These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

[Rubicon 1.3] Mobile Tractor Unit Meta Types

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2014-02-26 13:26:37 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
One more thread for today Smile

The Mobile Tractor Units have been by far the most popular Mobile Structures since we released them in Rubicon 1.0, and we've been extremely happy with the reception they have received from players and the very creative ways we are seeing them used.

In Rubicon 1.3 we are going to be adding two new variants of the MTUs that will be produced from BPCs available in the rare Ghost Sites (just like the blueprints for the rare variants of the Mobile Depots). These will be slightly upgraded versions of the base MTU with their own specializations.

I also want to quickly address some of the most common feedback we have been receiving about the MTUs so far:

Many players have been asking why the MTUs pull the closest wreck, as this behavior essentially prevents effectively using two complementary MTUs side by side. I can see why this would frustrate some players who are trying to maximize the effectiveness of their MTU setup.
We intend the MTUs to be a valuable option for many types of players, but we wanted to make sure that they do not completely overshadow other tractor beam platforms, most notably the Noctis. This is why they are limited to one beam at a time and why their tractor velocity is set lower than that of a Noctis. However if we made it easy to use multiple MTUs in parallel their effectiveness would scale far too well when used in groups, removing any role for other tractor beam solutions. This is why we have no plans to adjust the collection algorithm of the MTUs.

We have also seen many requests for the ability to share the access rights to a MTU between fleet or corp members.
Exploring this kind of functionality is something we would like to do in the future (possibly with existing modules and possibly with new ones) but properly connecting corp and fleet functionality to the code base behind Mobile Structures requires some behind the scenes work that is not yet completed.

As for the details of the MTU variants, we are adding two new structures: The slightly more common 'Packrat' Mobile Tractor Unit and the very rare 'Magpie' Mobile Tractor Unit.

'Packrat' Mobile Tractor Unit - specialized in durability
+200% higher sensor strength than the base MTU (affects difficulty of probing)
+25% higher tractor beam velocity than the base MTU
+50% Armor and Shield HP, +33% Hull HP compared to the base MTU

'Magpie' Mobile Tractor Unit - specialized in range
+500% higher sensor strength than the base MTU (affects difficulty of probing)
+50% higher tractor beam velocity than the base MTU
+40% higher max tractor beam range than the base MTU

Thanks and let us know what you think!

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#2 - 2014-02-26 13:28:15 UTC
does 3x higher mean 3x or 4x?
TAckermassacker
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3 - 2014-02-26 13:28:23 UTC  |  Edited by: TAckermassacker
please add a "launch for corp" option

'Teamwork' Mobile Tractor Unit
can be accessed by all of your corpmembers
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#4 - 2014-02-26 13:29:18 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
TrouserDeagle wrote:
does 3x higher mean 3x or 4x?


3x (+200%). I've updated the OP to clarify.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Rendiff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-02-26 13:49:22 UTC
I'm all about this.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#6 - 2014-02-26 13:52:23 UTC
Do you have any stats on the use of the higher meta depots btw?

Also, any plans for higher meta cyno jammers, siphons, etc?
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#7 - 2014-02-26 14:00:29 UTC
The only feedback I hear about mobile structures in-game is "why do ccp waste their time on this stuff instead of things the players want?"

Mobile structures are cool and all, but everyone I know would prefer dev time to be spent on polishing existing features that don't feel finished yet.

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#8 - 2014-02-26 14:03:49 UTC
Swiftstrike1 wrote:
The only feedback I hear about mobile structures in-game is "why do ccp waste their time on this stuff instead of things the players want?"

Mobile structures are cool and all, but everyone I know would prefer dev time to be spent on polishing existing features that don't feel finished yet.


while highsec is irrelevant, just about everyone there loves this stuff.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#9 - 2014-02-26 14:04:45 UTC
Cool stuff

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#10 - 2014-02-26 14:13:14 UTC
Swiftstrike1 wrote:
The only feedback I hear about mobile structures in-game is "why do ccp waste their time on this stuff instead of things the players want?"

Mobile structures are cool and all, but everyone I know would prefer dev time to be spent on polishing existing features that don't feel finished yet.


There are many people, myself included, that feel that the work on mobile structures is laying the ground-work for a future POS rework.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Alphax45
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-02-26 14:54:09 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Swiftstrike1 wrote:
The only feedback I hear about mobile structures in-game is "why do ccp waste their time on this stuff instead of things the players want?"

Mobile structures are cool and all, but everyone I know would prefer dev time to be spent on polishing existing features that don't feel finished yet.


There are many people, myself included, that feel that the work on mobile structures is laying the ground-work for a future POS rework.


I agree; I think this is a test of sorts for the base code for new POS (and maybe other things!). I firmly belive in the 5 year plan and I suspect (hope!) CCP has some cool future looking stuff to show us at FanFest this year :)
Arsine Mayhem
Doomheim
#12 - 2014-02-26 15:08:33 UTC
One thing that would be nice, if they didn't tractor empty wreaks.
Billy Hix
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#13 - 2014-02-26 15:24:39 UTC
I am getting really concerned by the levels of positive feedback to the upcoming changes. This can't be good in the long term.

I always feel the more positive stuff that happens in Eve the bigger the next CCP disaster will be.
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
#14 - 2014-02-26 15:24:56 UTC
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
One thing that would be nice, if they didn't tractor empty wreaks.


I don't see that as a problem. It means that when I'm done PVE'ing the rats, and call in my Light Drones, I can send out my Salvage Drones and all the wrecks, empty as well as non-empty, will be clustered around the unit, making for fast salvaging.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#15 - 2014-02-26 15:37:42 UTC
I like them too. My Noctis is far from obsolete, as nothing combines cargo space and high slots for salvagers the same way.

Now my Noctis has one tractor and seven salvagers and cleaning up a blockade takes maybe two minutes.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#16 - 2014-02-26 15:43:15 UTC
I think that these are fine changes (disclaimer: I don't use MTUs - reason: faster to salvage sites in a noctis or dedicated T3 salvager).

Making them harder to scan is also fine. I like scanning.

One thing though; I've heard (and seen) the issues with using more than one on the same grid. Namely, the fact that the MTUs may potentially grab the same wreck and then fight over it in some sadly bloodless version of Robot Wars in Space.

For the MTU users out there, I imagine that altering the targeting routine of the MTU to ignore a wreck which is already currently being tractored (either by pilot tractor beam module or another MTU) would be a welcome change.

I'm right behind you
Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#17 - 2014-02-26 15:43:57 UTC
Honestly the mobile depots and mobile tractor units are the only mobile structures you created that are worth bothering with. All the rest are junk.... the siphons are adorable but most corps that pay attention have no problem clearing them before they accomplish anything.

On the OP though: Please add "Launch for Corp" as an option. They're structures. It should not be hard to add that functionality to them.

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.  He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
Luwc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#18 - 2014-02-26 15:55:01 UTC
Fozzy.

WHY MOBILE STRUCTURES

http://hugelolcdn.com/hugereaction.com/i/1106.gif

http://hugelolcdn.com/i/267520.gif
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#19 - 2014-02-26 15:55:41 UTC
So an unprobable mtu.. Ook.
(Not quite unprobable but would require a implant scanner to do it)

Yaay!!!!
iskflakes
#20 - 2014-02-26 16:28:18 UTC
Tractoring empty wrecks when there are full wrecks nearby is one thing I dislike. Could this be fixed without making them too good?

I would also love to see mobile tractors that scoop abandoned drones, or destroy wrecks instead of looting them. If nothing else clearing the grid will help with graphical lag after a battle involving 999999 abandoned sentries that can't be recalled.

-
123Next pageLast page