These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123Next page
 

Make so that rigged ship can be repackaged and transported without losing the rigs

Author
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#21 - 2011-12-01 14:12:25 UTC
@Robert

Indeed, cars don't get repackaged for transport, but planes do. How about this, slight aftermarket modification and you can't disassemble the plane for transport, and its stuck in non-transportable form. With wingspan of maybe thirty meters for big plane, your only option for transport is really big ship.

Cool
Velicitia
XS Tech
#22 - 2011-12-01 14:25:22 UTC
Yeah, RL analogies have flaws Sad

But you *can* disassemble the plane -- you're just stuck destroying whatever that rigging you added to it. If you don't want to destroy the rigging you can:
a. fly it "home" under its own power
b. put it on a specialised platform that will get it "home" (e.g. the former U.S. space shuttles got carted around on 747s)

Works the same way in EVE...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#23 - 2011-12-01 14:26:46 UTC
you're right, there is always a RL analogy that sucks more than others
CobaltSixty
Fawkes' Loyal Professionals
#24 - 2011-12-01 14:32:16 UTC
Ultimately the point I think you're missing here is that rigs are implants for your ship - it's a game balance thing, nothing more. Just in the same way that you can't pop out implants and re-use them on a different clone, you can't take rigs off without destroying them. Repackaging strips all fittings, including any rigs, cargo, etc. from the ship as it's assumed to be disassembled and put back into the handy organizer box that comes with every ship.

If you're upset about not being able to move battleships around in Orcas, petition for a 100,000m³ increase in the size of their ship hangar. Every other subcapital fits just fine, and that change would still bring them up to only half the size of a carrier / Rorqual. Even so, considering you'd only be able to fit one battleship, you might be better just to fly it to your destination like you have to do now.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#25 - 2011-12-01 14:33:12 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
you're right, there is always a RL analogy that sucks more than others



been making crap RL : EVE analogies since 2007 Blink

or were you not directing that to me?

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#26 - 2011-12-01 14:54:20 UTC
Nestara Aldent wrote:


If limitations are fun, I'm sure such limitations could be made to the game to make you go crazy trying to play it. You can think my idea is bad, but if you want to explain your opinion, though nobody forces you to explain it, try to make sense.

This change wouldn't make the game easier. Not a single aspect of the game. It would be just a convenience.


That "convenience" right there can already be had. You can repackage your ships and make them easier to transport as is. However, currently, you have to make a choice if that "convenience" is worth losing your rigs or not. This is good.

This "feature" forces you to make a choice. Working as intended.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#27 - 2011-12-01 14:56:22 UTC
Also, you idiots need to stop making RL comparisons. No one cares.

The game is not balanced around lore or RL comparisons. The game is designed around gameplay and the effects your decisions have on yourself and others.

No one here gives a damn about cars or planes.
Prizon
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2011-12-01 17:45:05 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:


You're correct. Rigs are different than modules.... Modules can be removed from the ship, rigs cannot.

However, that's really the only difference.


Hardly.
I am a manufacturer and rigs r nothing like mods, unless u r only reffering to the attributes.

They have drawbacks no mod has, and they cannot b turned of.

That being stated it is quite clear that they act like part of the ship but they really are not. the rig not repackaging presents a beautifull dillema on how a player will play the game.

Rig the hell out of the hulls thus making you more stationary than not

Let them rigless and be nomadic

Use the best of both worlds

and these r not the only choices at hand.

The rig destruction when repackaged should stay as is.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2011-12-01 18:27:02 UTC
OK OK OK....


Lets make an agreement here then.

Ships can't be repackaged with rigs.

HOWEVER....

When ships are put into a curior contract and shoved into wahtever they're transported in....

Then certain things are done that reduce the m3 of the ship..

Such as

Removing antennas
Folding in wings
Retracting weapons bays


You know, basically small things that aren't repacking, but reduce the overall m3 of the vessel for transport.

The ship will not be as small as it would be if repackaged, but it would reduce the m3.

Take a scorpion for example.

468,000 m3 unpackaged

50,000 m3 packaged.

So instead of repackaging it or forcing couriors to transport it at a fully unpackaged m3, then lets just say that the ship is prepared for transport (much like a fighter on a U.S. carrier) anything that can fold up gets folded up... Anything that can be taken off is taken off.

Anyone who's ever tried package a ton of items into one space knows that taking an antenna off of something is enough to clear up a whole new area to put crap. And there's many other things you can do as well, like putting boxes into other boxes and so on.

So what I'm saying is that prepping it for shipment is different than packaging the ship.

packaging the ship makes it 50k m3.

Lets say that prepping the ship for transport reduces the m3 by half.

So a prepped for transport scorpion would be 234k m3.

Now, they can only be done like this for curior contracts.

This means players with frieghters will be able to transport more rigged ships, but not a crap load of them like they could unrigged ships.


I think this is fair, makes sense on lore, and makes sense when you try to compare it to a real world situation like a fighter that goes on a carrier. The wings can be folded to make it take up less space, or the plane can be completely disassembled and tossed in a box where is will take up even less room because it's a nice square box that can be fitted snuggly into a storage compartment.

I feel this actually makes sense.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#30 - 2011-12-01 19:18:27 UTC
For the love of god Joe Risalo, stop writing an essay for every response (and hitting the enter key after every sentence).

Make your point and move on; you're not being verbose, you're being long winded and ultimately ineffective.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#31 - 2011-12-01 19:20:24 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:


I think this is fair, makes sense on lore, and makes sense when you try to compare it to a real world situation like a fighter that goes on a carrier. The wings can be folded to make it take up less space, or the plane can be completely disassembled and tossed in a box where is will take up even less room because it's a nice square box that can be fitted snuggly into a storage compartment.

I feel this actually makes sense.


Good god you just don't get it do you?

The game is not designed around lore. Lore is created to suit proper game balance. And if this game were designed with real life parameters involved....well it just wouldn't exist.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#32 - 2011-12-01 19:29:51 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:


I think this is fair, makes sense on lore, and makes sense when you try to compare it to a real world situation like a fighter that goes on a carrier. The wings can be folded to make it take up less space, or the plane can be completely disassembled and tossed in a box where is will take up even less room because it's a nice square box that can be fitted snuggly into a storage compartment.

I feel this actually makes sense.


Good god you just don't get it do you?

The game is not designed around lore. Lore is created to suit proper game balance. And if this game were designed with real life parameters involved....well it just wouldn't exist.


I swear dude, you hate on everything that is typed by anyone..

I never see you type one possitive thing.

I can't remember a single comment you have posted on this character or your alt that agrees with anything anyone has said.

Oh, and the only reason why I said makes sense with lore and makes sense in the real world

IS BECAUSE

IT MAKES SENSE!!!!

This is something that can be easily implmented into Eve that would increase the overall happiness of players.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#33 - 2011-12-01 19:34:13 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:


I swear dude, you hate on everything that is typed by anyone..

I never see you type one possitive thing.

I can't remember a single comment you have posted on this character or your alt that agrees with anything anyone has said.



I can't remember a single time when you have made a post that didn't involve you hitting the enter key after every sentence. More on topic, I support stuff just fine. AF buff, destroy stations, etc. Unfortunately, the horrible ideas outweigh the good ideas. A large portion of the ideas brought to this subforum (and to Assembly Hall) have a fundamental goal: make the game easier. This is not a good thing.

Quote:
Oh, and the only reason why I said makes sense with lore and makes sense in the real world

IS BECAUSE

IT MAKES SENSE!!!!



Sweet. Still don't care. This idea would mean one less choice to make in Eve, essentially one further step in dumbing Eve down. This is silly.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#34 - 2011-12-01 19:40:47 UTC
PS Joe, I think its cute you have a crush on me.

Just be aware that I don't kiss on the first date, and I'm waiting for marriage to have sex.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2011-12-01 19:45:27 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:

I can't remember a single time when you have made a post that didn't involve you hitting the enter key after every sentence. More on topic, I support stuff just fine. AF buff, destroy stations, etc. Unfortunately, the horrible ideas outweigh the good ideas. A large portion of the ideas brought to this subforum (and to Assembly Hall) have a fundamental goal: make the game easier. This is not a good thing.


This actually only makes life slightly easier on what my suggestion was.
A freighter fitting 4 rigged bs's is only slightly better than 2

Quote:
Sweet. Still don't care. This idea would mean one less choice to make in Eve, essentially one further step in dumbing Eve down. This is silly.


Like I said, my suggestion is only a slight benefit to transports, but enough to make a difference.
Where as the OP would make a huge difference.
I think my suggestion fits well in Eve.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#36 - 2011-12-01 19:46:11 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
PS Joe, I think its cute you have a crush on me.

Just be aware that I don't kiss on the first date, and I'm waiting for marriage to have sex.


that's fair..

sex is always better if you wait anyway
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#37 - 2011-12-01 19:50:13 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Emperor Salazar wrote:

I can't remember a single time when you have made a post that didn't involve you hitting the enter key after every sentence. More on topic, I support stuff just fine. AF buff, destroy stations, etc. Unfortunately, the horrible ideas outweigh the good ideas. A large portion of the ideas brought to this subforum (and to Assembly Hall) have a fundamental goal: make the game easier. This is not a good thing.


This actually only makes life slightly easier on what my suggestion was.
A freighter fitting 4 rigged bs's is only slightly better than 2

Quote:
Sweet. Still don't care. This idea would mean one less choice to make in Eve, essentially one further step in dumbing Eve down. This is silly.


Like I said, my suggestion is only a slight benefit to transports, but enough to make a difference.
Where as the OP would make a huge difference.
I think my suggestion fits well in Eve.


Your suggestion is a 100% increase.

Its not better. Its just slightly less bad.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#38 - 2011-12-01 19:50:48 UTC
PS: please remove your enter key, TIA
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#39 - 2011-12-01 19:59:52 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Your suggestion is a 100% increase.

Its not better. Its just slightly less bad.


That's why I think my suggestion fits well. 100% isn't a huge difference, it's 4 bs's instead of 2, but that's enough to make a huge difference in Eve for the price of curior missions and the amount that can be transported at once.
Feligast
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2011-12-01 20:17:02 UTC
This is a bad idea, and the OP should feel bad. Get over yourself, buy new rigs or move it.. gasp.. THROUGH GATES.
Previous page123Next page