These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[PROPOSAL] Support Tug-class Vessel

First post First post First post
Author
Smiling Menace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#101 - 2012-02-22 11:14:49 UTC
Jack Carrigan wrote:
I appreciate all of the support this is garnering. Let's see if we can keep this thing going.


Indeed, Jack. Would be nice to see this class of vessel in game.
Mechael
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#102 - 2012-02-22 11:44:22 UTC
Not supported as is. I think it's a better idea to transform supercarriers for this role. Essentially they'd be like ship hangar arrays in POSes but mobile and with the typical supercarrier tank. You can change strategies on the fly with them, and replace losses very quickly. It'd also be even more of a pain to lose.

Then you could remove the turrets from Titans and tweak the way doomsdays work to be a solid counter. Two birds, one stone. Supercap problem solved. Supercarriers function more like carriers ought to, and Titans are no longer wtfbbqpwnmobiles to anything but cap ships.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Smiling Menace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2012-02-24 01:53:20 UTC
Mechael wrote:
Not supported as is. I think it's a better idea to transform supercarriers for this role. Essentially they'd be like ship hangar arrays in POSes but mobile and with the typical supercarrier tank. You can change strategies on the fly with them, and replace losses very quickly. It'd also be even more of a pain to lose.

Then you could remove the turrets from Titans and tweak the way doomsdays work to be a solid counter. Two birds, one stone. Supercap problem solved. Supercarriers function more like carriers ought to, and Titans are no longer wtfbbqpwnmobiles to anything but cap ships.


Would be interesting to hear your idea as to how a super carrier would be allowed into hi sec, or do people only move ships in null/low sec?
Mechael
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2012-02-26 00:39:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Mechael
Smiling Menace wrote:
Would be interesting to hear your idea as to how a super carrier would be allowed into hi sec, or do people only move ships in null/low sec?


That's actually a really good question. I don't have a solid answer, but I'm open to suggestions.

A couple things I thought of, off the top of my head, which are probably the most obvious answers ..

Option 1) Caps/Supercaps supposedly can't use stargates because of some sort of mass limitation on the stargates themselves. By this logic, any ship that is capable of carrying multiple rigged, unpackaged battleships also wouldn't be able to fit through a stargate. Therefore, these ships would not work in highsec but still be viable in low/nullsec where their force-projection capabilities are most needed anyway. It may not be the most pleasant answer, but then again by the same token how easy should it be for a nullsec alliance, or anyone really, to cross from one end of the galaxy to the other? Something important to consider.

Option 2) Allow them to use stargates, but still not be able to cyno in highsec. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense by the lore as far as I understand it, but if it must be done for some reason beyond "How awesome would it be if ..." then that's one way.

Option 3) Special cyno for supercarriers ("motherships" if you will, like they used to be called.) It'd work in highsec. Again, doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but you can write it into the lore as a new tech breakthrough or that this new, modulated cyno is permitted by CONCORD. It's still very important to consider the ramifications of giving nullsec quick and easy access to regions far, far from their home turf (naps are already a pretty rampant problem according to some of us, and why bother fighting your neighbors when you can fight someone really far away at your relative liesure?)


Based on these knee-jerk options, I like the idea of keeping this sort of force-projection ability out of highsec. I am open to discussion and suggestions though, for sure. I don't have all the answers, just feedback as a really old player. :)

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Tyran Scorpi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2012-02-26 01:42:36 UTC
Smiling Menace wrote:

Would be interesting to hear your idea as to how a super carrier would be allowed into hi sec, or do people only move ships in null/low sec?


Letting any capital ships into high sec would be a bad idea IMO. Carriers are only slightly larger than freighters to begin with, yet they cant use jump gates, which leads me to believe that they aren't allowed in high sec because concord doesn't want them there.

A freighter designed to carry rigged ships would need to be bigger than a standard freighter I would think, so why not make it a teir 2 freighter instead of tech 2? Then you could always add a tech 2 variant of your ship hauler with a lowered maint bay capacity and a jump drive.
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#106 - 2012-02-27 00:18:10 UTC
It is designed to be a Tier 2 Freighter, so that later down the line, a Tech 2 (jump-capable) version can be produced.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Tyran Scorpi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2012-02-27 05:59:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyran Scorpi
Jack Carrigan wrote:
It is designed to be a Tier 2 Freighter, so that later down the line, a Tech 2 (jump-capable) version can be produced.


ah ok, it sounded like it would be based on the tier 1 freighter hull to start with, so, my mistake.
Smiling Menace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#108 - 2012-02-27 23:18:52 UTC
Tyran Scorpi wrote:
Smiling Menace wrote:

Would be interesting to hear your idea as to how a super carrier would be allowed into hi sec, or do people only move ships in null/low sec?


Letting any capital ships into high sec would be a bad idea IMO. Carriers are only slightly larger than freighters to begin with, yet they cant use jump gates, which leads me to believe that they aren't allowed in high sec because concord doesn't want them there.

A freighter designed to carry rigged ships would need to be bigger than a standard freighter I would think, so why not make it a teir 2 freighter instead of tech 2? Then you could always add a tech 2 variant of your ship hauler with a lowered maint bay capacity and a jump drive.


I was being sardonic with that post.

What I actually meant was don't just assume that this proposal is for low/null sec as people do still need to move ships around hi sec space as well.

This proposal would benefit all.

Oh and by the way? Freighters, Jump Freighters and Orcas are capital ships and they are already used in hi sec. As long as this ship does not have a direct combat capability, it would just be following on from the capital ships already allowed in hi sec.

Still would like to see a Tug class ship solely for moving ships.
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#109 - 2012-02-29 02:08:12 UTC
The only "combat" capability one of these ship classes would have would be purely defensive modules. Modules designed to break locks, and assist in escaping hostilities. And some base tank modules.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#110 - 2012-03-01 19:55:01 UTC
Another bump for the future of logistics in game.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Smiling Menace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2012-03-02 03:26:56 UTC
We seem to be missing a Tug class ship here. Would be nice to see these in game.
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#112 - 2012-03-02 20:11:22 UTC
I know plenty of people that move frequently due to operations within their corporations. So, this would be exceptionally useful to them.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#113 - 2012-03-03 18:14:15 UTC
And... bump for exposure.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#114 - 2012-03-04 19:41:51 UTC
This would be a nice fill to a hole in the logistical aspects of warfare in New Eden.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

CCP Phantom
C C P
C C P Alliance
#115 - 2012-03-05 23:04:02 UTC
Please remember that bumping threads are prohibited according forum rule #12.

CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer

Smiling Menace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#116 - 2012-03-05 23:13:36 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
Please remember that bumping threads are prohibited according forum rule #12.


I don't think Jack was bumping. I think he was highlighting a need for further exposure to a good idea and was very eager to garner more support by keeping this topic in the eyes of his peers.

If he was, I am sure he meant no offence or to break any rules as Jack is a very fine and upstanding player of EVE that would never break any rules.

Saying that, this is a good idea and I doubt it would break the the game to have a ship dedicated to the moving of other ships. Another isk sink that CCP is very fond of.



Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
The Revenant Order
#117 - 2012-03-06 02:13:31 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
Please remember that bumping threads are prohibited according forum rule #12.


Ehh, oops.

But as Menace said, I was just trying to keep this idea in the eyes of my peers to garner more support for something that would be extremely useful, and non-game breaking.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Aren Valle
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#118 - 2012-03-07 07:02:47 UTC
The idea of ship mass being prohibitive isn't necessarily an issue. We are talking about a tug after all, which is really nothing more than a cockpit and engines with a framework in between to attach ships. Not really a terribly large amount of mass there. The anchor points wouldn't even need to be enclosed. You don't see it with tow-trucks or even most auto trailers for semis, and this is basically the same idea.
Kaylana Kavees
StarFire Industrialist Exchange
#119 - 2012-03-07 07:29:37 UTC
A tug ship for the rivers of space, sort of like how a river barge needs a tug to tow or push it along. But in this case the ships are housed within the tug if I am understanding correctly.

It could be a novel idea and would facilitate moving fleets around easier and would open up a new market. I agree no launching from the bay. Would need to dock up at a station before the ships could be unloaded.

I think the +.06 should only be on a t2 variant though or it would be to strong against a fleet trying to lock it down, once the skill was maxed out.

No on jump drive for a t1 variant, but maybe on t2 variant it would be feasible.

The young never do as they are told, The old never do as they say.

Malcorath Sacerdos
Coalition of Brutality
Warped Intentions
#120 - 2012-03-07 07:47:12 UTC
This is a great idea!

not that it will benefit me personally since i live in WH but its still a great idea !

+1