These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The next evolution of ships.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ash Katara
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2013-07-20 18:53:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Ash Katara
When EVE began it launched with T1 ships, which provided a stepped progression up through each size class. They were all somewhat versatile but each a bit more powerful than the previous. Later we were given T2 ships which were more powerful and specialized versions of the T1 ships. After these we saw the introduction of some new ship classes to fill the holes between Frigates, Cruisers and Battle ships, T2 versions of them and T3 Strategic Cruisers which are modular.

Currently the ships in EVE are undergoing a re-balance. The T1 ships are being re-positioned in to specific roles like their T2 variants in an effort to make the less desirable ships more useful and to balance the overall power curve. While I think there will be some benefit to this, I still don’t like the path this is taking us.

As the ships become more specialized it becomes easier to predict how that ship will fight or defend as most of them work best when fitted a specific way. It also means that you need a different ship for each different activity you want to engage in, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but there are some downsides. Having to have more ships means having to move more ships when one decides to relocate, but we don't have a great solution for relocating lots of ships. It also means that which ships I fly and have to train for become a matter of what they can do, rather then which ones I think look good and lets face it the ship is our avatar in EVE and no-one want to stare at a ship, which they feel is butt ugly, all day long.

So is there room in EVE for more modular or general purpose ships or a good solution for moving our growing collection of ships? Not all of us want to be specialists or have the time to acquire freighters.
Whitehound
#2 - 2013-07-20 18:57:29 UTC
Yay, we will get T5 ships soon! I cannot wait to read about them. What will they do? Will they finally feature a stripper pole??

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#3 - 2013-07-20 19:09:36 UTC
things are already ****** up with T3 and you expect CCP to put more hitech ships?.

a more realistic approach would be to strip ships of their hull bonuses and make them modular like the T3 ships, and implemente the subsystem thing to them. of course, T1 and T2 subsystems would have to be created in order to achieve this. basically it would allow players to make different mix of combinations for their desired hull.

but i think people would rage about it, there wouldnt be certain differences in having one hull or the other, except for aesthetics. that's the main issue. if we could design our own ships in this game, it would have sense to have that lvl of customization. but we have predefined hulls.
DataRunner Touch
Doomheim
#4 - 2013-07-20 19:30:07 UTC
I think the OP misses the point about this game. Of course you can still surpise your enemy with WTF fits, but, the thing is if you make every ship exactly the same, then you might as well take away all the race ships, all the weapons types and so on and give everyone one ship of each hull size and then give it the ability to Reskin to what you want it to look like, and allow you to change the color of your weapon fire :|
Ash Katara
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2013-07-20 19:58:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Ash Katara
So the general consensus is that this is a bad idea. I can see where you are coming from.

My concern as a casual player is that the current trend with regards to ships and roles in this game is towards a highly specialized model. Each individual ship does one thing well. While not necessarily a bad idea it does pose problems. As a casual player with limited time to play, I am finding it more and more difficult and time consuming to relocate. As ships become more specialized I need more of them to do different things, however in their infinite wisdom CCP have failed to give me a viable solution for moving my increasing stable of ships from place to place. I also fin most of the ships in EVE to rather un-appealing visually.

I will edit the OP to be more of a starting point for discussion then request for change.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#6 - 2013-07-20 20:31:29 UTC
I'm not sure I see the whole specialisation with the rebalance.
Some ships have become less "intended to do 3 things", and are now "does 1 or 2 better, with room for..."., while others were essentially powered-down versions of other ships and now have gotten new, specialised or generalised, roles.
The only thing that I get this point on is split-weapons.
That thing is, apart from +drones or drones+, pretty much gone.
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#7 - 2013-07-21 04:26:13 UTC
Ash Katara wrote:
So the general consensus is that this is a bad idea. I can see where you are coming from.

My concern as a casual player is that the current trend with regards to ships and roles in this game is towards a highly specialized model. Each individual ship does one thing well. While not necessarily a bad idea it does pose problems. As a casual player with limited time to play, I am finding it more and more difficult and time consuming to relocate. As ships become more specialized I need more of them to do different things, however in their infinite wisdom CCP have failed to give me a viable solution for moving my increasing stable of ships from place to place. I also fin most of the ships in EVE to rather un-appealing visually.

I will edit the OP to be more of a starting point for discussion then request for change.


it is not a bad idea, the problem is the implementation. adding another tech lvl isnt a solution, as giving subsystems to T2 and T1 ships is another bad approach, players have to stick to the predefined hulls and their predefined bonuses, changing that for freedom of customization would kill the whole rebalance process.
Ash Katara
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2013-07-22 04:13:16 UTC
Silivar Karkun wrote:


it is not a bad idea, the problem is the implementation. adding another tech lvl isnt a solution, as giving subsystems to T2 and T1 ships is another bad approach, players have to stick to the predefined hulls and their predefined bonuses, changing that for freedom of customization would kill the whole rebalance process.



So it's you opinion that we should all have to make the choice to either fly the ships we like and just deal with the fast that their role is not what we want to play, or fly the ship that fits the role we want to play and just deal with the fact we think the sip is butt ugly? Or maybe some of get us lucy and find a ship which appeals to both our desired play style and we find visually appealing.

Wether ship roles and bonuses are tied to the hull or to subsystem selection would not effect game play or the current balancing work one bit. I will be honest, I have been playing EVE on and off since beta and there is not a single ship in EVE which appeals to me ascetically and fits a role I want play. Its been rather disappointing to be honest, but there is nothing else out there like EVE so I keep playing.

We already have a few versatile multi-role ships out there, some are only accessible by well funded and longer term players, and others are one time special edition ships. Why can't we have a few more, perhaps one from size class which can be good at many different roles but never as good as a purpose build ship. Like the Gnosis, which can easily be fitted for Any weapon system or exploration, but these were a one time gift to players and no more new ones will ever be made.

There is room in EVE for a few Jack-of-all-Roles ships that are good at everything but masters of none. I really don't want to have to have a hanger full of different ships just to enjoy the different aspects of the game.
Marcus Harikari
#9 - 2013-07-22 07:06:59 UTC
no ships don't need to be modular

because when you see something on dscan
it's good that it gives you a rough idea of its capabilities

if every ship could be made to function like any other ship, all the useful d-scan data would dissapear
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#10 - 2013-07-22 18:27:59 UTC
Ash Katara wrote:
Silivar Karkun wrote:


it is not a bad idea, the problem is the implementation. adding another tech lvl isnt a solution, as giving subsystems to T2 and T1 ships is another bad approach, players have to stick to the predefined hulls and their predefined bonuses, changing that for freedom of customization would kill the whole rebalance process.



So it's you opinion that we should all have to make the choice to either fly the ships we like and just deal with the fast that their role is not what we want to play, or fly the ship that fits the role we want to play and just deal with the fact we think the sip is butt ugly? Or maybe some of get us lucy and find a ship which appeals to both our desired play style and we find visually appealing.

Wether ship roles and bonuses are tied to the hull or to subsystem selection would not effect game play or the current balancing work one bit. I will be honest, I have been playing EVE on and off since beta and there is not a single ship in EVE which appeals to me ascetically and fits a role I want play. Its been rather disappointing to be honest, but there is nothing else out there like EVE so I keep playing.

We already have a few versatile multi-role ships out there, some are only accessible by well funded and longer term players, and others are one time special edition ships. Why can't we have a few more, perhaps one from size class which can be good at many different roles but never as good as a purpose build ship. Like the Gnosis, which can easily be fitted for Any weapon system or exploration, but these were a one time gift to players and no more new ones will ever be made.

There is room in EVE for a few Jack-of-all-Roles ships that are good at everything but masters of none. I really don't want to have to have a hanger full of different ships just to enjoy the different aspects of the game.


no, the hulls have bonuses to certain roles, you can do whatever you want with the ships (like fitting a dominix for blasters instead of focusing on its drones, or putting artilleries on an abaddon, heck people even uses mining ships for pvp). there's the freedom of design in this game, we dont have all rounder ships but we can fit what we have avaliable to do something, of course, every ship is predefined to one role, so sometimes you have to stick to that one, but is due to the ship constraints. not the imagination.

T2 are specialized in a role but can be adjusted to a degree, T3 can play any role, just that they have balance issues.

there are ways in that a gnosis-like ship could be implemented of course. but it would have to be an special type of ship, like being a faction one, or could be a T3 ship. even using jovian ships could be another one.
Ashura Karashimu
Perkone
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-07-23 01:55:35 UTC
What we are missing is not 'Tech 4' ships, we are missing 'Tech Zero' ships. A Tech Zero ship would be more along the lines of this:

Ships that come with their own weapons built INTO the ship. Kinda like a modern day tank or battleship/cruiser/ect. We could easily balance them to be very expensive or something along those lines.

They don't have to have subsystems or anything like that, they can just be 'Out of the box, ready to use.'