These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Hull Hitpoint Rigs

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Paz Heiwa
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#121 - 2014-04-30 23:38:10 UTC
Baneken wrote:
Gotta love all the pirate QQ in this thread over being forced to bring a tad more people then usual to gank an orca. Pirate

This change should somewhat increase survivability for industrial ships and PvP applications also sound interesting.

Because we need another hisec buff.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#122 - 2014-05-01 00:14:47 UTC
Paz Heiwa wrote:
Baneken wrote:
Gotta love all the pirate QQ in this thread over being forced to bring a tad more people then usual to gank an orca. Pirate

This change should somewhat increase survivability for industrial ships and PvP applications also sound interesting.

Because we need another hisec buff.

Confirming that carebears tank their stuff in the first place.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#123 - 2014-05-01 06:26:10 UTC
Paz Heiwa wrote:
Because we need another hisec buff.


You are straying dangerously far from the code. The code does not say that hisec players should not be given options to make their play safer. It merely says they should be punished for NOT CHOOSING TO USE those options.

You should be welcoming this addition with open arms because it gives code-compliant miners a chance to further demonstrate just how far they've come from their bot-aspirant beginnings.
Kosetzu
The Black Crow Bandits
Northern Coalition.
#124 - 2014-05-01 12:36:53 UTC
Bait hull tanked Navy Mega... mmmmm
Valterra Craven
#125 - 2014-05-01 16:04:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Valterra Craven
Fozie, what are the chances that this becomes a medium change and you add leadership skills and t1 and t2 links to the list of hull additions? Also add a bonus 3% leadership for all the battle cruisers for Hull tanks... You can even leave out the implant to see how things shake out first...

I'd love to actually have a more viable way to "tank" freighters and make it more expensive for goons to gank them... Twisted
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#126 - 2014-05-01 18:59:39 UTC
I have a better solution.

Why not create a rigging system for each Slot Section with a generalized slot selection for each ship?

The total number of modules slots would determine the total number of rig slots for that section of modules.

Take for example the Procurer

1 x high slot
4 x medium slots
2 x low slots

The new rigging system would have the following rig slots for each module section.

1 x high slot - zero rig slots
4 x medium slots - 2 rig slots for medium slot related modules - 100 calibration points per rig slot
2x low slots - 1 rig slot for low slot related modules - 100 calibration points

plus two general use rig slots in the normal location

Using the general rig slots would just require learning the associated Rig Skills. But with the Module Section Specific Rig Slot you have to learn the same rig skills to level five.

The Module Section Specific Rig Slots could be used to add additional T1 or T2 rigs as well as from what I am reading about could possibly be the inception of Factional based rigs which could only be used in the Module Section Specific Rig Slots.
Andy Koraka
State War Academy
Caldari State
#127 - 2014-05-02 01:21:27 UTC
This is a pretty harsh stealth-nerf to suicide ganking. Considering the 60% omni resist from a DCU II is a lot higher than the 30/47 therm/kin T1 shield resists, and the 3x Hull rigs net you the same raw Hull HP that 3x CDFE do, that's no small EHP buff. Especially when the T1 barges along with their new hull tank, still have a midslot (or two) for an Adaptive Invulnurability Field II.

A lot of ships that were marginal for a well skilled T2 catalyst to solo are going to always need a second ship. Actually, with the new Hull rigs a pair of T2 catas in a .5 system probably couldn't take down a Retriever using a DCU II/Adaptive Invuln II unless they had perfect gunnery sklils and timed their shots perfectly.
Violette Tenebris
Perkone
Caldari State
#128 - 2014-05-02 07:29:22 UTC
Will These have stacking penalties (as the reinforced bulkheads do not)

as this could get pretty practical on say some of the navy ships with their raised ehp values/bulkheads not costing nearly as much fitting room (IE BIGGER Guns) as their armor counterparts.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#129 - 2014-05-02 09:10:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Lena Lazair
Andy Koraka wrote:
A lot of ships that were marginal for a well skilled T2 catalyst to solo are going to always need a second ship. Actually, with the new Hull rigs a pair of T2 catas in a .5 system probably couldn't take down a Retriever using a DCU II/Adaptive Invuln II unless they had perfect gunnery sklils and timed their shots perfectly.


If I fit a ship specifically to resist suicide ganking at the expense of all other possible advantages (losing a low slot and all my rigs), then I SHOULD be hard to gank. I don't get why this is unfair or a nerf to ganking. It's like people complaining that warp core stabs force you to bring more than one scrambler. Yeah, gee, ya think?

HTFU, this is EVE. Find a target from the 95% of players who won't bother to fit against suicide ganking and will never use these rigs anyway. Or make some friends and bring more cats. Geez...
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#130 - 2014-05-02 16:26:46 UTC
Lena Lazair wrote:
HTFU, this is EVE. Find a target from the 95% of players who won't bother to fit against suicide ganking and will never use these rigs anyway. Or make some friends and bring more cats. Geez...


No-one said it was gonna be impossible to suicide gank. But nonetheless, this is a buff to Orcas/Industrials/Miners and another nerf to suicide ganking.
Malcolm Malicious
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#131 - 2014-05-02 18:34:17 UTC
Finally, my hull tankers will be semi viable :D
Powers Sa
#132 - 2014-05-02 19:00:11 UTC
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.

Do you like winning t2 frigs and dictors for Dirt Cheap?https://eveninggames.net/register/ref/dQddmNgyLhFBqNJk

Remeber: Gambling addiction is no laughing matter unless you've lost a vast space fortune on the internet.
Victor Dathar
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#133 - 2014-05-02 19:04:27 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.


Nom nom nom goonie tears

^^^ lol that post is so bad you should get back 2 GBS m8 o7

@grr_goons : Wisdom, Insight, GBS Posts
Burneddi
Avanto
Hole Control
#134 - 2014-05-02 19:21:52 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.

This must be done, especially so if they aren't going to adjust freighter base cargo holds.
El Space Mariachi
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#135 - 2014-05-02 19:22:55 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.


powers may be a goonNOOB but he is correct. Compromise is a cornerstone of Eve.

gay gamers for jesus
Anslo
Scope Works
#136 - 2014-05-02 19:56:58 UTC
El Space Mariachi wrote:
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.


powers may be a goonNOOB but he is correct. Compromise is a cornerstone of Eve.


HTFU

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Oleg Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#137 - 2014-05-02 19:58:36 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
The Slayer
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#138 - 2014-05-02 19:58:45 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.


Adapt you goonie scumbag.
The Slayer
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#139 - 2014-05-02 19:59:41 UTC
The Slayer wrote:


Adapt you goonie scumbag.


wrong account sorry disregard
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#140 - 2014-05-02 19:59:43 UTC
Anslo wrote:

HTFU

that doesn't mean what you think it means

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.