These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mole Guy
Band of Builders Inc.
Drifters.
#241 - 2013-06-03 13:52:43 UTC
this is a BAD ASS idea!
a harby hull with pulse just looks right.

the abso is iconic, yes, but just having the damnation as a ham boat would be kewl.

the sleipnir is a great ship. as long as the performance doesnt change, then having it a kick ass huricane hull would be awesome.
so what that the old sleip is a cyclone hull, the huricane is an iconic bad ass bc that has reigned supreme for years. changing it to the command ship is a natural progression.

i love the myrm idea as the eos. if you think about it, converting the brutix to hold drones and all that stuff should significantly change its shape. we cant have the brutix change its shape, thats crazy..but the myrm IS a drone boat. make it t2 and roll with it.

the drake is an iconic missile boat. what better hull to make a nighthawk out of. t2 resists, bad ass missile damage...

yes, yes, YES!


yesyesyesyesyes
WOOT!!!
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#242 - 2013-06-03 13:53:05 UTC
Janna Windforce wrote:


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.".


A modestly unique (kind of like the kronos) t2 version of a base hull would be pretty bad ass.
Peter Dostoevsky
Fast Eddy's X-ploding Diner
#243 - 2013-06-03 13:56:14 UTC
I support the changing of the hulls fully.
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#244 - 2013-06-03 14:27:43 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Cards on the table, the Sleipnir is the ship I have the greatest emotional attachment to of any ship in EVE. It would look great as a Hurricane, but it would also look DIFFERENT and that makes me feel confused feelings deep inside my heart.

I also don't think this kind of change would be worthwhile unless we did all four and converted them into those specific hulls, since any deviation would make it harder for a new player trying to get information from their looks.

So it's kinda an all or nothing deal, which is what makes it such a difficult question.


Why is it all or nothing? That line of reasoning didn't stop you from making the Navy BC a Brutix, when it clearly should have been a Myrm (keeping in line with all the other tier'd BC hulls)? So how is this argument valid?

So +1 to this idea overall, but if guys want to keep the Slep as is, well, why not?
Jaredo Wens
Lone Shattered Star
#245 - 2013-06-03 14:43:06 UTC
personally I think they should go like so... [unpopular as some of these may be...]

Prophecy -> Damnation
Harbinger -> Navy*
Oracle -> Absolution*

Ferox -> Navy*
Drake -> Nighthawk
Naga -> Vulture*

Brutix -> Navy*
Myrmidon -> Eos
Talos -> Astarte*

Cyclone -> Claymore
Hurricane -> Navy*
Tornado -> Sleipnir*

* - these can easily be swapped around. Fluff wise the Tech 1 'tier 3' glass cannon BCs are all either prototypes or secret projects so using them as a base Tech 2 or as a navy ship isn't too much of a stretch.
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#246 - 2013-06-03 15:22:11 UTC
Jaredo Wens wrote:
personally I think they should go like so... [unpopular as some of these may be...]

Prophecy -> Damnation
Harbinger -> Navy*
Oracle -> Absolution*

Ferox -> Navy*
Drake -> Nighthawk
Naga -> Vulture*

Brutix -> Navy*
Myrmidon -> Eos
Talos -> Astarte*

Cyclone -> Claymore
Hurricane -> Navy*
Tornado -> Sleipnir*

* - these can easily be swapped around. Fluff wise the Tech 1 'tier 3' glass cannon BCs are all either prototypes or secret projects so using them as a base Tech 2 or as a navy ship isn't too much of a stretch.


I too like the idea of using err 'Tier 3' hulls, even though tiers are dead <3

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

BiggestT
Konvict Cartel
O.P.A
#247 - 2013-06-03 15:59:34 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?


    Please don't!

    I really like all the CS hull aesthetics the way they are (except the vulture paint job, not to mention all t2 hybrid cal ships, that grey-to-cream paint job is just strange).

    I'm guessing you will get a mixed reaction seeing as aesthetic is based on opinion rather than fact, so why bother putting on the effort to change something that isn't broke?

    At least keep the nighthawk/abso the same, these ships are gorgeous as is ;)
    Urhgo Khanab
    J.A.V
    #248 - 2013-06-03 16:26:13 UTC
    I vote yes to this !

    Although the sleipnir is iconic as it is today, i am all for changeing it to the cane hull. I think it would be awesome Big smile
    Drainor septum
    Drainor INC
    #249 - 2013-06-03 16:29:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Drainor septum
    I don't want the change with the nighthawk becoming a kind of drake like. This because the drake is ugly compared to the nighthawk, the hull of the drake is very "simple in design"(in directly) and you get quickly bored of it when you're looking at the drake for some time. The nighthawk is much more detailled which makes it far more interesting to look at.
    Red Woodson
    Estrale Frontiers
    #250 - 2013-06-03 16:41:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Red Woodson
    Ydnari wrote:
    Bear in mind that this would have a game play effect on the people who build these ships (which includes me). Whilst the hull change makes sense, it presumably has to change the base hull for invention and manufacturing, which would screw over people who have a large investment in the current hulls - and that would not make me happy :-\


    Quoting a solid point, even if I don't have the skills to build command ships. If you do indeed change the base hulls, please consider those who do production. Not only do they have large stores of hulls, but likely also have BPOs that aren't worth much except for invention due to the recent tiericide and the pre-extra-minerals stocks not being depleted yet.

    There is one thing that would need to happen well prior to any change. Broad and early notification, preferably via dev blog, that the change was coming to give people time to adapt their production assets as needed. The Command Ship redesign also needs to happen prior to, or at least simultaneously, with such a change such that all the CS are useful and worth producing.

    CCP, you don't have the best track record of thinking through how changes will effect industry, so please take the time to do this right, if you go through with it.

    PS. This reminds me, are the 'extra materials' going to be converted over to normal on BPOs when the pre change stocks are mostly depleted? Leaving them as is both hurts the insurance calculations, as well as with the floor price previously provided by reprocessing.
    PinkKnife
    The Cuddlefish
    Ethereal Dawn
    #251 - 2013-06-03 16:52:45 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



  • Fantastic idea, there's no reason to use the same hull now that there are more options to use. It helps differentiate things a good deal as well, please do this.
    Zhilia Mann
    Tide Way Out Productions
    #252 - 2013-06-03 16:53:20 UTC
    Slowly coming to terms with the fact that I'm in a distinct minority here, but I'm very much unabashedly opposed to the proposed change. Way back when I trained into a Nighthawk because I loved the look; I've always thought the Drake was uninspired. I adore the Absolution; never really cared for the Harbinger at all. As nice as the Hurricane is -- and don't get me wrong, it's pretty -- I abso-*******-lutely love the the Sleipnir just the way it is. Hell, I'd have to say the Sleipnir is my favorite-looking ship in the game (and she's not half bad in the performance area either).

    The only one I'm up in the air on is the Eos. I'll honestly say I've never flown one, and I do like the Myrmidon hull (but then, the Brutix is rather nice as well). I think I'd prefer that change. But if it's an all or nothing thing, I'm against it. Period.
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #253 - 2013-06-03 17:36:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
    Having just now checked for myself and confirming that Sleip/Clay are 18-slot and all other CS are 17-slot, I expect quite a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth when Fozzie's job forces him to remove the slot from both ships.

    Anyway, to people who hate the Drake model: It wouldn't be quite strictly just a regular old Drake, just like keeping the Sleip would not result in a normal-looking Sleip. The T2 versions of every hull are going to be made slightly different from the T1 counterparts. Right now we're waiting for the Paladin to be finished, and the Golem will likely be after that.

    ---
    Current numbers as of this post: 145 in favor, 47 opposed.
    Angelhunter
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #254 - 2013-06-03 17:58:41 UTC
    After thinking about this more

    Eos - Great change, the Myrm is a beautiful hull and deserves to be used more
    Nighthawk - Its Caldari, i don't fly Caldari, thus i could care less what is done.
    Absolution - The Harby looks more like a combat ship than a fleet booster, makes sense

    Now we come to one of my favorite ships in the game, The Sleipnir. Please please PLEASE don't change the Sleipnir, change the Claymore if you really want to use more hulls for T2 ships. The Sleipnir is a brawling brute and the hull just fits it perfectly in the way it looks. The Hurricane in my opinion has never really looked like an attack ship, reminded me more of an arty platform than anything else.

    tldr; Leave the Sleipnir alone, the rest is fine.
    Luc Chastot
    #255 - 2013-06-03 18:01:24 UTC
    I don't know if you are still reading this thread CCP Fozzie, but can you explain this contradiction?

    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    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.
    Quote:
    Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey – we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application.

    I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon.

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

    ExAstra
    Echoes of Silence
    #256 - 2013-06-03 18:03:35 UTC
    Luc Chastot wrote:
    I don't know if you are still reading this thread CCP Fozzie, but can you explain this contradiction?

    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    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.
    Quote:
    Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey – we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application.

    I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon.

    I would so rock a Navydon with blasters. TBH though I'd rather the Eos be a Myrm (at the very least).

    Save the drones!

    mama guru
    Ascendance
    Goonswarm Federation
    #257 - 2013-06-03 18:32:45 UTC
    Brutix looks better than the Myrm. So change the slepnir aswell. Damn your nostalgia, I want a 7 turret candycane.

    EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.

    Jen Ann Tonique
    Doomheim
    #258 - 2013-06-03 18:40:18 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:


    some stuff

    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

  • some stuff

    So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?


    Do it.

    Jen Ann Tonique does not approve of this product and/or service. Any comments contained herin are to be taken not seriously and no person/s shall hold Jen Ann Tonique responsible for any damage real and/or imagined due to use or misuse of above comment. By reading this statement you agree to the above terms.

    Sieg Vitilk
    Heavy Industry Mining Corporation GmBh
    #259 - 2013-06-03 18:55:55 UTC
    I greatly support this idea.

    Now we just have to wait the 2 year development/implementation cycle and we should be good right?
    Metal Icarus
    Wraithguard.
    The Wraithguard.
    #260 - 2013-06-03 18:59:11 UTC
    I agree with this change! Do it!

    The nighthawk "ferox" model always looked odd... The drake feels right!