These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Ship design process sucks - more creativity please
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
#21 - 2017-04-04 15:10:28 UTC
Wonder if there's any ice products that could be fitted in lore-wise to be highly flammable? Smile

@lunettelulu7
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#22 - 2017-04-04 15:28:54 UTC
Quote:
What about simply 'cool' weaponry like flamethrowers, lightning guns, etc?


Flamethrower in space mind your speed or you will burn both you and your target this particular game have much more weapons cool or otherwise to its disposal compared to EVE and its not about balance but its about TiDi more you have sooner it kicks in with far less ships on grid due to additional calculations.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#23 - 2017-04-04 15:32:03 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:

Having your ship frozen in place and unable to do something isn't a ton of fun in an MMO.


1) Take your ADHD medicine before playing the game.

2) I have already had my ship frozen in place and unable to do anything every single time I've ever been killed (even whole minutes at a time). It's called being scrammed, webbed, and perma-jammed.

3) It doesn't necessarily have to be a long time, but again, take your ADHD medicine so that 30 seconds or so doesn't seem like 10 hours to you.

4) Don't zero in on and nitpick specific proposals put here by anyone. The point is to show (by way of suggestions and ideas) that there could be a lot more creativity applied to the game, not to say "such-and-such feature should 100% definitely be added to the game."

Quote:
Weapons in Eve hit instantly because there's no meaningful reason to give them travel time.


What's the meaningful reason that missiles have travel time then?

Quote:
That's also the reason something like a "flamethrower" wouldn't do anything. Shields, armor, and hulls in Eve stand up to antimatter detonations and projectiles moving at .001c. Heck in lore Shields are....


Several people, including me, have already said 'inb4 the lore people show up.'
Zanar Skwigelf
HIgh Sec Care Bears
Brothers of Tangra
#24 - 2017-04-04 15:57:04 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
I think it's boring that the pattern for pretty much every ship that is released is 1) create the same ship across all 4 races, 2) change the appearance of the ship for each race according to that race's style, 3) adjust slot layouts across races (amarr has most lows, caldari has most mids, etc), 4) make same exact role bonuses and similar 'other' bonuses for all ships, and 5) call it a day.

As far as design goes, it's too cookie cutter, it's too risk averse, and it's too lazy. Why does essentially the same ship have to exist across all four races for every ship? Every race has frigate types A-D, every race has cruiser types A-D, etc.


What would you rather see compared to the current ship layout? Why should every single interceptor be a raptor?

Also, the t1 platforms that are similar are also starting points for the faction / pirate versions of those ships.
Teros Hakomairos
Doomheim
#25 - 2017-04-04 16:04:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Teros Hakomairos
This is the curse of free to play.....

Those ideas just come from people that are raised that way and don't know better.......

AOE damge?

DOT?

In EVE?

Get adult y'all

And don't try to change our game with your stupid FTP ideas......

Posters of ideas like that hav to be locked in a 2m³ box with not less than 2 angry porcupines...... :-)
MadMuppet
Critical Mass Inc
#26 - 2017-04-04 16:05:29 UTC
Lulu Lunette wrote:
Wonder if there's any ice products that could be fitted in lore-wise to be highly flammable? Smile



Something Florine based would do nicely:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckSoDW2-wrc

This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.

"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#27 - 2017-04-04 16:06:14 UTC
Oliver Delorean wrote:
Had kinda similar idea but a bit different approach...
Was thinking why should every ship to be tied to its bonuses, right now u see hurricane... u know it has projectile turret bonuses / phantasm - afterburner, and so on.

My idea was to keep the ship design but apply bonuses with fittings, so when u meet hurricane then u never know what type of weapons or bonuses the ship have.

This would make the combat a lot more interesting.



As soon as you did that some nerd with Pyfa would create the ONE super over powered fit and no one would fly anything else, ever.
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#28 - 2017-04-04 16:06:18 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
I think it's boring that the pattern for pretty much every ship that is released is 1) create the same ship across all 4 races, 2) change the appearance of the ship for each race according to that race's style, 3) adjust slot layouts across races (amarr has most lows, caldari has most mids, etc), 4) make same exact role bonuses and similar 'other' bonuses for all ships, and 5) call it a day.

As far as design goes, it's too cookie cutter, it's too risk averse, and it's too lazy. Why does essentially the same ship have to exist across all four races for every ship? Every race has frigate types A-D, every race has cruiser types A-D, etc.

And then there's weapons. Don't get me wrong, I think lasers, rail guns, missiles, and bullets are fine. But can't we have anything else? What about area of affect weapons? Splash damage? Damage over time? Area denial weapons? What about simply 'cool' weaponry like flamethrowers, lightning guns, etc?

Just seems like there's so much more that could be done to make this game so much cooler.


Yeah.. about that.. strangely enough Eve actually USED to be this way. And it was a balancing nightmare. The Minmatar had one more frigate than the other nations (the burst), the Amarr did not have a "probing" frigate (the Magnate), Typhoons and Scythes had the split weapon systems. Balance was impossible to do as one change to a common module would either have no effect or wildly unintended consequences depending on the ship. This lead to Tiercide, which made everything SO much easier on the devs, which also meant they could spend more time working on other aspects of the game.

You should also know that, besides how many mid or low slots a ship gets, the ship usually has to conform to the principle of the race, for example Minmatar ships have to be able to field ships that are faster than other races, Amarr ships typically start off with more capacitor, Gallente ships will have larger drone bays, Caldari ships will have better sensor strengths, etc. There are a lot of "under the hood" factors that you probably didn't realize play a part when they are developing a new ship or changing a current one.

But as I read the rest of your post, I have to agree that you just need to spend more time in the game as many of your ideas for weapons already exist in multiple forms. I will have to say that you need to PVP more.. then you will understand a little better why some of your weapon ideas aren't going to be impressive, or will be amazingly overpowered (which means "bad").

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
Teros Hakomairos
Doomheim
#29 - 2017-04-04 16:11:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Teros Hakomairos
Orakkus wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
I think it's boring that the pattern for pretty much every ship that is released is 1) create the same ship across all 4 races, 2) change the appearance of the ship for each race according to that race's style, 3) adjust slot layouts across races (amarr has most lows, caldari has most mids, etc), 4) make same exact role bonuses and similar 'other' bonuses for all ships, and 5) call it a day.

As far as design goes, it's too cookie cutter, it's too risk averse, and it's too lazy. Why does essentially the same ship have to exist across all four races for every ship? Every race has frigate types A-D, every race has cruiser types A-D, etc.

And then there's weapons. Don't get me wrong, I think lasers, rail guns, missiles, and bullets are fine. But can't we have anything else? What about area of affect weapons? Splash damage? Damage over time? Area denial weapons? What about simply 'cool' weaponry like flamethrowers, lightning guns, etc?

Just seems like there's so much more that could be done to make this game so much cooler.


Yeah.. about that.. strangely enough Eve actually USED to be this way. And it was a balancing nightmare. The Minmatar had one more frigate than the other nations (the burst), the Amarr did not have a "probing" frigate (the Magnate), Typhoons and Scythes had the split weapon systems. Balance was impossible to do as one change to a common module would either have no effect or wildly unintended consequences depending on the ship. This lead to Tiercide, which made everything SO much easier on the devs, which also meant they could spend more time working on other aspects of the game.

You should also know that, besides how many mid or low slots a ship gets, the ship usually has to conform to the principle of the race, for example Minmatar ships have to be able to field ships that are faster than other races, Amarr ships typically start off with more capacitor, Gallente ships will have larger drone bays, Caldari ships will have better sensor strengths, etc. There are a lot of "under the hood" factors that you probably didn't realize play a part when they are developing a new ship or changing a current one.

But as I read the rest of your post, I have to agree that you just need to spend more time in the game as many of your ideas for weapons already exist in multiple forms. I will have to say that you need to PVP more.. then you will understand a little better why some of your weapon ideas aren't going to be impressive, or will be amazingly overpowered (which means "bad").



Talking about "balancing" a game...this is just a demand of people who don't like to change a ship and are indignant if another ship does something better than THEIRS....at this moment the whine threats in the forum and ingame starts.....

Best example : the myr....a ship DESIGNED for drone using can use drones (even heavy) better than others ?

A SCANDAL...this has to be nerfed....and it was nerfed.......and this was the REAL scandal......

bottom line....
Charley Varrick
State War Academy
Caldari State
#30 - 2017-04-04 16:59:56 UTC
I'm still waiting for giant space slugs that live inside big asteroids. Big enough to swallow our ships whole! Would make cool hiding places.....
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#31 - 2017-04-04 18:20:22 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
I think it's boring that the pattern for pretty much every ship that is released is 1) create the same ship across all 4 races, 2) change the appearance of the ship for each race according to that race's style, 3) adjust slot layouts across races (amarr has most lows, caldari has most mids, etc), 4) make same exact role bonuses and similar 'other' bonuses for all ships, and 5) call it a day.

As far as design goes, it's too cookie cutter, it's too risk averse, and it's too lazy. Why does essentially the same ship have to exist across all four races for every ship? Every race has frigate types A-D, every race has cruiser types A-D, etc.

And then there's weapons. Don't get me wrong, I think lasers, rail guns, missiles, and bullets are fine. But can't we have anything else? What about area of affect weapons? Splash damage? Damage over time? Area denial weapons? What about simply 'cool' weaponry like flamethrowers, lightning guns, etc?

Just seems like there's so much more that could be done to make this game so much cooler.



Interesting ideas. But it's been tried before. Notice though that in Eve they tend to emulate some of those concepts already, just not in the context or the direct mechanic that implies it, but the end result is the same.

For example, some would say "how come we can't target an enemy warp drive?" as if to shoot only the part of the ship where the warp drive system is located (that would be a challenge..) . But there are modules that do just that. Chances are it's easier on the server to do it that way (or was back in 2003).

It is what it is.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
000Hunter000
Missiles 'R' Us
#32 - 2017-04-04 18:39:31 UTC
@OP!

If u think there all boring...

Can i haz your ships then? Big smile
Matthias Ancaladron
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2017-04-04 22:50:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Matthias Ancaladron
Maybe in dust 514. They never finished any of the racial guns because ???????
But I have lots of old posts on the dusts forums regarding racial weapons to fill in what they missed out on.
Things like a plasma mine for the challenge they would cover people plasma like napalm and cause damage over time, or having a special weapon where each shot had base damage and a plasma burn after effect that was essentially bleeding/burn damage and had a small scale when consecutive hits would refresh and increase the "burn"
And some ideas for an amarr heavy weapon that would be a charged to fire then release the trigger to fire a continuous laser beam for a short time before a forced cool down/reload between each shot.
Functionally no different from a lightning bolt but you seem to just want visually variation like a ship skin that transforms lasers into lightning. Simple animation change and makes a new visual if iu want to change it up and see new effects as long as people like me can toggle it off cause I can't have to many fancy but effects.

If anything I'd just want updated turrets that look like more like weapons than random polygon blobs with spinning bits. Especially with the new ship redesigns. Some turrets are cool, but others arare very janky looking and awkward and don't always fit quite right on hard points. Heavy pulse laser on smaller. The 5th turret on the bottom nose of the smaller is a little to small to fit a heavy pulse. So it kinda just hangs a bit off the edge. Just a minor annoyance to ocd people like me who care about space fashion.
Cade Windstalker
#34 - 2017-04-05 02:51:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Beast of Revelations wrote:
1) Take your ADHD medicine before playing the game.

2) I have already had my ship frozen in place and unable to do anything every single time I've ever been killed (even whole minutes at a time). It's called being scrammed, webbed, and perma-jammed.

3) It doesn't necessarily have to be a long time, but again, take your ADHD medicine so that 30 seconds or so doesn't seem like 10 hours to you.

4) Don't zero in on and nitpick specific proposals put here by anyone. The point is to show (by way of suggestions and ideas) that there could be a lot more creativity applied to the game, not to say "such-and-such feature should 100% definitely be added to the game."



  1. I'm fine, thanks, please leave the personal attacks elsewhere. Preferably far far away from here.

  2. Sounds like you need to find better fights then, because I'd say less than 10% of my deaths involve more than one of those. Also, still doesn't make it a fun mechanic, it just takes a lot more than one ship to do as opposed to your off the cuff suggestion.

  3. First off, that's not how ADHD works. Second, if I can remove an important ship from the fight for a period of time that is *amazingly broken* and I will immediately start abusing the heck out of it. There is absolutely nothing balanced about the mechanic you are suggesting.

  4. And I'm saying that your general proposal is poorly informed by actual gameplay and does not reflect the realities of the game. The specific point about that terrible idea for a stasis field mechanic you can inflict on others was completely secondary. It was just so bad I had to comment on it.


Beast of Revelations wrote:
What's the meaningful reason that missiles have travel time then?


It's a trade-off, in a lot of ways. Back when the game launched though the damage system was a *lot* simpler and missiles could be fairly easily out-run by a lot of ships. There's nothing like that with the other weapons.

As things stand missiles offer an interesting set of trade offs. Having other weapons delay damage doesn't really offer the same sort of complex trade off missiles currently offer, and there's nothing in your proposal that creates one. "More variety" isn't a good reason to just start tacking mechanics onto the game.

Beast of Revelations wrote:
Several people, including me, have already said 'inb4 the lore people show up.'


My primary objection is gameplay, not lore, your justification for this seems to be entirely "I think it would be cool" and "this makes sense because physics" neither of which is a good reason to throw all the current weapon mechanics into a blender and hit "puree".

In your OP you call the design "lazy" and "risk averse" you know what another way to sum that up is? "Working".

A game does not need "novel" mechanics to be fun or interesting, it doesn't need everything to be its own special snowflake. That does *not* make for good game design, and quite often attempting it just creates an unplayable mess.
Netan MalDoran
Hail To The King
The Silent Syndicate
#35 - 2017-04-05 02:58:06 UTC
IB4 'Realistik fiziks' Cool

"Your security status has been lowered." - Hell yeah it was!

Falcon's truth
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#36 - 2017-04-05 07:01:36 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:

  • I'm fine, thanks, please leave the personal attacks elsewhere. Preferably far far away from here.


    • I don't personally attack, at least not first. It was a joke.

    Quote:
    As things stand missiles offer an interesting set of trade offs. Having other weapons delay damage doesn't really offer the same sort of complex trade off missiles currently offer, and there's nothing in your proposal that creates one. "More variety" isn't a good reason to just start tacking mechanics onto the game.


    Plenty of trade offs are available. Instant damage is preferred. Delayed damage is a disadvantage. All other things being equal, one would always want instant damage over delayed damage. To want delayed damage, you'd want to be compensated, if possible.

    We already have a delayed damage weapon system, but it isn't the correct one. Bullets should be most delayed, but instead it is missiles. Lasers should be instant, but currently everything but missiles is. I simply think it would be more interesting if things were adjusted to more realistic settings rather than more unrealistic ones (again - delayed damage mechanic is already exists in the game).

    There are higher priorities, and ultimately if such a change is never made, nobody is gonna cry, including me. It was simply an idea, a suggestion, nothing more. I have a million of them. So does everyone else.

    Suggestions are like buttholes. Everybody has one.
    Avaelica Kuershin
    Paper Cats
    #37 - 2017-04-05 07:30:16 UTC
    Beast of Revelations wrote:
    I simply think it would be more interesting if things were adjusted to more realistic settings rather than more unrealistic ones.


    Trust me, you don't want more realistic settings. Though it would be amusing seeing players grapple with celestial mechanics.
    Every time "more realism" crops up, the proposer seems to be picking and choosing which parts are to be more realistic.
    Mister Tuggles
    Heretic Army
    Sedition.
    #38 - 2017-04-05 12:34:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Mister Tuggles
    I would rather CCP get back to finishing off the first phase of ship changes/revamp, and then do a second go around to iron everything out instead of them pumping out new ships. New lines of ships just causes more balance issues.

    Still waiting for the Blops revamp that was talked about, oh, 3+ years ago?
    Zanar Skwigelf
    HIgh Sec Care Bears
    Brothers of Tangra
    #39 - 2017-04-05 17:26:12 UTC
    Beast of Revelations wrote:
    I simply think it would be more interesting if things were adjusted to more realistic settings rather than more unrealistic ones


    I'm sorry your "space submarines that fly faster than light" game isn't realistic enough for you
    Cherry Sulphate
    ojingo
    #40 - 2017-04-05 17:51:59 UTC
    i was talking to this bird today and i was all like "if you played an internet spaceship game, what sort of ship would you like?" and she looked at me like, "?". and so I said, "hypothetically speaking, bab". then she was all smiles. and she said, "kid, could i have one that was like jelly shoes?" and was totally "hnn" and then i asked, "made out of jelly shoes material?" and she was quickly back at me with "yes, but also looking like jelly shoes". i thought that she was being awesome. then she said, "could i have one that looks like raisins, too?" and was full of "hey, let's get married".

    thanks for the chat, OP.
    Previous page123Next page