These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.3] Mobile Tractor Unit Meta Types

First post
Author
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2014-02-27 11:18:47 UTC
I don't really care about the tractor units, I would just like it if the scan inhibitor, mobile jump drives and cyno jammer weren't so useless.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2014-02-27 11:48:10 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
...I would just like it if the ... cyno jammer weren't so useless.


I have to agree here. The cyno jammer would be a useful tool if:

1. it was cheaper
2. it could be deployed instantaneously (say a 5 second online time)
3. it lasted for a few minutes only
4. it only affected the current grid, rather than the entire system.

In this way a roaming gang or forward recon force could use it as a reasonable counter to a cyno bait battleship. This would bring about better balance between small mobile gangs and entrenched pirates or sov holders, making for better fights with more varied outcomes.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#43 - 2014-02-27 13:17:02 UTC
Adding meta version hrmmmm, does that mean that the current MTu will be moved to Meta 0 where it should be instead of Meta 1 where it currently is( I nearly re-processed it the other day because it was in the Meta 1 listing)
Arsine Mayhem
Doomheim
#44 - 2014-02-27 15:45:41 UTC
Salpad wrote:
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
One thing that would be nice, if they didn't tractor empty wrecks.


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.


Cept salvage drones have a problem with clustered wrecks and just quit salvaging.
Qweasdy
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2014-02-27 20:35:10 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
View from w-space:

Thank you for the meta versions with faster tractor beams. That's helpful.
The other bonuses are not relevant to us.

By far the most useful feature to add to these MTUs would be to allow corp or fleet access. At the moment if the fleet member who dropped this unit in a series of C6 sites needs to log off to go to bed after an op, he is under considerable peer pressure not to, as his beauty sleep will cost his fleet several billion ISK.

Given that an MTU is already linked to a character, and a character maintains a reference to a corp (we know this because the pilot information window shows us his corp),I am struggling to imagine why it would be problematic to simply change the check from:

if (pilot == mtu.pilot) {
... allow opening and scooping ...
}

to

if (pilot.corp == mtu.pilot.corp
|| pilot.fleet == mtu.pilot.fleet
|| mtu.pilot.standingsOf(pilot) > 5) {
... allow opening and scooping ...
}

where mtu.pilot returns an object representing the dropper (owner) of the MTU.

Have I misunderstood something?


You've misunderstood that it's not a coding issue, rather a game design issue, simply they didn't think of it/didn't think it would be a good idea at the time. Why? Beats me, but hindsight is 20 20

This is a terrible thread. As such, it's locked. - CCP Falcon

Maxemus Payne
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
#46 - 2014-02-27 21:05:31 UTC
Stop screwing around with this crap and fix missiles.
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#47 - 2014-02-27 21:06:11 UTC
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
Salpad wrote:
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
One thing that would be nice, if they didn't tractor empty wrecks.


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.


Cept salvage drones have a problem with clustered wrecks and just quit salvaging.

...? I've never seen this happen. I've seen salvage drones stop salvaging because there is no wrecks in Drone Control Range and they don't auto restart when new ones appear/get brought within range/you move into range of.

You might want to bug report that.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2014-02-27 21:22:31 UTC
Qweasdy wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
View from w-space:

Thank you for the meta versions with faster tractor beams. That's helpful.
The other bonuses are not relevant to us.

By far the most useful feature to add to these MTUs would be to allow corp or fleet access. At the moment if the fleet member who dropped this unit in a series of C6 sites needs to log off to go to bed after an op, he is under considerable peer pressure not to, as his beauty sleep will cost his fleet several billion ISK.

Given that an MTU is already linked to a character, and a character maintains a reference to a corp (we know this because the pilot information window shows us his corp),I am struggling to imagine why it would be problematic to simply change the check from:

if (pilot == mtu.pilot) {
... allow opening and scooping ...
}

to

if (pilot.corp == mtu.pilot.corp
|| pilot.fleet == mtu.pilot.fleet
|| mtu.pilot.standingsOf(pilot) > 5) {
... allow opening and scooping ...
}

where mtu.pilot returns an object representing the dropper (owner) of the MTU.

Have I misunderstood something?


You've misunderstood that it's not a coding issue, rather a game design issue, simply they didn't think of it/didn't think it would be a good idea at the time. Why? Beats me, but hindsight is 20 20


"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."

The last half of this sentence (quoted from Fozzie) implies very strongly that (bizarrely) Fozzie sees it as a coding issue, which I find quite amazing.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#49 - 2014-02-27 22:18:58 UTC
Any reason that there's no inventable version? A short range, faster tractoring MTU would be a different niche to consider.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#50 - 2014-02-28 00:17:36 UTC
As a professional salvager, I'd like to correct CCP Fozzie's fuzzy thinking: MTUs will not replace a dedicated salvager, because MTUs are bulky, slow, and don't salvage. As a salvager, I want MTUs to target the furthest objects first because MTUs have a tractor beam with much longer range than a Noctis does (especially when piloted by a low-skilled rookie salvager).

Rather than just throwing your hands up in the air and saying, "not going to do it," here are some options to help maintain the fictional superiority of dedicated salvaging ships over MTUs:

  1. Increase the MTU volume, so that you can't feasibly carry six of them in a hull that is not designed for salvaging (i.e.: marauders and Noctis). A suitable increase would be from 100m3 to 150m3. This is a significant volume of any regular L4 mission-runner's hold. I doubt they'd want to waste their time with four of them.
  2. Increase the anchoring restrictions: if an MTU can't be anchored within 20km of another MTU, who will go to the effort of dropping more than one?


You could feasibly produce an MTU with two tractor beams and it would not impinge on the role of a dedicated salvage boat, except in edge cases where someone really really wants to salvage everything now without switching ships or contracting bookmarks to someone else.

Professional Noctis pilots love the MTU. It makes looting Mordus Headhunters far less RSI-inducing. Now if only we could pick up those wrecks beyond the range of the rookie pilots' tractor beams, it would be awesome.

TL;DR: MTUs are an excellent complement to existing salvaging specialist ships. Making MTUs tractor the furthest wrecks first will further enhance the synergy between dedicated salvaging ships and a dedicated tractoring and looting structure.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#51 - 2014-02-28 00:48:29 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
As a professional salvager, I'd like to correct CCP Fozzie's fuzzy thinking: MTUs will not replace a dedicated salvager, because MTUs are bulky, slow, and don't salvage. As a salvager, I want MTUs to target the furthest objects first because MTUs have a tractor beam with much longer range than a Noctis does (especially when piloted by a low-skilled rookie salvager).

Rather than just throwing your hands up in the air and saying, "not going to do it," here are some options to help maintain the fictional superiority of dedicated salvaging ships over MTUs:

  1. Increase the MTU volume, so that you can't feasibly carry six of them in a hull that is not designed for salvaging (i.e.: marauders and Noctis). A suitable increase would be from 100m3 to 150m3. This is a significant volume of any regular L4 mission-runner's hold. I doubt they'd want to waste their time with four of them.
  2. Increase the anchoring restrictions: if an MTU can't be anchored within 20km of another MTU, who will go to the effort of dropping more than one?


You could feasibly produce an MTU with two tractor beams and it would not impinge on the role of a dedicated salvage boat, except in edge cases where someone really really wants to salvage everything now without switching ships or contracting bookmarks to someone else.

Professional Noctis pilots love the MTU. It makes looting Mordus Headhunters far less RSI-inducing. Now if only we could pick up those wrecks beyond the range of the rookie pilots' tractor beams, it would be awesome.

I don't have a problem with changing the MTUs to target the furthest objects first. However, I disagree with increasing the MTU volume because @ 100m3 it's already a hindrance - particularly to smaller ships that need to carry lots of ammunition. If anything, they should be dropped down to 75m3 or even 50m3. As for the anchoring restrictions, the MTU mechanics discourage deploying more than one within range of another anyway (wreck "tug-o-war").

If there are any issues with the usefulness of the Noctis, these could be addressed by granting it some special bonuses to salvage drone speed and drone range (since it's unlikely to have any highs to augment this, and two mids don't go very far).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

STush T
House of Tuachair
#52 - 2014-02-28 02:20:44 UTC  |  Edited by: STush T
-Harder to scan, harder to destroy, faster tractoring
why would i use the original MTU then? If cost is the only benefit to using the original, then doesnt that hint at Pay 2 Win?

-You want to keep them juggling wrecks to avoid touching on the Noctis's turf,
The Noctis far outshines these things, 10 of these wouldnt do as good as a noctis,
however, the noctis is a clicky monstrosity that drives me crazy just listening to the sound of my mouse, let alone the nightmare of mindless micromanagement. It is an awesome ship, but a pain to use unless all the wrecks are T2 or sleeper, otherwise the return isnt worth the trouble. (*sigh, tangent got me, sorry)
If they didnt juggle (back to the MTUs), salvage drones and MTUs could properly relieve the headache of L4 isk grinding (haha, at least that part of them). For other salvage that is worth more, therefore worth the clickfest, the noctis will still outshine MTUs even if they didnt juggle. Mobile, Faster, More Cargo room, Pick and choose your wrecks, and can warp away clean with whatever you have gathered so far.
To sum up, I think the noctis is versatile and effective enough to remain superior to MTUs, even without the juggling sickness. Its side effect though is a worn out mouse and glazed eyes.

-Launch for Corp/fleet/your mother
Im glad that it is coming, this feature alone will reduce the amount of hair i have to pull from my head. I wish it were sooner and more concrete rather then "Exploring this kind of functionality is something we would like to do in the future"
Non-committal Vagueness, keeping mystery real^

-I didnt see any mention of a "scoop AND loot" possible option, this would again reduce hair pulling.
Im sure coding and stuff though. . .

-Also, when someone calls your name, Fozzie, its impolite to not respond, a zillion threads is not a good enough
excuse. . . https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=322666
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2014-02-28 09:35:15 UTC
STush T wrote:
-Harder to scan, harder to destroy, faster tractoring
why would i use the original MTU then? If cost is the only benefit to using the original, then doesnt that hint at Pay 2 Win?


lol
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2014-02-28 11:01:52 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
STush T wrote:
-Harder to scan, harder to destroy, faster tractoring
why would i use the original MTU then? If cost is the only benefit to using the original, then doesnt that hint at Pay 2 Win?


lol


I guess we'd better get rid of all faction and T2 modules then...

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

GeeShizzle MacCloud
#55 - 2014-02-28 12:02:33 UTC
i know this might be out of the scope of the MTU's but can capital/super wrecks be changed so they arent tractor-able, i find it extremely strange seeing a carrier wreck being tractored around faster than most frigates can fly through space.

even stranger is seeing super and titan wrecks charging around the battlefield too like theyre ceptors or something! (doesnt happen as often though)
Cheng Musana
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#56 - 2014-02-28 13:26:16 UTC
Cant wait to see MTU's for 500mil a pop. I seriously dont need faster working MTU's. what i need now is a deployable which can salvage next to my regular MTU.
Bkdvr
Nuke Waste
Domain Research and Mining Inst. Logistics
#57 - 2014-02-28 15:15:30 UTC
Instead of making two variations of the same thing, make one faster and make the other salvage.
STush T
House of Tuachair
#58 - 2014-02-28 15:56:26 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
STush T wrote:
-Harder to scan, harder to destroy, faster tractoring
why would i use the original MTU then? If cost is the only benefit to using the original, then doesnt that hint at Pay 2 Win?


lol


I guess we'd better get rid of all faction and T2 modules then...



Saying its pay2win is a bit extreme i agree, but if the meta does everything better then the original, why use the original?
Get rid of faction and t2. . .except they have a use, have benefits and drawbacks, and perform different task with different modules, so poor example.

Example of pay to win,
2 items in game, one does function A, the other does the same function A, but 50% better. The only difference is it cost however much more. The player with more money can afford the more expensive item giving him a clear advantage of 50% because of no other reason then he can afford it.

Minor and trivial, but still there. Anyway, dont really care about that, What I care about are things like corp deployment? If this is so much work, why wasnt it done for the original launch of the mtu? Were it me, it would be more important to finish the original MTU before i added more variants.

I havent heard much ranting and raving about wanting MTUs that are harder to probe, or even one that is harder to pop, but i have ranted and raved about "Launch for Corp" and received some positive support. (As well as the wreck juggling issue, but I pick and choose my battles to lose)

These new variants are just grief tears in a can. Nothing of real interest, just a way for other players to burn your isk.
I support forgetting these for now, and correcting the shortfalls of the one we have already.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#59 - 2014-02-28 17:45:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Riskless looting.

Bears can scoop MTU under fire and access loot during the aggression.

I say MTU under fire shouldn't be accessible, attackers are already penalized by suspect flag.
It takes a minute to kill a MTU in most cases and they cost too little to have any downsides atm.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2014-02-28 19:01:13 UTC
STush T wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
STush T wrote:
-Harder to scan, harder to destroy, faster tractoring
why would i use the original MTU then? If cost is the only benefit to using the original, then doesnt that hint at Pay 2 Win?


lol


I guess we'd better get rid of all faction and T2 modules then...



Saying its pay2win is a bit extreme i agree, but if the meta does everything better then the original, why use the original?
Get rid of faction and t2. . .except they have a use, have benefits and drawbacks, and perform different task with different modules, so poor example.

Example of pay to win,
2 items in game, one does function A, the other does the same function A, but 50% better. The only difference is it cost however much more. The player with more money can afford the more expensive item giving him a clear advantage of 50% because of no other reason then he can afford it.

Minor and trivial, but still there. Anyway, dont really care about that, What I care about are things like corp deployment? If this is so much work, why wasnt it done for the original launch of the mtu? Were it me, it would be more important to finish the original MTU before i added more variants.

I havent heard much ranting and raving about wanting MTUs that are harder to probe, or even one that is harder to pop, but i have ranted and raved about "Launch for Corp" and received some positive support. (As well as the wreck juggling issue, but I pick and choose my battles to lose)

These new variants are just grief tears in a can. Nothing of real interest, just a way for other players to burn your isk.
I support forgetting these for now, and correcting the shortfalls of the one we have already.


A meta-2 MTU will cost more money but yield a higher rate of return on that investment, so it's closer to an asset and risk allocation choice rather than pay to win.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".