EVE General Discussion

Some things about the ships in EVE bother me a bit. I suppose it's my OCD kicking in. Not the least is the "surface ocean ships transported to space" aspect which results in ridiculously short combat ranges, ridiculously low speeds, and some pretty silly "acceleration" effects. But never mind that. Here's my thoughts on some other things:

1. Nomenclature

The nomenclature of ships in EVE has grown up from the community and to some extent from the developers. Most of whom probably don't have any RW Navy experience. So some terms have arisen which frankly make me wince.

Rookie Ship - Really? Nobody in the RW would ever call it that. Call it a Corvette, and make it a bit smaller than a Frigate.

"Dessy" - No. Sorry. To me, the short designation for "destroyer" is "DD". Yeah, I know, that has another meaning in Eve Online. Don't care.

"EW Frigate" - Hm. Okay, I guess.

"Electronic Attack Ship" - No. Too cumbersome, for one thing. And it just doesn't sound right. Don't know what to call it.

"Cov(ert) Ops Ship" - No. "Stealth Frigate"

"Force Recon Ship" - "Force Recon Cruiser"

"Logistics" - "Fleet Support Cruiser"

"Heavy Interdiction Cruiser" - "Heavy Interdictor"

"BS" - Bull****. A battleship is a BB, just as a destroyer is a DD.

Note on BB and DD. These arise for me from the US Navy's nomenclature for these ships. I'm aware that other navies do things differently, but this is what I'm used to.

On Ship Types and Ship Classes

The ship types are Battleship, Battlecruiser, Cruiser, and so on. The ship classes are not so simple. In the RW, two ships built on identical hulls, but with different fittings (in Eve terms) would be in different classes. In Eve it seems better to classify each distinct hull as a distinct class - e.g. Navitas, Tristan, etc. But then you have to keep in mind that the capabilities of two Tristans (for example) may be significantly different. Pilot training and skill makes a difference, too, but that's true in the RW as well.

Sizes and Densities

David Weber's "Honorverse" ships, early on, had some pretty strange discrepancies. These came to light when AdAstra Games was working on their "Saganami Island Tactical Simulator" game. One comment that was made: "Some of these ships are about as dense as smoke!" This led to "The Great Restructuring" where the volumes and masses of the various ship types were brought into better alignment. I have the impression (I could be wrong) that not much attention was paid to this question in the design of Eve ships.

In modern RW practice, ships are classified to a large extent by displacement - the weight of water the ship displaces. In space, the mass of the ship seems likely to be more relevant. Eve does a poor job of this IMO:

Impairor: 1,148 Tonnes, 28,100 m3, 0.040 Tonnes/m3
Executioner: 1,090 Tonnes, 28,100 m3, 0.039 Tonnes/m3

A corvette should not be more massive than a frigate!

Coercer: 1,650 Tonnes, 47,000 m3, 0.035 Tonnes/m3
Omen: 14,045 Tonnes, 118,000 m3, 0.119 Tonnes/m3
Harbinger: 13,800 Tonnes, 234,000 m3, 0.059 Tonnes/m3

A Cruiser should not be more massive than a BC!

Apocalypse: 97,100 Tonnes, 495,000 m3, 0.196 Tonnes/m3

See how the densities are all over the place?

For comparison, some WWII ship types:

Frigate: around 1500 long tons
Destroyer: around 3500 long tons
Light Cruiser: 6000 long tons
Heavy Cruiser: 14,500 long tons
Battlecruiser: 34,000 long tons
Battleship: 58,000 long tons

For EVE I would suggest perhaps a density of 0.25 Tonnes/m3 and the following masses:

Corvette: 1000 Tonnes
Frigate: 1500 Tonnes
Destroyer: 3500 Tonnes
Cruiser: 12000 Tonnes
Battlecruiser: 35,000 Tonnes
Battleship: 60,000 Tonnes

A shuttle might mass 500 Tonnes, instead of the in-game 1600 Tonnes (more than a frigate? Really?) and have a volume of 2000 m3, half the size of a Corvette ("rookie ship") and one third that of a frigate.

This would result in volumes, respectively, of:

Corvette: 4000 m3
Frigate: 6000 m3
Destroyer: 14000 m3
Cruiser: 48000 m3
Battlecruiser: 140,000 m3
Battleship: 240,000 m3

For most folks, this will fall into the category "who cares", but I felt like saying it, so I did.

Nobody call them that. They are reffered to as the following FYI:

Noobship
Desi
EWAR frig
Mother ******* Blackbird
Cloaky and or Bomber
Recon (or PRIMARY THE LACHESIS)
Logi
HIC
Bait.



Stop comparing Granny Smith Apples to Fuji Apples. The noobship is a smaller general frigate, whereas the Executioner is a tech 1 interceptor. Compare the Impairor to the Tormentor instead. The interceptors are specialized to be lighter and more agile than other frigates, which would effect their mass considerably.

Are you also annoyed that 75mm railguns and 150mm railguns both use the same sized ammunition?

But a corvette is a rookie ship....uh huh. I called 911. They'll be here shortly. Meanwhile: Meet our first candidate for the Try Not To Think Award for 2015. Congratulations sir. OCD seems to give some candidates an advantage.

Rookie Ship is colloquial - the four Rookie Ships are frigates; they're old, virtually obsolete frigates which are no longer viable in real warfare but suitably similar to more modern vessels to see use as training ships.


"DD" is a designation which came into use to shorten the time required and to improve the clarity of encoded messages - They could be "D" but in adverse radio conditions the meaning of that is easily lost.
We don't have that history to reflect and we don't have to worry about Morse code, let alone unsecured communications given the fluid routers.
We shorten things to reduce the time required to write them but we need words which are pronouncable and relatively clear in spotty voice...


"BB" is the Blackbird; We've shortened things differently - the same reasons as above apply.


Why not? A corvette is likely to be less dense but it could well be far larger - corvettes are civilian vessels converted to military use after all...

Now compare ship volumes and cargo hold volumes.

Try not to laugh.

YAY! We get to be slaves to what YOU LIKE? Goody goody!

Step 1: Spread Cheeks
Step 2: Remove Stick

Homemade?