These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#301 - 2014-11-10 20:58:58 UTC
Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:
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.


https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define%20ferry

Quote:

a boat or ship for conveying passengers and goods, especially over a relatively short distance and as a regular service.


Seems to be apt to me.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#302 - 2014-11-10 21:02:07 UTC
Querns wrote:
Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:
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.


https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define%20ferry

Quote:

a boat or ship for conveying passengers and goods, especially over a relatively short distance and as a regular service.


Seems to be apt to me.


Yes, but they are definately not restricted to lakes and rivers as you said, and the term short is relative. Some ferry routes are 1,000 km long, or more.

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.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#303 - 2014-11-10 21:04:28 UTC
Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:
Yes, but they are definately not restricted to lakes and rivers as you said, and the term short is relative. Some ferry routes are 1,000 km long, or more.

I'll take your word for it. Being the man that I am, I am inclined to stick to the rivers and lakes that I'm used to.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Garnt TheBrobarian
Whole Squid
#304 - 2014-11-10 21:04:49 UTC
Klyith wrote:

Just because the people who want this ship the most want to carry around 3 pimp-fit pirate battleships, does not mean that the thing should be built to give them their every desire on a platter. It's not like you can't run incursions in a plain T1 BS if you wanted to.


No you don't get it. I can fit 10 blingy T3s in there so it should have at least as much tank as 10 blingy T3s combined, and should require 10 blingy T3s worth of ganking ships to gank, because that's somehow a logical equivalency that works, apparently?
Rin Nagamori
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#305 - 2014-11-10 21:04:56 UTC
Given what the new ship is designed to do, "Heavy Lift Ship" or "Heavy Lift Vessel" might be more appropriate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy-lift_ship
Gaan Cathal
Angry Mustellid
#306 - 2014-11-10 21:14:07 UTC
Slevin-Kelevra wrote:


I am talking about null sec jump bridges mate. With the 90% reduction you can move your whole fleet across the map using jump bridges, and gain very little fatigue doing so.


Seriously. This is an issue.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#307 - 2014-11-10 21:18:57 UTC
Gaan Cathal wrote:
Slevin-Kelevra wrote:


I am talking about null sec jump bridges mate. With the 90% reduction you can move your whole fleet across the map using jump bridges, and gain very little fatigue doing so.


Seriously. This is an issue.

Not while interceptors exist.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Sven Viko VIkolander
In space we are briefly free
#308 - 2014-11-10 21:31:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Sven Viko VIkolander
The demands of risk-adverse players are rampant in this thread. Give it 500k EHP!! Give it 600k EHP!! Allow it to carry 4-5 fitted battleships AND give it 600k EHP!!! But as many people have reasonably pointed out, just because you can carry X does not mean you should have a tank that makes it necessarily unprofitable to be killed while hauling X.

The more convenient / useful something is in EVE, the more potential risk it should involve. Moving a fitted battleship manually, the old way, is less convenient than hauling a few in the Bowhead--the Bowhead should Not *also* be safer as well, as that completely reverses the risk-reward balance. The Bowhead is going to make life a lot easier for many groups, including solo players such as myself. As a result though, it should bring with it great potential risk, such as being a prime target for ganks.
Lurifax
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#309 - 2014-11-10 21:38:57 UTC
Does this mean that the Rorq will get some love ?
Santa Spirit
Christmas Spirit and Goodwill Toward Man
#310 - 2014-11-10 21:39:45 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
John Ratcliffe wrote:
Well where's the picture? Stats are obviously useful, but I want to see what it looks like.

Happy with the Mids - pop a prop mod on there for faster warp engagement. I'll be getting one for sure.


I'll actually go look for a picture for you, there must be one around here somewhere.

edit: bad news =/ art says no WIP pictures so I guess you have to wait a week or two for it to show up on Sisi. I saw it though and it looks amazing, if that helps.



doesn't the speed bonus simply mean that as you increase it's stats by skilling it higher, you also increase the amount of time it takes to get into warp?

just saying. :P

Santa

Please come join the fun Dec 14th., 2017 Find the details [HERE] when the post is made
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#311 - 2014-11-10 21:40:48 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.


I don't doubt you, what I dislike is the undermining the message of the mechanic - why add more bonused hulls? At all? Even taking you at your word (and I do, for clarity) there is almost no POINT in it being bonused.

They are trying to limit projection and teleporting around the map - what message does the first new hull since the change having a reduction bonus send?

By their own admission, it is a high sec intended vessel - what harm would it not being fatigue reduced bring? Particularly if they are as useless as you've shown for rapid deployment? Then the message of "teleporting travel is dying" is retained.


Lady Rift wrote:
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


You miss my point - I wasn't talking about the devs, I was talking about null logistics chains - you cannot cry about the "removal" of something you never had. That would be like moaning about ABCs "losing" MMJDs.

If a new ship is added without reduction bonuses, how can you reasonably state that breaks current logistic chains?
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2014-11-10 21:44:39 UTC
A jump drive would be nice.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#313 - 2014-11-10 21:53:16 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Darirol wrote:
why do all those industrial ships have a speed bonus?


Because travel speed is one of the most important characteristics for haulers. Capacity, gank resilience and travel speed are basically it.

Top speed is irrelevant unless autopiloting. Autopiloting one of these will be a death sentence in HS since it will get bumped and ganked, in which case total EHP are also irrelevant. If the answer to either of these is 'get a webbing buddy' then you're not autopiloting, and the top speed bonus is still irrelevant. If SMA's can drop ships then this thing will be a loot pinata flown only by the clueless. This is 'Nestor'-level bad design mate. At least make it an agility bonus, which can also help if someone's foolish enough to fly on AP by helping them get to top speed faster.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#314 - 2014-11-10 21:55:46 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
A jump drive would be nice.


No, we already have ship haulers with jump drives, they're called carriers...

(not trying to be an ass, but seriously, we have that already and CCP just nerfed them cause they were too easy)

and BTW, not just no, but Hell NO!!!!!

*wink*

o7
Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#315 - 2014-11-10 21:56:59 UTC
afkalt wrote:
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.


I don't doubt you, what I dislike is the undermining the message of the mechanic - why add more bonused hulls? At all? Even taking you at your word (and I do, for clarity) there is almost no POINT in it being bonused.

They are trying to limit projection and teleporting around the map - what message does the first new hull since the change having a reduction bonus send?

By their own admission, it is a high sec intended vessel - what harm would it not being fatigue reduced bring? Particularly if they are as useless as you've shown for rapid deployment? Then the message of "teleporting travel is dying" is retained.

The point of it retaining the bonus is because it allows the hull to be used in more casual, PvE related environments. An example: the vagaries of nullsec production and the varied push/pull motivators added in Crius demand that ships, modules, and ammo be produced in disparate systems, and sold in yet others. Having the ship retain a fatigue bonus allows it to be used for production and to move fitted hulls around. Without the fatigue bonus, there's little reason to use it over a Jump Freighter. Forcing an individual into one particular choice is a hallmark of bad design. (Interceptors also fall into this category.)

What I'm primarily trying to do is diffuse the alarmingly prevalent belief that all forms of gameplay must suffer because a complicated, unrealistic vignette constructed by people with little expertise in the matter paints a diabolic picture. These vignettes are overwhelmingly constructed by folks who have an irrational distaste for the mechanic in question (largely brought about by their inability to USE this mechanic, fomenting an emotionally charged, inaccurate picture.) Under no circumstances have these vignettes been backed up by a single fact, calculation, or vetted by someone with a demonstrable amount of domain knowledge in the field in question. It also doesn't help that these vignettes are painted in stark refusal to accept the fact that the Interceptor exists. I'm not really sure how to reconcile this Interceptor-shaped blind spot.

I find the "but the ship is intended to be used in highsec" argument to be complete garbage, in general. The only time these arguments hold any water is when the game physically restricts the ship from being in a certain area of space (e.g.: carriers in highsec.) As an avowed nullsec haver, I'm just as capable of building and operating a Bowhead in 0.0 as I am in highsec.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Bearcastle
Bionesis Technologies
#316 - 2014-11-10 21:57:27 UTC
Bearcastle wrote:
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.




I would like to add few point.

Alone, with the spec now, it"s useless. The only good use might be for Incursion.

I will not use this kind of ship to move only 3 BS... I prefer to repackage and use a freighter.
The ship like it is, will not be worth the investment.

You have very good exemple in SF about this kind of ship. They are use as group support for long deployment.
Then you could refit, reload, repair without having to go back to base and you could carry specialze ship, replacement or a whole squadron.

As for the T2 I mentionned, it should have jump capabilities. As you say CCP Rise you see it as a Cap Class Ship, in that case make it really usefull.
It could be a very good ship to bring support in battle or long deployment, but it need a bit more capacity and possibility to hide.

As for moving ship in high sec, as some say, manually one by one, would be better than a huge investment, for a ship that will take dust the rest of the time.


Yes it's a good idea, so make it usefull.
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#317 - 2014-11-10 21:57:52 UTC
Santa Spirit wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
John Ratcliffe wrote:
Well where's the picture? Stats are obviously useful, but I want to see what it looks like.

Happy with the Mids - pop a prop mod on there for faster warp engagement. I'll be getting one for sure.


I'll actually go look for a picture for you, there must be one around here somewhere.

edit: bad news =/ art says no WIP pictures so I guess you have to wait a week or two for it to show up on Sisi. I saw it though and it looks amazing, if that helps.



doesn't the speed bonus simply mean that as you increase it's stats by skilling it higher, you also increase the amount of time it takes to get into warp?

just saying. :P

Santa



SEE?
even Santa knows that's a bad idea LOL

o/ Santa

Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#318 - 2014-11-10 21:59:46 UTC
afkalt wrote:
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.


I don't doubt you, what I dislike is the undermining the message of the mechanic - why add more bonused hulls? At all? Even taking you at your word (and I do, for clarity) there is almost no POINT in it being bonused.

They are trying to limit projection and teleporting around the map - what message does the first new hull since the change having a reduction bonus send?

By their own admission, it is a high sec intended vessel - what harm would it not being fatigue reduced bring? Particularly if they are as useless as you've shown for rapid deployment? Then the message of "teleporting travel is dying" is retained.


Lady Rift wrote:
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


You miss my point - I wasn't talking about the devs, I was talking about null logistics chains - you cannot cry about the "removal" of something you never had. That would be like moaning about ABCs "losing" MMJDs.

If a new ship is added without reduction bonuses, how can you reasonably state that breaks current logistic chains?

it sends a message of uniformity. They extended the 90% to industrials after the players brought up the major impact it would have on logistics without introducing a viable method to replace it at home. Allowing the bnus to stay opens up content for those willing to to find niche uses and put up more risk than the average player. Its needlessly restrictive. Just because major alliances won't be using these en masse does not mean individual players or smaller groups wont find purpose in them. When the rest of industrial ships lose their bonus (when nullsec finds itself with basic sustainability) then it will be reasonable to desire the mechanic removed. Its possible abuses are very limited, but its benefits could be found useful in certain edge cases.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#319 - 2014-11-10 21:59:54 UTC
Celly S wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
A jump drive would be nice.


No, we already have ship haulers with jump drives, they're called carriers...

(not trying to be an ass, but seriously, we have that already and CCP just nerfed them cause they were too easy)

and BTW, not just no, but Hell NO!!!!!

*wink*

o7
Celly Smunt

That is a gross misrepresentation of the restriction carriers received. They were restricted due to their superlative tank and damage application to subcaps, not their SMA.

I'd be in favor of a T2 version of the Bowhead that has jump drive capability. This mirrors the original split of carriers and jump freighters, where the former had its ability to carry industrials packed with materiel castrated, allowing the latter to have a role as a dedicated logistics vehicle.

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
#320 - 2014-11-10 22:03:35 UTC
Celly S wrote:
Santa Spirit wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
John Ratcliffe wrote:
Well where's the picture? Stats are obviously useful, but I want to see what it looks like.

Happy with the Mids - pop a prop mod on there for faster warp engagement. I'll be getting one for sure.


I'll actually go look for a picture for you, there must be one around here somewhere.

edit: bad news =/ art says no WIP pictures so I guess you have to wait a week or two for it to show up on Sisi. I saw it though and it looks amazing, if that helps.



doesn't the speed bonus simply mean that as you increase it's stats by skilling it higher, you also increase the amount of time it takes to get into warp?

just saying. :P

Santa



SEE?
even Santa knows that's a bad idea LOL

o/ Santa

Celly Smunt

Thats not how top speed and agility works unfortunately. Align speed (agility) is independent of speed.