These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials

First post First post
Author
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#241 - 2013-06-19 22:53:01 UTC
Good to see the Industrials are being adjusted.

I really wished thought that we could see these hulls in different roles other than just being damned to haulers. Logiclaly, if they had a larger size in terms of sig radius etc, one could apply each hull something unique, if not a moderate counterpart of a Battleship - depending on how far one wants to go. I guess it is too hard to imagine such.

Anyhow, this is just about adjusting the old, so we're just going to have to take it as it is.

Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all.

Azahar Ortenegro
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#242 - 2013-06-19 22:59:17 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm kind of surprised so few of you like the Hoarder though, its pretty hilarious looking.


The Hoarder's not hilarious, it's hideous. I spent time training Minmatar Industrial on two chars for the sole purpose of being able to fly the Mammoth. It's by far the most beatiful TI industrial, and should stay the main Minmatar cargo hauler.
Jessica San
Test Trading Company
#243 - 2013-06-19 23:02:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jessica San
CCP Rise wrote:
The challenge with industrials is that unlike most other ship classes, their value rests almost exclusively in 1 or 2 attributes (capacity and low slots), so when attempting to add flavor, the reality is that we would simply be limiting actual options. I have tried to preserve as much racial flavor as possible via some slot differences, differences in speed and align time, sig and little things like caldari being the only race with launchers on their industrials.

The reason why differentiation is hard is because there is a lack of hard constraints on other important ship features.

The important ones are:
1. High slots for cloak, probe launcher, salvager, tractor. A 0 high, 1 high, 2 high and 3 high industrial will all have different uses.
2. Mid slots for prop mods. A 0mid and 1 mid ship would be radically different from a 5mid and a 4mid ship. Non-shield tanked haulers don't need to have a mid at all, which lets them be better at something but unable to do some other thing.
3. Excess of lowslots: mobility and capacity trade off doesn't work because expanded cargohold and nanofibers fit in the same slot (plus bulkheads, plates, dcu/etc): solution is obviously to reduce this flexibility

Industrials have too much flexibility that is why it is hard to differentiate them. If industrials have far less fitting options due to slot, grid and cpu constraints, then serious trade offs can exist.

The existing hard constraints: fitting cloak + probe, fitting mwd already creates important differences in ships. More constraints can make more important ship niches.
Gizan
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#244 - 2013-06-19 23:03:42 UTC
Why does the bestower now hold MORE than the Impel, its t2 variant?
Thexx Littlechurch
Black Whole Industries
#245 - 2013-06-19 23:09:05 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'll try to get a meeting tomorrow with Art and see if we can reach an agreement about the Mammoth. I'm kind of surprised so few of you like the Hoarder though, its pretty hilarious looking.

Look for a post with final word sometime tomorrow.



I've never posted before and am posting this at work which risks losing my internet access. Hopefully that will suggest to you right away that I'm serious about this.

PLEASE reconsider this Mammoth decision!

The Mammoth (swear to God) is my favorite ship in the game. I live in a WH and spend 80-90% of my time online in my Mammoth, ferrying materials around to silos and such. I even probe in it. Oh and I've had that one individual ship for over three years now.

The idea that your art dept. doesn't like it is your primary reason to the change is frankly insulting to me.

Yes, because when you think about it they are putting thier own opinion above, what appears to be a large section of the playerbase, and definately above my own. It doesn't even sound like there is a functional reason to this.

My main problem with it is that there seems to be no practical reason for this change. I'm going to continue to use it because to me it's what I think of when I think of Eve, but dont do this please. Ill stay in my Mammoth because I love it, but I feel like you guys are screwing me over because of some capricious art guys.

Bad! Bad, bad, bad! Evil
RampoIIa
Throw More Dots
#246 - 2013-06-19 23:13:17 UTC




- 10% Bonus to tractor beam distance and velocity per level
Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#247 - 2013-06-19 23:17:31 UTC
I think we've just been trolled. CCP announces t1 industrial rebalancing and knows, like the other rebalancing efforts will get heat for it. So they throw in "the art dept said they don't like the Mammoth, so its out" thing to have everyone focus on and its a trivial point that they can go back and say, "meh, ok, whatever you guys want, we listen to the players!"

Kind of like MS walking back the DRM on the XBone and saying how they've finally decided to listen to customers. Or not since the XBone is like a flagship product and the Mammoth is an internet spaceship. But dang it, the Horder is fugly! Give us the Mammoth! Give us the Mammoth!

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."

Naomi Anthar
#248 - 2013-06-19 23:18:23 UTC
Any good reason for Bestower to have such huge align time. Sure it hauls most - but only with max skills and full fit.
I mean ok it can have worst align among those if it can haul most but why difference is so big?? Like 18 ish seconds vs 15 ish ? Kinda Harsh.
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#249 - 2013-06-19 23:36:34 UTC
How about giving the special 4 a special flavor, like an Ore Hold for people that wants to haul raw ore?

Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!

Akemi Kiyoura
Perkone
Caldari State
#250 - 2013-06-19 23:39:24 UTC
I still think we need something in between the Itty V and an Orca/Freighter. The difference in cost between the two hulls, not to mention the training time for the Orca/Freighter compared to an Itty V is borderline irrational.

There needs to be something that has at most 80k m3 of cargo. Why at most? To scale it with the rest of the indy freight hulls.
qoga
Society of Conscientious Thought
#251 - 2013-06-19 23:41:14 UTC
I also would like specialization rather than homogenization.

For a bit a variety, I propose Q ships!

Give one of the tanky industrials 4 high slots.
Preferably one of the Iterons, or maybe the Badger.

It would be nice to be able to give stupid pirates a bit of a surprise.

Sucya Alldown
Doomheim
#252 - 2013-06-19 23:48:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Sucya Alldown
Malcanis wrote:
Taleden wrote:
Two things about this proposal strike me as pointlessly irritating:

- The Itty5 losing its cargo crown to the Bestower is a slap in the face for everyone who trained Gal Indy 5 specifically to maximize their sub-capital hauling capacity (and for the record, that does not include me). That wold be fine if there was a solid reason for the change -- then you could give the customary "your 30 days' training granted you a benefit for a long time, but it has to change now and that's that" -- but in this case, there is no solid reason. The Bestower doesn't have to be bigger than the Itty5; they're so close that you might as well swap their numbers so that the Itty5 remains on top. The only reason to make the Itty5 worse than the new Bestower at exactly what the Itty5 was previously best at is if you're intentionally trying to be a jerk to current Itty5 pilots.


So far as I can see, the Iteron V hasn't lost a single cubic metre of cargo space.

Yes but the reason some people trained gallente industrial to level 5 was because it had the LARGEST cargo capacity. If they knew the Amarr were going to have it they would have trained Amarr Industrial to 5 instead. I being one that did train gallente 5 on more than one character for that very reason I even had a character that a friend had given me that was trained to minmatar indy v and i took the time training it to gallente v for the LARGEST cargo capacity. So I do take it as a kick in the nuts when there is no valid reason for making another races hauler bigger now.
I personally would be more supportive of removing the racial haulers and going to Ore for all haulers up to and including Jump freighters.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#253 - 2013-06-19 23:51:15 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Any good reason for Bestower to have such huge align time. Sure it hauls most - but only with max skills and full fit.
I mean ok it can have worst align among those if it can haul most but why difference is so big?? Like 18 ish seconds vs 15 ish ? Kinda Harsh.
Amarr have always been slow bricks. Now its just a huge slow brick. No worries here.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Melek D'Ivri
Illuminated Overwatch Group
Twilight Military Industrial Complex Alliance
#254 - 2013-06-19 23:57:38 UTC
Sucya Alldown wrote:
Yes but the reason some people trained gallente industrial to level 5 was because it had the LARGEST cargo capacity. If they knew the Amarr were going to have it they would have trained Amarr Industrial to 5 instead. I being one that did train gallente 5 on more than one character for that very reason I even had a character that a friend had given me that was trained to minmatar indy v and i took the time training it to gallente v for the LARGEST cargo capacity. So I do take it as a kick in the nuts when there is no valid reason for making another races hauler bigger now.
I personally would be more supportive of removing the racial haulers and going to Ore for all haulers up to and including Jump freighters.


Yes, but compared to the amount of training some missioners and pve players "lost" with changes to stuff like Heavy MIssiles was huge compared to the 2-3 weeks of crosstraining they are talking about with this. Or Orca pilots and all their extra skills.... Or previously crosstrained freighter pilots... the list has so many examples of things that are better/worse than they used to be.

I trained Amarr industrial V because I loved the providence before the reskin (especially the Ark), but also loved that the Impel was the largest hold for the DSTs. If they were making Caldari the biggest hold since the Charon is the big'un of the freighters I wouldn't complain about it.

Most Tengu pilots I know (I know a lot,) had to either go to a battleship at the time, which was rather lackluster and took for most about 40-50 days to train up to) actually switched to Machariel for missions, which I think takes about 70-80 days to really master? I understand that Iteron V pilots were the top dogs for a long time and the only ones able to fly around with those 40k m3 storylines in their holds, instead of focusing on CCP *not* changing your flavor of EVE, be glad you were a part of the hauling history of the Iteron line.
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#255 - 2013-06-20 00:04:16 UTC
Quote:
I'm kind of surprised so few of you like the Hoarder though, its pretty hilarious looking.


Eye of beholder, as usual.
Personally, to me the hull is even viable as a "Command Ship" (just by the word, not the t2 Battlecruiser). But I won't push that subject.

Anyhow, there are far "uglier" ships, and they are shiny AND have the new shaders - but who gives a damn.
And by all means, regarding minmatar aesthetics, there should be no question about shiny ships, for the general rule of thumb was always more "looks ugly, and deals wounds equally ugly".

On the other hand, nothing wrong with demanding the swap of hulls. But many others and I had something like that before and all remained as it - nothing happened, and we had to deal with it *sunglasses comes from above and sets on my nose *

Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all.

Phoenix Jones
The Markoni Dragons
#256 - 2013-06-20 00:13:19 UTC
Sucya Alldown wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Taleden wrote:
Two things about this proposal strike me as pointlessly irritating:

- The Itty5 losing its cargo crown to the Bestower is a slap in the face for everyone who trained Gal Indy 5 specifically to maximize their sub-capital hauling capacity (and for the record, that does not include me). That wold be fine if there was a solid reason for the change -- then you could give the customary "your 30 days' training granted you a benefit for a long time, but it has to change now and that's that" -- but in this case, there is no solid reason. The Bestower doesn't have to be bigger than the Itty5; they're so close that you might as well swap their numbers so that the Itty5 remains on top. The only reason to make the Itty5 worse than the new Bestower at exactly what the Itty5 was previously best at is if you're intentionally trying to be a jerk to current Itty5 pilots.


So far as I can see, the Iteron V hasn't lost a single cubic metre of cargo space.

Yes but the reason some people trained gallente industrial to level 5 was because it had the LARGEST cargo capacity. If they knew the Amarr were going to have it they would have trained Amarr Industrial to 5 instead. I being one that did train gallente 5 on more than one character for that very reason I even had a character that a friend had given me that was trained to minmatar indy v and i took the time training it to gallente v for the LARGEST cargo capacity. So I do take it as a kick in the nuts when there is no valid reason for making another races hauler bigger now.
I personally would be more supportive of removing the racial haulers and going to Ore for all haulers up to and including Jump freighters.


Honestly... its nitpicky. Yea the bestower could hold an extra GSC, giving it 800 to 1000 extra room... but lets be frank.. its not a big deal IF they fix up the other industrials and create that "Inbetween a T1 and a Freighter" industrial ship.

Right now everybody scraps for as much M3 as possible because these T1 ships are the best we really have. There low cost, disposable, can move allot of stuff around. If there was a inbetween the slight advantage the bestower has on the iteron would be a moot point.

Since such a ship or fix is on the table though, rage on. Fix the T1's by Fixing the Deep Space Transports. People would have viable options then and not feel "Scorned" because the ships can do what they need to do, and they don't have to worry about a 900 m3 advantage.

Yaay!!!!

Sucya Alldown
Doomheim
#257 - 2013-06-20 00:19:50 UTC
Mattk50 wrote:
Gah'Matar wrote:
Any chance the itty V can be tweaked to have slightly more cargo space then the bestower for old time's sake (and because my hauling alt has gall industrial 5 dammit)

the itty has the bonus of an extra midslot and better manuverability and ehp for slightly less cargo. Its balanced.

Yeah but most (me included) didn't train gallente industrial v for better manuverability and ehp, we trained it for the largest t1 sub capital capacity.
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#258 - 2013-06-20 00:53:31 UTC
Ah, I've been waiting for this sticky for a while now!

Instead of going for 2 industrials for each race and marginalising the rest, you could split the difference and have 3 for each race if art was willing to make the badger mk3 from the bustard hull, and you add an extra amarr indy. It does appear that the decision to only make 2 industrials per race be the 'official' versions is simply because of amarr and caldari only having two, and I guess art isn't willing to crank out two more models until the next expansion (for simple industrial ships).

Anyway, the stats look good, even if I can't see myself ever flying the wafer thin and super slow cargo indys (aka gank bait) when the quick and tough version can hold roughly 20k. Sigil ftw!



"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#259 - 2013-06-20 01:00:41 UTC
only two roles?, i was expecting more since the change in the mining ships. the minmatar industrial line was one of the more fitting as an example for this, and you decided to leave it the caldari/amarr way? disappointing

3 roles for industrials would have been better than what you plan, and several people have noted it. instead of leaving 4 industrials in limbo you should have put the plan to create 2 aditional industrials (one for amarr and one for caldari) as the aditional options. and then leave out the Iteron II and IV, then we have 3 industrials in each empire.

now what about those 2 extra industrials?, well, give them some sort of purpose.

Ripard Teg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#260 - 2013-06-20 01:05:35 UTC
Awesome feedback, guys! Please keep it coming! In particular, I'm loving all the posts about the Mammoth, the question of racial "balance", and the question of whether the fast hauler should also be the tanky hauler. For no particular reason whatsoever.

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.