These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dave Stark
#661 - 2013-06-23 18:38:19 UTC
Ranamar wrote:
The one high-value, high-volume good that comes to mind is PI products. They can get upwards of 75M ISK per 10k m^3. It's possible that capital parts qualify also, but I have no experience with those and I suspect most of the people making those are savvy and SP-ful enough that they have already trained Orcas.

Anyway, the problem, more so than "the Bestower is the new king" (because I think I might trade that 2% cargo space for the 50% more EHP of an Itty 5 that might at least stop a destroyer... or just trade it for align time on the Bestower) is that the Orca, with 60k hold at skill level and the ability to fit a MWD for accelerated aligning just completely obsoletes all of these ships. Sure, the orca costs about as much as 6 Blockade Runners (at least when I got my BR on my alt...) but it also carries the hold of them, at once, and it has more EHP than the 6 of them put together.

It's possible that the answer should be something to do with T2, but, the Orca really is still the premier highsec hauler, eve with a third of its potential cargo capacity being in the form of an ore bay.


i completely agree with what you've just said with respect to the orca. the orca is to hauling what t3s are to boosting. they are a ship where their secondary role outperforms ships designed to do the role in question. it's a really strange situation.

yeah, balance issues aside there's still no real niche that they fill other than "being cheap" which is an absurd role to fill. "look at me, i'm a cheap ship" it's crazy.

i'd like to comment on hauling PI goods, but i honestly have no experience of that. but surely, high value high volume items... freighters and/or courier contracts. even when i was mining (which is a terrible isk/hour activity) it would net me more profit to pay red frog to move my minerals than it would be for me to haul my own minerals [even if i could magic a freighter out of thin air].
like i say, i've just got no idea what role these are meant to fill since there are ships that do every aspect of their job better than they do.
Tampopo Field
Deep Stellar Coalition Enterprises
Silent Company
#662 - 2013-06-23 18:59:38 UTC
To me this seems like trying to force 12 ships into just two roles, because "its time to wrap up the tech1 rebalancing" and because no one bothered to come up with anything more intresting. "Just get them out of the way and focus on combat hulls, cause they aren't that important anyway."

Granted, industrials are not like frigates or other combat hulls. While combat hulls can serve alot of different fucntions, haulers are pretty mutch just "move junk from point A to point B without getting killed on route." They could however, have different roles based on intended area of usage. This distinction could easily give at least four separate roles:

-High capacity hauler with low tank, low speed and bad agility. For use when gating ganked is fairly unlikely.
-Auto pilot hauler with alot of speed, large sig, and weak tank. For low value transportation in high sec.
-Fast, tanky hauler with warp strength role bonus. For low and null sec transportation and when trying to avoid suicide gankers.
-Low mass hauler with scanning probe bonuses. For w-space use.


As for the skill bonuses, there are a few more aside form "+5% to Cargo Capacity, +5% to Agility, +5% to Max Velocity" that haulers could benefit from:
+5% to Armor Hit Points
+5% to Shield hit Points
+4% to Armor Resistances
+4% to Shield Resistances
+? to Warp Speed
-? Reduction to Signature Radius

It might also be a good idea to balance the Tech2 industrials at the same time when balancing Tech1. The "Tech1 firs then Tech2" approach seems to work well with combat hulls. The industrials however seem to be more likely to step on each others toes if balanced separately.

Notification: Because I'm lazy, I have a tendency to post without proof reading. This may result in various errors including but not limited to typos, weird typos, grammatical errors, bizarre sentence structure, words written repeatedly, mislocated paragraphs, pointlessly complicated explanations, general incoherency, and abrupt endings.

Eladaris
Indefinite.
#663 - 2013-06-23 21:00:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Eladaris
CCP Rise wrote:

Finally a quick note on "special bays" - We talked about this option quite a bit here at the office, and also with the CSM. While it does sound fun to add some new purpose (and new depth as a result) to haulers, there were simply too many problems to make this option seem worthwhile right now. There are issues with the level of specialization as it relates to t1 vs t2 ships.


Lots of rebalanced T1 ships seem to be putting the T2 ships out of business, in certain formats. Why stop now? Wasn't the goal that it would all come out in the wash once the T2's were balanced?

CCP Rise wrote:
There were issues about equality of access, this being the case especially if we gave special bays to only the extra Iterons and the extra Minmatar ship, but also being the case if we gave one special bay to each race. What do we say to the Amarr Ice miner who has to cross train to Gallente?


Tell them to HTFU? Even with no implants, and spec'ed the wrong way, you can unlock ALL THE ITTY'S in 40 minutes? Remember, you lowered the barrier to entry to these ships to Tier 1, so even if you wanted to be sorta decent at that new ship with it's special bay at III, you could do it in less than 24 hours. Once everyone knew they could fly the Itty V in less than 40 minutes training time, everyone was flying them... because they're the best at what they do.

If we had a Itty variant that did nothing but carry 45k of PI materials, there would be a useful niche for it, even if it had paper-thin walls. I'd just like to see some fitting variants in haulers, rather than all CE's in the lows,

CCP Rise wrote:

The idea has value, but with new industry work coming down the pipe, we would rather wait a while than assign a problematic role now.


And that pipe is... when? 'Industry expansion where' joke goes here?
matarkhan
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#664 - 2013-06-23 22:19:02 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Unfortunately, while we had some neat ideas, we weren't able to agree on something fun to do with the extra indies that Minmatar and Gallente have without either creating substantial racial imbalance or needing major resources that we would rather commit somewhere else.


So don't do it. Seriously. If it's worth doing, do it right. Don't half-ass it. As this stands right now you're telling your customers that you don't care enough to do something good.

"We have some good ideas, but we're not willing to put the effort into something creative, so here's a homogenous pile of crap."

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#665 - 2013-06-23 22:29:14 UTC
Mara's "Null Hypothesis": industrials don't need teiricide. Restore their original skill requirements and wait until some other part of the game starts screaming out for some kind of specialised hauler.

At present, the Iteron Mark V is "the best" hauler in terms of capacity. Of course you can stick nano fibres and warp speed rigs on it and it also becomes "the best" hauler in terms of getting stuff from A to B quickly.

If the rebalancer's hands are tied behind their backs in terms of adding new industrials to the Amarr and Caldari lineups, leaving well enough alone is probably the best option. Until there is time for the art department to come up with one or two extra hulls for Amarr and Caldari, just do nothing.
Zaxix
State War Academy
Caldari State
#666 - 2013-06-23 22:40:51 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Mara's "Null Hypothesis": industrials don't need teiricide. Restore their original skill requirements and wait until some other part of the game starts screaming out for some kind of specialised hauler.

At present, the Iteron Mark V is "the best" hauler in terms of capacity. Of course you can stick nano fibres and warp speed rigs on it and it also becomes "the best" hauler in terms of getting stuff from A to B quickly.

If the rebalancer's hands are tied behind their backs in terms of adding new industrials to the Amarr and Caldari lineups, leaving well enough alone is probably the best option. Until there is time for the art department to come up with one or two extra hulls for Amarr and Caldari, just do nothing.

Agreed. Just wait until the overall industry side of the game is ready for its updates/rebalance and then turn back to industrials. No problem is being solved with this rebalance and it would be a shame to waste the resources on what will undoubtedly turn out to be max cargo with mwd/cloak dominance.

Bokononist

 

Manfred Hideous
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#667 - 2013-06-23 23:16:44 UTC
Why not a role bonus for the ships?

Like the former Tier 1 ships get a bonus of moving 75% of top speed while cloaked, the middle ships getting a speed bonus for AFK shipping and the largest ships a 10% resist bonus?

This would put each of them into a specific niche without encroaching on the T-2 ships.
Molic Blackbird
Orion Faction Industries
Orion Consortium
#668 - 2013-06-24 00:12:48 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Mara's "Null Hypothesis": industrials don't need teiricide. Restore their original skill requirements and wait until some other part of the game starts screaming out for some kind of specialised hauler.

At present, the Iteron Mark V is "the best" hauler in terms of capacity. Of course you can stick nano fibres and warp speed rigs on it and it also becomes "the best" hauler in terms of getting stuff from A to B quickly.

If the rebalancer's hands are tied behind their backs in terms of adding new industrials to the Amarr and Caldari lineups, leaving well enough alone is probably the best option. Until there is time for the art department to come up with one or two extra hulls for Amarr and Caldari, just do nothing.



I also agree. The saying, "If its not broke, don't fix it" applies here. Industrial ships were mostly fine before the skill requirements were changed. However, it seems CCP has made up its mind to go ahead with the changes despite all the negative reaction to them. I don't expect the proposed changes to have any meaningful affects in game. A few more people will train for the Bestower and less people will fly the now 4 useless ships. Does that make this balancing pass worth the effort?
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#669 - 2013-06-24 00:26:07 UTC
So there are two issues that I can see, which makes the hauler tiericide very difficult.

1) There is little to no variety in fitting for haulers. Mids are shield tank, lows are for cargo. There is no mid slot apart from shields/mwd that is of any use to haulers. Since there arent any choices to make, there is no diversity in fitting.

2) All the haulers are the same. There is no real reason to use a particular race.


1) can be fixed by adding some midslot modules useful for hauling. This could be any number of things, from modules that improve autopiloting (ie, 10km instead of 15km), to modules that create specialized bays (like a bay for ore, or assembled ships or w/e).

2) I dont really see how to fix this without either having some haulers outright worse than others, or deleting a bunch. There are just too many ships for too few roles. Having a particular hauler faster than another, or having a little more hp isnt a differentiation of role. Maybe give different races role bonuses to modules created for 1)? Idk
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#670 - 2013-06-24 04:20:27 UTC
I'm getting the distinct impression this thread should have been posted weeks earlier, so the community could have added their input to the design and purpose of industrials. Instead, the dev team have posted a rather tepid proposed change that only now is getting the feedback it deserves.

Bottom line; either scrap the lot and give us two ORE haulers, or add some diversity to the ship's capabilities instead of just being flying cargo containers with slightly different stats.

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

Molic Blackbird
Orion Faction Industries
Orion Consortium
#671 - 2013-06-24 05:46:11 UTC
Galphii wrote:
I'm getting the distinct impression this thread should have been posted weeks earlier, so the community could have added their input to the design and purpose of industrials. Instead, the dev team have posted a rather tepid proposed change that only now is getting the feedback it deserves.

Bottom line; either scrap the lot and give us two ORE haulers, or add some diversity to the ship's capabilities instead of just being flying cargo containers with slightly different stats.



Scraping everything and going to just 2 ORE haulers is the worst solution of all and the toughest to implement. What do you do with all the ships and BPOs currently in game? What about the racial industrial skill points? Tech 2 haulers relied on the tech 1 haulers for manufacturing. What happens to those ships and BPO/BPCs? Freighters and JF require the racial Industrial skill. What do you do about that?

I've probably missed a few other things that link back to the racial industrial ships. If the racial industrial ships are removed, most likely the ships further up the line would also need to be removed. That's a whole lot of ISK and Skill points that need to be handled. Not to mention the tech 2 BPOs for BR and DST.

Also, I think the player base would be much more upset at a complete removal of the racial industrial ships.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#672 - 2013-06-24 05:59:23 UTC
Molic Blackbird wrote:
Galphii wrote:
I'm getting the distinct impression this thread should have been posted weeks earlier, so the community could have added their input to the design and purpose of industrials. Instead, the dev team have posted a rather tepid proposed change that only now is getting the feedback it deserves.

Bottom line; either scrap the lot and give us two ORE haulers, or add some diversity to the ship's capabilities instead of just being flying cargo containers with slightly different stats.



Scraping everything and going to just 2 ORE haulers is the worst solution of all and the toughest to implement. What do you do with all the ships and BPOs currently in game? What about the racial industrial skill points? Tech 2 haulers relied on the tech 1 haulers for manufacturing. What happens to those ships and BPO/BPCs? Freighters and JF require the racial Industrial skill. What do you do about that?

I've probably missed a few other things that link back to the racial industrial ships. If the racial industrial ships are removed, most likely the ships further up the line would also need to be removed. That's a whole lot of ISK and Skill points that need to be handled. Not to mention the tech 2 BPOs for BR and DST.

Also, I think the player base would be much more upset at a complete removal of the racial industrial ships.


Ships and BPOs : Convert them

Skillpoints: Convert them

T2: Convert those at the same time

Freighters/JF - Skills were already converted, so convert the skill tree until proper ORE/Interbus freighters can be devised, then convert.

They already showed it's possible to mess around with skill points at this scale when they did the Destroyer/Battlecruiser skill modification.

SubStandard Rin
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#673 - 2013-06-24 06:50:30 UTC  |  Edited by: SubStandard Rin
First off if we are to rebalance the Haulers then lets do it properly and don't rush it.

I think first off All four races needs 3 types of haulers

* Tanky (think procurer)
* Large / slow
* small, fast aligning, fast warping.

*specialist haulers -
** Ore/Ice hauler
** Gas hauler
** smuggle ship that have a minimal smuggle bay that allows contraband to move system->system.
** Pi hauler
** maintenance ship (Ship fitting service + fleet bay)
** combat hauler (ammo to fleet fights) high EHP good align and only ammo bay (only accept charges)


then redo the T2 industrials in same iteration

* DST -- give it jump engines so it acts like a mini JF (now its truly a Deep space transport)
* Blockade runner - don't change them they are fine.



Give each race 3 haulers so Caldari and Amarr gets a new one (when art department have done the skins)

then give each race a racial characteristics with a 10% bonus to a stat for example
* aligns faster
* tanks better
* have larger cargo bay
* higher base speed


Then with the specialist haulers could use the models but spread among the other factions of the game.
with just a simple colorscheme reskin. this could also move the obsolete Iteron models to fix this issue.

the bonus to this is that skills like Ore Industrials become more useful.


Please CCP consider this.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#674 - 2013-06-24 07:11:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
CCP Rise wrote:
Let us know what you think!

SIGIL

Amarr Industrial Skill Bonuses:
+5% Cargo Capacity
+5% Agility (was max velocity)

BESTOWER

Amarr Industrial Skill Bonuses:
+5% Cargo Capacity
+5% Max Velocity

I think this is completely wrong, for two main reasons:

1. Realistically, speedy-tanky versions would be used to autopilot through hisec. While bulky haulers - for cargo aggregation or "last mile" delivery in conjunction with freighters, i.e. that would be short trips driven manually. For that reason I strongly recommend to switch speed bonuses, that is:
SIGIL: + Max Velocity,
BESTOWER: + Agility.
Gate camps are insta-locking anyway, so it would mean nothing for PVP. But it would be a great incentive to train the skill, cause watching your hauler aligns kills you from the inside.

2. Who was that evil person who told you every race should have exactly the same bonuses? No wonder you cannot come up with reasonable racial "flavours". Also, 10% total bonus pool is kinda poor. When Iteron V was only accessable at level 5 skill, it was irrelevant, but now there is very little initiative to train skill to 5. Consider this option instead:
- BESTOWER: +7.5% Cargo Capacity, +7.5% Agility;
- BADGER MK2: +10% Cargo Capacity, +5% Agility;
- MAMMOTH: +5% Cargo Capacity, +10% Agility;
- ITERON V: +15% Cargo Capacity.


Voila! Now you have the flavours with
- Iteron is still the champion at lvl5,
- Mammoth being the fastest of snails (and good cargo at low skills),
- Bestower is all-round hauler (maybe have equal cargo with Iteron at lvl4),
- Badger falls a little behind Iteron at lvl5, but is faster and tankier.

Now let me know what do you think!
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#675 - 2013-06-24 07:38:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
Dave Stark wrote:
yeah, balance issues aside there's still no real niche that they fill other than "being cheap" which is an absurd role to fill. "look at me, i'm a cheap ship" it's crazy.
...
like i say, i've just got no idea what role these are meant to fill since there are ships that do every aspect of their job better than they do.

I agree that new Orca is the issue (boo for Ytterbium or whoever was behind that skill change).
But being cheap IS a reasonable role, if you remember that there are some areas in space other than hisec. On top of that, indy ships are agile (relative to Orca and freighters) and fit easily into wormholes.

But of course being cheap as the only role is a bad design. To fix that, I'd suggest to move most of Orca's cargo bay into ore bay. And roll back the change that made it possible for freighters to load/drop cargo in space.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#676 - 2013-06-24 07:42:47 UTC
I'd also say it would be better to leave hauler rebalance on the shelf for now until you can bring some interesting diversity to the table. The changes you've suggested look remarkably weak in terms of what would be brought to gameplay. The whole thing about eve is diversity and choice, wanting to train into everything to get that little edge over someone else. These changes would destroy that completely with no need to train into any other race given the small differences involved. This is the polar opposite of the frigate and cruiser changes where I still find myself totally spoilt for choice given the diversity they bring and yet remain equally useful. I have never had so much fun changing which ship to use and being unable to settle on 'the best one'. Big smile
the teddybear
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#677 - 2013-06-24 08:21:38 UTC
Well, looks like suicide ganking in a tornado is finally out of the picture, thanks ccp..now I guess i'll get a brutix or some stupid thing and be in range of worthless km whores.

My post anger you? too bad, suck it up and move along.

Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#678 - 2013-06-24 09:05:11 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
On the whole haulers are just not very exciting compared to a lot of other classes in EVE. I can understand you want something new to make them pop more, but please keep in mind that it was never there to begin with. These ships mostly just carry stuff around for cheap, that's what they do. The purpose of this balance is just to make sure that there is some depth of choice and that each race has access to a cheap ship to carry things around that isn't painfully worse than the Itty 5.

What if you're wrong? In fact you are...

Let's be honest - you've never done anything industry-related, did you?
Neither have anyone in your team, and active CSM members. Or they do it in a weird way that is totally diffirent from everyday practice. The case of Mammoth/Hoarder emphasizes that. Am I right? Or am I right?

So here comes the question: are you ready for REAL discussion? You know, I have more interesting things to do other than feeding forum trolls, so if you're firm in your decision - so be it. If you're open for dialogue - let's begin from the beginning and speak about the purpose of T1 industrials, their niche and it's overlap with Orca and freighters.
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#679 - 2013-06-24 09:15:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jowen Datloran
Eladaris wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

Finally a quick note on "special bays" - We talked about this option quite a bit here at the office, and also with the CSM. While it does sound fun to add some new purpose (and new depth as a result) to haulers, there were simply too many problems to make this option seem worthwhile right now. There are issues with the level of specialization as it relates to t1 vs t2 ships.


Lots of rebalanced T1 ships seem to be putting the T2 ships out of business, in certain formats. Why stop now? Wasn't the goal that it would all come out in the wash once the T2's were balanced?

CCP Rise wrote:
There were issues about equality of access, this being the case especially if we gave special bays to only the extra Iterons and the extra Minmatar ship, but also being the case if we gave one special bay to each race. What do we say to the Amarr Ice miner who has to cross train to Gallente?


Tell them to HTFU? Even with no implants, and spec'ed the wrong way, you can unlock ALL THE ITTY'S in 40 minutes? Remember, you lowered the barrier to entry to these ships to Tier 1, so even if you wanted to be sorta decent at that new ship with it's special bay at III, you could do it in less than 24 hours. Once everyone knew they could fly the Itty V in less than 40 minutes training time, everyone was flying them... because they're the best at what they do.

If we had a Itty variant that did nothing but carry 45k of PI materials, there would be a useful niche for it, even if it had paper-thin walls. I'd just like to see some fitting variants in haulers, rather than all CE's in the lows,

CCP Rise wrote:

The idea has value, but with new industry work coming down the pipe, we would rather wait a while than assign a problematic role now.


And that pipe is... when? 'Industry expansion where' joke goes here?

I will strongly agree to this post, especially that part about equality of access. You argument is hardly valid, CCP Rise, when you look at other specialization roles that have been separated by faction, such as electronic warfare, where it apparently is no problem. The required skill training time to access all industrial ships of a certain faction is also negligible.

Why is it my feeling that you rather just want to dump this aspect game down so you can get back to your pew-pew tweaks as quick as possible?

Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook 

Eladaris
Indefinite.
#680 - 2013-06-24 11:07:58 UTC
Jowen Datloran wrote:

Why is it my feeling that you rather just want to dump this aspect game down so you can get back to your pew-pew tweaks as quick as possible?


Sshhhh, he got stuck with the boring make-work, he wants to do move onto HAC's! He said so himself.

Pity that leaves an awfully lot of player's out in the cold for a lot more years waiting for a real iteration to the T2 Industrials which are probably also too boring to do correctly.