These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Update: Check out the new Raven model! It looks just like..
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#21 - 2011-11-16 11:41:20 UTC
it doesnt look bad, but it also doesnt look too much dissimilar to the model that it replaces.

So i guess thats good.

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Kietay Ayari
Caldari State
#22 - 2011-11-16 12:03:39 UTC
Please no negative comments about any Caldari State ships. Thank you in advance.

Ferox #1
4IN1
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#23 - 2011-11-16 12:06:24 UTC
Why are they still calling it raven?

They should have change the name to Nemo!

CCP: Ambition but rubbish
Kuzzka
Perkone
Caldari State
#24 - 2011-11-16 12:20:22 UTC
It looks nice on the screens.
Tivookz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#25 - 2011-11-16 12:43:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tivookz
I still think the Raven model should have gotten a complete remake.

Also, why is it acceptable in EVE to re-use stuff?

Just as an example the new game COD:MW3 had some buildings in it that existed in the predecessor MW: Black ops.

People raged about it etc.

However, everytime CCP decide to release a new "expansion" (yes, they refer to it as expansions) containing "new" ships it's not seldom an old ship with a new skin.

Black ops ships come to mind.

So does: Marauders, navy/tribal/fleet/etc editions, deep space transports, interceptors, exhumers and.. oh wait, almost every T2 ship out there.

It's bullshit.
ViRUS Pottage
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#26 - 2011-11-16 12:47:29 UTC
The CNR looks hella sexy, though.

The sandy colour of the Golem just... sucks.
Psychophantic
#27 - 2011-11-16 13:00:13 UTC
So it's not shiny anymore?

I kinda liked the shine on Caldaris pimp ships like the golem and hawk.

Like they thought they were worth giving a buff job to.
4IN1
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#28 - 2011-11-16 13:12:14 UTC
Tivookz wrote:
I still think the Raven model should have gotten a complete remake.

Also, why is it acceptable in EVE to re-use stuff?

Just as an example the new game COD:MW3 had some buildings in it that existed in the predecessor MW: Black ops.

People raged about it etc.

However, everytime CCP decide to release a new "expansion" (yes, they refer to it as expansions) containing "new" ships it's not seldom an old ship with a new skin.

Black ops ships come to mind.

So does: Marauders, navy/tribal/fleet/etc editions, deep space transports, interceptors, exhumers and.. oh wait, almost every T2 ship out there.

It's bullshit.

Well, tbh, they can fix the problem raven have by mirror the right "wing" and the large right hand spike to the left while leaving the rest un touch (you know, the round-ish bit mounted under the right armpit), but for some reason that a neurotypical won't undersrand, they just pick up a hand files and sharpen the edges...

CCP: Ambition but rubbish
Jada Maroo
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2011-11-16 13:16:12 UTC
Looking good to me. Big smile
ACE McFACE
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#30 - 2011-11-16 21:35:15 UTC
Tivookz wrote:
I still think the Raven model should have gotten a complete remake.

Also, why is it acceptable in EVE to re-use stuff?

Just as an example the new game COD:MW3 had some buildings in it that existed in the predecessor MW: Black ops.

People raged about it etc.

However, everytime CCP decide to release a new "expansion" (yes, they refer to it as expansions) containing "new" ships it's not seldom an old ship with a new skin.

Black ops ships come to mind.

So does: Marauders, navy/tribal/fleet/etc editions, deep space transports, interceptors, exhumers and.. oh wait, almost every T2 ship out there.

It's bullshit.

Well for your Call of Duty analogy, people were raging because the same building or truck in Afganistan also ended up in Paris or London or where ever its set

For EVE, why would a manufacturer make a completely different ship when the t1 counterpart can be made to do the same thing? It would be cool if there were different ships but it wouldnt make as much sense

Now, more than ever, we need a dislike button.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#31 - 2011-11-17 01:15:06 UTC
Fleet hardware/software updates.

The old hull was so well worn out and used and with newer equipment arriving every cycle altering electronic warfare fronts that the old racks and mountings could no longer accomidate the newer equipment so to save time they just rebanged out the original hull frame made any improvements for furtureability and then released that as a major update just to keep up with current warfare tatics.

The above reason is the 'catch all' lore reason for ship balances and change.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Tivookz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#32 - 2011-11-17 09:59:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tivookz
ACE McFACE wrote:
Tivookz wrote:
I still think the Raven model should have gotten a complete remake.

Also, why is it acceptable in EVE to re-use stuff?

Just as an example the new game COD:MW3 had some buildings in it that existed in the predecessor MW: Black ops.

People raged about it etc.

However, everytime CCP decide to release a new "expansion" (yes, they refer to it as expansions) containing "new" ships it's not seldom an old ship with a new skin.

Black ops ships come to mind.

So does: Marauders, navy/tribal/fleet/etc editions, deep space transports, interceptors, exhumers and.. oh wait, almost every T2 ship out there.

It's bullshit.

Well for your Call of Duty analogy, people were raging because the same building or truck in Afganistan also ended up in Paris or London or where ever its set

For EVE, why would a manufacturer make a completely different ship when the t1 counterpart can be made to do the same thing? It would be cool if there were different ships but it wouldnt make as much sense


Roleplay much eh?

Lets get real for just one second here. In EVE, just like in Call of Duty, there are no real ingame manufacturers. There are just real life companies being lazy.

There is no reason why they shouldn't make new ship models instead of re-using the old ones other than pure laziness and / or whatever economic agenda there might be.
Judie Ramone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#33 - 2011-11-24 22:34:59 UTC
So... does CCP plan on updating any models that don't happen to be Caldari battleships? Oh right, the Maller.
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#34 - 2011-11-24 22:41:39 UTC
Here is new Raven that doesn't seem to be any different at all.

But I find it sexy, because I am butthurt caldari - Troll.

Raven didn't look bad in the first place. It doesn't look badass now.

Bumper sticker and golden nuts would save it.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2011-11-24 22:44:30 UTC
Tivookz wrote:
I still think the Raven model should have gotten a complete remake.


Quoted for complete Truth.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#36 - 2011-11-24 22:59:33 UTC
In fact I am so butthurt, that I could post again.

Does new Raven look to you like a Toad? Does it look like a squished toad, like the old Raven did?

This toad is a tad more proportional, maybe it didn't burst yet. But devs are pushing it.

Pls, plug my butt, or I continue sh**posting.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
Previous page12