These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Dev Blog] Phoebe Travel Change Update

First post
Author
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#41 - 2014-10-30 19:44:05 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
I don't understand the basis of your argument here, considering that all of the large coalitions have given up vast swaths of space and Phoebe hasn't even hit yet.

It's harder than it used to but it's certainly not impossible. And people usually overreact, then adapt.
I fully expect "the big guys" to reclaim (in the long run) a large slice of what they gave up on "in anticipation of Phoebe".
Especially after the fatigue-burn-alliance-alts get sufficiently trained up.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#42 - 2014-10-30 19:47:44 UTC
Akita T wrote:
As per how somebody else explained some time ago, NOT having ALSO a ship-based jump fatigue stat will mean large alliances can still move their supercap fleets around at will thankyouverymuch by simply switching PILOTS on the ships between jumps.
And don't give me the "but, but, packaging" excuse - the ships most affected by this can't (or at least shouldn't) be packaged anyway.

do the math on the network of characters you need to do this

then do the math on what it would cost to just buy a second supercarrier and supercarrier alt and stick it in the second spot

come back once you've realized the pilot network is like a billion times more expensive
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#43 - 2014-10-30 19:48:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Querns wrote:
Akita T wrote:
As per how somebody else explained some time ago, NOT having ALSO a ship-based jump fatigue stat will mean large alliances can still move their supercap fleets around at will thankyouverymuch by simply switching PILOTS on the ships between jumps.
And don't give me the "but, but, packaging" excuse - the ships most affected by this can't (or at least shouldn't) be packaged anyway.

I would like to see this actually happen.

If it does in a major way, we'll clamp down on it, just as we will with any of the other suggested workarounds should they actually see widespread use.

No(t much) offense here, but let's be realistic - if you don't nip this in the not-yet-sprouted bud, you're setting yourself up for major pain in the more distant future when things start hitting the proverbial fan.
Whereas right now, all you would REALLY need to do (on a conceptual level, implementation might be less straightforward) is to add a SUPERCAPS ONLY jump fatigue ship attribute, and whenever a jump is to be performed, check both ship and pilot fatigue.

P.S. Also, what if it just happens in a "minor way"? Is that somehow more acceptable? Why?
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#44 - 2014-10-30 19:49:22 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

The feedback in the update thread was on the side of keeping the range bonus, yes. However, it's impossible to tell from that whether that's because majority opinion is on that side of the fence or simply that the people who wanted the damage bonus read the first post, were satisfied and didn't bother to reply. The only way we'd get feedback from the people who want the damage bonus is if we said we were taking it away, and then if there was significant outcry we'd probably have to switch it back again, and we want to avoid flip-flopping on these things wherever possible, mainly because it just confuses people

you could, somewhat trivially, tell the difference by doing some stats on things killed by rorqual drones

once you realize it happens like once every week, just send that guy an evemail and see what he says
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#45 - 2014-10-30 19:51:41 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Any more legible now? Logibro broke the text up a bit.


Are you able to at least comment on why the Rorq is being handicapped even further? Is there a plan or any information? These changes combined with how awful the Rorq is already really ruin it. If there was at least some sort of comment from CCP other than "we know it needs a rebalance at ??some point??", that would ease the frustration a bit.


In the choice between "keep drone bonus" and "keep jump range", we landed marginally on the side of the former. We're very prepared to revisit that, we just didn't feel we'd had enough input on the matter one way or the other to sway the decision.


Has anyone ran damage stats on rorq drone damage done on TQ in say the last month?

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2014-10-30 19:54:33 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
The feedback in the update thread was on the side of keeping the range bonus, yes. However, it's impossible to tell from that whether that's because majority opinion is on that side of the fence or simply that the people who wanted the damage bonus read the first post, were satisfied and didn't bother to reply. The only way we'd get feedback from the people who want the damage bonus is if we said we were taking it away, and then if there was significant outcry we'd probably have to switch it back again, and we want to avoid flip-flopping on these things wherever possible, mainly because it just confuses people.


I understand it is not easy to get a true representation of all opinions via the forums, but I implore you to look at the data behind Rorquals using drones in combat.

Furthermore, if possible, how many of those Rorquals used drones after doing more than a 5 ly jump.

OR EVEN BETTER

Run a report on how many active accounts with Rorquals actually have level 5 Capital Industrial Command for the full 100% drone bonus. Or just do a report on active Rorqual pilots and what their capital industrial command skill level is.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#47 - 2014-10-30 19:56:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
do the math on what it would cost to just buy a second supercarrier and supercarrier alt and stick it in the second spot
come back once you've realized the pilot network is like a billion times more expensive

Most of the jump fatigue evasion relay pilots don't need to be fully trained - in fact, they can have a skeleton skillset.
And you don't need to make ALL the jumps ALL the time - a few key ones will do just fine most of the time too, bringing the ship into or near systems with long-range inter-regional stargates.
Combine that with other travel options and you have yourself a need of maybe 2 alts per active supercap to reach about half the map in not a lot longer than you used to be able to (and drastically less time than you could "honestly" do).

Yeah, it's not TOO cheap, but for the same force projection capability, it's a lot cheaper than having many more fully trained pilots with extra supercaps included stationed in various staging areas semipermanently.

P.S. Anyway, even if it would be AT FIRST prohibitively expensive, the price will keep going down in time while ISK income levels keep rising, making it "cheaper" from two fronts at once.
Why not proactively make a tiny additional adjustment to prevent even the possibility of it happening much later on?
It's not like the workload to add this change to the existing changes would constitute a major timesink in comparison... while saving you a lot of potential grief later down the road.
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#48 - 2014-10-30 19:57:51 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Querns wrote:
Akita T wrote:
As per how somebody else explained some time ago, NOT having ALSO a ship-based jump fatigue stat will mean large alliances can still move their supercap fleets around at will thankyouverymuch by simply switching PILOTS on the ships between jumps.
And don't give me the "but, but, packaging" excuse - the ships most affected by this can't (or at least shouldn't) be packaged anyway.

I would like to see this actually happen.


If it does in a major way, we'll clamp down on it, just as we will with any of the other suggested workarounds should they actually see widespread use.

I'm going to stock up on popcorn for when you "clamp down" on people with multiple accounts that can fly capitals. And the so-called work-around above is not what I'm thinking of.
nospet
#49 - 2014-10-30 19:57:51 UTC
So what happens if the station you are in gets taken over and your med clone is there?

Are you stuck in the station for a year?
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#50 - 2014-10-30 19:58:59 UTC
Akita T wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
do the math on what it would cost to just buy a second supercarrier and supercarrier alt and stick it in the second spot
come back once you've realized the pilot network is like a billion times more expensive

Most of the jump fatigue evasion relay pilots don't need to be fully trained - in fact, they can have a skeleton skillset.
And you don't need to make ALL the jumps ALL the time - a few key ones will do just fine most of the time too, bringing the ship into or near systems with long-range inter-regional stargates.
Combine that with other travel options and you have yourself a need of maybe 2 alts per active supercap to reach about half the map in not a lot longer than you used to be able to (and drastically less time than you could "honestly" do).

Yeah, it's not TOO cheap, but for the same force projection capability, it's a lot cheaper than having many more fully trained pilots with extra supercaps included stationed in various staging areas semipermanently.


You also have to keep them plexed.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#51 - 2014-10-30 20:02:56 UTC
I guess the swaps will happen in safespots, because trying to clown-car supercaps into a POS and do swaps without any of them getting A) bumped or 2) stolen would be about impossible.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#52 - 2014-10-30 20:03:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Aryth wrote:
You also have to keep them plexed.

Riight, so they can't possibly reside on already existing alt accounts used for other purposes...

Querns wrote:
I guess the swaps will happen in safespots, because trying to clown-car supercaps into a POS and do swaps without any of them getting A) bumped or 2) stolen would be about impossible.

Fleet up with own alt, meet at random safespot, defleet, join actual fleet.
Just one option, I bet better ones exist.
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#53 - 2014-10-30 20:07:03 UTC
Well I'm still not sure about the high-sec caps thing but hope you guys announce it well in advance so I can invite all pilots to pop the Veldnaught before the changes are introduced.

/c

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#54 - 2014-10-30 20:09:22 UTC
On the other hand, meh, why do I bother arguing?
I don't have a vested interest in current nullsec power struggles and I don't even actively play that much anymore anyway.
Plus, the screams when it will happen (fingers crossed for Goonswarm dispensing the lulz for added insult to injury) will be most delicious.
I guess this was more of a late future reference "told you so" post spree.

Carry on, nothing to see here, move along now :P
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#55 - 2014-10-30 20:13:15 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Aryth wrote:
You also have to keep them plexed.

Riight, so they can't possibly reside on already existing alt accounts used for other purposes...

Querns wrote:
I guess the swaps will happen in safespots, because trying to clown-car supercaps into a POS and do swaps without any of them getting A) bumped or 2) stolen would be about impossible.

Fleet up with own alt, meet at random safespot, defleet, join actual fleet.
Just one option, I bet better ones exist.


There is still a cost associated with that. Unless you are of the opinion slots are free if it isn't a main...

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#56 - 2014-10-30 20:13:38 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Aryth wrote:
You also have to keep them plexed.

Riight, so they can't possibly reside on already existing alt accounts used for other purposes...

Querns wrote:
I guess the swaps will happen in safespots, because trying to clown-car supercaps into a POS and do swaps without any of them getting A) bumped or 2) stolen would be about impossible.

Fleet up with own alt, meet at random safespot, defleet, join actual fleet.
Just one option, I bet better ones exist.

No matter how the logistics work, it's just not feasible. We can prove this with actual math and examples, rather than the feelings and unsubstantiated hearsay we're currently employing in this conversation.

Consider the case of YA0 (a system in the middle of Deklein) to F2O (a system in the middle of the Delve / Querious area that, while we recently divested, is convenient for this example.)

The straightest shot route from A to B is 16 jumps. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/jump/Moros,044/YA0-XJ:F2OY-X

Now, if we pack our alts perfectly, we need 6 dedicated fatigue-managing alt accounts with 16 different characters, plus a seventh account to hold the main supercap pilot itself.

A nyx sitter is about 9b. I pulled a thread from the Character Bazaar at random; if you feel like doing more work to normalize this number, feel free. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=topics&f=277

So we are looking at a 144b outlay, plus 5.9b a month to support the accounts. For one route and one supercarrier.

Now multiply by 100, 200, 300, 400. Delve may be a rich region, but it ain't that rich!

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#57 - 2014-10-30 20:20:49 UTC
Akita T wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Querns wrote:
Akita T wrote:
As per how somebody else explained some time ago, NOT having ALSO a ship-based jump fatigue stat will mean large alliances can still move their supercap fleets around at will thankyouverymuch by simply switching PILOTS on the ships between jumps.
And don't give me the "but, but, packaging" excuse - the ships most affected by this can't (or at least shouldn't) be packaged anyway.

I would like to see this actually happen.

If it does in a major way, we'll clamp down on it, just as we will with any of the other suggested workarounds should they actually see widespread use.

No(t much) offense here, but let's be realistic - if you don't nip this in the not-yet-sprouted bud, you're setting yourself up for major pain in the more distant future when things start hitting the proverbial fan.
Whereas right now, all you would REALLY need to do (on a conceptual level, implementation might be less straightforward) is to add a SUPERCAPS ONLY jump fatigue ship attribute, and whenever a jump is to be performed, check both ship and pilot fatigue.

P.S. Also, what if it just happens in a "minor way"? Is that somehow more acceptable? Why?


It's a non-zero amount of work with a non-one chance of being needed, net work over time is lessened by playing "wait and see", and given that we've been very clear that we'll make changes if it becomes a big issue, if it happens our messaging strategy will be "told you so".

Yes, if it happens in a minor way, it's more acceptable, because that suggests that it is one option within a healthy ecosystem of other (cheaper) options. It's when something becomes a dominant strategy that it becomes problematic, because it's then making the game less interesting.

And if you're hoping to "I-told-you-so" later, will you also stand up and say "whoops, I was wrong" if it doesn't happen? :P

nospet wrote:
So what happens if the station you are in gets taken over and your med clone is there?

Are you stuck in the station for a year?


From the blog:

Quote:
You can always set your medical clone to your starter corporation’s HQ station.


Ie, you can *always* set your medical clone to your starter corporation's HQ station. The once-per-year thing is in addition to the above.
Copper Khai
#58 - 2014-10-30 20:24:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Copper Khai
Quote:
"We’d like to allow capitals into highsec without restriction in the future, but it’s a major change that is for a later time. For now, this maintains the status quo in highsec."


No, this will lead to titans sitting around Jita, just because. They will not be mysterious anymore.

Next you'll allow AFK macro dancing outside trade hubs (congo lines). Ridiculous. Terrible move, please rethink it.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#59 - 2014-10-30 20:26:21 UTC
Querns wrote:
Akita T wrote:
Aryth wrote:
You also have to keep them plexed.

Riight, so they can't possibly reside on already existing alt accounts used for other purposes...

Querns wrote:
I guess the swaps will happen in safespots, because trying to clown-car supercaps into a POS and do swaps without any of them getting A) bumped or 2) stolen would be about impossible.

Fleet up with own alt, meet at random safespot, defleet, join actual fleet.
Just one option, I bet better ones exist.

No matter how the logistics work, it's just not feasible. We can prove this with actual math and examples, rather than the feelings and unsubstantiated hearsay we're currently employing in this conversation.

Consider the case of YA0 (a system in the middle of Deklein) to F2O (a system in the middle of the Delve / Querious area that, while we recently divested, is convenient for this example.)

The straightest shot route from A to B is 16 jumps. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/jump/Moros,044/YA0-XJ:F2OY-X

Now, if we pack our alts perfectly, we need 6 dedicated fatigue-managing alt accounts with 16 different characters, plus a seventh account to hold the main supercap pilot itself.

A nyx sitter is about 9b. I pulled a thread from the Character Bazaar at random; if you feel like doing more work to normalize this number, feel free. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=topics&f=277

So we are looking at a 144b outlay, plus 5.9b a month to support the accounts. For one route and one supercarrier.

Now multiply by 100, 200, 300, 400. Delve may be a rich region, but it ain't that rich!


To quote myself from here almost exactly a month ago:

CCP Greyscale wrote:

Nova Fox wrote:
So...

1. Jump Ship
2. Clone Exits Ship
3. Fresh Clone Enters Ship
4. Jump Ship
5. Exited Clone Body Jumps Home
6. Rinse Repeat Until destination.


The actual logistics of doing this for a reasonable range of target systems are sufficiently involved that we do not expect it to happen in practice.


Could still turn out to be wrong, of course, but we'll see how it shakes out :)
Baron Deathicon
Outerspace Vanguard
#60 - 2014-10-30 20:29:16 UTC
So now I can't jump from low-sec station to Venal station anymore. I guess we now have to stealth jump at the lowest peak hours... that's pretty sad for the extra small corps that wants to live in nullsec.