These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New Minnie destroyer... o.O

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#21 - 2012-09-27 18:32:54 UTC
Oberine Noriepa wrote:
I think it looks fine. Certainly isn't the worst looking ship in the game.


"Fine" is not what we should be settling for with new content. If they don't look "great" then CCP has ****** up, period.
Jing Xin
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-09-27 20:51:25 UTC
The model in that video looks incomplete, at least. EVE players are used to some quality starship design, please keep it up.
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#23 - 2012-09-29 09:46:35 UTC
Penelope Pipebomb wrote:
these look like the work of 1st year students.. kind of expected something really impressive to match the new stealth bombers... i loved the t3 battle cruisers.. and had great hope for the dessie art...... these are sad... pls dont?


WiP are very hard to place as good or bad to the untrained eye. The Caldari and Minmatar Dessies may be textured and close to completion, and enough can be see to determine they are roughly intact and have little evolution left in their design.

The Tempest is further along than the Gallente, but still has texturing to bring it near completion, where the Gallente Destroyer is actually very roughly shaped and needs a lot of refinement yet. Nowhere near texturing on that one, but I can tell you, that it is very good. I like that design and I'll be happy to fly it, whatever the bonuses.

Unfortunately, the Minmatar Dessie leaves a lot to be desired. I think that might stem from the artists attempt to maintain a distinctly Minmatar appearance on at least some of the ships. Definitely overdid it I think, as I find it very hard to appreciate the design as is.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#24 - 2012-09-29 10:03:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Mars Theran
Good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M6n-YhIvno&feature=player_detailpage#t=21s

The rear engine housing and aft section of the ship fits nicely. I have no problem with it.

Also good in some respect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M6n-YhIvno&feature=player_detailpage#t=37s

In this one, you'll see that the front 'wingy bits' are awkwardly attached but not unappealing in form from this particular angle. The housing on the top of the ship is absolutely atrocious, but the front section between the two wingy bits, where they connect, isn't that bad.

Not so good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M6n-YhIvno&feature=player_detailpage#t=14s

This side profile is awful. Too many squares, and far to regular of a railway-tie-like chunkiness along the length of the ship, and still that awful housing. *edited out* Actually, I'm mistaken; it's not the symmetry of the wingy bits; it's the chunky square blob on the bottom of the nose behind them. The wingy bits look fine if you ignore it.

I'd also extend that nose out and slightly down in a tapered fashion, between the wingy bits. Maybe adjust the side panels a little to make them less regular, or squarish, and cut the cubes off or reshape them so they have less impact on the overall ship design. Maybe tapered slightly, less extruded, and less obvious. Additional detail wouldn't hurt I suppose.

The Housing.. .no idea. Actually, the very rear portion with the lighting isn't bad, so I'd keep that raised, but as a very small and structured shape that moves forward along the center of the model, possibly into a larger housing that dives in under the shielding bit on the front. Add some armoring to the edges that moves back under the rear shielding plates or something.

Just thoughts,
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Anabella Rella
Gradient
Electus Matari
#25 - 2012-09-29 21:20:04 UTC
I'm very disappointed in the new destroyer. I realize aesthetics are extremely subjective but, it really has no "family appearance" connection to other Minmatar ships and looks hurriedly thrown together. I mean no disrespect to the artists who designed this ship but it looks like a brick that someone attached a snow plow to the front of. Next to the re-imagined Stabber and Tempest it looks downright dowdy.

I know that this thread isn't being officially monitored but hopefully the fact that this ship's less than stellar looks (and I'm being kind) have been brought up in several other threads will generate attention from someone in CCP.

When the world is running down, you make the best of what's still around.
Aethlyn
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-09-30 08:05:16 UTC
Yep, I'm not impressed either. I like the idea of an oversized Breacher/Hound hull, but it's just too simple "block with panels" for me. While this looks rather good on a frigate, a destroyer needs more attachments/elements distracting from the base form. Considering this ship is in the website/promotional images, I don't expect any immediate changes just not being on the test server (e.g. incomplete model).

Looking for more thoughts? Follow me on Twitter.
Morgan North
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#27 - 2012-09-30 09:13:18 UTC
That Tsunami...

...Its the Ore Frigate!
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#28 - 2012-09-30 16:55:35 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
I'd like to remind you all that the new destroyers aren't the focus of testing, they are incidental WiP contained in the build. The art team have not requested early focus on their work nor are the actively seeking feedback so will not be monitoring threads.


So....what your telling us is, at the early stages, while things can still be easily changed, you do not want or care for feedback?

At what point is it generally excepted for feedback?

B/c less than 2 weeks before the pushed release for token feedback hasn't helped you retain customers much lately...

http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing    < Unified Inventory is NOT ready...
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#29 - 2012-09-30 18:22:30 UTC
Panhead4411 wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
I'd like to remind you all that the new destroyers aren't the focus of testing, they are incidental WiP contained in the build. The art team have not requested early focus on their work nor are the actively seeking feedback so will not be monitoring threads.


So....what your telling us is, at the early stages, while things can still be easily changed, you do not want or care for feedback?

At what point is it generally excepted for feedback?

B/c less than 2 weeks before the pushed release for token feedback hasn't helped you retain customers much lately...


Well, honestly, it isn't too hard to change anything with models at any time. The new Dessie is going to be as much work to change now, as it will be down the road, provided all they do are some minor modifications. It is pretty well a complete model already, and the textures are wrapped and pretty well complete.

Any changes to shape and structure will need new texture wraps and art, and then refitting hardpoints if needed. The changes I suggested wouldn't need changes to hardpoints, and could keep some of the original texture, but would still need a new wrap and some additional modeling. It's not quick and simple, to say the least, but it is maybe faster than doing an entirely new model.

zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Jada Maroo
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2012-09-30 23:59:00 UTC
^ That's all true but it's kind of sloppy to launch with an obviously amateurish design and then replace it a couple months later. Makes CCP look like they don't have their act together.

It's a bit worrying about the lack of response and the dismissiveness of the earlier dev reply. The model is so bad that people were speculating that it was a dev troll over at FH.
Burhtun
Burhtun Shipyards
#31 - 2012-10-01 05:29:55 UTC
Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too.

attempt to make it look cool:
http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg

EVE Ship Design Contest Entry | Drone UI Revamp
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-10-01 11:46:11 UTC
Burhtun wrote:
Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too.

attempt to make it look cool:
http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg


Thats just as 'bad'.
there needs to be more going on than just a rectangle box

The new stabber and tempest models are great... something resembling them plz

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#33 - 2012-10-01 13:06:18 UTC
Burhtun wrote:
Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too.

attempt to make it look cool:
http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg


Very well done m8! Got to love it when the players take it upon themselves to produce some quality concept art. That being said I think a total scrap of the original concept would do you better.
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#34 - 2012-10-01 14:20:13 UTC
Jada Maroo wrote:

It's a bit worrying about the lack of response and the dismissiveness of the earlier dev reply. The model is so bad that people were speculating that it was a dev troll over at FH.


It's eerily similar to the "we don't believe you" responses we all got while telling them the Uni Inv was a busted up piece of junk while it was still on SiSi...

http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing    < Unified Inventory is NOT ready...
Hiram Alexander
State Reprisal
#35 - 2012-10-01 21:55:11 UTC
Burhtun wrote:
Just posted this in another thread of the same topic, I'll leave it here too.

attempt to make it look cool:
http://burhtun.com/sketches/mindest.jpg

Actually that's quite impressive, compared to the current offering (in my opinion). It's perhaps a touch too 'stubby' looking, compared to the length of the other new destroyers, but still a world of an improvement to what we have.
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#36 - 2012-10-02 00:00:01 UTC
Panhead4411 wrote:
Jada Maroo wrote:

It's a bit worrying about the lack of response and the dismissiveness of the earlier dev reply. The model is so bad that people were speculating that it was a dev troll over at FH.


It's eerily similar to the "we don't believe you" responses we all got while telling them the Uni Inv was a busted up piece of junk while it was still on SiSi...


It's really not at all. We've never had this early level of public testing before, and it's important to focus on the features that we ask for feedback on, not the ones we explicitly don't. I wasn't being dismissive in the slightest, just trying to keep people focused on what was the subject of the tests - ship balancing.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#37 - 2012-10-02 01:39:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Roll Sizzle Beef
CCP Goliath wrote:
Panhead4411 wrote:
Jada Maroo wrote:

It's a bit worrying about the lack of response and the dismissiveness of the earlier dev reply. The model is so bad that people were speculating that it was a dev troll over at FH.


It's eerily similar to the "we don't believe you" responses we all got while telling them the Uni Inv was a busted up piece of junk while it was still on SiSi...


It's really not at all. We've never had this early level of public testing before, and it's important to focus on the features that we ask for feedback on, not the ones we explicitly don't. I wasn't being dismissive in the slightest, just trying to keep people focused on what was the subject of the tests - ship balancing.


Your ad department thinks its fit to print Same with Facebook WIP images. It's not just testers searching the data. You have put this hull in full view of everyone for a early level of public scrutiny. Someone in there is expecting us to look at it.
And I would hope many who can handle spreadsheets online could visually look at any ship hull for ten seconds and render a verdict on its attractiveness. Then go on to number crunch new ship stats for hours on end to see how they can actually make it OP.
Eckyy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2012-10-02 01:53:03 UTC
I kinda like it, reminds me of an ant lion.
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#39 - 2012-10-02 03:57:29 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
It's really not at all. We've never had this early level of public testing before, and it's important to focus on the features that we ask for feedback on, not the ones we explicitly don't. I wasn't being dismissive in the slightest, just trying to keep people focused on what was the subject of the tests - ship balancing.



Dismissive or nay your statement still has that feeling. Also I believe that players can give both ship balancing feed back and be able to critique ship models with out to much trouble, but maybe I am overstating the general player population's ability to multitask.

It just seems logical that the earlier something displeasing can be pointed out the more likely it can be tweaked before it goes live. But it seems given the press roll out, the Minmatar destroyer is going to go live as is. Which reveals why no feedback is desired about it's appearance, not now nor in the future.

All you had to do is just tell us that it was set in stone and that there was no interest in changing it.
Morgan North
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#40 - 2012-10-02 06:25:19 UTC
in this link :

http://www.eveonline.com/retribution/new-ships-new-roles/

It doesn't look too bad. I'dstill prefer the redesign proposed. But, yes... right now its probably moreinteresting to build up its stats, a new model might eventually... be done.