These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

A Carrier that Carries
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#41 - 2013-04-26 04:34:38 UTC
Vassal Zeren wrote:

The perfect power projection tool was not the idea behind this post. nomading was. So slash the carrying capabilities to 2 or 1 or no bs as you see fit. Anything so it's not op. That's not the heart of the matter I think. As previously stated, the mobile HQ idea is better in places like whs if it can temporarily make berth i.e. anchor.



First, you can already go nomad with existing carriers and Orcas. Second, nomading and power projects are kind of distinctions without a difference. Being able to move a stable of warship quickly around the map is projecting power. Existing nullsec groups already do exactly this, loading up their personal carriers with doctrine ships and taking a cyno chain to the next battleground.

And you can pretty much have all these POS-like capabilities by just putting another characters in a Rorqual and have it carry and anchor a POS and any mods you could possibly want. With 2 accounts, you could ride around in 2 carriers, 1 Rorq, and 3 alts for cyno and other skills.

There, you have the shields and capabilities of a POS by bringing a POS and all the mods with you. You can have the safety and features of a station by being able to dock these ships in a POS. You can bring a few battleships with you, or tons of smaller ships. Don't write off the restricted hanger on a Rorq either, because even if you don't mine you can still bring along a Noctis, a blockade runner and a couple more industrials, even ones fitted as bait ships.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#42 - 2013-04-26 05:23:03 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:

The perfect power projection tool was not the idea behind this post. nomading was. So slash the carrying capabilities to 2 or 1 or no bs as you see fit. Anything so it's not op. That's not the heart of the matter I think. As previously stated, the mobile HQ idea is better in places like whs if it can temporarily make berth i.e. anchor.



First, you can already go nomad with existing carriers and Orcas. Second, nomading and power projects are kind of distinctions without a difference. Being able to move a stable of warship quickly around the map is projecting power. Existing nullsec groups already do exactly this, loading up their personal carriers with doctrine ships and taking a cyno chain to the next battleground.

And you can pretty much have all these POS-like capabilities by just putting another characters in a Rorqual and have it carry and anchor a POS and any mods you could possibly want. With 2 accounts, you could ride around in 2 carriers, 1 Rorq, and 3 alts for cyno and other skills.

There, you have the shields and capabilities of a POS by bringing a POS and all the mods with you. You can have the safety and features of a station by being able to dock these ships in a POS. You can bring a few battleships with you, or tons of smaller ships. Don't write off the restricted hanger on a Rorq either, because even if you don't mine you can still bring along a Noctis, a blockade runner and a couple more industrials, even ones fitted as bait ships.


I tried to wrap my head around this issue for a few days. How do you implement the ability to roam, without it turning into a force multiplier? How can you ensure teamwork to keep it from being a solo pilots dream? And where is the practical application?

For me, I went to the POS structure, which is by all admissions a piece of old code that needs to go. But instead of taking it out, or rewriting it completely, I felt much as the op here seems to feel: add something that will eventually make the old POS's useless. It does what they do, only better. It's a newer system. And it adds a redundancy which prevents the breaking of all the mechanics that rely on the old POS system, like sovereignty.

I came up with this: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=229055&find=unread

Two issues still remain, in my mind: How do you handle the loss of modules, and how do you allow for hisec aggression on an undeclared/unowned structure?

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?
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2013-04-26 05:58:09 UTC
Ruze wrote:

I tried to wrap my head around this issue for a few days. How do you implement the ability to roam, without it turning into a force multiplier? How can you ensure teamwork to keep it from being a solo pilots dream? And where is the practical application?


There is none, because you are trying to cram a bunch of different attributes into 1 item. Just using multiple characters in existing ships with existing POS would give you all these abilities and then some with way more flexibility. Yah, POS kind of suck, but it would be better for everyone if ccp just fixed POS instead of trying to invent some pilot-able station and yet some how not do it in a way that some alliance fielding dozens of them won't be over-powered.

It's a solution looking for a problem. Even one else is already trucking their PvP and PvE ships around in carriers that can be bought, sold, and docked in stations. They are dropping and maintaining POS with Rorqs. And they can be pretty nomadic (not always voluntarily) with these existing tools.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#44 - 2013-04-26 06:03:02 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Ruze wrote:

I tried to wrap my head around this issue for a few days. How do you implement the ability to roam, without it turning into a force multiplier? How can you ensure teamwork to keep it from being a solo pilots dream? And where is the practical application?


There is none, because you are trying to cram a bunch of different attributes into 1 item. Just using multiple characters in existing ships with existing POS would give you all these abilities and then some with way more flexibility. Yah, POS kind of suck, but it would be better for everyone if ccp just fixed POS instead of trying to invent some pilot-able station and yet some how not do it in a way that some alliance fielding dozens of them won't be over-powered.

It's a solution looking for a problem. Even one else is already trucking their PvP and PvE ships around in carriers that can be bought, sold, and docked in stations. They are dropping and maintaining POS with Rorqs. And they can be pretty nomadic (not always voluntarily) with these existing tools.


Yet the existing POS system has been declared, even by the devs, as **** poor and full of bugs, especially in relation to role management, setup/take down, and the entire internal code.

Of course, dropping the shields and their relation in space, as well as the use as a moon mining implement, changes the proposed concepts to address what is being requested by many, without destroying the established and in-game mechanics.

I'm sure we're more likely to get a complete overhaul of the entire system, from moon mining minerals and their abuse to static sov space to poor meta-mechanics that have kept nul in it's current state for so long, well before we'd get a new ship/mechanic such as what's proposed.

But I still feel that it would be a great addition. Sure, not necessary with teamwork or the right amount of real life bucks to fund enough alt accounts, but still good.

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?
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#45 - 2013-04-26 07:38:37 UTC
Orca, small/medium POS, T3s

.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2013-04-26 10:17:48 UTC
CCP actually announced that they will be adding a ship to the game which has a large maintenance bay, cargohold, and corporate hangar--it has carrier tank, a standard drone bay, and the ability to fit gang links and a clone vat bay. I believe they are calling it a Rorqual.

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."
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2013-04-26 14:42:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Vassal Zeren
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Ruze wrote:

I tried to wrap my head around this issue for a few days. How do you implement the ability to roam, without it turning into a force multiplier? How can you ensure teamwork to keep it from being a solo pilots dream? And where is the practical application?


There is none, because you are trying to cram a bunch of different attributes into 1 item. Just using multiple characters in existing ships with existing POS would give you all these abilities and then some with way more flexibility. Yah, POS kind of suck, but it would be better for everyone if ccp just fixed POS instead of trying to invent some pilot-able station and yet some how not do it in a way that some alliance fielding dozens of them won't be over-powered.

It's a solution looking for a problem. Even one else is already trucking their PvP and PvE ships around in carriers that can be bought, sold, and docked in stations. They are dropping and maintaining POS with Rorqs. And they can be pretty nomadic (not always voluntarily) with these existing tools.


Your argument is, if I am interpreting it correctly, that the tools for nomading already exist in the form of a orc/roq + a pos. But I think the fact that you had to lay out all the steps required to nomad in these ship and the fact that you had to say a pos is required in addition to said ships is a hint to the impracticality of nomading. It can usually be argued against a new idea that there are certain things that can be done with in game tools to achieve the same purpose as the new idea does. However, if the idea is a good one It will be able to fluidly address the thing that is already sort of possible.

Since it has been asked multiple times I'll address again why i think this idea is not redundant. It would encourage people to move around with more ease then they can now; couple that with new wh space (with an assortment of new features aimed at mobility) and you've got a much more dynamic exploration element in the game.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-04-26 14:44:46 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:

The perfect power projection tool was not the idea behind this post. nomading was. So slash the carrying capabilities to 2 or 1 or no bs as you see fit. Anything so it's not op. That's not the heart of the matter I think. As previously stated, the mobile HQ idea is better in places like whs if it can temporarily make berth i.e. anchor.



First, you can already go nomad with existing carriers and Orcas. Second, nomading and power projects are kind of distinctions without a difference. Being able to move a stable of warship quickly around the map is projecting power. Existing nullsec groups already do exactly this, loading up their personal carriers with doctrine ships and taking a cyno chain to the next battleground.



This ship would not be able to cyno; it would use gates and whs.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#49 - 2013-04-26 15:37:29 UTC
Vassal Zeren wrote:
No fancy ideas here -- just a basic thing that I think people want: a non-combat oriented mobile base. Something to hold everything from ships to gear.

Each race has one of said ship. There would be minor differences between capabilities.

It can tank but not gank -- it would have carrier like ehp but no ability to fit combat mods of any kind.

I just wanted to re-spark the idea as I think a lot of people want some sort of mobile command center for small op and wh's etc.

Thoughts?

Have you heard of Orca?

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
High Bear Nation.
#50 - 2013-04-26 15:55:57 UTC
dm2 wrote:
i now what he wants .

and its alreday ingame .

aeon , mothership .

it fly
it have 50.000 m3 fleet hangar
2.500.000 m3 shipsbay

you can fit ships and do it all .

it even can cloak :p

archon the same story , and mutch cheaper .

if you dont like big risks , put your cynoship on selfdestrukt , and activate the cyno on your last 10 seconds .
ship destroyed , cyno is gone .
if its in a system where you cant dock .







no, he doesnt want a stupid aeon.
no, we dont want orca's. they wont hold bs size.
neither can extend shields to other ships. we're talking about a small, mobile base ship that can be unanchored and moved once the sites have despawned or we are discovered.
something that can hold 4 bs or so. no jump engines, no flights of drones, just a bs carrier, docking station and corp hangar.

something, when anchored it creats a shield where you can abandon your ships and get another and one doesnt have to be in the base for it to operate.

have you ever heard of an orca? ha!
have YOU ever heard of reading the whole post? he said a few bs's...where r you going to put that in an orca? on a rope behind it in tow?
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2013-04-26 19:57:14 UTC
Vassal Zeren wrote:

Your argument is, if I am interpreting it correctly, that the tools for nomading already exist in the form of a orc/roq + a pos. But I think the fact that you had to lay out all the steps required to nomad in these ship and the fact that you had to say a pos is required in addition to said ships is a hint to the impracticality of nomading.


Actually, none of my steps require a POS, I only added it because the do-everything ship you are thinking up has POS attributes.

If I was to go nomading, I wouldn't bring a POS. For just my personal use, 1 carrier or 2 Orcas would cover all my needs. 2 carriers and a Rorq with a POS would do pretty much everything and is way more flexible and survivable of a mix that a ship that has all your eggs in one basket. If someone took down 1 of my carriers, I still have the assets to move on and rebuild. If someone downed my pilotable station with all my possessions, I would be back to square one.


Also, considering that we are in a place in the evolution of Eve were nullsec alliances can drop staging outposts as 20bil each, having that ability for players to drop mini pilotable stations anywhere (I imagine one could just titan bridge them even if they lack a jump drive) means insane levels of power projection when many are already complaining about too much power projection.


This super nomading ship is honestly silly. People already live this lifestyle with existing tools, and they do it to such an extant that people already say it is too easy.
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2013-04-27 18:18:55 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:

Your argument is, if I am interpreting it correctly, that the tools for nomading already exist in the form of a orc/roq + a pos. But I think the fact that you had to lay out all the steps required to nomad in these ship and the fact that you had to say a pos is required in addition to said ships is a hint to the impracticality of nomading.


Actually, none of my steps require a POS, I only added it because the do-everything ship you are thinking up has POS attributes.

If I was to go nomading, I wouldn't bring a POS. For just my personal use, 1 carrier or 2 Orcas would cover all my needs. 2 carriers and a Rorq with a POS would do pretty much everything and is way more flexible and survivable of a mix that a ship that has all your eggs in one basket. If someone took down 1 of my carriers, I still have the assets to move on and rebuild. If someone downed my pilotable station with all my possessions, I would be back to square one.


Also, considering that we are in a place in the evolution of Eve were nullsec alliances can drop staging outposts as 20bil each, having that ability for players to drop mini pilotable stations anywhere (I imagine one could just titan bridge them even if they lack a jump drive) means insane levels of power projection when many are already complaining about too much power projection.


This super nomading ship is honestly silly. People already live this lifestyle with existing tools, and they do it to such an extant that people already say it is too easy.


A carrier and a rorq dont fit in C 1-4...

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#53 - 2013-04-28 02:06:36 UTC
Vassal Zeren wrote:

A carrier and a rorq dont fit in C 1-4...


Awesome. A pilotable station you can fly into a c1-4. What will you guys think up next/
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2013-04-28 02:19:05 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:

A carrier and a rorq dont fit in C 1-4...


Awesome. A pilotable station you can fly into a c1-4. What will you guys think up next/


Its not different from a pos in that regard -- except it trades protection for mobility.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2013-04-28 20:56:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
I think this could be a second variant of the freighter.

But the revamped POS could do it preatty much well, as long as it have the jump drive.....

Please read these!

New POS system New SOV system
Previous page123