These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Nerf specialized industrials - make them use cargo expansion too
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2014-09-11 05:22:24 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
So lets give ALL industrials at least 5k base cargo, and a specialist hold or a fleet hanger. So they can ALL carry a decent amount when fitted for tank, and can all carry loads when fitted for cargo.
Lets actually buff the industrial role in space. It's not like Indy pilots are already nerfed by having no weapons after all.

I can agree with that. It's still far from fixed, but it would be a tremendous step in the right direction. I may not be able to get 100, but I'll take 10 over 1 any day.

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."
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#62 - 2014-09-11 06:45:42 UTC
Just want to point out that if you do make the cargo expanders work on fleet hangers and other specialized holds, carrier logistics ends up with a massive buff, which makes for a relative nerf to jump frieghters.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#63 - 2014-09-11 07:16:17 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
The important trade-off here, as several have pointed out already, is that the Epithal hauls more than the Itty V due to being specialized.

Really? Great. Let's race. I have three cruisers that need to be moved from Amarr to Jita. You use your Epithal that "hauls more," and I'll use an Itty V. Ready? Go!
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
This is how CCP envisioned it. It is the purpose of specializing them. They aren't supposed to have vastly different applied defenses.

I'm sorry, the "CCP" prefix seems to have dropped from your name. When you get it back, then I'll pay attention to what you think CCP envisioned.

And that last sentence is especially silly considering the Nereus exists.
Anthar Thebess
#64 - 2014-09-11 07:17:04 UTC
Those specialized haulers are fine.
In lowsec provide income for new players - in real game they are dead on the first dictor/hictor/bubble.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2014-09-11 12:13:30 UTC
Itty V hauls less than Nereus in lowsec, and I'm talking about the safer parts.

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."
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2014-09-11 14:34:02 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Itty V hauls less than Nereus in lowsec, and I'm talking about the safer parts.


It hauls more by using what fit?
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#67 - 2014-09-11 15:31:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Fer'isam K'ahn
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Itty V hauls less than Nereus in lowsec, and I'm talking about the safer parts.

Nereus = 2700 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill
Iteron V = 5800 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill

Not getting it... sorry, are you just making stuff up now ?
Summer Isle
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#68 - 2014-09-11 16:17:57 UTC
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.

A DST (my Mastodon, at least; not sure if they're all the same for hold sizes) has a built-in fleet bay of ~60k m3, plus a regular hold of about 4500 m3. Expanders only work on the regular hold, which you don't necessarily need, because you have a 60k m3 fleet bay. Filling your lows with expanders only adds another 6-8k space which, if you need that, you should probably scale up to an Orca or even a Freighter (both of which can also achieve ridiculous tanks without sacrificing much in the way of hauling capacity [or for a Providence, can achieve ~350k EHP tank without sacrificing any cargo space at all]).

 Talk is cheap, but Void S and Quake L are cheaper.
Varnir Penken
State War Academy
Caldari State
#69 - 2014-09-11 16:23:32 UTC
If PI is ALL you haul, I can see where you are coming from...you're able to tank without fitting for cargo cap. On the other hand, say, you take an iteron, you have to fit for cargohold over tank to get its max storage capacity. There's the tradeoff. So if you want a tanky industrial able to haul a crap load of stuff, naturally you would want to choose one of the more specialized haulers, providing that what you want to haul fits. If you want to haul general stuff like loot, this isn't an option. If you are hauling a lot of loot then you may want an iteron. Then, you have to consider, do you want cargo space or do you want the tank? Of course, if you haul stuff in small quantities then a specialized transport would be sufficient (and, then, there is were the Blockade Runners come in).
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2014-09-11 22:20:41 UTC
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Itty V hauls less than Nereus in lowsec, and I'm talking about the safer parts.

Nereus = 2700 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill
Iteron V = 5800 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill

Not getting it... sorry, are you just making stuff up now ?

Nereus can hit the same level of safety with fewer warp stabs due to a stronger tank, smaller sig radius, and faster align. The remaining space can be used for cargo expanders. You can also easily relegate the Nereus' rig slots to cargo as it gets plenty of tank from mid slots alone. The Itty V needs those rig slots for tank to even get enough to ward off being blown up during align, regardless whether or not it has enough warp strength to get away.

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."
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#71 - 2014-09-11 23:07:55 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Itty V hauls less than Nereus in lowsec, and I'm talking about the safer parts.

Nereus = 2700 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill
Iteron V = 5800 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill

Not getting it... sorry, are you just making stuff up now ?

Nereus can hit the same level of safety with fewer warp stabs due to a stronger tank, smaller sig radius, and faster align. The remaining space can be used for cargo expanders. You can also easily relegate the Nereus' rig slots to cargo as it gets plenty of tank from mid slots alone. The Itty V needs those rig slots for tank to even get enough to ward off being blown up during align, regardless whether or not it has enough warp strength to get away.


But that's on purpose.

Every race has a two types of T1 Industrials: a small-hold fast / tanky one, and a larger-hold slower one. They serve two different roles. Use the small tanky one for places that could be troublesome, or where you only need to move a small amount of general cargo. Use the larger one in 'safer' areas where you need to move a larger amount of general cargo.

There's your basic choice -- cargo vs. speed / protection. It works well. But.... let's throw a spanner in the works. If you need to move a specialized cargo, there just might be a ship to move it with somewhat swiftly. Another choice.... now it's cargo type vs. cargo amount vs. speed / protection. And of course there are other choices: training time, ISK costs, heavy tank or stealth, etc.

You've been comparing the specialized haulers to the large slow ones. The reason that the specialized cargo indies are somewhat tanky is that they're based of the smaller tanky general haulers. They fill the same role -- fast transport.
At least that's what I think.

As for the cargo expanders applying across the board, I don't like it. It's way too heavy handed, and more importantly... it's not needed. If you wanted to just add some cargo to the larger haulers (I think the smaller ones are fine as-is) then I'm for that. Maybe increase the cargo bay bonus from the skill? That way if you absolutely must use the indy outside its role, then you might fit some sort of tank or speed enhancers on it... Though, honestly... use the right ship for the job in the first place.

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#72 - 2014-09-11 23:26:23 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Itty V hauls less than Nereus in lowsec, and I'm talking about the safer parts.

Emphasized for... um... emphasis. Not all of Eve is lowsec.

Of course the industrial that's designed to have the better tank will have a better tank under load. Otherwise, it would be pointless. If the Itty V could hold more while moving just as safely as the Nereus, why would anyone ever use the Nereus?
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#73 - 2014-09-12 04:16:46 UTC
The OP does have a point.

The specialized haulers are stupid good and, at least for Gallente, the restrictions are not that restricting given that they are specialized to some of the most common items to be hauled in bulk. And I say this as some one who regularly uses WCS'ed and tanked Epithals in nullsec. Those restrictions aren't that restricting when it is stuff I haul often and it does it without compromise.

I think that overall it was a good change, but the devs should have followed through on it and given a similar treatment of big holds and special buffs to the other Industrials. Unfortunately, Industrials aren't sexy so they did spend much time on it. The specialized haulers came up on the second pass of ideas, and they wouldn't hear any other suggestions after that.


All 4 races get a small/fast hauler, and a big/slow hauler, and Gallente get all the useful special haulers. They wanted to get away from the Itty V being the hands down best, but in their laziness they left Gallente still being the overall best.

They should have given all the general haulers a 20-30km3 bay that wasn't effected by expanders. Some racial flavor to make them distinctive would be nice, like shield resists for Caldari and armor resists for Amarr. Funny how the only Industrial to get some distinctive extra is the small Gallente hauler got a drone bay.


Industrials are generally busted.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2014-09-12 09:06:01 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Industrials are generally busted.

That they are.

I don't expect CCP to waste time on industrials before the more important ships have been fixed, but tiericide is in its final phases and I don't want to see an entire class of ships fail to be balanced reasonably.

At the start of tiericide, industrials and barges were horrible with paper tanks and a lousy array of options. Most weren't even worth flying unless you trained the wrong race or were trying to skimp on SP.

After the first balance pass, industrials (haulers) are looking about as balanced as combat ships were before tiericide. It's workable, but ugly and flawed as hell.

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."
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#75 - 2014-09-12 09:17:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Fer'isam K'ahn
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Itty V hauls less than Nereus in lowsec, and I'm talking about the safer parts.

Nereus = 2700 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill
Iteron V = 5800 m3, 5 low, 3 rig, 5% per skill

Not getting it... sorry, are you just making stuff up now ?

Nereus can hit the same level of safety with fewer warp stabs due to a stronger tank, smaller sig radius, and faster align. The remaining space can be used for cargo expanders. You can also easily relegate the Nereus' rig slots to cargo as it gets plenty of tank from mid slots alone. The Itty V needs those rig slots for tank to even get enough to ward off being blown up during align, regardless whether or not it has enough warp strength to get away.

You are making the error of 'is' or 'can' to 'ought' all the time, just because it has the possibility in one fit for one situation does not mean that's how it should be and needs to be balanced for, especially not if it neither breaks anything nor actually is unbalances due to more possibilities.

Your whole argument is still the same narrow mindedness (in perception and conclusion) of "You can shield tank the Dominix, therefore give Caldari better drone application" hinting at "shield tank, see the relation - now balance the drones also for both!" - If I would make that argument, you would also correct me on my error.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#76 - 2014-09-12 10:53:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
So you are still promoting 'specialized cargo bays expanders', ... this will not happen, since it will for instance destroy all mining vessels without a heavy revamp for the benefit of ... nothing. And they said already they won't do it, all this jammering for nothing.

I agree with conformity for lore text, for most modules, where it makes sense, but not for all just out of principle. In this case it makes no sense and isn't worth the effort, not only 'devs time' but throwing everything over the cliff and forcing everyone to reconsider, re-buy, re-fit and change their outfits, for yous adding it to the list of 'stacking penalty = true'.

So, should cargo expanders also work on drone bays, ship maintenance, fleet hangar ? It's all for 'cargo' Shocked

You're making a few too many assumptions here, and obsessing over small details instead of focusing on the general idea.

Let's scrap specialized cargo bay expanders and instead add a hull bonus to these specialized haulers: "Cargo Expanders apply to all cargo bays". Now they do not affect mining barges, DST, Orca, etc.

As for "worth the effort", that is highly subjective. I will flat out say you are wrong to assume that as something beyond your personal opinion; I would for one appreciate such changes and I know a few gankers that would too.

In the OPs idea these specialized bays are still useful because with max expansion they outweigh how much you can carry of that specific item type vs other T1 vessels. The difference is you have to sacrifice tank to do so or keep the same tank but with reduced cargohold (but still more than another T1 hauler of comparable tank)

In a game of risk/reward these changes are not a waste but in fact are rather necessary. They can be most easily compared to the freighter changes of late. You are literally arguing to take away the risk/reward formula and keep the choices homogenized. That is not healthy for EVE.

Hey guys.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#77 - 2014-09-12 11:27:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Fer'isam K'ahn
Steppa Musana wrote:
You're making a few too many assumptions here, and obsessing over small details instead of focusing on the general idea.

Let's scrap specialized cargo bay expanders and instead add a hull bonus to these specialized haulers: "Cargo Expanders apply to all cargo bays". Now they do not affect mining barges, DST, Orca, etc.

As for "worth the effort", that is highly subjective. I will flat out say you are wrong to assume that as something beyond your personal opinion; I would for one appreciate such changes and I know a few gankers that would too.

In the OPs idea these specialized bays are still useful because with max expansion they outweigh how much you can carry of that specific item type vs other T1 vessels. The difference is you have to sacrifice tank to do so or keep the same tank but with reduced cargohold (but still more than another T1 hauler of comparable tank)

In a game of risk/reward these changes are not a waste but in fact are rather necessary. They can be most easily compared to the freighter changes of late. You are literally arguing to take away the risk/reward formula and keep the choices homogenized. That is not healthy for EVE.

You are throwing the almighty risk/reward over everything (like most) to cover up the basic mistakes not to choose the porper tool for the job, but instead insisting in editing them and others so you can more easily get away with using an insufficient tool and make it look like the sufficient one. Where you are actually taking away choices for the sake of a more homogenous blend.

'Specialized' says it all, why does it have to be comparable to any other ship that has the 'hauler' tag ? There has been too much misconception here about what are the right tools and how to balance the similar types (set roles), like all ABCs in terms of range and dps, or all rookie frigs and such or the (let's call it) last firgate tier (Merlin, Incursus, Rifter ...) in combat application and which are not the proper tools and very different (spezialised) types - and can not ever be balanced to a similar type that does not actually exist. Nereus vs. Iteron is comaprable in a way, Epithal vs Iteron not.

An Incursus works differently then a Navita, then an Imicus .. but why, they are all T1 frigates Shocked
But a Miasmos and an Iternon V shall not for the exact same reason of being T1 haulers ?! Roll
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2014-09-12 13:53:55 UTC
As someone who uses all of the gallente haulers (including T2 now) in my view they are fine just the way they are and provide me with the right tool for the right job in most cases. As for the specialized hulls being able to tank more this just means they also carry correspondingly higher value stuff in their holds. Any prospective ganker just needs to know how many ships are required and the break even point on the hold contents I would imagine.

-1 from me if I could this time.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#79 - 2014-09-12 14:34:19 UTC
I liked the stacking penalties on cargo expanders idea. and/or the separate bays for standard industrials

i wouldnt say the epithal is OP

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
Grave Digger Eriker
Doomheim
#80 - 2014-09-12 14:39:52 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Specialized industrials like the Epithal, for instance, etc
You seem to be missing the whole point of a SPECIALISED industrial. It no use for anything else.

REJECT