These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Tier 3 BC's.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#1 - 2011-12-12 08:22:01 UTC
Much thanks to people that created these ships original designs are much better than the CCP redo that made it in game.

This is true for Talos and Tornado while changes are minimal it does make difference nado with original engines and center area is just pro and indication of size as truly massive ship considering where guns are located in original design.

In CCP variant of nado it is all blend in and symmetrical making ship from uber to plain in a way.

Again very good job indeed kinda sad that CCP didn't follow it thru. Straight

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Alara IonStorm
#2 - 2011-12-12 08:45:44 UTC
most of those design changes were made simply because the designs were ether Battlecruisers built to accommodate Medium Guns or Battleships built to accommodate Large Guns. Large Guns are very large but you tend not to notice on a 1000-1500m Hull. On a sender set of 400-600m Hulls they take up a hell of a lot more space.

The original Nado had an four on top of four gun block like the Tempests three on three block. The current Nado has about 1/4 the mass and the guns need to go all the way down the side also accounting for the Symmetry. Secondly while some of the pics were drawn with the intention of being a larger hull since the ships turned out to be smaller details needed to be cut.

Overall the similarities end at there hull shape because these ships do not match up to the stats or size the artist drew them around.
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#3 - 2011-12-12 09:02:03 UTC
This seems like a stealth whine thread and I don't approve. There are plenty of things to ***** at CCP about but tier 3's isn't one. (If only because they're not really tier 3's, they're tier 2a's.)

I was wrong about the tier 3's. I thought they'd be either overpowered or underpowered (and I thought that what eventually came out would be considered underpowered) and that they'd either be thrown on the scrapheap or that they'd force another ship onto the scrapheap but instead they've introduced a subtle new dynamic and fill a niche I didn't even know we needed without wrecking anything else. A ship that will be used, but that won't be ubiquitous. Perfect. GJ CCP.

(And yes, I realize this thread is about starship design but who even knew that EVE has graphics?)
Sinitron
DEATHFUNK
#4 - 2011-12-12 09:19:54 UTC
Aside from the Talos, most of the guns don't seem to fit the other ships.... The Tornado has huge slabs of metal to support the larger turrets, which looks bad, and the Oracle has a rack for 4 turrets which is alright, but the remaining 4 were just tacked on elsewhere because they ran out of space. The Naga doesn't look like it was supposed to support turrets in the first place, and while it doesn't look *bad* it still sort of looks tacked on.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2011-12-12 09:25:27 UTC
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
This seems like a stealth whine thread and I don't approve. There are plenty of things to ***** at CCP about but tier 3's isn't one. (If only because they're not really tier 3's, they're tier 2a's.)

I was wrong about the tier 3's. I thought they'd be either overpowered or underpowered (and I thought that what eventually came out would be considered underpowered) and that they'd either be thrown on the scrapheap or that they'd force another ship onto the scrapheap but instead they've introduced a subtle new dynamic and fill a niche I didn't even know we needed without wrecking anything else. A ship that will be used, but that won't be ubiquitous. Perfect. GJ CCP.

(And yes, I realize this thread is about starship design but who even knew that EVE has graphics?)



*rubs eyes, unbelieving*

--> AkJon saying something nice about ccp?

Ok, where is the real AkJon and what have you done to him?

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#6 - 2011-12-12 09:27:32 UTC
I still believe that the skill requirements should be higher to deter newbies and alt recycling.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Alara IonStorm
#7 - 2011-12-12 09:56:38 UTC
Sinitron wrote:
The Naga doesn't look like it was supposed to support turrets in the first place, and while it doesn't look *bad* it still sort of looks tacked on.

It was not designed too. It was intended to be a missile Battleship by the designer.

As for the others as well as the Naga all of them were not not meant to be the way they turned out. They were all designed in an art contest to be Battleship sized which would make there turrets smaller compared to the hull size or Battlecruisers with medium which amount to the same thing.

If they were CCP Designs built from the ground up instead of player designs or if the ships were the same class as they designed them to be with the same gun size as planned they would look less tacked on.

But all in all the new class used the player designs we liked and filled a role we wanted so I am definitely not complaining.
Sinitron
DEATHFUNK
#8 - 2011-12-12 10:52:21 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Sinitron wrote:
The Naga doesn't look like it was supposed to support turrets in the first place, and while it doesn't look *bad* it still sort of looks tacked on.

It was not designed too. It was intended to be a missile Battleship by the designer.


I am well aware of this, but CCP modelled the others to clearly support turrets, which is not the case for the Naga. The Talos proves they can do better.
The Old Chap
Doomheim
#9 - 2011-12-12 11:15:02 UTC
I'm still not convinced about the new BC's.

The 'Nado costs the same as a 'Phoon atm. Given that the 'Phoon has more low slots for gyro's etc, PLUS a 175m3 drone bay (The Tornado has none), PLUS over 3x the shield, armour and hull points... The 'Phoon looks like a much better proposition.

Just sayin.

Look into my eyes...   and tighten that sphincter, kid.
Alara IonStorm
#10 - 2011-12-12 11:26:41 UTC
The Old Chap wrote:
I'm still not convinced about the new BC's.

The 'Nado costs the same as a 'Phoon atm. Given that the 'Phoon has more low slots for gyro's etc, PLUS a 175m3 drone bay (The Tornado has none), PLUS over 3x the shield, armour and hull points... The 'Phoon looks like a much better proposition.

Just sayin.

Base Speed

Phoon Speed 130m/s Align 11.8s
Nado Speed 281m/s Align 6.6

These 2 Ships have absolutely 0 overlap in roles.
Daedalus Arcova
The Scope
#11 - 2011-12-12 11:27:20 UTC
The Old Chap wrote:
I'm still not convinced about the new BC's.

The 'Nado costs the same as a 'Phoon atm. Given that the 'Phoon has more low slots for gyro's etc, PLUS a 175m3 drone bay (The Tornado has none), PLUS over 3x the shield, armour and hull points... The 'Phoon looks like a much better proposition.

Just sayin.


You entirely miss the point of both this thread and of Tier 3 BCs.

As for the OP and other aesthetic whines, I actually think the oversized turrets on the limited hull real estate looks awesome (in the literal sense). A battlecruiser (albeit a large one) bristling with massive guns looks quite intimidating. Conceptually and aesthetically, the designs are far more true to the real-world battlecruisers of old, as well.
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#12 - 2011-12-12 15:56:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Mina Sebiestar
AkJon Ferguson wrote:
This seems like a stealth whine thread and I don't approve. There are plenty of things to ***** at CCP about but tier 3's isn't one. (If only because they're not really tier 3's, they're tier 2a's.)

I was wrong about the tier 3's. I thought they'd be either overpowered or underpowered (and I thought that what eventually came out would be considered underpowered) and that they'd either be thrown on the scrapheap or that they'd force another ship onto the scrapheap but instead they've introduced a subtle new dynamic and fill a niche I didn't even know we needed without wrecking anything else. A ship that will be used, but that won't be ubiquitous. Perfect. GJ CCP.

(And yes, I realize this thread is about starship design but who even knew that EVE has graphics?)


It most certainly is whine insomnia took better part of me last night and i somehow got to DA contest page noticing that changes are made to models and that better ones didn't make it in game that is all.

I don't rly have an issue with them looking pack with guns but in example of tornado it wasn't as symmetrical much CCP change it for no obvious reason or somebody there just think it will look better and that's just wrong to creator of ship imho.

I don't have any illusions of ships performance and i don't rly care about that my opinion is that best looking ships did not make it in game but redo of them did.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#13 - 2011-12-12 16:03:25 UTC
Lore wise this isnt the first time they tried turning a BC into a battleship the amarrians tried it with the prohpecy it just wasnt possible back then.

Seems that the murader technology is bleeding into other ships just as these tier 3 bcs and now the destroyers.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.