These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Which ship should be next for a redesign?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
YuuKnow
The Scope
#1 - 2012-04-08 02:56:31 UTC
I applaud CCP for having the wherewithall to realize that the player community would be happier if some ships were redesigned to look better. The new redesigns so far have looked great. Question is, which ship should be next for a design.

I vote for the Moa. The suitcase welding turkey has to go. After than the Celestis.... it defines the word ugly.

yk
PsyDrakoon
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2012-04-08 02:59:08 UTC
Minmatar Battleship Tempest and Typhoon
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#3 - 2012-04-08 08:58:04 UTC
PsyDrakoon wrote:
Minmatar Battleship Tempest and Typhoon


Echo

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2012-04-08 10:42:28 UTC
PsyDrakoon wrote:
Minmatar Battleship Tempest and Typhoon

Agree.
Annie Anomie
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-04-08 10:43:28 UTC
The pest sure.

Phoon already had a bit of rejig and I like it generally.

I think some of the gallente hulls are looking p tired.
Gerrick Palivorn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-04-08 10:44:37 UTC
Moa
Tempest
Blackbird

MMOs come and go, but Eve remains.  -Garresh-
Ettu Brute II
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2012-04-08 15:33:51 UTC
I'm getting an uncanny sense of déjà vu here, so I'll just copy and paste my reply to another thread:
Ettu Brute II wrote:
The short answer to the OP is: Tristan. And as I couldn't come up with a better description:
Saul Shardani wrote:
The stupid flying robot looking thing

Aside from that, the Imicus and everything in the Minmatar frigate, cruiser and battleship stables except the Probe, Rupture, Stabber and Typhoon (easily their best BS model, looking like a BS should - solid and powerful).
Hesidak Uroboroon
Doomheim
#8 - 2012-04-08 16:06:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Hesidak Uroboroon
moa. oh, and did i mention the moa? oh, and also the moa. Yes, and don't forget the moa.

The U.S. Navy has developed a railgun that can hit a target the size of a watermelon from about 200km away.  its probably around 8,000 years in the future, we can go faster then light, be immortal, teleport capital ships, communicate instantly, mine asteroids and make ships invisible,yet still our railguns can't even hit a massive spaceship over 100km....
Shukuzen Kiraa
F4G Wild Weasel
#9 - 2012-04-08 16:37:51 UTC
Marauders. They should have unique ship hulls.
Vaurion Infara
Doomheim
#10 - 2012-04-08 16:43:12 UTC
Quit being original. There's already an active thread on the subject.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=92461&find=unread

this is it
YuuKnow
The Scope
#11 - 2012-04-08 16:46:33 UTC  |  Edited by: YuuKnow
A ship being the ugliest doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be the next focus of redesign. If a ship is ugly, but no one flys it or its variants then its not worth redesigning it.

The Moa's varient is the Eagle, which is used enought that a redesign would be appreciated. The Celestis variate is a Recon. Definately something used quiet often.

yk
Vaurion Infara
Doomheim
#12 - 2012-04-08 17:40:18 UTC
YuuKnow wrote:
A ship being the ugliest doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be the next focus of redesign. If a ship is ugly, but no one flys it or its variants then its not worth redesigning it.

The Moa's varient is the Eagle, which is used enought that a redesign would be appreciated. The Celestis variate is a Recon. Definately something used quiet often.

yk



Haha, that's a laughably stupid argument, and a poor rationalization for a separate thread. With the upcoming tier balancing, you have no idea what ships will be useful and what won't. The only logical way is to fix the worse models and move on from there. Although, I seriously doubt you believe that BS and are just looking for some sad justification after being called out as a copy-thread.

this is it
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#13 - 2012-04-08 18:47:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe
YuuKnow wrote:
I applaud CCP for having the wherewithall to realize that the player community would be happier if some ships were redesigned to look better. The new redesigns so far have looked great. Question is, which ship should be next for a design.

I vote for the Moa. The suitcase welding turkey has to go. After than the Celestis.... it defines the word ugly.

yk


All t2 ships need to have model redesigns. I fully support the idea of t2 ships looking like modified versions of their tech 1 cousins. The addition of silly low poly engines like seen on the Ishtar is not acceptable. I'm talking about changes to the hulls that represent the significant design modifications and philosophies represented by the specific NPC corporations that produce them.
YuuKnow
The Scope
#14 - 2012-04-08 19:05:00 UTC  |  Edited by: YuuKnow
Vaurion Infara wrote:
YuuKnow wrote:
A ship being the ugliest doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be the next focus of redesign. If a ship is ugly, but no one flys it or its variants then its not worth redesigning it.

The Moa's varient is the Eagle, which is used enought that a redesign would be appreciated. The Celestis variate is a Recon. Definately something used quiet often.

yk


Haha, that's a laughably stupid argument, and a poor rationalization for a separate thread. With the upcoming tier balancing, you have no idea what ships will be useful and what won't. The only logical way is to fix the worse models and move on from there. Although, I seriously doubt you believe that BS and are just looking for some sad justification after being called out as a copy-thread.


What's laughably stupid is your idiocy.

Case in point. One of the first ships to be redesigned was the Scorpion. It wasn't the ugliest ship, but since it was flown so commonly then CCP made it a priority. The Raven was far from being the ugliest and it got a redesign because it is also so frequently flown as well. The Maller is yet another example. Far from the ugliest ship in Eve, but was again redesigned since it is such a common hull and the base hull for 2 of the tech 2 variants.

There have been a hundred "ugliest ship" threads. We need one that will provide a little more focus for the Devs/Art team.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#15 - 2012-04-08 19:13:24 UTC
YuuKnow wrote:
Vaurion Infara wrote:
YuuKnow wrote:
A ship being the ugliest doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be the next focus of redesign. If a ship is ugly, but no one flys it or its variants then its not worth redesigning it.

The Moa's varient is the Eagle, which is used enought that a redesign would be appreciated. The Celestis variate is a Recon. Definately something used quiet often.

yk


Haha, that's a laughably stupid argument, and a poor rationalization for a separate thread. With the upcoming tier balancing, you have no idea what ships will be useful and what won't. The only logical way is to fix the worse models and move on from there. Although, I seriously doubt you believe that BS and are just looking for some sad justification after being called out as a copy-thread.


What's laughably stupid is your idiocy.

Case in point. One of the first ships to be redesigned was the Scorpion. It wasn't the ugliest ship, but since it was flown so commonly then CCP made it a priority. The Raven was far from being the ugliest and it got a redesign because it is also so frequently flown as well. The Maller is yet another example. Far from the ugliest ship in Eve, but was again redesigned since it is such a common hull and the base hull for 2 of the tech 2 variants.

There have been a hundred "ugliest ship" threads. We need one that will provide a little more focus for the Devs/Art team.


Stop posting please.
Vaurion Infara
Doomheim
#16 - 2012-04-08 21:41:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaurion Infara
YuuKnow wrote:
What's laughably stupid is your idiocy.



^ That made me chuckle.

this is it
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#17 - 2012-04-08 22:04:23 UTC
YuuKnow wrote:
Vaurion Infara wrote:
YuuKnow wrote:
A ship being the ugliest doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be the next focus of redesign. If a ship is ugly, but no one flys it or its variants then its not worth redesigning it.

The Moa's varient is the Eagle, which is used enought that a redesign would be appreciated. The Celestis variate is a Recon. Definately something used quiet often.

yk


Haha, that's a laughably stupid argument, and a poor rationalization for a separate thread. With the upcoming tier balancing, you have no idea what ships will be useful and what won't. The only logical way is to fix the worse models and move on from there. Although, I seriously doubt you believe that BS and are just looking for some sad justification after being called out as a copy-thread.


retardpost.

Go away.
Mata1s
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2012-04-08 22:42:02 UTC
Bellicose hull please please
Luba Cibre
Global Song Setup
#19 - 2012-04-08 22:43:26 UTC
Mata1s wrote:
Bellicose hull please please

The Bellicose hull is awesome.

"Nothing essential happens in the absence of noise." 
StarVoyager Odunen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2012-04-08 23:01:25 UTC
Erebus. I need my little gatecamper to be pretty.

[u]HAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWKHAWK[/u]
12Next page