These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies
Joint Venture Conglomerate
#21 - 2013-06-19 11:52:32 UTC
Not sure the agility bonused ones are agile enough to make the bonus worth while - even a battleship without a sensor booster should be able to lock them before they warp.

For such cheap hulls they all appear to haul a lot now.

Fear God and Thread Nought

Azula Kishtar
Lonely among the Stars
#22 - 2013-06-19 12:06:13 UTC
I'll continue using the Mammoth. Simply because i think the hull is sexy.

Looks ok otherwise. I agree there isn't a lot to balance around with Industrials without doing something "special" to the redundant versions.

I'm much more excited for T2 ship changes anyway.
Aurora RedNova
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#23 - 2013-06-19 12:07:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Aurora RedNova
Jackie Fisher wrote:
Not sure the agility bonused ones are agile enough to make the bonus worth while - even a battleship without a sensor booster should be able to lock them before they warp.

For such cheap hulls they all appear to haul a lot now.



Too much. Maybe you can use them for cheap mineral hauling. But put 15 Tech2 frigs in these ships and THEY WILL get ganked.
Let us be honest: You use cloaky tech2 haulers for expensive stuff and everything with aligh time high like hell isn´t worth the time.
I already use red frog only for bigger stuff because my tech2 bustard is simply so slow that it hurts my nerves too much.
I really don´t know for what you need a Tech1 hauler with that cargo hold.
Throw 2 bcs in them? Will get prolly ganked by some catalysts^^
Somehow I miss the sense for the slower ships with bigger cargohold here.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-06-19 12:07:41 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:


Will keep listening about the Mammoth. There isn't an enormous amount of them being used so it felt like it wouldn't be too painful of a transition if it was better for visual direction. I'm less concerned about the continuity with the T2 model, but the differences in cost, and the forced transition for people who were using the Mammoth are real issues. Keep feedback coming and I'll poke around on my side some more.



Better for visual direction? How, the mammoth looks awesome. Looks like a wreathe with extra cargo space added.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

Jessica Danikov
Network Danikov
#25 - 2013-06-19 12:10:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Jessica Danikov
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Makes sense, I guess.

It'd be nice to have something like a ore hold, or a fitting service on the others, but it would be limiting for anyone but the gallente.


I mentioned this in a previous post (somewhere) but I can see the following Industrial roles:

1: tanky
2: fast - This is a lot less useful. As fast can be covered by a different class. A frigate sized courier
3: big
4: Specialist cargo (ore/gas/ice)
5: Fitting service
6: Fleet hangar


And we already have:
7: Salvager
8: PI specialist cargo.


This all makes too much sense. I don't have anything original to say any more.

T2 Industrials kinda cover the fast aspect with the blockade runners (they align like a frigate), freighters kind of occupy the tanky/big role, but the last 3 are interesting things that could be done with the T1 industrials. In fact, they do rather nicely match up...

Iteron Mk2 has the vents on the side that make it look like an ore hauler.
Iteron Mk3 has what look like pressurized canisters and would suit gas.
Iteron Mk4 naturally falls into the ice slot.
Hoarder looks most suited to being a fitting service/fleet hanger (two go hand in hand, really)- I'd support others wanting the Mammoth being the 'main' large industrial while I'm sure art would love to have the Hoarder be extra-special like that.

CCP Rise wrote:

Last, I want to talk a little about the 4 'extra' industrials. These were an incredibly hot topic here at the office, and we considered a really wide range of options for them. In the end, we felt that removing them from the game probably didn't add a lot of value, and would have been a disappointing departure from EVE history, but on the other side, giving them a job that was interesting and valuable but only available for Gallente and Minmatar felt unfair.


Well, there's already a strong precedent with the Scorpion being the only EWAR battlecruiser, but it's also a pretty moot point now that all the industrials only require level 1- it's hardly any bother to train into. Given the class already has issues with homogenisation, all the more reason to allow some races to be 'special' and try to have more differentiators, rather than trying to have equivalents with minor, meaningless variations which is causing the homogenisation.
LadyShu
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#26 - 2013-06-19 12:14:42 UTC  |  Edited by: LadyShu
awesome, spend time rebalancing something that is not broken and works fine.

Get your butts to work on t2 rebalancing or do something useful, what about nerfing off-grid boosters, logistics and so on.
Darth Kilth
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2013-06-19 12:15:25 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


Will keep listening about the Mammoth. There isn't an enormous amount of them being used so it felt like it wouldn't be too painful of a transition if it was better for visual direction. I'm less concerned about the continuity with the T2 model, but the differences in cost, and the forced transition for people who were using the Mammoth are real issues. Keep feedback coming and I'll poke around on my side some more.



Better for visual direction? How, the mammoth looks awesome. Looks like a wreathe with extra cargo space added.

I agree with this, the Mammoth is SEXY and should stay the biggest Minmatar industrial.

They are the reason I went with Minmatar Indy and not Gallante or Amarr.
Jessica Danikov
Network Danikov
#28 - 2013-06-19 12:17:22 UTC
Actually, maybe I do have something original to add- how much work would be involved in making the Iteron series truly modular (a bit like subsystems, but with the cargo holding bits)? They look like a modular hauling system, so why not make it one?

I know it's probably too much effort to be worth the while, but one can dream, right?
Grarr Dexx
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2013-06-19 12:23:21 UTC
Bestower can hold more than an Impel? Lol. What a waste of my ISK.
Evelgrivion
Origin.
Black Legion...
#30 - 2013-06-19 12:32:16 UTC
What's the reason for giving them such substantial baseline cargo capacities when compared to the present? Restricting the capacity of an industrial has obvious purpose in restricting player mobility, but I suppose that genie has been out of the bottle for some time now with Warp to Zero and Titan Bridges.
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#31 - 2013-06-19 12:35:58 UTC
Mammoth should get the biggest Minmatar cargohold, it just screams for it. It looks so sexy as opposed to the buttugly Hoarder.

But those changes seem ok. I like that. Cool
Alphax45
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2013-06-19 12:37:28 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Makes sense, I guess.

It'd be nice to have something like a ore hold, or a fitting service on the others, but it would be limiting for anyone but the gallente.


I mentioned this in a previous post (somewhere) but I can see the following Industrial roles:

1: tanky
2: fast - This is a lot less useful. As fast can be covered by a different class. A frigate sized courier
3: big
4: Specialist cargo (ore/gas/ice)
5: Fitting service
6: Fleet hangar


And we already have:
7: Salvager
8: PI specialist cargo.


Isn't 4,5,6 covered by the Orca?
That brings up another point, can we get a T2 Orca please :) (I know there is the Rorqual, but that isn't allowed in high sec)

Also; more of a wish list item; but some new barges would be good. (I'm bored of the current ones :P)
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#33 - 2013-06-19 12:41:44 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
What's the reason for giving them such substantial baseline cargo capacities when compared to the present? Restricting the capacity of an industrial has obvious purpose in restricting player mobility, but I suppose that genie has been out of the bottle for some time now with Warp to Zero and Titan Bridges.



you mean the 4 that have had cargo increases? With 3 of those being fairly minor, only the Badger Mk 2 being substantial?

Or did you misread the numbers, which have a baseline, and then the fully fitted version.


Alphax45 wrote:

Isn't 4,5,6 covered by the Orca?


Indeed. But I think it would be interesting to have single purpose ships that can do each one separately. It means the Orca has its place, but you can run something smaller and cheaper, in an appropriate situation.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

John B'dlam
Forkhaul Logistics Ltd.
#34 - 2013-06-19 12:46:09 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

First, something kind of simple: why the Hoarder instead of the Mammoth? This basically comes down to art direction. At earlier stages in this rebalance we considered both removing some ships from the game, and also adding more. Part of that discussion led to art asking that we use the Hoarder rather than the Mammoth as one of the primary Minmatar industrials.

I must admit I'm somewhat annoyed my lovely Mammoths are being hung out to dry in favour of what is by far the ugliest Minmatar industrial. Needing to replace/refit ships after rebalancing is to be expected, but this art direction does mean I'll be switching away from Minmatar haulers. While all the other high-cargo industrials look more derpy than the Mammoth, at least they're not Hoarders.
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#35 - 2013-06-19 12:46:23 UTC
I don't know exactly which numbers you are focusing on, but there should be no increase in t1 indie cargo capability as a class.

The old (current) Iteron 5 had 6000m3 base cargo, which translated to about 38500m3 cargo with expanders, level 5 indie skill, and expander rigs. The only new industrial to exceed that is the Bestower, which only does so by about 700m3 with the fully expanded version.

It may feel like a lot of increase capacity since before it was only available to Iteron 5 (which was over 10k expanded hold ahead of all the rest), and now its available to 4 ships. Or it may be that you're reading the numbers wrong =p

@ccp_rise

Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
Parasitic Legion.
#36 - 2013-06-19 12:48:16 UTC
It does feel like here is wasted potential with 4 ships being ignored for the rebalance.
Also what are you going to do about all the special edition Iteron Mark IVs?

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#37 - 2013-06-19 12:54:12 UTC
Daenna Chrysi wrote:
Oh h*ll no, itty 4 is one of the best indus there is. Also you are removing over 1k hp from the itty 5, how is that going to give it 50% more base hp compared to the old?


Clarification: he means that the "tanky" hauler line will have 50% more EHP than the Ity5 had.

By the time you put a DCU II and some bulkheads on one of those haulers they'll have quite a lot of EHP with no particular resist hole and very limited skill requirements.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#38 - 2013-06-19 12:57:33 UTC
Jackie Fisher wrote:
Not sure the agility bonused ones are agile enough to make the bonus worth while - even a battleship without a sensor booster should be able to lock them before they warp.

For such cheap hulls they all appear to haul a lot now.


The "bulky" haulers were normalised around the Iteron V.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Hehulk
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2013-06-19 12:59:19 UTC
The decision to use the hoarder instead of the mammoth for the minmatars bulk hauler disappoints me. The hull just looks better
Gelina Minaro
Expatriates
#40 - 2013-06-19 13:02:25 UTC
PLEASE tell me you're going to redesign Itty5. I really hate how it handles about as well as a ladder in a Three Stooges short. Make it like a double-wide itty3 or a beefier Itty4.


Also Mammoth looks better, keep it. If art complains, let them duct tape parts of the old Itty5 to it, problem solved.