These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Please fix the hardpoint layouts on the Cormorant and Ferox
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#1 - 2014-07-07 16:00:03 UTC
The Cormorant and Ferox hulls are two of my favorites, but something has long bothered me. The models are designed around an 8 turret setup, but they each only have 7 turret hardpoints. This leaves any setup using all 7 guns looking lopsided. I love asymmetry, but asymmetry without purpose bothers me.

I'd like to propose that CCP change two of the turret hardpoints on each the Cormorant and Ferox to be located along the centerline of the ship instead of left-right pairs. This still leaves the model with 8 turret hardpoints, but it allows a 7-gun fit to have a symmetrical gun layout.

Please? It wouldn't be that hard of a change to make, I think many pilots would approve of the new layout, and these hulls have been this way for as long as I can remember (~2006) without being fixed.

Thanks for the consideration.

(I know this idea must come up every so often, but I did a quick skim of the Commonly Proposed Ideas thread and didn't see any mention of it.)

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#2 - 2014-07-07 16:13:39 UTC
Turret and slot layout changes come up all the time. Your search-fu has failed you!
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#3 - 2014-07-07 16:20:34 UTC
Hy,

yes, either a remodel or revamp of those ships affected would be great, but I fear remodelling will take more time than a small edit to the ship stats, both might never happen though or take an indefinite time.

There are many more ships out there like the Dragoon, and some who are close to the chest in my case like the Myrmidon or Hyperion (which needs some extra Cap, CPU and Grid love also).

But, to be a small party pooper, this discussion already exists, feel free to join us there (3rd deja vu todayQuestion).

Cheers
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#4 - 2014-07-07 20:55:36 UTC
once they've rebalanced all the ships maybe. then they can do it all in one go. if ever.

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
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#5 - 2014-07-07 21:01:35 UTC
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
yes, either a remodel or revamp of those ships affected would be great, but I fear remodelling will take more time than a small edit to the ship stats, both might never happen though or take an indefinite time.

There are many more ships out there like the Dragoon, and some who are close to the chest in my case like the Myrmidon or Hyperion (which needs some extra Cap, CPU and Grid love also).


I'm not looking for a single change in any ship stats, or any changes in the base models, only the visual location of two of their turret hardpoints. As someone who's coded turrets on 3D spaceships before (granted, writing Homeworld mods, not in EvE), it really should be a pretty minor thing to do.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#6 - 2014-07-07 21:59:34 UTC
Ah ok, sorry .. ,)
Sigras
Conglomo
#7 - 2014-07-07 22:01:00 UTC
My Machariel and Hyperion would like to weigh in on the situation...
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#8 - 2014-07-07 22:28:17 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
The Cormorant and Ferox hulls are two of my favorites, but something has long bothered me. The models are designed around an 8 turret setup, but they each only have 7 turret hardpoints. This leaves any setup using all 7 guns looking lopsided. I love asymmetry, but asymmetry without purpose bothers me.

I'd like to propose that CCP change two of the turret hardpoints on each the Cormorant and Ferox to be located along the centerline of the ship instead of left-right pairs. This still leaves the model with 8 turret hardpoints, but it allows a 7-gun fit to have a symmetrical gun layout.

Please? It wouldn't be that hard of a change to make, I think many pilots would approve of the new layout, and these hulls have been this way for as long as I can remember (~2006) without being fixed.

Thanks for the consideration.

(I know this idea must come up every so often, but I did a quick skim of the Commonly Proposed Ideas thread and didn't see any mention of it.)


The devs deliberately ignored the turret hard point layout so as not to restrict the options of future balance teams, the same thing applies to the drake.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#9 - 2014-07-07 22:52:46 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
The devs deliberately ignored the turret hard point layout so as not to restrict the options of future balance teams, the same thing applies to the drake.


I consider that a poor excuse since the models would have the same number of turret locations as previously. If I were asking them to change the models or add additional turret locations, I could see that point, but I'm not, so I can't.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#10 - 2014-07-07 23:05:19 UTC
Buff cormorant while you are at it please.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#11 - 2014-07-10 19:38:04 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
The devs deliberately ignored the turret hard point layout so as not to restrict the options of future balance teams, the same thing applies to the drake.


I consider that a poor excuse since the models would have the same number of turret locations as previously. If I were asking them to change the models or add additional turret locations, I could see that point, but I'm not, so I can't.


I'm not defending CCP I think it's bad too, but balance changes have come and gone whilst hardpoints and the graphical effects of odd numbered guns and missing slots have been ignored. I think it's because art takes a long time to insert into the game. Makes me feel like Eve is being done on the cheap.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Grenn Putubi
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2014-07-10 20:26:47 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:

I'm not defending CCP I think it's bad too, but balance changes have come and gone whilst hardpoints and the graphical effects of odd numbered guns and missing slots have been ignored. I think it's because art takes a long time to insert into the game. Makes me feel like Eve is being done on the cheap.


I think you're misunderstanding what he's asking for.

He's not asking for assets to be changed, only for their references be adjusted. The ship has 8 turret mounts on the model, but only 7 turret slots after the rebalance. Each turret slot corresponds to one of the mounts on the model, but since the rebalance there's 1 mount that's never able to have a turret in it. The issue isn't that the empty mounts exists on the model, but that the one that's left empty when all the turret slots are full is out of place and the ship looks lopsided. There are many ship models where this happens. 2 others off the top of my head are the Stratios and the Venture. Both ships were initially designed with more mounts on the model than they had turret slots, and in the case of the Stratios it even has less high slots than mounts so there's no way to juggle the fit to get certain mounts filled.

What he's asking for is that the linking between the mounts and the high slots be rearranged so that the ship doesn't look lopsided when it's fully fit. It's not an unreasonable request and one that I've considered making myself many times because a lot of my favorite ships lost hardpoints in the rebalance and now look very odd when fit because of an obviously empty mount in the center of a group while there's a weapon in some outlying mount that could be empty instead and would be much less noticeable.

It'd be really nice if they performed some magic on ships like the Venture and Stratios to make them look like nicer when they're fully fit. The Venture has 3 high slots and 2 turret slots and 3 mounts on the ship model, why not make one of the turret slots fill 2 of the mounts so that when it's fit it has all 3 mounts full? The Stratios has 2 mounts on the body of the ship and 4 on the ring, 4 turret slots and 5 high slots, this means the 2nd mount on the body of the ship can never be filled, could it be altered to share those body mounts with mounts on the ring? Tricks like this are done on other ships, like the Vexor which has a certain slot linked to 3 mounts on the model. On ships like the Vexor this is necessary because it's the only way to get full firing coverage for that turret because of the odd mount placement on the ship, but why can't this be done for purely aesthetic reasons too? Empty mounts make ships look bad when they're really obvious
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#13 - 2014-07-10 20:40:50 UTC
Grenn Putubi wrote:
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:

I'm not defending CCP I think it's bad too, but balance changes have come and gone whilst hardpoints and the graphical effects of odd numbered guns and missing slots have been ignored. I think it's because art takes a long time to insert into the game. Makes me feel like Eve is being done on the cheap.


I think you're misunderstanding what he's asking for.

He's not asking for assets to be changed, only for their references be adjusted. The ship has 8 turret mounts on the model, but only 7 turret slots after the rebalance. Each turret slot corresponds to one of the mounts on the model, but since the rebalance there's 1 mount that's never able to have a turret in it. The issue isn't that the empty mounts exists on the model, but that the one that's left empty when all the turret slots are full is out of place and the ship looks lopsided. There are many ship models where this happens. 2 others off the top of my head are the Stratios and the Venture. Both ships were initially designed with more mounts on the model than they had turret slots, and in the case of the Stratios it even has less high slots than mounts so there's no way to juggle the fit to get certain mounts filled.

What he's asking for is that the linking between the mounts and the high slots be rearranged so that the ship doesn't look lopsided when it's fully fit. It's not an unreasonable request and one that I've considered making myself many times because a lot of my favorite ships lost hardpoints in the rebalance and now look very odd when fit because of an obviously empty mount in the center of a group while there's a weapon in some outlying mount that could be empty instead and would be much less noticeable.

It'd be really nice if they performed some magic on ships like the Venture and Stratios to make them look like nicer when they're fully fit. The Venture has 3 high slots and 2 turret slots and 3 mounts on the ship model, why not make one of the turret slots fill 2 of the mounts so that when it's fit it has all 3 mounts full? The Stratios has 2 mounts on the body of the ship and 4 on the ring, 4 turret slots and 5 high slots, this means the 2nd mount on the body of the ship can never be filled, could it be altered to share those body mounts with mounts on the ring? Tricks like this are done on other ships, like the Vexor which has a certain slot linked to 3 mounts on the model. On ships like the Vexor this is necessary because it's the only way to get full firing coverage for that turret because of the odd mount placement on the ship, but why can't this be done for purely aesthetic reasons too? Empty mounts make ships look bad when they're really obvious


I completely understand now and fully agree. Thanks for clearing up my confusion.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Grenn Putubi
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2014-07-10 20:46:31 UTC
You're welcome :)