These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#521 - 2013-06-21 17:57:52 UTC
Salpad wrote:
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Altrue wrote:
Caldari ships always have the less cargo capacity of their role, yet I heard that it was an industrial race Roll.



You heard wrong. It's a militant corporatocracy race. That's why their haulers are the most tankable historically and "battle badgers" are a thing.

If anything Gallente is the most "industrial".. the lore glorifies Gallente miners and their role in the Federation to support freedom and independence, and freedom means lots of free trade meaning more variety of haulers.


Well, that's good then, because then obviously Gallente should get the "specialized" haulers for industry, e.g. one with an ore bay and one with a mineral bay. And there are plenty of spare Gallente hull designs that can be assigned to those roles.


And all of that would be useless since you can train for an Orca in under 20 days.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#522 - 2013-06-21 17:58:53 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
. . .so he hasn't really given you a choice. if you want a "max cargo hauler" you basically have the iteron V if you bothered training gallente industrial V back when it was truly the only option, or train for a bestower. the other two ships aren't options as they're beaten at the role for less SP.

that simply isn't balanced when one ship is better in it's role than it's counterparts and does so with less SP.
The bolded part is sort of the whole crux of the issues in this thread. Rise is effectively going to replace one outgoing max-cargo ship for another. It's the utter lack of choice and innovation that is the point.

The italicized part isn't true. The Charon holds more at Caldari Freighter IV than ALL of the other freighters do at V. It's simply that its balanced in other ways, such as the others aligning faster, having more EHP, etc.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#523 - 2013-06-21 18:01:12 UTC
Frozentank Madullier wrote:
Do you know how cool it would be if instead of having the Iteron II through IV you could simply purchase the level 1 and then several "addons" and then could adjust the ship on departure. Increasing the volume and mass with each level. Like a semi truck. And you could have additional addons available that when repackaged could fit inside the level 1. So let's say I needed to haul a bunch of ships in one direction, I could take off with an Iteron I with 4 addon modules inside. Fly to Jita, expand the ship into an Iteron V and then load it up.

The fact that only Gallente has it really isn't a problem. It's a tech 1 ship that only requires level 1 skill to fly. We're talking about less than 1 day of training.


Or we could keep all those stuff in line with the rest of the game and make the specialised hauler part of the T2 lineup since T2 is in every other type of ship the specialisation line where you get more "gimmicky" possibilities at a cost in other stuff on the ship.
Dave Stark
#524 - 2013-06-21 18:04:41 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
. . .so he hasn't really given you a choice. if you want a "max cargo hauler" you basically have the iteron V if you bothered training gallente industrial V back when it was truly the only option, or train for a bestower. the other two ships aren't options as they're beaten at the role for less SP.

that simply isn't balanced when one ship is better in it's role than it's counterparts and does so with less SP.
The bolded part is sort of the whole crux of the issues in this thread. Rise is effectively going to replace one outgoing max-cargo ship for another. It's the utter lack of choice and innovation that is the point.

The italicized part isn't true. The Charon holds more at Caldari Freighter IV than ALL of the other freighters do at V. It's simply that its balanced in other ways, such as the others aligning faster, having more EHP, etc.


the italicized part is true, i just proved it. the bestower beats everything but the itty V at amarr industrial IV. even when other ships have the relevant racial industrial to V. i don't mind the bestower being bigger than everything else, at equal skill levels, that's fine. however when it's bigger than everything even at an inferior skill level? doesn't feel right to me.

with regard to freighters, if i'm not mistaken the fenrir at like IV or V is bigger than the charon at I, not to mention due to the fact that there's only one freighter per race the difference in cargo, speed, etc is needed.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#525 - 2013-06-21 18:07:00 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
. . .so he hasn't really given you a choice. if you want a "max cargo hauler" you basically have the iteron V if you bothered training gallente industrial V back when it was truly the only option, or train for a bestower. the other two ships aren't options as they're beaten at the role for less SP.

that simply isn't balanced when one ship is better in it's role than it's counterparts and does so with less SP.
The bolded part is sort of the whole crux of the issues in this thread. Rise is effectively going to replace one outgoing max-cargo ship for another. It's the utter lack of choice and innovation that is the point.

The italicized part isn't true. The Charon holds more at Caldari Freighter IV than ALL of the other freighters do at V. It's simply that its balanced in other ways, such as the others aligning faster, having more EHP, etc.


the italicized part is true, i just proved it. the bestower beats everything but the itty V at amarr industrial IV. even when other ships have the relevant racial industrial to V. i don't mind the bestower being bigger than everything else, at equal skill levels, that's fine. however when it's bigger than everything even at an inferior skill level? doesn't feel right to me.

with regard to freighters, if i'm not mistaken the fenrir at like IV or V is bigger than the charon at I, not to mention due to the fact that there's only one freighter per race the difference in cargo, speed, etc is needed.
Learn to read: The Charon holds more at Caldari Freighter IV than ALL of the other freighters do at V. It's simply that its balanced in other ways, such as the others aligning faster, having more EHP, etc.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#526 - 2013-06-21 18:07:01 UTC
Klingon Admiral wrote:
Some quick throwing around of some ideas:

1. Number of industrials per race

Three would be a good number in my oppinion, both Minmatar and Gallente have 3+ haulers and a Caldari one could relatively easy be created (Bustard w/ T1 Shaders). Only Amarr would lack a third industrial design. The haulers should be one each of the following categories:

1. Agile/Tanky Haulers
2. "Generalist" Haulers
3. "Specialist" Haulers

2. Industrial specialization

2.1 Agile/Tanky Haulers

They should have the smallest cargo of the bunch and should specialize to either be tanky OR agile. Maybe even forego a cargo bonus altogether and just give them slightly larger base-cargos. The specializations would of course be:

Caldari: Shield Tanky (Shield HP and/or Shield Resists)
Amarr: Armor Tanky (Armor HP and/or Armor Resists)
Minmatar: Fast agile (agility bonus)
Gallente: Efficient agile (largest cargohold, agility bonus, less agile than Minmatar)

Cargo capacity should go: Gallente > Amarr > Caldari > Minmatar

2.2 "Generalist" Haulers

The industrials we know and love/hate, only in an improved form. They should keep the traditional agility/cargo-boni and offer some sort of balance between agility/tank and cargo, which should lie between 25k and 30k.

Cargo capacity should go: Amarr > Gallente > Caldari > Minmatar

However, Gallente and Minmatar should posses enough agility that they beat Amarr respectively Caldari in the efficency department.

2.3 "Specialist" Haulers

The biggest of the bunch ... as long as you use their additional cargoholds. Should posess a cargo of about 40-50k, with their standard cargobay being really tiny.. My suggestions would be:

Amarr: Ore specilization, tiny cargo + large orebay
Minmatar: Fuel specialization, tiny cargo + large fuelbay, albeit no JD
Caldari: PI specialization, tiny cargo + command center bay (maybe) + PI goods bay, basically a Primae in good

Gallente: no specialization-specialization, no special bay, but the largest cargobay in the T1 subcapital department, total cargo should be significantly smaller than the other specialist haulers to prevent fotm status


now matter how big would be the cargo of the others, people would still use the best standard hauler, people just dont get it, specialized haulers wouldnt work.

also why limiting amarr to only 2 hulls?

again, the fix needed for this are 3 roles divided in speed, tank and cargo. 3 industrials for each race, amarr and caldari just need an aditional hull for each one, if CCP has the resources to implement Navy Battlecruisers, why not 2 new industrial hulls?, not fair for industrial players overall.
Dave Stark
#527 - 2013-06-21 18:08:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Maximus Andendare wrote:
stuff


so i read about as well as you when you told me that the bestower isn't bigger than the rest even at lower SP?
anyway let's not turn this in to an argument. i don't really want my point derailed.

edit: actually, it doesn't matter about freighters you're comparing apples to oranges. there's 1 freighter per race, vs multiple industrials per race. hence they HAVE to be different, where as industrials SHOULDN'T have that large of a difference.

when you have 1 ship per class, the differences must be done via races. however with multiple ships per class the differences should be done through ships not through the race they belong to.
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#528 - 2013-06-21 18:10:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Unforgiven Storm
Ripard Teg wrote:
I've Liked so many posts in this thread I've lost count.

Thanks to everyone giving feedback on this!

Just as a side note

this is awkward, you thanking us for our feedback instead of CCP RISE...

he posted the thread, he asked for feedback, he should be the one thanking us for the feedback not the CSM member that represent us and doesn't work for CCP.

Ugh

Don't put the t-shirt of a CCP Dev, don't get to close, you are a CSM member. Keep your distance to preserve your independence and objectivity. What is the next step? start apologizing for CCP when they do something wrong?!

Be careful, I start to see some signs there that I've seen in the recent past in other CSM that even you criticized.

--- now back to the issue at hand ---

I'm starting to agree with most people here, the 2 roles with 4 ships in each that are all the same and do all the same feels like a lost opportunity.

Try something new, take a risk CCP Rise. Give each ship a different flavor. One warps faster, another aligns faster and so on. Innovate, do something different with these 8 ships.

Now about the other 4 my opinion is still the same: What we will do with the 4 reserve ships: Iteron Mark II, Iteron Mark III, Iteron Mark IV and the Hoarder?

The solution is simple, they must be removed from the current races they belong and given to the Interbus. A new skill book is necessary » Interbus Industrial.

Later when there is time and effort the CCP Art Department changes the hulls. For now just change the skins with some new colors to reflect the new owners.

The idea is this give each one of this ships different but very specialized cargo roles to make them relevant and usable in this game. These ships should have very low normal cargo bays, like 500 m3 max but huge specialized cargo roles for example:

ITERON MARK II – give it 50 m3 to transport ore and minerals related products
ITERON MARK III – give it 50 m3 to transport ice and fuel related products
ITERON MARK IV – give it 50 m3 to transport PI and gas related products
Hoarder – give it 500m3 hangar to transport ships making it the first industrial ship carrier freighter that people is asking for some time now!
… also don’t forget to change their names.

Finally go to the BPO of the Iteron Mark III and transfer the invention part for the BPO of the Iteron Mark V BPO.

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#529 - 2013-06-21 18:10:53 UTC
Silivar Karkun wrote:
gonna put the concept of the 3 roles for industrials like this:

speed industrial: +5% cargo, agility and maximum velocity per lvl

tank industrial: +5% cargo and tank per lvl (be it shield or armor)

cargo industrial (AKA mini freighter): +10% cargo per lvl

of course this means that at racial industrial V you have one ship with 25% more cargo than the other 2, working as intended. while some ships would reach out the mark of 40k m3 they still wouldnt get close to what other industrial ships have, for example the orca, which can get almos 200k m3 fully cargoed.

now, what happens with the DST and the Blockade Runners?, the Blockade Runner would come after the speed industrial, adding the double of bonus (+10% cargo, agility and max velocity per lvl), same for the DST in relation with the tank industrial (+10% cargo and tank per lvl, armor or shield)

now, there's still a ship left, but the 3rd industrial role is intended to converge into freighters.

but we have 2 races which use only 2 industrials (Caldari and Amarr), while Gallente use 5. instead of leaving 4 ships useless, the idea is to put the art department into creating 2 aditional industrials, one for Amarr and one for Caldari, this giving it same ground as Minmatar, and use the Iteron I, III and V as the dedicated gallente industrials (maybe with Iteron II and IV as mid ground between each role)

the configuration would be then:

Amarr:

-Speed Hauler -> Sigil

-Tank Hauler -> Bestower

-Mini Freighter -> new hull required

Caldari:

-Speed Hauler -> Badger

-Tank Hauler -> Badger Mk II

-Minifreighter -> Badger Mk III (new hull required)

Minmatar:

-Speed Hauler -> Wreathe

-Tank Hauler -> Hoarder

-Mini Freighter -> Mammoth (they would still have the Mastodon as the DST of course, same bonus applied but it would need a change in its attributes in that case for leaving it in ground with what would be a T2 Hoarder)

Gallente:

-Speed Hauler -> Iteron

-midgrown between speed and tank -> Iteron II

-Tank Hauler -> Iteron III

-mid ground between tank and cargo -> Iteron IV

-Mini Freighter -> Iteron V

this looks better than what its planned right now, and doesnt leave industrial ships out of the equation... now in order to implement this i suggest that youd leave this rebalance to the winter expansion instead of shoving it for Odyssey 1.1, which is too soon BTW..


quoting this again...
Luc Chastot
#530 - 2013-06-21 18:19:49 UTC
Honestly Rise, just get rid of the excess industrials.

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

Deornoth Drake
Vandeo
#531 - 2013-06-21 18:20:13 UTC
haulers:
racial industrials
orca
(freighters)

Why not simplify hauling skills?
Let all be licenced by ORE like the Orca
But instead of just two directions you could end up with 12 ... (13 with the noctis)
- ship hauler
- ice/ore/gas hauler
- scan resistant
- ...

Racial ships -> PVP (PVE) - fighting
ORE ships -> industrial stuff including hauling

Just an idea ... not yet elaborated
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#532 - 2013-06-21 18:23:49 UTC
Deornoth Drake wrote:
haulers:
racial industrials
orca
(freighters)

Why not simplify hauling skills?
Let all be licenced by ORE like the Orca
But instead of just two directions you could end up with 12 ... (13 with the noctis)
- ship hauler
- ice/ore/gas hauler
- scan resistant
- ...

Racial ships -> PVP (PVE) - fighting
ORE ships -> industrial stuff including hauling

Just an idea ... not yet elaborated



for hauling the NPC corp that should be used should be the Interbus not ORE, that means a new industrial skill book, yes, but at least we put the ships in the correct place.

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
Alvar Kesh
Ealurian Shipyards
#533 - 2013-06-21 18:27:47 UTC
As an industrialist bitter vet, I can say that there is a lot of lost potential here. Haulers can be so much more as presented, and there are some very good examples in this thread how to make that. CSM member Ripart Teg for example. CPP would be an idiot not to listen to them.

As a side note: maybe not an experience small gang pvp-er is the best person for this rebalancing. Just saying.

Ealurian Shipyards' BPC shop
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#534 - 2013-06-21 18:30:05 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
so i read about as well as you when you told me that the bestower isn't bigger than the rest even at lower SP?
anyway let's not turn this in to an argument. i don't really want my point derailed.
There's no argument here. You're saying things are untrue:

  • You said that it is unbalanced to have a ship that carries more at lower skill points (lower skill level) than the others do at their max skill level. You used the Bestower, carrying more at Amarr Industrial IV than the others carry at Industrial V. It is not unbalanced.

  • I explained that "balance" doesn't always come in the form of a 1-to-1 comparison. I offered you an example in the game where a ship--a hauler no less--carries more at a lower skill level than every single one of its counterparts do at maximum skill level--a skill that takes ~35 days or so to train.

  • You failed to realize that "balance" can be accomplished in other ways, such as having the ship align faster, travel at sublight speeds faster, tank more, etc.

  • In fact, you conveniently left out that the Bestower takes ~10.1% longer to align than its next slowest competitor, the Badger Mk. II, and a whopping 19.2% slower than its next-smallest rival, the Iteron V that carries only less than 2%!!

Really, stop a moment to think about what you're posting before you go making claims that are blatantly false. These forums can be a place for vigorous discussion but not if statements are made to be dramatic and are biased to push your view.

In fact, running the numbers above, I'd HAPPILY take an Itty V carrying 2% less for an almost 20% gain in align time! Do you realize how fast that 20% is going to add up over time??

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#535 - 2013-06-21 18:45:18 UTC
Alvar Kesh wrote:
As an industrialist bitter vet, I can say that there is a lot of lost potential here. Haulers can be so much more as presented, and there are some very good examples in this thread how to make that. CSM member Ripart Teg for example. CPP would be an idiot not to listen to them.

As a side note: maybe not an experience small gang pvp-er is the best person for this rebalancing. Just saying.


All those specialisation things for different out of regular capacities should be in the T2 lineup where the specialised ships are and not in the T1 lineup where the generic ships are. It's like that in every single ship category. It's a hauler. It haul stuff. Lots of stuff in the same trip is better. Less in the same trip is worse.

Your cargo to tank to speed ratio is all dictated by what you put inside the hold and what you fit in the low slots.

Want more EHP? Go go bulkhead/DC.

Want more space? Cargo extender.

Not close enough to your liking yet? Play with the rigs too!
Dave Stark
#536 - 2013-06-21 18:53:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
so i read about as well as you when you told me that the bestower isn't bigger than the rest even at lower SP?
anyway let's not turn this in to an argument. i don't really want my point derailed.
There's no argument here. You're saying things are untrue:

  • You said that it is unbalanced to have a ship that carries more at lower skill points (lower skill level) than the others do at their max skill level. You used the Bestower, carrying more at Amarr Industrial IV than the others carry at Industrial V. It is not unbalanced.

  • I explained that "balance" doesn't always come in the form of a 1-to-1 comparison. I offered you an example in the game where a ship--a hauler no less--carries more at a lower skill level than every single one of its counterparts do at maximum skill level--a skill that takes ~35 days or so to train.

  • You failed to realize that "balance" can be accomplished in other ways, such as having the ship align faster, travel at sublight speeds faster, tank more, etc.

  • In fact, you conveniently left out that the Bestower takes ~10.1% longer to align than its next slowest competitor, the Badger Mk. II, and a whopping 19.2% slower than its next-smallest rival, the Iteron V that carries only less than 2%!!

Really, stop a moment to think about what you're posting before you go making claims that are blatantly false. These forums can be a place for vigorous discussion but not if statements are made to be dramatic and are biased to push your view.

In fact, running the numbers above, I'd HAPPILY take an Itty V carrying 2% less for an almost 20% gain in align time! Do you realize how fast that 20% is going to add up over time??


it is unbalanced, that's why they're rebalancing industrials. however instead of the itty V beats everything, it's now the bestower doing it. it's still too far ahead of the badger mk2 for the badger mk2 to be a consideration, for example.

you just compared apples to oranges, you compared a 1 ship class to a multiple ship class. there, the only difference is race, where as in industrials the difference is role. sure the ships should have quirks and benefits/drawbacks relating to their race outside of their primary stat, however the primary stats should generally all be somewhere similar so the choice of race comes down to the non-primary stat. it keeps racial flavour without making a "one ship to rule them all" situation that we're seeing with the ret/mack and now the bestower.

i didn't fail to see that, i just pointed out it's completely irrelevant if the other ships simply don't do the role they're supposed to do as well as another ship, because the ship that does it the best will be chose regardless of the secondary bonsues such as agility, speed etc.

that difference in align time means precisely 0 if you have to make 2 trips. that's why the ships should be far closer than they are now.

i'll admit the itty V vs the bestower is where ALL the industrials should be, but they aren't. the badger is lagging behind substantially. if the badger mk2 were as close to the bestower as the itty V then this wouldn't be an issue at all and i'd actually be quite content with the changes.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#537 - 2013-06-21 18:54:00 UTC
I'm not making any judgements just yet, but it might be helpful to clarify the priorities a player has when choosing a T1 hauler.

1: Max cargo capacity

2: This is a tie between alignment time (for those who manually pilot) and speed (for those who fly AFK).

3: Warp speed

4: Tank (a distant last)

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#538 - 2013-06-21 19:00:26 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I'm not making any judgements just yet, but it might be helpful to clarify the priorities a player has when choosing a T1 hauler.

1: Max cargo capacity

2: This is a tie between alignment time (for those who manually pilot) and speed (for those who fly AFK).

3: Warp speed

4: Tank (a distant last)



Not empty quoting.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#539 - 2013-06-21 19:07:15 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I'm not making any judgements just yet, but it might be helpful to clarify the priorities a player has when choosing a T1 hauler.

1: Max cargo capacity

2: This is a tie between alignment time (for those who manually pilot) and speed (for those who fly AFK).

3: Warp speed

4: Tank (a distant last)


All controled by low slots/rigs wich mean we only really need 1 hauler/race and as many low slots as possible so anyone can fit thier hauler to his own exact specification.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#540 - 2013-06-21 19:17:50 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Salpad wrote:
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Altrue wrote:
Caldari ships always have the less cargo capacity of their role, yet I heard that it was an industrial race Roll.



You heard wrong. It's a militant corporatocracy race. That's why their haulers are the most tankable historically and "battle badgers" are a thing.

If anything Gallente is the most "industrial".. the lore glorifies Gallente miners and their role in the Federation to support freedom and independence, and freedom means lots of free trade meaning more variety of haulers.


Well, that's good then, because then obviously Gallente should get the "specialized" haulers for industry, e.g. one with an ore bay and one with a mineral bay. And there are plenty of spare Gallente hull designs that can be assigned to those roles.


And all of that would be useless since you can train for an Orca in under 20 days.

Keep in mind though that Orca's are very slow and very expensive in comparison.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.