These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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, Round 2

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
lycaniz
Grim Determination
Manifest Destiny.
#81 - 2013-06-26 14:51:50 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
lycaniz wrote:
I feel that the mammoth is a bit underwhelming but maybe that's just me..


As for the hoarder, make the 'ammo' count for cap boosters aswell and it will have a use! but as it is it is pretty meh tbh.


It does count for cap boosters.



Ah, good!

*hides* thanks for quick answer.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#82 - 2013-06-26 14:52:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
The Mineral hauler needs to be able to haul ice products (isotopes, heavy water, liquid ozone). I can get why it can't haul strontium, but at a minimum, it should be able to haul those 3 items.


Suggested new ship names (if your going for that)

The Iteron Mark IV (Ore hauler), The Goliath

Iteron Mark II (Mineral Hauler), the Behemoth

Iteron Mar IV (Planetary Hauler), The Conveyor (too close to the Covetor, but works eitherway)

All rights to naming have been forthwith, given away to be used in whatever way, shape or form, however any company, person and/or entity, deems its use, with no payment, gift and/or anything.

Life would be less confusing than trying to identify which one is the Iteron II and which is the Iteron III.

Yaay!!!!
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#83 - 2013-06-26 15:00:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
*doublepost

Yaay!!!!
WInter Borne
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#84 - 2013-06-26 15:01:30 UTC
Dont suppose the ore hold could updated to include refined ice products?

I know some of us wormholers would enjoy a dedicated stront/fuel hauler with high capacity/low mass.
MrZany
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#85 - 2013-06-26 15:01:59 UTC  |  Edited by: MrZany
Erien Rand wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Jowen Datloran wrote:
Thank you for listening to the feedback, Rise. Much appreciated.
CCP Rise wrote:

  • Special purpose bays - This will be for Hoarder, Iteron Mark II, III, and IV. We wanted to do this originally, but held back because of concerns about racial inequality. Based on feedback I'm now hoping you guys will be fine with this inequality, as long as it isn't so favored towards Gallente that no one would ever train another race for hauling.

    • This is as much an issue as people having to train Caldari ship skills if they want to fly a powerful ECM or missile boat.


    People keep saying this but it is simply not true. It would be if there was a counterpart for the other races. If you don't want to train missiles, its okay because you can train lasers. In this case, there is no option for Caldari or Amarr to counter balance, even if it was a different bay.



    CCP Rise,

    why not just make the remaining haulers Ore ships?

    Ore could purchase the rights to the ships and modify them as they see fit. That would remove any accusations of "inequality" among the races.

    IIRC when the real world financial crisis happened China purchased the Hummer brand. Something similar could be put into the lore where due to constant wars the empires were forced to sell off some of their excess ship models.

    Doing this would allow you to get as creative as you like with the ships and also would give a reason why the ships were so drastically remodeled; they are owned by an entirely different corp that wants to take them in a different direction.



    Love the direction you are going in! Is there a reason why moving the remaining ships to Ore or Interbus can't happen?

    It would seem that from a design and lore standpoint it could be an exciting change. Another faction purchasing the rights to what had been iconic gallente and minmatar hulls due to (insert reason) seems like it would generate interest and create a bit of content.

    Also it would free you from having to make the Itty 5 "average" for balancing purposes. Seems like a win/win.

    Regardless of what you decide, you have done an excellent job with these changes and you area credit to the game.

    Thank you, now go ask for a raise Big smile
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #86 - 2013-06-26 15:03:35 UTC
    @ Phoenix Jones: The Iteron Iterations would follow Gallente naming convention. That being said, it's not hard to tell a cylindrical-spacewang Itty 3 from a lots-of-boxes itty 2.
    Orakkus
    ImperiaI Federation
    Goonswarm Federation
    #87 - 2013-06-26 15:04:22 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Alright, here we go.


    First off, love that you changed the Warp AU and coupled it with the agility. This should save industry pilots a lot of time in trying to get items to market.


    SIGIL - Most HP - Good increase in PG, and it appears that it might have enough to mount a medium turret. I'm still not a fan of "tanky" being only more HP, but it should be a bit better for running against high-sec gankers.

    BADGER - Most potential Cargo and Base Cargo in role (Also battle HAM Badger) - The only thing I disagree with here is the 1 turret/1 launcher thing. CCP Fozzie is well aware of how bad split weapon systems work. Just allow two launchers and/or two turrets and be done with it. They aren't bonused anyways.

    WREATHE - Fastest - Good, the ship definately needed some PG to make it viable.

    Iteron - Good all-around (and Drones!?) - Drones, eh. Not bad and well played.


    =======================================================================================

    Glad that you kept every race having their own heavy hauler.

    BESTOWER - Most potential Cargo - Cool

    BADGER MARK II - Launcher, Most Base Cargo - Same issue with the Badger

    MAMMOTH - Best travel time in role - I don't see an AU speed, so does travel time mean ONLY normal space speeds, or is there an AU bonus as well?

    ITERON MARK V - Average (to balance awesome Iteron II, III, IV) - Good

    =======================================================================================

    ITERON MARK II - Mineral Bay - Awesome, good size bay.

    ITERON MARK III - PI Commodities Bay - I hope this includes the ability to haul bases.. but other than that.. this is rather nice for base level operations.

    ITERON MARK IV - Ore Bay (Ore includes Gas, Ice, and Mineral Ore) - This is the best idea of the bunch. Being able to haul ore around more efficently will be a fairly big boon to starting industrialists.

    HOARDER - Ammo bay (This includes anything in the 'charge' group - bombs/cap charges/etc) - This comes in a very close second for good idea and you are now hero worshipped by anyone making cap charges. It will be interesting to see how this ship will play out.

    Now for the next important question.. when will we see it?

    He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
    Omnathious Deninard
    University of Caille
    Gallente Federation
    #88 - 2013-06-26 15:04:25 UTC
    Just out of curiosity, were all the warp speeds changed to 6au/s, only the first 4 say.

    If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
    LujTic
    Green Visstick High
    #89 - 2013-06-26 15:05:28 UTC
    I think the mineral and ore specialisations will be popular, but few people need to move more than 40k ammo and > 40k PI products sounds like you're asking to get ganked. I'd rather see the Hoarder than the Iteron II haul ice products (fuel) to make the Hoarder more usefull. Right now it's only good for cap boosters.
    Dex Ratzinger
    Ministry of War
    Amarr Empire
    #90 - 2013-06-26 15:05:45 UTC
    Sofia Wolf wrote:
    I really like new industrials. Only reservation is that many of them don't have sufficient PWG to fit MWD and PCD to do MWD trick. This is necessity of survival in low sec, and quite helpful in 0.0, and highsec during wardecks.

    Minimal PWG that someone noobish with Engineering at lvl 4 can fit mwd+pcd is ~130, so consider upgrading PWG of all industrials that are below that threshold.


    Nope, you have to gimp your fit for that, and it needs to remain that way.
    Just fly a blockade runner.
    Nicen Jehr
    Subsidy H.R.S.
    Xagenic Freymvork
    #91 - 2013-06-26 15:06:47 UTC
    Good work CCP Rise, T1 industrials looks done to me!

    Little Things to improve ≡⋁≡ | My Little Things posts
    Altrue
    Exploration Frontier inc
    Tactical-Retreat
    #92 - 2013-06-26 15:07:09 UTC
    Okay that's cool !

    I still think that the badger mark II is crap, but now it has its distinct advantages and its niche, so why not :)

    The other industrials seems very cool, except perhaps for minmatar, they are not bad, but their "race bonus" aka speed is a bit meh.

    Signature Tanking Best Tanking

    [Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

    Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
    Ransu Asanari
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #93 - 2013-06-26 15:09:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Ransu Asanari
    I'm overall pretty happy with these changes. The distinction between roles is good, and it encourages cross-training to get access to the other industrials, where before they may have just been a stepping stone to get cargo levels high enough. I also love the idea of the HAM Battle Badger!

    One thing I would have liked to see, is one hauler with a role to be able to haul fitted ships - maybe up to Cruiser/Battlecruiser size. Being able to move ONE fitted ship would be fine I think; right now only the Orca has a Ship Maintenance Bay to store and moved fitted ships. Others will have to weigh in on if that's too specific a role.

    Also, I don't believe Nanite Repair Paste counts as a charge... I know that because whenever I move ships via Carrier, I can't keep any in the cargo hold.. only cap boosters, ammo, and scripts.
    Taleden
    North Wind Local no. 612
    #94 - 2013-06-26 15:10:59 UTC

    1. Nice work on this pass! Streets ahead of the first draft.

    2. Could you edit the first post to be a little more explicit about which of those numbers are 0-skill baseline numbers, and which are assuming all-5 skills? It's hard to know how to interpret the posted HP, align times, special cargo bays, etc -- some of the stats seem poor-to-okay and some seem okay-to-great, depending on whether you've already factored in +25% or more from all the various applicable skills.

    3. I'm still confused about the Amarr and Gallente hulls having more armor than shields, given that it would be silly to armor tank any of them so long as cargo expanders are left in their current state. If you insist on leaving cargo expanders as-is and therefore expect all of these ships to be shield tanked, then why bother shifting their HP to armor? I suspect when people get these numbers into EFT they'll find that the Sigil, which you claim to have the highest potential EHP, will in fact be bested by the Badger and maybe even the Wreathe since those ships don't have to compromise between tank and cargo nearly as much.

    Ransu Asanari
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #95 - 2013-06-26 15:13:25 UTC
    Oh, and since we're looking at Industrials now (Yes, only Tech 1 for now), maybe make a sticky note when you get around to the T2 versions... I think the Deep Space Transports could use the Interdiction Nullifier System effect, to make them immune to bubbles. Maybe trade the +2 Warp Core Stability for that, as pilots could always fit Warp Core Stabilizers themselves based on risk. This would make them a more defined "Deep Space" aka Nullsec transport ship which would have a useful role out there. Right now, everyone I know uses Jump Freighters or Blockade Runners.
    Caleb Ayrania
    TarNec
    Invisible Exchequer
    #96 - 2013-06-26 15:13:53 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Quote:
    I looked through this thread but didn't see any references to other industrial work. What are you referring to?


    I should be more careful about making vague references to future development. Basically, our extremely high level direction for the next while is focused towards building things - we have no idea what will fall out of this specifically, but the overall direction may lead to new potential uses for indie ships, which is why I felt fine leaving 4 of them more or less open to change down the road. Please don't read into this, there's nothing particular that I know of relative to these ships coming in the near future.

    As far as the the abuse of the hoarder ammo bay for compression - the difference in potential capacity and unpacked volume between it and the old Iteron V isn't enormous. Not different enough to create a new kind of abuse, though obviously would make for more efficiency. I'll make sure we talk about if we are happy with this and if not we can adjust the unpacked volume on the Hoarder accordingly.


    Could you consider a discussion with the other devs and the CSM to change ORE compression into something that can compete with and make all compression "hacks" obsolete?

    I see hardly any game balance or exploit possible with making ORE compression really extremely effective, since that would resolve the whole import and export issue. It would also boost the ORE bay usability, and allow for more future boosts on logistics.

    Make them compete with any existing isk/m3 compression scheme.
    Anela Cistine
    Royal Amarr Institute
    Amarr Empire
    #97 - 2013-06-26 15:17:06 UTC
    The Itty III has a planetary materials bay, which is great, is that able to hold Command Centers? If not, could you make the standard bay a little bigger so the ship can hold at least 1 command center?

    It seems silly for a newbie to have to buy a ship to launch his command centers, then immediately sell that ship and buy a different ship to actually run his planets.
    Taleden
    North Wind Local no. 612
    #98 - 2013-06-26 15:18:33 UTC
    Anela Cistine wrote:
    The Itty III has a planetary materials bay, which is great, is that able to hold Command Centers? If not, could you make the standard bay a little bigger so the ship can hold at least 1 command center?

    It seems silly for a newbie to have to buy a ship to launch his command centers, then immediately sell that ship and buy a different ship to actually run his planets.

    IIRC the Primae's special PI hold was able to store command centers, so I would assume the same is true here. It'd be nice to get confirmation though.
    Ransu Asanari
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #99 - 2013-06-26 15:18:44 UTC
    Anela Cistine wrote:
    The Itty III has a planetary materials bay, which is great, is that able to hold Command Centers? If not, could you make the standard bay a little bigger so the ship can hold at least 1 command center?

    It seems silly for a newbie to have to buy a ship to launch his command centers, then immediately sell that ship and buy a different ship to actually run his planets.


    This is a good point. Command Centers are 1000m3, so maybe a static cargo hold of this amount?
    Fergus Runkle
    Truth and Reconciliation Council
    #100 - 2013-06-26 15:18:58 UTC
    Dark Stryke wrote:
    Denidil wrote:
    Looks good Rise - I don't know if you saw my post on reddit - but looking at this numbers it makes my post even more relevant: The Ore Hold on the Orca needs to be a LOT larger... 300k m3 - 400k m3 given the changes to ore bays on the industrials and mining barges / exhumers.

    Then let's talk about light carriers ..... :P

    The Orca and Rorqual both need revamps, especially the compression mechanics.


    Yeah these changes (although fantastic, thanks btw) do make the Orca's bays look a little small for its model size.

    Also would it hurt to give the Primae a 10k (rather than 1k) PI materials bay? It might get used then.