These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#261 - 2014-05-18 04:42:37 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Now all we need are rig slots for freighters (hint, hint)...

Ask and ye shall receive.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
M Key
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#262 - 2014-05-18 07:28:02 UTC
Wow, I'm quite impressed with how quick this went from "hey cool" to a giant F-U to anyone wanting to haul things.

How about a downside of agility reduction? Not going to be popular with most people, but atleast the rigs have some use.
Dave Stark
#263 - 2014-05-18 08:12:50 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Now all we need are rig slots for freighters (hint, hint)...

Ask and ye shall receive.

and then ye shall enter despair.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#264 - 2014-05-18 09:04:44 UTC
In the case of freighters yet another case of unbroken elements of the game being 'fixed'. We only have ourselves to blame for asking for module and/or rig slots to be available on freighters. By 'we' I mean the whingers who have been going on about it for ages.

At least we won't have the 'extra materials' added to the freighter BPO's which was my main worry about capital ships of all sizes being 'fixed' .........ahem......... I meant 'rebalanced'. Roll

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#265 - 2014-05-19 00:26:49 UTC
just realised i can tank a rettie better with these rigs.

YUSSS!!!

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Adolf Kaundur
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#266 - 2014-05-19 23:45:39 UTC
Well, when can we expect to see these hit the ground on sisi?
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#267 - 2014-05-20 01:17:23 UTC
M Key wrote:
Wow, I'm quite impressed with how quick this went from "hey cool" to a giant F-U to anyone wanting to haul things.

How about a downside of agility reduction? Not going to be popular with most people, but atleast the rigs have some use.

Hull rigs that had an agility reduction, hmmm, sorry nope - The aim here is to have drawbacks on the rigs that affects the ships which could most benefit from them - Haulers, hence cargo reduction is the best way to go.

Freighters, Jump Freighters, will have cargo capacity reduced in line with the added ability to fit Cargo Optimization Rigs. Fitting Hull Rigs to one of these ships will further reduce cargo capacity. Sounds fair to me (no it doesn't), especially when you consider, Cargo rigs have a drawback to Armor Amount.
Double Nerf to Freighters is just what all the freighter pilots out there were after.

All Drawbacks with little to no additional benefit. Yay team, way to go

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#268 - 2014-05-20 01:59:26 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:

Hull rigs that had an agility reduction, hmmm, sorry nope - The aim here is to have drawbacks on the rigs that affects the ships which could most benefit from them - Haulers, hence cargo reduction is the best way to go.

Agility directly affects Haulers since align time is highly important.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#269 - 2014-05-20 03:52:10 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

Hull rigs that had an agility reduction, hmmm, sorry nope - The aim here is to have drawbacks on the rigs that affects the ships which could most benefit from them - Haulers, hence cargo reduction is the best way to go.

Agility directly affects Haulers since align time is highly important.

So you believe losing up to 1/3rd of your cargo capacity is ok, as long as you can align a few seconds faster?
I believe there would be more than a few JF pilots who would disagree.
With the ability to fit rigs to a freighter comes a reduction in cargo capacity, fitting Hull rigs further reduces cargo capacity.
Doesn't matter how agile the ship is if it severely reduces its effectiveness for its intended role, IE; Moving large amounts of freight across vast areas.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#270 - 2014-05-20 09:31:05 UTC
No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#271 - 2014-05-20 10:54:35 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs.

Sorry I misunderstood your response.
I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable


My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#272 - 2014-05-20 11:29:21 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs.

Sorry I misunderstood your response.
I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable


If these rigs had an agility drawback, haulers don't really have an interesting choice to make. In terms of value: Cargo=EHP>>align time.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#273 - 2014-05-20 12:20:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs.

Sorry I misunderstood your response.
I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable


If these rigs had an agility drawback, haulers don't really have an interesting choice to make. In terms of value: Cargo=EHP>>align time.

It isn't about interesting choices, it is about losing a massive amount of cargo capacity on a ship designed to carry cargo.
Where is the interesting choice about losing 1/3 or more of your cargo capacity?
Bulkhead is having its drawback changed from agility to cargo capacity - Another not so interesting choice for JF pilots to make.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#274 - 2014-05-20 21:40:43 UTC
meaningful choice =/= choice u like

and thats the point. thats what makes it meaningful and interesting

and 2x things about losing 1/3 of ur cargo

1) even with no skills u dnt lose 1/3
2) with skills u half ur penalty

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#275 - 2014-05-21 01:40:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Daichi Yamato wrote:
meaningful choice =/= choice u like

and thats the point. thats what makes it meaningful and interesting

and 2x things about losing 1/3 of ur cargo

1) even with no skills u dnt lose 1/3
2) with skills u half ur penalty

Current cargo capacity is being reduced with the introduction of rigging for Freighters.
You will have less cargo capacity to start with, fitting hull rigs and bulkhead further reduces cargo capacity.
Orca
No modules = 37,500 m3
Cargo Optimization ll X 2 + Cargo Optimization l X 1 + Expanded Cargohold ll = 100,951 m3
Hull HP rig with max skills = 5% cargo reduction X 3 = 15% reduction (without stacking penalty)
Bulkhead ll = 11% cargo space reduction.

So we have max skill cargo hold capacity of 37,500 m3 minus 26% = 28,000 m3 +- a bit.

Freighters will have base cargo reduced to = 100% of current capacity with cargo optimization rigs and modules fit.
Using Orca as the example, fit for max cargo, the fittings = roughly 3X base cargo
A max skill Rhea 367,900 m3. Reduce base cargo to = 100% of current using Cargo Optimization rigs and modules = roughly 122,750 m3 base max skill cargo hold.
Fit for Hull tanking, you have base cargo hold of 122,750 - 26% for fitting drawbacks, you end up with a Jump Freighter with a cargo hold of around 92k m3. Or just big enough to carry the fuel needed to move it about and a couple of packaged frigates and fittings..

Alternatively, if cargo holds on Jump Freighters is not reduced, the ability to fit Cargo rigs and expanders will = a max skill Rhea with a cargo hold of around 1m m3.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#276 - 2014-05-21 02:06:54 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
This is going to kill my hull repping Vexor fit since it won't be cap stable without a cap booster - and I can't fit any cap boosters in my cargohold because of these stupid cargo reduction penalties to hull rigs and reinforced bulkheads.

/troll
Captain Finklestein
Doomheim
#277 - 2014-05-22 03:21:19 UTC
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
No, my point was that a loss of agility is a real down side to a hauler, so is perfectly fine penalty for these rigs. And keeps with similar theme to speed loss for armour rigs.

Sorry I misunderstood your response.
I agree an agility drawback for hull rigs would seem more reasonable


If these rigs had an agility drawback, haulers don't really have an interesting choice to make. In terms of value: Cargo=EHP>>align time.

Not when I'm web-warping my freighter to avoid being ganked by your alliance.

With a nomad set it may be a moot point, but without one losing significant agility will prevent insta-webwarping.

It's just more financially viable for me.
Draconus Lofwyr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#278 - 2014-05-24 21:07:26 UTC
with the changes to the freighter/jf to now use lowslots instead of the proposed rig slots, are these still being released? if so, is there any chance to also introduce a capital hull repairer module? this would allow the rorqual the possibility of hull tanking.
Charlie Firpol
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#279 - 2014-05-26 11:36:00 UTC
These rigs and the change to bulkheads is still going to come right? It will make my hulltanked algos so much more awesome (even though that is barely possible)

The Butcher of Black Rise - eve-radio.com
Thorado
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#280 - 2014-05-29 19:28:52 UTC
Like the idea in principle

Not seen anything on the usefulness of the hull repair modules. Are these likely to be fixed so as to be useful/effective and how about making them low slot modules as in the case of armour reppers.
Similarly are there likely to be rigs affecting the amount and speed of the repair modules.