These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Upcoming Changes To Industrials?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ZAKURELL0 LINDA
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#41 - 2013-05-20 04:29:05 UTC
SilentStryder wrote:
The last two Gallente Industrials should be Battle Industrials maybe make 1 with a decent sized Drone Bay for "SURPRISE" and maybe make a 3 Hard Point other Industrial... They could be Gallente Q-Ships. and against anything other then frigs and maybe destroyers there combat capability would be novelty.

BADGER~ BADGER~ BADGER~ BADGER~ BADGER~
o noes I spell wrong
ITTY~ ITTY~ ITTY~ ITTY~ ITTY~

RIP Iron Lady
Guido Tye
RvB Industries
#42 - 2013-05-20 08:37:16 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
if all else fail we'll shuffle the last two unused Iteron variations to have a dedicated bay for Spiced Wine and Exoctic Dancers P

all else must fail.



on a serious note, industrials should have cargo refitting, like on Transport tycoon deluxe. say an ittyV can choose between different configurations 40km3 of cargo unrestricted, 100k but only of capital parts with an increase in tank and lower align, 60k but only of ore/minerals with a lower tank and increased align speed, 200k but only for ship hulls, paired with increased tank and much longer align time. and lower cargo/ better tank/alignment for a transport like experience on a budget.

it can be done with the subsystem interface that's already in place.

not being able to move capital parts/ship hulls sucks, and no, a 700m isk mining command ship is not a solution.



T3 Haulers with various subsystems?? =)
Danni stark
#43 - 2013-05-20 08:59:58 UTC
Guido Tye wrote:
T3 Haulers with various subsystems?? =)


why is every one so obsessed with t3 ships instead of fixing ****** broken ships that we already have?

Ice Mining Skill Plan.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#44 - 2013-05-20 12:10:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Yokai Mitsuhide
Danni stark wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Plans we have for them so far is to have the same kind of treatment than we've done with the Mining Barges. Have one Industrial variation with good mobility, low EHP and low cargo for quickly moving things around, another with low mobility, low EHP and high cargo for bulk transport and the last one with good defenses but poor mobility / cargo to compensate.


you are aware your mining barge rebalance was horrible and failed at the "balance" part (look at your dev blog where you showed how much ore was mined by skiffs and procurers) so this already sounds bad.

also, i fail to see how a bulk or good defense industrial will have anything to offer over what an orca currently offers without being ridiculously OP, or a heavy nerf to the orca.

please prove me wrong and don't **** this up.


Really hope CCP is done listening the vocal minority of the community when it comes to ship balancing/changes.

Danni stark wrote:
Guido Tye wrote:
T3 Haulers with various subsystems?? =)


why is every one so obsessed with t3 ships instead of fixing ****** broken ships that we already have?


Because T3 ships allow you to build them to suit your play style. More T3 Ships would be nothing but a good thing. Sure there are ships that need some fixing/rebalancing but you're acting like it should be done now just because you want it to be. It's not that simple. They will get to fixing things when they get to them.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2013-05-20 12:21:55 UTC
Danni stark wrote:

the fact that the skiff and procurer mine less than 10% of any given non mercoxit ore is also an indicator that the ship isn't used (arguably, because it's poorly balanced)

it can be seen another way. For example: people prefer some more EHP to other factors. Then you have more people use ship with the biggest EHP than other ships.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Elfi Wolfe
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2013-05-20 16:37:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Elfi Wolfe
Linna Excel wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We're changing the skill requirements for Industrials as with all other ships for Odyssey.


However, the roles / attributes themselves will have to stay as they are for a while longer - we initially planed for them to go in the expansion as well, but they slipped out due to lack of time.

Tech1 Industrial overhaul has a high priority on our balanc-o-meter though - once battleships are updated, they'll be the last tech1 sub-capital hulls that need to go through the Tiericide fires.

Plans we have for them so far is to have the same kind of treatment than we've done with the Mining Barges. Have one Industrial variation with good mobility, low EHP and low cargo for quickly moving things around, another with low mobility, low EHP and high cargo for bulk transport and the last one with good defenses but poor mobility / cargo to compensate.

Which of course poses a problem with Gallente industrials and their 5 variations - as CCP Fozzie keeps saying all the time, if all else fail we'll shuffle the last two unused Iteron variations to have a dedicated bay for Spiced Wine and Exoctic Dancers P


For the gallente you can have 2 ships that are in-betweeners. Say one half mobility and half cargo and the other half mobility half defense, or half defense and half cargo. Or give them one well rounded cargo ship that has a good balance between all three and have the other one as either a more expensive upgrade of that ship or maybe an armed trap ship. Oh look, it's a freighter... with 125 bandwidth and 8 high slots.


Give the Gallente a Q-ship? Make a nice surprise. But then it still would not stop gank attempts.

Or maybe a escort carrier. But then they still would not be able to stop tanks or attacks in lowsec.

"Please point to the place on the doll where the carebear touched you."
Marsan
#47 - 2013-05-20 18:52:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Marsan
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We're changing the skill requirements for Industrials as with all other ships for Odyssey.


However, the roles / attributes themselves will have to stay as they are for a while longer - we initially planed for them to go in the expansion as well, but they slipped out due to lack of time.

Tech1 Industrial overhaul has a high priority on our balanc-o-meter though - once battleships are updated, they'll be the last tech1 sub-capital hulls that need to go through the Tiericide fires.

Plans we have for them so far is to have the same kind of treatment than we've done with the Mining Barges. Have one Industrial variation with good mobility, low EHP and low cargo for quickly moving things around, another with low mobility, low EHP and high cargo for bulk transport and the last one with good defenses but poor mobility / cargo to compensate.

Which of course poses a problem with Gallente industrials and their 5 variations - as CCP Fozzie keeps saying all the time, if all else fail we'll shuffle the last two unused Iteron variations to have a dedicated bay for Spiced Wine and Exoctic Dancers P



Have you considered giving one of them an ore bay, and one a ship bay? Sort of mini Orcas. Personally I want a hauler I can mount a decent tank and weapon.


PS- Please increase the tank of these ships. Or get us something between the Orca and lowely Indy. It's annoying to have to pull out the Orca or freighter to haul a small load just because the load is worth X100 the cost to gank my Mark V.....

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#48 - 2013-05-20 21:55:11 UTC
Personally I don't see a need to balance the T1 industrials eg Wreathe, Mammoth etc other than to add the seemingly obligatory 'isk sink' in terms of adding 'extra materials to their respective BPO's. After all the T1 industrials are not much stronger than a brown paper bag and should really only be used for short trips to empty high-sec PI customs offices or to do level four Distribution missions in high-sec. They are not safe or viable for any other usage.

If you want to transport stuff serious then depending on the m3 a Prowler, Orca, or Fenrir will be the ship of choice. Therefore rather than using man hours on T1 industrials I suggest you divert those resources to doing preliminary work on fixing broken items like the Corporation/Alliance Roles & Permissions. Nuff said. Smile

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#49 - 2013-05-20 22:03:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
You know as much as we scream for this and that.. we really only care about one thing.


Can it haul a ton of crap so I can get stuff done quickly and move on with life?

All I want to do is have it able to move roughly 100,000 to 150,000m3 through space (And not have to rely on using a 800 million isk Orca, or a 1.5 billion isk Freighter, or spend the next 2 hours hauling crap back and forth in a damn Bestower) so I can get my logistics crap done quickly and I can have fun shooting people.

Yaay!!!!
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#50 - 2013-05-21 00:39:20 UTC
feihcsiM wrote:
One of them should be given negligible cargo capacity but a small ship maintenance bay, say enough to carry a single assembled cruiser, or possibly battlecruiser (not sure if too much?).
It would be a genuinely useful ship.


Why would carrying a single assembled ship be useful? If you only have one ship to move then just fly it to your destination manually.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#51 - 2013-05-21 01:37:25 UTC
Which is the issue. Those ships would become the main target of everything. Ontop of that, there is no realistic way of having such a ship and it not be the size of an orca or larger

Yaay!!!!
SilentStryder
#52 - 2013-05-21 03:03:57 UTC
I suppose the most obvious solution that Gallente Tech 1 Industrial Hauler aficionado's wouldn't like but is the easiest and fairest solution, is just morph the left over iteron's into a different model, as close as possible to what the original model was, so the Itty 5 would be morphed into a high cargo version, and I guess if they got nothing else they could just choose a different model for the left over iteron, I would recommend dropping the Itty 1 and 2 though.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#53 - 2013-05-21 10:38:37 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
low EHP and low cargo for quickly moving things around

Guess I won't train a cloaky hauler then.



You don't know what you're missing then. For null sec it's a must have, low sec you can lol at everything and everyone before they can even lock you, for high sec you can simply haul as much plex as you want and no one will ever catch you provided, of course, you're not hauling afk

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#54 - 2013-05-21 10:48:41 UTC
Guido Tye wrote:
GreenSeed wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
if all else fail we'll shuffle the last two unused Iteron variations to have a dedicated bay for Spiced Wine and Exoctic Dancers P

all else must fail.



on a serious note, industrials should have cargo refitting, like on Transport tycoon deluxe. say an ittyV can choose between different configurations 40km3 of cargo unrestricted, 100k but only of capital parts with an increase in tank and lower align, 60k but only of ore/minerals with a lower tank and increased align speed, 200k but only for ship hulls, paired with increased tank and much longer align time. and lower cargo/ better tank/alignment for a transport like experience on a budget.

it can be done with the subsystem interface that's already in place.

not being able to move capital parts/ship hulls sucks, and no, a 700m isk mining command ship is not a solution.



T3 Haulers with various subsystems?? =)



This would be a mistake and step on Orca ability. Over 50K M3-->Orca-->Freighter

T3 subs for T2 freighters on the other hand would be a good choice, hauling fitted ships is a real pain in the arse, or just implement a Freighter with no cargo bay but a huge ship hangar capable to handle some BS BC and a couple frigs all fitted, jump capable of course with usual jump restrictions.

Carriers are a bit "awkward", I know more people using them only to haul their crap right and left, less that ever fight with and those who fight with usually don't undock zda carrier unless there's a large capital fleet...

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#55 - 2013-05-21 13:20:17 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Guido Tye wrote:
GreenSeed wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
if all else fail we'll shuffle the last two unused Iteron variations to have a dedicated bay for Spiced Wine and Exoctic Dancers P

all else must fail.



on a serious note, industrials should have cargo refitting, like on Transport tycoon deluxe. say an ittyV can choose between different configurations 40km3 of cargo unrestricted, 100k but only of capital parts with an increase in tank and lower align, 60k but only of ore/minerals with a lower tank and increased align speed, 200k but only for ship hulls, paired with increased tank and much longer align time. and lower cargo/ better tank/alignment for a transport like experience on a budget.

it can be done with the subsystem interface that's already in place.

not being able to move capital parts/ship hulls sucks, and no, a 700m isk mining command ship is not a solution.



T3 Haulers with various subsystems?? =)



This would be a mistake and step on Orca ability. Over 50K M3-->Orca-->Freighter

T3 subs for T2 freighters on the other hand would be a good choice, hauling fitted ships is a real pain in the arse, or just implement a Freighter with no cargo bay but a huge ship hangar capable to handle some BS BC and a couple frigs all fitted, jump capable of course with usual jump restrictions.

Carriers are a bit "awkward", I know more people using them only to haul their crap right and left, less that ever fight with and those who fight with usually don't undock zda carrier unless there's a large capital fleet...


There have been some posts regarding how to not trample over the Orca. I believe the main one was to split the hold up into several holds. So instead of just 1 hold that can hold 100,000m3, you would have multiple holds that would hold something like 25 or 30,000m3, restricting the amount that the ship can hold in one batch, but not taking over the orca's job (Urban Trucker's post made sense regarding how to restrict the Deep Space Transport and make it a functional ship).

Yaay!!!!
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#56 - 2013-05-21 14:21:57 UTC
I think probably larger sized haulers will be considered once the Freighter 'balancing' begins. It might be nice to have new mid range Freighters of say 400,000 m3 to bridge the gap. The only problem with this being the inevitable 'extra materials' being put on the Freighter BPO's which would push the cost to produce over two billion ISK. Cry

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#57 - 2013-05-22 10:39:51 UTC
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:
I think probably larger sized haulers will be considered once the Freighter 'balancing' begins. It might be nice to have new mid range Freighters of say 400,000 m3 to bridge the gap. The only problem with this being the inevitable 'extra materials' being put on the Freighter BPO's which would push the cost to produce over two billion ISK. Cry


These "midrange" freighters are the Tech 2 variants already. More agile, more ehp, ~350 000 m3. Current hauling roles are:
up to 35k m3 [deep space / t1 variants] - 35 to 150 k [orca] - 150 to 350 k [jump freighter] - 350 to 980k [freighter] plus theres extra category for "a bit too large for shuttle, lets take blocade runner".

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
Jayrendo Karr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#58 - 2013-05-22 11:25:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayrendo Karr
Danni stark wrote:

you are aware your mining barge rebalance was horrible and failed at the "balance" part (look at your dev blog where you showed how much ore was mined by skiffs and procurers) so this already sounds bad.

also, i fail to see how a bulk or good defense industrial will have anything to offer over what an orca currently offers without being ridiculously OP, or a heavy nerf to the orca.

please prove me wrong and don't **** this up.

Anyone saying these changes are worthless is wrong. The new procurer is fairly nice, i have an old character on this (my only) account that if things are slow, I can be in a 30k ehp barge with a tier 1 DC and all for under 1 mill SP, not great for much but it lets me earn a bit of isk while doing work and only checking every minute or so instead of every 5 seconds.

The old procurer had less than 10k ehp.

On that note I might train industrials if there was a way to transport 60-120k m3 without a JF which needs months of training time and a **** ton of isk.
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#59 - 2013-05-22 19:26:04 UTC
One thing we do need is a dedicated ship hauler for moving house in high sec. With rigs it can take absolutely ages to haul all of the ships you don't want to repackage as you have to do them one-by-one. Can do it with some Orca help, but it would be great if there was a Ship Freighter type with very small cargo hold and absolutely massive ship bay.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#60 - 2013-05-22 23:37:44 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Danni stark wrote:

the fact that the skiff and procurer mine less than 10% of any given non mercoxit ore is also an indicator that the ship isn't used (arguably, because it's poorly balanced)

it can be seen another way. For example: people prefer some more EHP to other factors. Then you have more people use ship with the biggest EHP than other ships.

the actual failure of the mining ship rebalance is that it practically killed a valuable game mechanic.

I should buy an Ishtar.