These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Capital Rigs

First post First post
Author
Badfellas Inc.
#201 - 2013-04-24 09:42:36 UTC
Schmell wrote:
So what numbes will they have?

How will, for example, t1 capital trimark and t2 large trimark compare in efficiency?

(considering t1 capital trimark will be around 5-10 times cheaper)


Not sure if this is a joke, or not.

Small trimark rigs:
tech 1: +15% armor
tech 2: +20% armor

Medium trimark rigs:
tech 1: +15% armor
tech 2: +20% armor

Large trimark rigs:
tech 1: +15% armor
tech 2: +20% armor

You know, it's almost like we've got a blatantly obvious pattern going on here...

Capital trimark rigs:
Uhhh maybe...
tech 1: +15% armor
tech 2: +20% armor
???

As for efficiency, thats really a moot point. You wont be able to put large rigs on capitals anymore, so whats the point in comparing?


Also, is it intended that t2 cargo rigging a rorqual should cost as much as the hull of the ship? O.o
Mordus Angels
#202 - 2013-04-24 10:07:35 UTC
goood, now make some capital shield extender and armor plates Cool
#203 - 2013-04-24 10:49:15 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=228442&find=unread

Super Capital Rigs :)

WE NEED THEM!

5x Materials needed to make capital rig - rather than large one.
10x Materials needed to make a supercapital rig - rather a capital one :)
#204 - 2013-04-24 11:00:57 UTC
Why don't the poors in this thread just fit t2 large rigs now and be done with it
Void Alliance
#205 - 2013-04-24 11:06:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Spc One
CCP Tallest wrote:
Hey
* Manufacturing Capital rigs will use 5 times the materials of Large rigs

Questions? Comments?

xXyoloxXxbroswagxXx420Xx wrote:
Love it.

Spend 1.3b on an Archon then 4.5b on T2 rigs. Good job CCP!


Meduza13 wrote:
So who is going to buy t2 rigs for anything smaller than mothership? whats the point of creating such thing like t2 capital rigs which nearly noone going to buy?



I will stop using capitals then, too expenssive.
C C P Alliance
#206 - 2013-04-24 11:32:34 UTC
ariana ailith wrote:
How will this affect rigs for Orca's? They're in the market as capital ships but at the same time are not really...
Will they stick with large rigs?

The Orca will still use large rigs.

[b]★ EVE Game Designer ★ ♥ Team Super Friends ♥[/b]

Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#207 - 2013-04-24 11:36:47 UTC
Spc One wrote:
I will stop using capitals then, too expenssive.

You do know that you basing that decision on the price of the most sought after (and hence most expensive) T2 rigs forces you to fly nothing but shuttles from here on out, right?

There are T2 rigs in all sizes that exceed the cost of all but the most expensive hulls available. The only odd-one out is medium rigs which are used on the most flown ships (BC + T1/T2 Cruisers) and thus has enough market volume to keep prices down and even then you are looking at 40M+ for the pricier T2 rigs.
Caldari State
#208 - 2013-04-24 11:45:49 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:
Jane Wade wrote:
do ships with large rigs already in them keep their bonuses?

Yes. Your currently fitted rigs will stay in place and keep their bonuses.



Please explain how this is even remotely fair and why the currently fit rigs should not instead be returned to the ship's cargo bay? So everyone who currently has a capital ship gets their rigs at a massive discount over everyone else who buys a cap from patch day forward. I sware, do you guys even think at all about the implications of changes you make or do you just randomly make them?
#209 - 2013-04-24 11:45:58 UTC
No one will stop using capitals because of rigs, and CCP should add super capital rigs.
Void Alliance
#210 - 2013-04-24 11:47:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Spc One
Anthar Thebess wrote:
No one will stop using capitals because of rigs, and CCP should add super capital rigs.

Maybe not super capitals, but for carriers to spend extra 5b for rigs is just insane.
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2013-04-24 11:58:12 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
No one will stop using capitals because of rigs, and CCP should add super capital rigs.

and next what ?, med-large for battlecruiser ?
#212 - 2013-04-24 12:16:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
We have:
Frigates/destroyers - Small
Cruisers/Battlecruisers/Industrial ships - Medium
Battleships/Ore Capitals - Large
Carriers/Dreads - Capital
Mothership/Titan - Capital? - we need super capital rigs!

This is a bit nonsense.
Compare size od cruisers/battlecruisers.
Now compare size of Dread/Titan

Still we should not check the ship size - but ship class ( already defined long time ago).
And Capital ships and Super Capital ships are quite different.

For me CCP instead of making the same stats for the capital/super capital rigs like for the small ones - should think about reducing the number of rigs, and making them more useful for the capital ships.
Northern Coalition.
#213 - 2013-04-24 12:24:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Moondog Hansen
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Still we should not check the ship size - but ship class ( already defined long time ago).
And Capital ships and Super Capital ships are quite different.


Destroyer-sized rigs fit this criteria too, are you advocating for a new rig size to be used in destroyers?

Also in the first half of your post you say cruisers and battlecruisers are the same size so they should use the same rig size but then proceed to argue that rigs should be determined by ship class, in which battlecruisers and cruisers are different classes so they should use different rig sizes. You are suffering from a phenomenon called cognitive dissonance.
Electus Matari
#214 - 2013-04-24 13:12:52 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:

We're putting capital rigs into EVE. Not much else to say, really. They will work pretty much as you would expect them to.


Makes a lot of sense. I approve of this.
Pandemic Horde
#215 - 2013-04-24 13:17:13 UTC
This is an awesome nerf to supers. BUT! if you leave T2 rigged supers as they are you are creating a huge imbalance for existing supercaps. If T2 capital rigs are not going to exist then they must removed from the supers that have them already. These T2 rigged supers will be around for years to come, having a huge advantage over other players.

If you announce this as the plan right now, the market will not be disrupted and people will not waste isk now, only to be angry later.
#216 - 2013-04-24 13:25:03 UTC
Spc One wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:
No one will stop using capitals because of rigs, and CCP should add super capital rigs.

Maybe not super capitals, but for carriers to spend extra 5b for rigs is just insane.


You do realise that T1 capital rigs will only cost 100 to 150 mil isk per ship right, not 5 bil?
Minmatar Republic
#217 - 2013-04-24 13:34:23 UTC  |  Edited by: MisterAl tt1
Max Teranous wrote:

You do realise that T1 capital rigs will only cost 100 to 150 mil isk per ship right, not 5 bil?

You do realize people fit T2 rigs not cos they have free isk, but cos they put capitals efficiency to the level?

With Chimera/Archon resists bonuses reduced and rigs made over-the-head expensive, those ships will be in a deep hole.
Caldari State
#218 - 2013-04-24 14:10:02 UTC
Wow....thanks for dropping a bomb on an already volatile tank of gasoline.

CCP Tallest....if you do guys do this, there has to be more supply. As others have stated, the
salvage market is highly volatile. As usual, this is mostly YOUR fault. You nerfed the crap out
of commander rat salvage (like 1% drop chance), and nerfed mag sites into oblivion. You DID
buff player wrecks, but increased T2 ship construction materials.

You MUST increase T2 salvage someplace. You will facewreck the economy. Folks will
do what I used to do and blow up T2 ships just for salvage. That was filthy until the extra
materials were introduced. Now, it may make a comeback.

Good job, as always. I see you thought it all through. ****tards.

P.S. If you guys want a nice supply of intact armor plates, load up an Orca with Amarr assault
ships, insure, eject, blow up with drones, salvage, rinse, repeat.

Of Sound Mind
#219 - 2013-04-24 14:33:11 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Gheyna wrote:

But t2 (and some t1) rigs for caps will cost alot. (you need to look at that ccp)

Well lets see, right now Trimarks on a battleship run you 21m or ~10% of the cost (for a Tier 3). On a carrier that would be ~105m which is, coincidentally, just under 10% of the cost.

Likewise, T2 trimarks for a BS would run you a billion, five times the cost of the ship. Three times the cost of the ship for a set of T2 trimarks for a carrier seems reasonable to me there, as well.

Enochia Starr wrote:
I hope that you compensate us for our Large T2 Trimarks on our supercapitals / titans.

Why would they do this? They'll continue to give the bonus just as they do now.


What you wrote is all fine and good, spot on of course, but c'mon now! Are you going to say nothing about the fact that letting people keep large (t2) rigs on existing ships is a buff to old players and a nerf to new blood?
Amarr Empire
#220 - 2013-04-24 14:33:38 UTC
Mistress Rose wrote:

P.S. If you guys want a nice supply of intact armor plates, load up an Orca with Amarr assault
ships, insure, eject, blow up with drones, salvage, rinse, repeat.


hehe I've tested this on test server ^^ found out it is too much work for little or no profit ,but maybe you are right and it will be a good thing to do if salvage materials will be more expensive
Forum Jump