| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
inSpirAcy
Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Posts: 3710
Location: NEE NAW
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:14 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I want to make a paper thin supergank variant of the Taranis.
_________________
Gank Night |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
James Lyrus
Keeper of the Commandments
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 9910
Location: Double posting in your SHC
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jade Constantine wrote: | you bastards can't fool me - I know you're all pimping golem alts in prep for the "epic mission arcs"  |
I wouldn't mind a more scintillating PvE experience. I mean, I've got to go make money occasionally, and mission running... gets boring quite quick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xenophobe
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 830
Location: Providence
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nrom Gustav wrote: | | Nobody would be bitching about falcons if we still had nan0z. Which incidentally might come back if there is any way to make a amagad fast cruiser with t3. Woop woop. |
actually, people bitched about them pretty much none stop at the height of the nano age. and you can still have nanoships, just that your choice is limited to "vagabond or frig hull" and its not the defacto base-fit for everything smaller than a battleship anymore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BattleWhack
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 1246
Location: HABIT
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed; I think those particular changes were a stroke of genius.
As for T3, I'd love a harby that was slow as fuck, buffertanked to shit, and had really good tracking 
_________________
Kenneth McCoy - Habitual Euthanasia |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karina Harington
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 2854
Location: Unsubbed
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm wondering if you'll be able to make a "cheap" version of the Nightmare out of T3. Game needs more shield tanking laser boats! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Asestorian
Joined: 14 May 2007
Posts: 1825
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh hey. My EON just arrived and it appears to have information on Tech III. I wonder if it's anything more than we already know though.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
acompton
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 1655
Location: Straight outta Vince Noir... FALG BLADE.
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Asestorian wrote: | | Oh hey. My EON just arrived and it appears to have information on Tech III. I wonder if it's anything more than we already know though. |
read it and tell us?
_________________
| Weirda wrote: | | This is not democracy and no one give shit what "SHC Thinks" (oxymoron tbh)... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xenophobe
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 830
Location: Providence
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i want a sneaky cloaky fast ship with ewar capacity and a good damage / buffer balance.
oh, and a puppy dispensor.
who am i kidding, im just going to make a vagabond that can warp cloaked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nrom Gustav
Joined: 19 Mar 2008
Posts: 2527
Location: [quote] Jade’s anus clamped shut around Garmon’s ****, the painful tightness almost causing the wel
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Xenophobe wrote: |
actually, people bitched about them pretty much none stop at the height of the nano age. and you can still have nanoships, just that your choice is limited to "vagabond or frig hull" and its not the defacto base-fit for everything smaller than a battleship anymore. |
At the height of the nano age you had a lot more options to scare off/kill falcons than you do now. 3.9km/s on a vaga doesnt really cut it anymore.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
orcane
Joined: 19 Jan 2007
Posts: 6599
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kwa Kaine wrote: | | Rivqua wrote: | | *UI Revamp, new UI team working on optimizing the usability of the UI. |
Anyone taking bets on them adding a new button or indicator on the HUD and calling it a 'revamp'? |
heh, I wish they wouldn't...
| BattleWhack wrote: | | Anyone wanna have a guess at the skill reqs for t3 goodies? |
lots of level 5 stuff, preferably of skills no one would train for their inherent benefits (hello Electronics Upgrades and Advanced Spaceship Command), and in general something that takes 1-2 months, at least 
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xenophobe
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 830
Location: Providence
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nrom Gustav wrote: | | Xenophobe wrote: |
actually, people bitched about them pretty much none stop at the height of the nano age. and you can still have nanoships, just that your choice is limited to "vagabond or frig hull" and its not the defacto base-fit for everything smaller than a battleship anymore. |
At the height of the nano age you had a lot more options to scare off/kill falcons than you do now. 3.9km/s on a vaga doesnt really cut it anymore. |
true, but people still whined about them something fierce. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Barbaro55a
Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 6300
Location: VANIS - INIT
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| acompton wrote: | | Asestorian wrote: | | Oh hey. My EON just arrived and it appears to have information on Tech III. I wonder if it's anything more than we already know though. |
scan it and show us? |
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Asestorian
Joined: 14 May 2007
Posts: 1825
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| acompton wrote: | | Asestorian wrote: | | Oh hey. My EON just arrived and it appears to have information on Tech III. I wonder if it's anything more than we already know though. |
read it and tell us? |
Ok. I might be reading it wrong and I have no idea what you already know. I'm typing this as I read.
So far:
- 12,500 possible configurations.
- Five ship components needed. Propulsion, three mid sections (offence, defence, power core) and a sensor array (bridge type thing).
- Each section determines separate abilities. Propulsion for speed, probably offence module for weaponry, etc, etc. Not been fully decided at time of writing.
- The combination of the modules decides the overall stats of the ship.
- Each section requires different skills (loltimesink).
- It would appear that the power core decides what other hull modules you can fit, so you can't have a nano-ewar ship with a billion guns. I might be reading that wrong though.
- Alternatively CCP might introduce some kind of "heat" that allows you to overload the structure of your ships to get this kind of power from one, but only for a very limited time (might just be wild imaginings of the writer though).
- They have been thinking up ways to make sure that Tech III is very much an option, not a requirement. Will they succeed?
- You can disassemble an assembled Tech III ship. Probably useful for transporting at least. Example given is needing your ship to be faster so getting your transport guys to bring down faster components, which will be much smaller and easier to carry, instead of a load of new Tech II ships.
- Rigs: Probably only one, and will make it harder to disassemble the ship because obviously the rig will break. No mention of actual Tech III rigs so far though.
- 'winsauce'. Not entirely sure what this is. There is an implication that disassembling a ship might make it lose something. Talk about crew members or a ship being 'sentient' and thus maybe gaining 'experience' or somesuch that is lost when it's broken down. Whatever it is, it's talk of a ship learning and becoming better through some system. Not confirmed and at this point probably going to remain on the drawing board because of balance issues. It could stay there, or it could come in later.
- A little box to the side suggests that as well as what was previously said about trying to not make older ships obsolete, Tech III should hopefully not need a ridiculous amount of time to train, at least initially. Breadth > Depth in the skill department here.
- Apparently not a lot of coding issues so far. An original prototype was thrown together by the CTO while waiting to do his FanFest presentation (cocky bastard).
- Base chassis might get a name but the likelihood is that CCP aren't going to be insane enough to come up with names for all variations. Not really sure how this is going to work though. They might just use the component type names stuck together, creating "Hunter-Squirrel XE-4". Implication here that we get to name what we create.
- Tech I = multi-purpose. Tech II = specialisation. Tech III = Tech I + Tech II; a ship that can fill any role you want, but only one at a time.
- Covert Ops pilots should either cry or rejoice. You're going to need to get good at spotting subsystems and knowing what they do. 'Look At' might become popular, although pretty painful in a large group of Tech III ships.
- You won't be able to tell a ships role/subsystems from scanner results.
- Subsystem targeting is still an idea (as it has always been) but at the moment it seems they haven't decided to put it in because of balance issues etc. Probably not going in then.
- Only cruiser sized Tech III ships. No idea when Tech III modules will come out. Any other ships released in the expansion will be related to "True Exploration".
And that's what it said.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karina Harington
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 2854
Location: Unsubbed
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is going to make gang warfare fun...
FC: What have they got?
Scout: 7 Falcons, 3 Zealots, a Phobos, 2 ButtMunchers, a PussyWagon and a PimpMustafa
FC: WTF?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James Lyrus
Keeper of the Commandments
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 9910
Location: Double posting in your SHC
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My concern is that with 'defense, offense, propulsion' that it might easily turn into a cookie cutter - fit the biggest of all of them, because you need more engines, more guns, and more tank.
I am optimistic though - it's not _impossible_ to do something cool and yet not grossly overpowered. It's just going to require some quite careful thought about the tradeoffs involved.
All cruiser sized is good though, as ... well, for starters cruiser sized is probably my favourite anyway. But also, it gives room to vary the range of the T3 ships enough to be interesting, without by default making them automatically the best choice - any more than a HAC is better than a BS.
I'm all excited, but mostly because it's a new real of EVE theorycrafting and munchkinising. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Usergroups
Search
Memberlist
