These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

Bring back the old crucifier hull

Author
Muestereate
Minions LLC
#41 - 2014-03-02 15:43:54 UTC
Crucifier, nail shape, amarian religious back-story, good ewar system. Was a good ship with personality.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#42 - 2014-03-03 08:32:04 UTC
The old design was sleek and elegant, this new design is caldari in ugliness and minmatar in colour. You've only got to look at the amarr rookie ship to see that the crucifier is clearly upside down and obviously so.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...

Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#43 - 2014-03-03 10:41:03 UTC
There are really people who preferred the old flying abortion to the new Crucifier?

Man, you people are just insane. This is the pure essence of madness here.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#44 - 2014-03-03 11:19:49 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
God yes, bring back the old model, the new model looks like it's flying upside down, plus we were told that it would be animated and I have yet to see any animation on it.

Also the artists have got carried away with the scaling, it looks far too big to be a frigate hull, not unless those windows are tiny.

OP +1

Yep, it looks like it should be some sort of heavily armoured cruiser, and not the fragile electronic attack frigate which it is. Artists should alter it or use the model for something more appropriate.
Kiryen O'Bannon
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#45 - 2014-03-03 11:56:47 UTC
the old model was one of the worst models in the game.

asymmetry in the overall structure of a ship is silly and should never happen. small parts, like the pod on the megathron's side or the cockpit on the millenium falcon are understandable, but in both cases the main hull is generally symmetrical. asymmetry just makes a ship complex for no corresponding gain.

real warships are only asymmetrical when they need to be. aircraft carriers are, but they have a distict reason to be that way. asymmetrical turret arrangements were tried with some early British dreadnought battleship classes, but they were dispensed with because in line turrets accomplished the same goal of a full broadside better,with less complex internal arrangements. EVE may not be strong on realism and science, but theres no reason to exaggerate that with ship models that just have pieces hanging all over the place for no good reason.

Eternal Father, King of birth, /Who didst create the heaven and earth, /And bid the planets and the sun/ Their own appointed orbits run; /O hear us when we seek thy grace /For those who soar through outer space.

Naomi Anthar
#46 - 2014-03-03 12:25:02 UTC
No No No No No No No No and again No. New Cruci hull looks great, just like Sentinel. Both ships also got rebalanced so they are viable options in non ugly hull ;).

And it's not caldari ... go back to your moas and blackbirds - Amarr hulls need some style and grace.
Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2014-03-03 12:55:53 UTC
Why did you even bother making this thread?

CCP spent actual development time and money making a new model for the Crucifier. They're not going to just go "oh, bring back the old one" because some people don't like it.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Klingon Admiral
Carcinisation
#48 - 2014-03-03 13:00:51 UTC
The problem I have with the Crucifier hull is that it looks like a fat Executioner or Slicer.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#49 - 2014-03-03 13:19:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
I swear to god, you people are on drugs and will have a hissy fit about literally ANYTHING.

If you hate change that much, why are you playing a constantly-changing game like EVE?

Jasen Harper wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:


It has a T2 paint but the Viziam base color (for most of the armor parts) looks very similar to the standard Amarr color, and the Viziam color for the ornaments has this slight green cast, which is very prominent on their other ships, like the Prorator, but not so much on the Sentinel because it has comparatively small ornamental areas.

It is not supposed to be animated just yet. As the Art Dept stated during FF2013, they are going to remodel ships with features in mind that allow for an implementation of transformation animations of their hulls in the future. They never stated an exact date when this animation would happen.



Okay, I stand corrected on the t2 paint scheme however all 4 marauders are animated and came that way when they were changed for Rubicon. There is absolutely no reason why a brand new ship, that is obviously supposed to be animated shouldn't be on release. Anything said about it at this point is simply an excuse.


Since you have clearly never flown or interacted with a Marauder in your entire life, let me clue you in: Marauders need a special module to trigger that animation, and you only see it when that module is active. Where is the animation-triggering module or status for the Crucifier's animation? OH RIGHT. IT DOESN'T HAVE ONE YET.

Nobody's come up with any ideas yet for what should trigger animations on subcaps other than Marauders yet. Nobody's designed modules or statuses or special operation modes for anything of the sort. They're re-designing ships with the animation included right now so that they don't have to go back and re-design them again later. Get your head out of your ass and stop acting so bloody self-entitled.

Not that it matters. Any reason in the world, no matter how important or true it may be is just an excuse, right? Logic and reality and resource limitations? Nonsense! Those are just pathetic excuses! CCP has no right to deny you your animations when you want them to be delivered and they should be grateful you don't demand that they pay you to play their game! Right?

People like you are the reason CCP doesn't tell us as much about development as they used to. For that, you have my eternal contempt.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#50 - 2014-03-03 16:05:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Actually, CCP themselves suggested in the art panel that normal modules could trigger the animation, if it gets implemented at some point. So, for example on the Crucifier, the activation of Tracking Disruptors could trigger the hull animation ... in the future.

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.

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#51 - 2014-03-04 13:07:31 UTC
Certainly, but that doesn't invalidate what I said.
Previous page123