These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Talvorian Dex
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#281 - 2014-10-09 20:47:35 UTC
Tri Vetra wrote:
I guess there won't be any "freighter convoys" after all.


there were never going to be any freighter convoys

Writer of Target Caller, an Eve Online PvP blog, at http://targetcaller.blogspot.com
Tenaya Masai
#282 - 2014-10-09 20:47:52 UTC
thats liveable. thx you for listening to us Big smileBig smile
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#283 - 2014-10-09 20:48:03 UTC
Edisonn Trent wrote:
90% reduction means that transport fleets will move a lot faster than capital fleets. Pretty easy to turn unarmed jfs into offensive gambits with that.

Or, you could use an interceptor, and use the JFs closer to the operating base to move stuff. Much faster than your option.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#284 - 2014-10-09 20:49:32 UTC
Mor Rioghainn wrote:


can you make star citzen beta key purchasable with plex maybe please?


Ah, sure, we'll ship the changes when star citizen is released in 2050

And only if we hit the richer - than - bill - gates tier.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#285 - 2014-10-09 20:53:31 UTC
This is much better than the original changes. I still think the fatigue values are a tad high and they need to be capped at like 7 days maximum fatigue possible though. If pilots are allowed to accumulate too much fatigue it will wind up resulting in people inadvertantly giving themselves huge fatigue timers and, rather than waiting them out, they'll just de-sub in frustration.

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.  He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
Dwissi
Miners Delight Reborn
#286 - 2014-10-09 20:53:42 UTC
Dream Five wrote:


Were you seriously planning to invest tens of billions into local production for just 10-100 guys in your far-away region?
That seems irrational from a business perspective.
You'd need hundreds of BPOs and huge stockpiles of lots and lots of different materials to be self-sustaining.

Tbh maybe I just don't understand the vision of self-sustaining 0.0 industry but seems like the ROI would be so bad that it would still be better to do logistics no matter how difficult it is, at least for some stuff. And then you'd just bring everything you need anyway.



This is what we 'others' complain about - the changes where opening up for more diverse gameplay again- with the current way only one way to play is feasible. ROI is not always measured in isk you know - there are actually players who do things just because they can be done - not necessarily because they are best isk per "insert favourite time length here".

If i would just speak for myself - and i know i am not the only one anyways - then i rather manufacture my ass of for no isk at all but for a real purpose that might support some actual group effort. Same goes for anything you might imagine - its not only shooting at things - even if many people still seem to believe that. ROI can also be measured in 'i can deliver everything the locals need' - it just depends on what your investment was meant for. With current logistics the gameplay of 'being self-sufficient' has been basically deleted.

Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins

Before someone complains again: grr everyone

Greed is the death of loyalty
Edisonn Trent
White Noise.
#287 - 2014-10-09 20:56:09 UTC
Querns wrote:
Edisonn Trent wrote:
90% reduction means that transport fleets will move a lot faster than capital fleets. Pretty easy to turn unarmed jfs into offensive gambits with that.

Or, you could use an interceptor, and use the JFs closer to the operating base to move stuff. Much faster than your option.


Or, set up jumpclones in important areas of the donut, fill 50 emergency jfs with battleships, 50 more with t1 cruisers and tacles, boom, empire defended.
progodlegend
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#288 - 2014-10-09 20:58:23 UTC  |  Edited by: progodlegend
Aryndel Vyst wrote:
I love how logistics continues to get deep anal fisted by not giving similar benefits to rorqs as you would JF's.


Calm down there buddy.
Tragot Gomndor
Three Sword Inc
#289 - 2014-10-09 20:58:42 UTC
Taram Caldar wrote:
This is much better than the original changes. I still think the fatigue values are a tad high and they need to be capped at like 7 days maximum fatigue possible though. If pilots are allowed to accumulate too much fatigue it will wind up resulting in people inadvertantly giving themselves huge fatigue timers and, rather than waiting them out, they'll just de-sub in frustration.


i guess it would be a great idea to only allow fatique reduction when the account is subbed xD

NONONONONONO TO CAPS IN HIGHSEC NO
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#290 - 2014-10-09 20:58:59 UTC
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
xttz wrote:
Is anything happening to prevent supercaps being virtually invulnerable on low-sec gates? Currently the only way to tackle them requires a lock, and without non-targeted interdiction they're easily capable of jumping through a gate then jumping out.
Discussing it.
A supercap in lowsec jumps a gate: implies gates were the intended travel plan. An escape cyno may not be on standby, or in jump range, in every case. A HIC with focused disrupt script loaded has a fair chance to stop a super who was gate travelling, without an escape cyno ready.


Yes but it has zero chance to stop a super who does have an escape cyno ready, and the super can tank on the out gate until one is in place.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#291 - 2014-10-09 20:59:41 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:

So I guess I am just a little confused on the sudden and complete 180 u turn.


This isn't a U-Turn. The changes are intended to nerf the ability of nullsec groups to project their firepower across the universe in a matter of minutes. These changes still fully nerf capital combat ships (?rorqual?) and prevent groups from tagging along every fight that happens in the galaxy.

Even with these small changes, more regional fights will kick up, because there will be less fear of getting hotdropped from across the galaxy.

I'm talking about the industrial and logistical changes. I think an 8 light year range for JFs would be a good compromise. It should be difficult to supply remote areas of null sec, but 8 light years would create a bit of geography in null sec so we can see how it plays out without actually cutting of all of null sec in its entirety.
A6ame
HIFI Holding
#292 - 2014-10-09 21:00:43 UTC
"All ships designated as having a “hauling” role in ISIS (ie the following ship groups: Industrial, Blockade Runner, Deep Space Transport, Industrial Command Ship, Freighter) will similarly get a 90% reduction to distance counted for the purpose of fatigue generation. Obviously they can’t jump themselves, but this also applies on use of bridges or portals. "

Whats to stop N3//CFC from now traveling in T1 industrial hauler blobs and avoiding massive fatigue generation???
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#293 - 2014-10-09 21:01:35 UTC
I think Jumpclones + JFs full of fleet of the line ships is going to be a very major way force projection will continue to be an issue.

That said, the new dynamic will still be interesting to see, and I guess nerfing JFs later isnt exactly hard.
Xanture Edion
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#294 - 2014-10-09 21:01:45 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Rorquals will stay at 5LY/90%


Is there a reason that Rorquals don't get the same 10LY range as JFs? Rorquals are used just as much for logistics as JFs, especially because their actual intended use isn't really...useful.


We didn't think it was sensible to let it keep its drone bonus and have a 10LY range, and at the end of the day the bonus won out. The ship needs a large rework anyway, and we'll revisit all this when that happens :)



So if the combat bonus won out, will we be seeing the rework align more to a combat capital? If this is not the case, then why not make the Rorqual a logistic ship (for what it's actually being used for), ditch the bonus and give it the 10ly range. Then revisit this hull for rework.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#295 - 2014-10-09 21:02:32 UTC
A6ame wrote:
"All ships designated as having a “hauling” role in ISIS (ie the following ship groups: Industrial, Blockade Runner, Deep Space Transport, Industrial Command Ship, Freighter) will similarly get a 90% reduction to distance counted for the purpose of fatigue generation. Obviously they can’t jump themselves, but this also applies on use of bridges or portals. "

Whats to stop N3//CFC from now traveling in T1 industrial hauler blobs and avoiding massive fatigue generation???

Gates are still faster. I recommend interdictor class space vessels for stopping them.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#296 - 2014-10-09 21:02:39 UTC
A6ame wrote:
"All ships designated as having a “hauling” role in ISIS (ie the following ship groups: Industrial, Blockade Runner, Deep Space Transport, Industrial Command Ship, Freighter) will similarly get a 90% reduction to distance counted for the purpose of fatigue generation. Obviously they can’t jump themselves, but this also applies on use of bridges or portals. "

Whats to stop N3//CFC from now traveling in T1 industrial hauler blobs and avoiding massive fatigue generation???


A single interdictor on the jumpgate between any of the adjacent bridge systems en route? Bye bye expensive clones. Hello Big fatigue timer!
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#297 - 2014-10-09 21:02:43 UTC
Lallante wrote:
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
xttz wrote:
Is anything happening to prevent supercaps being virtually invulnerable on low-sec gates? Currently the only way to tackle them requires a lock, and without non-targeted interdiction they're easily capable of jumping through a gate then jumping out.
Discussing it.
A supercap in lowsec jumps a gate: implies gates were the intended travel plan. An escape cyno may not be on standby, or in jump range, in every case. A HIC with focused disrupt script loaded has a fair chance to stop a super who was gate travelling, without an escape cyno ready.


Yes but it has zero chance to stop a super who does have an escape cyno ready, and the super can tank on the out gate until one is in place.

The way I figure it will work, is you get an dictor on both sides of the gate, and then it will be a matter of the dictor locking and using the infinite point on the super cap before the pilot can initiate jump drive. I imagine due to lag, and slow reactions, you would actually catch quite a few with this method.

Although if you want something more substantial, then perhaps a spool up on jumping out could be implemented.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#298 - 2014-10-09 21:04:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Lallante
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Lallante wrote:
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
xttz wrote:
Is anything happening to prevent supercaps being virtually invulnerable on low-sec gates? Currently the only way to tackle them requires a lock, and without non-targeted interdiction they're easily capable of jumping through a gate then jumping out.
Discussing it.
A supercap in lowsec jumps a gate: implies gates were the intended travel plan. An escape cyno may not be on standby, or in jump range, in every case. A HIC with focused disrupt script loaded has a fair chance to stop a super who was gate travelling, without an escape cyno ready.


Yes but it has zero chance to stop a super who does have an escape cyno ready, and the super can tank on the out gate until one is in place.

The way I figure it will work, is you get an dictor on both sides of the gate, and then it will be a matter of the dictor locking and using the infinite point on the super cap before the pilot can initiate jump drive. I imagine due to lag, and slow reactions, you would actually catch quite a few with this method.

Although if you want something more substantial, then perhaps a spool up on jumping out could be implemented.


No, decloak-jump is basically instantanous. You can begin decloaking and still have ~2 seconds before you are lockable in which to initiate the jump command.

Its pretty much impossible to fuckup.

I stand by my previous suggestion - give dictors a new lowsec enabled disruption probe type that only blocks jumping. Or allow dictors to drop the existing probes but have their warp-disrupting effect not work in lowsec, only jump-disrupting
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#299 - 2014-10-09 21:06:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Dwissi wrote:
Dream Five wrote:


Were you seriously planning to invest tens of billions into local production for just 10-100 guys in your far-away region?
That seems irrational from a business perspective.
You'd need hundreds of BPOs and huge stockpiles of lots and lots of different materials to be self-sustaining.

Tbh maybe I just don't understand the vision of self-sustaining 0.0 industry but seems like the ROI would be so bad that it would still be better to do logistics no matter how difficult it is, at least for some stuff. And then you'd just bring everything you need anyway.



This is what we 'others' complain about - the changes where opening up for more diverse gameplay again- with the current way only one way to play is feasible. ROI is not always measured in isk you know - there are actually players who do things just because they can be done - not necessarily because they are best isk per "insert favourite time length here".

If i would just speak for myself - and i know i am not the only one anyways - then i rather manufacture my ass of for no isk at all but for a real purpose that might support some actual group effort. Same goes for anything you might imagine - its not only shooting at things - even if many people still seem to believe that. ROI can also be measured in 'i can deliver everything the locals need' - it just depends on what your investment was meant for. With current logistics the gameplay of 'being self-sufficient' has been basically deleted.


I also don't understand how CCP expects at the same time having less stability/stagnation/blue donut in 0.0 and wanting more 0.0 production :) Those seem like opposite goals. If the environment is unstable you have to be completely irrational to invest capital in local manufacturing knowing that your POS/outpost might get captured anyday/hour now :)
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#300 - 2014-10-09 21:06:25 UTC
A6ame wrote:
"All ships designated as having a “hauling” role in ISIS (ie the following ship groups: Industrial, Blockade Runner, Deep Space Transport, Industrial Command Ship, Freighter) will similarly get a 90% reduction to distance counted for the purpose of fatigue generation. Obviously they can’t jump themselves, but this also applies on use of bridges or portals. "

Whats to stop N3//CFC from now traveling in T1 industrial hauler blobs and avoiding massive fatigue generation???


Small-scale pipe bomb, that's actually a thing. Industrials are paper thin.