These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Deep Space Transport Rebalance

First post First post
Author
Lair Osen
#341 - 2014-05-21 12:16:06 UTC
Dammit Fozzie, that was going to be one of the most awesome features in Kronos :(
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy
Caldari State
#342 - 2014-05-21 12:23:23 UTC
Lair Osen wrote:
Dammit Fozzie, that was going to be one of the most awesome features in Kronos :(


I too was pretty excited about it, but I can understand why even beyond the need to re-code it you're going back to this.

But *#@%$ FOZZIE! I wanted a DST can in my Orca Sad
Talcuris
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#343 - 2014-05-21 12:44:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Talcuris
Has anyone actually looked at the power grid requirements for the MMJD? The shield based transports are already in a pretty bad place power grid wise, a Bustard with 250 grid fitting a 165 pg jump drive leaves nothing much for tank, especially if you want to put in an afterburner as well. MWD is so far out of range it's not even funny.
Shield boost bonus is also mostly a joke when the best you can do is a medium ancillary booster. That's what, a total boost of 2k shield when blowing all charges?
So it comes down to picking just one of the following: large shield extender, large ancillary booster, MMJD or MWD.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#344 - 2014-05-21 12:56:35 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Gotze wrote:
So you are changing your mind ?

No he was just wrong about his own game.
I forgive him though, it's an awful lot to keep track of. If I were in CCP and making posts I'd be meticulously fact-checking everything I said so much that I'd never be able to get any actual work done.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Retar Aveymone
DJ's Retirement Fund
Goonswarm Federation
#345 - 2014-05-21 13:08:03 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Gotze wrote:
So you are changing your mind ?

No he was just wrong about his own game.
I forgive him though, it's an awful lot to keep track of. If I were in CCP and making posts I'd be meticulously fact-checking everything I said so much that I'd never be able to get any actual work done.

no: he was correct, it is just now possible to change now because of underlying fixes made in 2012
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#346 - 2014-05-21 16:51:03 UTC
if you could also make it so you could toggle heat while cloaked (eg when gatecloaked) these changes would be a lot better

since you can't reliably overheat & burn back to gates for example, as you have to activate the mwd immediately upon decloaking or risk sitting there if you know what i mean
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#347 - 2014-05-21 17:02:45 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
I can. I've done it many times. I've gotten to the point where I can reliably hit approach, toggle overheat on MWD, activate MWD, and cloak all within two server ticks (which is the same amount of time it takes to hit approach and activate MWD anyway).

But I agree, you should be able to toggle overheat while cloaked.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#348 - 2014-05-21 17:20:45 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Is the MJD affected byt he +2 warp?

Meaning, if someone scrams you, but you can warp away due to the point, will that still shut down the MJD because the ship overcomes the scram?

Basically does the MJD benefit from the +2 Warp Core Strength or not. IMO it should as the same thing prevents warp, MWD and MJD. Where using a long point only disables the warp core, not the modules anyway?

I have honestly never flown a DST so not sure if a scram shuts down the MWD either, but should the +2 warp core strength apply to it as well??


Scram = warp scrambler. It shuts off MWD and MJD. It has -2 warp core strength, or whatever that stat is. By itself, it will not stop a DST from warping. But it will shut off the other stuff.

So scram a DST in a bubble, and it's pretty much screwed. A Sabre in nulsec should still be able to solo kill a DST, assuming it has enough ammo. With a flight time of 120 seconds and a reload time fo 60 seconds, by managing its bubbles it can reload before the third bubble probe expires. Only question is can it slow boat back to gate without MWD and possibly webbed before the dictor chews through its tank.

This is perhaps a good reason to give DSTs bubble immunity. Or not. Depends on your viewpoint.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Tharin Malkyre
Knights of the Ouroboros
#349 - 2014-05-21 17:23:24 UTC
Well, now that the whole 'DST shoebox' is out of the way, back to the overall changes: I like it, for the most part. Crash back to the gate ability, sturdy tanks, gtfo ability, strong warp core, large cargo capacity that can be shared with the fleet.

I'm still a bit worried about the fitting abilities for a full tank and the new MMJD. Example: My Mastodon is getting gun turrets, but any 2 medium autocannons (since it's a medium hull) and the MMJD will overload the grid. And that's with no tank mods.

Other than that, I'm looking forward to these changes. The velocity bonus per level is fine by me. Slow-boating to a gate or wormhole right now is painful.
Kirluin
#350 - 2014-05-21 17:34:41 UTC
meh. I'd rather see DSTs be immune (or less affected by) webs. The idea being that while cloaky transports get by on speed and stealth, DSTs are more like (American) football running backs: they are designed to take hits, they are not fast but they are hard to slow down, and its up to the attacker to bludgeon it with overwhelming force before it gets out of the bubble (or crashes the gate).

no amount of overheated tank will even make a difference once you're webbed/neuted/scrammed etc.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#351 - 2014-05-21 18:39:18 UTC
Komi Toran wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Despite this, I would very much like to see the mastodon and occater get their speed bonus replaced with agility, and the bustard and impel get missile bonuses with a slot or two swapped for two highs each, and given a total of 4 launchers with bonuses (5% firing rate for impel, 10% kin damage for bustard) to give them the option to fight back a little or be used in defensive exotic pvp situations. An unbonused drone bay on the occator for 20/40 bandwidth and space would be very nice.

I don't understand this. Why do we want to give ships bonuses to things that they still wouldn't be good at? Bonuses should play to strengths.

And what did the Impel or Bustard ever do to you to make you hate them so? At least with the Mastodon and Occater, they'd get a big boost to m3/hour. Meanwhile you give the Amarr and Gallente an aggression timer so they're stuck on the wrong side of a gate with hostiles running a compromised tank due to worthless highslots.

It was a suggestion I made that was relevant to the issue people keep raising about homogenization. Just because you HAVE the option to do something doesn't mean you'd NEED to use it; it simply expands the options they have available to them.
If you'd like to JUST haul large amounts of things int the most expedient manner possible with my proposal, just fly the occator or mastodon. If you're in a fleet running supply and you'd like to help your buds out to be able to shoot at things with them, then you would have that option with the bustard and impel's missiles, or any other situation where you're expecting to get in a fight.

Also, define "Secure Transport". DSTs are them, and giving them the ability to shoot back is not at all unreasonable.
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#352 - 2014-05-21 18:53:28 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
It was a suggestion I made that was relevant to the issue people keep raising about homogenization. Just because you HAVE the option to do something doesn't mean you'd NEED to use it; it simply expands the options they have available to them.

Except you don't have the option of changing useless highslots into useful lows/mids. That's simply not a game mechanic.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#353 - 2014-05-21 19:05:47 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
PinkKnife wrote:


Leave the ships as you've done, they are good changes, just get rid of the fleet hangar, and add bubble immunity, and they will be flown, an they will have great roles.


Bubble immunity and warp core stabilization + warp core stabs is too powerful. You could mwd + cloak and warp away regardless of 2-3 ceptors pointing you.
You'd need a hictor and lots of stuff to decloak it on an inbound gate to ever catch these. They can't be stopped by bubbles, so they are effectively nullified t3 mega haulers.
They won't be deep space transporters, they will be blockade runners more efficient at outrunning blockades than the actual blockade runners which have to burn through bubbles and die painfully.



As opposed to BRs?

Look if you want them to see any use at all, you have to provide a comparable balance against a cov ops transport ship. Why would anyone risk a DST when they can just take a BR and be safer? 3 trips in a BR is safer than 1 in a DST.

Bubble immunity and being hard to catch (and it only takes a single ares with one scram and one point to shut down a DST) might actually cause a player choice in deep space as to what to use. If they want to throw on 7 stabs in exchange for cargo room, go for it, you can do the same thing on a BR.

The fleet hanger thing ads no new gameplay fozzie, they aren't magically going to see any use outside of being used to pad carrier hangar array space.

Why would anyone use these over a BR in low or null? Players are far more risk averse than they are lazy, especially if hauling valuable stuff.

Again, you have to consider opportunity costs. Something CCP apparently can't seem to get their head around. Why would you ever use these over a BR? More space? Okay, no thanks. I'll take my cloaky, bridgeable and nigh invulnerable blockade runner.

If you want a ship to be used you have to make it comparable in player choice. A DST with more space is just a ****** Orca. Give it something unique, i.e. nullification.


Really, look at the ****** work arounds you've had to do to try and fit this bad design into play. The answer is right in front of you as a hangar array isn't going to crate any new gameplay options. Immunity might.
Sael Va'Tauri
Morgan Industry
Silent Infinity
#354 - 2014-05-21 19:06:43 UTC
I'd still like to kick in for my idea to base DST's off of their T1 role bonuses, where they exist. Making the Caldari DST be the most cargo would also have the wonderful side effect of having SOME reason to train Caldari Indy...
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#355 - 2014-05-21 19:40:53 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:


As opposed to BRs?

Look if you want them to see any use at all, you have to provide a comparable balance against a cov ops transport ship. Why would anyone risk a DST when they can just take a BR and be safer? 3 trips in a BR is safer than 1 in a DST.


This is why I think the entire large-tanky-transport-for-getting-past-camps idea is a complete non-starter.

Either it's good enough to get past camps, which requires a reliability similar to Blockade runners, or it's not going to be used. There's nowhere in the middle; history has proved this. This entire DST pass is based on a dead horse.

I've said this for a long time, and it's why I wanted a 100k cargo transport. The mini-freighter is a role that's currently unfilled (Orcas don't count, they are not on the same skill line). The dangerous-space DST is a role that's dead on the starting line. I thought this was obvious to anyone that flew haulers, but CCP has dissappointed me immensely.

All I see out of this change for my usage is an extra 10k cargo space and more EHP for my gank-resistant highsec hauler.

Either make them stupidly hard to catch and nerf the crap out of JF's to give them demand (thus pissing off all nullsec alliances and JF pilots), or drop the entire idea of a tanky hauler and rebalance it into a role that we actually need.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#356 - 2014-05-21 19:49:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Someone mentioned web immunity, and something like -15% -10% to the effectiveness of all webs per level of Transport Ship would give them a unique flavor and make them better at powering through any attempt to stop them. They would still be vulnerable to bumping; I'm not sure what to do about that, or whether to do anything. -15% effectiveness to collision mechanics per level, so that they become these completely bull-headed ships?

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Tharin Malkyre
Knights of the Ouroboros
#357 - 2014-05-21 20:28:02 UTC
Kirluin wrote:
meh. I'd rather see DSTs be immune (or less affected by) webs. The idea being that while cloaky transports get by on speed and stealth, DSTs are more like (American) football running backs: they are designed to take hits, they are not fast but they are hard to slow down, and its up to the attacker to bludgeon it with overwhelming force before it gets out of the bubble (or crashes the gate).

no amount of overheated tank will even make a difference once you're webbed/neuted/scrammed etc.
That I really like. It's something we've not seen before, and it fits theme.
Bren Genzan
Open University of Celestial Hardship
Art of War Alliance
#358 - 2014-05-21 20:44:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Bren Genzan
Quote:


This is why I think the entire large-tanky-transport-for-getting-past-camps idea is a complete non-starter.

I've said this for a long time, and it's why I wanted a 100k cargo transport. The mini-freighter is a role that's currently unfilled (Orcas don't count, they are not on the same skill line). The dangerous-space DST is a role that's dead on the starting line.

All I see out of this change for my usage is an extra 10k cargo space and more EHP for my gank-resistant highsec hauler.

I agree with this. People running cargo in truly dangerous space will use scouts and a T1 with cloak for local moves, and Blockade Runners, Carriers or Jump Freighters to haul multiple regions. Small valuable cargo get moved in Covops and Strat Cruisers.

In the simplest terms, you cannot tank any ship enough to safely travel alone gate-to-gate in low sec or null sec. Hauling in dangerous space requires some combination of fast align times, cloaking, warp core stabilization and interdiction nullification.

You get caught in a DST in Syndicate or Curse, for instance, and people will just tackle and hold it until enough friends show up to kill it.

A mid sized freighter will see a lot of use, by players in high sec who want the convenience of hauling medium sized cargo without forking over the cash for an Orca or Freighter.
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#359 - 2014-05-21 22:08:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Allowing launching and scooping of structures from fleet hangars is something that needs more investigation, so we're increasing the standard cargo holds on all the DSTs so they can easily deploy and scoop structures.

.



A Customs office gantry is 7600m3 and to upgrade it you need an additional 3200 m3 of planetary commodities.

It would be nice if DST could be used to deploy them. The cargo holds still look pretty small cargohold should be a reason to chose these over a blockade runner.
Syri Taneka
NOVA-CAINE
#360 - 2014-05-21 22:30:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Syri Taneka
Lazei wrote:
One of the rare places where haulers intentionally put themselves in danger in null at least is when they are dropping or onlining towers. You can't drop towers from fleet hangar so now these ships that have bonuses that would be perfect for this kind of thing are completely useless. Could this be changed somehow?


It's far from an ideal choice, but, pair a DST up with a BR?

Bren Genzan wrote:
A mid sized freighter will see a lot of use, by players in high sec who want the convenience of hauling medium sized cargo without forking over the cash for an Orca or Freighter.


Except for the fact an Orca can move ~92k m^3 of cargo with a 200k EHP buffer tank AND also carry 400k m^3 of unpacked ships (of any kind). Sure, a DST can do so faster, but it's a short trip where speed actually winds up trumping that kind of capacity.