These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Cartridgexxxx
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#281 - 2014-11-10 19:47:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Cartridgexxxx
I would prefer T2 re-fittable rigs
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#282 - 2014-11-10 19:49:24 UTC
Quote:
“What hangs on a wall and you can dry your hands on it?”
“Um, a towel.”
“No, a herring.”
“A herring! A herring doesn’t hang on a wall.”
“But you could hang it there.”
“But who wants to dry his hands on a herring?”
“Well, you don’t have to.” -Sigmund Freud


It was stated to be a hisec ship. Why are you all in a tizzy about its usage (or lack of therein) in low or null? Yes you can take it there if you want to but you don't have to.

I asked for this ship knowing damn well it would be a gank target and in discussion with people in hisec most of them understood that as well. NOBODY should expect total safety and balancing your safety vs the want to do things is a part of the game. Live with it or don't fly it. Simple as that.

I appreciate all the theory crafters and people showing what the fit can be. I agree it could use a shade more ehp and am discussing it internally but I am NOT trying to make it invulnerable to the point that sufficient gankers will tidi themselves into boredom.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Bearcastle
Bionesis Technologies
#283 - 2014-11-10 19:56:22 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
As promised, here is your brand new ship-moving ship - the Bowhead.



BOWHEAD, well better than a Tug, as Tug are small push/pull ship.


This ship is not in the line of the Orca or Roaqual either.

What about OCTO (from octopus) with the ability to carry at least 8 BS, as octopus got 8 arms.
And in order to add some other tacticals habilities, would be nice to have a hight slot that could be use for a cloack.

Imagine a full fleet of BC, carried.... the rest will be history in the sandbox...

And may be we could already dream of a T2 version with the hability to use a Cov Op Cloacking Device.
This T2 version could be a heavily shield or tank ship, like an old iron clad. But in this case it's a Heavy Ship Carrier.
TheMercenaryKing
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#284 - 2014-11-10 19:58:39 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
As promised, here is your brand new ship-moving ship - the Bowhead.

We originally expected this to be a sister ship to the Orca, but after digging into the details realized that it was really more of a freighter and by setting it up that way we could avoid heavier skill requirements that had nothing to do with its role. This means we are going to introduce a new skill: ORE Freighter, which requires ORE Industrial III and Advanced spaceship command V just like other faction freighter skills.

There isn't much else to say other than that this ship is intended for a specific niche: high-sec transport of fitted/insured ships. It may find applications in other parts of space (especially because of the reduced jump fatigue), but we aren't really worried about hitting anything outside of the high-sec application. Because we were starting from scratch here, we decided to give a little more fitting flexibility (mid slots and rig slots), meaning the base hp is set a little lower than other freighters since you can actually get the EHP higher using rigs and a DCU.

Let us know what you think.

BOWHEAD

Ore Freighter Bonus:
5% bonus to max velocity per level
5% bonus to ship maintenance array capacity per level

Role Bonus:
90% reduction in jump fatigue generation


Slot layout: 0H, 3M, 3L, 3R; 0 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 1350 PWG, 215 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 10000 / 11000 / 36500
Capacitor (amount / recharge) : 3900 / 235000
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed): 65 / .065 / 640000000 / 1.37
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 51.5km / 45 / 3
Capacity (cargo / ship maintenance array): 4000 / 1300000 (goes up to 1.6 something with ore freighter 5)
Sensor strength: 12
Signature radius: 3200


1,600,000. that's 3 fitted battleships.

Could it be made to allow packaged ships in it's maintenance hold? make it like 800,000 (1 million at level 5) but allow packaged ships?
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#285 - 2014-11-10 19:58:51 UTC
bowhead .. who thought of that anyway? .. i prefer tugboat

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#286 - 2014-11-10 20:00:24 UTC
Gospadin wrote:
Zappity wrote:
But I want a ship transporter, not a repurposed mining hull. Enough to haul a couple of fit T3s and a battleship without being ganked. This wouldn't achieve that.


I think you're playing the wrong game.

Nobody moves 4 billion ISK worth of cargo risk free.

Come to think of it, imagine if the hauler pilot lost 200k SP (a single subsystem worth from IV to V) for each T3 destroyed in their SMB. Now that'd be interesting...

I agree. The ships I referred to are certainly not worth 4b.

Um, do you happen to mission in your T3? Just curious.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Valterra Craven
#287 - 2014-11-10 20:08:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Valterra Craven
I'm honestly curious if the ship given the size of the SMA is even statistically relevant for moving a few ships at a time.

Under what scenario besides moving rigged battleships does this ship make sense to use besides just flying the ship to destination?

In other words several questions need to be answered:
A. How many rigged ships does the average pilot have that they want to move?
B. How quickly are those rigged ships moved versus the time it would take for this slow ship to move them?
C. Does the cost of this ship and the possible loss of billions in ships this ship would carry worth the cost of the ship itself plus its cargo?


Lets say I have a rigged battleship, a rigged cruiser, and a rigged frigate I need to move 10 jumps. How does the math work out that it makes more sense for me to spend roughly a billion on a ship to move these three ships 10 jumps?

I've seen a lot of people talk about HP but not about how efficient it would be to even move ships with such a small SMA.

More relevant, does CCP even ask itself these questions in the planning meetings and if so why isn't the math disclosed to the players?
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#288 - 2014-11-10 20:09:31 UTC
and we chose not to name them ferries because?
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#289 - 2014-11-10 20:16:22 UTC
Rowells wrote:
and we chose not to name them ferries because?

Ferries only operate between two banks of a river or lake. Tugs move up and down the body of water they are in and can make multiple stops.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#290 - 2014-11-10 20:18:22 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
I appreciate all the theory crafters and people showing what the fit can be. I agree it could use a shade more ehp and am discussing it internally but I am NOT trying to make it invulnerable to the point that sufficient gankers will tidi themselves into boredom.


Well it already has more EHP (properly fitted and not afk) than any other highsec industrial apart from jump freighters, whose buff was completely over the top, that should be plenty for normal use especially considering that deep cargo scans aren't even on the table yet and we haven't got a commitment to drops in Rhea.

The people who think everything gets ganked in highsec these days are basing this mostly on the activity of a single fleet operated by a member of an idealistic organisation formed in reaction to the creep towards safe sec. I think we all know what organisation and what fleet commander I'm talking about, yes? This is not the norm for ganking.

The norm for ganking is that a high expectation of profit must first be established to not waste the gank ships (normally not catalysts! Most FCs are unable to assemble the numbers to use catalysts for freighter EHP targets), the effort of the logistics pilots, the security status of the gankers (going -10 is also not the norm! Some gankers do but -10 fleets have logistical disadvantages, facpol and can be engaged freely even before starting the gank) and everyone's time. Hell even when said fleet is operating, most targets, even high value targets, get through safely because it is in fact just one fleet and they cannot juggle targets flawlessly.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#291 - 2014-11-10 20:21:00 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Quote:
“What hangs on a wall and you can dry your hands on it?”
“Um, a towel.”
“No, a herring.”
“A herring! A herring doesn’t hang on a wall.”
“But you could hang it there.”
“But who wants to dry his hands on a herring?”
“Well, you don’t have to.” -Sigmund Freud


It was stated to be a hisec ship. Why are you all in a tizzy about its usage (or lack of therein) in low or null? Yes you can take it there if you want to but you don't have to.

I asked for this ship knowing damn well it would be a gank target and in discussion with people in hisec most of them understood that as well. NOBODY should expect total safety and balancing your safety vs the want to do things is a part of the game. Live with it or don't fly it. Simple as that.

I appreciate all the theory crafters and people showing what the fit can be. I agree it could use a shade more ehp and am discussing it internally but I am NOT trying to make it invulnerable to the point that sufficient gankers will tidi themselves into boredom.

m



any chance you can float this I mentioned earlier:

I wrote:
Just because it is a transport and you dont want to hurt null logisitics - remember this ship doesnt exist. Therefore there is no "harm" done removing the "industrial" bonuses to fatigue. You cannot lose what you never had in the first place. Plenty of precedent on this in removing MMJD from ABC, for example.


To give it this reduction devalues the point of the original change. No logisitcs were planned around an unreleased hull and the damned thing is intended for high sec. It undermines the jump changes, imho.

We should be reducing fatigue bonused hulls, not adding bleeding new ones.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#292 - 2014-11-10 20:24:51 UTC
Orca, Rorqual, Bowhead… all whales. Must be an Icelandic thing.
At least they didn't call it the "Tuna".

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#293 - 2014-11-10 20:27:17 UTC
Arguments re: fatigue in this thread are funny because they imply that fatigue reduction is tantamount to the complete elimination of fatigue in general. This is patently false — even fatigue bonused ships must wait before jumping, and have their ability to travel significantly hampered by fatigue. Don't believe me? Go do a jump freighter run on Serenity right now, and then do one on Tranquility later.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#294 - 2014-11-10 20:30:31 UTC
Querns wrote:
Arguments re: fatigue in this thread are funny because they imply that fatigue reduction is tantamount to the complete elimination of fatigue in general. This is patently false — even fatigue bonused ships must wait before jumping, and have their ability to travel significantly hampered by fatigue. Don't believe me? Go do a jump freighter run on Serenity right now, and then do one on Tranquility later.

How do I get on serenity. I must know. I've always wanted to meet the Chinese players.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#295 - 2014-11-10 20:30:53 UTC
P.S. Please nerf the Ishtar.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Ix Method
Doomheim
#296 - 2014-11-10 20:46:18 UTC
Random wondering, how are these supposed to work with courier contracts? Or are we going to have to be not lazy?

Travelling at the speed of love.
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#297 - 2014-11-10 20:47:21 UTC
May I suggest a tweaking of the contract system to allow anyone to transport ships outside a package so we can use this to effectively transport ship?

That way you could put a collateral value on a item (a ship!), transport it the way you want, then deliver that item at the destination.

We regularly transport Freighter and JF for customers, and we use the method of selling/reselling, which caused some problems at time.

I'm not sure if this is at all technically possible, but it would be nice!

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#298 - 2014-11-10 20:48:37 UTC
Having special ship couriers that can go into Ship Maintenance Arrays would be extremely cool.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#299 - 2014-11-10 20:50:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Rift
afkalt wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Quote:
“What hangs on a wall and you can dry your hands on it?”
“Um, a towel.”
“No, a herring.”
“A herring! A herring doesn’t hang on a wall.”
“But you could hang it there.”
“But who wants to dry his hands on a herring?”
“Well, you don’t have to.” -Sigmund Freud


It was stated to be a hisec ship. Why are you all in a tizzy about its usage (or lack of therein) in low or null? Yes you can take it there if you want to but you don't have to.

I asked for this ship knowing damn well it would be a gank target and in discussion with people in hisec most of them understood that as well. NOBODY should expect total safety and balancing your safety vs the want to do things is a part of the game. Live with it or don't fly it. Simple as that.

I appreciate all the theory crafters and people showing what the fit can be. I agree it could use a shade more ehp and am discussing it internally but I am NOT trying to make it invulnerable to the point that sufficient gankers will tidi themselves into boredom.

m



any chance you can float this I mentioned earlier:

I wrote:
Just because it is a transport and you dont want to hurt null logisitics - remember this ship doesnt exist. Therefore there is no "harm" done removing the "industrial" bonuses to fatigue. You cannot lose what you never had in the first place. Plenty of precedent on this in removing MMJD from ABC, for example.


To give it this reduction devalues the point of the original change. No logisitcs were planned around an unreleased hull and the damned thing is intended for high sec. It undermines the jump changes, imho.

We should be reducing fatigue bonused hulls, not adding bleeding new ones.



To assume that they didn't know about this ship when making the jump changes where made is stupid. They showed the ship off at eve Vegas before the jump changes went into effect
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#300 - 2014-11-10 20:54:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jean Luc Lemmont
Querns wrote:
Rowells wrote:
and we chose not to name them ferries because?

Ferries only operate between two banks of a river or lake. Tugs move up and down the body of water they are in and can make multiple stops.


You really need to update your definition of Ferry.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.