These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

T3 hauler

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Knoppaz
distress signals
#1 - 2013-09-15 07:13:25 UTC
Generell layout:
3/4/4 (+1 max cargo modules per level)


subsystems:

offensive:
small weapons only
- missile (3hardpoints, +5/lvl rof, +5/lvl missile velocity)
- laser (3hardpoints, +5/lvl damage, +5/lvl tracking)
- hybrid (3hardpoints, +5/lvl rof, +5/lvl optimal)
- projectile (3hardpoints, +5/lvl damage, +5/lvl falloff)

defensive:
- armor resists (+1 low, -1med)
- shield resists (+1med, -1 low)
- all hp
- cloakie (+2high, -1med, -1low, +1hardpoint, can fit cov-ops cloak)

propulsion:
- agility (+2 cargo modules, 120m/s, 3AU/s, 4s align)
- warp-speed (+3 cargo modules, 150m/s, 7,5AU/s, 6s align)
- speed (+5 cargo modules, 190m/s, 1AU/s, 10s align)
- nullify (+1 cargo module, 90m/s, 3AU/s, 8s align)


cargo modules:

- allround (15000m³, -5m/s, +1s align)
- ships [packed] (50000m³, -20m/s, +5s align)
- ore/minerals (35000m³, -15m/s, +4s align)
- ammo (20000m³, -10m/s, +2s align)


example:

a ship with missile, shield resist and warp-speed subsystem with 3 ore/mineral cargo modules fitted would be:
3/5/3 layout with +5/lvl rof, +5/lvl missile velocity bonus
105m/s, 7,5AU/s, 18s align


there is no need to fit all cargo modules, so the same ship could just fit 1 cargo module and be:
135m/, 7,5AU/s, 10s align

also it's possible to mix cargo modules, so a ship with speed subsystem could fit 1 of each cargo modules if wanted or even fly completely without cargo modules if needed.

this would give people a very flexible, but expensive tool to haul stuff around without making T1/T2 haulers or freighters obsolete.


thanks for reading.

Knoppaz / distressSIGNALS http://distresssignals.tumblr.com

a capsuleer's way to insanity
leviticus ander
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2013-09-15 07:53:24 UTC
you are aware that for the most part this would be abused by having whatever offensive system, the armour defensive system, and the speed prop system meaning that you have 10 cargo mods at level 5 and you put all of those into all around and add 5 cargo expanders for (if they don't have different stacking penalties than what I was looking at) about 266k M3 in a cruiser sized ship. that's verging on jump freighter size cargo in something that can warp as easily as something the size of the current indies.
Knoppaz
distress signals
#3 - 2013-09-15 08:40:17 UTC
leviticus ander wrote:
you are aware that for the most part this would be abused by having whatever offensive system, the armour defensive system, and the speed prop system meaning that you have 10 cargo mods at level 5 and you put all of those into all around and add 5 cargo expanders for (if they don't have different stacking penalties than what I was looking at) about 266k M3 in a cruiser sized ship. that's verging on jump freighter size cargo in something that can warp as easily as something the size of the current indies.



i think you misunderstood the concept. the hull only allows a maximum of 5 cargo modules at lvl5 skill. besides only the propulsion subsystems define the maximum possible cargo modules (3 total for the speed prop system in you example).

now let's take the speed prop subsystem with 5 cargo modules as example. it would give a total of 250m³ that can only be used for unpacked ships (e.g. 5 battleships). it would further have..

- a top speed of 90m/s (190m/s - 20m/s for each cargo module)
- warp 1AU/s
- have 35s (10s + 5s for each cargo module) align time

that is
a) far from warping around easily and
b) not even close to a freighter, even if you would fit cargo hold expanders
(tho it might be a good idea to ban those from T3 haulers, since they use specialized cargo bays).

also remember that there are no numbers on total hp of those ships. i would probably put them somewhere in the battlecruiser range. that's still less than an orca or a freighter, but better than T1/T2 haulers.

Knoppaz / distressSIGNALS http://distresssignals.tumblr.com

a capsuleer's way to insanity
leviticus ander
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2013-09-15 08:51:11 UTC  |  Edited by: leviticus ander
Knoppaz wrote:
i think you misunderstood the concept. the hull only allows a maximum of 5 cargo modules at lvl5 skill. besides only the propulsion subsystems define the maximum possible cargo modules (3 total for the speed prop system in you example).

that is
a) far from warping around easily and
b) not even close to a freighter, even if you would fit cargo hold expanders
(tho it might be a good idea to ban those from T3 haulers, since they use specialized cargo bays).

also remember that there are no numbers on total hp of those ships. i would probably put them somewhere in the battlecruiser range. that's still less than an orca or a freighter, but better than T1/T2 haulers.



ahh, I had missed the max part, so it's 5 rather than 10. plus I was saying jump freighters which have about 250-400kM3. also, I was saying that it would be using the all around cargoholds so it would only be getting +5 to the total warp speed which is similar to the itty 5.

EDIT: and I just read further to find out that cargohold expanders are not stacking penalized (or weren't at some point in the recent past) meaning that even with only 5 cargohold systems, you could still fit 285M3 worth of stuff in there with cargohold optimizers and T2 rigs in something the size of the cruiser, and with about a 15 second warp time.

EDIT 2: in case you're missing the math of this. you allow up to 5 max, that's fine, I mis-read that part. but with the speed system you can have all 5 of those active meaning that you could fill up with all around systems allowing 75kM3 base, but with the armour system it goes from 4 low slots to 5 low slots. as well as I'm guessing it would go with the mormal method of having 3 rigs for a T3 ship.

so you end up with 75k with 5 T2 cargohold optimizers that are not stacking penalized.
75000*(1+(.275*5)) = 178125M3
now you add the 3 T2 medium cargohold rigs at 20% a piece
178125*(1+(.2*3)) = 285000M3

to give you an idea, that's larger than all of the jump freighters base capacity except the rhea, with a base warp speed of 15 seconds. and that number would be brought down by even more by the spaceship command and advanced spaceship command skills as well as anything else affecting the agility of the ship.
Knoppaz
distress signals
#5 - 2013-09-15 10:12:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Knoppaz
leviticus ander wrote:
Knoppaz wrote:
i think you misunderstood the concept. the hull only allows a maximum of 5 cargo modules at lvl5 skill. besides only the propulsion subsystems define the maximum possible cargo modules (3 total for the speed prop system in you example).

that is
a) far from warping around easily and
b) not even close to a freighter, even if you would fit cargo hold expanders
(tho it might be a good idea to ban those from T3 haulers, since they use specialized cargo bays).

also remember that there are no numbers on total hp of those ships. i would probably put them somewhere in the battlecruiser range. that's still less than an orca or a freighter, but better than T1/T2 haulers.



ahh, I had missed the max part, so it's 5 rather than 10. plus I was saying jump freighters which have about 250-400kM3. also, I was saying that it would be using the all around cargoholds so it would only be getting +5 to the total warp speed which is similar to the itty 5.

EDIT: and I just read further to find out that cargohold expanders are not stacking penalized (or weren't at some point in the recent past) meaning that even with only 5 cargohold systems, you could still fit 285M3 worth of stuff in there with cargohold optimizers and T2 rigs in something the size of the cruiser, and with about a 15 second warp time.

EDIT 2: in case you're missing the math of this. you allow up to 5 max, that's fine, I mis-read that part. but with the speed system you can have all 5 of those active meaning that you could fill up with all around systems allowing 75kM3 base, but with the armour system it goes from 4 low slots to 5 low slots. as well as I'm guessing it would go with the mormal method of having 3 rigs for a T3 ship.

so you end up with 75k with 5 T2 cargohold optimizers that are not stacking penalized.
75000*(1+(.275*5)) = 178125M3
now you add the 3 T2 medium cargohold rigs at 20% a piece
178125*(1+(.2*3)) = 285000M3

to give you an idea, that's larger than all of the jump freighters base capacity except the rhea, with a base warp speed of 15 seconds. and that number would be brought down by even more by the spaceship command and advanced spaceship command skills as well as anything else affecting the agility of the ship.



let me pull some prices out of my rear..
let's say the hull has a price of 100m, each subsystem is 20m and an allround system is also 20m (with others being cheaper due to the specialization). That would be a total of 260m + 3 T2 rigs (your example) at 25m each (that's below actual rens price) = grand total 335m without modules (remember, prices might be like this comparing it to combat T3s, probably even more expensive).

That's pretty expensive and since you use the armor subsystem with T2 expanders you have no tank besides the added resists from the subsystem.
as i said, it should have around bc hp compared to the 300+k hp of a jump freighter. yeah, a T3 hauler like in you example would have nearly the cargo of a jump freighter and might be in warp in like 11-12s, but ..
a) can't use jump drives
b) can get ganked by just a handful tornados

** edit: besides, numbers are not final so the allround system could be +2s and the ammo system could be +2,5s or +3s

Knoppaz / distressSIGNALS http://distresssignals.tumblr.com

a capsuleer's way to insanity
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#6 - 2013-09-15 10:58:09 UTC
The only true T3 hauler is a tengu. It's really good at it.
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#7 - 2013-09-15 12:32:40 UTC
I dont find the concept that awful, it would make the most sense as a ORE ship or other non-racial finally catching on to the T3 fad. Im not sold on exactly the way you have suggested it though, and it is dangerously close to makeing current blockade runners completely obsolete.

Tech 3 is meant to be generalized rather than specialized, so in that sense I would say your heading in the wrong direction. But when it comes to hauling I don't know how "generalized" you can get, so i support the idea of hauling only one kind.

A hauler meant to carry ppackaged ships is something id definately look into.

Event Organizer of EVE North East
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#8 - 2013-09-15 20:58:52 UTC
T3 strategic cruisers are already contentious enough as it is.
Complete the rebalancing (all of it), make a few adjustments to T3s along the way and then we can look at expanded T3 classes. But first on the list would be frigates and battleships.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#9 - 2013-09-16 19:39:36 UTC
I have removed some troll posts

The OP has the right to post an idea to discuss and has the right to expect a civil and healthy discussion as a result. You don't have to agree, but post your arguments in a civil manner please.

The rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)