These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Raziphan Rebular
Path of Dooppa
#721 - 2013-06-24 16:01:21 UTC
I'm disappointed with these changes, a pure caldari player I feel that the Iteron's already had enough love. We've got two haulers us caldari the Badger and the Badger MK2, tell me whats the point of having two different haulers when the second one is obviously better.

Why can't we get a specialized hauler, or something?
FistyMcBumBasher
Goryn Clade
#722 - 2013-06-24 16:01:29 UTC
I have followed your posts on this thread and to me it did not appear that you were not perfectly happy with the proposed rebalance from the beginning. I got the feeling that you wanted to do more. So please do that, and release balance changes you are perfectly happy with.

As for the specialized bay's I would love to see a ship bay so that one line of t1 haulers was specialized in transporting ship hulls. Being able to move my own Battleships, Battlecruisers and Cruisers the few jumps from high sec to our lowsec staging system would be awesome. Plus, you risk having a loot pinata and dropping the ship hulls when you get blown up.
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#723 - 2013-06-24 16:02:40 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys


  • Special purpose bays - This will be for Hoarder, Iteron Mark II, III, and IV. We wanted to do this originally, but held back because of concerns about racial inequality. Based on feedback I'm now hoping you guys will be fine with this inequality, as long as it isn't so favored towards Gallente that no one would ever train another race for hauling.



  • Just saying for the record: remove these ships from the current races lines and give them to an NPC corp line of ships.

    This way people will train a race they like the most for "generic halling" (depending of the new attributes you are still thinking on giving each one) and this new line for "specific haulings".

    Iteron Mark II, III, and IV do specific halling and are available at level I of "NPC industrial" and then the Hoarder available at level 5 being the first freighter ship carrier in Eve.

    Later CCP adapts the hulls and colors, we can live with the current ones for some time, don't worry.

    Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)

    Successful Troll
    Pandemic Horde Inc.
    Pandemic Horde
    #724 - 2013-06-24 16:03:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Successful Troll
    I wont complain about anything you do to the indy ships...as long as I can still gank them on the jita undock Twisted
    Coras Aldeland
    K32 Industries
    #725 - 2013-06-24 16:09:41 UTC
    Instead of some sort of specialized bay, perhaps cargo capacity bonuses by race?

    I.e., a Minmatar's Wreathe, Hoarder, and Mammoth gets it's standard cargo hold of but gets a 5% or 10% bonus capacity it you load it with ore. Perhaps another gets bonuses loaded with PI, another with ammo or ship equipment, etc.
    Daenna Chrysi
    Omega Foundry Unit
    Southern Legion Alliance
    #726 - 2013-06-24 16:11:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Daenna Chrysi
    CCP Rise wrote:


  • Special purpose bays - This will be for Hoarder, Iteron Mark II, III, and IV. We wanted to do this originally, but held back because of concerns about racial inequality. Based on feedback I'm now hoping you guys will be fine with this inequality, as long as it isn't so favored towards Gallente that no one would ever train another race for hauling.
  • More separation between the two basic hauler types - I want to achieve this through several means including giving the faster haulers better warp time (up to 6au/tick instead of 4.5au/tick), taking a mid slot away from the cargo focused versions to highlight the tank on the others (this will partly be counter-acted by giving back the second high to the cargo versions), along with other small changes to make some of the tankier haulers stand out a bit more.
  • More quirkiness overall - I won't go into specifics right now, and it won't be anything extremely drastic, but I want to try and get each ship within a role set apart from the others as much as possible to avoid any feeling of homogenization (though I still feel that the very simplistic hauling system doesn't provide a lot of room for variation that wouldn't severely handicap some ships).


  • Just a wild idea here, but how about a ship maint bay of 30k m3? big enough to fit a single frigate nothing else. Prolly wouldnt work for the current indus, but if there would be a ORE hauler, it could have one.
    Maximus Andendare
    Stimulus
    Rote Kapelle
    #727 - 2013-06-24 16:12:56 UTC
    Raziphan Rebular wrote:
    I'm disappointed with these changes, a pure caldari player I feel that the Iteron's already had enough love. We've got two haulers us caldari the Badger and the Badger MK2, tell me whats the point of having two different haulers when the second one is obviously better.

    Why can't we get a specialized hauler, or something?
    Honestly, I can't see how you'd be unhappy with these changes, since he hasn't announced what they'll be yet. If anything, you should be thankful, since the Caldari ship line was marginalized outside of some lolfit pvp fittings.

    At least now there's a hope--and a very real chance--that each of the Industrials will serve some purpose, fit in some niche, find some use, etc. Don't underestimate a strong tank, raw capacity, faster warp, quicker align, etc., that can be accomplished to differentiate between them.

    It's far better than one being "the most" and end of the story.

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

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

    Jake Deaco
    Redwind Trading Facility
    Darwinism.
    #728 - 2013-06-24 16:14:27 UTC
    Why not give the T1's roles like the other ships?

    Could have a fast aligning one with limited tank but tackle avoidance built in, a beefier tanky one that can take actual damage, and then one that just maximizes cargo space much like the ones we have already.

    The speedy tackle avoider could have a smaller cargo hold, lower sig radius, better alignment and speed. Let it fit a MWD or ABer or something. The tanky one could have a medium sized cargo hold, with a tank that would actually require more than a single sniper shot, maybe even go as far as enabling big armor plates/shield extenders.

    Honestly an industrial ship should be able to tank like a cruiser, and even fit like a cruiser. Right now industrials are basically large cardboard boxes with tiny engines.
    Mike Voidstar
    Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
    #729 - 2013-06-24 16:15:30 UTC
    I appreciate the idea that additional roles cannot be put in without additional hulls being added.

    However, create the ships, and re-use existing hulls, perhaps with a slightly different paint job if visual identification is important. When the art team gets around to the V3 of the industrials, they can worry about unique extra hulls then.

    The bulk of this work falls on Fozzie/Rise, not art.

    The idea of additional holds actually intrigues me. Would it be possible to make the large haulers have 2 or more standard holds that fall just short of the battleship hauling point?

    Haulers with special ore holds would be welcome as well. I don't know many that do PI to a large degree, but I assume some of that stuff is bulky and/or numerous enough to warrant a large hauler as well.

    The roles exist and can be created if there is any will to do so at all. The hulls are the least of the problems, and could no doubt be easily fit in to the current production schedule.
    Raziphan Rebular
    Path of Dooppa
    #730 - 2013-06-24 16:19:10 UTC
    Maximus Andendare wrote:
    Raziphan Rebular wrote:
    I'm disappointed with these changes, a pure caldari player I feel that the Iteron's already had enough love. We've got two haulers us caldari the Badger and the Badger MK2, tell me whats the point of having two different haulers when the second one is obviously better.

    Why can't we get a specialized hauler, or something?
    Honestly, I can't see how you'd be unhappy with these changes, since he hasn't announced what they'll be yet. If anything, you should be thankful, since the Caldari ship line was marginalized outside of some lolfit pvp fittings.

    At least now there's a hope--and a very real chance--that each of the Industrials will serve some purpose, fit in some niche, find some use, etc. Don't underestimate a strong tank, raw capacity, faster warp, quicker align, etc., that can be accomplished to differentiate between them.

    It's far better than one being "the most" and end of the story.



    Ya as someone who is 'pure caldari' meaning I don't fly other races ships I'm disappointed. I'm concerned that my race has been sidelined to favor the Gallente again. They get all the new specilized bays and features, while we the caldari get a pair of haulers 1 of which is utterly redundant.
    Rhavas
    Noble Sentiments
    Second Empire.
    #731 - 2013-06-24 16:27:37 UTC
    Deornoth Drake wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Hey guys snip...
  • We started with fairly lofty ideas and slowly backed into a more conservative solution, both because of concerns about equality relating to the extra industrials and also because of knowing that more high level industry work was coming down the pipe that could impact our needs in the near future. ... snip ...
  • Special purpose bays - This will be for Hoarder, Iteron Mark II, III, and IV. We wanted to do this originally, but held back because of concerns about racial inequality. Based on feedback I'm now hoping you guys will be fine with this inequality, as long as it isn't so favored towards Gallente that no one would ever train another race for hauling.
  • ... snip

    1) More details about "more high level industry work was coming down the pipe" are very welcome!
    2) To avoid that "Based on feedback I'm now hoping you guys will be fine with this inequality, as long as it isn't so favored towards Gallente that no one would ever train another race for hauling." let the haulers with the special bays require the ORE Industrial skill instead of the Gallente one :D

    This. Spin a story about the Gallente and Minmatar selling the hull production rights to ORE because it's too expensive / not worth it for them to keep up with manufacturing so many variations and so sold the rights to ORE. *Poof* all fair, and no art changes need to be made, just change the description text to "sold in YC 11X to ORE, who modified the design to be a specialist in whatever".

    Of course, even better would be to get rid of those four, making them collector items, and creating new ORE hulls. But I understand dev time ROI means this is unlikely. Smile

    Thanks for listening, looking forward to your next pass.

    Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary

    Maximus Andendare
    Stimulus
    Rote Kapelle
    #732 - 2013-06-24 16:28:11 UTC
    Raziphan Rebular wrote:
    Maximus Andendare wrote:
    Raziphan Rebular wrote:
    I'm disappointed with these changes, a pure caldari player I feel that the Iteron's already had enough love. We've got two haulers us caldari the Badger and the Badger MK2, tell me whats the point of having two different haulers when the second one is obviously better.

    Why can't we get a specialized hauler, or something?
    Honestly, I can't see how you'd be unhappy with these changes, since he hasn't announced what they'll be yet. If anything, you should be thankful, since the Caldari ship line was marginalized outside of some lolfit pvp fittings.

    At least now there's a hope--and a very real chance--that each of the Industrials will serve some purpose, fit in some niche, find some use, etc. Don't underestimate a strong tank, raw capacity, faster warp, quicker align, etc., that can be accomplished to differentiate between them.

    It's far better than one being "the most" and end of the story.



    Ya as someone who is 'pure caldari' meaning I don't fly other races ships I'm disappointed. I'm concerned that my race has been sidelined to favor the Gallente again. They get all the new specilized bays and features, while we the caldari get a pair of haulers 1 of which is utterly redundant.
    How can you fear your race is being sidelined when you have no idea what the changes will be?

    How did you not feel sidelined before when Gallente and Amarr both high higher capacity and Gallente was ahead on align time? Fact is, you have no idea what the changes will be. Maybe Gallente's raw carry will be smaller but increased via holds? Maybe Caldari will be able to mount a stupidly-sized tank or warp faster than the others.

    We can go on all day speculating and wondering what's coming, but until that OP is updated, we just have no idea. It's really not worth it at this point to worry about "what if," since it's fairly clear that the original concept is undergoing some big changes, and Rise has stated that he knows--and is going to try and achieve--differences so that each ship has a place in the line that sets it apart from the rest.

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

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

    Ersahi Kir
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #733 - 2013-06-24 16:36:25 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
  • More separation between the two basic hauler types - I want to achieve this through several means including giving the faster haulers better warp time (up to 6au/tick instead of 4.5au/tick), taking a mid slot away from the cargo focused versions to highlight the tank on the others (this will partly be counter-acted by giving back the second high to the cargo versions), along with other small changes to make some of the tankier haulers stand out a bit more.


  • This is honestly what I want to avoid. When you do something like give an extra high slot to every ship in a class you're making things too homogenized. If you want to mix it up give some ships in the same category an extra utility high, some an extra mid, and some extra lows. Working backwards from max capacity to desired number of lows, giving everything the same number of highs, and then making up the difference in mids isn't making things unique, it's making them homogenized. Mix it up and lets see what players can make up.

    If you guys are working on some neato ideas though I am excited to see what they are.
    Phoenix Jones
    Small-Arms Fire
    #734 - 2013-06-24 16:45:21 UTC
    Vayn Baxtor wrote:
    Quote:
    Long as we get something that can move mass amounts (between 100,000 m3 and 200,000 m3), in some-type of configuration (not a freighter, jump freighter, or Orca), that involves either the T1 ships, the Deep Space Transports, or some new transport ship, I'll be happy. i really could care less of the utility, the tank, the "special abilities". Just something that can handle the movement of a mass bulk order where a Orca or Freighter can't do, in a ship that doesn't cost a billion isk.

    I could have recovered the 4 hours of moving crap I just did, because that was in no way, shape, or form, fun or enjoyable.


    Hehe... I thought this was eve, not world of wait ;D

    Come to think of it now, the industrial ships aren't "that industrial".
    This one been burning on my tongue for a while.

    Too bad the module thread has been unstickied. Right now, there seems to be the issue and/or debate on all sides about versatility, special bays etc etc. I am really starting to think it would have been best if we did have that "subsystem module" thought of an idea be brought over to the industrial ship area (and other ships);

    Only that such subsystem modules come in form of High/Med/Low modules that could significantly change the ship's role. Because; we always have the same problem - we need industrial ships that can do several tasks, but without having CCP be tossing out hundreds of ships for each role.

    Following that sort of ruleset where you can only fit one of such flavor into the ship; we could somewhat have a base industrial hull be fitted with the module that substantially expands cargo, OR introduces a special bay of a specific flavor (PI commoditiy cargo, ship hangar bay, etc)

    Will leave it there.

    Or is such too hard to imagine?


    People are getting a little carried away with trying to make these ships do all these minor things that they are missing the point of them. They move crap from A to B. Now there are valid concerns, ganks, cargo scans, speed, usefulness, and keeping the original heredity of the Races ships...

    But people just want to move crap from A to B, preferably without getting blown up. I'm of the point where I just want to get as much crap in as possible. 99% of the time it is not even Expensive, cost worthy crap, just stuff that takes a ton of space t move. I'd like a better option than a 750 million isk Mining Ship, a 1.5 Billion No Slot Freighter, or a 150 Million Isk Transport that is beaten cargo wise by a 1.2 million isk T1 level 1 ship.

    Yaay!!!!

    Alara IonStorm
    #735 - 2013-06-24 16:46:51 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    In this case, there is no option for Caldari or Amarr to counter balance, even if it was a different bay.

    Caldari has 3 Hauler Hulls, one is in use solely on the Bustard. So Caldari really has 3.

    As for Amarr... paint job.
    Kenneth Skybound
    Gallifrey Resources
    #736 - 2013-06-24 16:50:32 UTC
    I am totally in favour of Caldari getting the tankiest, amarr the largest, minmatar the fastest and gallente the most specialist T1 haulers.

    Caldari have the largest freighter, and the typical line up seems to be about traits NOT following on into similar indy ships for some reason, so give them the tank. Amarr the largest haul as they have so little else to offer.

    Minmatar are notorious for speed, so keep that. Maybe an indy which is bonused to sig and MWD usage for those "burn away" moments.

    Gallente can go insane. Have their tankier ship and the bigger ship, but overshadowed by the caldari/amarr. Conversely, they then have 3 ships which can be weirdly awesome in other ways. Ore hold. Fuel hold. Epic tractor? (impinging on the orca/noctis, I know). Maybe a resupply ship (for ammo/drones) or go insane and allow one to carry packaged ships (and only ships) but is unable to pick up/drop off in space like freighters used to be.

    Looking forward to this Iteron Iteration. :D
    Gustovness
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #737 - 2013-06-24 16:52:53 UTC
    Hey guys, I first would like to say that I'm happy that you guys always revisit old aspects of Eve in order to keep them up to date with the rest of the game's developments. This is why I wanted to throw out to idea of using PI as a baseboard for having indys fulfill roles. I dunno how you guys will implement it, but I'd consider training for a new indy from scratch if it gave me bonuses to how much stuff I could unload from customs offices (and so it long as it wasn't Minmatar)
    Toshiro Ozuwara
    Perkone
    #738 - 2013-06-24 16:57:12 UTC
    Does anyone think that faster warp time on a hauler actually matters?

    We're talking about the most edge case of uses right here.

    Also, how the frak do the Caldari, the corporate industrial behemoth empire that it is, have worse haulers than the Gallente, who are essentially futuristic Ron Paul voters?

    It didn't take long to locate the tracking beacon, deep inside the quarters for sleepin' They thought they could get away Not today, it's not the way that this kid plays

    ChaseTheLasers
    Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium
    #739 - 2013-06-24 17:01:05 UTC
    Taleden wrote:
    Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
    if you have a ship that has the biggest tank in the world, a single frigate can still disable it and hold it indefinitely. That's why DSTs are fail - once pointed, they can't really break free. However, if that transport has at least some armament, it has a chance to wrestle out and get away. In that situation, the tank serves a purpose - surviving not indefinitely, but long enough.


    This is a great point. So far, hauler tankiness means one and only one thing in practice: how many Tornados can it survive. That number limits the value of cargo that can be safely moved in high-sec, while the cargo bay itself limits the volume. But it's not a very interesting limitation because almost every hauler proposed here can only withstand 0 or 1 Tornados. It also doesn't really matter at all in low, null or wormhole space because any amount of damage at all will eventually take down a hauler which has been pinned. It might take an hour, but the hauler still has no recourse, no matter its tank.

    But if the "tanky" haulers had some additional capabilities, then suddenly their tank means something else: how long do they have to run off a solo pirate in dangerous space before going down? And I'm not just talking about weapons, necessarily -- how about a line of "tanky" haulers with EWAR bonuses?


    • Caldari: bonus to ECM jammers, to break the attacker's lock
    • Amarr: bonus to energy neutralizers, to disable the attacker's point/scram
    • Gallente: bonus to sensor dampeners, to break the attacker's lock
    • Minmatar: bonus to web range and strength, to outrun the attacker's point/scram


    This idea needs some serious love - I've asked for something like this myself a few times at Fanfest.

    It discourages fitting a tank and just relying on that with AP. You need to actually interact with the game to help survive when attacked.
    Not only that, but I can see fleets of haulers already trolling can flippers. Yes please.
    Zeb DaMadMan2
    Duckling System
    #740 - 2013-06-24 17:02:23 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:

  • Make them all useful
  • Make them as different from each other as possible
  • Add new function/purpose where possible

  • This. I'm getting tired of how CCP as of late has been trying to make every race equal to each other, it goes against even having different races to begin with.
    Thank you Rise for recognizing this.

    "As soon as we stop asking about the launcher design, CCP will assume we already love it.

    We won't." - Eve Community