These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#861 - 2013-08-28 12:04:08 UTC
Meyr wrote:
How about I make it easy for you, instead...

Why do you regard a hauler as the only class of ship that you cannot use to its full potential? Why should a pilot need to limit their fit, gimp it, in effect?

The purpose of an Industrial is to relocate items. There is absolutely no item in Eve that, when an Iteron V is filled with it, will not pay several times over for the firepower needed to kill the hauler. You can't find an item that inexpensive. Period. By definition, your argument calls for not utilizing a 'cargo-class' Industrial to its full potential.



You could use the same argument to make the proposition that a megathron is useless since it's sole purpose is to apply DPS but we are forced to gimp it horribly by wasting slots on tank that keep it alive.

Eve ships are by their nature, general purpose. Sure they have bonuses for certain modules but there's no rule book that says that these modules are mandatory.

pvp ships make tradeoffs between speed, tank, range, dps and ewar capability.

Industrials make tradeoffs between cargo space and survivability

mining ships make tradeoffs between mining efficiency and survivabillity.

Sorry, what's the problem?

Are you saying that you want a cargo ship with a huge cargo bay and battleship ehp?

There is already one - it's called an Orca.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Dr Prometheus
Gears of Construction
Gears Confederation
#862 - 2013-08-28 12:30:29 UTC
Quote:
The Epithal will have a bay dedicated to commodities produced through planetary interaction.



Erm don't we have the Primea for that? (you know the Noctis in better colors.)

Dude, where is my Quafe Megathron?
Sevena Black
The Black Redemption
#863 - 2013-08-28 16:00:39 UTC
I like the idustrials being changed, but I dont like these changes

CCP is telling me what ship to use for what activity more and more. I'm a bigger fan of me deciding that.

I would prefer to see each race having 3 different looking T1 industrials - Gallente loses 2, Amarr and Caldari gain 1.

The difference between the industrials would have 2 aspects; their race and their size

Version 1: Small, "fast" and least cargospace
Version 2: Average
Version 3: Big, even slower and most cargospace

Caldari & Minmatar: Shield and speed
Gallente and Amarr: Armor and HP

Since the discovery of sleepers and their technology, all empires have given the order to upgrade their most vulnerable ships with this new technology. Following the succes of the strategic cruisers.
Each industrial can now fit 2 industrial subsystems (more skills for the subsystem department )

Possible subsystems:
- specialized ammobay: reduces base cargocapacity with 500m3 and adds a 1000m3 bay that can only carry ammo fuel etc
- specialized ore bay: reduces ..... only ore
- advanced engine thrusters: reduces base cargocapacity with 500m3 and increases agility with 5%
- cool sounding engine subsystem: reduces... increases speed with 10%

other examples are subsystems that increase warpspeed, increase tractorspeed etc. The most important thing here is to keep the bonusses these subsystems provide to T1, from overpowering the T2 industrials' field of expertise.

Advantages:

- race will impact choice, but less than now and more based on their racial stats (slots, resists, race specialty in EVE)
- less need for crosstraining to get into the industrial you need
- more skills for the subsystem department
- skills allow specialization based on choice (you dont have to train them if the subsystems they unlock dont fit your needs)
- more integration of sleeper tech within the EVE universe and "story"
- specialization of industrial ships without forcing me to choose the ship CCP has chosen for me (sandbox anyone?)
- T2 industrials remain more specialized in their respective fields.

TL;DR
Dont worry, the message of this post requires a sound reading capability, meaning it would have been lost on you anyway.
Torrema Sinclair
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#864 - 2013-08-28 16:38:07 UTC
Can you with these changes and t2 rigs move stuff like Battleships? (Havent bothered trying those Prepatch EFT)
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#865 - 2013-08-28 16:47:29 UTC
Like your proposal, Sevena.

Mournful - an individual hull in a combat ship has several different options:

Thorax, Glass Cannon - Neutron Blasters, shield extender, damage mods
Thorax, Balanced - Ion Blasters, Armor or Shield tank
Thorax, Tanky - Electron Blasters, Armor Tank, Trimarks

Now, the Iteron V (or any other of the racial 'max-cargo' Industrials proposed here):

Itty, Max Cargo capacity - big cargo bay, paper thin tank, can be ganked by one, maybe two frigates (assuming a 0.5 system)
Itty, Balanced - slightly smaller cargo bay, slightly less paper thin tank, can still be ganked by one, maybe two frigates
Itty, MAX TANK - still a loot piñata, can be ganked by a single T-1 fit Catalyst

See the difference? There's no option in which the Itty V, as proposed, is a viable candidate for ANYTHING if you try to utilize the full cargo capacity, because you simply cannot put anything in it that won't easily and readily cover the cost of killing the hauler.

There's nothing it can do that can't be done better by another hull. The Thorax has practical uses in every configuration, it merely depends upon which trade-off the pilot is willing to make, and ranges from extreme DPS at the expense of tank, or a very solid tank at the expense of DPS.

The Iteron V has absolutely ZERO capacity to make that kind of trade-off. In max-cargo configuration, you cannot fill it up with ANYTHING and reasonably hope to survive encountering any type of hazard. In max-tank configuration, it still has a laughably thin tank, and will die in a fire the first time someone looks at it with bad intentions.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#866 - 2013-08-28 18:24:16 UTC
Meyr wrote:
Like your proposal, Sevena.

Mournful - an individual hull in a combat ship has several different options:

Thorax, Glass Cannon - Neutron Blasters, shield extender, damage mods
Thorax, Balanced - Ion Blasters, Armor or Shield tank
Thorax, Tanky - Electron Blasters, Armor Tank, Trimarks

Now, the Iteron V (or any other of the racial 'max-cargo' Industrials proposed here):

Itty, Max Cargo capacity - big cargo bay, paper thin tank, can be ganked by one, maybe two frigates (assuming a 0.5 system)
Itty, Balanced - slightly smaller cargo bay, slightly less paper thin tank, can still be ganked by one, maybe two frigates
Itty, MAX TANK - still a loot piñata, can be ganked by a single T-1 fit Catalyst

See the difference? There's no option in which the Itty V, as proposed, is a viable candidate for ANYTHING if you try to utilize the full cargo capacity, because you simply cannot put anything in it that won't easily and readily cover the cost of killing the hauler.

There's nothing it can do that can't be done better by another hull. The Thorax has practical uses in every configuration, it merely depends upon which trade-off the pilot is willing to make, and ranges from extreme DPS at the expense of tank, or a very solid tank at the expense of DPS.

The Iteron V has absolutely ZERO capacity to make that kind of trade-off. In max-cargo configuration, you cannot fill it up with ANYTHING and reasonably hope to survive encountering any type of hazard. In max-tank configuration, it still has a laughably thin tank, and will die in a fire the first time someone looks at it with bad intentions.


Good thing you don't do this analysis for the amarr industrials. The bestower is the perma paper tanked hauler, and the supposedly tank specialty sigil fails to be tanky because of the discord between armor tanking and cargo. At least galente got 3 specialized haulers that are good and 1 ok tanky aligny hauler.
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#867 - 2013-08-28 22:41:57 UTC
Not going to disagree with that - as bad as the Gallente Iteron V is, the Amarr Industrials got completely screwed. I just don't fly the Amarr cruisers (aside from the Awesome Arbitrator!) often enough to make a valid comparison like I did with the Thorax.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#868 - 2013-08-28 23:15:30 UTC
Meyr wrote:
Like your proposal, Sevena.

Mournful - an individual hull in a combat ship has several different options:

Thorax, Glass Cannon - Neutron Blasters, shield extender, damage mods
Thorax, Balanced - Ion Blasters, Armor or Shield tank
Thorax, Tanky - Electron Blasters, Armor Tank, Trimarks

Now, the Iteron V (or any other of the racial 'max-cargo' Industrials proposed here):

Itty, Max Cargo capacity - big cargo bay, paper thin tank, can be ganked by one, maybe two frigates (assuming a 0.5 system)
Itty, Balanced - slightly smaller cargo bay, slightly less paper thin tank, can still be ganked by one, maybe two frigates
Itty, MAX TANK - still a loot piñata, can be ganked by a single T-1 fit Catalyst

See the difference? There's no option in which the Itty V, as proposed, is a viable candidate for ANYTHING if you try to utilize the full cargo capacity, because you simply cannot put anything in it that won't easily and readily cover the cost of killing the hauler.

There's nothing it can do that can't be done better by another hull. The Thorax has practical uses in every configuration, it merely depends upon which trade-off the pilot is willing to make, and ranges from extreme DPS at the expense of tank, or a very solid tank at the expense of DPS.

The Iteron V has absolutely ZERO capacity to make that kind of trade-off. In max-cargo configuration, you cannot fill it up with ANYTHING and reasonably hope to survive encountering any type of hazard. In max-tank configuration, it still has a laughably thin tank, and will die in a fire the first time someone looks at it with bad intentions.


Sir, have you actually logged in to SISI, fitted up a new industrial for MAX TANK and flown it into a combat site?

I am guessing not. I have done precisely this. I watched with amusement as various ships, including an ishtar, tried to break the dual-asb tank.

There was more than enough time for concord (or corp members if you're in W-space, low or null) to turn up.

I simply do not recognise or agree with your conclusions. I think they are premature and unfounded.

Sorry.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#869 - 2013-08-29 01:16:46 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Sir, have you actually logged in to SISI, fitted up a new industrial for MAX TANK and flown it into a combat site?

I am guessing not. I have done precisely this. I watched with amusement as various ships, including an ishtar, tried to break the dual-asb tank.

There was more than enough time for concord (or corp members if you're in W-space, low or null) to turn up.

I simply do not recognise or agree with your conclusions. I think they are premature and unfounded.

Sorry.


Were you flying the Iteron Mk V, Bestower, Mammoth, or Badger Mk II when you did this test? How did it fare against actual alpha gank ships such as tornados or talos (taloses?)? I'm suprised that two medium ancillary shield boosters were able to sustain against a ishtar, perhaps you could share your fit.
Eric Raeder
No Fee Too High
#870 - 2013-08-29 06:43:04 UTC
Does anyone know if any of the new specialized industrials will be able to carry ice products? The description at the beginning of the thread only mentions ice ore, not refined ice products.

If so, which ship(s)? The Kyros carries minerals, does that include refined ice? The Hoarder carries ammo and charges, since some ice products are used up by jump drives and cynos, do they count as ammo? Or possibly they go in the Miasmos, which carries ice ore?
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#871 - 2013-08-29 07:15:39 UTC
The whole point of my posts about the proposed changes is simply this:

The 'max-cargo' Industrials are pointless. There is simply no item in Eve that you can use to fill it to capacity where, even at a 30% drop rate, it won't pay for the cost of killing it several times over. It has damned near zero tank, even if you fit it with shield extenders, hardeners, a DC II, Reinforced bulkheads, an EANM, and shield rigs. It just can't tank worth a damn, can't hope to survive a gank, is incapable of defending itself, and has no power grid to fit expanded defenses or an MWD for some speed.

In short, its primary selling point, cargo capacity, is what draws gankers to it like flies, and it will crumple like the tissue paper it's made from if you sneeze at it.

That other haulers are able to fit some modicum of defenses has absolutely no bearing upon this matter - these ships SUCK. The concept behind the proposed changes is, at best, poorly thought out, and, at worst, yet another handout to the ganking community by CCP devs who don't seem to understand that, if you make a stupidly easy to gank ship EVEN EASIER TO KILL, it defeats the purpose of even building that ship, much less buying or flying it.

My prediction: if these changes go through, the market movement for this particular sub-class of ships will plummet to near zero. You won't be able to give them away, and the only ones seen flying will be te ones people already own.

A hauling ship needs to be able to survive an attack that will be repaid by the loot it drops if it is cargo-fit and filled with the least-valuable cargo possible. As the value of the cargo goes up, the capacity should be sacrificed in order to achieve greater defenses, yes, but these particular ships don't have that option.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#872 - 2013-08-29 07:58:22 UTC
Meyr wrote:
The whole point of my posts about the proposed changes is simply this:

The 'max-cargo' Industrials are pointless. There is simply no item in Eve that you can use to fill it to capacity where, even at a 30% drop rate, it won't pay for the cost of killing it several times over. It has damned near zero tank, even if you fit it with shield extenders, hardeners, a DC II, Reinforced bulkheads, an EANM, and shield rigs. It just can't tank worth a damn, can't hope to survive a gank, is incapable of defending itself, and has no power grid to fit expanded defenses or an MWD for some speed.

In short, its primary selling point, cargo capacity, is what draws gankers to it like flies, and it will crumple like the tissue paper it's made from if you sneeze at it.


I think the term you're looking for is "noobtrap."
DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan
#873 - 2013-08-31 00:11:40 UTC
Sevena Black wrote:
I would prefer to see each race's industrial category have 3 ships i.e. Gallente loses 2; Amarr and Caldari gain 1. I think cargo size and mobility need to separate the 3 industrial ships within each race:

  • small and fast
  • medium
  • large and slow
Okay, I edited your post slightly for clarity, but I think it gets your point across.

Adding subsystems to t1 industrial haulers makes them t3 ships, which would then come with appropriate levels of prerequisites. I think t1 industrial ships need to have optional cargohold modules, so players have flexibility to only train 1 race of haulers as custom-hauling needs change.

Either that or make all these new ammo/pi/ore/etc cargohold changes fully customizable on a (t3) strategic industrial cruiser, which would likely originate from ORE secretly facilitating between Core Complexion, CreoDron, Lai Dai, and Viziam.
Psycros
Evasive Finance
#874 - 2013-09-02 05:05:54 UTC
DetKhord Saisio wrote:
Sevena Black wrote:
I would prefer to see each race's industrial category have 3 ships i.e. Gallente loses 2; Amarr and Caldari gain 1. I think cargo size and mobility need to separate the 3 industrial ships within each race:

  • small and fast
  • medium
  • large and slow
Okay, I edited your post slightly for clarity, but I think it gets your point across.

Adding subsystems to t1 industrial haulers makes them t3 ships, which would then come with appropriate levels of prerequisites. I think t1 industrial ships need to have optional cargohold modules, so players have flexibility to only train 1 race of haulers as custom-hauling needs change.

Either that or make all these new ammo/pi/ore/etc cargohold changes fully customizable on a (t3) strategic industrial cruiser, which would likely originate from ORE secretly facilitating between Core Complexion, CreoDron, Lai Dai, and Viziam.


YES. This is the only kind of revamp that would truly make sense..which is why CCP will never implement it. The industrial changes, like nearly every other ship change since forever, have only one purpose: to make ganking even more of a zero-risk activity. We have dedicated, dirt-cheap T1 tacklers now, for God's sake. The problem with a game that supports piracy is that to make it work you have to keep giving the pirates new advantages to overcome any possible defense. Only by providing industrials the same "efficiency vs safety" options as other ships can we level the playing field. BTW, I would also make the medium haulers the most adaptable, possibly through a higher assortment of mid & low slots. Let them be the jack of all trades but master of none. But as I said, that would make far too much sense for CCP (Constantly Coddling Pirates) so we'll never see it happen.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#875 - 2013-09-02 06:15:38 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:

Good thing you don't do this analysis for the amarr industrials. The bestower is the perma paper tanked hauler, and the supposedly tank specialty sigil fails to be tanky because of the discord between armor tanking and cargo. At least galente got 3 specialized haulers that are good and 1 ok tanky aligny hauler.

On the plus side, a shield tanked Sigil can mount a decent sized medium weapon and thus equal or exceed a Badger with gun and launcher in DPS. Probably not worth having only ~20K EHP vs ~30K EHP when fitted for 10K m3 cargo, but there it is.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#876 - 2013-09-02 06:26:32 UTC
Meyr wrote:

The 'max-cargo' Industrials are pointless. There is simply no item in Eve that you can use to fill it to capacity where, even at a 30% drop rate, it won't pay for the cost of killing it several times over. It has damned near zero tank, even if you fit it with shield extenders, hardeners, a DC II, Reinforced bulkheads, an EANM, and shield rigs. It just can't tank worth a damn, can't hope to survive a gank, is incapable of defending itself, and has no power grid to fit expanded defenses or an MWD for some speed.

In short, its primary selling point, cargo capacity, is what draws gankers to it like flies, and it will crumple like the tissue paper it's made from if you sneeze at it.

And yet, the new Bestower will be able to mount much the same tank as the current one if you settle for the same hold as today's can have. Today there are still are tons of Bestowers in use (despite the Itty V being objectively better), mostly untanked or nearly so. This makes your argument suspect, because following your logic the sky should have been ganked clean of T1 haulers by now.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#877 - 2013-09-02 08:10:47 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Meyr wrote:

The 'max-cargo' Industrials are pointless. There is simply no item in Eve that you can use to fill it to capacity where, even at a 30% drop rate, it won't pay for the cost of killing it several times over. It has damned near zero tank, even if you fit it with shield extenders, hardeners, a DC II, Reinforced bulkheads, an EANM, and shield rigs. It just can't tank worth a damn, can't hope to survive a gank, is incapable of defending itself, and has no power grid to fit expanded defenses or an MWD for some speed.

In short, its primary selling point, cargo capacity, is what draws gankers to it like flies, and it will crumple like the tissue paper it's made from if you sneeze at it.

And yet, the new Bestower will be able to mount much the same tank as the current one if you settle for the same hold as today's can have. Today there are still are tons of Bestowers in use (despite the Itty V being objectively better), mostly untanked or nearly so. This makes your argument suspect, because following your logic the sky should have been ganked clean of T1 haulers by now.


I have a mule that flys the bestower, but I don't haul anything valuable in it. The most it carries is either some kernite for that stupid 'materials for war' storyline mission, or enough tech 1 missiles to keep me shooting for a week or so. Anything more than a few mil and I pull out the orca and haul on my main instead of letting my bestower mule autopilot in the background.

The update really isn't helping anything, except my mule will be using a sigil because it's faster and has enough cargo to hold what I'm hauling.
bilingi
Grandeur Illusions
#878 - 2013-09-02 15:32:05 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
*Quickly looks at the thread*

You got it wrong people, you're not supposed to be happy!

You're supposed to riot! Set things on fire with the flame wars! Start the threadnaught! Fire ze missiles! Rage! Let the anger consume you!

Now I will have no choice but to mention CCP Rise is doing to a good job. Think about it: he's drinking water in a huge jug instead of a regular glass. How twisted can one be to do that? This has to be punished. Evil



SOme of us arent happy but we learned long ago not to expect anything about saying it... Why beat your head on a brick wall..
bilingi
Grandeur Illusions
#879 - 2013-09-02 15:35:34 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
I think like every other part of eve, there are tradeoffs to be done with industrials.

If you want to transport 35,000m3 of goods in one then all the mods you fit are going to be cargohold mods, leaving little powergrid for good shield defences.

However if you're willing to accept a smaller cargohold then you can start getting stronger shield extenders and boosters on there with the help of a few fitting mods.

For transporting low-value high-volume ore, weak defences are nor normally a problem. If you want to transport high value (usually smaller) items then a refit is probably on the cards.

If the iteron V isn't capable of achieving the buffer/tank you need, then the new nyrios (is that how you spell it?) could be a candidate.



except the gankers now have no trade off.. even sec penaltys can be bought off now.. They basicly have no risk what so ever..
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#880 - 2013-09-02 15:49:02 UTC
bilingi wrote:

except the gankers now have no trade off.. even sec penaltys can be bought off now.. They basicly have no risk what so ever..


Yes that's right.

You've just described Eve Online.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".