These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Hull Hitpoint Rigs

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
El Space Mariachi
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#161 - 2014-05-02 23:35:26 UTC
Andy Koraka wrote:
michael chasseur wrote:
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.


rigs already have drawbacks, why should they change them just to make MiniLuv happy?


Because a max velocity penalty on a Freighter isn't a penalty at all, since nothing they do in space is affected by it. They're still going to align and warp at the same speed with or without tanking rigs.


they're actually going to align very marginally faster with hull rigs :^)

gay gamers for jesus
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#162 - 2014-05-02 23:42:02 UTC
El Space Mariachi wrote:


they're actually going to align very marginally faster with hull rigs :^)


this is why ur teacher tells u to show ur workings. so she can point at the bit where u went wrong.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
El Space Mariachi
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#163 - 2014-05-02 23:48:34 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
El Space Mariachi wrote:


they're actually going to align very marginally faster with hull rigs :^)


this is why ur teacher tells u to show ur workings. so she can point at the bit where u went wrong.


max velocity effects align speed champ

unless people web freighters for target practice

gay gamers for jesus
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#164 - 2014-05-02 23:49:59 UTC
Burneddi wrote:
Wouldn't sub-warp speed decrease be almost completely irrelevant on freighters? Well, aside from when you autopilot.

Many people auto-pilot their freighters in Highsec, so it will be a real drawback to them. For consistency sake it would make more sense to reduce cargohold though (see Expanded Cargohold drawbacks).

Burneddi wrote:
Especially if they don't reduce freighter base cargo space, there'll be practically no reason to ever fit anything but the hull rigs on a regular freighter. Jump freighters would obviously benefit greatly from the cargo rigs, but the lack of increased hull HP wouldn't hurt them nearly as much either.

Fozzie mentioned a freighter rebalance and not just: slam 3 rig slots onto them and be done with it. I'll make up my mind when the rebalanced freigher/jf stats are out, not before. Maybe the ganker crowd should do the same before screaming foul.

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#165 - 2014-05-02 23:56:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
El Space Mariachi wrote:


max velocity effects align speed champ

unless people web freighters for target practice


velocity on its own doesnt affect align time. it affects acceleration...but thats not align time.

ppl let their freighters gain some speed and THEN web them into warp.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Warr Akini
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#166 - 2014-05-03 02:32:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Warr Akini
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.


To expand on 'this would be the best balance,' consider this little trinket of logic:

A cargo expander rig increases by a percent value the most important aspect of a freighter or jump freighter (or to a lesser extent Orca or Rorqual), directly affecting its bottom line by a significant amount. Its drawback, if made to be armor amount as suggested, will decrease -by a percent value (this is the important part)- an already minute and largely insignificant attribute of a freighter or jump freighter (the vast majority of a freighter's EHP is in its hull). So the drawback does not necessarily match the benefit, being an incredibly insignificant effect on an absolute scale.

A hull rig, decreasing speed, will indeed affect autopiloters, but let's face it, they weren't getting anywhere fast anyway. Active freighter operation, almost a hilarious contradiction in terms, would be largely unaffected. Remember the part about freighter/JF having a LOT of their ehp in hull? This means a hull rig, increasing a percent value of the hull, has a hell of a lot more of an effect on an absolute scale than a piddly max velocity reduction.

With my reputation as Miniluv chief on the line, I plan to get more accounts to gank more freighters anyway, but do consider making the drawbacks appropriately mirrror the benefits, at least in the case of freighters/JFs and to a lesser extent Orcas/Rorquals. As some guy above me said, though, the final balance numbers aren't out yet.
Lucy McCallum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#167 - 2014-05-03 02:41:44 UTC
Warr Akini wrote:
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.


To expand on 'this would be the best balance,' consider this little trinket of logic:

A cargo expander rig increases by a percent value the most important aspect of a freighter or jump freighter (or to a lesser extent Orca or Rorqual), directly affecting its bottom line by a significant amount. Its drawback, if made to be armor amount as suggested, will decrease -by a percent value (this is the important part)- an already minute and largely insignificant attribute of a freighter or jump freighter (the vast majority of a freighter's EHP is in its hull). So the drawback does not necessarily match the benefit, being an incredibly insignificant effect on an absolute scale.

A hull rig, decreasing speed, will indeed affect autopiloters, but let's face it, they weren't getting anywhere fast anyway. Active freighter operation, almost a hilarious contradiction in terms, would be largely unaffected. Remember the part about freighter/JF having a LOT of their ehp in hull? This means a hull rig, increasing a percent value of the hull, has a hell of a lot more of an effect on an absolute scale than a piddly max velocity reduction.

With my reputation as Miniluv chief on the line, I plan to get more accounts to gank more freighters anyway, but do consider making the drawbacks appropriately mirrror the benefits, at least in the case of freighters/JFs and to a lesser extent Orcas/Rorquals. As some guy above me said, though, the final balance numbers aren't out yet.


This, totally this.
I like when Bakini is on fire, he actually says clever stuff.
Cato XIII
The Carnifex Corp
#168 - 2014-05-03 02:45:22 UTC
On behalf of the New Order of Highsec let me state that we look foward to killing proper hull-rigged Orcas. Having so many agents flying 758dps cats has made de-pixelizing the current version of the Orca... easy.

We accept your challenge CCP.

Prediction: Large Cargo Rigs will still be the default rigs for the highsec Orca pilot.

Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#169 - 2014-05-03 06:50:05 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way.


The trade-off is that the freighter can't fit the warp speed rigs they'd much rather have if they choose these hull rigs for extra tank. A cargo drawback wouldn't actually affect most hauling anyway as ISK value, not cargo space, is still going to be the limiting factor most of the time, even with the extra tank from these rigs.
Ntrails
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
#170 - 2014-05-03 09:34:56 UTC
I don't play a lot of eve online, so feel free to correct me:

Shield extenders increase sig
Shield rigs increase sig

Armour plates increase mass/make you slow as balls
Armour rigs increase mass/make you slow as balls

Hull bulkhead things reduce cargo
New hull rigs increase mass/make you slow as balls

(also noting that cargo expanders reduce hull HP - in what is supposed to be a symmetrical relationship)

My point being that copying the drawback from armour rigs makes no sense at all in the context of other similar modules.
Luukje
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#171 - 2014-05-03 10:31:49 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank?
This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.

Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#172 - 2014-05-03 11:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Pahrdi
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Let us know what you think!
-Fozzie

Give us a ganglink to go with the hull rigs Pirate.

Remove standings and insurance.
Gaara's sniper
MLG1337420BlazeIt360TitanNoScopeCorporationSWAG
#173 - 2014-05-03 12:16:49 UTC
Oh boy, now i'll have to use 9 taloses instead of 7,
GG WP CCP
report pubbies for feed
push vfk fast no def
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#174 - 2014-05-03 16:51:29 UTC
Tengu Grib wrote:
Real men hull tank. Thanks CCP! Now we can do it for REAL!

this.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#175 - 2014-05-03 16:58:38 UTC
Liafcipe9000 wrote:
Tengu Grib wrote:
Real men hull tank. Thanks CCP! Now we can do it for REAL!

this.

I checked the numbers in evehq. A hull tanked neutageddon will have more ehp than an armour tanked neutageddon - if you ignore the effect of gang links.

This is because the hull rigs give a 5% larger bonus when compared to trimarks.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#176 - 2014-05-03 23:01:33 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Liafcipe9000 wrote:
Tengu Grib wrote:
Real men hull tank. Thanks CCP! Now we can do it for REAL!

this.

I checked the numbers in evehq. A hull tanked neutageddon will have more ehp than an armour tanked neutageddon - if you ignore the effect of gang links.

This is because the hull rigs give a 5% larger bonus when compared to trimarks.



lol whats a domi look like?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
JackEuchre
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#177 - 2014-05-03 23:29:02 UTC  |  Edited by: JackEuchre
My hullranis will have 7.5k ehp tank now :D
Arla Sarain
#178 - 2014-05-03 23:41:34 UTC
Hull tanking enyos lel.
I Have 18Accounts
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#179 - 2014-05-04 12:27:46 UTC
Goodbye Badger.
Helloooooooooo Nereus.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#180 - 2014-05-05 11:36:31 UTC
Tengu Grib wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
and who would use them?
hull tanking as a whole is something that needs work if you expect people to hull tank anything


Hull rigs on orcas, with DC and Bulkhead. Yeah, not looking forward to trying to pop those.

Be a real pain and dual tank it..
Shield tank - XLASB, T2 Invul X 2, T2 LSE ;
Hull Tank - T2 Bulkhead, DCU and Hull rigs;
= A little over 300k EHP.
Give me a 275% Bonus to Heavy Drones, lowsec mining with an Orca becomes a little more viable. Blink

PS; 1 more low for a DDA would be nice .. LoL

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.