These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rhea] Introducing the Bowhead

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Belligerent Undesirable
#81 - 2014-11-10 13:47:33 UTC
Change the speed bonus to 4% shield resist per level and give it +1 mid
Jess Tanner
Bangworks Systems Inc.
#82 - 2014-11-10 13:49:18 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Acquisition will work the same as freighters - there will be a NPC seeded BPO (with the same distribution as the Orca), it will be a bit cheaper than a freighter BPO, the Bowhead build materials will also be similar to other Freighters but will be be a bit lower. I would expect eventual market price to be 100 or 200 mil lower than other freighters.

It will use capital rigs.

I think it's been said other places but as far as loot - we hope to get a change ready in time for Rhea that will make SMA loot work the same as CHAs where the contents will be inside the wreck on ship death, it's still not totally clear if that will happen in time but it would be in the following release if not.

I'm not convinced about the EHP needing to be higher but I'll bring this to the rest of the team and get back to you.


MFW CCP Rise said he would give me a loot pinata for christmas!

Go with Bob, keep Him always in your heart. He is your Sword, Shield, and the Knife in your back.
Seiko Hikitari
Everlasting Vendetta.
#83 - 2014-11-10 13:51:08 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, we're talking about it here and think there's probably no good reason not to raise the HP some. Where do you guys think it needs to be to make say, three t2 fit BS, inefficient to gank?

And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.

Gank with what. Because the numbers are going to be entirely different depending on whether we're talking meta catalyst, t2 catalyst, thrasher, vexor, talos, or strawman tornado, and whether you're taking security tags cost into account.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#84 - 2014-11-10 13:51:52 UTC
Here's a teaser image that CCP released at EVE Vegas.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#85 - 2014-11-10 13:54:46 UTC
I dunno man, if i add up the ships ehp i would probably end up moving in my theoretical one i end up with ~500k ehp in ships stored in mine... Adding up to (without refitting, juggling expensive mods or anything) several billion isk...

My orca in its current fit pulls 233k when rigged for travel speed, would say 450-500 when speed rigged to 600-750k full on buffer be excessive? I think more then that would be NICE but it might push it into "ungankable" territory. That said i wouldnt be opposed to it having ~carrier levels of ehp if it turns out to be balanced...
Revileushin Eyri
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2014-11-10 13:55:17 UTC
Seiko Hikitari wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, we're talking about it here and think there's probably no good reason not to raise the HP some. Where do you guys think it needs to be to make say, three t2 fit BS, inefficient to gank?

And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.

Gank with what. Because the numbers are going to be entirely different depending on whether we're talking meta catalyst, t2 catalyst, thrasher, vexor, talos, or strawman tornado, and whether you're taking security tags cost into account.


Give the hull native thermal resists, and gankers will become VOID! Funny.

INACTIVE ATM: Taking Wing - A rambling blog that's mostly EVE stuff.
Nox52
Pterygopalatine
#87 - 2014-11-10 13:55:59 UTC
Come on rise, lower the mass so it fits through the low class wormholes. You know you want to!
Praal
Bearded BattleBears
#88 - 2014-11-10 13:56:05 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:

With the main load being in its SMA, you can utilize all slots for tank, which as said before, gives it a 350k ehp tank (which is pretty damn tough, even for ganking standards) and you can even fit a 100MN MWD on top of that. That's solo.
Flying with an alt in a hyena makes you ungankable due to instant warps.

No, it doesn't make it ungankable, it just requires the gankers to fit points and/or have a couple extra gankers to alpha the Hyena as soon as it decloaks.

Ask all the "insta"-align ceptors that get killed in nullsec how that works out for safety.

Besides, to use a Hyena you need a second pilot, which means you could already be moving 2 battleships with the resources you're expending, and doing it faster.
Maddaxe Illat
Kerberos Inc.
#89 - 2014-11-10 13:57:36 UTC
I love it but a ORE Freighter for ship not ore?Roll
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#90 - 2014-11-10 13:59:36 UTC  |  Edited by: EvilweaselFinance
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, we're talking about it here and think there's probably no good reason not to raise the HP some. Where do you guys think it needs to be to make say, three t2 fit BS, inefficient to gank?

And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.

At 350k hp it IS inefficient to gank it with the hope of 1.5 T2 fit BS dropping. What on earth makes you think it's not? Do the math on it yourself.

It has all the hitpoints of a tanked freighter (which are no slouch to take down) and has the ability to fit active modules to resist a gank. It can align, jam, etc - it will be significantly harder to take down than a tanked freighter.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#91 - 2014-11-10 14:00:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
CCP Rise wrote:
And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.

Agility is definitely preferable. Not that it necessarily matters, but what's the total rig calibration - 300, 350 or 400? And completely unrelated, at some point it would be nice to have a transport-specific rig or module that allowed players to convert their merchantman to an armed raider (AMC) by swapping cargo space for turrets or launchers.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#92 - 2014-11-10 14:01:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Arden Elenduil
Praal wrote:
Arden Elenduil wrote:

With the main load being in its SMA, you can utilize all slots for tank, which as said before, gives it a 350k ehp tank (which is pretty damn tough, even for ganking standards) and you can even fit a 100MN MWD on top of that. That's solo.
Flying with an alt in a hyena makes you ungankable due to instant warps.

No, it doesn't make it ungankable, it just requires the gankers to fit points and/or have a couple extra gankers to alpha the Hyena as soon as it decloaks.

Ask all the "insta"-align ceptors that get killed in nullsec how that works out for safety.

Besides, to use a Hyena you need a second pilot, which means you could already be moving 2 battleships with the resources you're expending, and doing it faster.



The advance warning you get when a ship being webbed into warp is arriving is such that it's nigh on impossible to time properly. Not to mention the fact that you can hardly scan it when that happens.

I'll admit, there is a VERY remote possibility that the hyena might be ganked, but even then, the odds of it happening are so ridiculously slim, it's hilarious.
Also, I think using a second pilot to counteract the combined efforts of at least a dozen people counts as pretty balanced.

Edit: I did you a favour, here's a quick Hyena fit I threw together.
[Hyena, Warp Helper]
Damage Control II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
Adaptive Nano Plating II

Stasis Webifier II
Stasis Webifier II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium Shield Extender II

[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Small Core Defense Field Extender I
Small Core Defense Field Extender I


Pretty cheap, webs out to 39km's (the range of just about any gate) and zips around at 3km/s with 7.3k ehp.
Good luck ganking that...
handige harrie
Vereenigde Handels Compagnie
#93 - 2014-11-10 14:01:59 UTC  |  Edited by: handige harrie
I like the idea for the ship, making it have a bigger SMA than a carrier is somewhat awkward though, but i guess being a jack of all trades, makes you a master of none.

I don't think that it's really fitting to the ORE faction. It's a ship moving Ships. There is nothing industrial about it, it's all logistics. Lore wise I think it would be better fitting to move the ships to the Factions and have ORE as the designer.

Something like: ORE came up with the design, but decided it would be to niché and not fitting their core business (being industrial with mining etc) enough to go through to final production. Instead they sold the almost finished Designs to interested factions which then had to finish designing them, before being able to produce them an masse and put Blueprints out for interested parties.

This way you can use the same model, with different shaders and make some minor adjustments to stats like how the regular freighters are done. You can also use the respective races freighter skill to fly the ship.


I also don't see a need for the Jump Fatigue bonus as this ship can easily be used to 'project power'. The very thing the Jump Fatigue wants to limit.

Baddest poster ever
Fonac
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#94 - 2014-11-10 14:07:09 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, we're talking about it here and think there's probably no good reason not to raise the HP some. Where do you guys think it needs to be to make say, three t2 fit BS, inefficient to gank?

And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.


CCP Rise for president!
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#95 - 2014-11-10 14:07:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, we're talking about it here and think there's probably no good reason not to raise the HP some. Where do you guys think it needs to be to make say, three t2 fit BS, inefficient to gank?

And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.

Dropping align doesn't really make much sense, as the ship has enough grid to fit a prototype 100mn mwd, which lowers the align to 10-12s. I guess if you are autopiloting, it is nice, but the 5% velocity is also nice in that situation too.

The only compelling bonus is warp speed, but honestly, it doesn't really matter.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#96 - 2014-11-10 14:16:08 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, we're talking about it here and think there's probably no good reason not to raise the HP some. Where do you guys think it needs to be to make say, three t2 fit BS, inefficient to gank?

And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.

Wow, that was quick. I'm impressed, never seen CCP respond to feedback this quickly. Has someone slipped happy pills into the office coffee machine this morning or something?
Dave stark
#97 - 2014-11-10 14:17:28 UTC
fits 3 battleships.
fits 100mn mwd if you sacrifice a low (or maybe even don't have to depending on the rest of your fit, i fail at mentally fitting ships while at work).

3 rig and 3 lows mean it should fit a decent tank, too.

overall, 10/10, good job. will probably purchase one.
can you refit from it? guessing not but...
Seiko Hikitari
Everlasting Vendetta.
#98 - 2014-11-10 14:21:21 UTC
Querns wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, we're talking about it here and think there's probably no good reason not to raise the HP some. Where do you guys think it needs to be to make say, three t2 fit BS, inefficient to gank?

And you're right about afk travel vs active travel, switching to agility to support align time sounds good to me.

Dropping align doesn't really make much sense, as the ship has enough grid to fit a prototype 100mn mwd, which lowers the align to 10-12s. I guess if you are autopiloting, it is nice, but the 5% velocity is also nice in that situation too.

The only compelling bonus is warp speed, but honestly, it doesn't really matter.

+1 in favor of warp speed bonus
Kalina Sabree
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2014-11-10 14:23:11 UTC
Any idea what if any wormhole class restrictions this new ship will have?
Delekon
Lethal Devotion
#100 - 2014-11-10 14:24:02 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Delekon wrote:
Can the mass be lowered to 300000000? So it can fit in all wormhole types.

If it stays like this the ship will only be available to the residents of the c5/c6.
You can also give us a rig that reduces mass for this ship, by smth like 20% (sort of the opposite of the planned higgs anchor rig) . This way we get to use it without making the ship more bump-able in highsec.

Otherwise totally cool idea.


That may not be a good idea necessarily. While it would be interesting to fit this through wormholes, being able to cram what would be an army of ships into a random wormhole (c2-c4), with 1 guy, might be a bit unbalancing and more like how nullsec would supply their line.

Don't think c1 through c4 space needs this ship in there.


The ship can't really carry that much. I think it's like 10 t3s.
The limiting factor in sieges is always the number of pilots and never the number of hulls.

Having the ship will mean you can log off and get out in case of a siege. This could be a bad idea to some extent but i think whspace needs a bit more accessibility atm. The ships also provide some help with security. It takes far less time to just adjust the mass of this hull to be more like the orca than to fix the POS code, right?