These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ORE mining battleship - more fitting versatility, less mining output!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grezh
Hextrix Enterprise
#61 - 2015-01-22 23:18:46 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:

1. Many ships require fitting implants or a fitting mod to 'fit properly.' A dual rep triage armor thanatos requires a PG implant/mod. Single rep in triage is pretty pointless. A Nidhoggur has a horrible time trying to fit anything triage. If memory serves, a megathron struggles to fit a rack of T2 425's. CCP has balanced many ships so they require either a concession or fitting implant/mod. Like the Jaguar, right OP? This does not in any way make an ORE battleship 'necessary.' Do I in general like the idea of adding more ships to Eve? Yes. Do they need to be sensible and thought out? Yes. Do I occasionally wonder what would happen if 'x' ship was added, even though it was not really awesome at anything, kinda just a lesser version of this, or a redundant version of that, or kinda nothing in particular? Oh wait.... I see you over there Deimos, or nidhoggur, or insert ship that no one uses because 'that ship over there' just plain does it better. Yes I know a pimped Nidhoggur in a WH is bad ass. Yes I know there are always hard core fans of whatever ship that will use it even when it is literally the worst ship in New Eden.

2. Unfounded assumption. It's a Faction battleship, even if it's ORE. ORE does not have a line of frigates, cruisers, etc in game. It has the barges, but this fits literally no where in their existing tree, if CCP wishes to maintain any sort of consistency. That alone has the potential to make it far more expensive. See following list for details:
Barghest
Bhaalgorn
Tempest Fleet
Raven Navy
Nestor

And the interesting thing about all these^, they have their own progression tree that is consistent with CCP design, and are still more expensive than their T1 counter parts, in some cases 3 times as expensive, thereabouts. This is why we need to know how OP proposes this ship is made? Is it a whole new line? in that case give us the rest of the line and sell it to us. Is it an LP blueprint? Is it T1, T2, T3? Faction? anything? Then we can see how we can twist it and see if we can exploit it.


3. The Venture was not necessary. It was neat, but not necessary in any way shape or form. Watching them be warped into a PVP machine was quite entertaining, because all those bonuses for PVP.

4. This is why smartbombing BS are a thing right? Because all those smartbomb bonuses. Even better, smartbombing black ops or, yes, you're reading this right, smartbombing cloaky T3's. Both of these exist because all those smartbombing bonuses right? Also why slow cat fleets are so hard to beat, because all those combat bonuses right? Further, this is why battle exequror's still run around here and there, because all those combat bonuses. One of my personal favorites, the Jabbadon used by some wormhole entities to pull all the sleeper aggro onto an abbadon fit with..... wait for it..... ECM!, Voila! All those ECM bonuses!

As stated, the Eve community can take anything and warp it into something it was never intended to be. Hence the need to show how this proposal 'fixes this absolute must have issue without introducing some new monster.'

Again, the burden of Proof is on you, OP.



1. Use of non-rebalanced capital ships as examples is faulty for proving your point.

2. If i remember correctly, the venture is called a mining frigate. the use of pirate/navy ships as examples is faulty due to lack of bpos to produce said ships. All t1 ORE ships have seeded bpos and thus the minerals take up most of the price unlike your examples.

3. By your definition of necessary ship i could delete every ship but the typhoon and never have to add a ship again because anything more would be 'unecessary'. Each ship, no matter if the community perceives it as underpowered still adds diversity to the game, the addition of a ORE mining battleship would both fill the niche of dedicated mining escort, but also not detract from the role that other ships may possess, thus increasing both diversity and enjoyment for those who wish to fill the niche.

4. I fail to see how edge cases of using player perception against them in order to emerge victorious contributes to a ship being overpowered. Since there are no battleships bonused to smartbombs it naturally follows that those that have more high slots to fit said smartbombs have a soft 'bonus' to smartbombs compared to ships with fewer high slots.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2015-01-22 23:40:49 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
-1 for unnecessary idea, incomplete idea, poor manners, ranting, and empty threats of trying to use forum moderation to defend a bad post.

Are you calculating CPU costs in your head? Mining laser upgrades increase the CPU costs of the lasers too, you know. If you had bothered to plug this into EFT we'd have never gone this far. You savagely defend your accusation that the Navy battleships have enough CPU to perform this role while a preliminary glance fit in EFT reveals this to be a far cry from the truth. You even provided a fit, which I quickly shot down for both being insufficient in the role (lack of fitting flexibility, your fit is comparable to a Procurer in terms of both tank AND room for changes) and for lacking CPU to work. You countered that the fit does in fact possess enough CPU. You want numbers? I'll give you numbers, straight from EFT. Lets assume max skills (which shouldn't be necessary for a T1 ship) and all T2 modules. We'll use your fit which is a terrible fit as it has a weak passive tank, no active tank, no propulsion module, and lacks enough cargo space for two miner cycles without using mining drones.
CPU used with empty utility high: 1060.73 tf
CPU available without implants: 1020.53 tf
CPU needed to fit: +4%
CPU bonuses applied already: 1x CPU rig I, 2x CPU mod II

And this fit hinges upon using a navy battleship and a set of implants valued nearly as high as a t1 battleship hull. I don't know why you insist on valuing my proposed ship on par with navy battleships when it is a tech 1 non-navy. You say it's a "faction" battleship, well so is the Megathron-Gallente faction. But the basic Megathron is not a faction Navy battleship. To all of you who have suggested the proposed ship should be considered tech 2: it has attributes on par with tech 1 battleships and possesses only two skill bonuses. I did not provide hit point values but I intended for them to be similar to tech 1 battleships. So the hull cost of this ship would be around 150-200 mil, like a Megathron, Raven, or Typhoon. As a tech 1 ship balanced toward accessibility to newer players, it should be viable with a meta 0-4 fit costing under 25 mil with relevant skills ranging from level 2 to 4. Tech 1 Megathron does not have that utility high and has 30 less base CPU. You expect me to fit 3-4 CPU improvements just to squeeze a low-CPU cost fit onto the ship, and you claim viability based on the net DPS and mining output being a little below my suggested ship when you have made strong concessions just to stretch the numbers up to that point.

My idea is not unnecessary, its lack of completion is intentional as was discussed in the OP and I made that decision after several more complete versions of other ship suggestions that were shot down for having tentative attributes listed by number or for the post being too long that people didn't read it. I am excluding as many details as possible to keep my proposals short enough for you guys, yet you insist on not reading the whole thing while shooting me down for shortening it for you. I believe my manners have been exemplary here, and I would ask you to review your own--I speak not of your direct words but of your slack manner in presenting your ideas and reading mine plus your zeal in attacking my posts for the same weaknesses which I am not showing in as strong a fashion. I have not ranted at any point here, assuming the definition of a rant is a long-winded post with excessive redundancy or irrelevant points; everything I have said is on topic and important, and despite my long posts I have done a considerable amount of trimming before posting; this post is an exception, and me trying a new angle that will perhaps work for you. I made no empty threat and my intent is not to use forum moderation in self-serving defense but to maintain the civility of this thread. I did not report your last post for one reason only: that you explained to me that you actually believed your points were valid, making me suspect the sloppiness of your work might be less intentional than I had previously thought.

Now I have explained specifically where your work is sloppy and in numerous posts have explained in-depth and in varying words exactly what is wrong with your points, so do me a favor and take these points into consideration before you repeat yourself again. I've already heard what you said before, and have even repeated it back to you multiple times and in different words to verify to you that I did in fact understand what you were saying, so that you would not feel it necessary to re-iterate or re-word the same point again. Yet you persist in telling me the same thing repeatedly. I recognize the redundancy in my post but I have placed it here intentionally because I believe it is necessary to get my point across in a way you will comprehend. What I want from you is for you to consider all of the following bullet points thoroughly before replying. Consider my words in the following bullet points to be exactly as intended with zero mistakes, and interpret them literally. If and when you do reply, I want you to say something new. If your only response is to maintain agreement with your previous post, do not re-iterate it, but only notify me that you are unwavered.

  • The proposed battleship is tech 1, not Navy
  • Existing tech 1 battleships run out of CPU after fitting the mining lasers and before fitting all of the mining upgrades or the rest of the fit
  • Existing tech 1 battleships cannot achieve adequate mining output and adequate damage output in a single fit
  • I believe the greater allowance of mining and damage in my proposal is warranted because 1.) it does neither one better than existing ships, and 2.) it will rarely be doing both at the same time
  • Existing tech 1 battleships do not possess a cargohold large enough to mine pleasantly without multiple cargohold expanders

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."
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2015-01-22 23:49:49 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
This is why we need to know how OP proposes this ship is made? Is it a whole new line? in that case give us the rest of the line and sell it to us.

I'd love to go into details but I'm focusing on one ship at a time because people have trouble dealing with several.

Here's one I came up with recently, thanks to Bronson Hughes for pointing out the skill progression:

ORE Battlecruiser

Fits weak mining -or- DPS with its turret hardpoints, has a defensive bonus and a bonus to mining foreman links. Can fit one link naturally and has 2 utility highs and adequate fitting for the one easily, but in fact can somewhat reasonably fit 2 command processors and 3 mining foreman links. This gives some flexibility on how much command vs tank vs DPS vs mining the pilot/fleet wants while ultimately giving it strong defense in any setup and a solid role as on-grid boosts and fleet defense.

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."
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2015-01-23 16:18:17 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
One big long huge post dismantling two very poor arguments later, deciding it wasn't worth my time and deleting it....

*Snip* Please refrain from spamming. ISD Ezwal.

As an example, no I've not done precise maths on this:

battleship Wildfire(insert name of choice):
4 high slots: 2 turret locations, 2 launcher
5/6 mids
4 lows
400m3 cargo
75/75 bandwidth/bay
3k Ore hold
~2200 PG
~600-700 CPU
~4000/4500 GJ capacitor capacity.

*can fit strip miners*

Ship bonus: 50% reduction in powergrid and CPU needs, and capacitor activation costs for modules requiring shield operation skill
50% reduction in torpedo and cruise missile PG needs

Skill bonus: 7.5% increase to explosion velocity of torpedo's per level(don't use missiles much so tweak as necessary, or change to something that applies damage better.)
10% Bonus to scan resolution per level


The concept here being something that might not do much DPS, but is good at applying it's handful of DPS, and can mine while doing it. It doesn't need to do much DPS to blap a gankers catalyst, just needs to get lock. Two torps aren't going to do much damage, even if they fully apply, but as long as they almost fully apply they'll get through hostile frigates and NPC rats pretty quickly. Go three launchers if necessary and drop a low or something.

Unlike the existing battleships that can do what your proposal suggests, this approach focuses on an aggressive burst tank as gank defense, and damage application against gank destroyers, not massive dps. The only real answer for attack battle cruiser ganks is real logi. It doesn't have the fitting to fit outside its bonuses, and doesn't have the cap to tank for a long time.


You could then do a cruiser that can fit 1 strip miner, 2 rapid light missile launchers, get a bonus to RoF, penalty to reload and have no tank or something, and a frigate that is highly tanky but does 20 dps or something and gets bonuses to mining drones, having only 1 high. Your BC is not any different from an existing prophecy, and ORE has a ship for mining boosts. Find a way to make it special.

There are so many ways to go about it differently and effectively without doing the same old thing, only with a twist instead of a twirl. An ORE flavored Rokh is not the answer.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2015-01-23 16:33:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Clever, first half of the post is the same repeat post you've put in here enough times already, second half is new content.

In response to your mining battleship idea: I see nothing in it that supports brief application of damage or tank but rather only sustained damage/tank in small amounts. Also, 4 strips is a bit much. I'm shying away from strip miners because you can't give a ship strips and utility highs without either giving it too much mining yield or setting an arbitrary limit to how many can be fit. Mining lasers are already limited by turret hardpoints. Also, some of the most important parts of battleship fitting flexibility is the ability to fit large armor repairers, heavy capacitor boosters, XL shield boosters, heavy neutralizers and nosferatus, and other modules with a high powergrid cost. These give battleships special advantages over battlecruisers and help to diversify them further. Your proposal doesn't even really explore those options with the exception of a contrived bonus for shield boosters and so I would contend that it's actually less diverse than mine.

I've already responded previously about CPU costs and needing too many fitting modules to make fits viable, so I won't get into it again. Lets agree to disagree, I've already asked you twice to stop posting about the existing battleships you think can cover my proposal. I'm done asking.

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."
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#66 - 2015-01-23 21:25:08 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post.

The Rules:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Scifi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#67 - 2015-01-24 02:58:04 UTC
Tiddle Jr wrote:
All righty, here what i came out this morning - T2 Noctis Hull base ORE ship. Interesting ship, with very narrow role.

So taking into the mind a few threads related to Mining Drones "need more love" i think we could expect that love from CCP, in a turms of appearing T2 mining drones along with Mining Drone yield upgrade module. Whisch is obviously nice addition and are very welcomed and expected things in game.

Here the Noctis turned to T2 version of it, with re-designed slots layout ofc, other major stats, and here is most interesting thing - the bonuses.

Mining drone bonuses for sure, along with solid bandwith and drone bay. Maybe we could expect something like Vexor has atm, 10% bonus to Drone damage, hitpoints and ofc yield gain.

The layouts might be turned upside down, 3/4/(8 just to much), lets say 6 low slots with basic 1.46k m3 of cargohold with extenders would give an amazing capacity.

Tanking, dunno really up to you, ASB or MAAR i think shiled tank is more obviuos in this case.

So pretty tanky, could handle at least 1 nado alpha strike could protect itself with heavies or either sentries and still provide significant ammount of ore mined via drones.

Just a thought from my side i'd nothng serious but still a LOT to think of vs. debating seally BS idea which is useless from my pov.

Cheers.



Both this and the dedicated gas-cloud miner both have merit I think. A ship that can fit the strip miner equivalent of a gas cloud harvester would be very welcome. And something like this, a drone boat with excellent bonuses to yield would avoid a lot of the "Just use a rokh" style arguments I think.
Grezh
Hextrix Enterprise
#68 - 2015-01-25 21:00:06 UTC
While the absence of a large ore hold on the suggestion has some merit I feel like with the amount of cpu that this has that fitting way too many asbs would be possible and with ~3 times the hold of a regular battleship if fit specifically for tank it would be ridiculously difficult to take down. Is that a specific decision on your part? I understand that having an ore hold requires it to be fairly large off the bat since expenders don't work on them however it also adds nothing to a ships combat capabilities unlike a regular hold. If anything giving a mining battleship a much lower regular hold size would help cull its ability to asb endlessly, something like 400m3.
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2015-01-26 01:25:37 UTC  |  Edited by: BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
I think this is what you're looking for:
[Armageddon, Miner]
Mining Laser Upgrade I
Mining Laser Upgrade I
Mining Laser Upgrade I
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Co-Processor II
Co-Processor II

Large Micro Jump Drive
Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Miner II
Miner II
Miner II
Miner II
Miner II
Heavy Energy Neutralizer II
Heavy Energy Neutralizer II

Large Processor Overclocking Unit I
Large Processor Overclocking Unit I
Large Core Defense Field Extender I

Bouncer II x5
Garde II x5

I'll personally don't see any real application or usefulness to the said ship. You'd be looking at a (ORE) pirate faction battleship with the said stats, and would find that in most cases a skiff or armageddon would do the same things better. Sure, you'd hit some niche in between the two, but you pay a billion isk to do so when the alternative ships cost 200m or less.

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
Grezh
Hextrix Enterprise
#70 - 2015-01-26 04:30:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Grezh
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
I think this is what you're looking for:
[Armageddon, Miner]


Did you not read about 4 pages of counterarguments to propositions like yours?

EDIT: Also, ORE is unlike any pirate faction in that there a bpos for t1 ORE ships, so saying that a t1 ORE battleship would cost 600 mill - 1 bill is like saying t1 barges cost 150mil or a venture costs 70mil, all of which are not true
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2015-01-27 18:59:05 UTC
Grezh wrote:
While the absence of a large ore hold on the suggestion has some merit I feel like with the amount of cpu that this has that fitting way too many asbs would be possible and with ~3 times the hold of a regular battleship if fit specifically for tank it would be ridiculously difficult to take down. Is that a specific decision on your part? I understand that having an ore hold requires it to be fairly large off the bat since expenders don't work on them however it also adds nothing to a ships combat capabilities unlike a regular hold. If anything giving a mining battleship a much lower regular hold size would help cull its ability to asb endlessly, something like 400m3.

It can't fit 2-3 XL ASBs and carry a whole bunch of cap booster charges and still mine effectively, it won't have the CPU for the lasers nor the cargo space for the ore. In the case where it fits no lasers, only missiles and shield tank, it trades superior defense for inferior offense. A Scorpion can do this already though my proposal has a bit more CPU and a lot more cargohold while Scorpion has two extra mid slots and a lot more powergrid, but neither one is really very popular because having a lot of tank isn't useful if you can't do anything important with the ship.

Scorpion Navy Issue has 780 TF CPU, 8 mid slots, 5 low slots, 650m3 cargohold (can fit 40x cap booster charge 800). To top it off, the ship has a shield resist and missile rate of fire bonus. It can definitely tank much better than the ship I'm proposing and while doing a lot more missile damage (8 effective launchers). I don't think my proposal is overpowered for T1 when this monster is so far ahead, but only faction Navy.

An alternative could be to give a reduction to CPU costs of fitting mining lasers, but I don't see it being much of an issue. It's something to consider though. Actually something I have considered is that my proposal wouldn't be needed if the CPU cost of mining lasers were reduced. The Venture and Prospector would need a small rebalance but everything else might just fall into place.

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."
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2015-01-28 07:19:16 UTC
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
I'll personally don't see any real application or usefulness to the said ship. You'd be looking at a (ORE) pirate faction battleship with the said stats, and would find that in most cases a skiff or armageddon would do the same things better. Sure, you'd hit some niche in between the two, but you pay a billion isk to do so when the alternative ships cost 200m or less.

I think it's fair to consider the net impact of the ship, even if you have to give it stats that seem absurdly high. An example of this is combat battlecruisers which have +10% per level damage bonuses to their guns, making six guns more powerful than seven guns on a normal ship at max skill. It's mostly balanced out by their being limited to six guns.

I've given the battleship a net potential of basically three options as a hybrid combat/mining ship:
1.) a bit slower mining than a Procurer and with way smaller ore bay, similar offense, but much greater fitting flexibility and a bit better defenses at the cost of maneuverability and more expensive hull
2.) offense significantly weaker than a Raven, defense about the same as a Raven, with the ability to mine like a Venture
3.) mediocre offense and mediocre mining with decent defense

None of those sound powerful enough to me to warrant putting the cost of the hull so high. Am I missing something here?

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."
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2015-01-28 11:28:28 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:


I've given the battleship a net potential of basically three options as a hybrid combat/mining ship:
1.) a bit slower mining than a Procurer and with way smaller ore bay, similar offense, but much greater fitting flexibility and a bit better defenses at the cost of maneuverability and more expensive hull
2.) offense significantly weaker than a Raven, defense about the same as a Raven, with the ability to mine like a Venture
3.) mediocre offense and mediocre mining with decent defense

None of those sound powerful enough to me to warrant putting the cost of the hull so high. Am I missing something here?



Yes.

Outside of 4 pages saying 'these ships all do what you're asking,' you're also missing the essence of ORE.

ORE does not do 'little bits of everything.' ORE builds the best ship they can for a a specific role. They choose to build or buy what they want, or else buy someone to take it for them/defend them from whoever. Quoted directly from the Eve-wiki, all sniggers around 'wiki-accuracy' aside:

'They used their massive wealth to buy protection for their bases and keep their operation secret. Several pirate factions have tried to muscle in on the ORE territories, but with little success.'

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Category:ORE

Minmatar do huge versatility, as an example. Minmatar fight even when outmanned and outgunned. They can armor tank, shield tank, nano tank. They can missile or projectile, EWAR, or even drone to some extent. The Noctis is not a multi-tanker, dps machine. It's a focused salvager. The barges are not built to lead fleets, they are built for 3 different scenario's for mining. The Orca is built to support mining. Every ORE ship is focused into a single purpose revolving around industry. Every offshoot of that purpose is what capsuleers make of it, none of those 'versatilities' the planned design. You are pushing for huge versatility on this ship as a selling point, how exploitable could that be? See how New Eden took the limited versatility of the Venture? procurer? Orca?


Also, if you look through the ORE ships, you'll see your ship diverges sharply from ORE design in other ways. First, If you look at the ISIS, and click on ORE, you'll see that their very definition is counter to this ship: 'Industrial Backbone of New Eden. Depend on others to fight for them. Rely on shields if all else fails.' ORE builds ships to build a greater Industrial empire, a greater base of wealth and industry, they don't build ships to fight battles. The main reason their ships are fit with even basic defenses is due to ORE being practical enough to know they would need them just to survive space.

Another major difference is the 'specs' of this ship, as rough as they are. There are only 2 ORE ships which have more than 4 mid slots: The Skiff(T2, tankiest subcap) at 5, and the Rorqual at 7(capital ship). This is while ORE relies on avoidance as it's primary defense, and shields as its secondary. Only 1 ORE ship has more than a 50Mbit/s drone bandwidth, and that's the Rorqual(Capital ship). Even the orca has 50, and it's a capital ship, even if a very small one, it still is built from capital components. Only two ORE ships have over 400 CPU, the Orca and Rorqual(capital ships), and the Orca is a paltry 430, barely over half of the proposed 800. The only ORE ship with 4 lows is the prospect, which seems really high given the venture's 1 low slot, the only two with more than 3 highs are the noctis(dedicated salvager) and Rorqual. The only places your proposal remains close to ORE design are the low powergrid, the higher cargo hold, and the mining bonus. Nearly every ORE subcap is well below your proposed slot layout, with only the Rorqual exceeding it, for all intents and purposes. Before the 'well this is a battleship, it's supposed to be different and bigger and better response,' remember, ORE hasn't and doesn't build combat ships. Capsuleers have made a few work as combat ships, but they weren't built for that purpose.


Take away all the decisive postings of ships that already do more or less what you're asking with a bit of finagling, take away all the doubts of whether this is actually a role that needs filled, take away all the insistence that this is jack of all trades, master of nothing ship is the answer to mining support, not a couple scythes and a vulture as are the best answer for support for combat ships, take away all the other reasons which are reason enough for this idea to be rethought, there is still this: For this ship to at all mesh with ORE philosophy, ORE would have to be completely re-written, or else declare open war. See how this idea directly conflicts with everything ORE?

Now if CCP were to re-write ORE, or else pull ORE into the Empire's wars, or a war with True Power, or a war with the gankers that have been plaguing ORE vessels for so long, or anything to support a sudden aggressive mindset, then maybe this idea could be looked at. But as it stands, both in concept and lore/philosophy, this ship does not at all fit with ORE.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2015-01-28 13:05:29 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
None of those sound powerful enough to me to warrant putting the cost of the hull so high. Am I missing something here?



Yes.

Outside of 4 pages saying 'these ships all do what you're asking,' you're also missing the essence of ORE.

ORE does not do 'little bits of everything.' ORE builds the best ship they can for a a specific role. They choose to build or buy what they want, or else buy someone to take it for them/defend them from whoever. Quoted directly from the Eve-wiki, all sniggers around 'wiki-accuracy' aside:

'They used their massive wealth to buy protection for their bases and keep their operation secret. Several pirate factions have tried to muscle in on the ORE territories, but with little success.'

Sounds to me like ORE would probably find themselves very favorable to a mining/combat hybrid ship. ORE wants protection, they fight pirates and live in dangerous space. I see anything but a faction that would build squishy barges made for mining and mining only. I submit that CCP has ORE pegged wrong and that if they wish to uphold the lore, they should make ORE industrials more offense-centric than they are.

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."
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2015-01-28 15:11:39 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Sounds to me like ORE would probably find themselves very favorable to a mining/combat hybrid ship. ORE wants protection, they fight pirates and live in dangerous space. I see anything but a faction that would build squishy barges made for mining and mining only. I submit that CCP has ORE pegged wrong and that if they wish to uphold the lore, they should make ORE industrials more offense-centric than they are.


Unfortunately, that's an opinion, one that isn't necessarily 'true,' so to speak. Spending time diversifying attention between building this ship and that ship and that other ship and training people to do this and that and that other thing detracts from the focused methodology that ORE has so far exhibited. Why spend time learning to do 'thing A'(and ending with a sub satisfactory result) when guy over there will do it(and do it to satisfactory result) for an acceptable sum of gold which you have in huge supply because you're really good at 'thing b.'


That decision making point is where you get diversity. You can have another 'race' that just jumps into the big arms race of the four empires and pirate factions by extension, or you can have one that makes a different decision and chooses to forgo the arms race and instead focus on what they are already really good at. ORE, to date, has chosen to remain the best in the galaxy at mining asteroids(and other industry stuffs), not players.


CCP could choose to change that, sure. They could choose to do the Summer expansions(forget their names, not bothered to look them up) as ORE declaring war on CODE. and miniluv and marmite and etc, etc, and as a result put out a line of focused ORE combat ships. But even if they did, I think any ORE ships of war would have a specific approach in mind and would be well adapted for it, while being underwhelming, and less capable than existing hulls, nearly any other way, a case of 'why are you using a celestis to mine when you can fly and own a retriever?'

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2015-01-28 15:34:16 UTC
That is a large part of what I'm going for here: a re-look at ORE faction to make them less flighty and more fighty. I think introducing launchers into their standard fittings could make them both more diverse as well as give them a better appearance of being hardy.

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."