These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Nerf specialized industrials - make them use cargo expansion too
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-09-09 00:03:25 UTC
Specialized industrials like the Epithal, for instance, are at a supreme advantage for hauling their respective cargo when compared to standard industrials, because the specialized ones do not need cargo expanders and rigs to reach full capacity. This allows them to fit all manner of defensive rigs and low-slot modules to become extremely durable while still being able to haul a full load. For example, an Epithal with a full defensive setup and no cargo expanders has a planetary commodities hold capacity of 67,500m3 (at industrial skill V). An Iteron Mk V, on the other hand, must fill its rig slots and low slots completely to achieve its full cargo capacity of 37,152m3 at skill V. With a full defensive setup and no cargo expanders, the Iteron Mk V carries only 7250m3.

I propose that these specialized industrials have their base bay size decreased, but allow it to be boosted with cargo expanders and rigs to reach full size, just like other industrials.


A problem with standard industrials is that they lose too much cargo space by merely removing a single cargo expander. I further propose that cargo expansion have a stacking penalty instituted (with base cargoholds and cargo expander amounts adjusted to compensate) such that the difference between 3 or 4 expanders would be small enough that it would likely be more reasonable to instead use a defensive module. This way, industrials can fit modules into their low slots, or rigs in rig slots, for defense without demolishing their hauling capacity.

Example numbers for cargo stacking penalty:

Increasing the Cargo Expander II from 27.5% to 40% (so that there is still a big difference between having them vs. not having them), here are the approximate cargo expansion values after stacking penalty:

  • 1 expander: 140%
  • 2 expanders: 189%
  • 3 expanders: 232%
  • 4 expanders: 258%
  • 5 expanders: 268%

Exact values may vary slightly; these figures are obtained from stacking penalty values lacking decimal points.

So the maximum cargo expansion is approaching around 270-275%. If rigs grant the same amount or almost as much cargo expansion as regular expanders, then all ships are capable of reaching similar multiples of the base value regardless of how few low slots they have. Lets say we make tech 1 rigs grant 35% expansion, and thus assume an approximate average of 250% expansion on most industrials fit for high cargo capacity. Thus we want the base cargohold value of the industrial to be about 40% of the desired maximum. It'll be good for Caldari industrials to have a slightly higher base than Amarr, for instance, due to having fewer low slots--and they already do have this. So for the large industrials (Bestower, Tayra, Iteron Mk V, Mammoth), the maximum hangs near 38,000m3. We therefore want their base to be about 15,000m3. The small industrials' (Sigil, Badger, Nereus, Wreathe) max cargoholds are about 15,000m3 to 19,000m3 so we want their base values around 6000m3 to 7500m3.

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."
Sigras
Conglomo
#2 - 2014-09-09 00:27:44 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Specialized industrials like the Epithal, for instance, are at a supreme advantage for hauling their respective cargo when compared to standard industrials, because the specialized ones do not need cargo expanders and rigs to reach full capacity. This allows them to fit all manner of defensive rigs and low-slot modules to become extremely durable while still being able to haul a full load. For example, an Epithal with a full defensive setup and no cargo expanders has a planetary commodities hold capacity of 67,500m3 (at industrial skill V). An Iteron Mk V, on the other hand, must fill its rig slots and low slots completely to achieve its full cargo capacity of 37,152m3 at skill V. With a full defensive setup and no cargo expanders, the Iteron Mk V carries only 7250m3.

Have you considered that this may be by design?

Sure, an Epithal gets better defenses, in exchange for being able to carry anything else! One could argue that the Iteron V is the ship that needs a nerf.

"why does my Epithal have to fit cargo expanders and cargo rigs just to get 1/3 of the cargo space an Iteron V comes with natively? how fair is that? meanwhile, my Epithal is stuck with this useless planetary commodities bay that i'm never gonna use."

See what I did there?

The ships are designed for different purposes, perhaps you should use them that way...
Lugh Crow-Slave
#3 - 2014-09-09 00:38:29 UTC
wasn't this the point?

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Iudicium Vastus
Doomheim
#4 - 2014-09-09 00:41:10 UTC
I had thought it was obvious that the ability to use the lows for other purposes already was the trade-off for being able to carry absolutely nothing else but a single sort of cargo, period.

[u]Nerf stabs/cloaks in FW?[/u] No, just.. -Fit more points -Fit faction points -Bring a friend or two with points (an alt is fine too)
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-09-09 01:03:00 UTC
I had thought the trade-off was in how much more the specialized types can carry.

Sigras wrote:
"why does my Epithal have to fit cargo expanders and cargo rigs just to get 1/3 of the cargo space an Iteron V comes with natively?"
You mean just to get 5x what the Itty V comes with natively, right?

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."
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#6 - 2014-09-09 01:10:01 UTC
Just my nature but I read the OP as just another I am upset because they made my gank targets tougher.
If that is the case then I say to bad for you the potential victims caught a bit of a break on this one so adapt or give up ganking these ships your choice.

On the other hand if I am wrong then buy and use the indy ships that best fit your needs. CCP finally decided to give the indy ship line a worthy dose of specialization making all of them worthy of flying instead of just the top level from each race.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#7 - 2014-09-09 01:18:29 UTC
the only problem i have with them is that outside the ammo hauler they are all galenteen ships

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2014-09-09 01:25:18 UTC
If you want to haul that quantity of random things, use a DST.

The things are highly specialised, that's a disadvantage in itself.
Sigras
Conglomo
#9 - 2014-09-09 01:27:21 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I had thought the trade-off was in how much more the specialized types can carry.
Sigras wrote:
"why does my Epithal have to fit cargo expanders and cargo rigs just to get 1/3 of the cargo space an Iteron V comes with natively?"
You mean just to get 5x what the Itty V comes with natively, right?

if you dont want to carry planetary commodities its 1/3 the cargo space.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-09-09 01:29:03 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
On the other hand if I am wrong then buy and use the indy ships that best fit your needs. CCP finally decided to give the indy ship line a worthy dose of specialization making all of them worthy of flying instead of just the top level from each race.

You are indeed wrong, as a look at my killboard will show. I mentioned the Epithal because I have plenty of experience flying it. If you look at my killboard, you may also note a lack of Epithal losses--and it isn't for lack of flying in dangerous space. I can easily haul large amounts of PI materials from Naguton with the Epithal. It's too easy, in fact. I can fit 4 warp stabs with a solid 20k EHP tank and still fit 67,500m3 of PI mats in the hold. Were I using a Sigil (most low slots) with 4 warp stabs, I would be carrying under 6000m3 total cargo. I may align about 40% faster but my EHP will be only slightly higher and I'll be carrying under a tenth of the cargo of the Epithal.

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."
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#11 - 2014-09-09 01:29:09 UTC
The current design is deliberate and the trade-off of having better defenses in exchange for only being able to carry very specific types of cargo was, in fact, the entire point.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2014-09-09 01:33:28 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
If you want to haul that quantity of random things, use a DST.

The things are highly specialised, that's a disadvantage in itself.

DST can't haul much if it's got any defenses. Doesn't have defenses if it can haul anything. It's the same issue I'm talking about with all of the other industrials. There's too much cargo trade-off for a decent defense--you have to cut it down to a tiny fraction of the max just to survive more than ten seconds of fire from a single gank ship. Specialized industrials bypass this entirely, suffering no loss in cargo at maximum defense.

All you who are disagreeing with me, I just want to understand one thing: are you disagreeing that the trade-off is too large for generalized industrials, or are you disagreeing that the trade-off is too small for specialized industrials? Because you'd be a hypocrite to disagree with both points.

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."
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2014-09-09 01:36:26 UTC
Sigras wrote:
if you dont want to carry planetary commodities its 1/3 the cargo space.

Why would someone fly an Epithal to haul general cargo?

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."
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#14 - 2014-09-09 01:51:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
If you want to haul that quantity of random things, use a DST.

The things are highly specialised, that's a disadvantage in itself.

DST can't haul much if it's got any defenses. Doesn't have defenses if it can haul anything. It's the same issue I'm talking about with all of the other industrials. There's too much cargo trade-off for a decent defense--you have to cut it down to a tiny fraction of the max just to survive more than ten seconds of fire from a single gank ship. Specialized industrials bypass this entirely, suffering no loss in cargo at maximum defense.

All you who are disagreeing with me, I just want to understand one thing: are you disagreeing that the trade-off is too large for generalized industrials, or are you disagreeing that the trade-off is too small for specialized industrials? Because you'd be a hypocrite to disagree with both points.




..........whuuuuttt...?


DST? As in Deep Space Transports? As in the ships with built in fleet hangars with 52.5-62.5k m3 cargo room with no fitting mods at all? The ones that can fit a full tank without sacrificing anything of value?

I have no words (That wont get me yelled at by mods). At least none that can describe you pontificating upon a subject that you obviously know absolutely nothing whatsoever about.

You ridiculous ********* (precensored for imagination)
Absolutely Not Analt
Carebears on Fire
#15 - 2014-09-09 02:03:17 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
If you want to haul that quantity of random things, use a DST.

DST can't haul much if it's got any defenses. Doesn't have defenses if it can haul anything.


My 85K EHP Bustard with 60k of generic cargo space would like to have a few words with you.

Eve is a multi player game. And you are the content. - Ralph King-Griffin Being meh at two things is not better than being great at one. - Lugh Crow-Slave
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#16 - 2014-09-09 02:09:40 UTC
As a ganker I would be very happy with these ships sporting anti-tanks.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-09-09 02:28:39 UTC
Shows how much I stay up to date with the changes. Perhaps what really needs to update is my EFT.

Anyway, giving DSTs a fleet hangar just bypasses the issue. Well they still have a significant regular cargo space that could be boosted with cargo mods, but you won't start seeing big changes until you have five or more on there. It's the same point I keep re-iterating, which all of you keep ignoring: some industrials are forced to sacrifice almost all of their tank in order to avoid sacrificing almost all of their cargohold size. Others bypass this by having non-variable cargohold size. So we have ships on both extremes, nothing in the middle.

I'll put this in as few words as possible: how can both extremes be okay if being in the middle is not better?

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."
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#18 - 2014-09-09 02:41:47 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Shows how much I stay up to date with the changes. Perhaps what really needs to update is my EFT.

Anyway, giving DSTs a fleet hangar just bypasses the issue. Well they still have a significant regular cargo space that could be boosted with cargo mods, but you won't start seeing big changes until you have five or more on there. It's the same point I keep re-iterating, which all of you keep ignoring: some industrials are forced to sacrifice almost all of their tank in order to avoid sacrificing almost all of their cargohold size. Others bypass this by having non-variable cargohold size. So we have ships on both extremes, nothing in the middle. how can both extremes be okay if being in the middle is not better?


June 3rd. (Kronos release with changed DST's)
July 3rd.
August 3rd.
September 3rd.


Are you telling us that you play so little that you have not updated your EFT in over three months, or flown the applicable ships in a quarter of a year, but feel qualified to make judgements on their use and changes that should be done to them?

That's like saying I'm qualified to make insightful commentary on NFL draft picks, when the last football game I watched was the last Superbowl.

Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
How can both extremes be okay if being in the middle is not better?


Why the hell does the presence of two acceptable extremes mean that right in the middle must be better?

Really sweet foods are good. Really spicy foods are good. Sit right in the middle and you know what you get? Oatmeal. **** that.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#19 - 2014-09-09 02:56:55 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:


I'll put this in as few words as possible: how can both extremes be okay if being in the middle is not better?


Because being meh at two things is not better then being great at one

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Sigras
Conglomo
#20 - 2014-09-09 02:59:21 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Sigras wrote:
if you dont want to carry planetary commodities its 1/3 the cargo space.

Why would someone fly an Epithal to haul general cargo?

EXACTLY!

Thats the trade off, theyre completely useless for everything else which means its ok that they're better than everything else at what they do!
123Next pageLast page