These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon] Command Ship Models

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#441 - 2013-10-08 14:56:30 UTC
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
The former Thread stands over several Months and the reaction was very positiv why the hell are people starting to hate this Change now all of a sudden?


Because the only people who looked into that thread were people who 1. really really want the change and 2. stay on forums when there aren't changes announced.


These changes being announced brought all the people that fly these ships on a daily basis in here because they don't like it.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Aesheera
Doomheim
#442 - 2013-10-08 15:12:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Aesheera
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
The former Thread stands over several Months and the reaction was very positiv why the hell are people starting to hate this Change now all of a sudden?


Because the only people who looked into that thread were people who 1. really really want the change and 2. stay on forums when there aren't changes announced.


These changes being announced brought all the people that fly these ships on a daily basis in here because they don't like it.

This pretty much.

I love my Commandships.
I'm okay with the Abso change, even though I still feel the current one is p damn frickin sweet.
Getting used to a Myrm-Eos or Drake-Nighthawk is gonna take a looooong time.

EDIT: Cane-Sleipnir will only do one thing for me. Sell my current one and leave it behind me. Some may call me silly but I've spent plenty of time skilling for ships that have a strong aesthetic value to me.

- I think my passion is misinterpreted as anger sometimes. And I don't think people are ready for the message that I'm delivering, and delivering with a sense of violent love.
Cosmic Ferret
5th Element Incorporated
Corelum Syndicate
#443 - 2013-10-08 15:26:54 UTC
please don't change sleipnir :S
Sarmatiko
#444 - 2013-10-08 15:48:17 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
And just to be clear we're still early on and nothing is set in stone at this point. What I don't want to do however is make kneejerk changes before more people have had a chance to try them out and give the alternate hulls a chance on Sisi.. Take the time to check them out on Sisi and let the idea settle in, keep letting us know what you think. We will continue to be taking feedback for quite a while.

I'm afraid we have situation completely similar to Vagabond frills - most people don't give a damn until stuff hits TQ. And then we will have nice threadnought in GD and drama all over forums and blogs.

We can't know about CCP mid-term plans, maybe Command Ship models revamp already planned and Rubicon changes exist just as temporary substitutes (like old Tempest, Stabber, Paladin etc.).
But damage will be done anyway - people won't forgive current Sleipnir change.
SOL Ranger
Imperial Armed Forces
#445 - 2013-10-08 16:12:45 UTC  |  Edited by: SOL Ranger
Vjorn Angannon wrote:

...
I *BLEEPING* HATE what you are planning to do to my Sleipnir!!!!!!!
...


I love the change, I have been hoping for it since forever and I'm far from alone with that opinion.
I know nostalgia is a powerful thing but the change makes sense, given that I do sympathise because I too still enjoy the Sleipnir hull as is, just not as much as I desire the Hurricane hull.

Alternative solution, introduce new Command Ship/'Advanced' Battlecruiser which is more in line with the Hurricane:

Thor
Hurricane Class Fire Support Battlecruiser

Minmatar Battlecruiser skill bonus per level:
5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret, Cruise Missile and Heavy Missile damage.
5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret, Cruise and Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher rate of fire.

Advanced Battlecruiser skill bonus per level:
10% bonus to Large Projectile Turret optimal range.
10% bonus to Large Projectile Turret falloff

Role Bonus:
95% reduction in the powergrid need of Large Projectile Turrets, Cruise and Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers.
50% reduction in the CPU need of Large Projectile Turrets, Cruise and Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers.

Slot layout: 8 H , 4 M, 6 L, 6 turrets, 4 Launchers
Fittings: 1500 PWG, 475 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 4000 / 4100 / 3500
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 75 / 60 / 40 / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 90 / 67.5/ 25 / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2625 / 583s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 165 / 0.704 / 12800000(+300000) / 12.49s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 75
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km / 220 / 7
Sensor strength: 20 Ladar
Signature radius: 240
Cargo capacity: 525

Possible Paintjob

Well, let me dream it at least.

The Vargur requires launcher hardpoints, following tempest tradition.
Ozzymandias Duskwalker
Spartan Vanguard
#446 - 2013-10-08 16:33:27 UTC
Harbinger model as a command ship? Hell no! That idea is bad and you should feel bad! Evil

SSTC, flying moas before they were cool.

SSTC is now recruiting! we have lvl 5 mission fleets, incursion fleets, mining fleets, camping fleets, lolfleets, whyisthisguyfcing? fleets, 'zzZzZZzzzz' fleets (POS and POCO bashing) and exploration fleets!.
David Kir
Hotbirds
#447 - 2013-10-08 17:01:08 UTC
Ozzymandias Duskwalker wrote:
Harbinger model as a command ship? Hell no! That idea is bad and you should feel bad! Evil


Could you at least argue the reasons because of which the Harbinger hull can not be that of a command ship?

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
Strata Maslav
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#448 - 2013-10-08 17:05:36 UTC
Im looking forward to this change. Though I think somewhere down the line these reskins need to be given something a little more distinctive to the model.

I think the hurricane model is one of the most sexy looking ships in the game and I am glad it will be getting a T2 variant.

Strata
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#449 - 2013-10-08 17:40:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
So, if these models really must be used...

Can we at least get rid of the following on the Harbinger model for both the Harbinger and the new Absolution?

Harbinger Front Flaws

Yes, I am well aware that the upper flaw comes from the fact that 3D artists only do 1 half of the actual model and than just mirror it, but can't the do a better job at assigning and smoothening the borders?

And what is this chiloschisis at the end of the pick for?

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Mavis O'Day
Total.
#450 - 2013-10-08 18:13:11 UTC
Nightdrake looks cool - for me, as a huge Drake fan. But Absolution... Well, it's not bad, but Prophecy hull looks better as for my taste.
Denuo Secus
#451 - 2013-10-08 19:27:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Denuo Secus
I prefer the old models. All former tier1 BC hulls are some of the best looking hulls in my opinion. It's sad to see the Absolution not looking like the Absolution - my first command ship I was able to fly Sad

Why don't you keep the T2 hulls for Harb, Drake, Myrm and Cane not for some other, future T2 BCs?

---

Btw...since this thread is about command ships and textures...is there any chance the Damnation texture will be fixed? All other Khanid ships look very nice, deep black+silver. Only the Damnation is grey. Compare it to the Sacrilege - a huge difference.

---

PS...this thread is still about command ships (Vulture) and textures ^^ ...another question: any plans to change the Ishukone textures (except Rhea)? The Rhea was the last Ishukone ship which was V3ed - and it got a different texture than all other Ishukone ships. A much (much) better one in my humble opinion. It is (1) not consistent and (2) feels wrong to see (literally) cool Caldari space ships in grey-gold.
Dead-eye Flint
#452 - 2013-10-08 21:37:13 UTC
This whole change is one big reason to throw up.

As stated in the previous discussion topic, the change is completely and utterly pointless on top of alienating pilots who like the look of the ships they currently fly.

On a more personal note, after holding on to my Nighthawk for a very long time, always hoping that it might just become competitive or at least useful at some point ,despite receiving nerf after nerf, it is finally time to get rid of it.
Having to look at that awful Drake model (I don't care that someone emptied a paint cannister over it, it still looks dreadful) instead of the great Ferox/former Nighthawk design, on top of flying a completely inferior ship is, well, entirely pointless.


WTS 1 Nighthawk.
FlinchingNinja Kishunuba
Crunchy Crunchy
#453 - 2013-10-08 22:32:16 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Aesheera wrote:

Also, why 3 fleet Commands and 1 combat Command redesign? Consistency would make more sense: all fleets or all combats adopting new hulls.

There are no longer such things as fleet or combat command ships. That distinction was removed when we rebalanced the class.

And just to be clear we're still early on and nothing is set in stone at this point. What I don't want to do however is make kneejerk changes before more people have had a chance to try them out and give the alternate hulls a chance on Sisi.. Take the time to check them out on Sisi and let the idea settle in, keep letting us know what you think. We will continue to be taking feedback for quite a while.


Excellent, don't change the nighthawk! Go put a full complement of hmlt2 on it and tell me it doesn't look better then the bent pop tart that is a drake?
Hanna Cyrus
Spessart Rebellen
#454 - 2013-10-08 22:36:48 UTC
Don't change it! Make a election, but don't do it, because a few guys cries only loud enough...
Thyralon G'zer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#455 - 2013-10-08 22:39:01 UTC
Oh noo ... why do you do this to the good old Sleipnir? Crappy hurricane hull?? Why?
I loved the Sleipnir being a huge Thrasher - it behaved like that too!

Admittedly I havent flown my Sleipnir since you last "changed" it... now got yet another reason not to do so.

Oh boy ... *sigh*
Alexhandr Shkarov
The MorningStar. Syndicate
#456 - 2013-10-08 22:59:18 UTC
I still don't like it that you're switching the Sleipnir hull to a Hurricane. It takes away an iconic Winmatar ship's design.

All my posts are on my personal title and should not be confused as me speaking for anyone else.
Aesheera
Doomheim
#457 - 2013-10-08 23:48:18 UTC
Rees Noturana wrote:
They look amazing to me. T2 Myrm and Hurricane? Yes, please.

This, yes.

But not as a replacement for the Sleip and Eos.

- I think my passion is misinterpreted as anger sometimes. And I don't think people are ready for the message that I'm delivering, and delivering with a sense of violent love.
Sol Mortis
An Heroes
#458 - 2013-10-09 00:26:04 UTC
You should trust your gut about the Sleipnir! Keep it a Cyclone Hull!

The Sleipnir has a lot of history, and for many years it was basically The Only cyclone hull you ever actually saw in space.

I hope you will give more thought to making the Claymore a Hurricane hull instead.

Also the navy hurricane looks too much like the SleipCane with the camo paintjobs.

A Hurricane with a shiny Core Complexion paint job would look cool and be unique and keep noobs from being really confused when they watch old alliance tournaments.
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#459 - 2013-10-09 00:45:08 UTC
Ignore haters, these changes are great.

Almost as great as if you actually made more ship models for them.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#460 - 2013-10-09 01:34:40 UTC
Sol Mortis wrote:
You should trust your gut about the Sleipnir! Keep it a Cyclone Hull!


No.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature