These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

About the Eos' model

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Angelus Ryan
One Ronin
#221 - 2013-06-02 13:58:28 UTC
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

I'd love to see this.
Kenpachi Viktor
Perkone
Caldari State
#222 - 2013-06-02 14:00:40 UTC
Mangala Solaris wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull



    • You sold me on it.

    Seriously, this would be pretty cool.

    A war that would’ve involved 20,000 players, 75% of nullsec space, and hundreds of supercapitals was halted not by diplomacy, but by a game mechanic so dreadful that those who have experienced it previously have no desire to do so again. - Fix POS & SOV
    Zverofaust
    Ascetic Virtues
    #223 - 2013-06-02 14:16:21 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

    I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

    It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?


    Yes please.
    Ching Tao
    UK Freedom Fighters
    Wrecking Machine.
    #224 - 2013-06-02 14:25:37 UTC
    The Nighthawk should of had the Drake hull design from day 1

    Supported!
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #225 - 2013-06-03 09:35:03 UTC
    Ching Tao wrote:
    The Nighthawk should of had the Drake hull design from day 1

    Supported!


    If the former Tier 2 Battlecruisers had existed when Command Ships were implemented, it very well might have and we wouldn't be having this thread today.

    In my opinion, this is an opportunity to fix a years-old inconsistency and perhaps a glaring oversight as well. Putting things the way they should have been from the very start isn't a bad thing.
    Shinzu Akachi
    The Vomit Comets
    #226 - 2013-06-03 09:45:12 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

    I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

    It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?


    A MILLION TIMES YES!
    Theodore Giumbix
    Science and Trade Institute
    Caldari State
    #227 - 2013-06-03 09:56:53 UTC
    Lloyd Roses wrote:
    Theodore Giumbix wrote:
    Sarmatiko wrote:
    Proposed Command Ship hull changes

    Awesome work. This must be done.


    Yes to that video. Especially to all but the sleipnir. Sleipnir is fine though, needs wings.


    Add this video to your first post please.

    Yo, New Eden, got capsuleers in da house. What's up? And their pimped rides. Yo, capsuleer, if ya want me to unpimp your ride, lemme hear ya say Wat?
    StoneCold
    Decadence.
    RAZOR Alliance
    #228 - 2013-06-03 10:05:45 UTC  |  Edited by: StoneCold
    Imo the Sleip is the best looking ship ingame. Seeing it changed to hurricane hull would be a tad sad.
    In the end it´s still nice as the hurricane is the 2nd best looking hull (Ofc only if you leave the megathron out ;)).

    And with the cyclone beeing a missile boat nowadays i have to support it.
    I only feel for the nighthawk-pilots - drakes are guly.

    +1

    My true stories
    Largueles Amarr
    La Famille Amarr
    #229 - 2013-06-03 10:38:32 UTC
    Cool idea, i like it !
    (Especially considering the recent successful works on subtle modifications between ships based on the same hull)
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #230 - 2013-06-03 11:13:52 UTC
    StoneCold wrote:
    Imo the Sleip is the best looking ship ingame. Seeing it changed to hurricane hull would be a tad sad.
    In the end it´s still nice as the hurricane is the 2nd best looking hull (Ofc only if you leave the megathron out ;)).

    And with the cyclone beeing a missile boat nowadays i have to support it.
    I only feel for the nighthawk-pilots - drakes are guly.

    +1


    To address both of your concerns, the models are getting changed in one way or another no matter what.

    Furthermore, a T2 drake would look somewhat different from the T1/Navy version as part of the Art team's continuing "T2 should look different from T1" campaign.
    Hoarr
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #231 - 2013-06-03 11:34:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Hoarr
    No. No no no no no no no. No.

    I'm with Fozzie on this in that the Sleipnir has the most sentimental value to me of any ship in eve. I think that it might be a cool change, but only if you make the Sleipnir an exception and make the claymore get the 'cane hull. If the choice is going to be a binary one with the previously stated ship hulls, I would have to say HELL NO.


    If you take my Sleipnir away from me I will ****ing cut you.
    Rhnra Pahineh
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #232 - 2013-06-03 11:41:25 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?

    They will know fear and cower before the mighty hulls! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
    Xer Jin
    Hedion University
    Amarr Empire
    #233 - 2013-06-03 12:23:51 UTC
    i say do it cause your gonna do it again and this is an easy switch the first time i'd say cause you already have the hull it would be cool to have a bit more variety or just wait and make 8 new designs for all the cs sooner rather than later but red and gold harb and kaalakiota drake are badass i want kaalakiota paint job for all my caldari ships and cn versions too i also want corp and alliance colours and ship badges do it thinking about what a new widow hull might look like awesome ? i think so!
    Luc Chastot
    #234 - 2013-06-03 12:33:48 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?

    Yes.

    Also, if what you're saying is true, why did the Brutix end up being the navy BC? You could have made a blaster Myrmidon and be done with it.

    Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

    Fifth Blade
    Jump Drive Appreciation Society
    #235 - 2013-06-03 12:38:28 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

    I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

    It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?

    There is only one correct answer: Yes.
    Xer Jin
    Hedion University
    Amarr Empire
    #236 - 2013-06-03 12:45:13 UTC
    alas there shall be much neckbeard stroking and wailing and gnashing of teeth over this topic but after seeing the new apoc and stealth bombers and tempest hulls i know whatever ccp does with these hulls will be cool but really giving us some painting options in eve would be best
    Jerick Ludhowe
    Internet Tuff Guys
    #237 - 2013-06-03 13:13:31 UTC
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:


    In my opinion, this is an opportunity to fix a years-old inconsistency and perhaps a glaring oversight as well. Putting things the way they should have been from the very start isn't a bad thing.


    I'd like to take this opportunity to fix all of the 5+ year old inconsistencies that Command Ship have. Command ships have more inconsistencies compared to t1 variants and even inter class balancing than any other ship a the moment.

    Here is a killer example that is 7+ years old... So when comman ships were originally released, their base hp values were quite a bit higher than their tech 1 brothers at generally around 15%. Shortly after the implementation of Commands CCP released a patch which increased the raw hp value of BC to make them more viable in comparison to BS. However, in this patch, they forgot to boost the hp value of the Command Ships which resulted in t1 having more raw hp value...

    Oh here is another one.... Way back when, when BCs were first introduced... The cyclone was an 8-4-4 layout, this was determined to be a **** slot layout for a shield tanking ship so ccp eventually fixed it by simply adding another mid slot giving it the 8-5-4 layout that we remember prior to the most recent BC changes... After this change Command ships were introduced which were all +1 total slot compared to their tech 1 counterparts. The problem with this is that the sleipnir and claymore were granted the +1 ontop of the additional +1 the cyclone already got. This meant that Matari Command Ships are at a +1 advantage compared to the other races command ships. This "inconsistency" still exists today and has been a root cause of the Sleipnirs questionable balance since it's implementation.

    How these errors continue for 7+ years is beyond me. Fozzie and crew better do a bang up job on these ships as they have been the most ignored combat ships in eve's history.
    Johann Rascali
    The Milkmen
    Churn and Burn
    #238 - 2013-06-03 13:38:07 UTC
    I like the concept of splitting the CS models and completely support it. However, personally, I was looking forward to flying the Nighthawk, but my zealous hatred of Drakes will likely be that dream's downfall.

    Blanking signatures doesn't seem to work, so this is here.
    Jayrendo Karr
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #239 - 2013-06-03 13:43:10 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:

  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?

    No, god please no, no, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
    Janna Windforce
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #240 - 2013-06-03 13:49:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Janna Windforce
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.

    I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.

    It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.

    That would (potentially) mean:

  • Eos would use the Myrm hull
  • Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull
  • Abso would use the Harb hull
  • Nighthawk would use the Drake hull

    • This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?


    Given then potential of Command Ships (Sleipnir at least), don't you think they deserve their own models? Some that says "I'm da boss here.". There are soo many nice design ideas on DevianArt...