These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

About the Eos' model

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kerplakershtat Rova
The Mostly Free People's Republic of Persephone
#321 - 2013-06-05 15:09:35 UTC
Yes, the sooner the better!

Oh, and while we're here, can we have those 4x high-res textures as well, please?
LtauSTinpoWErs
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#322 - 2013-06-05 19:14:13 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?


    Sounds great!
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #323 - 2013-06-05 19:32:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
    We've reached page 17, so I'll update the numbers. Yes, even if they show nothing.

    As of this post:

    176 in favor of the changes.

    56 opposed to the changes.
    Ireland VonVicious
    Vicious Trading Company
    #324 - 2013-06-05 19:33:40 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

    I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

    It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?



    Love the idea!

    Eos is the only one I'd still love to see some change to if that was to happen.

    Sucks to have the T2 of a drone ship have less drones usage.

    I have a thread with some options already going if it interest you.

    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3151353

    We really need a BC with 125 bandwidth.

    Reduce it's dps and replace with ew and logistics drone bonuses if need to keep balance but please get us a bc that uses drones that can uses as much bandwidth as the 3 cruisers that already can.
    DeLindsay
    Galaxies Fall
    #325 - 2013-06-05 22:49:30 UTC  |  Edited by: DeLindsay
    Quote:
    Now if I could only find the new one from this year's Fanfest where they put T1, T2, T3, Navy and Pirate on a graph to show where they are in relation to each other in terms of balance.
    Yeah the one I'm referring to was back in like Jan where they showed the first images of what Tiericide (skill wise) was going to do and recommended we train Dessy/BC 5 then, still can't find it though. That thread had a link to further talk more in depth about the CS changes where CCP mentioned increasing all CS's damage output, removing Fleet/Field (giving both 3 links), adding a second gang bonus to all CS's and making the Eos into a better Drone boat than it is now.
    Quote:
    We really need a BC with 125 bandwidth.
    If all they did with the Eos was give it 125mb Bandwidth and the Myrmidon skin I'd be a happy guy. I'm fairly certain I read it's losing a gun already in favor of Drones, but as with above I can't find the damn thread.

    The Operative: "There are a lot of innocent people being killed in the air right now".

    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: "You have no idea how true that is".
    Silas Shaw
    Coffee Hub
    #326 - 2013-06-05 22:55:25 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    Cards on the table, the Sleipnir is the ship I have the greatest emotional attachment to of any ship in EVE. It would look great as a Hurricane, but it would also look DIFFERENT and that makes me feel confused feelings deep inside my heart.

    I also don't think this kind of change would be worthwhile unless we did all four and converted them into those specific hulls, since any deviation would make it harder for a new player trying to get information from their looks.

    So it's kinda an all or nothing deal, which is what makes it such a difficult question.


    All or nothing? No dice.

    Much as I would love to see a Creodon Myrm and a Drake modeled hawk, my life requires LASERCHICKENS. Seeing as how the T1 is not a LASERCHICKEN and the Damnation is a paltry missilechicken, we must preserve the LASERCHICKEN. Perhaps a big black harby instead?


    Sorry for the caps, but they were needed. ;p
    DeLindsay
    Galaxies Fall
    #327 - 2013-06-06 02:09:35 UTC
    Quote:
    my life requires LASERCHICKENS
    I recognize a fellow BoomChikin when I see one ;)

    The Operative: "There are a lot of innocent people being killed in the air right now".

    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: "You have no idea how true that is".
    DeLindsay
    Galaxies Fall
    #328 - 2013-06-06 08:42:57 UTC
    Friendly Bumpity McBump.

    The Operative: "There are a lot of innocent people being killed in the air right now".

    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: "You have no idea how true that is".
    Theodore Giumbix
    Science and Trade Institute
    Caldari State
    #329 - 2013-06-06 10:05:42 UTC
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
    We've reached page 17, so I'll update the numbers. Yes, even if they show nothing.

    As of this post:

    176 in favor of the changes.

    56 opposed to the changes.


    The stats and function of these ships made them what they are today, not the look. And LOGIC in this game is more important than a beauty contest. +1 for the changes again.

    Yo, New Eden, got capsuleers in da house. What's up? And their pimped rides. Yo, capsuleer, if ya want me to unpimp your ride, lemme hear ya say Wat?
    PavlikX
    Scan Stakan
    HOLD MY PROBS
    #330 - 2013-06-06 10:18:37 UTC
    Yeah, and logic tells that prophecy and absolution have similarity in armor res bonuses and turret fitting
    And absolution with harbinger have only turrets both, meantime harbinger can be fitted in shield tank.
    And logic tells to us leave absolution alone! Damnation too.
    ExAstra
    Echoes of Silence
    #331 - 2013-06-06 11:00:26 UTC  |  Edited by: ExAstra
    PavlikX wrote:
    Yeah, and logic tells that prophecy and absolution have similarity in armor res bonuses and turret fitting
    And absolution with harbinger have only turrets both, meantime harbinger can be fitted in shield tank.
    And logic tells to us leave absolution alone! Damnation too.

    Nah, logic says that everyone saying the changes shouldn't go through are doing so because they like the looks of the current command ships. And inversely the people who say that the changes should go through are doing so because they like the looks of the proposed hull change (and variety therein).

    Game balance, bonuses of the ships, fittings, etc, none of that matters. You can say "Well the Sleipnir is too different from the Hurricane it wouldn't make sense and it gets a shield boost bonus!"

    My response to you is: "Kronos (Megathron) with Hyperion rep bonus. Paladin (Apocalypse) with Hyperion rep bonus. Golem (Raven) with Maelstrom rep bonus. Vargur (Tempest) with Maelstrom rep bonus. Eos (Brutix) with drone bonuses. Damnation (Prophecy) with missile bonuses. The list goes on."

    Save the drones!
    Castelo Selva
    Forcas armadas
    Brave Collective
    #332 - 2013-06-06 11:43:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Castelo Selva
    CCP Fozzie wrote:


    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull



    • For the love of Gods, please DO IT NOW!

    Fully supported. Go Fozzie, you still have time to put this at Odyssey 1.1

    Best post ever!
    Alsyth
    #333 - 2013-06-06 11:48:41 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

    I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

    It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?




    Nonononono

    EOS using Myrm because the faction BC uses the Brutix hull is a very good idea, but not the others.

    Field Command ships are the ones that were flown by main characters who got attached to the appearance of the hull. I love my Nighthawk (appearance), Sleipnir and Absolution, I really don't want them to change hull.

    On the other hand, Fleet CS are usually replaced by T3 or flown by alts in POSes anyway, their appearance is much less of a concern to me (I only uses the Claymore and seldom the Damnation).

    EOS is never used, changing its hull won't bother anyone.
    Funky Lazers
    Funk Freakers
    #334 - 2013-06-06 13:04:59 UTC
    Seth Asthereun wrote:
    IamBeastx wrote:
    CCP Fozzie wrote:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • Yes to EOS hull change.
    Yes to Abso hull change.
    Yes to Nighthawk hull change.

    No to sleipnir hull change, this ship is far too widely known and remembered with its current hull, almost EVERY tournament and day to day fighting it gets seen.

    Change the claymore hull maybe, but deffo no to sleipnir hull change imo.


    This!!!!


    This this!!!!

    Whatever.
    Praetor Hartgan
    Angel's of Death
    #335 - 2013-06-06 13:24:18 UTC
    Yes to all the changes, gimme the Sarum Harb Cool
    Mole Guy
    Bob's Bait and Tackle
    #336 - 2013-06-06 14:54:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Mole Guy
    quote=Alsyth]
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

    I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

    It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?




    Nonononono

    EOS using Myrm because the faction BC uses the Brutix hull is a very good idea, but not the others.

    Field Command ships are the ones that were flown by main characters who got attached to the appearance of the hull. I love my Nighthawk (appearance), Sleipnir and Absolution, I really don't want them to change hull.

    On the other hand, Fleet CS are usually replaced by T3 or flown by alts in POSes anyway, their appearance is much less of a concern to me (I only uses the Claymore and seldom the Damnation).

    EOS is never used, changing its hull won't bother anyone.[/quote]
    ************************************************************************


    FLEET AND FIELD ARE GOING AWAY!!!!
    geez.
    they will ALL be combat command ships. all boosting, all damaging, all on grid (hopefully later than sooner).

    i dont care which of the command ships you change to which, as long as we have one with missiles and one with lazers.
    one with drones and one with guns
    two with missiles and two with guns

    the only difference is in the skin and name. functionality will be the same, just pic and name.
    if it made boom yesterday, itll make boom tomorrow.
    personally i would love to fly a candycane painted, polka dot speckled, 1970s plaid striped ugly ship with a pink power ranger painted on the side so when it shows up i spanked yer ass into a KM, you will be embarrassed into not playing for a week.

    so give me a harby, hurricane, drake, or myrm. i dont care. as long as they have the same stats, itll be nice to have something new to look at for a change.
    PavlikX
    Scan Stakan
    HOLD MY PROBS
    #337 - 2013-06-06 15:07:46 UTC
    In general i agree, it is much less important then their post-rebalance future, but still, i like absolution as it is
    Mole Guy
    Bob's Bait and Tackle
    #338 - 2013-06-06 15:29:44 UTC
    the abso IS iconic.
    i love the look of it. how it glissens in the light.
    i love the damnation look as well.

    i could see a harby painted up either way.
    and once they re-do the harby skin, it might be even better.. =)
    Alx Warlord
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #339 - 2013-06-06 21:58:37 UTC
    I WANT IT!!! THE ONLY REASON I DON'T FLY AN EOS IS BECOUSE IT DON'T LOOK LIKE A MYRM!!!

    Please read these!

    New POS system New SOV system
    ExAstra
    Echoes of Silence
    #340 - 2013-06-07 04:22:46 UTC  |  Edited by: ExAstra
    Alx Warlord wrote:
    I WANT IT!!! THE ONLY REASON I DON'T FLY AN EOS IS BECOUSE IT DON'T LOOK LIKE A MYRM!!!

    Really? You don't not fly it because it's kind of the least attractive of all the Fleet Command Ships?
    (functionally, I mean)

    Save the drones!