These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
#181 - 2014-05-05 17:47:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Aureus Ahishatsu
Personally I would like to see some type of special ship introduced into the game that is along the "ORE" shipline which would be unique in that it would be the only logi ship to give a bonus to remote/ self hull repairs. Granted this ship would be very circumstantial but it would encourage some of the large industry groups to travel in a fleet. As of right now if you have a support group with a freighter or an orca the only thing you can do is hopefully out dps the opposing fleet before they pop your hauling ship as the hull and not the shield or armor accounts for the major of the ships total HP. The ship could even have even stats across the board of armor shield and hull so that it is equally supportable by any arrangement of ships. The catch being that since base stats are even it doesn't have quite the tank as other ships which are designed for just one line. As much as people love ganking freighters/ orcas full of loot. There should be a reward/ benefit to flying with 1/2 of these logi ships designed specifically to keep your big semi truck hauling stuff alive.
Jur Tissant
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#182 - 2014-05-07 05:15:23 UTC
Now we've just got to create a set of ships focused specifically on hull strength.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#183 - 2014-05-07 09:38:58 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Liafcipe9000 wrote:
Tengu Grib wrote:
Real men hull tank. Thanks CCP! Now we can do it for REAL!

this.

I checked the numbers in evehq. A hull tanked neutageddon will have more ehp than an armour tanked neutageddon - if you ignore the effect of gang links.

This is because the hull rigs give a 5% larger bonus when compared to trimarks.



lol whats a domi look like?


Something like this I would have thought:
[Dominix, neut]

3x Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I
3x Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I

2x Heavy Capacitor Booster II (Navy Cap Booster 800)
Large Capacitor Battery II
Warp Disruptor II
100MN Microwarpdrive II

Damage Control II
6x Reinforced Bulkheads II

3x Structure Rig II

5x Curator II
5x Warrior II
5x Ogre II

Which if my maths are correct gives total EHP of over 200k, of which 198k is in structure.

I think it's quite a compelling proposition.

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".
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2014-05-07 09:50:09 UTC
then there's 'surprise hull neut kronos!'

[Kronos, hull neut]

3x Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Bastion Module I
4x Neutron Blaster Cannon II (Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L)

Heavy Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I
Federation Navy Stasis Webifier
100MN Microwarpdrive II
Republic Fleet Warp Disruptor

6x Reinforced Bulkheads II
Damage Control II

2x Hull Rig II

5x Hammerhead II


Which has 252690 EHP in structure alone
and delivers 836dps along with the neuts.

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".
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#185 - 2014-05-07 10:25:01 UTC
Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.

I just got back to work after a bit of post-fanfest death plague recovery. I'm working through a bunch of threads to catch up on what was discussed over Fanfest and the last two days.

I'm all caught up on this thread, and although I won't make a decision quite yet, I do find the arguments for hull rigs affecting cargo to be quite compelling. I'll give it some more thought.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Dave stark
#186 - 2014-05-07 10:56:38 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I'm all caught up on this thread, and although I won't make a decision quite yet, I do find the arguments for hull rigs affecting cargo to be quite compelling. I'll give it some more thought.


for the sake of consistency; bulkheads have a speed penalty, therefore so should the rigs.

does that mean, if you decide on a cargo penalty that you'd also change the penalty on bulkheads?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#187 - 2014-05-07 10:59:26 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I'm all caught up on this thread, and although I won't make a decision quite yet, I do find the arguments for hull rigs affecting cargo to be quite compelling. I'll give it some more thought.


for the sake of consistency; bulkheads have a speed penalty, therefore so should the rigs.

does that mean, if you decide on a cargo penalty that you'd also change the penalty on bulkheads?


I won't rule it out, but changing one doesn't mean we'd NEED to change the other.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Kankame
nExperience Industries Inc.
#188 - 2014-05-07 10:59:27 UTC
I would go with an increase in mass, higher aligntime, inertia and/or slower speed

If you decide for such a tweak, then please change the other rigs that affect the same stats. For Example the Cargohold Optimization to reduce Hullpoints and not Armor would make more sense to me.

Founder and CEO of Mercantile Club Capsuleer Association located in Kaimon - The Citadel Caldari Roleplayer
Kankame
nExperience Industries Inc.
#189 - 2014-05-07 11:05:51 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I'm all caught up on this thread, and although I won't make a decision quite yet, I do find the arguments for hull rigs affecting cargo to be quite compelling. I'll give it some more thought.


for the sake of consistency; bulkheads have a speed penalty, therefore so should the rigs.

does that mean, if you decide on a cargo penalty that you'd also change the penalty on bulkheads?


I won't rule it out, but changing one doesn't mean we'd NEED to change the other.


It would make much more sense or you have to explain the "Why" this module does change that and not the other stat very good in the description.

Why not a small penalty to everything ^^

Founder and CEO of Mercantile Club Capsuleer Association located in Kaimon - The Citadel Caldari Roleplayer
Dave stark
#190 - 2014-05-07 11:11:41 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I won't rule it out, but changing one doesn't mean we'd NEED to change the other.


this is true, the cargo rigs don't share a penalty with cargo modules. i just like things to be all the same and consistent.
Warr Akini
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#191 - 2014-05-07 11:13:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Warr Akini
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.

I just got back to work after a bit of post-fanfest death plague recovery. I'm working through a bunch of threads to catch up on what was discussed over Fanfest and the last two days.

I'm all caught up on this thread, and although I won't make a decision quite yet, I do find the arguments for hull rigs affecting cargo to be quite compelling. I'll give it some more thought.


You've probably figured out very fast that reducing cargo for something like a hulltanking battleship is just as piddly of a reduction (except perhaps for those who use cap boosters, maybe) as reducing speed or armor for a freighter or jump freighter. So, if you keep rigs working they way they are, you're going to give a drastic advantage to one or the other (again noting the hilarious absolute benefit that hull rigs and cargo rigs give to freighters independently, see my previous post in this thread). I figure hardcoding something into freighters specifically is probably more likely as they are a special class of ship.

A very special class of ship to explode.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#192 - 2014-05-07 15:58:08 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I'm all caught up on this thread, and although I won't make a decision quite yet, I do find the arguments for hull rigs affecting cargo to be quite compelling. I'll give it some more thought.


for the sake of consistency; bulkheads have a speed penalty, therefore so should the rigs.

does that mean, if you decide on a cargo penalty that you'd also change the penalty on bulkheads?


I won't rule it out, but changing one doesn't mean we'd NEED to change the other.

You also have the option of placing stacking penalties on reinforced bulkheads as a way of balancing things out.

Would rather have less maximum hull HP capacity with no speed penalty than massive HP with massive speed bonus. I'm sure the Orca pilots disagree. Big smile
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#193 - 2014-05-07 16:29:49 UTC
to be honest a reduction in cargo it's not really a penalty on a bait hull tanked bs; and will be a very big hit on freighters; so maybe the speed penalty is the right thing for now
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#194 - 2014-05-07 16:49:26 UTC
Bulkheads reduce cargo, that doesn't mean these rigs would need to as well.

Nanofibers reduce structure, but polycarbs reduce armor, and that works just fine and both are noteworthy penalties.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#195 - 2014-05-07 16:53:39 UTC
Considering the ships the hull rigs are most effective, i.e. Orca and Freighters, a cargo penalty would make their usefulness rather dubious.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#196 - 2014-05-07 16:54:18 UTC
Batelle wrote:
Bulkheads reduce cargo, that doesn't mean these rigs would need to as well.

Bulkheads reduce velocity, not cargo.

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#197 - 2014-05-07 17:14:21 UTC
cool that these don't stacking penalize so we really should fit 3 or none

kinda like warp speed rigs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#198 - 2014-05-07 17:24:27 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
Considering the ships the hull rigs are most effective, i.e. Orca and Freighters, a cargo penalty would make their usefulness rather dubious.


That's the point. There needs to be trade-offs in EVE and as Fozzie put it ~have interesting fitting choices~
If hull rigs remain on velocity then as a freighter pilot I would just fit a mix of hull/warp rigs which is just a massive buff to freighters.

Depending on what rebalances are coming to freighters. Hull rigs should penalize cargos because of their extreme use to freighter/orca pilots.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#199 - 2014-05-07 17:30:01 UTC
Capqu wrote:
cool that these don't stacking penalize so we really should fit 3 or none kinda like warp speed rigs

trimarks and cdfe's are not stacking penalized either.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#200 - 2014-05-07 17:33:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
X Gallentius wrote:
Capqu wrote:
cool that these don't stacking penalize so we really should fit 3 or none kinda like warp speed rigs

trimarks and cdfe's are not stacking penalized either.


thats the point

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=340216&find=unread

the reasoning behind changing them according to fozzie is to make fitting an interesting choice in that 3rd rig slot
aka the opposite of how the most common rigs in the game works and how these new added rigs are going to work


and i quote

Quote:
Stacking penalties go a long way to making rig and module combination choices interesting instead of just slapping a max number of one thing onto your ship, and this change will keep warp rigs competitive while also providing some more interesting choices around what your third rig should be.


i mean i'd understand if it was a different dev to who made these rigs but the actual same person introduces rigs like this then says something like that in another thread blows my mind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg