These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sentinel zx
#421 - 2013-06-20 20:54:03 UTC
How about turning MAMMOTH or one of the other Minmatar Industrials in to one of Pirates faction ships Blood Raider for example
with 5% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer drain amount per level (Amarr bonus)
may be +5% Max Velocity per level (Minmatar bonus)
with max cargo (rigst1 + cargo expander) 30k m3

Iteron 2 could be a Serpentis Industrial ship with bonus to +5% Max agility and
Role Bonus: Interdiction Nullifier
Immunity to non-targeted interdiction
with max cargo (rigst1 + cargo expander) 10k m3
with BS sig and very low hp

Iteron 3 and 4 could be turn in to ore industrials

Iteron 3 would be only able to transport ore (maybe 40k m3 + 100m3 normal cargo)
and would be able to fit one Gang Link module and with 5% cargo bonus per level for the Ore bay

Iteron 4 could be redesign as a heavy ship transporter with 40k m3 Ship bay with 5% cargo bonus per level for the Ship bay


for the other industrials i thougt it would be interesting to give one of them per race a small e-war bonus or Damage bonus like a Frig for example (that they able to put max.100dps) for some defense


Amarr 2% bonus to effectiveness of tracking disruptors per level
Minmatar X% bonus to small projectile Turret damage per level
Caldari 2% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret optimal range per skill level
Gallente 5% bonus to remote sensor dampener effectiveness per level

just some ideas outside the box Blink
Paul Leonard Kersey
Doomheim
#422 - 2013-06-20 20:56:31 UTC
I like how every race has different number of haulers, yup that's "balance"Roll
Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
#423 - 2013-06-20 20:59:26 UTC
Since everybody's starting to toss out their counter-proposals, here's my example of a ship lineup that offers some more variety. It doesn't require any specialized bays or new ship models, but you'd have to do two re-skins using existing models and existing textures.

Fast

Sigil -- speed 5, agility 4, armor EHP 1, cargo 3 -- +10% warp speed, +5% speed per level
Iteron -- speed 4, agility 5, armor EHP 3, cargo 1 -- +10% warp speed, +5% agility per level
Badger -- speed 5, agility 4, shield EHP 3, cargo 1 -- +10% warp speed, +5% speed per level
Wreathe -- speed 4, agility 5, shield EHP 2, cargo 2 -- +10% warp speed, +5% agility per level

Strong

(Amarr) -- speed 1, agility 2, armor EHP 5, cargo 3 -- +4% armor resists, +5% agility per level (Sigil or Bestower hull with a new texture)
Iteron III -- speed 3, agility 1, armor EHP 5, cargo 2 -- +5% armor HP, +5% speed per level
(Caldari) -- speed 2, agility 2, shield EHP 5, cargo 2 -- +4% shield resists, +5% speed per level (Bustard hull with T1 texture)
Hoarder -- speed 2, agility 3, shield EHP 5, cargo 1 -- +5% shield HP, +5% agility per level

Big

Bestower -- speed 2, agility 2, armor EHP 2, cargo 5 -- +5% cargo, +5% speed per level
Iteron V -- speed 1, agility 3, armor EHP 2, cargo 5 -- +5% cargo, +5% agility per level
Badger II -- speed 2, agility 1, shield EHP 3, cargo 5 -- +5% cargo, +5% agility per level
Mammoth -- speed 3, agility 2, shield EHP 1, cargo 5 -- +5% cargo, +5% speed per level


  • Attributes are shown as simply 1 through 5, indicating a general ballpark category which would be mapped to some sane spectrum for that attribute; i.e. cargo 1-5 might range from 5k-40k while agility 1-5 ranges from 15s-5s align time.
  • Equal attribute categories don't mean identical final attributes: the Caldari's high-EHP ship would be a bit tankier than the Minmatar's high-EHP analogue, for example.
  • Minmatar specialize in speed; their fast ship is the fastest with balanced strength and size, and their strong and big ships are faster than the others'.
  • Caldari specialize in strength; their strong ship is the strongest with balanced speed and size, and their fast and big ships are stronger than the others'.
  • Amarr specialize in capacity; their big ship is the biggest with balanced speed and strength, and their fast and strong ships are bigger than the others'.
  • Gallente are the jacks-of-all-trades; they don't have a specialty, but they'll be the second best in all three categories, not far behind the specialist race for that category. They also have the two leftover hulls which can be balanced to give them a little more flexibility.
  • Yes, I was originally one of the ones that thought making the Bestower bigger than the Iteron V was silly; now that I've spent some time playing with the numbers myself, I can see that it greatly simplifies the balancing problem given that Gallente have two extra hulls to deal with. If we were going to drop those two extra hulls then it might make sense to have Gallente be the capacity specialists and make Amarr the average ones.
  • Armor-tanked ships would have 4-5 low slots and only 1-2 mid, and shield-tanked ships vice versa; since we've removed cargo expanders from the equation, this won't affect cargo capacity.

Sarhyl Connaly
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#424 - 2013-06-20 21:10:49 UTC
As I see things, the objective of Tiericide on these industrials is to give us all options without penalizing our skill set, as well remove blatant imbalances. Before, there was a set & lengthy path to a scant handful of ships, whose superiority was dictated by ridiculous gap. As long as ships have differences, there will always be one boat that is unquestionably the best in a certain area - such as cargo capacity or align time - and a certain type of player will run numbers until they find it and use it to the exclusion of all others. However, it should not be the case that one race has a monopoly on these outcomes, otherwise it fits neither player interest nor the historical texture of the game to fly anything else. Therefore, all our options have to be close enough to a universal template to be competitive with each other, even across racial divides.

By the same token, they cannot be that template or everything will feel rightfully indistinct., and race flavor becomes just different ship models. We're going to need to accept numerical differences of some kind. They just can't be very wide. Finding a balance between those two principles is difficult, but I think the new changes are quite good at toeing the middle line.

Indeed, shouldn't we actually be glad of the increased homogeneity, since it means our fits and flying styles make more of a difference? It would be very cool to have a ship that was designed to, and mathematically reflected, the role of a specialist ice transport, gas transport, or ship hauler. But wouldn't it be better to have those specializations come from the players' configuration of their equipment, rather than arbitrary base statistics? If we get new modules or rigs down the line that allow us to inject more of those differences into our vessels, we will have been much better served than trying to force them in now along an inoptimal racial divide.

I write Afterburning Weasels.

We're all faffing about. Why not enjoy it?
Karash Amerius
The Seven Shadows
Scotch And Tea.
#425 - 2013-06-20 21:36:06 UTC
In the beginning of Eve, it was determined that Gallente was the "Hauling" race. Obviously CCP did not really know what they were doing compared to today's efforts...but this is the result of such decisions. As the devs noted, you guys are worried about taking some uniqueness out of the game; flavor if you will.

Well, you should be damn worried about that. Do not sacrifice flavor for "balance"...it just seems to me you are missing a golden opportunity in doing something special for the entire transporting class of ships from Frigs (yes frigs) all the way to Jump Freighters. If you guys commit to iteration and NOT walk away after a balancing pass, then fine, tell us what the overall plans are.

People whining about a certain Minmatar ship are definitely missing the forest from the trees.

Karash Amerius Operative, Sutoka
Lister Vindaloo
5 Tons of Flax
#426 - 2013-06-20 21:42:26 UTC
Well you've dealt with mammothgate now how about answering the question of why fairness is important with industrials while there's a specialist Ewar ship flying around that only a single race has access to, it's an awful lot more training time if I ant to cross train into it as well.
Fairness is too vanilla ice cream, we want all the flavors!
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#427 - 2013-06-20 21:53:28 UTC
While its true that the Scorpion stands out as the other major piece of asymmetry in EVE, there's 2 things that make it very different than the situation with the Iterons for me:

First, there is a significant difference between asymmetrical role assignment, and an actual difference in ship count. While the Scorp doesn't have disruption counterparts at the moment, at least it has SOME counterpart in the form of the additional ship in either combat or attack roles that each race other than Caldari gets. This is a big deal. If there was a Scorpion as the only disruption BS, but it was a 4th BS, and Caldari just had it as an extra compared to only 3 for the other races, I think people would be a lot less happy with it.

Second, and more importantly for me in this case, the Scorpion has an established and cherished place in the game. In comparison, the extra Iterons currently have no valuable contribution that we would be stripping away. They contribute flavor, which has value, but that's really all. If it were the other way around, that Gallente had always had unequal access to special bays for each extra Iteron, it would be a much bigger decision about whether we actually wanted to take something away that players had come to know and use over EVE's history. By the same token, imagine if in the battleship lines there had been only combat ships, and we randomly decided to give Caldari the only disruption BS. This would be much different (and much worse) than what actually happened, I think.

@ccp_rise
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#428 - 2013-06-20 22:21:46 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
While its true that the Scorpion stands out as the other major piece of asymmetry in EVE, there's 2 things that make it very different than the situation with the Iterons for me:

First, there is a significant difference between asymmetrical role assignment, and an actual difference in ship count. While the Scorp doesn't have disruption counterparts at the moment, at least it has SOME counterpart in the form of the additional ship in either combat or attack roles that each race other than Caldari gets. This is a big deal. If there was a Scorpion as the only disruption BS, but it was a 4th BS, and Caldari just had it as an extra compared to only 3 for the other races, I think people would be a lot less happy with it.

Second, and more importantly for me in this case, the Scorpion has an established and cherished place in the game. In comparison, the extra Iterons currently have no valuable contribution that we would be stripping away. They contribute flavor, which has value, but that's really all. If it were the other way around, that Gallente had always had unequal access to special bays for each extra Iteron, it would be a much bigger decision about whether we actually wanted to take something away that players had come to know and use over EVE's history. By the same token, imagine if in the battleship lines there had been only combat ships, and we randomly decided to give Caldari the only disruption BS. This would be much different (and much worse) than what actually happened, I think.


Geddon is disruption
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#429 - 2013-06-20 22:24:01 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Rise
Quote:
Incase my last post was buried under the cascade of cries for mammoths, I'll ask again


While being rude in my old channel in game seems like an unnecessary way to retaliate for me not responding to you directly, I'm going to fall for it respond.

I think you make a good point, and it made me think about it a lot. I don't think I'm going to make any adjustments though, and I'll do my best to explain why.

Mainly, I don't think its a problem for the Bestower to have to give up a slot. When compared by max potential cargo, the Bestower comes in the highest, so having a distinct trade-off emerge to threaten that seems fairly healthy to me. I imagine that most people will not trade out a low, and as a result will be more vulnerable, which I think is fine. Maybe if this seems like a serious problem to someone else, they will consider cross training to fix it, which is also okay. If this was a distinct disadvantage for a ship that other stand-out problems I would probably look at changing it.

The second part of it is more to do with how well they all tank as a role, and the idea of taking a slot away from them to make them more vulnerable. This is more convincing to me, but I still have a feeling it will work out fine. We know the smaller versions will have better travel time, and on top of that, they will have much more base hp along with more fitting room. I think the larger ones will ganked quite a bit more often, even if its not by just one Nado. If that's the case then there will still be good decisions to make between which one to use. I'm not sure whether the pressure this puts on DSTs should fall on DST balance or on the balance here, but that is a good question as well.

I will talk with a few others tomorrow and see where they stand so that I'm not just basing this off my own opinion.

edit: oh and also, the post above about the Scorpion was not about models. You should read it and read the posts I'm responding to before assuming.

@ccp_rise
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#430 - 2013-06-20 22:24:25 UTC
Quote:
Geddon is disruption


No its not =)

@ccp_rise
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#431 - 2013-06-20 22:26:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Harari
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
Geddon is disruption


No its not =)


It has pretty much the same bonuses as the entire amarr line of ewar ships, such as the sentinel and curse


Edit: Also i think it would be good if ALL the industrials had to make a choice between high tank and max cargo. Limiting resources forces people to make choices, which is good. As they are currently, every highsec indy will just fit shield extenders and cargo expanders. If in order to get over that magical barrier of "doesnt die to 1 nado", they had to give up at least 1-2 lowslots, then people would be able to make choices on risk vs reward for their hauler.
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#432 - 2013-06-20 22:28:48 UTC
Both of those ships have bonuses to tracking disruption, which is the actual Amarr disruption. Neutralization falls in kind of a gray area, but it is not classified as disruption (look at the Dragoon, which is what the Geddon actually compares to).

@ccp_rise
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#433 - 2013-06-20 22:29:53 UTC
Sorry I'm asking this, but after playing so long, I still haven't figured (or just forgot) :
What's the point of the 5% velocity bonus anyways?

Can't it be integrated in some way to the base speed as it was done for Vigil so that there is a free bonus slot for something else more viable?

Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all.

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#434 - 2013-06-20 22:31:00 UTC
Vayn Baxtor wrote:
Sorry I'm asking this, but after playing so long, I still haven't figured (or just forgot) :
What's the point of the 5% velocity bonus anyways?

Can't it be integrated in some way to the base speed as it was done for Vigil so that there is a free bonus slot for something else more viable?


Its an autopiloting bonus
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#435 - 2013-06-20 22:32:43 UTC
Thanks. Haven't used autopilot in ages.

Though it doesn't seem that much of a difference heh. Still think it could be integrated into the base speed.

Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all.

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#436 - 2013-06-20 22:39:50 UTC
Another option is to introduce a midslot module that would be nice for haulers, so shield tanking a hauler has to give something up.
Rena Windor
Unholy Knights of Cthulhu
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#437 - 2013-06-20 23:01:32 UTC
What I don't understand is doesn't this break into the roles of the T2? I mean they are the same way, stealth for cargo space and larger HP for +2 to warp core stabilization. Doesn't seem really worth it.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#438 - 2013-06-20 23:14:12 UTC
Rena Windor wrote:
What I don't understand is doesn't this break into the roles of the T2? I mean they are the same way, stealth for cargo space and larger HP for +2 to warp core stabilization. Doesn't seem really worth it.


Covops cloak is definitely worth it, and everyone knows DSTs have problems
Makoto Priano
Kirkinen-Arataka Transhuman Zenith Consulting Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#439 - 2013-06-20 23:21:54 UTC
I would assume that CCP'll be starting heavy into the T2 rebalance soon, and that this'll include a review of the T2 industrials so that they're not invalidated by this.

Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries: exploring the edge of the known, advancing the state of the art. Would you like to know more?
Jax Slizard
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#440 - 2013-06-20 23:29:29 UTC
Rise, so far you seem to focus on making sure that each race has equal access to all roles. I think that that is the wrong approach. Crosstraining is easy, make each race capable of doing something the others aren't, more like EWAR.

Give one a massive velocity difference (but not agility) over the others. Give one race a bunch of haulers with very large but specialized bays, (like can only contain ore, or ships, or drones, or whatever.) Give one race haulers actual EWAR bonuses. Give one a bonus to tractor beam range/speed. Give one race a really wonky (like shields with high EM) resist profile. Give one 5 high slots. Give one a really really really high mass, and really really really high agility to make it bump-resistant.

If I can come up with 7 ideas in 5 minutes, surely you can do something more interesting than giving one hauler a launcher slot to make it different than the others. What you are doing to the ships right now is unimaginative, and you defend it by saying that each race must be balanced with the others. If they are so balanced as to lose any real differences between them, you might as well make one line of ORE haulers and be done with it.

If someone really wants whatever new and different bonus some other races' haulers have, he can train for it, and damn all the people that complain about not having instant access to it.

Please, make it worth it to actually train all of the races, like with all the combat ships.