Fly only one type of ship. Then, yes, you will only fly one (per race) of the 12,500 available. Vaedon Jack-of-all-trades...Master-of-none
arbiter reformed Minmatar Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.01.10 04:59:00 - [54] sounds good, i think if anything t3 will be underpowerd(look at blackops etc) i hope they get the balance right
Mr Ignitious R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.	Posted - 2009.01.10 05:39:00 - [55] Originally by: arbiter reformed sounds good, i think if anything t3 will be underpowerd(look at blackops etc) i hope they get the balance right sounds like all t3 needs is reasonable market price. Thats my only real concern at the moment.

Pages: 1 2 :: [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.