These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Thoughts on a Proposal for the Tiericide of the Industrial Ship Class.

Author
Alara IonStorm
#1 - 2012-11-13 14:46:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Industrial Tiericide.

The general fitting of Industrial Ships is usually Shield Tank in the Mids and the all important Cargo Expanders eating the lows and rigs making Shield fit Cargo Ships the by far average standard for EVE. I would like to see this change with a change to the Cargo Expansion system moving it from an item of mass hauling to a mod for the average ship and letting base stats make up the difference allowing for more options in tank design and slot layout.

There are currently 12 T1 Industrials (2 Caldari, 2 Amarr, 3 Minmatar and 5 Gallente + 1 Badger Mk 3 Model in use by the Bustard.) Each T1 Industrial has a bigger hold and tank then the Tier below it with little realistic variation.

1. Cargo Expander / Cargo Optimization.

I would like to see these be split into 3 groups, small medium and large.

Cargo Expanders T1 > Meta > T2 (Removal of Hull and Speed Penalty)

Small for Frigate / Destroyer / 1 PG 10 CPU, + 50m3 T1 > 75m3 T2 of Cargo Space.
Medium for Cruiser / Battlecruiser / 100 PG 20 CPU, + 100m3 T1 > 150m3 T2 of Cargo Space.
Large for Battleships / 1000 PG 30 CPU, + 200m3 T1 > 300m3 T2 of Cargo Space.

Cargo Optimization Rigs

Small / + 50m3 T1 > 75m3 T2 of Cargo Space.
Medium / + 100m3 T1 > 150m3 T2 of Cargo Space.
Large / + 200m3 T1 > 300m3 T2 of Cargo Space.

This makes Expanders tools of the common non focused hauling ship good for increasing the holds for what have you.

--

2. New Industrial Roles.

--

1. Fast Transport: High Speed and Agility, Low Tank, Small Slot Layout, 1 High Slot, 5 Slots shared between Low and Mid. Fitting 50-60 Base PG / 300 CPU for low end tank and other mods. Small Hold of around 5000M3.

Hull Cost: Around 5 Million ISK (Tank Fit around 15000-20000EHP)

Role Bonus 85% Reduction in Power Grid need for propulsion modules (allows it to fit medium MWD's and AB's without High PG Tank Items.)
Role Bonus +1 Warp Strength
Bonus. 5% Speed or Agility.

Min: Wraith
Cal: Badger Mk I (Possibly scaled down a bit in size.)
Gal: Iteron Mk I
Amarr: Small Amarr Hauler not yet designed

Note: A small fast Transport for speedy delivery, running goods quickly across dangerous territory or smuggling. It is not built to withstand heavy fire or combat but instead can avoid fast single Warp Disrupting ships and outrun most heavier craft.
--

2. Armored Transport: Battleship Speed and Battlecruiser Agility, High Defense. 4 High Slots 4 Turrets or Missiles 5% Dmg Bonus / Small Drone Bay 20-40m3. 8 Slots shared between Mid and Low. Cruiser Level base HP. Cruiser Lvl Fitting / Capacitor. Cargo Hold around 8000M3.

Hull Cost: Around 15-20 Million ISK (High cost designed not to be as cheap as Cruisers.) (EHP Full Tank Fit around 60000, Combat Fit around 30000-40000 > Combat Fit = Tackle / Prop / Dmg Mods depending on Tank Type.

Bonus: 5% Weapon Dmg / 5% Bonus to Shield or Armor HP.

Min: Hoarder (Autocannon)
Cal: Badger Mk II (Heavy Assault Missile)
Gal: Iteron Mk III (Blaster)
Amarr: Sigil (Pulse Laser)

Note: Ships would not directly compete with Cruisers for being better at Combat, They lack a Gun Turret (Or Second DMG Bonus in Vexor / Ruptures case), have a Smaller Slot Layout and much lower speed and agility / high sig. They will be designed to be able to defend themselves in convoy groups or from small ship attacks.

--

3. Hauler: Moderate Speed and Low Agility. Low Tank. 2 High Slot 1 Turret, 4 Slots shared between Mid and Low. Large Hold around 35000m3 Max Skill. Fitting 60-70 Base PG / 250 CPU (Not enough for Prop Mod)

Hull Cost: Around 10 Million ISK (Tank Fit 20000-30000 EHP)

Bonus. 5% Cargo Capacity.

Min: Mammoth
Cal: Badger Mk III
Gal: Iteron Mk V
Amarr: Bestower

Note: Your basic Bulk Transport for low value large size goods. Smaller things of value can be placed in Faster / more heavily Defended T1 Ships or Invisible T2 Ships. Larger things of value would best be stowed in a Heavy Transport or Freighter requiring further progression down the Transport Career Path.
--

T2 Blockade Runner Cargo Change to around 10000m3 / T2 Deep Space Transport around 40000m3

The missing 2. The Iteron's Mk II and IV would either say collector ships or variations of the Fast Transport (Mk II) and the Hauler (Mk IV) with very slight stat adjustments just to keep the models flyable.

3. Orca and Rorqual

The Cargo Expander Change will hurt the Orca which is why I suggest the ORE Bay be Expanded to a lofty 250000 Orca / 500000 Rorqual and their Cargo Hold be dropped to around 2500m3 for Crystal Storage.

A change like this would also bring into question the much discussed intermediate hauling stage between the current T1 Industrial Ships and the Freighter. Scaled down Freighters are an obvious solution. Perhaps very similar to the Standard T1 Freighter to save design time, a mini ship created by the Empires for cheaper Hauling. Perhaps a whole new design. 500-750 Mil 300000m3 Hold, tiny bit faster Speed / Align, little less HP around 150000 EHP.

--

There it is. My take on a possible Industrial Tiericide plan.
Alara IonStorm
#2 - 2012-12-01 15:35:53 UTC
Got buried 18 days ago. Take 2.
Souisa
WESCORP 2.0
#3 - 2012-12-02 01:54:36 UTC
Why should the cargo expanders require that much powergrid?

o/

Souisa
WESCORP 2.0
#4 - 2012-12-02 01:57:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Souisa
And i think this role bonus +1 warp strengh is getting out of hand :) They should make a proper warp core stabiliser instead. However that will probably lead to alot of whine. Some people get satisfaction of probing people out and warp scramming and destorying their ships, if more people begin to fit WCS, then these preying pirates or griefers will begin to whine because that means more victims will get away. Much better to just remove the warp disrupter completely to send a clear message.

o/

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-12-02 09:10:58 UTC
I think your idea has merit, but it makes more sense to me to add a stacking penalty to cargo expanders instead. This way, the industrials with 4-5 low slots can devote 2-3 to cargo expansion (or use rigs) and still have room for armor tank. It's a bit of a squeeze but all in the name of maximizing cargo.

This would of course have to come with an increase in cargo rig bonus and an increase in base ship cargohold size (or expander amount) so that the max amount is similar to old values.

Another simple point toward tiericide of current industrials is to give the smaller industrials a smaller sig radius. Their current sig radius is far too high for their tissue-paper hull, meager slot setup, or their bare-bones powergrid to support any sort of halfway reasonable highsec tank. They get by entirely on the scarcity of highsec gankers, and for no other reason. They could also maybe use a faster align than they have, but shrinking their sig radius might make enough difference.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

DiaoMoney
DMoney Corp
#6 - 2012-12-02 11:59:14 UTC
I don't understand why the rig changes can be anyhow related to the tiericide. The second idea should just stand on itself.
Alara IonStorm
#7 - 2012-12-02 17:05:49 UTC
DiaoMoney wrote:
I don't understand why the rig changes can be anyhow related to the tiericide. The second idea should just stand on itself.

The reason is to end large cargo enhancements and fold the larger bays into the hulls themselves.

Instead make cargo enhancements go from % based to number based like Shield Exdeners and give about the same as they do on a regular non hauler ship. Make them for use on smaller ships only because if you make them for use on bigger ships they hold their low and rig slots (especially rig slots) prisoner and it becomes hard to balance base cargo over other things.

Removing % based expanders in general from the industrial tier and making the ships stand without them like Mining Barges lets you exploit all their fitting option. Give them the tank you would give them with a full expander load then add Tank, Bulk, Combat ect, all easier to balance across both tank types and multiple tanking types.

Technically with this change no Industrial classes Hauling ability would really change except the Orca. Even sub cap haulers would see the same sized Cargo Holds with these new expanders as they could get with % based.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#8 - 2012-12-02 20:27:48 UTC
I dont see why t1 haulers should have more tank than assault frigates
Alara IonStorm
#9 - 2012-12-02 21:35:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Michael Harari wrote:
I dont see why t1 haulers should have more tank than assault frigates

Well first off you are partially wrong. If you use every slot to tank you get a Stronger tank an Assault Ship the Fast Transport and not much below the Bulk.

On that note.

Assault Frigate <_50m_>
Industrial<________________________________500-900m__________________________________________>

That is like asking why it is harder to sink a container ship then an armored speed boat with an M60 Mount. They are Large Hulls with Medium Hull Attributes not Small Frigate Hulls. One of them is Military designed with Guns to fight off Pirates. Despite being Battleship sized comparing them to Military Hulls looks like this.

* Fast / Around Destroyer / Assault Ship Sized Tank.
* Military Armored Transport / Heavy tanked Cruiser
* Bulk Transport. / Lightly Tanked Cruiser.

That is a reasonable solid amount of HP, they are large ships not paper planes. If it is Suicide Ganking you are concerned about, people gank freighters and transports so a Bulk Transport with 25k EHP and 35000 Cargo is not exactly the safest thing on the planet. Sure the Armored Transport in a defensive Defensive fit could tank 60000Kish but so could my Caracal in a Defensive, it's job is to be tough but not haul a lot.

No one will be seriously weakened by these knew Industrials, Bulk Transports and Fast Transports won't be impregnable fortresses in the least, Armored Transports won't be Hauling whole Battlefleets across the universe in their 8000Kish holds.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2012-12-04 08:18:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
I'd like to see a variation on your proposal for the armored transport. I take it you like the "battle badger" approach, but I think your current description makes them into mediocre combat cruisers with a giant cargohold. It's not really the industrial style to pack on a bunch of offensive modules that aren't likely to be used. If you want it to be good for hauling around in a convoy with fleet members and be able to participate in combat, just give it the drone bandwidth. Heck, since it's an industrial, it might as well have a drone bay way larger than its bandwidth.

My proposal for a unique and useful armored transport is one that has decent EHP but focuses on high resists and a very fast rate of repair. With a hefty powergrid and a healthy capacitor, all it needs is a reduction to the powergrid cost of a large armor repairer, or a reduction in the CPU cost of an X-large shield booster.

Alternatively, you could make each racial industrial unique:

Amarr Sigil: high EHP, high armor resists, lots of low slots for armor hardeners (2/6)
Caldari Badger Mk II: high EHP, high shield resists, lots of mid slots for shield hardeners (6/2)
Gallente Iteron Mk III: fast armor repair, -75% powergrid cost for fitting large armor repairer (3/5)
Minmatar Hoarder: fast shield repair, -50% CPU, -25% powergrid cost of X-Large shield booster (5/3)

About 500-600MW powergrid each, and maybe 300-400Tf CPU, and a battlecruiser capacitor. It's less than a battleship, but it only needs to run one battleship module. The Sigil and Badger might have more capacitor and less regen speed to help buffer against neuting.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

PhatController
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-12-14 14:00:03 UTC  |  Edited by: PhatController
Cargo expanders and rigs would not be used if this happened, as wasting a slot for a tiny 50-200m3 or cargo on a ship that already has 35k m3 is pointless. Also, why add guns/missiles to haulers. Also agree that +1 warp strength is OP.

But most of all, why fix something that isn't broken? I don't see any real benefit to doing this.

The only thing I can think of atm that's need changed in the hauling space, is the addition of a ship to plug the huge hole in between industrial's and haulers, maybe in the 250-350k m3 range.
Alara IonStorm
#12 - 2012-12-14 14:12:01 UTC
PhatController wrote:
Cargo expanders and rigs would not be used if this happened, as wasting a slot for a tiny 50-200m3 or cargo on a ship that already has 35k m3 is pointless.

Duh. I want them off the big Indies completely. Let them use those slots for other things and make the majority of the Cargo Space base. Otherwise Shield Tankers have the advantage and in case you haven't noticed all big Haul Industrial's are Shield Tanked..
PhatController wrote:

Also, why add guns/missiles to haulers. Also agree that +1 warp strength is OP.

Guns so they can defend themselves on their own or in convoys, they are combat haulers. +1 Warp Strength is no where near OP, it is a built in Warp Stab.
PhatController wrote:

But most of all, why fix something that isn't broken? I don't see any real benefit to doing this.

All Haulers except the highest Tier ones are useless when you train the next tier. I don't know if you have been asleep the last year but Tieracide is happening and Haulers are part of that. CCP plans to give each one a role.
PhatController wrote:

The only thing I can think of atm that's need changed in the hauling space, is the addition of a ship to plug the huge hole in between industrial's and haulers, maybe in the 250-350k m3 range.

No the only thing that needs changing is a role for each type of hauler AKA Tieracide which is the primary focus of balance changes and that is coming for haulers as well as confirmed by CCP Ytterbium.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2012-12-14 14:23:18 UTC
Why industrial ships have only one class size?? we should have small medium large and then the freighters....
PhatController
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2012-12-14 15:36:22 UTC  |  Edited by: PhatController
Alara IonStorm wrote:
1.
PhatController wrote:
Cargo expanders and rigs would not be used if this happened, as wasting a slot for a tiny 50-200m3 or cargo on a ship that already has 35k m3 is pointless.

Duh. I want them off the big Indies completely. Let them use those slots for other things and make the majority of the Cargo Space base. Otherwise Shield Tankers have the advantage and in case you haven't noticed all big Haul Industrial's are Shield Tanked..
2.
PhatController wrote:

Also, why add guns/missiles to haulers. Also agree that +1 warp strength is OP.

Guns so they can defend themselves on their own or in convoys, they are combat haulers. +1 Warp Strength is no where near OP, it is a built in Warp Stab.
3.
PhatController wrote:

But most of all, why fix something that isn't broken? I don't see any real benefit to doing this.

All Haulers except the highest Tier ones are useless when you train the next tier. I don't know if you have been asleep the last year but Tieracide is happening and Haulers are part of that. CCP plans to give each one a role.
4.
PhatController wrote:

The only thing I can think of atm that's need changed in the hauling space, is the addition of a ship to plug the huge hole in between industrial's and haulers, maybe in the 250-350k m3 range.

No the only thing that needs changing is a role for each type of hauler AKA Tieracide which is the primary focus of balance changes and that is coming for haulers as well as confirmed by CCP Ytterbium.


1. Why would I want to give up a slot/rig on ANY ship for 50m3 of cargo.

2. Transports already can defend themselves, by warping away, achieving this with very fast align speed combined with a cloak, or with warp strength of +2. Second, if in a convoy, why bring to "Industrails" that can do a half arse job of fighting and half arse job of hauling, instead of just bring one dedicated hauler and one dedicated combat ship?

3. Have to disagree, if I want something small moved fast, I use a badger Mk1, for bigger things, I use a Badger mk2. If i want something moved through low/null-sec, I use a transport ship or Jump Freighter.

4. Most roles have already been filled:
-Fast /small high sec hauling: industrial haulers
-large high sec hauling: Orca and freighters
-low/null sec small hauling: transports
-low/null sec large hauling: Jump Freighter



The only good changes I can think of , is adding something between and indie and a freighter, and adding a mid slot cargo expander that can't be used at the same time as the current low slot expanders to allow for armor tanking.
Alara IonStorm
#15 - 2012-12-14 15:56:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
PhatController wrote:

1. Why would I want to give up a slot/rig on ANY ship for 50m3 of cargo.

The same reason you would put cargo expanders on Frigates.

These new ones are not designed to go on Industrial Ships at all which will have their Cargo amounts buffed to work without them. Small, Medium Large > Frigate > Cruiser > Battleship.

PhatController wrote:

2. Transports already can defend themselves, by warping away, achieving this with very fast align speed combined with a cloak, or with warp strength of +2. Second, if in a convoy, why bring to "Industrails" that can do a half arse job of fighting and half arse job of hauling, instead of just bring one dedicated hauler and one dedicated combat ship?

And with T1 Haulers designed for speed they can do escape options better then current while T2 does it even better.

Why bring one Industrial and one combat ship when you can bring one Combat Industrial and one Combat Ship unless you need more Cargo Space, then you use a Bulk. If you can not find a use for it with your narrow parameters then don't use it, simple as that.

1. Speed
2. Defended and Tanked
3. Bulk

PhatController wrote:

3. Have to disagree, if I want something small moved fast, I use a badger Mk1, for bigger things, I use a Badger mk2. If i want something moved through low/null-sec, I use a transport ship or Jump Freighter.

Well now you would have the Badger Mk3 for the Badger Mk 1 and 2's job of heavy hauling and 2 new Badgers as well as Jump Freighters, Blockade Runners and Deep Space Transports.

If you do not like having all these different options as well as all the old ones feel free not to use them. Other certainly would find use for a more tanky defended Industrial and a Fast Destroyer like Speed and Agility Industrial.

PhatController wrote:

4. Most roles have already been filled:
-Fast /small high sec hauling: industrial haulers
-large high sec hauling: Orca and freighters
-low/null sec small hauling: transports
-low/null sec large hauling: Jump Freighter

Filled lopsidedly with 8 Industrials that are useless as soon as you train the next tier. Mammoth, Bestower, Itty V and Badger Mk II. Once you have them you have no reason to go down a notch unlike the new Cruisers that follow certain roles. Attack, Combat, Logi, EWAR.

Better System

Standard

- Bulk = Current Industrial Type with slow speed, low Tank and a heavy load.
- Speed = Faster Hauling and hard to catch in Low Sec
- Defended = Harder to Kill by Gank when tanked or kill in small ships

Advanced

- Blockade Runner = Invisisble
- Deep Space Transport =Bulk Hauler that is also Tanked and has Warp Strength.

Capital

- Light Freighter = Larger but not massive loads
- Freighter = Massive Loads

Advance Capital

- Jump Freighter = Middle Ground Cargo with ability to Jump.

More options at lower skill, more options in general, more ships for different roles. That is what Tieracide is. Make ships like these and people will use them 100%, if you don't use the new ones fine you won't really be affected from current Industrials except maybe by the Orca change to make it more ORE Centric but they don't have to do that if it proves unpopular.
Teshania
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2012-12-14 16:17:29 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
[quote=PhatController]
Better System

Standard

- Bulk = Current Industrial Type with slow speed, low Tank and a heavy load.
- Speed = Faster Hauling and hard to catch in Low Sec
- Defended = Harder to Kill by Gank when tanked or kill in small ships

Advanced

- Blockade Runner = Invisisble
- Deep Space Transport =Bulk Hauler that is also Tanked and has Warp Strength.

Capital

- Light Freighter = Larger but not massive loads
- Freighter = Massive Loads

Advance Capital

- Jump Freighter = Middle Ground Cargo with ability to Jump.

More options at lower skill, more options in general, more ships for different roles. That is what Tieracide is. Make ships like these and people will use them 100%, if you don't use the new ones fine you won't really be affected from current Industrials except maybe by the Orca change to make it more ORE Centric but they don't have to do that if it proves unpopular.


Liked,

This is a much better system and makes all vessels in the class have a "Role" Is this not what CCP has been pushing for ?

We need a Bounty Button on the Forums

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#17 - 2012-12-14 16:35:43 UTC
What do we think about a small (2-3k m3) fragile Transport Ship that can jump to cynos? No fitting required, just a 2-3k m3 cargohold, a fuel bay that can fit enough fuel for 2-3 jumps.
Alara IonStorm
#18 - 2012-12-14 16:39:58 UTC
Paikis wrote:
What do we think about a small (2-3k m3) fragile Transport Ship that can jump to cynos? No fitting required, just a 2-3k m3 cargohold, a fuel bay that can fit enough fuel for 2-3 jumps.

I know the runner can currently be bridged by BOp's but yeah since there would be three Haulers per race that would be an interesting addition to the TS lineup.

I also like the Idea of T2 Tier Battlecruisers being light on the T2 Resists and becoming jump ships along with T2 Tier 3 Battleships. A kind of Rapid response force.
Hakan MacTrew
MUTED VOID
#19 - 2012-12-14 17:23:31 UTC
Teshania wrote:
Alara IonStorm wrote:
[quote=PhatController]
Better System

Standard

- Bulk = Current Industrial Type with slow speed, low Tank and a heavy load.
- Speed = Faster Hauling and hard to catch in Low Sec
- Defended = Harder to Kill by Gank when tanked or kill in small ships

Advanced

- Blockade Runner = Invisisble
- Deep Space Transport =Bulk Hauler that is also Tanked and has Warp Strength.

Capital

- Light Freighter = Larger but not massive loads
- Freighter = Massive Loads

Advance Capital

- Jump Freighter = Middle Ground Cargo with ability to Jump.

More options at lower skill, more options in general, more ships for different roles. That is what Tieracide is. Make ships like these and people will use them 100%, if you don't use the new ones fine you won't really be affected from current Industrials except maybe by the Orca change to make it more ORE Centric but they don't have to do that if it proves unpopular.


Liked,

This is a much better system and makes all vessels in the class have a "Role" Is this not what CCP has been pushing for ?

Also liked.

Makes a lot of sense and seems balanced.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2012-12-15 09:22:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Alx Warlord wrote:
Why industrial ships have only one class size?? we should have small medium large and then the freighters....
I'd like to see the Badger Mk II, Iterons Mk II and IV, and Hoarder made into the mediums, Sigil, Badger, Iteron, and Wreathe into the smalls, and Mammoth, Iterons Mk III and V, and Badger Mk III made into the larges:
The larges would use large rigs, the hulls would cost 3-5x the amount they cost currently, they would align like a covetor, and they would carry around 50-75k m3 when fully fitted for cargo. The mediums would carry around 20-25k m3 at max, and the smalls would use small rigs and align swift, like a cruiser. Their hulls would cost 15-25% of current and they would carry around 8-10k m3 max.

The Amarr could have a third industrial added for this, or....
The Bestower could align somewhere between a medium and large, count as large (for rigs), but have a cheap hull, like a medium. It'd still require the industrial skill at 1, and it would carry around 25k m3 cargo at skill 1, but would increase much faster than others by skill level and would carry more like 40k m3 at skill 5. That way it is useful at low and high skill levels without being overpowered.

The Iterons Mk I - III might have cheap-ish hulls and decent carrying capacity with under par HP and powergrid and very few slots. The IV and V in contrast would have slightly larger cargoholds, more HP and powergrid, and a lot more slots, and would cost more for the hull.

The Badgers ought to be slower but with a stronger shield tank, while the Minmatar indys should have smaller sigs and be more agile at the cost of some cargo space.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

123Next page