These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Rebalancing and Renaming Industrials

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lady Zarrina
New Eden Browncoats
#81 - 2013-07-16 20:15:17 UTC
I realize these changes need to be done for various reasons. But will tech 1 industrial ever be more than just a floating loot pinata?

EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#82 - 2013-07-16 20:17:29 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
So what about the special edition industrials, e.g. Iteron Mk IV Quafe Ultra Edition? Will they have their legacy names or will they all be "Miasmos Quafe Ultra Edition", "Miasmos Quafe Ultramarine Edition", etc.? And will they also be rebalanced, or will they have the legacy stats of the old Iteron Mk. IV?

I'm really just curious, since I don't use industrials.


according to the forum thread, they would keep both name and configuration due to being special edition ships...
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#83 - 2013-07-16 20:18:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Valterra Craven wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

Except that Itty 5 no longer has the best cargo (nor speed), and training for a specialty bay (the very definition of a niche role) that you don't need is a senseless waste (albeit a small one).

You already know this situation is going to change when time and resources are available. I think most people are happy with the improvements for the moment and STRONGLY disagree with shelving the whole project until a later date.


While correct that the itty 5 no longer has the best cargo or speed, I am also correct in that it wasn't nerfed, everything else was buffed.

Again my argument was about efficiency. Best is meaningless when the differences are so small. Why train for the best in one area with such marginal differences when its far more likely that training for the most hulls would likely yield unforeseen benefits in the future?

And no, I don't know this situation is going to change in the future, nor do I know that the proper time and resources will ever be available. See I've been a player in Eve for long enough now that I've seen many promises from CCP that have never materialized. I am not foolish enough to believe them now.

I do however agree with you that most people now are more than happy with the changes since it means that a vast majority of the player base will be buffed, who wouldn't be happy with buffs?

That said, these changes still don't meet their stated goals, which is all I was saying, nothing more, nothing less.

It would be more correct to say they don't meet YOUR desired goals. As has been pointed out the buffs to the other races meet our requirements just fine for now. Smile

And you'll have to excuse the rest of us for believing a CCP developer over your fears as far as plans for the future go.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#84 - 2013-07-16 20:20:10 UTC
Lady Zarrina wrote:
I realize these changes need to be done for various reasons. But will tech 1 industrial ever be more than just a floating loot pinata?

I certainly hope so.

Being a super stealthy or hard to kill loot pinata is the role of T2.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#85 - 2013-07-16 20:27:34 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Lady Zarrina wrote:
I realize these changes need to be done for various reasons. But will tech 1 industrial ever be more than just a floating loot pinata?

I certainly hope so.

Being a super stealthy or hard to kill loot pinata is the role of T2.

Then what would be the motivation to get a blockade runner or DST?

I think these changes are fine and make sense. I still think you need a mini-freighter class... something like a 100k m3 cargo hold retailing for about 100 mil to bridge the gap between standard indys and freighters for hauler types.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Zaknussem
Everybody Loves Donuts
#86 - 2013-07-16 20:29:54 UTC
Ansylia wrote:
The only skill refund that I can recall is the elimination of the Learning skills.


Bureaucratic Connections
Financial Connections
High Tech Connections
Labor Connections
Military Connections
Political Connections
Trade Connections

Remember them? They got axed and the skill points refunded. New skills were introduced to replace them, though.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#87 - 2013-07-16 20:35:29 UTC
Gogela wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Lady Zarrina wrote:
I realize these changes need to be done for various reasons. But will tech 1 industrial ever be more than just a floating loot pinata?

I certainly hope so.

Being a super stealthy or hard to kill loot pinata is the role of T2.

Then what would be the motivation to get a blockade runner or DST?

I think these changes are fine and make sense. I still think you need a mini-freighter class... something like a 100k m3 cargo hold retailing for about 100 mil to bridge the gap between standard indys and freighters for hauler types.

DOH, TYPO.

That was supposed to come out "I certainly hope not. Being a super stealthy or hard to kill loot pinata is the role of T2".

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#88 - 2013-07-16 20:51:59 UTC
Tiercide is good but question still remains what is waiting down the line for industrial side of Eve and will it make me wanna try it? And just FYI splashing my screen with brackets of stations with free production lines won't do the trick (shameful and crude reference to "exploration expansion").

Invalid signature format
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#89 - 2013-07-16 20:56:59 UTC
Somewhere in the coldness of space a gang of disreputable capsuleers camp a gate.

The gate goes active and a lone wanderer shows up in a..

N̶e̶r̶e̶u̶s̶
K̶r̶y̶o̶s̶
E̶p̶i̶t̶h̶a̶l̶
M̶i̶a̶s̶m̶o̶s̶

Never mind, target that explosion and FIRE!

Love the new names and iteration on old ships, good job CCP Cool

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF
Valterra Craven
#90 - 2013-07-16 21:04:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Valterra Craven
Ranger 1 wrote:

As has been pointed out the buffs to the other races meet our requirements just fine for now. Smile

And you'll have to excuse the rest of us for believing a CCP developer over your fears as far as plans for the future go.


If by your requirements you mean having devs spend time making the other races industrails not suck compared to the itty 5 only to still need to train for gall indy then sure.

One last thing, there is a big difference between fear and having skepticism over something when hard data points the opposite direction of what someone tells you. Eve sure has no shortage of people believing the BS that others tell them (*cough* any alliance today *cough*... I'm sure adding yourself to their lot won't really change anything either way.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#91 - 2013-07-16 21:32:23 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

As has been pointed out the buffs to the other races meet our requirements just fine for now. Smile

And you'll have to excuse the rest of us for believing a CCP developer over your fears as far as plans for the future go.


If by your requirements you mean having devs spend time making the other races industrails not suck compared to the itty 5 only to still need to train for gall indy then sure.

One last thing, there is a big difference between fear and having skepticism over something when hard data points the opposite direction of what someone tells you. Eve sure has no shortage of people believing the BS that others tell them (*cough* any alliance today *cough*... I'm sure adding yourself to their lot won't really change anything either way.

If by "not suck" you mean superior, sure. Smile

Actually, as far as ship balancing and adjusting their track record has been superb... or is that another fact you chose to ignore because it doesn't support the point you are trying to make...

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Valterra Craven
#92 - 2013-07-16 21:40:59 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

If by "not suck" you mean superior, sure. Smile

Actually, as far as ship balancing and adjusting their track record has been superb... or is that another fact you chose to ignore because it doesn't support the point you are trying to make...


If by superior you mean marginally better, sure

Actually, I agree with you that their track record on ship balance since the Incarnia debacle has been superb. Its the fact that it was awful for 8 years before then is what I chose to not ignore because it supports the point I am trying to make.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#93 - 2013-07-16 21:54:04 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

If by "not suck" you mean superior, sure. Smile

Actually, as far as ship balancing and adjusting their track record has been superb... or is that another fact you chose to ignore because it doesn't support the point you are trying to make...


If by superior you mean marginally better, sure

Actually, I agree with you that their track record on ship balance since the Incarnia debacle has been superb. Its the fact that it was awful for 8 years before then is what I chose to not ignore because it supports the point I am trying to make.

Smile

How about we compromise on "a viable alternative".

I'm well aware of how these things were handled in the past, I think we've both been here since the beginning (or before). I'm right there with you on being dissatisfied in how things were iterated on in the past... but I have a fairly high degree of confidence in the team that is currently handling issues of this nature.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Radgette
EVE Irn Bru Distribution
#94 - 2013-07-16 21:57:44 UTC
god damn those names ><

you do realise noone is gonna call them that right. well maybe some noobs

I'm kind of confused though:

you go through the modules removing the different names saying it's hard for noobs to remember all the new names then you add a bunch of new names to the indy ships :P

Surely the normal "Iteron" should keep it's name as it is the progenitor of the class, a mark 5 with no mark one or reference to it seems strange also I understand changing the names of the ships getting dedicated bays to differenciate but the Itty 1 is just a standard hauler so ye no idea why your renaming it.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#95 - 2013-07-16 22:03:19 UTC
Why not just delete the iteron 2-4? All those ships.. its just a bit silly =/

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#96 - 2013-07-16 22:12:56 UTC
Now we just need a cov-ops version of the Hoarder.

I'm sure the stealth bomber pilots of the world would love a /large/ resupply ship to bring them more bombs.

Big smile

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Max Zerg
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2013-07-16 22:59:04 UTC
Dear CCP

please, reconsider using " Miasmos " as the spaceship name
this, with no doubts, is the offensive term
second: term miasmos definitely refers to hazard ( greek μίασμα ) - filth, pollution
first: it commonly refers to pooping
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#98 - 2013-07-16 23:00:26 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Natasha Maraska wrote:
So are any other of the other races getting any love on this? That's nice for Galls and ok for Cald, but everyone else only having 2 haulers and no specializations? Seems like forcing purists to have to buy and train more skills just to be equal...


I discussed this a ton with the community in the Features and Ideas feedback threads linked in the Dev Blog. If you're interested in it I recommend looking through some of the posts in those threads.


Your main arguments were continuity and artists' time though.

Since continuity will be thrown overboard with the renaming anyway, what about my earlier suggestion of moving one of the former iterons each over to Caldari and Amarr respectively?

You'd end up with a very neat setup with each race having 2 general and one special purpose hauler at minimal investment.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#99 - 2013-07-16 23:13:53 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Quote:
The most recent example? Freighters used to require Industrial V to fly - now only Industrial III is required - making Levels 4 and 5 now wasted points if you never intended to fly Industrials or Transports.

The racial industrial skill also increases cargo bay size and speed, hardly wasted points.


Consider for a moment who needs big haulers: the most common use I have seen is for shuttling ore back and forth from mining operations. Sure, you could use a second Orca, but if you have a junior miner their options were to fly a Retriever and haul using that (nice big ore bay) or train to fly the Iteron V, configure for maximum capacity, and haul using that.

With this new set of industrials, nothing much has changed. Just use the specialty Gallente ore hauler rather than the Iteron V. Nothing changes.

I understand where you are coming from, but when thinking about hauling capacity you have to think about which ships are best for the hauling role you are about to perform. For some people (the "racial purists") there is only the slight pang of knowing that "cross-training" to Gallente would net them 15k m3 more ore hauling capacity over their Bestower. For everyone else, the specialty haulers mostly being under one racial banner make it easy to figure out which way to go: train Gallente for the most options. Train Caldari for maximum general cargo capacity. Train Minmatar if you really need to haul ammo around the place in a rusty metal box.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#100 - 2013-07-16 23:45:03 UTC
Now even less reason to fly a Primae.
We could still use a specialized ship hauler.