open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Regular or Unleaded
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2009.08.20 14:46:00 - [1]
 

Apocrypha 1.5 brings a number of changes to New Eden. Of great import to some of you high-flying capsuleers are the changes to cargo holds and fuel bays. Read all about it in CCP Abathur newest dev blog.

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:08:00 - [2]
 

Oh dear, carrier pilots will be upset again.

Elefant
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:17:00 - [3]
 

This is a great change, especially the fact that we can now use carriers to move an unpackaged battleship - means when you get to your destination we can drop off the carrier and go kill stuff YARRRR!!

Lord Haur
Amarr
Grim Determination
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:19:00 - [4]
 

You always could carry an unpackaged battleship.

Just some (Megathron comes to mind) were 513k m3 so you could only fit one at a time. Now you can carry two.

Sade Onyx
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:21:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Mashie Saldana
Oh dear, carrier pilots will be upset again.
Or maybe they will be pleased that they will no longer be constantly roped into doing courier missions for the corp / alliance, and actually get to see more combat xD

Well the pilot might not be, but the ship itself will be happier xD

Black Bird1000
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:24:00 - [6]
 

Well, I personally don't have a problem with the changes, but, how should small alliances / corps which can't afford a jumpfreighter fuel their POSes / do logistics?

Freighterruns through 0.0 are not really funny...

I'm a little bit afraid that this change will give large alliances even more advantages over small ones.

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:27:00 - [7]
 

Quote:

Ore Bays are storage space for... ore.



orely? Laughing

Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:29:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Fuujin on 20/08/2009 15:31:05
I fail to see why the carrier and mothership fuel bays are so small.

By your own logic, these bays are limited to holding the "massive amount" of ice products needed to fuel their jump drives. Not only that, but they need to hold the REALLY massive amount of strontium needed to fuel their triage modules.

The cargo hold itself I'm blase about. I wish it was larger, or that we could launch modules from the CHA, but I can deal. What I have a problem with, however, is the ship with the largest jump range being limited to 1-2 cycles of triage (each cycle is, with GOOD skills, 900m3--fully 30% of the fuel bay. With remedial skills, a single cycle is 1350 m3 of strontium, or 45% of the entire bay).

The CHA is a poor substitute to the cargobay. In even low-lag situations it can be exceedingly finicky and very slow to open or respond. Sometimes it even gets "stuck" and requires a session change before it will display its contents. When you are relying on it for triage, this can totally change the course of a battle.

I'm not asking for a larger cargohold. Just a larger specialized fuel tank thats useless for hauling. Especially for motherships, which can't dock and easily refuel. Ships intended to live out their existence totally outside stations need to have a great deal of "stamina" and self-sufficiency.

Jainia Soltella
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:36:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Black Bird1000
Well, I personally don't have a problem with the changes, but, how should small alliances / corps which can't afford a jumpfreighter fuel their POSes / do logistics?

Freighterruns through 0.0 are not really funny...

I'm a little bit afraid that this change will give large alliances even more advantages over small ones.

Stealth blob-whine detected.

A cargo-fit Rorqual can easily haul enough fuel for a large POS or several small/medium towers.

If your corp/alliance or at least one member can't afford 1.6B they aren't going to be able to afford to fuel the towers for very long anyway.

Miyamoto Isoruku
Caldari
Original Sin.
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:39:00 - [10]
 

Bomb bays for stealth bombers would be awesome. It doesn't have to be big--just give em enough space to carry 3-5 bombs.

Lord Haur
Amarr
Grim Determination
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:46:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Lord Haur on 20/08/2009 15:47:48
Originally by: Fuujin
Not only that, but they need to hold the REALLY massive amount of strontium needed to fuel their triage modules.


Strontium Clathrates is an Ice Product ugh

Edit: Also, you now have MORE space than before for fuel + stront, so non-issue is non-issue.

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:50:00 - [12]
 

"Since the beginning of EVE, one of the more frustrating issues when trying to balance ships has been that there was only one ‘space' available for all of the stuff a player needed to carry along - the ‘Cargo' Bay."

But isn't that EXACTLY what a sandbox game is about?

Give players the tools and look what they create.

If put in to many restrictions like you are doing now for a while in Eve, then you lose the original sandbox concept.

Why shouldn't I be allowed to use a dread as some sort of hauling ship if I want to? It doesn't make much sense since the jump freighters or the rorqual is much better, but still, if I want to do it, why not? What is it CCP's business there??

I can understand that you want fuel bays for fine tuning and so on. But you put in to many restrictions!


My advice:
Modules/rigs which can change the size of the different bays at the cost of the other bays. Example: Increase fuel bay, but it will end up in a smaller cargo bay (plus whatever else is necessary for balancing). Or increase cargo bay but reduce fuel bay and decrease agility.


DON'T TAKE AWAY THE SANBOX CONCEPT BY INTRODUCING TO MANY RESTRICTIONS!


I already hated it how you handled the rigs. Why shouldn't I be allowed to put a small rig onto a battleship? I can use small smartbombs, small guns, small afterburners on a battleship also! Of course small rig would give only little bonus, so it wouldn't make that much sense, but still! And why shouldn't I be allowed to put a medium rig on a small ship, if it fits? I can use bs-sized modules on a bc also. But nooo ... you are taking away the sandbox aspect!

Same approach with the fuelbay now again. You restrict to much - sure that makes balancing easier, you do not need to think that much about possible unorthodoxal usages - it takes away from the unique feeling of Eve.

Fuelbay or not, THINK OF THE SANDBOX!

Lord Haur
Amarr
Grim Determination
Posted - 2009.08.20 15:53:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Lord Haur on 20/08/2009 15:55:00
Originally by: Gnulpie
"I already hated it how you handled the rigs. Why shouldn't I be allowed to put a small rig onto a battleship? I can use small smartbombs, small guns, small afterburners on a battleship also! Of course small rig would give only little bonus, so it wouldn't make that much sense, but still! And why shouldn't I be allowed to put a medium rig on a small ship, if it fits? I can use bs-sized modules on a bc also. But nooo ... you are taking away the sandbox aspect!

Small/Med/Large rigs all have the same bonuses and penalties. All that's changed is that rigging anything battlecruiser and smaller became cheaper.

Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:01:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Fuujin on 20/08/2009 16:04:08
Originally by: Lord Haur
Edited by: Lord Haur on 20/08/2009 15:47:48
Originally by: Fuujin
Not only that, but they need to hold the REALLY massive amount of strontium needed to fuel their triage modules.


Strontium Clathrates is an Ice Product ugh

Edit: Also, you now have MORE space than before for fuel + stront, so non-issue is non-issue.


I was focusing more on the huge volume of space required by that particular ice product which does not fuel the jump drive, not that it was of a separate class of material.

And from the logic put forth by the devblog--if it is consistent, anyway--the cargospace of capital ships was a grudging concession to the volumes of ice product required, and they were horrified to discover that some parties were using said space to haul general cargo. Now that they are 'freed from the shackles of general cargo,' they can safely expand the size of the fuelbay to a functional level where you can use 3-4 triage cycles and still have a respectable round-trip jump range.

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:03:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Lord Haur
Edited by: Lord Haur on 20/08/2009 15:55:00
Originally by: Gnulpie
"I already hated it how you handled the rigs. Why shouldn't I be allowed to put a small rig onto a battleship? I can use small smartbombs, small guns, small afterburners on a battleship also! Of course small rig would give only little bonus, so it wouldn't make that much sense, but still! And why shouldn't I be allowed to put a medium rig on a small ship, if it fits? I can use bs-sized modules on a bc also. But nooo ... you are taking away the sandbox aspect!

Small/Med/Large rigs all have the same bonuses and penalties. All that's changed is that rigging anything battlecruiser and smaller became cheaper.


I don't see the issue either with rigs at least. The only change was lower cost of rigging smaller ships. To me that only makes logical sense. If you want the option to fit crappy or more powerful rigs at reduced/increased penalties, just ask for it. Nothing in this round of changes rules that out.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:15:00 - [16]
 

Quote:

A cargo-fit Rorqual....



Well, since the patch was about to somewhat bring ships back to their intended role, cargo fitting a Rorq to make it a fuel tanker is kinda voiding the intention.

Rukh Eila
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:17:00 - [17]
 

Anybody know whether the 75% reduction in Carrier cargo size effects just the cargo hold or does it also effect the corp hanger?

Nekopyat
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:21:00 - [18]
 

If people are re-purposing combat centric ships like the dreads into non-combat roles, what that SHOULD be telling you is that the lineup of industrial ships is inadequate.

If a ship can be abused into filling a role BETTER then the specialized ships that are designed to fill that role, that is an indication that something is wrong with those specialized ships (or that there is not enough variety in them). Nerfing the flexable combat ship is not the answer. Giving better options is.

Which is exactly what the shipbuilders in new eden would probably do. Oh, there is a demand for ships that can do XYZ! we should make some of those and earn piles of cash! They could even start by just taking dread hulls and hollowing them out.

Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:24:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Fuujin on 20/08/2009 16:27:26
Originally by: Rukh Eila
Anybody know whether the 75% reduction in Carrier cargo size effects just the cargo hold or does it also effect the corp hanger?


The corp hangar is unaffected by the size reduction. Whether you can actually use it at any given time is another question.


Edit: To be post above, the Rorqual is an excellent ship that combines a modest tank with hauling capabilities nicely tiered between a DST and a Jump Freighter. So the niche that was filled by dreads and carriers was finally addressed by CCP (years later). At this point, people using dreads to haul are just using a ship of convenience; anyone who trains to dreadnought specifically to haul is really doing something wrong.

Femaref
Armageddon Day
WE FORM VOLTRON
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:33:00 - [20]
 

just cargo

Daftny Litchinova
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:36:00 - [21]
 

Ammo bay is a great idea, and in the same type of idea, I would like to see a 'stack' for turrets and missile launchers - you could put different ammo type stacked in advance (maybe one or 2), the weapon won't reload for 10 seconds because you change ammo type before they ran out of the actual ammo used...after all we are in a high tech far future eh?! this delay every time you change ammo type just doesn't make sense imo. just like having to reactivate weapons when they have reloaded...it doesn't feel like sci-fi high tech stuff!

Ho and can I get more details about that ore bay for the orca? is it a replacement? how it affect the rest of the cargo bay?

overall great stuff

Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:45:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Daftny Litchinova


Ho and can I get more details about that ore bay for the orca? is it a replacement? how it affect the rest of the cargo bay?

overall great stuff



The orca and rorqual got a bit of a "buff"--their general cargoholds are not reduced, while the ore bay was added (and the rorq got a 'free' fuel bay as well).


Clansworth
Good Rock Materials
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:52:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Fuujin
Originally by: Daftny Litchinova


Ho and can I get more details about that ore bay for the orca? is it a replacement? how it affect the rest of the cargo bay?

overall great stuff



The orca and rorqual got a bit of a "buff"--their general cargoholds are not reduced, while the ore bay was added (and the rorq got a 'free' fuel bay as well).




Which, when you consider the Rorq's ore bay can hold the compressed ore, you're looking at some SERIOUS increase in usefulness.. almost enough to bring the rorq out of the POS shields... A question I have is, can the compression lines pull from/to the ore bay? I'm guessing not, but THAT would seriously be a big improvement, and decrease a lot of the redundant dragging.

something somethingdark
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:56:00 - [24]
 

lol carriers


in essence you dont want me to use the triage module or welll anything else but
1) bring rigged ships from A to B
2) participate in cap fights as the dps that doesnt lag
3) rep poses ... but not with triage


brilliant!

Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.08.20 16:58:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Fuujin on 20/08/2009 17:00:02
Originally by: Clansworth

Which, when you consider the Rorq's ore bay can hold the compressed ore, you're looking at some SERIOUS increase in usefulness.. almost enough to bring the rorq out of the POS shields... A question I have is, can the compression lines pull from/to the ore bay? I'm guessing not, but THAT would seriously be a big improvement, and decrease a lot of the redundant dragging.


Testing on singularity showed that it could not; if that has been 'fixed' is another question. Probably not though.

It is a decent enough buff for the rorq, at that.


Originally by: something somethingdark
lol carriers

in essence you dont want me to use the triage module or welll anything else but
1) bring rigged ships from A to B
2) participate in cap fights as the dps that doesnt lag
3) rep poses ... but not with triage

brilliant!


Apparently, if it can't be done in a single triage cycle it's not worth doing.

Clansworth
Good Rock Materials
Posted - 2009.08.20 17:01:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Fuujin
Edited by: Fuujin on 20/08/2009 17:00:02
Originally by: Clansworth

Which, when you consider the Rorq's ore bay can hold the compressed ore, you're looking at some SERIOUS increase in usefulness.. almost enough to bring the rorq out of the POS shields... A question I have is, can the compression lines pull from/to the ore bay? I'm guessing not, but THAT would seriously be a big improvement, and decrease a lot of the redundant dragging.


Testing on singularity showed that it could not; if that has been 'fixed' is another question. Probably not though.

It is a decent enough buff for the rorq, at that.


Originally by: something somethingdark
lol carriers

in essence you dont want me to use the triage module or welll anything else but
1) bring rigged ships from A to B
2) participate in cap fights as the dps that doesnt lag
3) rep poses ... but not with triage

brilliant!


Apparently, if it can't be done in a single triage cycle it's not worth doing.


i figured not.. I'm hoping that the future S&I improvements expand input ant output selection options, to allow pulling to.from alternate POS modules, and from specialized bays, such as on the rorq...

Kyra Felann
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.08.20 17:11:00 - [27]
 

I like these changes.

I'm also looking forward to seeing ammo magazines in ships. It would make much more sense than storing ammo in a cargo bay, plus it would allow lots of ammo without making a ship too good at carrying cargo.

Darkdood
Posted - 2009.08.20 17:11:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Darkdood on 20/08/2009 17:16:47
I 100% agree with all of the fuel bays cargo changes etc it all makes sense ACCEPT... why carriers get only 3k for fuel? and moms get 5k? This makes absolutely no sense to me given that in a fight if a carrier jumps with the dreads triage modes to rep/support ships and then jumps back home it used EXACTLY the same fuel as the dread. Assuming same skill lvl's. So why don't all three have 8k fuel bays?

If your answer is that the carrier and moms have corp hangars then I have two words for you...

EPIC FAIL!

Sertan Deras
Gallente
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.08.20 17:13:00 - [29]
 

So let me get this straight. You upped the Dread fuel bay to 8k (not really gonna complain, but it was fine at 6k)...and you left Carriers at 3k.

Seriously, do you guys play this game? At all? News flash for you: Carriers use the same amount of fuel per LY as Dreads but can actually jump farther (using more fuel), also have a module that uses stront, and very often fit a cyno that uses liquid ozone. What's this add up to? The fact that Carriers need just as much fuel.

Don't give me the "Haha, you have a CHA" line either, because that's now the only place a Carrier can actually put capital mods. Oh yes CCP, you're lovely little change here made it so capitals can't actually carry their own mods. Ingenious game design. Yes, lets have capital mods be 80 times the size of other mods in the game (news flash, my ship isn't 80 times the size of a battleship), then make it so the ships that use them can't carry them. Brilliant.

Oh noes, players were using their 2bn ISK, 10 months of training ships to haul their personal stuff around, we can't have that, now can we? You guys make it sound as if you could run an industrial empire using a Dread as your hauler (you couldn't). This is just another one of CCP's famous "Oh geez, the players thought up an alternate use for a hull, better change that post haste" patches.

Kyra Felann
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.08.20 17:16:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Gnulpie
But isn't that EXACTLY what a sandbox game is about?


Your definition of "sandbox" is different from mine if you think the ability to effectively use a hammer as a screwdriver is a good thing.

The sandbox is what you do with ships, not how you fit them. Many MMOs have great flexibility in how you develop your character's skills and stats--does that make them a sandbox also?

I think you misunderstand what makes Eve a sandbox.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only