Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Unclaimed.
102
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 13:52:00 -
[241] - Quote
this is a BAD ASS idea! a harby hull with pulse just looks right.
the abso is iconic, yes, but just having the damnation as a ham boat would be kewl.
the sleipnir is a great ship. as long as the performance doesnt change, then having it a kick ass huricane hull would be awesome. so what that the old sleip is a cyclone hull, the huricane is an iconic bad ass bc that has reigned supreme for years. changing it to the command ship is a natural progression.
i love the myrm idea as the eos. if you think about it, converting the brutix to hold drones and all that stuff should significantly change its shape. we cant have the brutix change its shape, thats crazy..but the myrm IS a drone boat. make it t2 and roll with it.
the drake is an iconic missile boat. what better hull to make a nighthawk out of. t2 resists, bad ass missile damage...
yes, yes, YES!
yesyesyesyesyes WOOT!!! |
Jerick Ludhowe
Error-404
461
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 13:53:00 -
[242] - Quote
Janna Windforce wrote:
Given then potential of Command Ships (Sleipnir at least), don't you think they deserve their own models? Some that says "I'm da boss here.".
A modestly unique (kind of like the kronos) t2 version of a base hull would be pretty bad ass.
|
Peter Dostoevsky
League of Angered Gentlemen
26
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 13:56:00 -
[243] - Quote
I support the changing of the hulls fully. |
Mariner6
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
160
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 14:27:00 -
[244] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Cards on the table, the Sleipnir is the ship I have the greatest emotional attachment to of any ship in EVE. It would look great as a Hurricane, but it would also look DIFFERENT and that makes me feel confused feelings deep inside my heart.
I also don't think this kind of change would be worthwhile unless we did all four and converted them into those specific hulls, since any deviation would make it harder for a new player trying to get information from their looks.
So it's kinda an all or nothing deal, which is what makes it such a difficult question.
Why is it all or nothing? That line of reasoning didn't stop you from making the Navy BC a Brutix, when it clearly should have been a Myrm (keeping in line with all the other tier'd BC hulls)? So how is this argument valid?
So +1 to this idea overall, but if guys want to keep the Slep as is, well, why not? |
Jaredo Wens
Lone Shattered Star
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 14:43:00 -
[245] - Quote
personally I think they should go like so... [unpopular as some of these may be...]
Prophecy -> Damnation Harbinger -> Navy* Oracle -> Absolution*
Ferox -> Navy* Drake -> Nighthawk Naga -> Vulture*
Brutix -> Navy* Myrmidon -> Eos Talos -> Astarte*
Cyclone -> Claymore Hurricane -> Navy* Tornado -> Sleipnir*
* - these can easily be swapped around. Fluff wise the Tech 1 'tier 3' glass cannon BCs are all either prototypes or secret projects so using them as a base Tech 2 or as a navy ship isn't too much of a stretch. |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2277
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 15:22:00 -
[246] - Quote
Jaredo Wens wrote:personally I think they should go like so... [unpopular as some of these may be...]
Prophecy -> Damnation Harbinger -> Navy* Oracle -> Absolution*
Ferox -> Navy* Drake -> Nighthawk Naga -> Vulture*
Brutix -> Navy* Myrmidon -> Eos Talos -> Astarte*
Cyclone -> Claymore Hurricane -> Navy* Tornado -> Sleipnir*
* - these can easily be swapped around. Fluff wise the Tech 1 'tier 3' glass cannon BCs are all either prototypes or secret projects so using them as a base Tech 2 or as a navy ship isn't too much of a stretch.
I too like the idea of using err 'Tier 3' hulls, even though tiers are dead <3 ISD Suvetar Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
BiggestT
Black Watch Guard Amarr 7th Fleet
62
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 15:59:00 -
[247] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:This is something I've been thinking about during my predesign for the command ships.
I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on.
It might be interesting to convert half the command ships into the other BC hull, picking the one that matches their weapon type at the T1 level.
That would (potentially) mean:
Eos would use the Myrm hull Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull Abso would use the Harb hull Nighthawk would use the Drake hull This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition.
So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?
Please don't!
I really like all the CS hull aesthetics the way they are (except the vulture paint job, not to mention all t2 hybrid cal ships, that grey-to-cream paint job is just strange).
I'm guessing you will get a mixed reaction seeing as aesthetic is based on opinion rather than fact, so why bother putting on the effort to change something that isn't broke?
At least keep the nighthawk/abso the same, these ships are gorgeous as is ;) |
Urhgo Khanab
J.A.V
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 16:26:00 -
[248] - Quote
I vote yes to this !
Although the sleipnir is iconic as it is today, i am all for changeing it to the cane hull. I think it would be awesome |
Drainor septum
Space Dynamics inc.
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 16:29:00 -
[249] - Quote
I don't want the change with the nighthawk becoming a kind of drake like. This because the drake is ugly compared to the nighthawk, the hull of the drake is very "simple in design"(in directly) and you get quickly bored of it when you're looking at the drake for some time. The nighthawk is much more detailled which makes it far more interesting to look at. |
Red Woodson
Veg Garden
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 16:41:00 -
[250] - Quote
Ydnari wrote:Bear in mind that this would have a game play effect on the people who build these ships (which includes me). Whilst the hull change makes sense, it presumably has to change the base hull for invention and manufacturing, which would screw over people who have a large investment in the current hulls - and that would not make me happy :-\
Quoting a solid point, even if I don't have the skills to build command ships. If you do indeed change the base hulls, please consider those who do production. Not only do they have large stores of hulls, but likely also have BPOs that aren't worth much except for invention due to the recent tiericide and the pre-extra-minerals stocks not being depleted yet.
There is one thing that would need to happen well prior to any change. Broad and early notification, preferably via dev blog, that the change was coming to give people time to adapt their production assets as needed. The Command Ship redesign also needs to happen prior to, or at least simultaneously, with such a change such that all the CS are useful and worth producing.
CCP, you don't have the best track record of thinking through how changes will effect industry, so please take the time to do this right, if you go through with it.
PS. This reminds me, are the 'extra materials' going to be converted over to normal on BPOs when the pre change stocks are mostly depleted? Leaving them as is both hurts the insurance calculations, as well as with the floor price previously provided by reprocessing. |
|
PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
342
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 16:52:00 -
[251] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
That would (potentially) mean:
Eos would use the Myrm hull Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull Abso would use the Harb hull Nighthawk would use the Drake hull
Fantastic idea, there's no reason to use the same hull now that there are more options to use. It helps differentiate things a good deal as well, please do this. |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
1251
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 16:53:00 -
[252] - Quote
Slowly coming to terms with the fact that I'm in a distinct minority here, but I'm very much unabashedly opposed to the proposed change. Way back when I trained into a Nighthawk because I loved the look; I've always thought the Drake was uninspired. I adore the Absolution; never really cared for the Harbinger at all. As nice as the Hurricane is -- and don't get me wrong, it's pretty -- I abso-*******-lutely love the the Sleipnir just the way it is. Hell, I'd have to say the Sleipnir is my favorite-looking ship in the game (and she's not half bad in the performance area either).
The only one I'm up in the air on is the Eos. I'll honestly say I've never flown one, and I do like the Myrmidon hull (but then, the Brutix is rather nice as well). I think I'd prefer that change. But if it's an all or nothing thing, I'm against it. Period. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
221
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:36:00 -
[253] - Quote
Having just now checked for myself and confirming that Sleip/Clay are 18-slot and all other CS are 17-slot, I expect quite a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth when Fozzie's job forces him to remove the slot from both ships.
Anyway, to people who hate the Drake model: It wouldn't be quite strictly just a regular old Drake, just like keeping the Sleip would not result in a normal-looking Sleip. The T2 versions of every hull are going to be made slightly different from the T1 counterparts. Right now we're waiting for the Paladin to be finished, and the Golem will likely be after that.
--- Current numbers as of this post: 144 in favor, 47 opposed. |
Angelhunter
Conquering Darkness
20
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:58:00 -
[254] - Quote
After thinking about this more
Eos - Great change, the Myrm is a beautiful hull and deserves to be used more Nighthawk - Its Caldari, i don't fly Caldari, thus i could care less what is done. Absolution - The Harby looks more like a combat ship than a fleet booster, makes sense
Now we come to one of my favorite ships in the game, The Sleipnir. Please please PLEASE don't change the Sleipnir, change the Claymore if you really want to use more hulls for T2 ships. The Sleipnir is a brawling brute and the hull just fits it perfectly in the way it looks. The Hurricane in my opinion has never really looked like an attack ship, reminded me more of an arty platform than anything else.
tldr; Leave the Sleipnir alone, the rest is fine. |
Luc Chastot
Gentleman's Corp
373
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:01:00 -
[255] - Quote
I don't know if you are still reading this thread CCP Fozzie, but can you explain this contradiction?
CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. Quote:Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey GÇô we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application. I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
ExAstra
Echoes of Silence
145
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:03:00 -
[256] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:I don't know if you are still reading this thread CCP Fozzie, but can you explain this contradiction? CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. Quote:Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey GÇô we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application. I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon. I would so rock a Navydon with blasters. TBH though I'd rather the Eos be a Myrm (at the very least). Save the drones! |
mama guru
Thundercats The Initiative.
129
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:32:00 -
[257] - Quote
Brutix looks better than the Myrm. So change the slepnir aswell. Damn your nostalgia, I want a 7 turret candycane. ______
EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak. |
Jen Ann Tonique
University of Caille Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:40:00 -
[258] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
some stuff
That would (potentially) mean:
Eos would use the Myrm hull Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull Abso would use the Harb hull Nighthawk would use the Drake hull some stuff
So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?
Do it.
Jen Ann Tonique does not approve of this product and/or service. Any comments contained herin are to be taken not seriously and no person/s shall hold Jen Ann Tonique responsible for any damage real and/or imagined due to use or misuse of above comment. By reading this statement you agree to the above terms. |
Sieg Vitilk
Discreet Production Lines Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:55:00 -
[259] - Quote
I greatly support this idea.
Now we just have to wait the 2 year development/implementation cycle and we should be good right? |
Metal Icarus
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
568
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:59:00 -
[260] - Quote
I agree with this change! Do it!
The nighthawk "ferox" model always looked odd... The drake feels right! |
|
Theodore Giumbix
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:01:00 -
[261] - Quote
Damn that EOS is soo BAD ASS!
I wonder how a Rokh would look like with that paint-job.
CCP we really need a BAD ASS faction Rokh! The Tek - a show that covers hardware, pc games, indie games, legal policies that pertain to technology, the internet, and nerd culture. Please sign: Disabling the clouds in anomalies/signatures/missions |
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Easily Offended
104
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:07:00 -
[262] - Quote
With the 2 command ships of each race moving closer in battlefield role and performance (as outlined in the deblog once upon a time), I think it is just natural to differentiate them by something more.
The hull is an easy, no-gameplay-impact option for this and I approve it wholeheartedly. |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
521
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:18:00 -
[263] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Eos would use the Myrm hull Sleipnir would use the Hurricane hull Abso would use the Harb hull Nighthawk would use the Drake hull So, hypothetically, what do you guys think?
Yes, please. Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables. |
Yaturi
The Scope Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:35:00 -
[264] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. ...... (hull switches) ...... This is the kind of thing that we'd expect many people would have strong opinions about, and since it wouldn't have direct gameplay effects we wouldn't consider it worth doing unless there was some significant community support for the idea that overwhelms the opposition. So, hypothetically, what do you guys think? Sarmatiko wrote:Please don't touch my Sleipnir and Nighthawk I want Sleipnir, not Brutor Hurricane; Nighthawk, not Kaalakiota Drake. And while this thread is ongoing, silent change of models will cause another inevitable shitstorm on forums, because as always major part of the community will be unaware about this. If you like to change something so iconic - make proper playerbase-wide poll first.
As the guy who made the original red paint mockup shown in the op back in December 2008 (I **** you not, I used ms paint and it was for some stupid hictor thread I was babbling about) I'm gonna have to agree with Sarmatiko on this. There needs to be a hull poll so to speak. The poll should give players questions that have bubbled choices.
1st question: Should command ship hulls be switched. Yes or No bubble?
2nd question: What should Amarr field cs be, Harby or Phroph bubbles. Followed with the same question for fleet cs. Then a "no switch" bubble for those who dont want it.
This is repeated for the next 3 races a total of 5 simple input questions that could help solve this predicament, if presented to the players a la csm voting style.
My personal opinions are this: Galente switch is good, but it seems the hurricane should be the new claymore and the cyclone remain the sleipnir. As for the Amarr, the harbinger should be the new absolution and the prophecy remain the damnation. Hurricane and Harbinger are the more agressive looking ships which fits better fit with field ships. The opposite goes with Caldari, the ferox should remain the field hull and the drake made into the new vulture fleet cs. Ferox looks more aggressive imho. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
224
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 20:06:00 -
[265] - Quote
I do wish people would understand that "Field" and "Fleet" distinctions are going to be removed from the game and all Command Ships will simply be "Command Ships" with bonuses to boosting as well as combat ability. |
Alec Polaris
The Pilots Who Say Ni
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 20:14:00 -
[266] - Quote
It never made sense to me that a company, which is supposed to be modifying ships rather than building new ones, would scrap a ship's existing weapon system and leave the hull the same. This change would make sense. |
sXyphos
The Scope Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 20:37:00 -
[267] - Quote
Yes! just finished training command ships and i want this so bad You should apply this mentality wherever you can,diversity makes this game even more beautiful. |
Jing Xin
Gravity Mining and Manufacturing Inc Storm of Souls
14
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 20:38:00 -
[268] - Quote
Just let them change livery at will (or for small AUR fee). Once they get their KK Drakes and Carthum Harbingers, check what they think about changing iconic hulls then. It has been many years since CovOp model change, and as much as I enjoy Probe variations (including recent Vherokior Probe), Cheetah does not look like a Cheetah to me. |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Unclaimed.
104
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 21:38:00 -
[269] - Quote
yes! someone besides myself who has read that the field/fleet differentiation is going away and ALL command ships will have a whoopass side AND a booster side. not a forced choice, but an ongrid boostin, open a case of whoopass and throw it on ya type ship.
i just wonder if the minie versions will loose the extra slot they have (start the whining now) or will the rest of them gain another slot?
but the biggest question i have is, are we going to have weapon bonuses like the marauder (since a ton of new t1 ships are gaining them) or is it going to be 3 links and 5 weapons?
hopefully!*!**!!*!*! we have 4 2x weapons like the marauders. that would leave 3 high slots for links. leave it at 7.
i think the command ship bonuses should follow the hac line. itll provide the linear progression eve is heading towards, make training easier and just make sense. i mean if you send a hac in and we love the results enough to send in bc.."make it exactly like u did, just add links".. =) IE, the zealot=absolution (harby hull)=laser boat with range bonuses like the zealot the sac=damnation (prophecy hull)=missile boat with cap and rof/ham damage like the sac
ishtar=eos (myrm (with the new dominix bonuses)) ishtar bonuses with the domi mixed in deimos=astarte (brutix)=a whole-lotta whoopass just as its always been
vaggy=sleipnir (huricane hull) same bonuses as the vaggy (no base ship)=claymore missile boat
eagle=vulture (ferox hull) same bonus progression ceberus=nighthawk (drake hull) add kewl cerb bonuses
keep the bonuses and the weapon platforms the same so one doesnt have to train many different types of weapons while trying to get to battlecruiser 5 then command ship 5. itll keep with the linear progression eve is going.
will u give us a hint fozzie? how much whoop ass will they have? 5 guns? 6? 4 x2 guns? 4 x1.75 guns? the suspence is killin me |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
225
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 21:48:00 -
[270] - Quote
Fozzie dislikes power creep. His style of balancing will probably force him to remove that extra slot from the Minmatar CS in order to "bring them in line with the others". Odds are that this will cause unfathomable angst and quite possibly remove a fair share of the Sleipnir's popularity, resulting in somewhat fewer pilots caring if the model is changed or not.
As for the highslot layout, it was indicated that they aren't going to let you fit a full rack of weapons and a full rack of boosts at the same time. You'll have to choose between DPS, boosting, or a mix of both.
Regardless of that, this is not the thread for discussing ship balancing mechanics. Make a thread elsewhere for that, please. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |