These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Enterprise - ORE Strategic Industrial
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Drake Doe
88Th Tax Haven
#21 - 2013-04-08 03:55:32 UTC
Nexas Alduin wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Except, this ship can only fit one Strip Miner, something you conveniently forgot.


If you knew how to actually word things then people wouldn't make such mistakes. But since all you do know how to do is reply to people in sarcastic fashion I'll instead just let the thread die. Too bad, really, since I actually liked the idea and was throwing in constructive criticisms.

Don't blame your inability to read on someone else, it makes you look dim.

"The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! pops more corn" ---Evernub--
Drake Doe
88Th Tax Haven
#22 - 2013-04-08 03:58:14 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Drake Doe wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Why would any one use a exhumer if this is made? It makes them obsolete as well as the orca.

Well, take a look at Hacs and T3s

Yes I know, Hacs are almost useless compared to a properly fit t3. Why would you want to do that to exhumes also.

With rebalancing that should be changing too, so I assume after a bit of modification on that bonuses it'll become more in line with the exhumers. Besides, at best it'll just add 1 more ship to the useless pile.

"The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! pops more corn" ---Evernub--
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#23 - 2013-04-08 09:22:41 UTC
a brilliant april fools joke, shame I read it so late, I almost took it as seriously when reading it.

my thanks for the laugh

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
androch
LitlCorp
#24 - 2013-04-08 11:43:48 UTC
stupid useless ship
Velicitia
XS Tech
#25 - 2013-04-08 11:50:21 UTC
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
a brilliant april fools joke, shame I read it so late, I almost took it as seriously when reading it.

my thanks for the laugh

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#26 - 2013-04-10 00:41:16 UTC
androch wrote:
stupid useless ship

What a well-thought out critique of my suggestion. I applaud your willingness to specify what was wrong with it.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#27 - 2013-04-14 03:57:57 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:
androch wrote:
stupid useless ship

What a well-thought out critique of my suggestion. I applaud your willingness to specify what was wrong with it.

/sarcasm

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#28 - 2013-04-14 04:34:13 UTC
Personally, I really like it. I agree with one of the few constructive comments on page one, that numbers wise, you really need to tone down a lot. If fully fitted for pure yeild, this ship should be beating a hulk in mining capabilities ... but not doubling what a hulk can do.

As well, subsystems which allow it to salvage, strip mine, gas mine, mercoxit mine, moon scan, probe scan, haul, cloak out and even command boost would be awesome. Obviously it wouldn't do it all at once. Also obviously, it'd look ugly as hell. But if you make the ship the industrialists dream jack-of-all trades like the t3 cruisers are, it could be very useful.

This should be the natural progression of Exhumers, Transport Ships, the Noctis, the Covert Ops probe ships (more focus on the probing than the covert ops), the Planetary Interaction ships and a mini-Orca (without the ship fitting/storage capability, but possibly a mining option). Sounds awesome for w-space, what with the ability to change out subsystems at a pos that is supposed to be landing soon.

Give it the benefit of doing many varying industrial things, but none of them as well as their t2 counterparts ... unless you focus the ship entirely for it.

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#29 - 2013-04-15 03:48:11 UTC
Ruze wrote:
Personally, I really like it. I agree with one of the few constructive comments on page one, that numbers wise, you really need to tone down a lot. If fully fitted for pure yeild, this ship should be beating a hulk in mining capabilities ... but not doubling what a hulk can do.

I did the math. Not counting Mining Upgrades, it has faster cycles but less yield. In the end, it has slightly less yield per minute than the Hulk does. Not counting Mining Upgrades, that is. Mining Upgrades can be pretty CPU intensive, anyway.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2013-04-15 04:27:40 UTC
I'm going to have to withhold my support for this ship. It's either going to exceed the capabilities of the current ORE ships and obsolete them, of it's going to suck in comparison with a wtf price tag.

The balance for racial Tech III's is that in PvE they do less damage than battleships, and in PvP the skill point loss possibility exists. These don't translate well into ORE activities unless it's restricted from high sec, which would make the ship niche at best.
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#31 - 2013-04-15 07:47:32 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:
I'm going to have to withhold my support for this ship. It's either going to exceed the capabilities of the current ORE ships and obsolete them, of it's going to suck in comparison with a wtf price tag.

The balance for racial Tech III's is that in PvE they do less damage than battleships, and in PvP the skill point loss possibility exists. These don't translate well into ORE activities unless it's restricted from high sec, which would make the ship niche at best.


As has been mentioned before, a better ship with a high price tag doesn't obsolete the cheaper ships with the same roles otherwise I'd never see any of the T1 mining ships, which I do.

If it did, everyone would solely use T3 strategic cruisers and all other cruiser sales, both tech1 and tech 2 would dwindle and die. That simply hasn't happened since T3 cruisers were introduced, thus negating that argument.
Keeper O'Secrets
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#32 - 2013-04-15 08:00:40 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
Ersahi Kir wrote:
I'm going to have to withhold my support for this ship. It's either going to exceed the capabilities of the current ORE ships and obsolete them, of it's going to suck in comparison with a wtf price tag.

The balance for racial Tech III's is that in PvE they do less damage than battleships, and in PvP the skill point loss possibility exists. These don't translate well into ORE activities unless it's restricted from high sec, which would make the ship niche at best.


As has been mentioned before, a better ship with a high price tag doesn't obsolete the cheaper ships with the same roles otherwise I'd never see any of the T1 mining ships, which I do.

If it did, everyone would solely use T3 strategic cruisers and all other cruiser sales, both tech1 and tech 2 would dwindle and die. That simply hasn't happened since T3 cruisers were introduced, thus negating that argument.


show me 1 player with the skill to fly a mackinaw/hulk that chooses to fly a ret/cov....
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#33 - 2013-04-15 08:03:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tchulen
Keeper O'Secrets wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Ersahi Kir wrote:
I'm going to have to withhold my support for this ship. It's either going to exceed the capabilities of the current ORE ships and obsolete them, of it's going to suck in comparison with a wtf price tag.

The balance for racial Tech III's is that in PvE they do less damage than battleships, and in PvP the skill point loss possibility exists. These don't translate well into ORE activities unless it's restricted from high sec, which would make the ship niche at best.


As has been mentioned before, a better ship with a high price tag doesn't obsolete the cheaper ships with the same roles otherwise I'd never see any of the T1 mining ships, which I do.

If it did, everyone would solely use T3 strategic cruisers and all other cruiser sales, both tech1 and tech 2 would dwindle and die. That simply hasn't happened since T3 cruisers were introduced, thus negating that argument.


show me 1 player with the skill to fly a mackinaw/hulk that chooses to fly a ret/cov....


Me

EDIT - I own 2 hulks but I fly my covetors more than I fly the hulks.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-04-15 08:06:54 UTC
Keeper O'Secrets wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Ersahi Kir wrote:
I'm going to have to withhold my support for this ship. It's either going to exceed the capabilities of the current ORE ships and obsolete them, of it's going to suck in comparison with a wtf price tag.

The balance for racial Tech III's is that in PvE they do less damage than battleships, and in PvP the skill point loss possibility exists. These don't translate well into ORE activities unless it's restricted from high sec, which would make the ship niche at best.


As has been mentioned before, a better ship with a high price tag doesn't obsolete the cheaper ships with the same roles otherwise I'd never see any of the T1 mining ships, which I do.

If it did, everyone would solely use T3 strategic cruisers and all other cruiser sales, both tech1 and tech 2 would dwindle and die. That simply hasn't happened since T3 cruisers were introduced, thus negating that argument.


show me 1 player with the skill to fly a mackinaw/hulk that chooses to fly a ret/cov....

Lots of reasons to, for instance of you are in potentially hostile territory or for instance when I use to mine in wormholes, it was always covs due to costs.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#35 - 2013-04-15 08:16:13 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

Lots of reasons to, for instance of you are in potentially hostile territory or for instance when I use to mine in wormholes, it was always covs due to costs.


Precisely. That's why I often use covs.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#36 - 2013-04-15 08:36:36 UTC
Keeper O'Secrets wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Ersahi Kir wrote:
I'm going to have to withhold my support for this ship. It's either going to exceed the capabilities of the current ORE ships and obsolete them, of it's going to suck in comparison with a wtf price tag.

The balance for racial Tech III's is that in PvE they do less damage than battleships, and in PvP the skill point loss possibility exists. These don't translate well into ORE activities unless it's restricted from high sec, which would make the ship niche at best.


As has been mentioned before, a better ship with a high price tag doesn't obsolete the cheaper ships with the same roles otherwise I'd never see any of the T1 mining ships, which I do.

If it did, everyone would solely use T3 strategic cruisers and all other cruiser sales, both tech1 and tech 2 would dwindle and die. That simply hasn't happened since T3 cruisers were introduced, thus negating that argument.


show me 1 player with the skill to fly a mackinaw/hulk that chooses to fly a ret/cov....

*raises hand*

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2013-04-15 09:44:40 UTC
I'll support this when it has at least 2 subsystem options for hauling instead of for mining. It already has 3 for mining and 1 for command. There's room for 2 more I think.

Howabout one for bulk hauling: small industrial cargohold plus some low slots. It's like a sigil that can tank and has battlecruiser powergrid and CPU.

And then one that's smaller but has an agility and warp strength bonus.

Lastly, I haven't done any calculations on yields, but I wanna remind you to make sure that this thing cannot outmine an exhumer. It's probably fine if it can outmine a Venture, but only by a bit.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#38 - 2013-04-15 09:52:18 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I'll support this when it has at least 2 subsystem options for hauling instead of for mining. It already has 3 for mining and 1 for command. There's room for 2 more I think.

The Command subsystem also doubles as a Ore Hauling Subsystem, and the Colonization Subsystem can also haul good amounts of fuel, starbase structures and planetary command centers. It isn't general cargo hauling, but I still consider it hauling.

Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Lastly, I haven't done any calculations on yields, but I wanna remind you to make sure that this thing cannot outmine an exhumer. It's probably fine if it can outmine a Venture, but only by a bit.

It can't outmine a Hulk, but it certainly mines a whole lot more than a Venture does (a Venture mines at less than 50% of what Tech 1 Mining Barges and Battleships can)

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#39 - 2013-04-15 09:52:49 UTC
Keeper O'Secrets wrote:
show me 1 player with the skill to fly a mackinaw/hulk that chooses to fly a ret/cov....

Well, that's 3 just from the few people in this thread. You'll find most people use the ship that fits the risk assessment they've made of whatever situation they're going to be in. I own tech III ships but I use tech 1 and tech 2 cruisers more often than I do the tech III.

@OP - I agree with Gerrick, the covert subsystem would really be better if it allowed the use of cov ops cloaks. It would give the Black Ops another use as you could fairly safely project a small mining gang deep into null. The safety of transport would obviously be balanced by the immense isk loss if the fleet were actually to be hotdropped on. Also, having read your proposal a bit better I really do like it. I can't see any reason not to include a tech III mining ship. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be discussion on some of the stats but the concept is good and you've obviously thought this through pretty well.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#40 - 2013-04-15 09:58:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Felsusguy
Tchulen wrote:
@OP - I agree with Gerrick, the covert subsystem would really be better if it allowed the use of cov ops cloaks

It.... does? What made you think it couldn't? It has a 99% reduction in cloak CPU usage.

Edit: sorry, 100%

Edit: at the time of this edit, I have 69 likes.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.