These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Corp Hangars on ships and You

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#101 - 2012-11-30 15:47:40 UTC
Celgar Thurn wrote:
".....we need to get the complexity of EVE under control......."

Erm. No we don't. EVE Online is a complex game for adults and mature people to play. If people want something simple to play they should choose WoW. Ugh. I swore then. Lol.



Depends on the complexity they're talking about.

Complexity for players is fine.

Complexity for code is less so. You end up with very brittle code, which has a tendency to break when you touch it. See the POS code. Or the old crimewatch code.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
DexterShark
Trask Industries
#102 - 2012-11-30 15:48:23 UTC
Singulis Pacifica wrote:
TLDR: Blockade Runners have no proper tank to deal with the increased risk of cargo-scan immunity. With this being said, it should be given to Deep Space Transports instead.

Andski wrote:
You only ever see them in hisec, usually fully fit with expanders and cargo rigs, negating the purpose of the ship to begin with.


I'm specialized in one for high-sec cargo deliveries, but no chance in heck that these modules will ever end up on my DST. I fly with what cargo hold it gives me through skills and see that as its maximum.

Your analogy with the armored truck is a very good one though. A DST is essentially just that: an armored truck for higher valued cargo.

CCP FoxFour wrote:

We did consider this and discussed it a fair bit. It was however determined that it fit the role of the blockade runner far more.


I can understand the main reason for it. The Blockade Runner is cloaky/secretive. As such, an immunity to cargo scans fits the role perfectly. However, practical implementation is that the Blockade Runner has no true need for this in its intended environment anyway. After all, A Blockade Runner excels in low-sec and null-sec environments. It always uses its cloaking ability to jump safely from system to system (unless you are deep in friendly territory, I suppose). As such, it does not need a cargo-scan immunity in the environment it is designed to operate in. The only practical implementation for this is for high-sec. However, the Blockade Runner lacks one thing: a proper tank. It's fast, agile, secretive, but not very sturdy. It's only a slight improvement compared to most Tech 1 Industrials.

That is why the Deep Space Transport would be a better option for this cargo-scan immunity. It's not because something needs to happen to make this ship more popular (no matter what you as CCP do, some ships will always be more popular than others), but the main reason for this is its ability to field a proper tank. High-sec cargo hauling is safe as long as you are aware of certain risks.

Cargo-scan immunity is an additional risk: some suicide-gankers are willing to take a risk in ganking a ship like this and with that being said, the pilot of said ship with cargo-scan immunity knows it has now become a potential target for these gankers. A Blockade Runner with a cargo-scan immunity has the potential to become the "lottery" for gankers. You win some, you lose some. "let's see what this one has in its cargo hold".

A Deep Space Transport with cargo-scan immunity can become the target for this "lottery" just as the Blockade Runner. Only, the Deep Space Transport has a trick up its sleeve: it can, if properly skilled and fitted, withstand a suicide-gank of several BC/BS ships. So the practical implementation should be to add it to the Deep Space Transports rather than the Blockade Runners as it puts additional risk on the Blockade Runner pilots (even though you mean well), where as the Deep Space Transports know how to deal with this risk: put more emphasis on it's intended use and be
Andski wrote:
an armored truck with tinted windows.



QFT - All of it.
Wiu Ming
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2012-11-30 15:48:46 UTC
Viscis Breeze wrote:
"Blockade Runners are being updated to be immune to cargo scanners, and as such will always show up as empty on scans"

Surely this makes them less useful as they will just be instantly targeted and popped regardless of cargo. Quite disappointed with this.


Do you even know what a Blockade Runner is? It's the cloaky version, not the +2 Deep Space Transport.

So why on earth would cloaky haulers get popped any more than they do now, just because you can't 'scan' them anymore? If you don't want to get popped, stop being so f**king lazy and manually pilot your ship.
Aethlyn
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2012-11-30 15:49:00 UTC
I can understand both sides... having it on the BRs sounds more fitting background wise, but having it on the DSTs sounds more interesting mechanic wise (or considering what it adds to the ship)... hard decision.

Looking for more thoughts? Follow me on Twitter.
Callic Veratar
#105 - 2012-11-30 15:50:49 UTC
There are a lot of people complaining in here about reducing complexity.

There are two different types of complexity at work here. The first that the players are complaining about is the system complexity. This is directly tied to what the devs are talking about in code complexity.

From what is described, some of the code is so complex (and likely stupid) that impossible to introduce new complexity and nuance into a system without breaking another system. So, to upgrade ship-based corp hangars they may first have to remove the dumb complexity, but once that's done, it can be added to and enhanced in a smart way.

Some day we might get logical folders for cargo with access control so that we don't ever have to worry about dealing with cans again.
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#106 - 2012-11-30 15:51:05 UTC
I find it slightly amusing how the dev blog plays down the loss of divisions, it's not the end of the world but it's still going to be a pita over all.
Seetesh
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#107 - 2012-11-30 15:51:37 UTC
Some very interesting changes in particular the blockade runner changes are very much welcomed.
Viscis Breeze
Abrupt Decay
Deteriorated
#108 - 2012-11-30 15:52:48 UTC
Singulis Pacifica wrote:
TLDR: Blockade Runners have no proper tank to deal with the increased risk of cargo-scan immunity. With this being said, it should be given to Deep Space Transports instead.

Andski wrote:
You only ever see them in hisec, usually fully fit with expanders and cargo rigs, negating the purpose of the ship to begin with.


I'm specialized in one for high-sec cargo deliveries, but no chance in heck that these modules will ever end up on my DST. I fly with what cargo hold it gives me through skills and see that as its maximum.

Your analogy with the armored truck is a very good one though. A DST is essentially just that: an armored truck for higher valued cargo.

CCP FoxFour wrote:

We did consider this and discussed it a fair bit. It was however determined that it fit the role of the blockade runner far more.


I can understand the main reason for it. The Blockade Runner is cloaky/secretive. As such, an immunity to cargo scans fits the role perfectly. However, practical implementation is that the Blockade Runner has no true need for this in its intended environment anyway. After all, A Blockade Runner excels in low-sec and null-sec environments. It always uses its cloaking ability to jump safely from system to system (unless you are deep in friendly territory, I suppose). As such, it does not need a cargo-scan immunity in the environment it is designed to operate in. The only practical implementation for this is for high-sec. However, the Blockade Runner lacks one thing: a proper tank. It's fast, agile, secretive, but not very sturdy. It's only a slight improvement compared to most Tech 1 Industrials.

That is why the Deep Space Transport would be a better option for this cargo-scan immunity. It's not because something needs to happen to make this ship more popular (no matter what you as CCP do, some ships will always be more popular than others), but the main reason for this is its ability to field a proper tank. High-sec cargo hauling is safe as long as you are aware of certain risks.

Cargo-scan immunity is an additional risk: some suicide-gankers are willing to take a risk in ganking a ship like this and with that being said, the pilot of said ship with cargo-scan immunity knows it has now become a potential target for these gankers. A Blockade Runner with a cargo-scan immunity has the potential to become the "lottery" for gankers. You win some, you lose some. "let's see what this one has in its cargo hold".

A Deep Space Transport with cargo-scan immunity can become the target for this "lottery" just as the Blockade Runner. Only, the Deep Space Transport has a trick up its sleeve: it can, if properly skilled and fitted, withstand a suicide-gank of several BC/BS ships. So the practical implementation should be to add it to the Deep Space Transports rather than the Blockade Runners as it puts additional risk on the Blockade Runner pilots (even though you mean well), where as the Deep Space Transports know how to deal with this risk: put more emphasis on it's intended use and be
Andski wrote:
an armored truck with tinted windows.


Well reasoned, I totally agree.

Recruitment: http://bit.ly/1r4G5Pv Website: http://www.no-vacancies.net/ Channel: No Vacancies
Kimo Khan
Rage Against All Reds
GunFam
#109 - 2012-11-30 15:53:08 UTC
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
CCP FoxFour wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
so you just removed the single most important use of orcas, hauling for mining fleets

not cool


How did we remove that?


i think a lot of people are scratching their heads as to how this guy got to that conclusion... maybe he thinks his orca will be ganked all the time with the amount of trit he's carrying/hauling for a mining fleet.

ohh if only he knew how gankers operate! LOL



I suspect it is more the idea that a Freighter can now do this. The orca can now just sit in a POS to give benefit, but does not even need to be present since the freighter can do all the hauling.
Aethlyn
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#110 - 2012-11-30 15:53:25 UTC
Used my Orca a lot in the past for corp mining ops (3-4 players most often) and we never really used the divisions. We just used one division for ore, the other for ammo (mining crystals). Never felt the need to use more than 2, maximum 3. With the new system you can still do this, e.g. drop one cargo container per participating player, so it's easy to sort everyone's stuff, etc. Don't really see any reason to complain right now.

Looking for more thoughts? Follow me on Twitter.
Aethlyn
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#111 - 2012-11-30 15:54:11 UTC
Kimo Khan wrote:
I suspect it is more the idea that a Freighter can now do this. The orca can now just sit in a POS to give benefit, but does not even need to be present since the freighter can do all the hauling.

The freighter is still horrible at collecting the jetcans from miners and miners can't transfer their ore on their own (if you're close enough and don't want to use jetcans).

Looking for more thoughts? Follow me on Twitter.
Viscis Breeze
Abrupt Decay
Deteriorated
#112 - 2012-11-30 15:54:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Viscis Breeze
Wiu Ming wrote:
Viscis Breeze wrote:
"Blockade Runners are being updated to be immune to cargo scanners, and as such will always show up as empty on scans"

Surely this makes them less useful as they will just be instantly targeted and popped regardless of cargo. Quite disappointed with this.


Do you even know what a Blockade Runner is? It's the cloaky version, not the +2 Deep Space Transport.

So why on earth would cloaky haulers get popped any more than they do now, just because you can't 'scan' them anymore? If you don't want to get popped, stop being so f**king lazy and manually pilot your ship.


Because you have 3 situations:

- You have something valuable and therefore fly properly.
- You are in lowsec, null, wh and therefore fly properly.
- You have nothing and AP to jita.

The last case is where you get popped, because it is assumed you are carrying something (with the scan changes).

It is exactly the same reason why freighters don't use double wrapping any more, if you are hiding what is in your cargo then you most likely have something of value.

Recruitment: http://bit.ly/1r4G5Pv Website: http://www.no-vacancies.net/ Channel: No Vacancies
Kimo Khan
Rage Against All Reds
GunFam
#113 - 2012-11-30 15:57:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Kimo Khan
Aethlyn wrote:
Kimo Khan wrote:
I suspect it is more the idea that a Freighter can now do this. The orca can now just sit in a POS to give benefit, but does not even need to be present since the freighter can do all the hauling.

The freighter is still horrible at collecting the jetcans from miners and miners can't transfer their ore on their own (if you're close enough and don't want to use jetcans).


Oh I agree that actually using a Freighter as a mining op hauler is not a great idea. Can't tank it, cant fit it, can't use tractors. But my argument was that I suspect people are planning that and they can see it as a nerf to the Orca.

Orca's are still better at this than a freighter, but a freighter can haul more.

EDIT: Let me clarify. Using a Freighter to replace an Orca is not a great idea. Using a freight to haul for an orca supported op can be good in that the orca can stick around and collect everything for the freighter. The freighter just needs only 1 trip for the entire orca hold. Now you just need to figure out how to protect the freighter from gankers.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#114 - 2012-11-30 16:07:17 UTC
If you were going to do it, you have the freighter sitting atop the orca, and taking out as the ore gets dumped. Or tractored in and dumped by the orca pilot.

It's really a replacement for the hauling orca, rather than the boosting. shame it loses the additional gang links.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Udonor
Doomheim
#115 - 2012-11-30 16:09:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Udonor
IMHO technology should always work. all ships should always be scannable regardless of what "targets" want.

Do not get carried away with the abtritary ship roles theme. No magic ships please.



That said. The counter ECM technology for defeating scans could well exist.


But a good rule of thumb would e to treat anti-scan like warp stabs and cloaks.


That is devices that counter another technology (basically cargo oriented ECM in this case) should be available as rigs or modules before showing up as an integrated part of T2. And there should be a specific cost added to T2 ships based on modules or rig cost. Transports with built-in cargo invisiblity should cost an extra 20-100M or give up soem equal T2 feature liek +2 warp stabs.
Lord Haur
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#116 - 2012-11-30 16:10:15 UTC
Fleet Hangars:
Meh. OK sure, play the "fixing code" ball. Still loss of functionality. While it's nice that non-corp members will finally be able to remove stuff from fleet hangars, I sincerely hope there's still an option to allow corp/fleet members the ability to drop items into the hangar/bay WITHOUT allowing take access. In any case, congratulations on cementing fleet hangars on supercapitals as restricted-use cargobays, except when refuelling. Cans are a PITA and wasteful.

Seperating the access for fleet hangar/SMB is a good addition though. Shame it's limited to either no access, or TAKE ALL MY STUFF.

New Cans: v0v. While certainly availiable for use as a replacement for divisions, most won't bother, or use the existing compressive cans, either for the extra volume or for the extreme granularity. You don't want to be using a 1km3 can when you only want it to hold a few mods, for example to seperate your maxtank modules from the rest of the general detritus supercapitals need to carry.

Scannable bays: v0v. Only ship really affected is the Orca, which loses it's somewhat unintended role of hauling super-expensive cargo.

Unscannable Blockade Runners: Because this line of Transport Ships needed to be MORE awesome than they already are. Just means they'll be forced to run cloaked everywhere in highsec now, lest they get nuked because "unscannable ship = loot pinata".

Freighters: Part of the point was they had extreme cargobays, but had to be at a station/POS to load/unload. I do understand it was rather complicated before, though.

SMB/SMA usage restrictions: Awesome. Certainly makes in-combat refitting a lot easier in anything other than a capital blob.

Forcefield passwords: Decent change. Won't stop most people entering passwords every time just to be sure.

Locking settings on audit log containers: Awesome. Especially if it applies to station containers as well.
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#117 - 2012-11-30 16:15:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Krell Kroenen
Aethlyn wrote:
Used my Orca a lot in the past for corp mining ops (3-4 players most often) and we never really used the divisions. We just used one division for ore, the other for ammo (mining crystals). Never felt the need to use more than 2, maximum 3. With the new system you can still do this, e.g. drop one cargo container per participating player, so it's easy to sort everyone's stuff, etc. Don't really see any reason to complain right now.


Well think about it this way, divisions are dynamic in their size, cargo containers are not. So If i have some materials I want segregated I have use the set size of the container regardless of the amount I really wish to store and if I go over that size even if by 5m3 I am forced to use another container to keep it secure and separated. So I lose cargo space more often than not.

And that gives me reason to complain right now.


If they can make the containers adjust their volume dynamically then I would be content.
Udonor
Doomheim
#118 - 2012-11-30 16:18:50 UTC
Cans would not be so bad a way to separate drop only access EXCEPT

#1 it would really be nice if you could change labels of cans on ships (and for freighters assemble cans)

#2 only pilot can access can contents while in ship if I understand correctly. Doesn't mesh well with new unlimited player general access.

Only one solution: As public service gankers need to blow these ships up before anyone gets confused and pilots expire of over work doling out from cans.
Merouk Baas
#119 - 2012-11-30 16:19:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Merouk Baas
RE: Deep Space Transports having scan immunity, I think they just didn't want to give the immunity to the tanky ship. All the suicide gankers will start complaining that their profession has been nerfed if they make this change. Because not only do they have to attack a tanky ship now, but now they won't even know what the payout will be. And that's completely unfair to suicide gankers.

So you guys can logically argue it all you want, the decision wasn't made based on the arguments you're arguing.
Nicol Caius
League of Gentlemen
The Initiative.
#120 - 2012-11-30 16:20:05 UTC
@Devs,
please reconsider the unscannable bonus to the blockade runner. as others have said, its largely a determent to this ship class. my blockade runner will now be a target for just auto-piloting to jita empty. the best case scenario would be to give this bonus to the deep space transport. this would improve the usage of this ship class, isn't that way you guys are aiming for with all the other ship balancing changes? if this isn't possible, i suggest removing it altogether. i'd rather not have my expensive blockade runners being used as pinatas wherever i go to hi-sec.