These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Strategic Cruiser Rigging
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bowel Movementz Kado
Tribal Mist
#1 - 2015-07-09 16:00:18 UTC
I'd like to share an idea I had about rigging strategic cruisers. From my limited use of the search function I could not find where this has been brought up before, if it has I apologize in advance.
T3 cruisers are supposed to be versatile and extremely flexible through the use of different subsystems. The one thing that is not at all flexible on the ship is the way they, or any other ship currently, is rigged. The rigs are attached to the hull and must be destroyed to be replaced.
I think it would be a positive change to allow T3s to switch between different rigs just as easily as they can switch between subsystems. This could be accomplished by allowing rigs to be attached to specific subsystems and would then those subsystems installed on the ship. Removing a rig from a subsystem would still destroy it and the hull itself would have the same limitations, only 3 total rigs and 400 calibration total. Currently I maintain multiple of the same T3 cruiser hulls for different purposes due to the different rigging requirements...solo, PVE, CTA tengus for example. I might be lazy or cheap but I'd like to only need one hull and multiple variations of rigged subsystems to fill those roles.

Constructive feedback greatly appreciated.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#2 - 2015-07-09 16:09:51 UTC
As silly as the people who want to remove t3 rigs entirely.

Cost, and inability to refit them, is part of the intended balance of rigs.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2015-07-09 16:10:02 UTC
Most people would rather see strat cruisers nerfed into the ground than hilariously buffed like this.

I do hope you've invested in a flameproof suit.
Bowel Movementz Kado
Tribal Mist
#4 - 2015-07-09 16:22:59 UTC
I never planned on getting in the middle of the T3 nerf wars nor do I see this as a performance buff, more that it would make a single hull capable of filling more than 1 role without the cost of re-rigging. Performance nerfs would apply the same to T3Cs in either case.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#5 - 2015-07-09 16:50:13 UTC
Bowel Movementz Kado wrote:
I never planned on getting in the middle of the T3 nerf wars nor do I see this as a performance buff, more that it would make a single hull capable of filling more than 1 role without the cost of re-rigging. Performance nerfs would apply the same to T3Cs in either case.

no, they wouldn't. With the ability to re-rig, your cloaky nullified fleet can fit warpspeed or agility rigs, depot's in hold with the combat subsystems and rigs. Bring along a couple blockade runners. Free burn past the outer defenses of your target. Refit in various systems, drop off the travel subs and rigs, pick up ammo from the blockade runners. You now have gotten much more power projection out of the hulls through this change with only a little more logistical work.

This is one of about a dozen scenerios where re-rigging a t3 without cost is a major benefit that I've come up with off the top of my head.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
baltec1
Bat Country
The Initiative.
#6 - 2015-07-09 16:57:52 UTC
It makes more sense to remove the rigs entirely than give them this buff they very much don't need.
Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
Of Essence
#7 - 2015-07-09 17:55:08 UTC
Ishtars are supposed to be drone boats... but the only thing that's stopping them from being really capable drone boats is their drone bay's inability to fit every type of drone!

I propose the Ishtar drone bay be increased so that it can fit 5 of every type of drone, other than fighters of course because that would be OP!

I mean come on, my Ishtar can only fit 1 type of sentries, 2 tops if I don't carry any extra of each type. I think it should be able to fit 5 of each sentry, 5 of each heavy, 5 of each medium, and 5 of each race's light drones. Then of course 5 of each size of ECM drone, and then obviously double whatever that number is, so it can fit 10 of each. You need extra of each drone type of course in case some get shot.

What? Oh this is just about rigs on T3s?

Sorry I thought this thread was "Post the most ridiculous OP-making suggestion for an already OP hull/class that you can think of".

The UI update we deserve
Bowel Movementz Kado
Tribal Mist
#8 - 2015-07-09 18:41:36 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Bowel Movementz Kado wrote:
I never planned on getting in the middle of the T3 nerf wars nor do I see this as a performance buff, more that it would make a single hull capable of filling more than 1 role without the cost of re-rigging. Performance nerfs would apply the same to T3Cs in either case.

no, they wouldn't. With the ability to re-rig, your cloaky nullified fleet can fit warpspeed or agility rigs, depot's in hold with the combat subsystems and rigs. Bring along a couple blockade runners. Free burn past the outer defenses of your target. Refit in various systems, drop off the travel subs and rigs, pick up ammo from the blockade runners. You now have gotten much more power projection out of the hulls through this change with only a little more logistical work.

This is one of about a dozen scenerios where re-rigging a t3 without cost is a major benefit that I've come up with off the top of my head.


Thanks for the response.

Can rigs not be changed out via mobile depot and other in space fitting services? I feel stupid asking this question but ive never needed to change rigs in space.. but it is my understanding that you are able to and I plan on checking when I get home. If so though, the above tactic should already exist and this would do little to change its effectiveness beyond lowering the cost by the value of destroyed rigs.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#9 - 2015-07-09 18:43:20 UTC
Bowel Movementz Kado wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Bowel Movementz Kado wrote:
I never planned on getting in the middle of the T3 nerf wars nor do I see this as a performance buff, more that it would make a single hull capable of filling more than 1 role without the cost of re-rigging. Performance nerfs would apply the same to T3Cs in either case.

no, they wouldn't. With the ability to re-rig, your cloaky nullified fleet can fit warpspeed or agility rigs, depot's in hold with the combat subsystems and rigs. Bring along a couple blockade runners. Free burn past the outer defenses of your target. Refit in various systems, drop off the travel subs and rigs, pick up ammo from the blockade runners. You now have gotten much more power projection out of the hulls through this change with only a little more logistical work.

This is one of about a dozen scenerios where re-rigging a t3 without cost is a major benefit that I've come up with off the top of my head.


Thanks for the response.

Can rigs not be changed out via mobile depot and other in space fitting services? I feel stupid asking this question but ive never needed to change rigs in space.. but it is my understanding that you are able to and I plan on checking when I get home. If so though, the above tactic should already exist and this would do little to change its effectiveness beyond lowering the cost by the value of destroyed rigs.


I can fit a rig in space with a depot or mobile fitting service. One of the other potential abuses involves nestors, WHs, t3s and swapping rigs like with triage ballet.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#10 - 2015-07-09 19:36:58 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
As silly as the people who want to remove t3 rigs entirely.

Cost, and inability to refit them, is part of the intended balance of rigs.

You also can't fit t3s without rigs without making them broken or OP.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#11 - 2015-07-09 19:54:03 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
As silly as the people who want to remove t3 rigs entirely.

Cost, and inability to refit them, is part of the intended balance of rigs.

You also can't fit t3s without rigs without making them broken or OP.

It is possible to balance t3s without rigs. Unfortunately, they then are forced into about 3 fits per that still work for combat, and maybe 2 more per t3 that have a purpose period.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2015-07-09 19:54:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Strategic cruisers could lose their rig slots and still maintain their supreme flexibility, remaining far above even the most flexible tech 1 ships. Just the same, were these ships nerfed properly (I'm talking about the subsystems), then it really wouldn't hurt that much to allow them to remove and keep rigs.

My personal preference is to leave them treating rigs the same as other ships. There's something cool about a ship that can use the whole circle on the ship fitting screen.



James Baboli wrote:
It is possible to balance t3s without rigs. Unfortunately, they then are forced into about 3 fits per that still work for combat, and maybe 2 more per t3 that have a purpose period.

If subsystems were balanced properly, then strategic cruisers would have 4⁵ viable subsystem setups, not to mention the varying ways you can fit any given subsystem setup. They just have to be balanced by someone who has a significant understanding of how the functions on the subsystems even work.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#13 - 2015-07-09 20:38:17 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:


James Baboli wrote:
It is possible to balance t3s without rigs. Unfortunately, they then are forced into about 3 fits per that still work for combat, and maybe 2 more per t3 that have a purpose period.

If subsystems were balanced properly, then strategic cruisers would have 4⁵ viable subsystem setups, not to mention the varying ways you can fit any given subsystem setup. They just have to be balanced by someone who has a significant understanding of how the functions on the subsystems even work.

Agreed. There are 4 or 5 fits per ship which take advantage of synergy between all 5 subsystems to generate a stat line which is well above the straight total of the individual components. Then there are subsystems which are just extremely powerful in isolation (armor buffer subsystems in particular because of synergy with trimarks, the larger base EHP of 1600 plates over LSEs and slave sets, and the tengu's shield booster subsystem because of the already high rep/s relative to armor reps, SBAs, invulns vs EANMs and crystal sets + blue pill and great base resists) The first is an issue of design team not accounting for all the configurations and how they go together well enough. the second is an issue of balance independent of the rest of the t3, and should probably have been toned way down before release.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp