These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
First pagePrevious page8910
 

Dev Blog: Rebalancing and Renaming Industrials

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tare Bloodraven
My Test Corp
#181 - 2013-08-15 01:17:46 UTC
Oraac Ensor wrote:
MhytBuster wrote:
You can fill the tipper truck with bottles of water ,
Try reading my post properly:
Quote:
Borrow a tipper truck from a construction site and try using it as a bulk water carrier.


MhytBuster wrote:
a tanker with a proper opening can be filled with parcels , or... well I'm sure you get the picture xD
Define "proper".

[Edit] To give a more relevant comparison, consider RL shipping on present day planet Earth.

Gas carriers carry gas, nothing else.

Oil tankers carry oil, nothing else.

Ore carriers carry ore, nothing else.

Etc, etc.


THE ONLY REASON THIS IS DONE IS IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC SAFETY and SPACE NO ONE GIVES A DAMN.
Rawthorm
The Establishment
#182 - 2013-08-15 10:02:33 UTC
With things in EvE moving over to the "Bay" model for carrying things, I think it's about time Expanded Cargo's worked on Bays as well as the native cargo hold (Or release a specific mod) as well as anything giving a negative bonus to cargo doing the same.

If I'm carrying basic cargo, I can over double my capacity, but if i'm now carrying say gas I can't have the hauler designed for it increase it's effectiveness in the same way.
Having Expanded Cargo's effect bays could open up options beyond haulers. Barges carrying more Ore per run if they drop a mining enhancer, carriers and dreads dropping a little tank or damage to carry more siege fuel, ect
Druthlen
The Carlisle Group
#183 - 2013-08-16 14:24:27 UTC
2 Ore Industrials Should be created to hold Ore and minerals. They shouldnt go to gallente.
Tare Bloodraven
My Test Corp
#184 - 2013-08-18 09:24:57 UTC
Druthlen wrote:
2 Ore Industrials Should be created to hold Ore and minerals. They shouldn't go to gallente.


Roll

No, you don't get it either,

if they are identifiable by anything such as you suggest then they become easy floating targets for gankers. All they have to do is sit at gates like Niarja blow up the ore/mineral haulers for potential big isk.

unless you make them "armored cars" with tanks like battleships which i seriously doubt CCP wants to do, see my earlier post on making them configurable similar to t3 cruisers.....

Each Race should have only two, there is no need to more than that, one big and slower, one faster but smaller and have the pilot choose the "BAY" module to get max room for specialized hauling.

I shouldn't have to cross race train to get any specific benefit to haul, this is a basic function to eve.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#185 - 2013-08-18 17:27:08 UTC
Tare Bloodraven wrote:
I shouldn't have to cross race train to get any specific benefit to haul, this is a basic function to eve.



That's why all the freighters are identical, right?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Oraac Ensor
#186 - 2013-08-19 03:05:18 UTC
Tare Bloodraven wrote:
Oraac Ensor wrote:
MhytBuster wrote:
You can fill the tipper truck with bottles of water ,
Try reading my post properly:
Quote:
Borrow a tipper truck from a construction site and try using it as a bulk water carrier.


MhytBuster wrote:
a tanker with a proper opening can be filled with parcels , or... well I'm sure you get the picture xD
Define "proper".

[Edit] To give a more relevant comparison, consider RL shipping on present day planet Earth.

Gas carriers carry gas, nothing else.

Oil tankers carry oil, nothing else.

Ore carriers carry ore, nothing else.

Etc, etc.


THE ONLY REASON THIS IS DONE IS IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC SAFETY and SPACE NO ONE GIVES A DAMN.

Nope.

It's done in the interest of efficiency.

And there's no need to shout.
Tare Bloodraven
My Test Corp
#187 - 2013-08-19 11:15:50 UTC


Etc, etc.[/quote]

Nope.

It's done in the interest of efficiency.

And there's no need to shout.[/quote]

if you were correct they wouldn't need to create different types of trucks to carry all the liquids......
they could just as easily put the tank inside a container and utilize the standard fittings on every tractor trailer

obviously you are incorrect and efficiency isn't the reason.....it's so they fuels and caustic liquids are easily identifiable and not hidden amongst the other cargo as i said along with a "TX endorsement" on your Class A license in the United States.

In EVE we need that hidden camouflage to protect our haulers from the scum of the game that are to lazy anything but prey on those that actually work mining, building or hauling.

Since CCP refuses to stop paying insurance to suicide gankers for having Concord destroy their ships for committing crimes (another stupid act that no real life insurance company would do because it's considered fraud and they would all go out of business.)

But so much for attempting to be realistic....
Tare Bloodraven
My Test Corp
#188 - 2013-08-19 11:29:02 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Tare Bloodraven wrote:
I shouldn't have to cross race train to get any specific benefit to haul, this is a basic function to eve.



That's why all the freighters are identical, right?



And what's the "Major" difference in Freighters? You don't get Highs/med/lows to fit and they are all basically the same? I'd be happy with one blasted industrial but they started with two for Caldari and Amarr and 3 for Minmatar, 5 for Gallente. Since they screwed the training requirements, Oops sorry, simplified them to just level 1 for all industrials, why not just go further and only make one for each race and use Bay modules ? that makes it really easy......

(But then again i haven't seen CCP do anything simply. for example wtf did extra minerals come from on BPO's? in real life manufacturing there's no such thing, you either need something or you don't)

Would having only one industrial hauler for each race make the game to simple? There isn't much justification i can see for having more than one anymore.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#189 - 2013-08-19 12:03:16 UTC
Well, The Fenrir maxs out around 8% less cargo than the Charon.

And aligns 6 seconds faster. That's around 15% faster.

The Obelisk has a tank that's around 10% better.

Not inconsequential differences

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Adunh Slavy
#190 - 2013-08-27 17:44:35 UTC
Nothing about build costs?

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Oraac Ensor
#191 - 2013-08-29 06:18:01 UTC
Tare Bloodraven wrote:

if you were correct they wouldn't need to create different types of trucks to carry all the liquids......
they could just as easily put the tank inside a container and utilize the standard fittings on every tractor trailer

Trucks, trailers, tractors???

I'm talking about SHIPS.
Amadeus Z
VM Labs
#192 - 2013-08-29 16:02:48 UTC
Twisted

"I think it's kinda funny to bring one industrial per role into WHs .... really reasonable change!"
First pagePrevious page8910