These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Two new barges: frigate and battleship size (NOT MORE YIELD!!!)
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-01-04 00:07:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
The "frigate" barge fits somewhere between the Venture and the Procurer, being closer to the size of a destroyer and having comparable fittings, but defenses not so much lower than what a cruiser has. It should be faster and more agile than a cruiser and with lower sig radius. This thing should run laps around the Procurer, but would lack the strong tank and would have less ore hold space and a bit lower mining output. To further differentiate it, it could have two high slots but only be able to fit one strip miner, and can put a probe launcher or cloak in the remaining high slot. It would only have +1 to warp strength, however, and with a targeting range similar to or less than the Procurer (which has a pretty short range anyway). Finally, this ship would have a smaller drone bandwidth/bay. 15/30 sounds good.

This barge would cost around 5-8 mil worth of minerals to produce. Its Exhumer version might land somewhere around 50-75 mil.



The "battleship" barge would fit three strips but would have no bonus to yield, so it would mine between a Retriever and a Covetor. It would be larger and slower than a Covetor, with a lot of hit points and powergrid. It could fit battleship shield boosters or armor repairers and would have battleship mass/sig radius. Along with this, it would have some utility highs that can't fit extra strip miners, with launcher hardpoints (no launcher bonuses) and a fairly decent drone bay. Its skill bonuses would be one defensive and one perhaps for range of strip miners. It can transform between two different modes: mining mode which allows it to use strip miners but not launchers or drones, and defense mode which turns off the strips and brings the defenses online.

This barge woould cost around 150-250 mil worth of minerals to produce. Its Exhumer version might land somewhere around 1-1.5 bil.

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."
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2015-01-04 00:18:10 UTC
Why?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2015-01-04 00:42:42 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Why?

I think the main reason is that I have trouble dealing with the smallest barge being the tankiest. It makes more sense to me (being used to the rest of EVE and all) to instead pay more money for a larger barge with more tank, or to buy a small one that has much less tank but is also cheap and agile.


I wouldn't mind if they just shrunk the Procurer and Skiff, and turned their sig tank into their defense, and then beefed up the size and EHP of Covetors and Hulks along with the price tag, making them into slow and expensive behemoths. Wouldn't change their roles much. The Covetor/Hulk are already slow in terms of max velocity/align, why can't they have some more powergrid and mass/sig radius? And why do Procurer/Skiff need battleship (almost) tank if they skirt around the place like a cruiser? Why not just shrink the sig and powergrid, and then they won't need all those hit 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."
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#4 - 2015-01-04 01:08:24 UTC
Try a Gnosis in a mining set up

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2015-01-04 01:18:02 UTC
Tiddle Jr wrote:
Try a Gnosis in a mining set up

Doesn't mine enough, only has the hit points. Good combat ship even in a mining setup, but it mines only slightly faster than a Venture, and the Venture has an ore bay. (Though a cargo expanded Gnosis gets about as big).

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."
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2015-01-04 01:18:22 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Why?

I think the main reason is that I have trouble dealing with the smallest barge being the tankiest. It makes more sense to me (being used to the rest of EVE and all) to instead pay more money for a larger barge with more tank, or to buy a small one that has much less tank but is also cheap and agile.


I wouldn't mind if they just shrunk the Procurer and Skiff, and turned their sig tank into their defense, and then beefed up the size and EHP of Covetors and Hulks along with the price tag, making them into slow and expensive behemoths. Wouldn't change their roles much. The Covetor/Hulk are already slow in terms of max velocity/align, why can't they have some more powergrid and mass/sig radius? And why do Procurer/Skiff need battleship (almost) tank if they skirt around the place like a cruiser? Why not just shrink the sig and powergrid, and then they won't need all those hit points?



Smallest being tankiest is called a drawback. you trade yield and hold for tank.

Sig tanking is not going to help against small weapons with tracking bonuses.



What does your idea actually add to the game? Why would people fly these new ships over the ones they already have access to?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-01-04 01:31:03 UTC
They just seem like generally better options. If these changes happened, I'd fly a lot less Retriever and a lot more Covetor and Procurer--when I'm actually in a barge at all, anyway.

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."
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#8 - 2015-01-04 01:49:22 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
They just seem like generally better options. If these changes happened, I'd fly a lot less Retriever and a lot more Covetor and Procurer--when I'm actually in a barge at all, anyway.


Ah... yes, mining battleships. But with a dedicated ore hold. Takes me back years to seeing Apocs mining in Enedore.

I do agree that the appearance of the mining barges and exhumers with the inverse between size and durability is somewhat humorous. One could chalk it up to the more dedicated and sophisticated equipment required to increase yield leading to a lack of structure and armor.

One could also look at the ORE = mining as a consequence of market demand. ORE's superior mining vessels lead to other manufacturers to repurpose their mining ships into something else - Osprey into a tech 1 logi, for example.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2015-01-04 01:54:46 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
They just seem like generally better options.



Why. What do they do that you can't already do.
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#10 - 2015-01-04 04:41:14 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
The "frigate" barge fits somewhere between the Venture and the Procurer, being closer to the size of a destroyer and having comparable fittings, but defenses not so much lower than what a cruiser has. It should be faster and more agile than a cruiser and with lower sig radius. This thing should run laps around the Procurer, but would lack the strong tank and would have less ore hold space and a bit lower mining output. To further differentiate it, it could have two high slots but only be able to fit one strip miner, and can put a probe launcher or cloak in the remaining high slot. It would only have +1 to warp strength, however, and with a targeting range similar to or less than the Procurer (which has a pretty short range anyway). Finally, this ship would have a smaller drone bandwidth/bay. 15/30 sounds good.

This barge would cost around 5-8 mil worth of minerals to produce. Its Exhumer version might land somewhere around 50-75 mil.



The "battleship" barge would fit three strips but would have no bonus to yield, so it would mine between a Retriever and a Covetor. It would be larger and slower than a Covetor, with a lot of hit points and powergrid. It could fit battleship shield boosters or armor repairers and would have battleship mass/sig radius. Along with this, it would have some utility highs that can't fit extra strip miners, with launcher hardpoints (no launcher bonuses) and a fairly decent drone bay. Its skill bonuses would be one defensive and one perhaps for range of strip miners. It can transform between two different modes: mining mode which allows it to use strip miners but not launchers or drones, and defense mode which turns off the strips and brings the defenses online.

This barge woould cost around 150-250 mil worth of minerals to produce. Its Exhumer version might land somewhere around 1-1.5 bil.


To squeeze something between existing not that easy.
So basically tanky barge... but price vs. Efficiency doesn't looks good.
What are you trying to achieve?

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Mario Putzo
#11 - 2015-01-04 04:53:24 UTC
Bigger is better I like it, and true in every other aspect of the EVE universe perfect suggestion!
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#12 - 2015-01-04 08:01:09 UTC
Mining bs with 3 stripes could be our best friend Orca. Just add turrets bays and allow to fit those, with no mining bonus ofc. Possibility to deploy 4 heavies or sentries enough for protection. And it's one of the most tankiest ship in game. The price would hit 1.0 + b ready if such changes ever happen.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Lugh Crow-Slave
#13 - 2015-01-05 00:31:17 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Bigger is better I like it, and true in every other aspect of the EVE universe perfect suggestion!


not quite we need to make webs stronger and raise capital turret tracking speeds for some reason i still can't hit frigates in my nag without help

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2015-01-05 00:53:45 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
They just seem like generally better options.



Why. What do they do that you can't already do.

Bigger, tougher, more expensive battleship barge with more offense when it isn't mining? I can use it to mine in places with strong rats and not need protection. Might not need protection from players, but probably want to be kinda sneaky with it just the same. But it could be decent fun being in a mining fleet scraping through a class 4 gravimetric site, occasionally all going to combat mode to start shooting the rats. And don't judge its viability on how many mining locations there are with tough rats--maybe the problem is that mining locations have rats that are too soft because they were designed for weak, flimsy miners.

Barge like a Venture but bigger and with more fitting options? Might be slower, but Venture is much faster than I usually want anyway. Venture doesn't have enough slots. I can't do a lot of fun fits with it. Also I'd love to have a ship I can use both to mine and to explore. Venture's fitting options are too slim and Procurer's got no utility high slot.

I'm just scratching the surface here, there are still many uses I haven't even thought of. Basically my designs are centered around giving the player more room to toy with new playstyles, while the current barges and Venture seem to be centered around forcing miners to just be miners and nothing else. I get tired of not being able to find a ship that can do the things I want to do because just about everything is so over-specialized. A lot of times I find a fun activity and a nice, generalized tech 1 ship that'll do it, but a lot of other times I don't. That's when I go on the forums and start suggesting ways to make tech 1 ships more generalized.

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."
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#15 - 2015-01-05 02:00:15 UTC
Come back to reality if you want a trench you take a shovel or either excavator which are specific tools for that. And not some all in one machine a luxury car from one side and a heavy machinery from another.
You have things split by designated areas of use.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2015-01-05 02:57:54 UTC
A shovel should be a module. All too often CCP's design team seems to think that a shovel is a ship. I don't want to fly a shovel. I want to fly a tractor that has a shovel and a rake and a shotgun, should I choose to put a shovel and a rake and a shotgun on my tractor.

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."
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#17 - 2015-01-05 03:49:38 UTC
Noted.
From the pov to change ORE ships, I'd still think of Orca at some point to be your mining BS. Orca was forgotten and came pseudo-freighter role. Apart of mining booster it's should be allowed to do sort of mining as well.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Tabyll Altol
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2015-01-05 09:59:37 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
The "frigate" barge fits somewhere between the Venture and the Procurer, being closer to the size of a destroyer and having comparable fittings, but defenses not so much lower than what a cruiser has. It should be faster and more agile than a cruiser and with lower sig radius. This thing should run laps around the Procurer, but would lack the strong tank and would have less ore hold space and a bit lower mining output. To further differentiate it, it could have two high slots but only be able to fit one strip miner, and can put a probe launcher or cloak in the remaining high slot. It would only have +1 to warp strength, however, and with a targeting range similar to or less than the Procurer (which has a pretty short range anyway). Finally, this ship would have a smaller drone bandwidth/bay. 15/30 sounds good.

This barge would cost around 5-8 mil worth of minerals to produce. Its Exhumer version might land somewhere around 50-75 mil.





The "battleship" barge would fit three strips but would have no bonus to yield, so it would mine between a Retriever and a Covetor. It would be larger and slower than a Covetor, with a lot of hit points and powergrid. It could fit battleship shield boosters or armor repairers and would have battleship mass/sig radius. Along with this, it would have some utility highs that can't fit extra strip miners, with launcher hardpoints (no launcher bonuses) and a fairly decent drone bay. Its skill bonuses would be one defensive and one perhaps for range of strip miners. It can transform between two different modes: mining mode which allows it to use strip miners but not launchers or drones, and defense mode which turns off the strips and brings the defenses online.

This barge woould cost around 150-250 mil worth of minerals to produce. Its Exhumer version might land somewhere around 1-1.5 bil.


To the first idea: i never had a destroyer tank much the are good for much dmg / yield.

The secound idea sounds like a procurer with a better yield.

I think the mining barges have a good cover you have one for every "need" (yield/tank/cargo).

-1
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2015-01-05 11:31:10 UTC
these niches are already filled.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]