EVE General Discussion

The actual definition of "capital ship" in EVE has been a point of contention among pedants such as myself. While most people would look at this subject and say "who gives a ****" I say there needs to be clear and consistent definitions. Definitions which include the carriers, supercarriers, dreadnoughts, titans, and the Rorqual as all of the ships belonging to the capital ship class. This does not include the Orca, freighters, or jump freighters.

Whenever somebody brings this subject up the usual response is that freighters, jump freighters, and the Orca are all listed under the market category of capital ships. I however do not believe that such a categorization is correct. The market has, in the past, had modules and other items which were improperly categorized, and even today certain modules are in categories that don't make sense.

For example, everyone knows that the Nanofiber Internal Structures is used as a propulsion upgrade. The reason they're used is to increase speed and agility, which are attributes combined from two listed propulsion upgrades, the Overdrive Injector System and the Inertia Stabilizers. Yet the nanofiber is listed under hull upgrades, despite the fact that like the overdrive and the istab, its hull effects are detrimental. It's like saying the Warp Core Stabilizer is an electronics and sensor upgrade because it reduces lock range and scan resolution, or that the Improved Cloaking Device II is a propulsion upgrade since it decreases speed while cloaked. It should be pretty evident that this categorization is improper and the nanofiber should be considered a propulsion upgrade.

Similarly, the categorization of the Orca and freighters don't share any attributes that are common to the the real capital ships. The only thing that can be said about them is that they're really big. Jump freighters are freighters with jump drives, which capital ships do have, but then so do the Black Ops. Clearly a jump drive does not automatically make a ship a capital ship.

So what defines a capital ship? For a clear set of attributes a capital ship is:

• Any ship that cannot use stargates
• Any ship that requires the capital ships skill
• Any ship with a mass of greater than 1,000,000 tons
• Any ship which, should it happen to be in highsec, is subjected to severely restrictive rules on its usage

Supercapitals are of course a subclass of capitals which all have the following attributes

• Cannot dock in a station
• Cannot use any wormholes
• Are immune at all times to all forms of E-war
• Must be constructed in a Capital Ship Assembly Array

I propose that freighters and jump freighters be moved into the separate category of Freighters, which will encompass Standard Freighters and Advanced Freighters. The Orca would be moved into its own category of Industrial Command Ship. Technically supercapitals shouldn't be on the market at all, since they cannot be docked except by GM intervention.

(And move nanofibers to propulsion modules, seriously.)

Just because OP wrote that he is a pedant:

A Nanofiber Internal Structure is no propulsion module because it does not propel anything.

You're right, what I meant to write was propulsion upgrade.

It's only partially a feature request. It's mostly to start a discussion on how we've categorized these things and why.

No. Nanofiber Internal Structure is listed under hull because it changes the hull of a ship. It is not listed under propulsion because it doesn't change the propulsion system of a ship. Overdrive Injector System and Inertia Stabilizers are modules which plug into the propulsion system of a ship, so they are listed under propulsion.

What you are proposing is to classify "carbon fiber body" as an "engine upgrade for a car", because "if you give a car a carbon fiber body, the engine (an unrelated component) will make the entire car go faster". Nanofibers aren't propulsion upgrades, they don't change the way ships propel themselves.

A capital ship is any ship that requires the "Capital Ships" skill, or in the case of industrial ships, the "Capital Industrial Ships" skill.

Actually makes sense. Though for the sake of not having to open more tabs, I don't care whether they change it or not. We have gone so far down the rabbit hole that a lot of logical changes can not be done. Or can be done but at more cost than necessity. This is due to old code and while eve fills a niche role. Difficulties it has with keeping up with other games will eventually sink the title. In the mean time I accept small illogical features and content, simply to enjoy eve while it is around.

On a side note, CCP recode the game already. I am sick and tired of exiting out just to log onto an alt.

No we are dead. We went off to Faction Warfare to die remember?

Both the overdrive and the istab have detrimental effects to the hull - they reduce a ship's cargo capacity and increase its signature radius, respectively. Similarly the nanofiber reduces a ship's hull HP, while altering both attributes (speed and inertia modifier) which make the overdrive and istab propulsion upgrades in the first place. It's not a hull upgrade, because it doesn't upgrade the hull. It upgrades the propulsion by making the ship faster and more agile. It's basically the same as having both of these propulsion upgrades fitted, except using one slot instead of two for slightly less of a gain in both areas, with a different drawback. It most certainly is a propulsion upgrade.


People don't search market categories based upon lore, they search based upon the intended use of the module. If you want to make your ship faster and more agile, you'd probably think to look in propulsion upgrades first, which is where the nanofibers should be.


The Capital Industrial Ships skill is only for the Rorqual, and it requires the Capital Ships skill anyway (the ship also requires the Capital Ships skill at level 2 to fly it anyway). The Orca requires neither Capital Ships nor Capital Industrial Ships. It doesn't even require Advanced Spaceship Command.

I think on the whole, you're quite right. But especially this one is absolutely correct:

I don't think that's technically possible though.