These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Deep Space Transport Rebalance

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#241 - 2014-05-20 12:51:16 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
CynoNet Two wrote:
Grarr Dexx wrote:
They don't need it. It'd make blockade runners useless since you might as well run the same blockade cloak warping with a DST hauling four times as much cargo.


Blockade runners would still be better for low-sec and covert ops work. DSTs would ignore bubbles but be vulnerable to infini-points, making them preferable for null-sec and wormholes.


You can use infinite points in 0.0 too. The point I'm making is that it's pointless to have BRs if DSTs have bubble immunity, because it's just as easy to cloak warp DSTs as it is to warp a BR and hit the cloak button.

That's an issue with MWD cloak warping being a bullshit borderline exploit, though.


I seem to recall they tried to fix mwd cloak warping in 2007 or so, and their fix didn't work, so they gave up and left it (pro tip ccp, all you need to do is make it so cloaking instantly cuts your prop mod). still leaves mwd warping big ships though.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#242 - 2014-05-20 12:58:19 UTC
G's Biatch wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Allowing launching and scooping of structures from fleet hangars is something that needs more investigation, so we're increasing the standard cargo holds on all the DSTs so they can easily deploy and scoop structures.

We are also increasing the assembled volumes of the DSTs a bit, to keep the balance surrounding DSTs hauling cargo in ship maintenance bays.

We have discussed the questions surrounding hauling of battleships into C1 wormholes with the CSM and internally, and decided that we are ok with this function at this time. Using a DST to get a battleship into a C1 siege still requires the attackers to have their own starbase set up in the system for disassembly.



Fozzie Can we fill the Fleet Hanger and place these ships in SMA's in cap ships, or will the Ammo only rule still apply?

Thanks


The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
G's Biatch
Four Brothers United
#243 - 2014-05-20 13:05:44 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
G's Biatch wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Allowing launching and scooping of structures from fleet hangars is something that needs more investigation, so we're increasing the standard cargo holds on all the DSTs so they can easily deploy and scoop structures.

We are also increasing the assembled volumes of the DSTs a bit, to keep the balance surrounding DSTs hauling cargo in ship maintenance bays.

We have discussed the questions surrounding hauling of battleships into C1 wormholes with the CSM and internally, and decided that we are ok with this function at this time. Using a DST to get a battleship into a C1 siege still requires the attackers to have their own starbase set up in the system for disassembly.



Fozzie Can we fill the Fleet Hanger and place these ships in SMA's in cap ships, or will the Ammo only rule still apply?

Thanks


The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.



Thank you.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#244 - 2014-05-20 13:25:50 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.


Stealth 100.000 m3 boost to rorquals?
C/d
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#245 - 2014-05-20 13:28:12 UTC
Also Fozzie. If 400.000 m3 is the new ship assembled size. You can put these into an orca with a double wrapped container inside and like, noone would know.
Also combine this with like 500.000 ehp on the orca post-kronos.

Pls no, pls change.
TheMercenaryKing
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#246 - 2014-05-20 13:32:18 UTC  |  Edited by: TheMercenaryKing
CCP Fozzie wrote:
CynoNet Two wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone.


Can we get some feedback on the bubble immunity thing for DSTs? Obviously it's a dumb idea for Blockade Runners, but replacing the DST warp core stability bonus with bubble immunity makes a lot of sense and isn't anywhere near as strong as it is on Interceptors / T3 cruisers.

Was the idea considered?


The idea was considered and rejected as it would make DSTs too difficult to catch in nullsec and (especially) wormhole space and wouldn't provide much interesting gameplay.


I highly disagree.

Your stats show the align times of around 25-27 seconds, before mods and skills. Offhand, i beleive this makes for about a 15 second align time and I do not know about the align time with an MWD cycle. That said, with a normal cruiser it should take about 3.3 seconds to target a 165 sig. This would give people 12 seconds to get in range and point them if they are stationary, the lock, then approach if needed to point them. In which case they would only need a long point.

An MMJD may save them, may, but as i posted in the MMJD thread, I think it should be 50km jump range and a lower cooldown.

This first case is far more balanced than the interceptors or T3s and I cant see how you and your team trashed it.

The second case: Actual use in Null.

Who is going to fly a hauler in nullsec without a scout? no one is going to be daft enough to do that or if they do they deserve to die.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#247 - 2014-05-20 13:42:23 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
G's Biatch wrote:


Fozzie Can we fill the Fleet Hanger and place these ships in SMA's in cap ships, or will the Ammo only rule still apply?

Thanks


The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.


Yeah, this needs to not go live. You can get 100.000 m3 carriers if this is the case.
Rorquals more, supers even more.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#248 - 2014-05-20 13:43:44 UTC
I suppose the whole point of periodic changes is to shake things up a bit... Now I have to consider what I can move in my carrier... You've effectively given my carrier a fleet hanger of ~70k-130k m3. That's 10k from the carrier and ~60k from each DST I cram into it. By my current calculations, I can move 5 cruiser-sized ships and one DST in my carrier. The DST could be filled with up to ~60k of fuel, mods, etc. Very useful...

Is this intended?

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#249 - 2014-05-20 13:46:15 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
CynoNet Two wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone.


Can we get some feedback on the bubble immunity thing for DSTs? Obviously it's a dumb idea for Blockade Runners, but replacing the DST warp core stability bonus with bubble immunity makes a lot of sense and isn't anywhere near as strong as it is on Interceptors / T3 cruisers.

Was the idea considered?


The idea was considered and rejected as it would make DSTs too difficult to catch in nullsec and (especially) wormhole space and wouldn't provide much interesting gameplay.


Excellent. Hold the line, Fozzie. Hold the line.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#250 - 2014-05-20 13:46:39 UTC
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
CynoNet Two wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone.


Can we get some feedback on the bubble immunity thing for DSTs? Obviously it's a dumb idea for Blockade Runners, but replacing the DST warp core stability bonus with bubble immunity makes a lot of sense and isn't anywhere near as strong as it is on Interceptors / T3 cruisers.

Was the idea considered?


The idea was considered and rejected as it would make DSTs too difficult to catch in nullsec and (especially) wormhole space and wouldn't provide much interesting gameplay.


I highly disagree.

Your stats show the align times of around 25-27 seconds, before mods and skills. Offhand, i beleive this makes for about a 15 second align time and I do not know about the align time with an MWD cycle. That said, with a normal cruiser it should take about 3.3 seconds to target a 165 sig. This would give people 12 seconds to get in range and point them if they are stationary, the lock, then approach if needed to point them. In which case they would only need a long point.

An MMJD may save them, may, but as i posted in the MMJD thread, I think it should be 50km jump range and a lower cooldown.

This first case is far more balanced than the interceptors or T3s and I cant see how you and your team trashed it.

The second case: Actual use in Null.

Who is going to fly a hauler in nullsec without a scout? no one is going to be daft enough to do that or if they do they deserve to die.


The align time for the DSTs is the same as for any other ship that can fit an MWD

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
CynoNet Two
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#251 - 2014-05-20 14:00:23 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
I highly disagree.

Your stats show the align times of around 25-27 seconds, before mods and skills. Offhand, i beleive this makes for about a 15 second align time and I do not know about the align time with an MWD cycle. That said, with a normal cruiser it should take about 3.3 seconds to target a 165 sig. This would give people 12 seconds to get in range and point them if they are stationary, the lock, then approach if needed to point them. In which case they would only need a long point.

An MMJD may save them, may, but as i posted in the MMJD thread, I think it should be 50km jump range and a lower cooldown.

This first case is far more balanced than the interceptors or T3s and I cant see how you and your team trashed it.

The second case: Actual use in Null.

Who is going to fly a hauler in nullsec without a scout? no one is going to be daft enough to do that or if they do they deserve to die.


The align time for the DSTs is the same as for any other ship that can fit an MWD


And still significantly higher than both an Interceptor and T3 cruiser - the latter of which can have more ehp AND a covert cloak.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#252 - 2014-05-20 14:08:29 UTC
I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
CynoNet Two
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#253 - 2014-05-20 14:13:59 UTC
This is why we can't have nice things :(
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#254 - 2014-05-20 14:19:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
If the damn thing was cheaper I would say ok. This is an expensive ship to lose.

I don't quite agree with the Yolo of battleships in C1's.

With that said, the changes aren't bad. Just don't know if they are good enough to make the whole "transport with an escort" work well enough.

Overheat modules, double tank, mega repairs, reisstance, fleet hangers. Its almost a tanky Orca.

It might work.

In lowsec, could potentially survive a gatecamp and burn back to the gate.

In Nullsec, could survive a gank if escorted (vs the rest of the transport ships).

In Wormhole space.. well apply to null.

might be enough.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.


Balance is balance. Good move there.

Yaay!!!!
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy
Caldari State
#255 - 2014-05-20 14:21:48 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.


And Orca pilots everywhere cried a little..
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#256 - 2014-05-20 14:21:54 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.


Wow... hello massive carrier buff.
PS: I want credit for pointing this out.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#257 - 2014-05-20 14:24:57 UTC
The DST will be more useful than a Miasmos for ore hauling since the Orca pilot can simply drag stuff from all three storage compartments into the DST's fleet hangar.

The DST will also serve nicely to replace a Kryos for mineral hauling and Hoarder for ammo hauling because of the built in stab, and the ability to fit an MWD without requiring rigs.

I'll focus on finding something to complain about tomorrow.

Oh hang on, I found a gripe! They're rather homogenous. I'd prefer clear roles: the Mastodon for "absolutely, positively overnight!" with the Bustard for Ghostbusters style hauling, the Impel for Dirty Harry style armour tank baiting, and the Occator for a combination of capacity & agility.

PS: a long time ago there was a courier company in Australia called "Comet". Their motto was "absolutely, positively overnight? Hello Comet!" (and being the '80s they had a cool jingle too). Folks in the USA will recognise the slogan from FedEx ads during the same period. Our advertising folks in the '80s thought they could pull the wool over our eyes and recycle US scripts. These days they just play the whole US ad, complete with corny accents and pronouncing "Z" as "zee".

PPS: Ghostbusters: no job too big, no fee too big!

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#258 - 2014-05-20 14:29:53 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Overheat modules, double tank, mega repairs, reisstance, fleet hangers. Its almost a tanky Orca.


All we need now is an ORE DST that gets the ORE bonus to mining foreman links and we won't need to put Orcas in small fleets anymore.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Grarr Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#259 - 2014-05-20 14:56:57 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
G's Biatch wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Allowing launching and scooping of structures from fleet hangars is something that needs more investigation, so we're increasing the standard cargo holds on all the DSTs so they can easily deploy and scoop structures.

We are also increasing the assembled volumes of the DSTs a bit, to keep the balance surrounding DSTs hauling cargo in ship maintenance bays.

We have discussed the questions surrounding hauling of battleships into C1 wormholes with the CSM and internally, and decided that we are ok with this function at this time. Using a DST to get a battleship into a C1 siege still requires the attackers to have their own starbase set up in the system for disassembly.



Fozzie Can we fill the Fleet Hanger and place these ships in SMA's in cap ships, or will the Ammo only rule still apply?

Thanks


The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.


So you're telling me that manually piloting a DST is still a pointless effort and putting it into a carrier creates a miniature JF? Will you at least tell me that an unpiloted DST will not have skills applied to it and anything over the 50.000 m³ cargo will be prevented from being placed into a ship maintenance bay?
Neutral Jita Hauler
Doomheim
#260 - 2014-05-20 15:09:53 UTC
If they didn't take the lazy route with a fleet hanger and instead created a non-restricted 'general goods bay', all of this would have been prevented.